Invasion of Ukraine • Page 80

Yeah, I take this as a good thing. Russia is just letting the US know so no one jumps the gun. If they want to continue doing it then have at it. It's their weapons.

Of course some people on Reddit are thinking Putin is planning something but I 99.9% doubt that. It's called "annual" for a reason and Putin has nothing to gain from doing anything tricky.

 

Yeah, I personally don't think he is going to launch nukes at anyone else right now - but the main thing our govt and other experts have been saying to reassure the public is that if Russia were going to launch nukes, we would see signs of them getting ready to do so, and exercises like this provide cover for that. I believe it was even part of their plan decades ago to hide a first strike with exercises.

I think some sort of planned catastrophe / explosion at Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant resulting in something akin to a large dirty bomb is much, much more likely to happen first.

 

Proper CIA/Russia propaganda just in time baby!

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ons-against-non-nuclear-threats-pentagon-says

Oh goodie. I wonder where the first ones will land.

 

I really liked how Phyllis Bennis broke down the various types of diplomacy, all of which unfortunately are not happening right now, and differentiated the idea of Ukraine and Russia negotiating a peace deal from diplomacy that should be taking place between the US and Russia that isn't necessarily specifically related or limited to what is happening on the ground in Ukraine, such as her example of the military base being constructed in Poland.

I do think that those two ideas are being purposely conflated in an attempt to quell even the suggestion of dissent from the status quo right now.

 

He brings up a lot of good points about the Crimea situation being a lot more complicated than is being portrayed, but my main critique of what I thought he was getting at would be that any polling that took place after Russia moved their military in is pretty much useless. You can't really trust people saying "well yeah, I don't mind being part of Russia" when there are already Spetsnaz pointing loaded AK-74's in your face.

 

Russia’s Putin rules out using nuclear weapons in Ukraine

 

did what i put in bold happen in crimea? but in general all polling before crimean annexation is pro russia. all polling after the events of Maidan likely only increased pro Russian sentiment.

 

Fortunately the referendum was null and void, so it doesn’t matter if a majority are “pro-Russia”

 

why not. if the majority of a non-settler population in an area such as Crimea wants to be part of a different state, one they have historic ties too in modern memory, why shouldn't they be?

 

Because Crimea is a part of Ukraine, and a section of Ukraine can’t just hold a referendum on its own, held by a foreign invader, and have the results considered legit. Mexico can’t go into Texas, have a referendum, and have Texas then consider itself part of Mexico. Settler, non-settler, historical ties - none of that gives legitimacy to the referendum

 

Your Texas analogy doesn't work because it was American settlers that settled in Texas and then seceded from Mexico before joining the US.

If a non-settler people, the population of Crimea in this instance, feels they are being liberated and welcome intervention and annexation, it may not be legitimate on any grounds of legality but in terms of self determination? Sound fair.

Like... if Crimeans asked Ukraine for a referendum giving it "legitimacy"'' Ukraine would obviously say no or intervene through force themselves.

 

That sentence was written in a joking manner, but my serious point would be that any polling or referenda that took place on or after February 27th 2014 is pointless to look at or reference in any way. I did say he brought up some valid points about what polling showed before that.

 

which is why the video looks at polling before that date.

 

He looks at and talks about both, no?

 

yes, but the polling before and after lines up and supports one another. also the favorable polling before puts doubt on any forced by gunpoint scenario you jokingly described and the polling done after was not done by Russia or Russian orgs but by western ones.

 

I mention the Texas example from a legality and recognition standpoint; unless it’s the country itself that is running the referendum, and not an outside power/invader, it’s not a valid/legal/legit referendum. A referendum held in Texas by Mexico is just as invalid as the referendum held in Crimea by Russia. If Ukraine held the referendum, and Crimea voted to join Russia, then by all means I assume they’d be free to join Russia.

This reminds me of Scotland’s attempts to go independent form the UK, as in (from a legal standpoint), in terms did how the rules are there, they have to get permission from London in order to hold the referendum again. They can’t just hold the referendum on their own.

 

ah, so proceduralism. yeah i don't think things need to be legal or follow proper rules to be valid.

 

I mean, Scotland probably should have been independent from England like a half a millennium ago so I'm not sure this helps your argument. Should Palestinians have to wait for Israel's permission to become independent? Should the US have waited for King George to let them vote on independence? It sure would be nice if people were asked their preference but in general that doesn't really happen

 

I mean we already had a large chunk of this country declare itself independent from the other half and we rightfully kicked their asses and made them stay. but we really fucked up the aftermath and didn’t keep the boot on the throat long enough to snuff out all their BS and racism