• WWIII

    From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to ALL on Wed Apr 30 02:18:40 2014

    Read a column by Gwynne Dyer, yesterday's paper. He believes the
    Ukraine crisis won't lead to WWIII. His theory is, nobody is
    going to push it that far, the last two world wars taught them
    the lesson, it's not worth it.

    As he said, "That is why, even as Russian tanks drive right up
    to Ukraine's eastern borders, and the Ukrainian army prepares to
    die in a fight it knows it would lose, nobody else in europe is
    getting ready for war. If the Russians want part or all of
    Ukraine, they can have it-and pay the long term price for taking
    it, which would be very high. But nothing in Eurpoe is worth
    blowing all of Europe up for."

    I wonder about that. I wonder if, maybe, he's got it backwards.
    I wonder if the result of doing nothing might not be what leads
    to the war nobody wants.

    We have long been told that Hitler might have been stopped,
    probably would have been stopped, if the other nations had
    stepped in with his first aggression against the Sudentenland,
    against Austria, against those who could not defend themselves.

    What makes anyone think Putin is any less than Hitler?

    When Obama declared he was pulling our troops out of Afghanistan
    and Iraq the Republicans ranted and raved about how no one would
    ever trust us, because we abandoned an ally. Yet the governments
    of Iraq and Afghanistan were never allies, they were client
    states and corrupt in the extreme. Their fight is internal, even
    the outside influences would be no threat at all if those
    governments had the support of the people.

    No matter what the status of the Ukraine and it's government,
    Russia is clearly an outside invader. Failing to come to their
    aid would be a clear sign to Putin that the West really is too
    weak to stop him. Not too militarily weak, on that we outweigh
    them in spade, but too weak morally.

    That may yet be the factor that gives us the war no one wants.



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... No one can fix everything, everyone can contribute to fixing something.
    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 bbs.docsnetservices.com (1:123/140)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to BOB KLAHN on Wed Apr 30 13:54:44 2014
    Hi, BOB KLAHN!
    I read your message from 30.04.2014 02:18

    BK> Read a column by Gwynne Dyer, yesterday's paper. He believes the
    BK> Ukraine crisis won't lead to WWIII. His theory is, nobody is going
    BK> to push it that far, the last two world wars taught them the
    BK> lesson, it's not worth it.

    BK> As he said, "That is why, even as Russian tanks drive right up to
    BK> Ukraine's eastern borders, and the Ukrainian army prepares to die
    BK> in a fight it knows it would lose, nobody else in europe is getting
    BK> ready for war. If the Russians want part or all of Ukraine, they
    BK> can have it-and pay the long term price for taking it, which would
    BK> be very high. But nothing in Eurpoe is worth blowing all of Europe
    BK> up for."

    BK> I wonder about that. I wonder if, maybe, he's got it backwards. I
    BK> wonder if the result of doing nothing might not be what leads to
    BK> the war nobody wants.

    BK> We have long been told that Hitler might have been stopped,
    BK> probably would have been stopped, if the other nations had stepped
    BK> in with his first aggression against the Sudentenland, against
    BK> Austria, against those who could not defend themselves.

    BK> What makes anyone think Putin is any less than Hitler?

    Your words are a twaddle unless you see the columns of Russian tanks and troops marching along the Ukraine roads. Ukraine is similar Yugoslavia.
    It is also not a country of a single nation. It is also separated. It is
    also true that in general one part of it hates another. And no wonder
    that in WWII one part hailed Hitler's troops and fought on its side,
    while another part fought with Hitler in a guerilla war.

    Who told you that countries cannot split up? Why do you think that
    Ukraine cannot split like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia? It is not
    pro-Russian forces are fighting in eastern Ukraine. It is the Russian
    people who always lived there, in eastern and southern Ukraine, and they
    were extremely insulted when pro-western rebels removed their candidate (Yanukovich, who won democratic elections) from power. Rebels in Kiev
    were minority, but they captured power by force, violating all
    democratic institutions and election results.

    Putin is not Hiller, just because Russia is not a fascist Germany.
    Russia doesn't want to rule over the world and topple those governments
    it doesn't like. It is somebody else.

    BK> When Obama declared he was pulling our troops out of Afghanistan
    BK> and Iraq the Republicans ranted and raved about how no one would
    BK> ever trust us, because we abandoned an ally. Yet the governments of
    BK> Iraq and Afghanistan were never allies, they were client states and
    BK> corrupt in the extreme.

    It easy to explain. When you conquer a country _by military invasion_
    you, as a rule, can find collaborators only among bastards, traitors and thieves. So, it is no wonder when you see a high level of corruption
    inside of the countries you mentioned above.

    BK> No matter what the status of the Ukraine and it's government,
    BK> Russia is clearly an outside invader. Failing to come to their aid
    BK> would be a clear sign to Putin that the West really is too weak to
    BK> stop him. Not too militarily weak, on that we outweigh them in
    BK> spade, but too weak morally.

    It is not correct. Ask people from Israel or the US what an invasion
    looks like. So far you can't tell of Russian "invasion". People must be
    very accurate in such things.

    Bye, BOB!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.debate 2014
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to ALEXANDER KORYAGIN on Fri Jun 6 01:29:56 2014

    Without true freedom of speech and the press no one can have any
    idea what is going on in Russia. However, any govt that puts a
    woman's music group in prison for protest songs, and for a long
    time, is not a govt I believe is honest.

    BK>> I wonder about that. I wonder if, maybe, he's got it backwards. I
    BK>> wonder if the result of doing nothing might not be what leads to
    BK>> the war nobody wants.

    BK>> We have long been told that Hitler might have been stopped,
    BK>> probably would have been stopped, if the other nations had stepped
    BK>> in with his first aggression against the Sudentenland, against
    BK>> Austria, against those who could not defend themselves.

    BK>> What makes anyone think Putin is any less than Hitler?

    Your words are a twaddle unless you see the columns of
    Russian tanks and troops marching along the Ukraine roads.

    Once that happens it's too late. What we do know is those troops
    and tanks were massed on the Ukraine border, but have recently
    been withdrawn.

    What Putin has accomplished is to give the former Soviet states
    reason to believe he is trying to reconstitute the Soviet Union.
    That gives them reason to ask for more US military aid,
    including the anti-missile systems that had been canceled a few
    years ago.

    ...

    Who told you that countries cannot split up? Why do you
    think that Ukraine cannot split like Yugoslavia,
    Czechoslovakia?

    I have no problem with countries splitting up. What I do have is
    when one portion wants to secede, and the reports are of masked
    gunmen patrolling the cities. If they are legitimate, why are
    they masked?

    If the people who live there want to split off, I don't have a
    problem with that. I do have a problem with it being done by
    masked gunmen.

    It is not pro-Russian forces are fighting
    in eastern Ukraine. It is the Russian people who always
    lived there, in eastern and southern Ukraine, and they were
    extremely insulted when pro-western rebels removed their
    candidate (Yanukovich, who won democratic elections) from
    power.

    Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and
    killing people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how
    many Russian people live there? And why are Russians living in
    Ukraine and claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured
    power by force, violating all democratic institutions and
    election results.

    By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.
    According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten
    after Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention
    or such, but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding
    the previous constitution be reinstated.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25182830

    But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of
    bloodshed, that ultimately brought him down.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Putin is not Hiller, just because Russia is not a fascist
    Germany.

    Russia doesn't want to rule over the world and
    topple those governments it doesn't like. It is somebody
    else.

    Russia maybe not, Putin I'm not so sure of.

    BK>> When Obama declared he was pulling our troops out of Afghanistan
    BK>> and Iraq the Republicans ranted and raved about how no one would

    ...

    It easy to explain. When you conquer a country _by military
    invasion_ you, as a rule, can find collaborators only among
    bastards, traitors and thieves. So, it is no wonder when

    Afghanistan was the base for the 9-11 attack. Iraq was a war for
    oil. We should have been out of Afghanistan quickly, and never
    in Iraq. I was talking about the republican reaction to a screw
    up series of wars, vs doing nothing or something now.

    ...

    BK>> No matter what the status of the Ukraine and it's government,
    BK>> Russia is clearly an outside invader. Failing to come to their aid
    BK>> would be a clear sign to Putin that the West really is too weak to
    BK>> stop him. Not too militarily weak, on that we outweigh them in
    BK>> spade, but too weak morally.

    It is not correct. Ask people from Israel or the US what an
    invasion looks like. So far you can't tell of Russian
    "invasion". People must be very accurate in such things.

    Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted
    to cut the Ukraine up.


    http://tinyurl.com/lsgsoqd

    washingtonpost
    ousted-ukraine-president-warns-of-civil-war-criticizes-us-for-
    aiding-current-government

    Yanukovych last appeared in public Feb. 28, in a news
    conference also in Rostov, when he asserted he was still the
    legal president of Ukraine and that he was not calling upon
    Russia to intervene militarily.

    The next day, Russia's parliament authorized President Vladimir
    Putin to send troops into Ukraine, and soon thereafter Russia
    asserted that Yanukovych had requested the intervention the day
    after he spoke to the press.

    ...

    Ousted Ukraine president warns of civil war, criticizes U.S.
    for aiding current government

    ...

    "The cities are being patrolled by masked gunmen," Yanukovych
    said in a statement to the press in the southern Russian city
    of Rostov-on-Don.

    Yanukovych, who read from a statement in Russian and did not
    take questions, accused the West and the United States of
    backing fascists in Ukraine - another regular allegation being
    made by Russian authorities.

    ...

    On March 6, after gunmen took over the parliament building in
    the Crimean regional capital, Simferopol, a pro-Russian
    leadership was installed. Then the regional parliament voted
    behind closed doors for Crimea to leave Ukraine and join
    Russia, setting a referendum for Sunday to validate their
    decision.

    Some links to look at.

    Wall street journal
    http://tinyurl.com/ohlh6ys

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27633117

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution


    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... I'm not lost -- I'm "locationally challenged"
    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 bbs.docsnetservices.com (1:123/140)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to BOB KLAHN on Mon Jun 9 13:20:06 2014
    Hi, BOB KLAHN!
    I read your message from 06.06.2014 01:29

    BK> Without true freedom of speech and the press no one can have any
    BK> idea what is going on in Russia. However, any govt that puts a
    BK> woman's music group in prison for protest songs, and for a long
    BK> time, is not a govt I believe is honest.

    I believe you can hardly imagine a situation when some Arab girls in frivolous, "ala gay parade" style clothes rush into the main Jerusalem synagogue and start singing "Allah, kill infidels?" Jews, I believe, can understand that such an act is criminal and completely unacceptable. But Americans think that it was OK, just because they had lost the true
    faith in God. It is now all the same for them -- a gay parade in a
    street or a fucking mess in the main cathedral. It must be equally
    allowed. Well, at least in Russia. ;)

    BK>>> I wonder about that. I wonder if, maybe, he's got it backwards. I
    BK>>> wonder if the result of doing nothing might not be what leads to
    BK>>> the war nobody wants.
    BK>>> We have long been told that Hitler might have been stopped,
    BK>>> probably would have been stopped, if the other nations had
    BK>>> stepped in with his first aggression against the Sudentenland,
    BK>>> against Austria, against those who could not defend themselves.
    BK>>> What makes anyone think Putin is any less than Hitler?
    AK>> Your words are a twaddle unless you see the columns of Russian
    AK>> tanks and troops marching along the Ukraine roads.

    BK> Once that happens it's too late. What we do know is those troops
    BK> and tanks were massed on the Ukraine border, but have recently been
    BK> withdrawn.

    But now it is too early to speak in this way, and your comparisons are
    false. The only correct comparison is comparing the situation in Ukraine
    with the situation in Yugoslavia after some areas of it declared a
    separation. Until the civil war Yugoslavia's borders and integrity were
    also recognized across the world.

    BK> What Putin has accomplished is to give the former Soviet states
    BK> reason to believe he is trying to reconstitute the Soviet Union.
    BK> That gives them reason to ask for more US military aid, including
    BK> the anti-missile systems that had been canceled a few years ago.

    Many territories of the former USSR have still been closely related with
    each other as economically as in other areas. Actually, until last time, eastern Ukraine was separated from Russia only formally. In reality, all
    the eastern Ukraine plants continued working with Russian plants, there
    was no real border, people could freely move from one country to
    another. The same things are now with Byelorussia, Kazakhstan and some
    other former USSR republics. Putin has invented nothing. It is a lie,
    that all people of the republics of the USSR hated each other and had
    nothing in common. So, it is a natural idea to legalize things that have always been and have existed now.

    AK>> Who told you that countries cannot split up? Why do you think that
    AK>> Ukraine cannot split like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia?
    BK> I have no problem with countries splitting up. What I do have is
    BK> when one portion wants to secede, and the reports are of masked
    BK> gunmen patrolling the cities. If they are legitimate, why are they
    BK> masked?

    Well, if you had seen the Maidan rebellion in Kiev you could have also
    seen the rebels wearing masks. It is natural for this kind of events.
    These people have relatives, they are not sure that the secret police
    will not come to their homes during the night.

    You can also note that the police across all the world now uses modern technology - it photographs all the demonstrators, rebels so to create a special database for future arrests and repressions.

    BK> If the people who live there want to split off, I don't have a
    BK> problem with that. I do have a problem with it being done by masked
    BK> gunmen.

    The modern Ukraine mentality cannot accept that some people might have a desire to divorce and live separately. It is like (in some Asian
    countries) women are not allowed to divorce on their own will.

    Compare: Divorce in Saudi Arabia http://saudiwoman.me/2009/04/07/divorce-in-saudi-arabia/

    AK>> It is not pro-Russian forces are fighting in eastern Ukraine. It
    AK>> is the Russian people who always lived there, in eastern and
    AK>> southern Ukraine, and they were extremely insulted when pro-
    AK>> western rebels removed their candidate (Yanukovich, who won
    AK>> democratic elections) from power.

    BK> Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and killing
    BK> people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how many Russian
    BK> people live there? And why are Russians living in Ukraine and
    BK> claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    There are 8-9 million Russians in Ukraine. It is incorrect to call them killers or terrorists, as the present authority does. More of that -- it
    is a gruesome propaganda and a lie. Russian people started their
    protests in the same lawless way the pro-western activists started their activity in Kiev -- noisy defiant demonstrations, capturing municipal buildings, dispersing the police etc. Yanukovich refused to shoot people
    in Kiev (my respect to him for that!), but after the western rebels had
    come to power in Kiev they shamelessly started to use a brutal force
    against eastern protesters. After some victims the wheel of a civil war
    had started its rotation. Blood is a perfect lubricant for it.

    AK>> Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured power by force,
    AK>> violating all democratic institutions and election results.

    BK> By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.

    The Kiev police just guarded government buildings from the rebels.
    Actually, there was only one attempt to clear Maidan -- when Yanukovich
    was on his foreign visit. The police had cleared Maidan during a
    half-an-hour. But there was outcry about democracy violation and the demonstrators were allowed to come back. After that the police looked
    like lamp posts and were burned alive with Molotov cocktails.

    BK> According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten after
    BK> Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention or such,
    BK> but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding the
    BK> previous constitution be reinstated.

    After wining the 2010 elections Yanukovich was the legitimate state
    leader and, besides, the leader of the biggest parliamentarian
    coalition. They had all rights to do the changes they wanted. It is
    democracy. If another party had won elections they could have do the
    same. They could join to Devil or so -- it would also a legal choice.
    The legal majority in Kiev was removed from parliament by force and threats.

    That's why many in the east of the Ukraine (Yanukovich's electorate)
    consider the Kiev's events as an illegal cope and don't want to obey the
    new power.

    BK> ----------------------------------------------------------------
    BK> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25182830

    BK> But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    BK> protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of bloodshed,
    BK> that ultimately brought him down.
    BK> ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Can you pay attention that "many of them were protesters"? Who were the others? They were the police. They police returned fire only after they
    got under a sniper fire and lost a dozen of people. If the police had
    not shot with live ammunition for four or five months of the rebellion -
    what an event could provoke them to fire? Especially when an agreement
    with Yanukovich had been achieved? I strongly believe that some people
    in Maidan square did not want a peaceful solution. And they derailed the agreement in a most outrageous way.

    <skipped>
    BK> Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted to
    BK> cut the Ukraine up.

    Such events as a rule are made by small but active groups. Such a thing happened in Kiev, such a thing happened in eastern Ukraine. Russia has
    played a small role -- eastern rebels had quickly captured a lot of
    modern weapon and even some military bases. So now they are a force and
    if somebody don't want to spill blood or fight with them they must
    negotiate with them and, first, to stop call them terrorists and
    bandits. How easily some people can use such marks and tags!

    <skipped>

    BK> On March 6, after gunmen took over the parliament building in the
    BK> Crimean regional capital, Simferopol, a pro-Russian leadership was
    BK> installed. Then the regional parliament voted behind closed doors
    BK> for Crimea to leave Ukraine and join Russia, setting a referendum
    BK> for Sunday to validate their decision.

    It doesn't matter who were that gunmen. Even id they guarded that
    meeting, surely the situation was not like in a Moscow theater which was captured by terrorists in 2002.

    And at last about the referendum. It was open and honest. Everybody
    voted as he wanted. Those who chose not to vote (many of the 13% Tatar population, for instance) were free in making their choice, and their
    votes were taken into account and not hidden. Everybody in the Crimea
    had an opportunity to express his choice.

    A NATO's general whined bitterly that the Crimea referendum "was held
    under Russian gun barrrels," but it is more fare to say that the last
    Ukraine elections were held under the gun barrels of Ukraine's army, at
    least in the east. What kind of fare elections can be in a country with
    a civil war? BTW, it is exactly the same reason why the latest elections
    in Syria were declared illegal by the West. Double standards?

    Bye, BOB!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.debate 2014
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to ALEXANDER KORYAGIN on Thu Jul 3 03:44:00 2014
    .PID: SX 4.5/P/6.0W5 RB10275
    .MSGID: 1:135/382 07e0d0d3

    Without true freedom of speech and the press no one can have any
    idea what is going on in Russia. However, any govt that puts a
    woman's music group in prison for protest songs, and for a long
    time, is not a govt I believe is honest.

    BK>> I wonder about that. I wonder if, maybe, he's got it backwards. I
    BK>> wonder if the result of doing nothing might not be what leads to
    BK>> the war nobody wants.

    BK>> We have long been told that Hitler might have been stopped,
    BK>> probably would have been stopped, if the other nations had stepped
    BK>> in with his first aggression against the Sudentenland, against
    BK>> Austria, against those who could not defend themselves.

    BK>> What makes anyone think Putin is any less than Hitler?

    Your words are a twaddle unless you see the columns of
    Russian tanks and troops marching along the Ukraine roads.

    Once that happens it's too late. What we do know is those troops
    and tanks were massed on the Ukraine border, but have recently
    been withdrawn.

    What Putin has accomplished is to give the former Soviet states
    reason to believe he is trying to reconstitute the Soviet Union.
    That gives them reason to ask for more US military aid,
    including the anti-missile systems that had been canceled a few
    years ago.

    ...

    Who told you that countries cannot split up? Why do you
    think that Ukraine cannot split like Yugoslavia,
    Czechoslovakia?

    I have no problem with countries splitting up. What I do have is
    when one portion wants to secede, and the reports are of masked
    gunmen patrolling the cities. If they are legitimate, why are
    they masked?

    If the people who live there want to split off, I don't have a
    problem with that. I do have a problem with it being done by
    masked gunmen.

    It is not pro-Russian forces are fighting
    in eastern Ukraine. It is the Russian people who always
    lived there, in eastern and southern Ukraine, and they were
    extremely insulted when pro-western rebels removed their
    candidate (Yanukovich, who won democratic elections) from
    power.

    Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and
    killing people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how
    many Russian people live there? And why are Russians living in
    Ukraine and claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured
    power by force, violating all democratic institutions and
    election results.

    By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.
    According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten
    after Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention
    or such, but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding
    the previous constitution be reinstated.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25182830

    But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of
    bloodshed, that ultimately brought him down.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Putin is not Hiller, just because Russia is not a fascist
    Germany.

    Russia doesn't want to rule over the world and
    topple those governments it doesn't like. It is somebody
    else.

    Russia maybe not, Putin I'm not so sure of.

    BK>> When Obama declared he was pulling our troops out of Afghanistan
    BK>> and Iraq the Republicans ranted and raved about how no one would

    ...

    It easy to explain. When you conquer a country _by military
    invasion_ you, as a rule, can find collaborators only among
    bastards, traitors and thieves. So, it is no wonder when

    Afghanistan was the base for the 9-11 attack. Iraq was a war for
    oil. We should have been out of Afghanistan quickly, and never
    in Iraq. I was talking about the republican reaction to a screw
    up series of wars, vs doing nothing or something now.

    ...

    BK>> No matter what the status of the Ukraine and it's government,
    BK>> Russia is clearly an outside invader. Failing to come to their aid
    BK>> would be a clear sign to Putin that the West really is too weak to
    BK>> stop him. Not too militarily weak, on that we outweigh them in
    BK>> spade, but too weak morally.

    It is not correct. Ask people from Israel or the US what an
    invasion looks like. So far you can't tell of Russian
    "invasion". People must be very accurate in such things.

    Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted
    to cut the Ukraine up.


    http://tinyurl.com/lsgsoqd

    washingtonpost
    ousted-ukraine-president-warns-of-civil-war-criticizes-us-for-
    aiding-current-government

    Yanukovych last appeared in public Feb. 28, in a news
    conference also in Rostov, when he asserted he was still the
    legal president of Ukraine and that he was not calling upon
    Russia to intervene militarily.

    The next day, Russia's parliament authorized President Vladimir
    Putin to send troops into Ukraine, and soon thereafter Russia
    asserted that Yanukovych had requested the intervention the day
    after he spoke to the press.

    ...

    Ousted Ukraine president warns of civil war, criticizes U.S.
    for aiding current government

    ...

    "The cities are being patrolled by masked gunmen," Yanukovych
    said in a statement to the press in the southern Russian city
    of Rostov-on-Don.

    Yanukovych, who read from a statement in Russian and did not
    take questions, accused the West and the United States of
    backing fascists in Ukraine - another regular allegation being
    made by Russian authorities.

    ...

    On March 6, after gunmen took over the parliament building in
    the Crimean regional capital, Simferopol, a pro-Russian
    leadership was installed. Then the regional parliament voted
    behind closed doors for Crimea to leave Ukraine and join
    Russia, setting a referendum for Sunday to validate their
    decision.

    Some links to look at.

    Wall street journal
    http://tinyurl.com/ohlh6ys

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27633117

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution


    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... I'm not lost -- I'm "locationally challenged"
    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 bbs.docsnetservices.com (1:123/140)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to BOB KLAHN on Sat Jul 5 22:36:01 2014
    Hello Bob,

    [..]

    It is not pro-Russian forces are fighting
    in eastern Ukraine. It is the Russian people who always
    lived there, in eastern and southern Ukraine, and they were
    extremely insulted when pro-western rebels removed their
    candidate (Yanukovich, who won democratic elections) from
    power.

    Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and
    killing people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how
    many Russian people live there? And why are Russians living in
    Ukraine and claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    Who has. the right to decide who gets to stay and who must leave?
    Palestinians claim Israelis stole their land. And they are right.
    Many Pales"tinians have been displaced, and forced to live in
    refugee camps as "stateless" citizens. The land belongs to the
    original inhabitants. And yet other peoples from far away were
    allowed to settle and literally steal that land from the proper
    owners.

    Of course, we did much the same thing in regards to Native
    Americans, forcing them to live on reservations which we had
    so conveniently set aside for them.

    Hell, we were so damned nice to Injuns that we denied them
    the right to vote - until Bill Clinton took office. And now
    look at what they are doing to us. Those same Injuns are
    taking us to court in order to keep our oil companies from
    fracking on the land that we gave them to live on!

    Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured
    power by force, violating all democratic institutions and
    election results.

    By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.
    According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten
    after Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention
    or such, but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding
    the previous constitution be reinstated.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25182830

    Britons are masters of deceipt. Notice the Brits know better
    than to have a (written) constitution of their own ...

    But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of
    bloodshed, that ultimately brought him down. ----------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the CIA, Libyans are the most patriotic people
    on Earth. For decades, they looked upon their leader as being
    the most honest and trustworthy man who ever lived. Libyans
    invited Americans to their country to live and work, being ever
    so kind to have a separate page to stamp for a passport so
    that nobody would ever know you had been there. Yes, my friend,
    Libyans loved Billy Beer, which is why Billy and Moammar got
    along so great. But I digress.

    Putin is not Hiller, just because Russia is not a fascist
    Germany.

    Russia doesn't want to rule over the world and
    topple those governments it doesn't like. It is somebody
    else.

    Russia maybe not, Putin I'm not so sure of.

    Adolf Hitler sported a funny mustache.
    Vladimir Putin sports a James Bond look.

    Adolf Hitler only had one ball.
    Vladimir Putin has a pair of huge brass balls.

    Adolf Hitler despised steak, being a vegetarian.
    Vladimir Putin indulges on mountains of red meat.

    When Obama declared he was pulling our troops out of Afghanistan
    and Iraq the Republicans ranted and raved about how no one would

    ...

    It easy to explain. When you conquer a country _by military
    invasion_ you, as a rule, can find collaborators only among
    bastards, traitors and thieves. So, it is no wonder when

    Afghanistan was the base for the 9-11 attack. Iraq was a war for
    oil. We should have been out of Afghanistan quickly, and never
    in Iraq. I was talking about the republican reaction to a screw
    up series of wars, vs doing nothing or something now.

    Al Qaeda was The Base (al Qaeda translated into English is The Base).
    Osama bin Laden took credit for the attacks of 9-11, but there is
    much that remains a mystery. For example, President Bush was warned
    well ahead of time that terrorists were planning such a strike, yet
    chose to nothing to prevent it. Minister Louis Farrakhan claims
    that all 19 terrorists were still alive and well in the Middle
    East after the WTC Towers came crashing down.

    Did the President know about an impending terrorist attack and
    deliberately choose to do nothing, knowing no wartime President
    has ever lost a bid for re-election? Did al-Qaeda really do it,
    or was it merely a claim that was unsupported and unsubstantiated
    by Osama bin Laden in order to appear a hero to his followers?
    Are the alleged hijackers still alive and well, or is Minister
    Farrakhan full of bunk?

    No matter what the status of the Ukraine and it's government,
    Russia is clearly an outside invader. Failing to come to their aid
    would be a clear sign to Putin that the West really is too weak to
    stop him. Not too militarily weak, on that we outweigh them in
    spade, but too weak morally.

    It is not correct. Ask people from Israel or the US what an
    invasion looks like. So far you can't tell of Russian
    "invasion". People must be very accurate in such things.

    Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted
    to cut the Ukraine up.

    It was never Putin's intention to invade Ukraine.

    http://tinyurl.com/lsgsoqd

    washingtonpost
    ousted-ukraine-president-warns-of-civil-war-criticizes-us-for-
    aiding-current-government

    Yanukovych last appeared in public Feb. 28, in a news
    conference also in Rostov, when he asserted he was still the
    legal president of Ukraine and that he was not calling upon
    Russia to intervene militarily.

    The next day, Russia's parliament authorized President Vladimir
    Putin to send troops into Ukraine, and soon thereafter Russia
    asserted that Yanukovych had requested the intervention the day
    after he spoke to the press.

    The US Congress authorized the use of force in regards to Iraq
    so that President Bush could force Saddam Hussein to back down
    - thus allowing UN inspectors to continue their work in Iraq.
    How did that work out? Instead of diplomacy, our fine President
    chose WAR. We were the aggressor. Iraq did not attack the US.
    We attacked Iraq.

    Did Russia invade Crimea? No.
    Did Russia invade Ukraine? No.

    The people of Crimea made their own choice to join Russia.
    Nobody forced them to do that. A vote was held, and it was
    really no contest.

    Ousted Ukraine president warns of civil war, criticizes U.S.
    for aiding current government

    Today he is nobody, a has-been politician who has lost the
    trust of his own people. He may have a new place to stay in
    Russia, but he will never be loved by Russians. That is the
    problem with traitors. They are seen by everyone as having
    no honor ...

    "The cities are being patrolled by masked gunmen," Yanukovych
    said in a statement to the press in the southern Russian city
    of Rostov-on-Don.

    Yanukovych, who read from a statement in Russian and did not
    take questions, accused the West and the United States of
    backing fascists in Ukraine - another regular allegation being
    made by Russian authorities.

    There are a handful of right-wing fanatics in Ukraine, but
    they are a very small minority and of no consequence. Most
    Ukrainian politicians are of stable mind and are not bent
    on national suicide.

    On March 6, after gunmen took over the parliament building in
    the Crimean regional capital, Simferopol, a pro-Russian
    leadership was installed. Then the regional parliament voted
    behind closed doors for Crimea to leave Ukraine and join
    Russia, setting a referendum for Sunday to validate their
    decision.

    The people of Crimea have spoken, and Russia obeyed.

    --Lee

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to BOB KLAHN on Sat Jul 5 22:36:11 2014
    Hello Bob,

    BOB KLAHN -> ALEXANDER KORYAGIN brought next idea :

    Without true freedom of speech and the press no one can have any
    idea what is going on in Russia. However, any govt that puts a
    woman's music group in prison for protest songs, and for a long
    time, is not a govt I believe is honest.

    And what, pray tell, might "true freedom of speech and the press"
    be? Certainly we do not have that here, in the good old U.S. of A.
    So how can you say or even suggest that Russia is any worse of a
    country than we are when it comes to such matters?

    In regards to Pussy Riot, those girls were not imprisoned because
    of the music (if one can call it that) they played. They desecrated
    a church. Try doing that in a church in America and see how long
    it takes for the men in blue to come pick your sorry ass up. The
    congregation would applaud the cops and invite them all to dinner.

    I wonder about that. I wonder if, maybe, he's got it backwards. I
    wonder if the result of doing nothing might not be what leads to
    the war nobody wants.

    We have long been told that Hitler might have been stopped,
    probably would have been stopped, if the other nations had stepped
    in with his first aggression against the Sudentenland, against
    Austria, against those who could not defend themselves.

    What makes anyone think Putin is any less than Hitler?

    Your words are a twaddle unless you see the columns of
    Russian tanks and troops marching along the Ukraine roads.

    Once that happens it's too late. What we do know is those troops
    and tanks were massed on the Ukraine border, but have recently
    been withdrawn.

    We invaded Mexico and annexed half their country as our own.
    We also invaded the Kingdom of Hawai'i and annexed that entire
    country as our own. At least we bought Alaska fair and square
    from the Russians rather than taking it by force ...

    What Putin has accomplished is to give the former Soviet states
    reason to believe he is trying to reconstitute the Soviet Union.
    That gives them reason to ask for more US military aid,
    including the anti-missile systems that had been canceled a few
    years ago.

    President Putin is not interested in resurrecting the former
    Soviet Union. He was nothing more than a lowly clerk in the KGB
    during those halcyon days, and not a very well-paid one at that.
    Being Top Dog in the new Russia with all the pretty girls begging
    him for favors is much more his style.

    A return to the Cold War is not in Putin's (or Russia's) best
    interest. Putin knows this. So do the Russian people, as well
    as all of Europe.

    What Putin wants is for Europe to remain divided, rather than
    for Europe to unite in a tightly knit European Union. Putin has
    allies in Europe who are with him on this. And it is with those
    allies that Putin will seek to make deals, or at least use them
    to gain influence with others.

    Who told you that countries cannot split up? Why do you
    think that Ukraine cannot split like Yugoslavia,
    Czechoslovakia?

    I have no problem with countries splitting up. What I do have is
    when one portion wants to secede, and the reports are of masked
    gunmen patrolling the cities. If they are legitimate, why are
    they masked?

    Abraham Lincoln had no problem with slavery, but did have a big
    problem with countries splitting up. In fact, he had so much of
    a problem he started a war ...

    If the people who live there want to split off, I don't have a
    problem with that. I do have a problem with it being done by
    masked gunmen.

    President Jefferson Davis never wore a mask. Neither did
    General Robert E. Lee ...

    It is not pro-Russian forces are fighting
    in eastern Ukraine. It is the Russian people who always
    lived there, in eastern and southern Ukraine, and they were
    extremely insulted when pro-western rebels removed their
    candidate (Yanukovich, who won democratic elections) from
    power.

    Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and
    killing people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how
    many Russian people live there? And why are Russians living in
    Ukraine and claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    It all ccmes down to one basic question - "What do the people want?"
    And most people in Crimea consider themselves as being Russian.

    --Lee


    Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured
    power by force, violating all democratic institutions and
    election results.

    By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.
    According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten
    after Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention
    or such, but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding
    the previous constitution be reinstated.




    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25182830

    But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of
    bloodshed, that ultimately brought him down.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Putin is not Hiller, just because Russia is not a fascist
    Germany.

    Russia doesn't want to rule over the world and
    topple those governments it doesn't like. It is somebody
    else.

    Russia maybe not, Putin I'm not so sure of.

    When Obama declared he was pulling our troops out of Afghanistan
    and Iraq the Republicans ranted and raved about how no one would

    ...

    It easy to explain. When you conquer a country _by military
    invasion_ you, as a rule, can find collaborators only among
    bastards, traitors and thieves. So, it is no wonder when

    Afghanistan was the base for the 9-11 attack. Iraq was a war for
    oil. We should have been out of Afghanistan quickly, and never
    in Iraq. I was talking about the republican reaction to a screw
    up series of wars, vs doing nothing or something now.

    ...

    No matter what the status of the Ukraine and it's government,
    Russia is clearly an outside invader. Failing to come to their aid
    would be a clear sign to Putin that the West really is too weak to
    stop him. Not too militarily weak, on that we outweigh them in
    spade, but too weak morally.

    It is not correct. Ask people from Israel or the US what an
    invasion looks like. So far you can't tell of Russian
    "invasion". People must be very accurate in such things.

    Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted
    to cut the Ukraine up.


    http://tinyurl.com/lsgsoqd

    washingtonpost
    ousted-ukraine-president-warns-of-civil-war-criticizes-us-for-
    aiding-current-government

    Yanukovych last appeared in public Feb. 28, in a news
    conference also in Rostov, when he asserted he was still the
    legal president of Ukraine and that he was not calling upon
    Russia to intervene militarily.

    The next day, Russia's parliament authorized President Vladimir
    Putin to send troops into Ukraine, and soon thereafter Russia
    asserted that Yanukovych had requested the intervention the day
    after he spoke to the press.

    ...

    Ousted Ukraine president warns of civil war, criticizes U.S.
    for aiding current government

    ...

    "The cities are being patrolled by masked gunmen," Yanukovych
    said in a statement to the press in the southern Russian city
    of Rostov-on-Don.

    Yanukovych, who read from a statement in Russian and did not
    take questions, accused the West and the United States of
    backing fascists in Ukraine - another regular allegation being
    made by Russian authorities.

    ...

    On March 6, after gunmen took over the parliament building in
    the Crimean regional capital, Simferopol, a pro-Russian
    leadership was installed. Then the regional parliament voted
    behind closed doors for Crimea to leave Ukraine and join
    Russia, setting a referendum for Sunday to validate their
    decision.

    Some links to look at.

    Wall street journal
    http://tinyurl.com/ohlh6ys

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27633117

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution


    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    .. I'm not lost -- I'm "locationally challenged"
    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 bbs.docsnetservices.com (1:123/140)

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to ALEXANDER KORYAGIN on Thu Jul 17 02:16:00 2014

    BK>> Without true freedom of speech and the press no one can have any
    BK>> idea what is going on in Russia. However, any govt that puts a
    BK>> woman's music group in prison for protest songs, and for a long
    BK>> time, is not a govt I believe is honest.

    I believe you can hardly imagine a situation when some Arab
    girls in frivolous, "ala gay parade" style clothes rush
    into the main Jerusalem synagogue and start singing "Allah,
    kill infidels?" Jews, I believe, can understand that such
    an act is criminal and completely unacceptable. But

    Which would require maybe 30 days. Not several years.

    BTW, how about, "God" do whatever, which is what Arab girls
    would say. Well, if they spoke English.

    Does that apply to the protest Pussy Riot being attacked with
    whips in Sochi last February?

    BTW, you chose the worst possible example when you chose Israel.
    These were not foreign or even anti-Russian protestors, they are
    Russians, and they didn't sing anything about killing innocents,
    but a protest against Putin.

    Which would be closer to Jews going into a Synogague and singing
    a protest against Netanyahu. And there are plenty of Jews who
    oppose Netanyahu.

    Americans think that it was OK, just because they had lost
    the true faith in God.

    Russians spent 7 decades without recognition of God and couldn't
    fix that. Americans have as much faith in God as Russians do,
    which is damning with faint praise.

    It is now all the same for them -- a
    gay parade in a street or a fucking mess in the main
    cathedral. It must be equally allowed. Well, at least in
    Russia. ;)

    Real freedom means a gay parade must be tolerated. As to singing
    in a cathedral, how is that a fucking mess? So they get thrown
    out. If they have been praising Putin they would probably get a
    medal.

    ...

    AK>>> Your words are a twaddle unless you see the columns of Russian
    AK>>> tanks and troops marching along the Ukraine roads.

    BK>> Once that happens it's too late. What we do know is those troops
    BK>> and tanks were massed on the Ukraine border, but have recently been
    BK>> withdrawn.

    But now it is too early to speak in this way, and your
    comparisons are false. The only correct comparison is
    comparing the situation in Ukraine with the situation in
    Yugoslavia after some areas of it declared a separation.

    Not really. Not is, "as is widely believed, Russia is sending in
    provacatuers to instigate unrest, and soldiers to fight there.
    They have admitted they are there, but claim they are
    volunteers. What would even volunteers be doing there?

    What part of Yugoslavia became part of Russia? I don't recall.


    Until the civil war Yugoslavia's borders and integrity were
    also recognized across the world.

    And what part of Yougoslavia asked to be admitted to Russia?

    BK>> What Putin has accomplished is to give the former Soviet states
    BK>> reason to believe he is trying to reconstitute the Soviet Union.
    BK>> That gives them reason to ask for more US military aid, including
    BK>> the anti-missile systems that had been canceled a few years ago.

    Many territories of the former USSR have still been closely
    related with each other as economically as in other areas.

    Irrelevent.

    Actually, until last time, eastern Ukraine was separated
    from Russia only formally. In reality, all the eastern
    Ukraine plants continued working with Russian plants, there
    was no real border, people could freely move from one
    country to another. The same things are now with
    Byelorussia, Kazakhstan and some other former USSR
    republics.

    Even you just referred to them as "republics".

    Putin has invented nothing. It is a lie, that
    all people of the republics of the USSR hated each other
    and had nothing in common. So, it is a natural idea to
    legalize things that have always been and have existed now.

    Since no one said that, it is meaningless. Though I am sure many
    did hate Russia, that does not mean they hated each other.

    AK>>> Who told you that countries cannot split up? Why do you think that
    AK>>> Ukraine cannot split like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia?

    BK>> I have no problem with countries splitting up. What I do have is
    BK>> when one portion wants to secede, and the reports are of masked
    BK>> gunmen patrolling the cities. If they are legitimate, why are they
    BK>> masked?

    Well, if you had seen the Maidan rebellion in Kiev you
    could have also seen the rebels wearing masks. It is
    natural for this kind of events. These people have
    relatives, they are not sure that the secret police will
    not come to their homes during the night.

    It is Russia that is famous for "secret police".

    You can also note that the police across all the world now
    uses modern technology - it photographs all the
    demonstrators, rebels so to create a special database for
    future arrests and repressions.

    If they don't have a constitution with a court system that
    vigorously enforces freedom of speech, that is a problem.

    That takes us back to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly.

    BK>> If the people who live there want to split off, I don't have a
    BK>> problem with that. I do have a problem with it being done by masked
    BK>> gunmen.

    The modern Ukraine mentality cannot accept that some people
    might have a desire to divorce and live separately. It is

    And how does that justify Russian interference?

    like (in some Asian countries) women are not allowed to
    divorce on their own will.

    No, it is not like that at all.

    Compare: Divorce in Saudi Arabia http://saudiwoman.me/2009/04/07/divorce-in-saudi-arabia/

    No, I won't.

    AK>>> It is not pro-Russian forces are fighting in eastern Ukraine. It
    AK>>> is the Russian people who always lived there, in eastern and

    ...

    BK>> Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and killing
    BK>> people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how many Russian
    BK>> people live there? And why are Russians living in Ukraine and
    BK>> claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    There are 8-9 million Russians in Ukraine. It is incorrect
    to call them killers or terrorists, as the present
    authority does. More of that -- it is a gruesome propaganda

    Yet they have been killing people. Some of them. If the rest of
    the 8-9 million Russians don't agree with that, then what is the
    basis for it being done?

    and a lie. Russian people started their protests in the
    same lawless way the pro-western activists started their
    activity in Kiev -- noisy defiant demonstrations, capturing
    municipal buildings, dispersing the police etc. Yanukovich
    refused to shoot people in Kiev (my respect to him for

    IOW, it wasn't a violent protest.

    that!), but after the western rebels had come to power in
    Kiev they shamelessly started to use a brutal force against
    eastern protesters. After some victims the wheel of a civil
    war had started its rotation. Blood is a perfect lubricant
    for it.

    So, why are Russian "volunteers" involved? 8-9 million Russians
    living there should be enough to handle it.

    AK>>> Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured power by force,
    AK>>> violating all democratic institutions and election results.

    BK>> By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.

    The Kiev police just guarded government buildings from the
    rebels. Actually, there was only one attempt to clear
    Maidan -- when Yanukovich was on his foreign visit. The

    Ya know, if you include links to your sources I can look at
    them. It's legal here.

    police had cleared Maidan during a half-an-hour. But there
    was outcry about democracy violation and the demonstrators
    were allowed to come back. After that the police looked
    like lamp posts and were burned alive with Molotov
    cocktails.

    I saw one video of police vehicles driving into the protest
    lines, and getting molotov cocktails in return.

    BK>> According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten after
    BK>> Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention or such,
    BK>> but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding the
    BK>> previous constitution be reinstated.

    After wining the 2010 elections Yanukovich was the
    legitimate state leader and, besides, the leader of the
    biggest parliamentarian coalition. They had all rights to
    do the changes they wanted. It is democracy. If another

    Nowhere in any democracy I am familiar with does the winner get
    to rewrite the constitution just like that.

    party had won elections they could have do the same. They
    could join to Devil or so -- it would also a legal choice.
    The legal majority in Kiev was removed from parliament by
    force and threats.

    Once they rewrote the constitution they ceased to be the legal
    authority.

    That's why many in the east of the Ukraine (Yanukovich's
    electorate) consider the Kiev's events as an illegal cope
    and don't want to obey the new power.

    Or they are Russian instigators.

    BK>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
    BK>> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25182830

    BK>> But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    BK>> protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of bloodshed,
    BK>> that ultimately brought him down.
    BK>> ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Can you pay attention that "many of them were protesters"?
    Who were the others? They were the police. They police
    returned fire only after they got under a sniper fire and
    lost a dozen of people. If the police had not shot with

    You don't shoot innocent protestors to get revenge. And the 88
    they are talking about were killed by police. Like the US Kent
    State incident, during the Vietnam war, you can get innocent
    bystanders killed when you fire on protestors.

    live ammunition for four or five months of the rebellion -
    what an event could provoke them to fire? Especially when

    Losing the fight for public support could.

    an agreement with Yanukovich had been achieved? I strongly
    believe that some people in Maidan square did not want a
    peaceful solution. And they derailed the agreement in a
    most outrageous way.

    Which does not mean the people who derailed it weren't the
    police.

    <skipped>
    BK>> Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted to
    BK>> cut the Ukraine up.

    Such events as a rule are made by small but active groups.
    Such a thing happened in Kiev, such a thing happened in
    eastern Ukraine. Russia has played a small role -- eastern
    rebels had quickly captured a lot of modern weapon and even
    some military bases. So now they are a force and if

    Rebelious private citizens don't capture weapons and bases from
    the military without help.

    somebody don't want to spill blood or fight with them they
    must negotiate with them and, first, to stop call them
    terrorists and bandits. How easily some people can use such
    marks and tags!

    Who is calling them terrorists and bandits? No one here I know
    of.

    <skipped>

    BK>> On March 6, after gunmen took over the parliament building in the
    BK>> Crimean regional capital, Simferopol, a pro-Russian leadership was
    BK>> installed. Then the regional parliament voted behind closed doors
    BK>> for Crimea to leave Ukraine and join Russia, setting a referendum
    BK>> for Sunday to validate their decision.

    It doesn't matter who were that gunmen. Even id they
    guarded that meeting, surely the situation was not like in
    a Moscow theater which was captured by terrorists in 2002.

    Unless those terrorists were Ukrainians your point is a
    diversion.

    And at last about the referendum. It was open and honest.
    Everybody voted as he wanted. Those who chose not to vote
    (many of the 13% Tatar population, for instance) were free
    in making their choice, and their votes were taken into
    account and not hidden. Everybody in the Crimea had an
    opportunity to express his choice.

    Which requires outside observers to verify. Who was observing?

    A NATO's general whined bitterly that the Crimea referendum
    "was held under Russian gun barrrels," but it is more fare
    to say that the last Ukraine elections were held under the
    gun barrels of Ukraine's army, at least in the east. What

    Do you have a link to refer to on that?

    kind of fare elections can be in a country with a civil
    war? BTW, it is exactly the same reason why the latest
    elections in Syria were declared illegal by the West.
    Double standards?

    Do you see the Ukraine army fighting itself in this war? Who is
    the other army?



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... ... Millions for comfort. Not one cent for truth.
    * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 bbs.docsnetservices.com (1:123/140)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to BOB KLAHN on Sun Jul 20 19:23:39 2014
    Hi, BOB KLAHN!
    I read your message from 17.07.2014 02:16

    BK>>> Without true freedom of speech and the press no one can have any
    BK>>> idea what is going on in Russia. However, any govt that puts a
    BK>>> woman's music group in prison for protest songs, and for a long
    BK>>> time, is not a govt I believe is honest.

    AK>> I believe you can hardly imagine a situation when some Arab girls
    AK>> in frivolous, "ala gay parade" style clothes rush into the main
    AK>> Jerusalem synagogue and start singing "Allah, kill infidels?"
    AK>> Jews, I believe, can understand that such an act is criminal and
    AK>> completely unacceptable. But

    BK> Which would require maybe 30 days. Not several years.

    Maybe it is correct that the scale of the insult had been taken into
    account. One thing, when you insulted a few passengers in the bus. 30
    days of detention is a just term. Another thing, when you desecrated the
    main state cathedral and insulted millions of believers.

    I don't believe that they were imprisoned for their chanting "Mother of
    God, remove Putin from Russia." If they had said it loudly, without that fucking fuss, they would not have been taken in court.

    BK> Does that apply to the protest Pussy Riot being attacked with whips
    BK> in Sochi last February?

    There are hooligans in any part of politics or culture. Some local
    Cossack went go beyond their commission when they had seen that the
    girls were going to undertake another performance. But surely, that
    whipping was to scare the girls. I think you understand well that if the
    girls had had the traces of whipping on the bodies they would have
    interneted them out instantly.

    <skipped>
    AK>> It is now all the same for them -- a gay parade in a street or a
    AK>> fucking mess in the main cathedral. It must be equally allowed.
    AK>> Well, at least in Russia. ;)

    BK> Real freedom means a gay parade must be tolerated. As to singing in
    BK> a cathedral, how is that a fucking mess? So they get thrown out. If
    BK> they have been praising Putin they would probably get a medal.

    Every culture has its own understanding about limitations the people
    must impose on themselves voluntarily. Such limitations define
    civilization. Such a thing cannot be universal. For instance, in the US Madonna glints with its naked hams and the crowd roars, but in some
    countries she is seen disdainfully, like a prostitute.

    <skipped>
    AK>> But now it is too early to speak in this way, and your comparisons
    AK>> are false. The only correct comparison is comparing the situation
    AK>> in Ukraine with the situation in Yugoslavia after some areas of it
    AK>> declared a separation.

    BK> Not really. Not is, "as is widely believed, Russia is sending in
    BK> provacatuers to instigate unrest, and soldiers to fight there. They
    BK> have admitted they are there, but claim they are volunteers. What
    BK> would even volunteers be doing there?

    Russia sends nobody, at least nobody can prove it by facts. Volunteers penetrate into Ukraine themselves. As you know well until recent time
    the border between Ukraine and Russia was just a scratch on the map.

    AK>> Until the civil war Yugoslavia's borders and integrity were also
    AK>> recognized across the world.
    BK> And what part of Yougoslavia asked to be admitted to Russia?

    Ukraine fights with sepatist in its east. Yugoslavia fought with
    separatist on its west. That is the only difference. The main question
    is should a country kill thousand of people for their desire to live separately? Should the US or other country in the 21st century think
    that such killings are OK?

    <skipped>
    AK>> There are 8-9 million Russians in Ukraine. It is incorrect to call
    AK>> them killers or terrorists, as the present authority does. More of
    AK>> that -- it is a gruesome propaganda

    BK> Yet they have been killing people. Some of them. If the rest of the
    BK> 8-9 million Russians don't agree with that, then what is the basis
    BK> for it being done?

    Separatist fighters in Ukraine have a wide support of the population. Especially now after hundreds of civilians were killed by the Ukraine's
    army.

    <skipped>
    AK>> that!), but after the western rebels had come to power in Kiev
    AK>> they shamelessly started to use a brutal force against eastern
    AK>> protesters. After some victims the wheel of a civil war had
    AK>> started its rotation. Blood is a perfect lubricant for it.

    BK> So, why are Russian "volunteers" involved? 8-9 million Russians
    BK> living there should be enough to handle it.

    The great amount of volunteers from Russia is the Ukraine's propaganda invention. There are no trustworthy numbers.

    I think the number of volunteers from Russia is small. The reason is
    simple - what Russia is going to do by sending a small number of troops
    into Ukraine? Does it want to conquer Ukraine in such a way? No chances.
    The fighting in Ukraine has some sense only in the case that the local
    people form the bulk of fighters, and they are ready to fight for their freedom to the end.


    AK>>>> Rebels in Kiev were minority, but they captured power by force,
    AK>>>> violating all democratic institutions and election results.

    BK>>> By force? It seems most of the force was used against them.

    AK>> The Kiev police just guarded government buildings from the rebels.
    AK>> Actually, there was only one attempt to clear Maidan -- when
    AK>> Yanukovich was on his foreign visit. The

    BK> Ya know, if you include links to your sources I can look at them.
    BK> It's legal here.

    Read [[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_November_2013_attack_on_protesters#30_November_attack_on_protesters
    30 November attack on protesters]]]

    AK>> police had cleared Maidan during a half-an-hour. But there was
    AK>> outcry about democracy violation and the demonstrators were
    AK>> allowed to come back. After that the police looked like lamp posts
    AK>> and were burned alive with Molotov cocktails.

    BK> I saw one video of police vehicles driving into the protest lines,
    BK> and getting molotov cocktails in return.

    I saw million time when American police drives into the protest lines,
    but I never saw molotov cocktails in return. ;-) It is probably double standards.

    BK>>> According to what I have seen, the constitution was rewritten
    BK>>> after Yonukovych took power, not by a constitutional convention
    BK>>> or such, but by the courts. The protestors started out demanding
    BK>>> the previous constitution be reinstated.

    AK>> After wining the 2010 elections Yanukovich was the legitimate
    AK>> state leader and, besides, the leader of the biggest
    AK>> parliamentarian coalition. They had all rights to do the changes
    AK>> they wanted. It is democracy. If another

    BK> Nowhere in any democracy I am familiar with does the winner get to
    BK> rewrite the constitution just like that.

    Well, the new president Poroshenko promotes his variant of new
    constitution. It is also different from 2004 variant. New countries
    (like Ukraine) always construct new constitutes often.

    <skipped>

    BK> Rebelious private citizens don't capture weapons and bases from the
    BK> military without help.

    It is possible when military refuse to shoot protesters.

    AK>> somebody don't want to spill blood or fight with them they must
    AK>> negotiate with them and, first, to stop call them terrorists and
    AK>> bandits. How easily some people can use such marks and tags!

    BK> Who is calling them terrorists and bandits? No one here I know of.

    Ukraine authority call them always in such a way. The war operation in
    the Ukraine's east is called "ATO" -- anti terrorist operation.

    <slipped>
    AK>> And at last about the referendum. It was open and honest.
    AK>> Everybody voted as he wanted. Those who chose not to vote (many of
    AK>> the 13% Tatar population, for instance) were free in making their
    AK>> choice, and their votes were taken into account and not hidden.
    AK>> Everybody in the Crimea had an opportunity to express his choice.

    BK> Which requires outside observers to verify. Who was observing?

    All who wanted to. EU declared the referendum illegal and refused to
    send its observers. But any way there were many observers there.

    AK>> A NATO's general whined bitterly that the Crimea referendum "was
    AK>> held under Russian gun barrels," but it is more fare to say that
    AK>> the last Ukraine elections were held under the gun barrels of
    AK>> Ukraine's army, at least in the east. What

    BK> Do you have a link to refer to on that?

    Search materials about Civil war in Ukraine. Is is possible to do
    elections when one part of a coutry fights with the other?

    AK>> kind of fare elections can be in a country with a civil war? BTW,
    AK>> it is exactly the same reason why the latest elections in Syria
    AK>> were declared illegal by the West. Double standards?

    BK> Do you see the Ukraine army fighting itself in this war? Who is the
    BK> other army?

    Thousands of heavy armed insurgents?

    Bye, BOB!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.debate 2014
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to LEE LOFASO on Mon Jul 21 20:48:00 2014

    ...

    Being insulted is not ground for shooting up the place, and
    killing people. It is not grounds for seizing power. Now, how
    many Russian people live there? And why are Russians living in
    Ukraine and claiming the right to decide who rules the country?

    Who has. the right to decide who gets to stay and who must

    Those who were there first? OK, democracy over all other
    systems.

    leave? Palestinians claim Israelis stole their land. And

    The UN did.

    ...

    other peoples from far away were allowed to settle and
    literally steal that land from the proper owners.

    Those displaced by war often do that, through out history. From
    what I read, the frightening thing about Attilla the Hun is, he
    was the loser in the wars where he came from.

    Of course, we did much the same thing in regards to Native
    Americans, forcing them to live on reservations which we had
    so conveniently set aside for them.

    Yep.

    Hell, we were so damned nice to Injuns that we denied them
    the right to vote - until Bill Clinton took office. And now
    look at what they are doing to us. Those same Injuns are
    taking us to court in order to keep our oil companies from
    fracking on the land that we gave them to live on!

    Dang it! How come they get it right but our representatives get
    it so wrong?
    ...

    But it was the deaths of at least 88 people, many of them
    protesters shot dead by uniformed snipers in 48 hours of
    bloodshed, that ultimately brought him down.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the CIA, Libyans are the most patriotic people
    on Earth. For decades, they looked upon their leader as
    being the most honest and trustworthy man who ever lived.

    Well, since they might be killed for saying anything else...

    ...

    there. Yes, my friend, Libyans loved Billy Beer, which is

    No wonder they had problems.

    ...

    Russia maybe not, Putin I'm not so sure of.

    ...

    Afghanistan was the base for the 9-11 attack. Iraq was a war for
    oil. We should have been out of Afghanistan quickly, and never
    in Iraq. I was talking about the republican reaction to a screw
    up series of wars, vs doing nothing or something now.

    ...

    example, President Bush was warned well ahead of time that
    terrorists were planning such a strike, yet chose to
    nothing to prevent it.

    His bosses at the Project for a New American Century over ruled
    him. It was their excuse to have the war they so long wanted.

    Louis Farrakahn deleted.

    ...

    Did the President know about an impending terrorist attack
    and deliberately choose to do nothing, knowing no wartime
    President has ever lost a bid for re-election? Did

    Hid daddy did, but he ended his war too soon.

    is Minister Farrakhan full of bunk?

    Yes.

    ...

    It is not correct. Ask people from Israel or the US what an
    invasion looks like. So far you can't tell of Russian
    "invasion". People must be very accurate in such things.

    Putin has backed off. However, it certainly appeared he wanted
    to cut the Ukraine up.

    It was never Putin's intention to invade Ukraine.

    He might not have intended to, he probably figured it would all
    be done by proxy.

    ...

    The US Congress authorized the use of force in regards to
    Iraq so that President Bush could force Saddam Hussein to
    back down - thus allowing UN inspectors to continue their
    work in Iraq. How did that work out? Instead of diplomacy,

    That part worked out perfectly.

    our fine President chose WAR. We were the aggressor. Iraq
    did not attack the US. We attacked Iraq.

    That was the catch, the Bush puppet masters never intended
    anything but invasion.

    Did Russia invade Crimea? No.
    Did Russia invade Ukraine? No.

    The people of Crimea made their own choice to join Russia.
    Nobody forced them to do that. A vote was held, and it was
    really no contest.

    There is no way to really know that. Who counted the votes?

    ...

    So nice to have your absurdities back.

    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... History is a base to build on not a quagmire in which to become immersed.
    * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 bbs.docsnetservices.com (1:123/140)
  • From Roy Witt@1:387/22 to BOB KLAHN on Fri Aug 15 13:02:24 2014
    Greetings BOOB!

    Should a country kill thousands of own people for their
    desire to live separately?

    Case in point: The US Civil War 1861-1865

    The better question would be, should a country not kill thousand
    of their own people as the price for freeing millions from
    slavery?

    As long as they're Yankees, no.

    PS - The Civil War wasn't about slavery...but it sure turned out to be a
    crutch for y'all.


    Have a day!

    R\%/itt - K5RXT

    --- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
    --- D'Bridge 3.99
    * Origin: The Master Baiter Playground for Morons (1:387/22)
  • From Bill McGarrity@1:266/404 to Roy Witt on Fri Aug 15 18:16:00 2014
    On 08-15-14 13:02, Roy Witt wrote to BOB KLAHN <=-


    Should a country kill thousands of own people for their
    desire to live separately?

    Case in point: The US Civil War 1861-1865

    The better question would be, should a country not kill thousand
    of their own people as the price for freeing millions from
    slavery?

    As long as they're Yankees, no.

    Last I heard it was Yankees: 1 the South: 0

    PS - The Civil War wasn't about slavery...but it sure turned out to be
    a crutch for y'all.

    Don't you mean "totally" about slavery? The basis behind all southern contention was how the slave trade centered around states rights, economic freedoms and slavery itself.

    Economically, the south relied on slave labor for econonic success. Crops were sold to England and the returning ships brought back cheap manufactured goods produced in Europe. Northern factories were producing many of the same goods thus import duties were passed to help keep the $ in the US. These taxes pissed off the southerns. Guess they couldn't afford new slaves.

    States rights.. as with today's southern mentality, they felt they had no obligation to follow the rules as spelled out in the Constitution. Silly boys... not everyone thought slavery and secession was a suitable alternative to the American way of life. I would make one acception to that secession caveat though.

    Slavery. Now unless you feel men can be owned by another, this is fairly self explainatory. The good old boys felt as if their "way of life" was being attacked. Hell, we let them have their kool-aid.... what else did they want.

    Funny how all three are dependent on one common thread... slavery. I guess the south's crutch on slavery to remain "proper gentlemen" hit a speed bump.






    Bill

    Telnet: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
    Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


    ... Look Twice, Save a Life... Motorcycles are EVERYWHERE!!
    --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
    * Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)
  • From Roy Witt@1:387/22 to Bill McGarrity on Sun Aug 17 12:19:03 2014
    Greetings Bill!

    The better question would be, should a country not kill thousand
    of their own people as the price for freeing millions from
    slavery?

    As long as they're Yankees, no.

    Last I heard it was Yankees: 1 the South: 0

    Ask yourself, how many more Yanks died than Rebels?

    Dead Yanks 596,670: South 490,309

    Served: Yanks 1,532,278, South 591,810 i.e. a little under 3:1

    Eligible, but ran off to Canada: Yanks: 2,430,294, South: none

    Even with close to total conscription, the South could not match the
    North's numerical strength. Southerners also stood a significantly
    greater chance of being killed, wounded, or captured, especially if they
    were old men, women and teenage civilians.

    PS - The Civil War wasn't about slavery...but it sure turned out to
    be a crutch for y'all.

    Don't you mean "totally" about slavery?

    Get yer historical facts straight: The Northern and Southern sections of
    the United States developed along different lines. The South remained a predominantly agrarian economy while the North became more and more industrialized. Different social cultures and political beliefs developed.

    All of this led to disagreements on issues such as taxes, tariffs and
    internal improvements as well as states rights versus federal rights.

    Slavery was an excuse to make war by the Yanks 'after the war started'...

    The basis behind all southern contention was how the slave trade
    centered around states rights, economic freedoms and slavery itself.

    Wrong, see above.

    Slavery. Now unless you feel men can be owned by another, this is
    fairly self explainatory.

    Moron.

    The good old boys

    aka Democrats, no Southerun Democrats, who are now against all that
    preaching they did back then.

    ... Look Twice, Save a Life... Motorcycles are EVERYWHERE!!

    Got another one, he was 'beheaded'...I guess he was a christian in arab clothing, looking for a 'way out'...


    Have a day!

    R\%/itt - K5RXT

    --- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
    --- D'Bridge 3.99
    * Origin: The Master Baiter Playground for Morons (1:387/22)
  • From Bill McGarrity@1:266/404 to Roy Witt on Sun Aug 17 17:23:00 2014
    On 08-17-14 12:19, Roy Witt wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-


    The better question would be, should a country not kill thousand
    of their own people as the price for freeing millions from
    slavery?

    As long as they're Yankees, no.

    Last I heard it was Yankees: 1 the South: 0

    Ask yourself, how many more Yanks died than Rebels?

    Dead Yanks 596,670: South 490,309

    Served: Yanks 1,532,278, South 591,810 i.e. a little under 3:1

    Eligible, but ran off to Canada: Yanks: 2,430,294, South: none

    All your #'s can be compared to the game of baseball where one pitcher gives up 15 hits in a game yet still walks away with the victory. It's the final score that counts.


    Even with close to total conscription, the South could not match the North's numerical strength. Southerners also stood a significantly greater chance of being killed, wounded, or captured, especially if
    they were old men, women and teenage civilians.

    Shit happens...


    PS - The Civil War wasn't about slavery...but it sure turned out to
    be a crutch for y'all.

    Don't you mean "totally" about slavery?
    ay withRW> Get yer historicathe l facts straight: The Northern and Southern sections
    of the United States developed along different lines. The South
    remained a predominantly agrarian economy while the North became more
    and more industrialized. Different social cultures and political
    beliefs developed.

    All of this led to disagreements on issues such as taxes, tariffs and internal improvements as well as states rights versus federal rights.

    Slavery was an excuse to make war by the Yanks 'after the war
    started'...

    The basis behind all southern contention was how the slave trade
    centered around states rights, economic freedoms and slavery itself.

    Wrong, see above.

    Did I not explain all that in my original post (the one where you edited out the economic reasoning). You play the game like FauxEntertainment... edit the shit out of a story to make them seem intelligent.


    Slavery. Now unless you feel men can be owned by another, this is
    fairly self explainatory.

    Moron.

    So you own slaves Roy?

    The good old boys

    aka Democrats, no Southerun Democrats, who are now against all that preaching they did back then.

    And the baton was passed to the southern Republicans of today. Actually, ALL republicans fit that image.



    Bill

    Telnet: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
    Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


    ... Look Twice, Save a Life... Motorcycles are EVERYWHERE!!
    --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
    --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32
    * Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)
  • From Roy Witt@1:387/22 to Bill McGarrity on Mon Aug 18 19:05:05 2014
    Greetings Bill!

    The better question would be, should a country not kill thousand
    of their own people as the price for freeing millions from
    slavery?

    As long as they're Yankees, no.

    Last I heard it was Yankees: 1 the South: 0

    Ask yourself, how many more Yanks died than Rebels?

    Dead Yanks 596,670: South 490,309

    Served: Yanks 1,532,278, South 591,810 i.e. a little under 3:1

    Eligible, but ran off to Canada: Yanks: 2,430,294, South: none

    All your #'s can be compared to the game of baseball where one
    pitcher gives up 15 hits in a game yet still walks away with the
    victory. It's the final score that counts.

    I concur with the former, but the final score has no meaning when the
    'battle' had so many shining moments. Take the battles fought in the north before the tide of turned when the North put more people on the
    battlefield than the South.

    Even with close to total conscription, the South could not match the
    North's numerical strength. Southerners also stood a significantly
    greater chance of being killed, wounded, or captured, especially if
    they were old men, women and teenage civilians.

    Shit happens...

    Yanks die.

    PS - The Civil War wasn't about slavery...but it sure turned out to
    be a crutch for y'all.

    Don't you mean "totally" about slavery?
    ay withRW>> Get yer historicathe l facts straight: The Northern and
    ay withRW>> Southern

    sections

    Weren't sections like a railroad construction crew.

    of the United States developed along different lines. The South
    remained a predominantly agrarian economy while the North became
    more and more industrialized. Different social cultures and
    political beliefs developed.

    All of this led to disagreements on issues such as taxes, tariffs
    and internal improvements as well as states rights versus federal
    rights.

    Slavery was an excuse to make war by the Yanks 'after the war
    started'...

    The basis behind all southern contention was how the slave trade
    centered around states rights, economic freedoms and slavery itself.

    Wrong, see above.

    Did I not explain all that in my original post (the one where you
    edited out the economic reasoning).

    Economics was the reason for the war, not slavery, Moot point.

    You play the game like FauxEntertainment...

    It's a wonder you havn't broken that mirror with all of your faux claims
    to victory.

    edit the shit out of a story to make them seem intelligent.

    Like you do, not likely.

    Slavery. Now unless you feel men can be owned by another, this is
    fairly self explainatory.

    Moron.

    So you own slaves Roy?

    Why would I, I don't own any cotton plantations. But owning slaves
    wouldn't be out of the question if I did, in 1860.

    The good old boys

    aka Democrats, no Southerun Democrats, who are now against all that
    preaching they did back then.

    And the baton was passed to the southern Republicans of today.

    Not really. They had to overcome the morons who led them down this path.

    Actually, ALL republicans fit that image.

    The Republacans that will be sitting in the Senate next year and the other
    one who will be living in the WH in 2016.

    Have a day!

    PS - I'm not a Republican...FYI


    R\%/itt - K5RXT

    --- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
    --- D'Bridge 3.99
    * Origin: The Master Baiter Playground for Morons (1:387/22)