How Western Media faked it - a Russian view

[Daioh]

Did Russia ever try to join things like Nato?

No

Why not?

Do you believe Russia would have joined if asked?

No

Why not?

but that's no excuse to go all NATO on Russia.

Explanation?

Russia would not join NATO but as I said it's not a reason to paint Russia as bogeyman.

Russia has a somewhat negative reputation especially with many of the former soviet states does it not? (Hence their potential image as a bogeyman)
What has Russia done to change this perception?

 

[barbos]

No

Why not?

Why yes?

Do you believe Russia would have joined if asked?

No

Why not?

Why yes?

but that's no excuse to go all NATO on Russia.

Explanation?

What is there to explain?

Russia would not join NATO but as I said it's not a reason to paint Russia as bogeyman.

Russia has a somewhat negative reputation especially with many of the former soviet states does it not? (Hence their potential image as a bogeyman)
What has Russia done to change this perception?

Russia launched RT to change that obviously erroneous perception.

 

[Daioh]

Why yes?

Are you not going to support your position?
Surely you have some reason why Russia never pursued this avenue or why it would not if given the chance?

What is there to explain?

Exactly what you mean by "go all Nato"
What does this entail exactly?

Russia launched RT to change that obviously erroneous perception.

Is that it?

 

[barbos]

Daioh, Why NATO would not disband?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Daioh, Why NATO would not disband?

1) There's no reason to disband it.

2) The military realized the Russian bear wasn't dead. The missiles are still there, the bear is waking from it's slumber and trying to regain it's lost territory.

 

[Daioh]

Daioh, Why NATO would not disband?

Why should it?

I would think that staying with Nato (Particulalry for much smaller nations) and all the political, military and economic co-operation that goes with it far outweighs many of these countries going it alone

 

[barbos]

Daioh, Why NATO would not disband?

Why should it?

Why not?

 

[barbos]

Daioh, Why NATO would not disband?

1) There's no reason to disband it.

What would that be?

2) The military realized the Russian bear wasn't dead. The missiles are still there,

Well, US missiles are still there too, same with NATO - still there.

the bear is waking from it's slumber and trying to regain it's lost territory.

Yeah, you should have thought twice before taking his territory.

 

[Jayjay]

Why should it?

Why not?

For the same reason that countries don't disband their armies between wars.

 

[barbos]

Why not?

For the same reason that countries don't disband their armies between wars.

How is that the same reason? Nobody asks you disband your armies. Finland has an Army and it is not in NATO.

 

[Jayjay]

For the same reason that countries don't disband their armies between wars.

How is that the same reason? Nobody asks you disband your armies. Finland has an Army and it is not in NATO.

Why do countries keep armies even when they are not at war? Because they need to prepare for the worst, just in case. It's the same with NATO.

 

[Daioh]

Why should it?

Why not?

I would think that staying with Nato (Particulalry for much smaller nations) and all the political, military and economic co-operation that goes with it far outweighs many of these countries going it alone

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1) There's no reason to disband it.

What would that be?

2) The military realized the Russian bear wasn't dead. The missiles are still there,

Well, US missiles are still there too, same with NATO - still there.

the bear is waking from it's slumber and trying to regain it's lost territory.

Yeah, you should have thought twice before taking his territory.

We didn't take any territory. His conquests left and joined us out of fear of his trying to reconquer them.

 

[barbos]

What would that be?

2) The military realized the Russian bear wasn't dead. The missiles are still there,

Well, US missiles are still there too, same with NATO - still there.

the bear is waking from it's slumber and trying to regain it's lost territory.

Yeah, you should have thought twice before taking his territory.

We didn't take any territory. His conquests left and joined us out of fear of his trying to reconquer them.

No, that's other way around. One of your conquests (Crimea) voted to leave you.

 

[dystopian]

No, that's other way around. One of your conquests (Crimea) voted to leave you.

Did they? It's kind of hard to tell when they had guns to their heads when they were voting.

 

[Togo]

I'm really struggling to understand this.

Ukraine is a 'conquest' because the parliament voted to sack their president, and the new guy reversed a pro-Russian stance in favour of closer ties with Europe. Fresh elections were then held, and the people backed the new government, albeit in coalition. They will get to vote again in a few years time, at which point they can vote to keep or get rid of these parties as they see fit.

Crimea was invaded by Russian troops. These troops then helped to organise a referendum in which all groups, not just those with tied to Russia, supposedly voted by a vast majority to become part of Russia. No further elections will be held.

How are these in any way comparable?

 

[barbos]

You have been lied too.
Violent coup orchestrated by US forced democratically elected President out of the country.
Then violent mob consisting primarily from ukrainanian nationalist and, let be honest here, nazi forced parliament to vote to expel President, they did not get enough votes but since Yanukovich was not going to come back they let it be.
Then President election which South and East of the country refused to participate, not to mention Crimea which voted to leave this trainwreck.
Sorry guys, what is happening in Ukraine has nothing to do with democracy.

But I am certainly glad that you accept the right of Crimea to leave Ukraine.

 

[Togo]

You have been lied too.

By whom? How have you established you have not been lied to?

Violent coup orchestrated by US forced democratically elected President out of the country.
Then violent mob consisting primarily from ukrainanian nationalist and, let be honest here, nazi forced parliament to vote to expel President, they did not get enough votes but since Yanukovich was not going to come back they let it be.

Ok, so you're saying that the parliamentary vote wasn't sufficient, and was intimidated by armed Nazis. Votes influenced by guns aren't fair.

Then President election which South and East of the country refused to participate,

The refusal to take part was in Donbass held by armed separatists, and in Crimea, held by Russian soldiers. That's quite a small section of the country (<10%).

And then there were the Parliamentary elections.

not to mention Crimea which voted to leave this trainwreck.

Well no, you've just argued that an election where armed intimidation takes place is nothing to do with democracy, so you're arguing that Crimea did not vote to leave, it was annexed by Russian soldiers. Again, I'm happy for you to take either line, so long as you're consistent.

Sorry guys, what is happening in Ukraine has nothing to do with democracy.

Several thousand international observers, and several thousand more independent polling companies, appear to disagree with you. How big are you claiming this conspiracy is?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What would that be?

2) The military realized the Russian bear wasn't dead. The missiles are still there,

Well, US missiles are still there too, same with NATO - still there.

the bear is waking from it's slumber and trying to regain it's lost territory.

Yeah, you should have thought twice before taking his territory.

We didn't take any territory. His conquests left and joined us out of fear of his trying to reconquer them.

No, that's other way around. One of your conquests (Crimea) voted to leave you.

1) They weren't a conquest. The Ukraine hadn't joined NATO.

2) The election in the Crimea was an obvious sham.

 

[funinspace]

An interesting short article, citing comments from Mr. Kissinger, diverging from mainstream US political thought:
http://www.strategic-culture.org/pv...-forget-about-crimea-and-nato-membership.html

Speaking of Crimea’s accession to Russia, he noted that this is a special case, as Ukraine and Russia were one country for a long time. In his view, the West must recognize its mistakes. "Europe and America did not understand the impact of these events, starting with the negotiations about Ukraine's economic relations with the European Union and culminating in the demonstrations in Kiev," said Mr. Kissinger. "All these, and their impact, should have been the subject of a dialogue with Russia."
He is sure that Ukraine has always had a special significance for Russia. Failure to understand this was fatal, and the Ukrainian authorities can forget about the Crimean peninsula. "Nobody in the West has offered a concrete program to restore Crimea," said Mr. Kissinger. "Nobody is willing to fight over eastern Ukraine." In his opinion, introducing anti-Russian sanctions was a mistake.