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 2nd March 2015, 07:57 AM   #161
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 22,776
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
State companies, owned by the state?
And the state owned by?

OK, Putin's state isn't Yeltsin's state. Default won't be a credible threat until those resources are drawn down anyway.

Quote:
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.
The West's financial system may not be able to. It's not just the sum involved, there's the leverage and the psychological effect. It's white-knuckle stable as it is.

Quote:
In that case they probably killed a few others before him. Any luck in finding those?
Perhaps back in the Chicago period, but this is a particular case in a new and evolving political climate. The most prominent critic of the Donbass war about to lead a march just after making a speech condemning that war in no uncertain terms. There's no equivalent to hand that I'm aware of.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger 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 2nd March 2015, 08:04 AM   #162
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
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.
And as long as you don't understand the notion of "evidence" there is nothing that will sway you either. Shall I call you a US apologist then?

You might start by providing evidence that people in Crimea considered it an invasion, considered the annexation "forced" and the elections (by which I presume you mean the referendum) "rigged". All I've seen yet are some claims without any evidence that have nothing to do with reality.
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 2nd March 2015, 08:07 AM   #163
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 22,776
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
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.
"Better our crooks than their crooks", perhaps. Or genuine hope that this time would be different.

When there's a war on and bodybags are coming home everything else tends to be obscured. It's after the war that people start wondering what it was all for and was it worth it. When funds for reconstruction are blatantly siphoned-off - as they surely will be - it can be very bad for sitting governments.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger 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 2nd March 2015, 08:15 AM   #164
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
"Better our crooks than their crooks", perhaps. Or genuine hope that this time would be different.
The latter as far as I can tell. It probably won't take long until the reality of what the IMF actually does will start to sink in. Poverty is already strongly going up I think.

Quote:
When there's a war on and bodybags are coming home everything else tends to be obscured.
Meaning that the government has an interest in keeping the war going, that's not good.
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 2nd March 2015, 08:29 AM   #165
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 22,776
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
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.
What's relevant is how many Crimeans regard the Russian army as foreign. Many of them have no links, cultural or otherwise, to Kiev and never have. Long before the annexation there were common complaints that Kiev governments were neglecting Crimea in favour of Western Ukraine (and, of course, themselves). The only interest they seemed to show was in Sevastopol, collecting the rent and using it as a bargaining counter with Russia.

Crimeans didn't suddenly start feeling Ukrainian when Kruschev attached them to Ukraine in 1954, nor when Kiev declared independence within the Soviet boundaries. If you consider the Crimean communities and their histories there's no reason why most of them would want to stick with Kiev, especially when Russia offered them better pensions regularly paid.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger 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 2nd March 2015, 09:01 AM   #166
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
The most prominent critic of the Donbass war about to lead a march just after making a speech condemning that war in no uncertain terms. There's no equivalent to hand that I'm aware of.

FYI Nemtzov was better known to the average Guardian reader than to the average Russian. He was a political has-been with minimal approval rates and no threat to TPTB at all.

Funny btw how Porky goofed up again by telling a tale how Nemtzov was about to publish irrefutable evidence of Russian army involvement in Donbass, bombshell apparently, indirectly admitting that the pap he presents every other day is nothing of the kind.
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 09:44 AM   #167
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Polls are not free and fair voting.



Quote:
No they were not and nothing you linked there is even evidence of that. Again, those are opinion polls not even asking if the referendum was conducted in a free and fair manner. That they were occupied already without international monitors in and of itself means the referendum is invalid.



Quote:
Do you have any sort of, you know, evidence for these claims?
Even Putin admits to the troops now, as linked earlier, so you have nothing to stand on here.

Quote:
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
No, that's not what I'm saying. Nice straw man.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
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.
Have you noticed that different people are making different arguments, or should we attribute arguments made by other Putin apologists to you too?
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 09:55 AM   #168
magellan
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 670
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
FYI Nemtzov was better known to the average Guardian reader than to the average Russian. He was a political has-been with minimal approval rates and no threat to TPTB at all.

Funny btw how Porky goofed up again by telling a tale how Nemtzov was about to publish irrefutable evidence of Russian army involvement in Donbass, bombshell apparently, indirectly admitting that the pap he presents every other day is nothing of the kind.
Clapper too:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...6ee_story.html

Openly sending arms into ukraine might provoke the russians into sending arms openly too.
And here I thought that the russian invasion in the donbass was already proven beyond a doubt, just like the historic fact that saddam hussein was training al quaeda in the use of chemical weapons...
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 2nd March 2015, 10:03 AM   #169
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Polls are not free and fair voting.
Your question was "how was it determined they actually wanted this?". Let me turn this around, how have you determined they didn't actually want this?

Quote:
No they were not and nothing you linked there is even evidence of that. Again, those are opinion polls not even asking if the referendum was conducted in a free and fair manner.
From what I linked:
"Overwhelming majorities say the March 16th referendum was free and fair (91%) and that the government in Kyiv ought to recognize the results of the vote (88%)."

Have you even bothered reading any of what I linked to?

Quote:
That they were occupied already without international monitors in and of itself means the referendum is invalid.
International monitors, such as the OSCE, were invited but they refused. So yeah, let's refuse to monitor it even when asked to and then afterwards we can say it was invalid because we didn't monitor it.

Besides, isn't the burden of proof on the one promoting a conspiracy theory?

Quote:
Have you noticed that different people are making different arguments
I have noticed that the US apologists don't seem to mind any contradictions they make amongst themselves. I have also noticed that they never present any evidence for their claims, no matter how much it is asked for. Just a bunch of self-contradictory claims that don't hold up under even the slightest scrutiny.

Do you or do you not say that those who might have voted differently had been expelled? Unless you're going to also claim that most of Crimea has been expelled, does that not mean that most of Crimea would not have voted differently?

What I notice most is that US apologists have no better argument than the childish "Putin apologist!".
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 2nd March 2015, 10:18 AM   #170
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Your question was "how was it determined they actually wanted this?". Let me turn this around, how have you determined they didn't actually want this?
That's exactly opposite how the burden of proof works, and not how self-determination would work for it to have any meaning.



Quote:
From what I linked:
"Overwhelming majorities say the March 16th referendum was free and fair (91%) and that the government in Kyiv ought to recognize the results of the vote (88%)."

Have you even bothered reading any of what I linked to?
Missed that part, thanks. No, I clicked one, saw it wasn't what was claimed, then didn't click the others.



Quote:
International monitors, such as the OSCE, were invited but they refused. So yeah, let's refuse to monitor it even when asked to and then afterwards we can say it was invalid because we didn't monitor it.

And why did they refuse?


Quote:
Besides, isn't the burden of proof on the one promoting a conspiracy theory?
Conspiracy theory? It was a military occupation. That's a conspiracy of a sort I suppose. Moreover, you're the one claiming it was a valid referendum to support self-determination. I claim it was not. The reasons it was not are true, and supported. The reasons you claim it was are...well...something about polling agreeing. That's the equivalent of 'we all knew he was guilt, so the lynch mob was a valid trial'.

Quote:
I have noticed that the US apologists... [snip]
Yeah, this isn't about the US at all. Nothing you said there is on topic, or relevant, besides conclusively proving that calling you a 'Putin apologist' is completely accurate.
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 11:00 AM   #171
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
That's exactly opposite how the burden of proof works
No it isn't. Even allowing for your claim that the initial burden of proof is on the one stating that is what they wanted (which it is not), I have given evidence that is what they wanted, so now the burden of proof is on you. I see you still fail to provide any evidence for your case.

Quote:
Irrelevant, they may have refused because they all wanted to go to a party instead. If they refuse to monitor a referendum then the fact that they haven't monitored it is not a basis for claiming it is illegal. It's illegal therefor we don't monitor it, we don't monitor it therefor it is illegal. That's circular if you hadn't noticed.

There's also a difference between it being illegal, in the sense of not in accordance with the law, and being illegitimate, in the sense of not having been free and fair and representative.

What's more, the determination of whether an action is in accordance with some law is not within the OSCE's mandate and certainly not within the Swiss foreign minister's.

Quote:
Conspiracy theory?
Yes, the theory that a conspiracy exists that falsified the results, against all the evidence, but the proposer knows The Truth as evidenced by reference to for instance some obscure report by the Russian human rights council that inadvertently "leaked" The Truth even though the people who produced the report refute that interpretation.

This is supposed to be the JREF forums and you can't even recognize an archetypical conspiracy theory? That it is promoted by every war-mongering pundit in the mass media and everyone who uncritically swallows it doesn't make it any less so.

Quote:
Moreover, you're the one claiming it was a valid referendum to support self-determination. I claim it was not.
Maybe you ought to define what you consider "valid" to mean. My definition is clear, if a referendum is free and fair and representative of the will of the population then I consider it "valid".

Quote:
The reasons you claim it was are...well...something about polling agreeing.
Yes exactly.

Quote:
That's the equivalent of 'we all knew he was guilt, so the lynch mob was a valid trial'.
That's just nonsense and you know it. Try "We all want something so the referendum we did in which we expressed that was a valid referendum". A referendum is a method of measuring opinion, not of anything that is independent of opinion, such as "guilt" in your example. There's nothing wrong with an ad populum argument in context of a referendum, for obvious reasons.

Quote:
Yeah, this isn't about the US at all.
It's not about Putin either, but that doesn't stop you doing those accusations, does it? It's about what the people in Crimea want, you know, the "self" in "self-determination".

Quote:
Nothing you said there is on topic, or relevant
I've deconstructed your claim about deportation of people who would've voted against it. Are you saying your own claim wasn't on topic? I've also pointed out that you're not providing evidence for your claims, which is not only on topic but quite relevant.

I notice you ignored my questions: "Do you or do you not say that those who might have voted differently had been expelled? Unless you're going to also claim that most of Crimea has been expelled, does that not mean that most of Crimea would not have voted differently?"

Quote:
besides conclusively proving that calling you a 'Putin apologist' is completely accurate.
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
What I notice most is that US apologists have no better argument than the childish "Putin apologist!".
Thank you for making my point for me.

Last edited by caveman1917; 2nd March 2015 at 12:58 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 2nd March 2015, 11:16 AM   #172
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by magellan View Post
just like the historic fact that saddam hussein was training al quaeda in the use of chemical weapons...
You'd think that the Iraq war would've been a perfect opportunity to get familiar with how war propaganda works. Some people just never learn from history.
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 2nd March 2015, 12:18 PM   #173
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 22,776
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You'd think that the Iraq war would've been a perfect opportunity to get familiar with how war propaganda works. Some people just never learn from history.
Sometimes they can learn the wrong thing. Anti-German propaganda in the UK during WWI was vicious and thoroughly discredited after the war. When the truth of the Final Solution began to come out it was widely dismissed as more of the same.

If occupation of the Crimea had been followed by large-scale ethnic cleansing it's hard to see why the Ukrainian government wouldn't make a big issue of it, which should provide plenty of evidence. It may become necessary for there to exist previously unknown death-camps (possibly FEMA-run) to which anti-Russian Crimeans were sent.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger 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 2nd March 2015, 01:22 PM   #174
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
No it isn't. Even allowing for your claim that the initial burden of proof is on the one stating that is what they wanted (which it is not), I have given evidence that is what they wanted, so now the burden of proof is on you. I see you still fail to provide any evidence for your case.

Now you're moving the goalposts and thus making as straw man of what I've said. I'm not claiming that in a free and fair referendum that the people of Crimea wouldn't have voted to join Russia. Thus, I don't have to provide evidence for a claim I am not making. My claim was about the circumstances of the referendum and the justification for the invasion. The referendum is invalid, but not because the results are out of line with what the people wanted.



Quote:
Irrelevant, they may have refused because they all wanted to go to a party instead. If they refuse to monitor a referendum then the fact that they haven't monitored it is not a basis for claiming it is illegal. It's illegal therefor we don't monitor it, we don't monitor it therefor it is illegal. That's circular if you hadn't noticed.
You thought the reasons were relevant when you speculated about them earlier. And no, the reasoning is not circular because those criteria do not rely on one another. It can be illegal for many reasons, one or the other, neither but something else, both, etc.

Quote:
There's also a difference between it being illegal, in the sense of not in accordance with the law, and being illegitimate, in the sense of not having been free and fair and representative.
This happens to be both of the first two, and on the third we don't have a time machine to tell how it would have turned out without the invasion.

Quote:
What's more, the determination of whether an action is in accordance with some law is not within the OSCE's mandate and certainly not within the Swiss foreign minister's.
Again, you thought it was a conspiracy against the referendum before, but now it doesn't matter.



Quote:
Yes, the theory that a conspiracy exists that falsified the results, against all the evidence, but the proposer knows The Truth as evidenced by reference to for instance some obscure report by the Russian human rights council that inadvertently "leaked" The Truth even though the people who produced the report refute that interpretation.

This is supposed to be the JREF forums and you can't even recognize an archetypical conspiracy theory? That it is promoted by every war-mongering pundit in the mass media and everyone who uncritically swallows it doesn't make it any less so.

Again, you're making a straw man of my points.



Quote:
Maybe you ought to define what you consider "valid" to mean. My definition is clear, if a referendum is free and fair and representative of the will of the population then I consider it "valid".



Yes exactly.

But it has not shown to be free and fair, and under the occupation of the foreign power they seek to join means it was de facto not free and fair.







Quote:
That's just nonsense and you know it. Try "We all want something so the referendum we did in which we expressed that was a valid referendum". A referendum is a method of measuring opinion, not of anything that is independent of opinion, such as "guilt" in your example. There's nothing wrong with an ad populum argument in context of a referendum, for obvious reasons.

I don't know what argument you're trying to counter here, but opinion polls are not the same as referendum, you can't simply substitute one for the other. Referendums might be opinion polls, but not all opinion polls are referendum.



Quote:
It's not about Putin either, but that doesn't stop you doing those accusations, does it? It's about what the people in Crimea want, you know, the "self" in "self-determination".

Nonsense. Putin is the head of the government (and one that holds disproportionate power in that government), that invaded Ukraine. It is very much about him and his country.



Quote:
I've deconstructed your claim about deportation of people who would've voted against it.
You did no such thing, you hand waved. When the other side has foreign troops with tanks and guns surrounding you, no opinion poll is evidence that they didn't influence the results.

Quote:
Are you saying your own claim wasn't on topic? I've also pointed out that you're not providing evidence for your claims, which is not only on topic but quite relevant.


Quote:
I notice you ignored my questions: "Do you or do you not say that those who might have voted differently had been expelled? Unless you're going to also claim that most of Crimea has been expelled, does that not mean that most of Crimea would not have voted differently?"

Expelled? When did I claim that.




Quote:
Thank you for making my point for me.

Dead wrong. You're trying to ignore everything else I've said to claim that all I have left is the extremely accurate label of 'Putin apologist', even though you're doing the 'but US!' dodge. Using the term doesn't make it invalid, and certainly isn't evidence that my arguments are weak.

Calling you a Putin apologist doesn't change the arguments made one bit.
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 01:41 PM   #175
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 14,884
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 02:01 PM   #176
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Now you're moving the goalposts
You said "How was it determined that they actually wanted this?" I gave you a bunch of polls that determine that they actually wanted this. Then you said: "polls are not free and fair voting" but I'm the one who's moving the goalposts?

Quote:
You thought the reasons were relevant when you speculated about them earlier.
I never speculated about them.

Quote:
And no, the reasoning is not circular because those criteria do not rely on one another. It can be illegal for many reasons, one or the other, neither but something else, both, etc.
It doesn't make the argument "it was invalid because there were no international observers" when those observers decided themselves not to monitor it, for whatever reason, any more valid.

Quote:
Again, you thought it was a conspiracy against the referendum before, but now it doesn't matter.
I never thought anything of the sort. I'm not sure where you're even getting that from other than misinterpreting my remark about the invalidity of the "there were no observers" argument after they themselves declined to monitor it as being a statement regarding some insidious reason they declined.

Quote:
But it has not shown to be free and fair, and under the occupation of the foreign power they seek to join means it was de facto not free and fair.
1. They themselves consider it free and fair. But of course you know better.
2. By your reasoning every independence referendum, such as the Scottish one, is de facto not free and fair.

Quote:
Nonsense. Putin is the head of the government (and one that holds disproportionate power in that government), that invaded Ukraine. It is very much about him and his country.
Again, analyze the word "self-determination" for a moment.

Quote:
Expelled? When did I claim that.
Right here:
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
after the people who might have argued and voted against it had been driven out.
Now will you answer those questions I posed you are you just going to hand-wave them away?

Quote:
You're trying to ignore everything else I've said to claim that all I have left is the extremely accurate label of 'Putin apologist', even though you're doing the 'but US!' dodge.
It's not a dodge, it's pointing out how ridiculous such a thing is by showing how easily I can do that too.

Quote:
Using the term doesn't make it invalid, and certainly isn't evidence that my arguments are weak.
I agree, your arguments are weak all by themselves.

Quote:
Calling you a Putin apologist doesn't change the arguments made one bit.
Then why do you do it? Do you know what an ad hominem is?

Last edited by caveman1917; 2nd March 2015 at 02:02 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 2nd March 2015, 02:10 PM   #177
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You might start by providing evidence that people in Crimea considered it an invasion, considered the annexation "forced" and the elections (by which I presume you mean the referendum) "rigged". All I've seen yet are some claims without any evidence that have nothing to do with reality.
The rigging of the referendum starts with the assembly vote to hold it. According to Strelkov, the members were gathered up by rebels and voted in a closed session, in the presence of armed 'little green men'. If that does not set alarm bells ringing, you must have a strange view of what 'free and fair' means.
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 2nd March 2015, 02:18 PM   #178
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You said "How was it determined that they actually wanted this?" I gave you a bunch of polls that determine that they actually wanted this. Then you said: "polls are not free and fair voting" but I'm the one who's moving the goalposts?

Yes, polls. That's my point, not fair and open referendum, polls. That's one of my main points!



Quote:
I never speculated about them.
Quote:
International monitors, such as the OSCE, were invited but they refused. So yeah, let's refuse to monitor it even when asked to and then afterwards we can say it was invalid because we didn't monitor it.
If that wasn't speculation, then it was assertion for which there is no evidence, which is worse than speculation.

Quote:
It doesn't make the argument "it was invalid because there were no international observers" when those observers decided themselves not to monitor it, for whatever reason, any more valid.
What? Yes it does. What a bizarre thing to say.


Quote:
I never thought anything of the sort. I'm not sure where you're even getting that from other than misinterpreting my remark about the invalidity of the "there were no observers" argument after they themselves declined to monitor it as being a statement regarding some insidious reason they declined.
See above.


Quote:
1. They themselves consider it free and fair. But of course you know better.
2. By your reasoning every independence referendum, such as the Scottish one, is de facto not free and fair.
1. It doesn't matter what they think. No, really. Believing something to be true isn't the same as it being true. That isn't something they can vote on and make it so, unlike an election. Those who said it wasn't fair could be right.
2. That's not even in the least true. What foreign troops have invaded and are occupying Scotland? English?


Quote:
Again, analyze the word "self-determination" for a moment.
Today on non-sequiter theater.



Quote:
Right here:
Sorry, fled.


Quote:
Now will you answer those questions I posed you are you just going to hand-wave them away?
It isn't part of my argument. Again, the outcome isn't what determines if the referendum was free and fair. See the lynching example. To make it more clear, 'no'.


Quote:
It's not a dodge, it's pointing out how ridiculous such a thing is by showing how easily I can do that too.
This is still nonsense. The US hasn't invaded the Ukraine; Russia has. Bringing up Putin is actually related to the situation, while bringing up the US is not. This is basic. You can say something, that doesn't make it 'the same'.

Quote:
I agree, your arguments are weak all by themselves.
Ha. You have no room to complain again about what others do 'when they run out of arguments.'


Quote:
Then why do you do it? Do you know what an ad hominem is?
Yes I do. You apparently do not. I have not made the argument that you're wrong because you're 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 2nd March 2015, 02:24 PM   #179
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
The rigging of the referendum starts with the assembly vote to hold it.
Holding a referendum, even under pressure, is not the same as rigging it.

Quote:
If that does not set alarm bells ringing, you must have a strange view of what 'free and fair' means.
Anything more substantive than alarm bells?

Here's another thing to ponder, given that there was overwhelming popular support for joining Russia, why bother rigging the referendum and risking being caught with it which would only hurt their case? And if you're going to rig it, then why invite international observers?

Last edited by caveman1917; 2nd March 2015 at 02:33 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 2nd March 2015, 02:28 PM   #180
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
1. It doesn't matter what they think. No, really.
And with that we are done.
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 2nd March 2015, 06:12 PM   #181
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
And with that we are done.
For those following along, "It doesn't matter what they think," is referring specifically to if the elections were free, open, fair, legitimate, etc. A question of fact such as that is not determined by popular vote. It is not referring to self-determination.

Such context removal is a cheap way to score internet points, but tends to fail on forums like these where people can, and will, look back to see what was actually said.
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 06:32 PM   #182
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
For those following along, "It doesn't matter what they think," is referring specifically to if the elections were free, open, fair, legitimate, etc. A question of fact such as that is not determined by popular vote. It is not referring to self-determination.

Such context removal is a cheap way to score internet points, but tends to fail on forums like these where people can, and will, look back to see what was actually said.
I know what it refers to, I quoted it and said "we're done" because you have obviously decided that it is a priori impossible for it to have been a free and fair referendum, and hence nothing is going to convince you otherwise.

If you thought this a bit through you'd notice that your remark that I quoted would entail that even if you were standing in Crimea saying "it wasn't free and fair" you'd have almost everyone (you know, those people who were actually there when it happened and hence can be expected to have had better knowledge about it) saying "yes it was, just let it go already", with you replying "it doesn't matter what you guys think about that, I'm here to tell you it wasn't, because Putin". So I decide to treat it just like any Crimean in that situation would after trying to convince you that it was indeed free and fair, shrug and move along.
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 2nd March 2015, 06:42 PM   #183
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I know what it refers to, I quoted it and said "we're done" because you have obviously decided that it is a priori impossible for it to have been a free and fair referendum, and hence nothing is going to convince you otherwise.

If you thought this a bit through you'd notice that your remark that I quoted would entail that even if you were standing in Crimea saying "it wasn't free and fair" you'd have almost everyone (you know, those people who were actually there when it happened and hence can be expected to have had better knowledge about it) saying "yes it was, just let it go already", with you replying "it doesn't matter what you guys think about that, I'm here to tell you it wasn't, because Putin". So I decide to treat it just like any Crimean in that situation would after trying to convince you that it was indeed free and fair, shrug and move along.


Despite it not satisfying your requirements for a valid self-determination style breakaway, you're fine with it? That's a nice and inconsistent opinion, but it doesn't justify the invasion or Russia's other actions.

And yes, it was invalid because of the invasion and because of a few other reasons. It is a priori just as OSCE said. There couldn't be free and fair referendum within that situation so it is in fact assumed that any referendum in that situation would not be free and fair.

The people there can say it all they like, it doesn't make it true. You're saying now it doesn't matter, which is quite different from if it's true or not.
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 06:42 PM   #184
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Let's see if you're at least consistent about this bizarre definition of what constitutes free and fair elections/referenda.

You consider the Iraqi election of 2005 not free and fair then? Or does your definition change when it's an occupation by US forces?
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 2nd March 2015, 06:43 PM   #185
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,094
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Let's see if you're at least consistent about this bizarre definition of what constitutes free and fair elections/referenda.

You consider the Iraqi election of 2005 not free and fair then? Or does your definition change when it's an occupation by US forces?

Was Iraq voting to join the US?
__________________
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 2nd March 2015, 07:02 PM   #186
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Despite it not satisfying your requirements for a valid self-determination style breakaway, you're fine with it?
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.

Quote:
And yes, it was invalid because of the invasion and because of a few other reasons. It is a priori just as OSCE said. There couldn't be free and fair referendum within that situation so it is in fact assumed that any referendum in that situation would not be free and fair.
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.

Quote:
The people there can say it all they like, it doesn't make it true. You're saying now it doesn't matter, which is quite different from if it's true or not.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm saying it's true, exactly by virtue of those involved considering it true.

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?

Last edited by caveman1917; 2nd March 2015 at 07:04 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 2nd March 2015, 07:04 PM   #187
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Was Iraq voting to join the US?
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".
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 3rd March 2015, 08:06 AM   #188
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,723
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Despite it not satisfying your requirements for a valid self-determination style breakaway, you're fine with it? That's a nice and inconsistent opinion, but it doesn't justify the invasion or Russia's other actions.

And yes, it was invalid because of the invasion and because of a few other reasons. It is a priori just as OSCE said. There couldn't be free and fair referendum within that situation so it is in fact assumed that any referendum in that situation would not be free and fair.

The people there can say it all they like, it doesn't make it true. You're saying now it doesn't matter, which is quite different from if it's true or not.
I agree with all of this. And caveman1917 probably does too, for for some reason pretends not to.

PS - I'm sure that the "1917" in the nickname has no significance at all, given his/her post content.
carlitos 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 3rd March 2015, 09:39 AM   #189
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I agree with all of this. And caveman1917 probably does too, for for some reason pretends not to.
No I do not. So not only do you pretend to know better whether the referendum was free and fair than the people who are there, and would be in a much better position to judge that, you now also claim to know better what I agree with than I do myself? Have you missed the part where they say that the Ukrainian (and by extension Western) media are spreading false information about the situation in Crimea? Or is that also irrelevant in your "I know better than they themselves" mentality?

Quote:
PS - I'm sure that the "1917" in the nickname has no significance at all, given his/her post content.
If you think it refers to the Russian revolution then you're right, if you think you somehow know what the significance about that is regarding this then you're wrong. You only need to look at what I said about supporting the West-Ukrainians in their choice to volunteer their country to be the next IMF target. Even if I think they're making a huge mistake that won't stop me defending their right to make it, but then I'm the one who's inconsistent about self-determination of course...
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 3rd March 2015, 10:14 AM   #190
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,723
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
No I do not. So not only do you pretend to know better whether the referendum was free and fair than the people who are there, and would be in a much better position to judge that, you now also claim to know better what I agree with than I do myself? Have you missed the part where they say that the Ukrainian (and by extension Western) media are spreading false information about the situation in Crimea? Or is that also irrelevant in your "I know better than they themselves" mentality?
I'm not pretending at all. The referendum didn't meet any aspect of international law regarding free and fair elections. That is it. No I do not pretend to know what anyone meant. It was not a free election,. Period. You can cite opinion polls all you want. It means nothing.


Quote:
If you think it refers to the Russian revolution then you're right, if you think you somehow know what the significance about that is regarding this then you're wrong. You only need to look at what I said about supporting the West-Ukrainians in their choice to volunteer their country to be the next IMF target. Even if I think they're making a huge mistake that won't stop me defending their right to make it, but then I'm the one who's inconsistent about self-determination of course...
Sure.
carlitos 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 3rd March 2015, 10:21 AM   #191
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
The referendum didn't meet any aspect of international law regarding free and fair elections.
Care to be more specific? Present a sourced list of aspects of international law regarding a free and fair referendum and show that none are met.

Quote:
Sure.
That's nonsense and you know it.
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 3rd March 2015, 10:42 AM   #192
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,723
Quote:
Present a sourced list of aspects of international law regarding a free and fair referendum and show that none are met.
Others have done this and you hand-waved it away. No thanks.

You chose a nickname that included the year of the Russian revolution. The only topic you have participated in is the discussion of Ukraine. You acknowledge that the year is significant in your name choice. And yet my pointing this out is nonsense.

Good luck with others believing that nonsense.
carlitos 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 3rd March 2015, 10:47 AM   #193
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
I'll do it for you
http://www.ipu.org/cnl-e/154-free.htm

Quote:
(1) Every adult citizen has the right to vote in elections, on a non-discriminatory basis.

(2) Every adult citizen has the right to access to an effective, impartial and non-discriminatory procedure for the registration of voters.

(3) No eligible citizen shall be denied the right to vote or disqualified from registration as a voter, otherwise than in accordance with objectively verifiable criteria prescribed by law, and provided that such measures are consistent with the State's obligations under international law.

(4) Every individual who is denied the right to vote or to be registered as a voter shall be entitled to appeal to a jurisdiction competent to review such decisions and to correct errors promptly and effectively.

(5) Every voter has the right to equal and effective access to a polling station in order to exercise his or her right to vote.

(6) Every voter is entitled to exercise his or her right equally with others and to have his or her vote accorded equivalent weight to that of others.

(7) The right to vote in secret is absolute and shall not be restricted in any manner whatsoever.
The evidence suggest this has all been met. You're just looking for an excuse to disregard its results because they didn't choose what you wanted them to choose, while accusing others of inconsistency.
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 3rd March 2015, 10:48 AM   #194
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Others have done this and you hand-waved it away.
Then you should have no problem pointing me to the post in which such a list was presented.
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 3rd March 2015, 10:54 AM   #195
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
You chose a nickname that included the year of the Russian revolution.
It's the same nickname I've used for over 10 years, including on other forums I participate in.

Quote:
The only topic you have participated in is the discussion of Ukraine.
It is the topic of which I have enough knowledge to realize that y'all were making stuff up in.

Quote:
You acknowledge that the year is significant in your name choice.
Because when I made my email adress caveman@hotmail.com was already taken, so was caveman with my birth year after it, so I picked 1917. Should I again point out that this was over 10 years ago?

Quote:
And yet my pointing this out is nonsense.
Yes exactly. It's grasping at straws to hide that you have no real argument, other than ad hominems apparently. Seriously, if you have to resort to "look at his username" as an argument that says something about the strength of your position.
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 3rd March 2015, 10:55 AM   #196
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,723
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I'll do it for you
http://www.ipu.org/cnl-e/154-free.htm



The evidence suggest this has all been met. You're just looking for an excuse to disregard its results because they didn't choose what you wanted them to choose, while accusing others of inconsistency.
Complete, utter bollocks. An invading army, occupying soldiers, media blackouts, notwithstanding:

"citizen" - of what country????
"prescribed by law" - of what country????
"weighted vote" - based on what borders????
"appeal to a jurisdiction" - what jurisdiction????

You don't seem to be delusional, so this is obviously propaganda. Would you like to enlighten us as to why you joined up to post this propaganda here? CE wasn't meeting his/her quota?
carlitos 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 3rd March 2015, 11:04 AM   #197
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
"citizen" - of what country????
Crimean residents with a Ukrainian passport.

Quote:
"prescribed by law" - of what country????
The Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

Quote:
"weighted vote" - based on what borders????
What is that supposed to mean? It says that every vote should be weighted equally with all others. If you can't even understand what "equal weighing of votes" means in that document then I seriously doubt your capability to judge this.

Quote:
"appeal to a jurisdiction" - what jurisdiction????
The Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

Last edited by caveman1917; 3rd March 2015 at 11:17 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 3rd March 2015, 11:16 AM   #198
caveman1917
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,224
From the constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea

Quote:
1. Ukrainian nationals residing in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea shall freely participate in the solution of any and all such matters as come within the terms of reference of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, both directly, which shall be by way of elections and referendums, and through the authorities of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
I'll just ask you the same question: What, if any, evidence would convince you that the referendum was free and fair?
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 3rd March 2015, 01:25 PM   #199
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I'll just ask you the same question: What, if any, evidence would convince you that the referendum was free and fair?
Going back to first principals:

Referendum carried out under the laws of the country, or UN control
Fair and balanced question, including the status quo as an option
Freedom for supporters of both sides to campaign without intimidation
Sufficient time for the electorate to make an informed decision
International observers to confirm that the campaign, voting and counting were in accordance with international standards
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 3rd March 2015, 01:29 PM   #200
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,723
The "country" being the Ukraine, of course.
carlitos 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 04:32 PM.
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.