Continuation - Ukraine erupts in riots and general strikes

CapelDodger · Feb 28, 2015

dudalb said:
Let's see how the Putin fanboys justify this.....

Have you not the slightest doubt that this was instigated by Putin?

CapelDodger · Feb 28, 2015

caveman1917 said:
As I said earlier I'm not familiar with Chechnya. But since everyone seems to be asking this I've typed in "chechnya opinion poll" in google and the first result is of a poll finding that 78% of Chechnyans want to remain part of Russia. So no, I don't support its independence based on that. Of course maybe I just stumbled on a statistical outlier, again I'm not familiar enough with it to be able to tell.

Chechnya, as currently outlined, comprises two very disparate parts : in the north is the flat fringe of the steppeland, perfect for agriculture and heavily colonised by Slavs as the Russian Empire established security in the region, and a fringe of Caucasian hill-clan territory of the Islamic primitivist persuasion. The north then experienced one of the first oil-booms, in the late 19thCE and into the 20th. Peculiar it certainly is, but not an outlier; most places down there are peculiar.

caveman1917 · Feb 28, 2015

CapelDodger said:
Chechnya, as currently outlined, comprises two very disparate parts : in the north is the flat fringe of the steppeland, perfect for agriculture and heavily colonised by Slavs as the Russian Empire established security in the region, and a fringe of Caucasian hill-clan territory of the Islamic primitivist persuasion. The north then experienced one of the first oil-booms, in the late 19thCE and into the 20th. Peculiar it certainly is, but not an outlier; most places down there are peculiar.

Thank you for the explanation. I meant outlier in the sense that this specific poll (most Chechnyans wanting to be part of Russia) may have been an outlier whereas most other polls suggest otherwise. Since at least two people have been asking whether I support Chechnya (in the sense of supporting its independence I presume) after I said that I support self-determination above all, I would have expected to find that a majority of Chechnyans want independence.

CapelDodger · Feb 28, 2015

LSSBB said:
Do you support Chechnya?

What do you mean by Chechnya? Lines on the map and the people who find themselves inside them?

At what size does this right to self deternination end, family, block, neighborhood, town, valley?

You missed out "individual", but you have asked the most pertinent question there is regarding the human experience.

I have no answer, any more than anybody else does or has ever done. I can only reflect on what seems to work and what seems not to. Self-determination based on lines drawn on maps and the people who find themselves inside them doesn't seem to work.

caveman1917 · Feb 28, 2015

CapelDodger said:
Self-determination based on lines drawn on maps and the people who find themselves inside them doesn't seem to work.

Is that an inherent issue of drawing lines on the maps or a result of a general unwillingness to redraw those lines, and a willingness to use force to stop it, when circumstances and popular will change?

CapelDodger · Feb 28, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Thank you for the explanation. I meant outlier in the sense that this specific poll (most Chechnyans wanting to be part of Russia) may have been an outlier whereas most other polls suggest otherwise. Since at least two people have been asking whether I support Chechnya (in the sense of supporting its independence I presume) after I said that I support self-determination, I would have expected to find that a majority of Chechnyans want independence.

The Chechnyan thing is, of course, a distraction as rhetorical device. The people who throw it up haven't the slightest clue about its peculiarities. They don't have a clue that everywhere has its peculiarites. There can be similarities but no equivalences.

The problem with Ukraine is that it's utterly artificial. There's never been a Ukrainian government that hasn't been prefixed with "Pro-Western" or "Pro-Russian". One bunch of thieves or another; the only purpose of Ukraine was that it be thieves in Kiev, not Moscow.

CapelDodger · Feb 28, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Is that an inherent issue of drawing lines on the maps or a result of a general unwillingness to redraw those lines, and a willingness to use force to stop it, when circumstances and popular will change?

It's the unwillingness to redraw lines even if they're clearly disastrous. The can of worms principle applies. Consider all the borders drawn by the Imperial powers for their own convenience and left behind for new rulers with a UN guarantee. Hasn't turned out terribly well.

Dividing the USSR by its administrative borders was a lazy option but what the heck when there's money to be made and liberal democratic capitalism to spread throughout the world by virtue of its triumph. I always knew it looked to easy.

dudalb · Feb 28, 2015

CapelDodger said:
Have you not the slightest doubt that this was instigated by Putin?

Putin is by far the most likely suspect.

From the way this hit was carred out, it was a professional level job,

jimbob · Feb 28, 2015

dudalb said:
Putin is by far the most likely suspect.

From the way this hit was carred out, it was a professional level job,

It doesn't harm Putin's position, but equally, extreme nationalists could do it independently.

caveman1917 · Feb 28, 2015

CapelDodger said:
The problem with Ukraine is that it's utterly artificial. There's never been a Ukrainian government that hasn't been prefixed with "Pro-Western" or "Pro-Russian". One bunch of thieves or another; the only purpose of Ukraine was that it be thieves in Kiev, not Moscow.

That was one of the arguments against Maidan that came from the East, that it's just exchanging one set of crooks for another. After Akhmetov and other Donbass oligarchs dropped Yanukovich and switched sides there was a window of opportunity within the East's rebel movement to kick out and expropriate them, the earliest proposals called for nationalisation, but we all know how that turned out once the Russian nationalists got hold of it.

LSSBB · Mar 1, 2015

dudalb said:
Putin is by far the most likely suspect.

From the way this hit was carred out, it was a professional level job,

We don't know who carried it out, or if Putin even knew. It could have been fanboys looking to score some points, and ala many other an assassination, they end up creating a martyr.

McHrozni · Mar 1, 2015

CapelDodger said:
That would be assets of Russian nationals then.

State companies, owned by the state?

I don't think it's likely at all. The Russian economy is largely internal, and a lose-lose game where Russia loses less than the West can be sold as a win and a chance to show that old Russian mettle in adversity. Make-do and mend - it's less than a generation away.

I'm not sure even that would work. Western exposure to Russia is about 1 month's work of ECB QE. I'm reasonably certain West is more capable of withstanding Russian deafult than Putin.

It's far more likely that Nemtsov was killed for what he said about the Donbass war than any threat he might pose to Putin. The real threat to Putin is the nationalist tiger he thought to ride.

In that case they probably killed a few others before him. Any luck in finding those?

McHrozni

Aber · Mar 1, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Thank you for the explanation. I meant outlier in the sense that this specific poll (most Chechnyans wanting to be part of Russia) may have been an outlier whereas most other polls suggest otherwise. Since at least two people have been asking whether I support Chechnya (in the sense of supporting its independence I presume) after I said that I support self-determination above all, I would have expected to find that a majority of Chechnyans want independence.

The question about Chechnya is relevant because in the 1990s Chechnya was de facto independent, and Russia has fought 2 bloody wars to put in place its own strongman president.

Ignoring this history makes you appear ignorant and hypocritical in supporting Russian actions in eastern Ukraine.

caveman1917 · Mar 1, 2015

Aber said:
Ignoring this history makes you appear ignorant and hypocritical in supporting Russian actions in eastern Ukraine.

Seriously? I've said twice that I'm not familiar enough with Chechnya to make a determination. However since it got asked twice I figured I'd take a quick look, said exactly how I did that (googling "Chechnya opinion poll") and presented what I found. Even then I openly admitted that I am not familiar enough to be able to tell whether what I found was an accurate representation of what the Chechnyans want. I'm very well aware that it takes a lot more study to understand a situation than just looking at one opinion poll, and have openly admitted that I have not done such study nor am I particularly interested in doing so. All I have found is that the Chechnyans don't want to be independent. If you care to present data that they do, then I'm more than willing to change my conclusion. And if they really don't want independence, then maybe you should tell them that they're ignorant. It's not hypocritical, it's being consistent.

I am however familiar enough with Ukraine and have studied its nuances, its history and the various opinion polls over time. And I don't support the Russian actions in East-Ukraine, I support the Russian annexation of Crimea and the militia in East-Ukraine. I only support the Russian actions in Ukraine in as much as they stop Kiev's actions in East-Ukraine, the majority of the population there don't want either Kiev or Moscow to rule over them - they want mostly self-rule, only a minority wants to join Russia but that's still more than the minority that want to keep the current Ukrainian situation. Hence in ascending order of support we have Kiev, Russia, the militias.

Aber · Mar 1, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Seriously? I've said twice that I'm not familiar enough with Chechnya to make a determination. However since it got asked twice I figured I'd take a quick look, said exactly how I did that (googling "Chechnya opinion poll") and presented what I found. Even then I openly admitted that I am not familiar enough to be able to tell whether what I found was an accurate representation of what the Chechnyans want. I'm very well aware that it takes a lot more study to understand a situation than just looking at one opinion poll, and have openly admitted that I have not done such study nor am I particularly interested in doing so. All I have found is that the Chechnyans don't want to be independent. If you care to present data that they do, then I'm more than willing to change my conclusion. And if they really don't want independence, then maybe you should tell them that they're ignorant. It's not hypocritical, it's being consistent.

Some history for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War

The First Chechen War, also known as the War in Chechnya, was a conflict between the Russian Federation and the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, fought from December 1994 to August 1996

The official figure for Russian military deaths is 5,500, while most estimates put the number between 3,500 and 7,500, or even as high as 14,000.[7] Although there are no accurate figures for the number of Chechen forces killed, various estimates put the number at about 3,000 to over 15,000 deaths. Various figures estimate the number of civilian deaths at between 30,000 and 100,000 killed and possibly over 200,000 injured, while more than 500,000 people were displaced by the conflict, which left cities and villages across the republic in ruins.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War

The campaign ended the de facto independence of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and restored Russian federal control over the territory.

The exact death toll from this conflict is unknown. Unofficial estimates range from 25,000 to 50,000 dead or missing, mostly civilians in Chechnya. Russian casualties are over 5,200 (official Russian casualty figures)[26] and are about 11,000 according to the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers.[27]

Russia's response to the defacto independence of a republic which was part of the Russian Federation is military intervention with huge casualties.

So pick a principle:
- a state is entitled to do whatever it takes to prevent a region declaring independence - Russia's view of Chechnya
- a state is entitled to occupy and annex part of another country, as long it can show that a referendum that it controls shows that the population wants it - Russia's view of Crimea
- state borders can be changed BUT it requires BOTH the agreement of the local population AND the international community - most of the west's view
- whatever Russia does is right and moral - the Kremlin view

And I don't support the Russian actions in East-Ukraine, I support the Russian annexation of Crimea and the militia in East-Ukraine.

You do realise that without Russia action and support there would not be a militia in eastern Ukraine?

LSSBB · Mar 1, 2015

Wait a second - are opinion polls a solid basis for democracy? Especially with the question of whether they were constructed in an unbiased fashion, an what population was sampled, still open?

caveman1917 · Mar 1, 2015

Aber said:
So pick a principle

None of those. I believe I've already explained the principle that I choose to use, but to put it in your terms: A local population can do whatever it wants, join any state it wants (if the population in that state agrees with it of course), secede from any state it wants, change its status within a state without secession (such as federalization), etc; and it's nobody else's business to interfere with it.

You do realise that without Russia action and support there would not be a militia in eastern Ukraine?

Maybe, maybe not. Have you considered that if Kiev hadn't decided to use military force to suppress the autonomy movement that there wouldn't be a militia either? Still, this is all speculation.

caveman1917 · Mar 1, 2015

LSSBB said:
Wait a second - are opinion polls a solid basis for democracy? Especially with the question of whether they were constructed in an unbiased fashion, an what population was sampled, still open?

You can't just look at a single opinion poll, but have to analyze all available polls and other data to get an understanding of what a population thinks and wants. That's why I said that even if the single poll I found about Chechnya finds that they don't want independence it may still not be an accurate representation, I'm just not interested enough in Chechnya to put in the effort required.

Opinion polls aren't a solid basis for democracy, referenda would be. Which is ironically exactly what happened in Crimea and the Donbass. Both showing results that are consistent with the polls. Opinion polls are however, especially when they're consistent with eachother, the best way to find out what a population wants. It's not perfect, but as far as grounding a position in actual data goes, it's the best there is.

caveman1917 · Mar 1, 2015

caveman1917 said:
You can't just look at a single opinion poll, but have to analyze all available polls and other data to get an understanding of what a population thinks and wants.

To illustrate this, take a look at this propaganda piece in the Washington Post (this was the standard type of articles being published in the Western press at the time)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rendum-in-crimea-keep-these-5-charts-in-mind/

What it conveniently fails to point out is that the poll it uses to find only 41% support in Crimea for unification with Russia asks whether they think that the entire Ukraine should join Russia and that they are cherry-picking and misrepresenting it. Unless you are familiar with all the other polls and can see that this result doesn't fit you're unlikely to catch this sort of stuff. That's why I won't take a position on Chechnya until I've done my research, which I'm not going to do anyway because it doesn't interest me enough.

Aber · Mar 1, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Maybe, maybe not. Have you considered that if Kiev hadn't decided to use military force to suppress the autonomy movement that there wouldn't be a militia either? Still, this is all speculation.

What autonomy movement? Do you mean Russian special forces in unmarked uniforms, like Strelkov?

As to the principle that any population can change its status on its own - have you thought this through? How do you define the area under consideration; how do you measure the will of the population; do you accept the ultimate result of this is everybody having their own country?

caveman1917 · Mar 1, 2015

Aber said:
What autonomy movement? Do you mean Russian special forces in unmarked uniforms, like Strelkov?

No, I mean these people
http://photo.sf.co.ua/g/394/5.jpg
http://www.rogerannis.com/wp-conten...s-in-Donetsk-eastern-Ukraine-April-6-2014.jpg
http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibt.../public/2014/07/07/rtr3xczu.jpg?itok=tqzHvrEw
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ao0Gjf5UERk/maxresdefault.jpg

As to the principle that any population can change its status on its own - have you thought this through?

If the alternative is civil war then yes, I'll go with self-determination instead.

How do you define the area under consideration

Recursively. Start with a large area, and recursively subdivide until the problem is solved.

how do you measure the will of the population

By referendum.

do you accept the ultimate result of this is everybody having their own country?

No, you have not presented evidence of this. For instance Crimea isn't its own country now, it just switched.

Aber · Mar 1, 2015

caveman1917 said:
No, you have not presented evidence of this. For instance Crimea isn't its own country now, it just switched.

Presumably you believe that the Crimean Tartars who are being harassed by the Russian authorities have the right to decide they do not want to remain in Russia, but could rejoin Ukraine?

carlitos · Mar 1, 2015

Aber said:
What autonomy movement? Do you mean Russian special forces in unmarked uniforms, like Strelkov?

What a concept. . External autonomy? Enforced autonomy? Putinonomy ?

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

Aber said:
Presumably you believe that the Crimean Tartars who are being harassed by the Russian authorities have the right to decide they do not want to remain in Russia, but could rejoin Ukraine?

Of course they have the right. Do you have evidence that says they want to rejoin Ukraine?

Latest data I know of (january 2015) shows that 4% of Crimeans doesn't agree with the annexation, of which only 20% (less than 1% of the total sample) said that is because they preferred Ukraine. Compare with 12% Crimean Tatar population. Of interest here is that 45% say that reporting in Ukrainian media about Crimea is absolutely false and another 35% saying it is more false than true. And it's not because they're "brainwashed by Russian propaganda", only 10% trust the Russian media. It doesn't ask about Western media, but that's essentially copy-pasting Ukrainian media as far as Crimea/Donbass goes.

http://www.gfk.com/ua/Documents/Presentations/GFK_report_FreeCrimea.pdf

So rather than ask me the exact same question over and over again substituting one group after another, would it not be better to be more skeptical about the reports that presumably lead to the assumptions underlying your questions?

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

carlitos said:
What a concept. . External autonomy? Enforced autonomy? Putinonomy ?

Yes, a right to self-determination even if they don't want what the West wants? What a concept...

tyr_13 · Mar 2, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Yes, a right to self-determination even if they don't want what the West wants? What a concept...

How was it determined that they actually wanted this? Free and fair referendum? No, it was after being invaded by the same power they allegedly so badly wanted to join, observed only by that power, and after the people who might have argued and voted against it had been driven out.

Even if one is to argue that a simple local referendum would be all that is required to leave one country and join another, it doesn't mean that this referendum was valid. It was not, and it matters nothing what someone believes a valid referendum would have resulted in.

McHrozni · Mar 2, 2015

tyr_13 said:
How was it determined that they actually wanted this? Free and fair referendum? No, it was after being invaded by the same power they allegedly so badly wanted to join, observed only by that power, and after the people who might have argued and voted against it had been driven out.

And after enduring a few weeks of media blackout, with only Russian propaganda permitted. The referendum went badly, so they posted fake results. Real results leaked a little bit later.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrod...lection-results-only-15-voted-for-annexation/

30% turnout, 50% in favor of annexation.

There were no instruments against vote rigging, and it's likely Russian servicemen in Crimea voted as well, plus there was no effective measure against multiple voting. It's likely the pro-Russian sentiment was even lower than that.

McHrozni

McHrozni · Mar 2, 2015

Pro-Ukrainian bloggers posted this analysis about how important Ukraine is to Putler:

http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.com/2015/02/russia-needs-ukraine-to-fulfill-its.html

The gist of it: without Ukraine, Russia can't field fighters, helicopters, can't build air to air missiles and doesn't have a nuclear deterrent.

In other words, without Ukraine, Russia barely matches ISIS in war hardware. Note to all dictator wannabes: if your army relies on another state, make sure you treat it well.

McHrozni

Rincewind · Mar 2, 2015

Aber said:
Some history for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War

Russia's response to the defacto independence of a republic which was part of the Russian Federation is military intervention with huge casualties.

So pick a principle:
- a state is entitled to do whatever it takes to prevent a region declaring independence - Russia's view of Chechnya
- a state is entitled to occupy and annex part of another country, as long it can show that a referendum that it controls shows that the population wants it - Russia's view of Crimea
- state borders can be changed BUT it requires BOTH the agreement of the local population AND the international community - most of the west's view
- whatever Russia does is right and moral - the Kremlin view

You do realise that without Russia action and support there would not be a militia in eastern Ukraine?

It does make me wonder about the poll that Caveman1917 found.

After all that Russia has done to Chechnya it seems to defy common sense that anyone there would want to unite with Russia.

McHrozni · Mar 2, 2015

Rincewind said:
After all that Russia has done to Chechnya it seems to defy common sense that anyone there would want to unite with Russia.

Cognitive dissonance or, by it's classical name that I prefer, doublethink.

Russian crimes since 1991 eclipse those of any other state in that time, except North Korea. But because it opposes US from time to time it is permissible for Russia to do anything and everything it desires.

There is no sense in arguing with these people, if they had any reason whatsoever they would've found out their positions were illogical to the point of absurdity by now. Use the ignore button if they bother you.

McHrozni

McHrozni · Mar 2, 2015

CapelDodger said:
Dividing the USSR by its administrative borders was a lazy option but what the heck when there's money to be made and liberal democratic capitalism to spread throughout the world by virtue of its triumph. I always knew it looked to easy.

While I agree it was the lazy option, this also assumes the West is somehow to blame for dividing the USSR the way it was divided. This seems rather unjustified to me. I can agree the British have historic blame (that they can't fix now) for Iraq and that the French have historic blame for some of the feces going on in western Africa and so on, but this can't apply to the case of USSR. Western powers didn't occupy or control the land, they didn't dictate the terms of breakup - they didn't even dictate the breakup itself, the government in Moscow had the option of cracking down on dissent by force come hell of high water. The West couldn't stop it anyway.

There is also a presumption that states with significant minorities are somehow ungovernable. This is nothing short of ludicrous as long as Switzerland exists. Last time I checked it's a rather prosperous state as well, even though it has no substantial natural resources.

McHrozni

Rincewind · Mar 2, 2015

McHrozni said:
Cognitive dissonance or, by it's classical name that I prefer, doublethink.

Russian crimes since 1991 eclipse those of any other state in that time, except North Korea. But because it opposes US from time to time it is permissible for Russia to do anything and everything it desires.

There is no sense in arguing with these people, if they had any reason whatsoever they would've found out their positions were illogical to the point of absurdity by now. Use the ignore button if they bother you.

McHrozni

I agree with you - and definitely not bothered!

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

tyr_13 said:
How was it determined that they actually wanted this?

By all the polls, even dating back years ago, saying so. If you want some examples

http://www.razumkov.org.ua/eng/files/category_journal/NSD104_eng_2.pdf
http://www.undp.crimea.ua/img/content/file/monitoring_ru_2009_10-12.pdf
http://www.undp.crimea.ua/img/content/file/monitoring_ru_2010_10-12.pdf
http://www.undp.crimea.ua/img/conte...ring Report (October to December 2011)(5).pdf
http://avaazpress.s3.amazonaws.com/558_Crimea.Referendum.Poll.GfK.pdf

Free and fair referendum?

Let's ask the Crimeans themselves, shall we?

http://www.bbg.gov/wp-content/media/2014/06/Ukraine-research-brief.pdf
http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/08...rnance-ukrainians-want-to-remain-one-country/
http://www.gfk.com/ua/Documents/Presentations/GFK_report_FreeCrimea.pdf

All free and fair.

No, it was after being invaded by the same power they allegedly so badly wanted to join, observed only by that power, and after the people who might have argued and voted against it had been driven out.

Even if one is to argue that a simple local referendum would be all that is required to leave one country and join another, it doesn't mean that this referendum was valid. It was not, and it matters nothing what someone believes a valid referendum would have resulted in.

Do you have any sort of, you know, evidence for these claims?

ETA: So according to you the Crimeans widely wanted to join Russia for years, then when they actually had the chance they all changed their minds and the referendum results were falsified, and afterwards they all forgot about it again and said the referendum was indeed free and fair? And you want us to just believe you on your word on this? Maybe you're just being too logical for me here

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

McHrozni said:
And after enduring a few weeks of media blackout, with only Russian propaganda permitted. The referendum went badly, so they posted fake results. Real results leaked a little bit later.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrod...lection-results-only-15-voted-for-annexation/

30% turnout, 50% in favor of annexation.

There were no instruments against vote rigging, and it's likely Russian servicemen in Crimea voted as well, plus there was no effective measure against multiple voting. It's likely the pro-Russian sentiment was even lower than that.

McHrozni

Let's take a look at what the council had to say about that
"In particular, speaking about the Crimean referendum, the review authors convey only value judgments of his interlocutors, not appreciating their objectivity and accuracy.

The Council requests that the media does not distort the content of this review."

http://www.president-sovet.ru/struc...olitike/materialy/problemy_zhiteley_kryma.php

Paul Roderick Gregory is a propagandist, and not a very good one at that, as you could easily determine if you cared to fact-check the claims he makes - in this as well as in his other articles.

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

McHrozni said:
There is no sense in arguing with these people, if they had any reason whatsoever they would've found out their positions were illogical to the point of absurdity by now. Use the ignore button if they bother you.

Do you know what logic actually is? Or is it just "if I don't like it then it's illogical"? Otherwise you are free to show the "illogical" aspect of my positions.

CapelDodger · Mar 2, 2015

dudalb said:
Putin is by far the most likely suspect.

From the way this hit was carred out, it was a professional level job,

And in Russia only the State can call on professional hit-men? I think not.

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

Have you noticed that you guys are contradicting eachother? Both arguing that only 15% of Crimeans voted to join Russia as well as that those who would vote against it had been driven out before the referendum. Did someone mention doublethink? The thing that allows you to notice these things is called "logic", maybe you should look it up.

CapelDodger · Mar 2, 2015

caveman1917 said:
That was one of the arguments against Maidan that came from the East, that it's just exchanging one set of crooks for another.

Do Ukrainians in the West feel very much different? I doubt it.

caveman1917 · Mar 2, 2015

CapelDodger said:
Do Ukrainians in the West feel very much different? I doubt it.

At the time they widely supported the Euromaidan movement and the interim government resulting from it. I've not seen data that suggests a change in those opinions, but it's possible - I've not looked for any either.

carlitos · Mar 2, 2015

caveman1917 said:
Yes, a right to self-determination even if they don't want what the West wants? What a concept...

If you think that invasion by a foreign army, forcible annexation, media blackouts and propaganda and rigged elections = "self determination " i don't think that there is anything that will sway you. A Putin apologist as someone said earlier.

Continuation - Ukraine erupts in riots and general strikes

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Uncritical "thinker"

Philosopher

Devilish Dictionarian

Penultimate Amazing

Master Poster

Philosopher

Master Poster

Devilish Dictionarian

Philosopher

Philosopher

Philosopher

Master Poster

Philosopher

Master Poster

"más divertido"

Philosopher

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Philosopher

Philosopher

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

"más divertido"