ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Russia-Ukraine relations , Ukraine incidents , Ukraine issues , vladimir putin

Reply
Old 3rd March 2015, 05:00 PM   #201
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
Referendum carried out under the laws of the country, or UN control
The referendum was carried out in accordance with the standard electoral procedure as used in Ukraine, and specifically in accordance with the constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea specifying which people get to vote (Ukrainian nationals residing in Crimea).

It contradicted the constitution of Ukraine, in specific that no region is allowed to secede without agreement of the rest of Ukraine. That it is constitutional in this sense is not and never has been a requirement, most independence referendums have in fact been unconstitutional that way. This was btw the same argument used by Gorbachev to declare the independence referendums by the baltic states invalid (contradicted the constitution of the USSR which had the same provision), an argument that was refuted by the West since such constitutional provision contradicts the inherent right to self-determination as provided by the UN charter.

Quote:
Fair and balanced question, including the status quo as an option
The referendum would only have been valid with a turnout of over 50%, anyone wanting to maintain the status quo could do so by not voting. Whether the option should have been on the ballot or implicit by turnout is debatable, but in my view this way of doing it is more democratic since first, no citizen should be required to take affirmative action to maintain the status quo and second, this overestimates support for the status quo since there will also be voters who don't go vote for different reasons. If people wanted to maintain the status quo they could've done so in the simplest way possible, by ignoring the referendum.

Quote:
Freedom for supporters of both sides to campaign without intimidation
Both pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian rallies were held without interference by the authorities (such as those attended by one journalist here https://twitter.com/yaffaesque/statu...98700512165888).

Neither Western nor Russian media reported much on the pro-Ukrainian campaign, both presumably for their own reasons.

Minor instances of violence have been reported but these do not appear to have been instigated by the authorities but are of the usual type of scuffles and provocations, and the police appears to have done its work in that regard.

Quote:
Sufficient time for the electorate to make an informed decision
Not sure what "sufficient time" exactly means, but the question of reunification with Russia or the status of Crimea in Ukraine had been an issue in Crimea ever since the breakup of the USSR. It's not like this suddenly appeared out of the blue, or that the decision (join Russia or don't join Russia) is a particularly difficult one to understand.

Quote:
International observers to confirm that the campaign, voting and counting were in accordance with international standards
International observers were invited, both the OSCE as well as journalists and others. The OSCE refused on the basis that the referendum was unconstitutional. In the end 135 international and 1240 local observers were registered, as well as 623 journalists from international media (for instance here http://news.am/eng/news/199152.html). No widespread violations or irregularities were found by them, and although some of the observers were questioned as to their objectivity since some of them belonged to far-right groups, even the Czech observers (two MP's and a mayor who weren't) reported that the referendum was formally regular, there was no pressure on voters or any soldiers on the streets, and that it was comparable to the Czech elections (for example here http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ct24/dom...eho-aktivisty/).

Last edited by caveman1917; 3rd March 2015 at 05:07 PM. Reason: there were some minor reports
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2015, 10:55 AM   #202
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It satisfies all of them. Just because you're inventing some bizarre definition of "free and fair" that you somehow believe has objective and factual validity outside the opinion of the people involved doesn't mean I'll use it.
Some bizarre definition? Not say, the definition of the international organizations who observe and sanction such things?



Quote:
The OSCE said that it was illegal, specifically that it contradicts the Ukrainian constitution which specifies that no region can secede without agreement of the rest of Ukraine. That's quite something else.

Yes, illegal, unlawful, invalid because of it. They were not going to observe and then declare it doubly invalid. That would waste resources and allow Russia to make the presence of 'international observers' in their propaganda. It was not, as you 'not speculated' so that they could declare the elections invalid anyway.



Quote:
I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm saying it's true, exactly by virtue of those involved considering it true.
That is a truth that simply cannot be established in that way.

Quote:
In any case, unless you can answer the following question this discussion is utterly pointless. What, if any, evidence would convince you that the referendum was indeed free and fair?
Russia could have not invaded and allowed Ukrainian referendum to determine the outcome in accordance with international law. Russia could withdraw and let the Ukraine conduct the referendum with UN observers.

What would it take for you to acknowledge the invasion was illegal, and thus the referendum could not be valid? Nothing of course, you believe opinion polls can establish fair elections. Actually, that is only what you are arguing, I am unconvinced you actually believe this.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It was voting for which party would lead them, with one party being backed by the US. Change "election" into "referendum" and "parties" into "choices".
Why? Do you acknowledge these are drastically different situations then?

I do not support the American lead coalition invasion of Iraq. I think the failures of the government elected after it have had many disastrous outcomes, including the raise of ISIS on top of the corruption.

The elections under those (messed up and avoidable) circumstances were the best they were going to get though, and did have international observers, and of course elected a government that asked the US to leave. I hold that elections after the withdrawal of the US would be more valid.

In other words there are mitigating and aggravating factors in each, and the US in Iraq doesn't excuse the invasion of the Ukraine by Russia. The sins of the US simply isn't germane to the subject, and you're trying to build a tu quoque, poorly, and switch it more to the US. Again, this is consistent with your position as a Putin apologist.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2015, 04:16 PM   #203
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,699
Quote:
Autonomous Republic of Crimea
So the Russians invade and invent a name for the territory they occupy and suddenly it's a country with it's own constitution and justification imposed by the occupying forces.?

I guess that makes the ISIS 'Caliphate' a country as well.
Captain_Swoop is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 05:59 AM   #204
magellan
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 670
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
So the Russians invade and invent a name for the territory they occupy and suddenly it's a country with it's own constitution and justification imposed by the occupying forces.?
That name was invented in 1991. That's also when their constitution (different from the ukrainian) was written.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
I guess that makes the ISIS 'Caliphate' a country as well.
Hate to break this to you: But that is what they are trying to do. Main problem at this point in time seems to be control over their own airspace. We'll have to see how that developes.
magellan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:27 AM   #205
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
Graham Phillips is back home and has a message to the British people:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [...] [5]...
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:29 AM   #206
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
So the Russians invade and invent a name for the territory they occupy and suddenly it's a country with it's own constitution and justification imposed by the occupying forces.?
All you had to do was just copy-paste it in google. I'm willing to discuss the subject on a serious level, but not if you're just going to take some cheap shots while apparently not even wanting to do the most basic research into it. If you think watching/reading Western mass media constitutes learning about the situation then you are badly mistaken. The same goes for Russian mass media, but I presume you're not using those.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 11:46 AM   #207
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,651
Originally Posted by magellan View Post
That name was invented in 1991. That's also when their constitution (different from the ukrainian) was written.



Hate to break this to you: But that is what they are trying to do. Main problem at this point in time seems to be control over their own airspace. We'll have to see how that developes.
God,another ISIL "barve anti imperialist freedom fighters" fanboy.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 12:37 PM   #208
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
US Commander in Europe Panics, Goes on Bizarre Anti-Putin Rant

Originally Posted by Sputnik News
"I am sure Putin wants to destroy our alliance, not by attacking it but by splintering it."

[commander of the United States Army Europe (USAREUR) Command Lt. Gen. Frederick "Ben"] Hodges, who declared that there are 12,000 Russian troops in Ukraine, the biggest made-up number yet.

That's the same guy who recently gave U.S. medals to Ukrainian cannon fodder/army soldiers.
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [...] [5]...
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 12:54 PM   #209
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
AAAND here's more polling of Crimeans, this time by none other than Russia-hating Soros' "Open Democracy" foundation, which does some mental gymnastics and claims to detect a "conundrum", but has to report that a professional Levada poll found that

Originally Posted by Open Democracy
[...] First, the great majority of the sample (85%) declared that Crimea was ‘moving in the right direction.’ This finding is in contrast to previous polling conducted in Crimea.

Polling by the International Republican Institute found only 6% of Crimeans believed the country (Ukraine) was heading in the right direction in November 2009, 11% in October 2011, and 24% in May 2013. The May 2013 figure for how Crimea specifically was heading was 22%. [...]

This trend even seems to include the oh-so-oppressed Tatars of which only 40% say that Crimea is heading in the wrong direction.
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [...] [5]...

Last edited by Childlike Empress; 5th March 2015 at 01:05 PM.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 03:35 PM   #210
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
The referendum would only have been valid with a turnout of over 50%, anyone wanting to maintain the status quo could do so by not voting. Whether the option should have been on the ballot or implicit by turnout is debatable, but in my view this way of doing it is more democratic since first, no citizen should be required to take affirmative action to maintain the status quo and second, this overestimates support for the status quo since there will also be voters who don't go vote for different reasons. If people wanted to maintain the status quo they could've done so in the simplest way possible, by ignoring the referendum.


The question you asked was what evidence would be needed to convince me that the referendum was free, fair and valid.

Your response is full of excuses for what actually happened, and is not a serious attempt to discuss what a free and fair referendum should look like.

Is there anything at all you would criticise on what was done in Crimea?
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 05:31 PM   #211
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
What's wrong with the point I made? It's quite a fair argument if you'd consider it, in a general sense, not just about the Crimean one. Rolling your eyes at it is not a counterargument.

Quote:
The question you asked was what evidence would be needed to convince me that the referendum was free, fair and valid.

Your response is full of excuses for what actually happened, and is not a serious attempt to discuss what a free and fair referendum should look like.
It's not full of excuses, you gave me 5 aspects that would determine this according to you, I provided information on each one of them. It may or may not meet your standards and you may or may not agree with any arguments made, but that doesn't mean they're excuses.

As far as I see it, the entire reason those modalities exist is to ensure that a referendum's result accurately represents the will of the population and that they are free to express that will through the referendum, which it clearly did in this case.

Quote:
Is there anything at all you would criticise on what was done in Crimea?
Yes. Several things in fact. Not the validity of the referendum and reunification with Russia though.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 05:40 PM   #212
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
which does some mental gymnastics and claims to detect a "conundrum"
Specifically note how they again keep cherry-picking and misrepresenting that poll showing 41% support for the entire Ukraine joining Russia, to then conclude that because of Russian propaganda the support magically "doubled". George Soros' foundations are becoming more and more transparent in their propaganda, but it won't stop the media from parroting it dutifully of course. HRW is falsifying photographs as a past-time now, claiming one of a mourning mother after the Odessa massacre to be from Russia of some woman "repressed by Putin" (they didn't even bother to change the patch on the uniforms of some policemen in the picture clearly showing them to be Ukrainian), and just a couple of days ago claiming that a photo of Kobane after destruction by a US bombing campaign to be a picture of destruction by a Syrian bombing campaign.

Last edited by caveman1917; 5th March 2015 at 05:46 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 10:51 AM   #213
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
The Guardian is having a field day today.

After publishing a PR piece about a "female Ukrainian freedom fighter" helping her countrymen in the "struggle against Russian aggression" people started pointing out the SS insignia and other neo-nazi symbols painted on her van. So what did the Guardian do? The same it always does, quickly remove all those comments. And later quietly changed the article.

Remember how the Guardian brought us the "comments saying there are fascists in Ukraine are written by a secret Russian paid troll army" stuff when their earlier articles were coming under fire for writing pretty much the same nonsense. How they still get people to willingly part with their money to get to read what they write is beyond me.

Last edited by caveman1917; 6th March 2015 at 11:10 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 11:29 AM   #214
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
What's wrong with the point I made? It's quite a fair argument if you'd consider it, in a general sense, not just about the Crimean one. Rolling your eyes at it is not a counterargument.
is what your 'argument' deserved.

I can conclude that you do not think it important to have a fair and balanced question in a 'free and fair' referendum.

You claim that the exact question doesn't matter because
Quote:
The referendum would only have been valid with a turnout of over 50%
Can you provide a source for this, as according to Wikipedia:
Quote:
The referendum rules did not state if there was a threshold number of votes needed for the result to be enacted.

I'd also be interested to hear what you would criticise given you're so content with the result.
Quote:
Yes. Several things in fact. Not the validity of the referendum and reunification with Russia though.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 12:08 PM   #215
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
is what your 'argument' deserved.

I can conclude that you do not think it important to have a fair and balanced question in a 'free and fair' referendum.
You are misrepresenting the argument I made. Let me try to make it clearer. Consider any group of people that wants to change something through a referendum.

In your preferred way they'd have a ballot saying "Do you want to change X?" with either yes or no as an option. Suppose there is a turnout of 70% including 40% yes and 30% no, then X would get changed, yet there is only proof of a minority of people (40%) that want X changed.

I consider the following a better way. A ballot with "I want to change X" and it only being valid with >50% turnout. That way you'll never have a change of something when there's only a minority support being proven. I consider the status quo the default position and the burden of proof for majority support to be on the side wanting to change it.

Quote:
You claim that the exact question doesn't matter
I'm not claiming that, I've said that the status quo, in my opinion, doesn't have to be on the ballot. You can agree or not with the argument, but there's no need for the stuff, it's a fair argument based on burden of proof and on the reason we actually have referendums in the first place, which is to base any change on proven majority support for it.

Quote:
Can you provide a source for this
Certainly.

For the Sevastopol referendum
Quote:
Referendum on Crimean Sevastopol’s accession to Russia to be found valid, if turnout 50%
http://tass.ru/en/world/722652

And for the Crimean referendum (technically there were two referendums)
Quote:
By early afternoon, Aksenov had declared the referendum valid, saying that the turnout reached about 50%.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/mar...endum-20140316

Quote:
I'd also be interested to hear what you would criticise given you're so content with the result.
The use of paramilitary units would be one. Not admitting the troops are Russian special forces would be another.

Last edited by caveman1917; 6th March 2015 at 12:23 PM. Reason: I probably misunderstood something
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 04:17 PM   #216
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
The Guardian is having a field day today.

After publishing a PR piece about a "female Ukrainian freedom fighter" helping her countrymen in the "struggle against Russian aggression" people started pointing out the SS insignia and other neo-nazi symbols painted on her van. So what did the Guardian do? The same it always does, quickly remove all those comments. And later quietly changed the article.

Remember how the Guardian brought us the "comments saying there are fascists in Ukraine are written by a secret Russian paid troll army" stuff when their earlier articles were coming under fire for writing pretty much the same nonsense. How they still get people to willingly part with their money to get to read what they write is beyond me.

Hahaha. How pathetic.

John Mearsheimer has been in Berlin for some event and yesterday dared to go on the daily half-an-hour show Russia Today is lately (to the outrage of the German pre$$titutes) producing in German. After some advice (not only by yours truly ), the untranslated and uncut interview has been published. Quite interesting:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [...] [5]...
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:28 PM   #217
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Hahaha. How pathetic.
Yes, long gone are the days when it actually took some effort to see through the cries about secret paid troll armies. Seems people have also learned to take screenshots of their comments so it may get a lot harder for the Guardian to keep this up.

ETA: the last time I remember that "paid troll army" argument being used convincingly, at first glance, was last summer on wikipedia's Su-25 article with the MH17 thing. That's when it got used on the people putting the flight ceiling at 10km rather than 7km claiming that's what it said in their manuals, most of whose IPs traced to Russia (which should have been unsurprising since that's probably the place where you'll find most people with Su-25 manuals). Then they got mass banned as instigated by those oh-so-objective Western editors pointing to the Sukhoi website saying 7km. Problem of course was that the Sukhoi English language website described the...wait for it...export variant (Su-25K), who would've thought. And Ukraine being, well, part of the USSR at the time didn't get the export variant but the variants that do have a 10km ceiling (and some even more). It was certainly fun to see it play out with nobody apparently thinking of checking the Ukrainian air force's website which does say 10km, and at least back then it was actually a challenge to figure this stuff out.

Last edited by caveman1917; 6th March 2015 at 06:57 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2015, 02:11 AM   #218
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You are misrepresenting the argument I made.
This is how your argument appears to me:

I agree with the result in Crimea.
For a referendum result to be valid the referendum must be free and fair.
Therefore the referendum in Crimea must have been free and fair.


It sounds as if you have got your hands on some Douglas Adams software.

This approach makes you sound either very nave, or biased. This is reinforced by your apparent lack of relevant historical knowledge eg Chechnya.

Quote:
I consider the following a better way. A ballot with "I want to change X" and it only being valid with >50% turnout. That way you'll never have a change of something when there's only a minority support being proven. I consider the status quo the default position and the burden of proof for majority support to be on the side wanting to change it.
Your personal opinion only. How about some evidence on what procedures have been followed in internationally accepted referendums?

You have also missed problems with the turnout threshold in Crimea - those running the referendum did not have the valid voter registration lists as these were held by Kiev, so calculating the turnout was problematic; and there are clear examples of violations where people voted without correct paperwork.

Quote:
The use of paramilitary units would be one. Not admitting the troops are Russian special forces would be another.
You raise some mild criticism on these points, but cannot accept that the presence of the armed forces of another country in the parliamentary chamber when a decision was taken to hold the referendum invalidates the whole concept of a free and fair referendum.

Quote:
there's no need for the stuff
When you are arguing backwards from your preferred result on a skeptics forum, and rely on your personal opinion on how referendums should be run; yes it is needed.

Last edited by Aber; 7th March 2015 at 02:12 AM.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2015, 05:42 AM   #219
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
Remarkably frank article in SPIEGEL calling out Nuland and StrangeBreedlove: Breedlove's Bellicosity: Berlin Alarmed by Aggressive NATO Stance on Ukraine

Originally Posted by SPIEGEL
It was quiet in eastern Ukraine last Wednesday. Indeed, it was another quiet day in an extended stretch of relative calm. The battles between the Ukrainian army and the pro-Russian separatists had largely stopped and heavy weaponry was being withdrawn. The Minsk cease-fire wasn't holding perfectly, but it was holding.

On that same day, General Philip Breedlove, the top NATO commander in Europe, stepped before the press in Washington. Putin, the 59-year-old said, had once again "upped the ante" in eastern Ukraine -- with "well over a thousand combat vehicles, Russian combat forces, some of their most sophisticated air defense, battalions of artillery" having been sent to the Donbass. "What is clear," Breedlove said, "is that right now, it is not getting better. It is getting worse every day."

German leaders in Berlin were stunned. They didn't understand what Breedlove was talking about. And it wasn't the first time. Once again, the German government, supported by intelligence gathered by the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany's foreign intelligence agency, did not share the view of NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).

The pattern has become a familiar one. For months, Breedlove has been commenting on Russian activities in eastern Ukraine, speaking of troop advances on the border, the amassing of munitions and alleged columns of Russian tanks. Over and over again, Breedlove's numbers have been significantly higher than those in the possession of America's NATO allies in Europe. As such, he is playing directly into the hands of the hardliners in the US Congress and in NATO.

The German government is alarmed. Are the Americans trying to thwart European efforts at mediation led by Chancellor Angela Merkel? Sources in the Chancellery have referred to Breedlove's comments as "dangerous propaganda." [...]
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [...] [5]...
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2015, 05:52 AM   #220
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,843
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Remarkably frank article in SPIEGEL calling out Nuland and StrangeBreedlove: Breedlove's Bellicosity: Berlin Alarmed by Aggressive NATO Stance on Ukraine
Ah, those sources. Smart folks.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2015, 09:53 AM   #221
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
This is how your argument appears to me:

I agree with the result in Crimea.
For a referendum result to be valid the referendum must be free and fair.
Therefore the referendum in Crimea must have been free and fair.
Try this: The people in Crimea agree with the result. The people in Crimea consider it free and fair and say that Ukrainian/Western media is spreading false information. Ergo the referendum was likely free and fair and the information on which the West bases itself to consider it otherwise is likely false or misrepresented.

Quote:
This is reinforced by your apparent lack of relevant historical knowledge eg Chechnya.
How is Chechnya even relevant here?

Quote:
Your personal opinion only.
What else would it be? This isn't hard science you know.

Quote:
How about some evidence on what procedures have been followed in internationally accepted referendums?
Although not a referendum a relevant internationally accepted vote to compare the procedure with would be the vote by the Ukrainian parliament to oust Yanukovich, which is what started this entire thing. The procedure followed was

1. Unconstitutional.
2. Posting armed militants inside the building as well as outside blocking the entrances. (see for instance page 94 of Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands)
3. Deputies who were allowed inside voting for those who were denied entry. (for instance here)

At least one Western legal scholar (it used to be quoted in the wikipedia article on the maidan protests but seems to have been removed, I can't immediately find it again) argued that these transgressions did not mean that the vote was invalid because it still "clearly represented popular will" (presumably those 51% who considered that act legitimate).

So what's wrong with arguing on the same basis for the subsequent votes in Ukraine? Always be careful when asking for a comparison to precedents

Quote:
You have also missed problems with the turnout threshold in Crimea - those running the referendum did not have the valid voter registration lists as these were held by Kiev, so calculating the turnout was problematic
Calculating the turnout only requires knowledge of the total number of registered voters, not their individual identities.

Quote:
and there are clear examples of violations where people voted without correct paperwork.
As far as I know there was one claim by a person that she was able to vote with a Ukrainian residence permit rather than a Ukrainian passport as would've been required. Do you know of any more examples?

Quote:
but cannot accept that the presence of the armed forces of another country in the parliamentary chamber when a decision was taken to hold the referendum invalidates the whole concept of a free and fair referendum.
No it doesn't. Whether a referendum is free and fair is not contingent on the presence of foreign military in the decision whether to hold it. Applying your argument would automatically invalidate a whole bunch of referendums and elections that were internationally considered free and fair after military intervention by foreign powers, some of the most recent ones being Afghanistan and Iraq. -ing doesn't make your argument any more valid.

Last edited by caveman1917; 7th March 2015 at 09:55 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2015, 04:13 PM   #222
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
Seems like today another assassination attempt on Mozgovoi happened (there has been a series of "suicides" of Ukrainian opposition figures while the "western" news was focusing on Nemtsov obsessing about Putin, btw). Apparently he survived a triple bomb attack on his car but still managed to send a message out the same day, only slightly injured:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
De-Putin-Nazify America!
...progress updates [1] [2] [...] [5]...
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2015, 01:55 AM   #223
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Try this: The people in Crimea agree with the result. The people in Crimea consider it free and fair and say that Ukrainian/Western media is spreading false information. Ergo the referendum was likely free and fair and the information on which the West bases itself to consider it otherwise is likely false or misrepresented.

How is Chechnya even relevant here?

What else would it be? This isn't hard science you know.

Although not a referendum a relevant internationally accepted vote to compare the procedure with would be the vote by the Ukrainian parliament to oust Yanukovich, which is what started this entire thing. The procedure followed was

1. Unconstitutional.
2. Posting armed militants inside the building as well as outside blocking the entrances. (see for instance page 94 of Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands)
3. Deputies who were allowed inside voting for those who were denied entry.

At least one Western legal scholar (it used to be quoted in the wikipedia article on the maidan protests but seems to have been removed, I can't immediately find it again) argued that these transgressions did not mean that the vote was invalid because it still "clearly represented popular will" (presumably those 51% who considered that act legitimate).

So what's wrong with arguing on the same basis for the subsequent votes in Ukraine? Always be careful when asking for a comparison to precedents

Calculating the turnout only requires knowledge of the total number of registered voters, not their individual identities.

As far as I know there was one claim by a person that she was able to vote with a Ukrainian residence permit rather than a Ukrainian passport as would've been required. Do you know of any more examples?

No it doesn't. Whether a referendum is free and fair is not contingent on the presence of foreign military in the decision whether to hold it. Applying your argument would automatically invalidate a whole bunch of referendums and elections that were internationally considered free and fair after military intervention by foreign powers, some of the most recent ones being Afghanistan and Iraq. -ing doesn't make your argument any more valid.
You are just reinforcing the impression that your position is:

I agree with the results of the referendum, therefore the process does not matter

making you either nave or biased.

Quote:
How is Chechnya even relevant here?
Because you are parroting the official Russian line on Crimea; Chechnya is a counter-example of what Russia does when a part of its territory declares independence - it ignored the views of Chechens and fought two bloody wars to bring it back under the Kremlin's control.

Quote:
Calculating the turnout only requires knowledge of the total number of registered voters, not their individual identities.
And how do you know the total number of registered voters if you do not have a detailed list? If you do not know who the voters are, how can you claim a 50% turnout?

Quote:
-ing doesn't make your argument any more valid.
I use the smilies to show my opinion of your arguments, which is not much. The more that you repeat the same points, the more I tend to believe that your are simply biased, rather than nave.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2015, 07:46 AM   #224
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
You are just reinforcing the impression that your position is:

I agree with the results of the referendum, therefore the process does not matter

making you either nave or biased.
You are just reinforcing the impression that your position is:

I don't agree with the results of the referendum, therefore I'll look for anything that can be construed as to it not having been free and fair

Quote:
Because you are parroting the official Russian line on Crimea
Completely irrelevant thus. Shall I point out that you are parroting the official Ukrainian line on Crimea, which is now ignoring the views of the Donbass and fighting a bloody war to bring it back under Kiev's control? Or maybe you prefer parroting the official UK line on Crimea, and we all know what the UK did with its colonization campaigns?

Quote:
And how do you know the total number of registered voters if you do not have a detailed list? If you do not know who the voters are, how can you claim a 50% turnout?
I don't know, you could for instance go to the website of the Central Election Commission of Ukraine where those numbers are provided. It's what the editors of the wikipedia page on the Crimean referendum did, I see you're also not interested in doing some basic research on this. But then it's just an idea you know

Quote:
I use the smilies to show my opinion of your arguments, which is not much.
Oh I see, well in that case

Quote:
The more that you repeat the same points, the more I tend to believe that your are simply biased, rather than nave.
Projecting much with your "Look at evil Russia in Chechnya" point are we? Also still waiting for some evidence of those "clear examples of people voting without correct paperwork" that you claimed.

Last edited by caveman1917; 8th March 2015 at 07:56 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 12:38 AM   #225
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
The referendum was carried out in accordance with the standard electoral procedure as used in Ukraine, and specifically in accordance with the constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea specifying which people get to vote (Ukrainian nationals residing in Crimea).
Just about everything in the above paragraph is an outright lie. Russian nationals without Ukrainian passports were allowed to vote. Constitution of Crimea specifically prohibited referendum of such nature, etc.

Quote:
It contradicted the constitution of Ukraine, in specific that no region is allowed to secede without agreement of the rest of Ukraine. That it is constitutional in this sense is not and never has been a requirement, most independence referendums have in fact been unconstitutional that way. This was btw the same argument used by Gorbachev to declare the independence referendums by the baltic states invalid (contradicted the constitution of the USSR which had the same provision), an argument that was refuted by the West since such constitutional provision contradicts the inherent right to self-determination as provided by the UN charter.
Last time I checked, Russians already had a state. If they're a minority elsewhere and want to live in a Russian state, they're free to move there if they want so.

Unless there were drastic changes since yesterday when I last checked, the said state also had plenty of empty room. It's not Monaco or Singapore, so the excuses you make for the anschluss of Crimea are just that - pathetic excuses and nothing more.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 01:02 AM   #226
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You are just reinforcing the impression that your position is:

I don't agree with the results of the referendum, therefore I'll look for anything that can be construed as to it not having been free and fair
I have personal experience of a number of constitutional referendums (including a couple in 1993); they didn't look anything like what happened in Crimea. You are trying to create a general case of what a free and fair referendum looks like based on Crimea, and your own personal logic.

Quote:
I don't know, you could for instance go to the website of the Central Election Commission of Ukraine where those numbers are provided.
Voter registrations are not static; they change as people move and die. Therefore without the detailed list it is not possible to know what the registered number of voters was at the date of the referendum.

Quote:
Projecting much with your "Look at evil Russia in Chechnya" point are we?
I thought you didn't know anything about Chechnya?

You have convinced me; you are not very nave, you are simply biased.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 06:41 AM   #227
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Putler publicly admitted that he planned annexation of Crimea before there was any unrest on the peninsula.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31796226

Just in case anyone is still thinking it was something spontaneous. It was a clear case of military occupation and annexation of a piece of sovereign country, unseen in Europe since you-know-when.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 08:29 AM   #228
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
I have personal experience of a number of constitutional referendums (including a couple in 1993); they didn't look anything like what happened in Crimea. You are trying to create a general case of what a free and fair referendum looks like based on Crimea, and your own personal logic.
I'm not creating a general case of what a free and fair referendum looks like based on Crimea. You are arguing that there is only one way in which a referendum can be organized such that it is free and fair. Just because referendum A isn't organized the same way as referendums B, C and D doesn't necessarily mean that A isn't free and fair too.

If you want to argue that it isn't free and fair you should do so on its own terms, not by using an argumentum ad antiquitatem.

Quote:
Voter registrations are not static; they change as people move and die. Therefore without the detailed list it is not possible to know what the registered number of voters was at the date of the referendum.
If you claim personal experience of constitutional referendums then you should know that voter lists are always drawn up several days before the actual referendum. For example in my country, Belgium, the call-up letter to vote also arrives a couple of weeks before the actual elections. Claiming that in those couple of weeks people may have moved and died and therefore it is not possible to know the exact number of registered voters at the date of the referendum is exactly "looking for anything that can be construed so as to it not having been free and fair".

Quote:
I thought you didn't know anything about Chechnya?
I don't have to in order to know a fallacy of relevance when I see one.

Quote:
You have convinced me; you are not very nave, you are simply biased.
Idem dito.

Last edited by caveman1917; 9th March 2015 at 08:38 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 08:36 AM   #229
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Putler publicly admitted that he planned annexation of Crimea before there was any unrest on the peninsula.
You do know your own source contradicts you, right?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 09:09 AM   #230
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I'm not creating a general case of what a free and fair referendum looks like based on Crimea. You are arguing that there is only one way in which a referendum can be organized such that it is free and fair. Just because referendum A isn't organized the same way as referendums B, C and D doesn't necessarily mean that A isn't free and fair too.
That's not what you were trying to do earlier to justify the Crimean result based on achieving 50% turnout, to avoid the problem with the question used (which didn't have the status quo as an option).

Quote:
Let me try to make it clearer. Consider any group of people that wants to change something through a referendum.

In your preferred way they'd have a ballot saying "Do you want to change X?" with either yes or no as an option. Suppose there is a turnout of 70% including 40% yes and 30% no, then X would get changed, yet there is only proof of a minority of people (40%) that want X changed.

I consider the following a better way. A ballot with "I want to change X" and it only being valid with >50% turnout.
As to the voter lists needed to justify 50% turnout:

Quote:
If you claim personal experience of constitutional referendums then you should know that voter lists are always drawn up several days before the actual referendum.
Any evidence that the separatists in Crimea had any detailed voter lists several weeks before the referendum, or just a total number of voters? If just a total how recently was that total compiled?

As you enjoy opinion polls:

Quote:
On the site of the Pro-regime newspaper "krymskaya Pravda" has started a poll from March 5, 2015 year on "How would you answer the question of the referendum today?" Festival, which was attended by 4510 people.

61% of crimeans voted for "more authority to the Crimea in the Ukraine", while only 19 percent wanted Crimea was part of Russia
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 09:10 AM   #231
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
You have convinced me; you are not very nave, you are simply biased.
Let me ask you something. Do you consider the vote ousting Yanukovich valid?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 09:15 AM   #232
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
That's not what you were trying to do earlier to justify the Crimean result based on achieving 50% turnout, to avoid the problem with the question used (which didn't have the status quo as an option).
I consider both ways valid but one better than the other, for the reasons I have stated.

Quote:
Any evidence that the separatists in Crimea had any detailed voter lists several weeks before the referendum, or just a total number of voters? If just a total how recently was that total compiled?
It was the total number of registered voters as of 28 february 2014 (ie 16 days before the referendum) as published by the Central Election Commission of Ukraine.

Quote:
As you enjoy opinion polls:
An online poll on the website of a newspaper?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 09:16 AM   #233
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You do know your own source contradicts you, right?
No, it pretty much says exactly what McHrozni stated it says.

Quote:
Crimea was formally absorbed into Russia on 18 March, to international condemnation, after unidentified gunmen took over the peninsula.

Mr Putin said on TV he had ordered work on "returning Crimea" to begin at an all-night meeting on 22 February.

The meeting was called after Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted.

[...]

"I invited the leaders of our special services and the defence ministry to the Kremlin and set them the task of saving the life of the president of Ukraine, who would simply have been liquidated," he said.

"We finished about seven in the morning. When we were parting, I told all my colleagues, 'We are forced to begin the work to bring Crimea back into Russia'."


[...]

On 27 February, unidentified armed men seized the local parliament and local government buildings in Crimea, raising the Russian flag.

Among them appeared to be regular soldiers without military insignia, who were dubbed the "little green men".

Mr Putin subsequently admitted deploying troops on the peninsula to "stand behind Crimea's self-defence forces".
Literally the very day Yanukovych was kicked out, 22 days before the referendum was held, Putin called a meeting of military and intelligence personnel, and said "we're annexing Crimea".
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni

Last edited by A'isha; 9th March 2015 at 09:18 AM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 09:22 AM   #234
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
No, it pretty much says exactly what McHrozni stated it says.
You think there wasn't any unrest in Crimea before 22 february?

ETA: unless by unrest you don't mean those months of protests and counter-protests etc, but the takeover by military units. In which case the claim boils down to "the takeover was planned before it was executed", to which the answer would be: duh.

Last edited by caveman1917; 9th March 2015 at 09:32 AM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 12:43 PM   #235
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,651
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Putler publicly admitted that he planned annexation of Crimea before there was any unrest on the peninsula.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31796226

Just in case anyone is still thinking it was something spontaneous. It was a clear case of military occupation and annexation of a piece of sovereign country, unseen in Europe since you-know-when.

McHrozni
Gonna be fun to see the Putin fanboys explain away this confession.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 12:51 PM   #236
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You think there wasn't any unrest in Crimea before 22 february?
What unrest was there in Crimea before 22 February? The protests there didn't start until after Yanukovich was removed (and after Putin's meeting).

Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Gonna be fun to see the Putin fanboys explain away this confession.
Looks like straight-up denial, so far.
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 01:30 PM   #237
crescent
Graduate Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,832
Some of the language seems to imply that Russian forces were in Donestk when Yanukovych was rescued.

Quote:
Full details of Mr Yanukovych's escape from Ukraine are unclear although Mr Putin spoke of preparations to evacuate him from Donetsk.

"Heavy machine guns were placed there, so as not to waste time talking," he added, with preparations made by land, sea and air.
Who placed the heavy machine guns there?
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th March 2015, 01:37 PM   #238
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 15,982
Holidaymakers
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th March 2015, 03:55 AM   #239
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
Some of the language seems to imply that Russian forces were in Donestk when Yanukovych was rescued.

Who placed the heavy machine guns there?
It could be just a figure of speech, although a mililtary incursion is strongly hinted.

Can Ukraine go in front of ICJ with this? It's a blatant admission of Russian guilt, after all. Sure, they won't get Crimea back, but they could at least sue for damages - the banking assets and income tax they're now unable to collect from Crimea, for example. Could ICJ judge Russia owes the taxes that would be collected from Crimea until Ukraine recognizes Crimea as Russia or something similar?

It would be a rather nasty drain on Russian resources they would be ill placed to avoid, after all.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th March 2015, 04:33 AM   #240
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 23,218
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Gonna be fun to see the Putin fanboys explain away this confession.
If it was me I'd try the Vicky Pollard defence

Originally Posted by Vicky Pollard
Yer but no but yer but no but he was totally justified and everythink
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:58 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.