Ukraine looking for former President for War Crimes

[Phatscotty]

"cold hard cash will defeat all evil"

[mrswdk]

@sax I totally see how that's happened in the Middle East, but however much the US/EU clamour for the success of the Ukrainian opposition I doubt they're ever going to come up with sufficient justification to completely tear Ukraine up and remake it as something that better suits them. The Ukrainian president may have his flaws but he is still a white democratic president, not a brown military dictator.

[GoranZ]

Seems a lot of the civilians (at least in Kiev) don't want to be closely tied to Russia, but would rather have closer ties to the Western Part of Europe. Military action by others looks doubtful, but sanctions certainly seem to be close to happening. Story seems similar to the Egyptian protests/riots as well. Started off with peaceful protesting, and then something set it off and so far at least 100 people have been killed and many more wounded.

Thoughts on what will happen in Ukraine?

How do you know what civilians in Kiev want? I doubt you are/were there recently and probably you don't have magical crystal ball
If you getting your conclusions from Western media then you can watch Russia Today so everything will be mixed up in your head

What can happen in Ukraine?
1. The country splits(hopefully peacefully), and prorussian part will merge with Russia, while the western Ukraine will advance towards EU but its economy will suffer badly at the beginning.
2. Undecided, the country will hardly have any advance for some time.
3. Ukraine as a whole straightens its ties with Russia... or better said Russia is fully back on track.

There are no similarities between the motives in Ukrainian and Egyptian protesters... Egypt was split between Islamist and Secular while Ukraine is split between ProUkrainian and ProRussian part. So in Egypt there was religious conflict and in Ukraine its national one, and in Egypt the population with different religious believes is mixed almost everywhere opposite from Ukraine where you have 2 almost non mixed parts.

Most likely the near outcome will be 2 or 3 since EU(without any significant help of US) is by no match equal to Russia.

So the country is politically split (read sphere of influence) more or less east and west?

It is split to around 50-50, SouthEastern part is ProRussian and NorthWestern part is ProUkrainian but not only on politically but also in mother language and even economically. ProRussian part has higher GDP, almost double then ProUkrainian part, is deeply connected with the economy of Russia, so everything is quite complicated.

[notyou2]

Seems a lot of the civilians (at least in Kiev) don't want to be closely tied to Russia, but would rather have closer ties to the Western Part of Europe. Military action by others looks doubtful, but sanctions certainly seem to be close to happening. Story seems similar to the Egyptian protests/riots as well. Started off with peaceful protesting, and then something set it off and so far at least 100 people have been killed and many more wounded.

Thoughts on what will happen in Ukraine?

How do you know what civilians in Kiev want? I doubt you are/were there recently and probably you don't have magical crystal ball
If you getting your conclusions from Western media then you can watch Russia Today so everything will be mixed up in your head

What can happen in Ukraine?
1. The country splits(hopefully peacefully), and prorussian part will merge with Russia, while the western Ukraine will advance towards EU but its economy will suffer badly at the beginning.
2. Undecided, the country will hardly have any advance for some time.
3. Ukraine as a whole straightens its ties with Russia... or better said Russia is fully back on track.

There are no similarities between the motives in Ukrainian and Egyptian protesters... Egypt was split between Islamist and Secular while Ukraine is split between ProUkrainian and ProRussian part. So in Egypt there was religious conflict and in Ukraine its national one, and in Egypt the population with different religious believes is mixed almost everywhere opposite from Ukraine where you have 2 almost non mixed parts.

Most likely the near outcome will be 2 or 3 since EU(without any significant help of US) is by no match equal to Russia.

So the country is politically split (read sphere of influence) more or less east and west?

It is split to around 50-50, SouthEastern part is ProRussian and NorthWestern part is ProUkrainian but not only on politically but also in mother language and even economically. ProRussian part has higher GDP, almost double then ProUkrainian part, is deeply connected with the economy of Russia, so everything is quite complicated.

So essentially, the poor are rebelling against their overlords.

Queue Saxi.

[DoomYoshi]

What a dastardly case of American exceptionalism you have developed saxi.

[GoranZ]

It is split to around 50-50, SouthEastern part is ProRussian and NorthWestern part is ProUkrainian but not only on politically but also in mother language and even economically. ProRussian part has higher GDP, almost double then ProUkrainian part, is deeply connected with the economy of Russia, so everything is quite complicated.

So essentially, the poor are rebelling against their overlords.

According to your previous logic all undeveloped countries should start attacking and destroying Canadian companies, which will not happen for now(although Japanese companies witnessed similar event in their Chines subsidiaries last year)

I presume you understand what I previously wrote... SouthEastern Ukraine is richer because there are many industrial complexes that make a lot of their business with Russia, so basically if Russia economy is expanding so will SouthEastern Ukrainian. It has nothing to do with exploitation of NorthWestern part of the country

[notyou2]

I did not indicate it was exploitation of the workers. I simply stated that the have nots are fighting with the haves. In this particular country it seems the haves and have nots are divided east and west. So some are looking for a better life while others are happy with the status quo. I really don't understand how you arrive at the conclusion they should start attacking Canadian companies.

[mrswdk]

According to your previous logic all undeveloped countries should start attacking and destroying Canadian companies, which will not happen for now(although Japanese companies witnessed similar event in their Chines subsidiaries last year)

The attacks on Japanese factories had nothing to do with Japan being more developed than China or anything like that. It was just part of a wave of anti-Japan hysteria that swept through the stupider echelons of Chinese society after the Senkaku Island dispute was turned into a big deal again.

[DoomYoshi]

Ukraine is a democracy and would be able to vote said individual out once they had fulfilled their role as the person who leads Ukraine into the EU.

Exactly, Ukraine is a democracy and it's already had (2012) elections that were monitored by the ODIHR and those elections put in power a government that decided not to affiliate with the EU. These are anti-democracy "protests."

Right, because elected officials make a country a democracy. Let's note that saxi recognizes North Korea as a democracy. Plus, what mrswdk said.

Once a nation falls to the U.S. the first thing that happens is a new constitution is introduced (see Poland, Iraq, Hungary, etc.). These constitutions invariably include layers upon layers of so-called "independent" boards and commissions and insulated constitutional courts comprised of "leaders of civil society," in reality unelected bodies that serve to entrench American interests throughout the country and lace its political order in such a way that all future governments are bound in action. This is, in fact, the same way the U.S. operates. In his 1937 book America's Families Ferdinand Lundberg, which is otherwise a bunch of nonsense, otherwise saliently noted about the U.S. constitution ...

How is a pro-US government worse for the people of Ukraine than a pro-Russia government?

All these people who cry about the 1% so happily and blindly march off to cheer the one-percent's bought and paid-for revolutions when it's neatly packaged and marketed with a false David vs. Goliath storyline, as in Iraq or Libya or Syria. It's been two weeks since the U.S. ASOS was recorded discussing who the U.S. was going to choose to run Ukraine when it was all done. Any legitimate, semi-intelligent protesters would have packed up and gone home once that recording was released.

How does this matter? If I am going to work in the morning, and my neighbour asks to carpool, should I then stop because someone else might profiteer off my efforts?

You present a simplified narrative as if this entire protest was planned by a marketing firm. I don't disagree that there are vested interests involved in this. However, it is a feedback cycle in which activists activate something, interested parties find a way to capitalize and re-present the narrative to the activists who then activate something else. The Standing Man protests were not a deliberately marketed thing originally. It was one guy. It was then marketed and turned into an icon, but Political parties, like internet clowns, can't just create memes when they are trying to.

Freedom in America isn't complete. However, I'd rather be a puppet to pharmaceuticals and insurance companies than human traffickers and communists.

Pretty soon, revolutions will be useless. Once the governments of the world figure out a way to put an end to internet freedoms, I will probably agree with you that we should all just go home instead. You say all the intelligent people should have gone home. What if they have no home to go home to? You are perfectly happy sending these people to dead-end jobs where they can work for a pittance and end up in debt and die, totally insignificant blots. Why is that option better than dying on CNN with riot police putting a hammer through your skull?

[BigBallinStalin]

The Standing Man protests were not a deliberately marketed thing originally. It was one guy. It was then marketed and turned into an icon, but Political parties, like internet clowns, can't just create memes when they are trying to.

Sure, they can. Insane Clown Posse, Britney Spears, and many other such bands were designed for particular target markets, and it really worked out well.

I don't really understand how the protests really started with one guy. There's more going on. If one person stands up and says, No., why would anyone else join him? It's less costly to stay at home, and your individual effort negligibly shifts the probability of a successful revolution. One way to overcome that is to get paid, to expect nicer pay within or from a new government, and so on. These are offers made by insiders within the current government with their outside backers.

So, I can't speak for sax, but I'm equally annoyed at the US and equally dismissive of the Ukrainian protesters' efforts. To be blunt, they're useful idiots, or they're rent-seekers. Nothing great about that. Even if the US gets involved, I don't see the outcome as being likely better than some Russian-backed 'democracy'. How many dictators/presidents installed by the US turned out well? I know about 66% of direct US interventions failed to bring a democracy better than Iran. Nearly all such outcomes are nowhere close to being as democratic as Poland...

[DoomYoshi]

It's less costly to stay at home

Prove it.

[DoomYoshi]

The Standing Man protests were not a deliberately marketed thing originally. It was one guy. It was then marketed and turned into an icon, but Political parties, like internet clowns, can't just create memes when they are trying to.

Sure, they can. Insane Clown Posse, Britney Spears, and many other such bands were designed for particular target markets, and it really worked out well.

For every success story, how many failures have their been? If it's that easy to get a platinum album, why don't you do it?

I don't really understand how the protests really started with one guy.

DY:"I think the Phoenix Coyotes made a stupid move moving to Glendale"
BBS:"What are you talking about? The World Cup is in Rio hur dur dur"

[BigBallinStalin]

It's less costly to stay at home

Prove it.

Dude, it's like public goods 101. You don't reap the profits of providing the good because it's non-rivalrous and non-excludable---and the chances of your individual contribution swinging the tide toward revolutionary success are negligible. (Good = the outcome from the revolution). The profit motive is very small; that's one's incentive. What's the opportunity cost? Staying safe at home and watching it on TV. And you get just as much credit for helping if you join the revolution--when it's just about over. It's not like people are furiously checking records to see who did what and when.

Of course, different people face different profit motives--e.g. rent-seekers and dumb people.

This a collective action problem (see: Mancur Olson - The Logic of Collective Action).

Check out papers citing Charles Tilly's Dual-power thesis and Gordon Tullock's The Social Dilemma.

[BigBallinStalin]

The Standing Man protests were not a deliberately marketed thing originally. It was one guy. It was then marketed and turned into an icon, but Political parties, like internet clowns, can't just create memes when they are trying to.

Sure, they can. Insane Clown Posse, Britney Spears, and many other such bands were designed for particular target markets, and it really worked out well.

For every success story, how many failures have their been? If it's that easy to get a platinum album, why don't you do it?

What? It's not my comparative advantage. Speak sense.

I've already mentioned how unsuccessful US interventions for promoting democracy have been, so reread what I said?

I don't really understand how the protests really started with one guy.

DY:"I think the Phoenix Coyotes made a stupid move moving to Glendale"
BBS:"What are you talking about? The World Cup is in Rio hur dur dur"

" It was one guy."

Are you really suggesting that one guy got things going? If not, why even bring it up (or mention that he's the sole cause of the Standing Man protests)?

It helps to explain how your position is true.

[saxitoxin]

as if this entire protest was planned by a marketing firm

Correct. The exiled American dissident Diana Johnstone discusses this in detail, specifically in the case of the U.S.-backed "revolution" in Serbia, in her book Fools' Crusade: Yugoslavia, Nato, and Western Delusions, but she provides a good overview in this Counterpunch article of how the U.S. suffocates its victims through these "protests"; if you struggle the serpent constricts tighter, if you just sit there you're doomed.

... other Western “humanitarian” organizations, has ceased to make any distinction between genuine repression of dissident thinkers and the sort of repression that is triggered by deliberate provocation, that is, by actions whose sole purpose is precisely to provoke repression, in order to accuse a targeted regime of being repressive. The Serbian group “Otpor” pioneered this sort of action, following teachings of Gene Sharp. Actions which anywhere in the world would be considered disorderly conduct are elevated to the level of Victor Hugo eloquently defying Napoleon III. Neither the quality of dissidence nor its context seem to matter. And nobody stops to ponder seriously how to deal with provocateurs who deliberately break the law in order to be arrested. Should the law be suspended especially for them? Or what? Arresting them falls into a trap, but not arresting them would arouse complaints from indignant citizens who dislike such exhibitionism.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/28/ ... l-protest/

[DoomYoshi]

re you really suggesting that one guy got things going? If not, why even bring it up (or mention that he's the sole cause of the Standing Man protests)?

The Standing Man protests were started by one man. It's not even a question for debate. I wasn't talking about EuroMaidan, just one particular meme associated with it. You had no idea what I was even talking about, as is apparent from your response.
-------------

I've already mentioned how unsuccessful US interventions for promoting democracy have been, so reread what I said?

So on one hand, the protestors are stupid for actually supporting US interests against their will, but on the other hand, they are stupid because supporting US interests doesn't always work?

Of course, different people face different profit motives--e.g. rent-seekers and dumb people.

Oh, I get it. Dumb people are dumb because they are listening to what the American government tells them to do instead of 2 Yankee internet forum-goers? I like how your valuation of goods supersedes theirs.

[saxitoxin]

Ukraine has announced a "deal" with the "protesters" to diffuse the crisis and come to a power-sharing agreement. This shows how hypocritical the west is -

-When tuition fees protesters surrounded Prince Charles' car in London, banged on the windows and shouted "off with their heads!" did the UK government immediately resign and offer the protesters several ministerial portfolios in a unity coalition government? No, a nationwide manhunt was launched, the students tracked down, expelled from their universities for life, and then jailed.

-When G20 protests rocked Toronto did the Canadian government call in the Mexican foreign minister to negotiate an end? Such a notion would never even have been seriously mentioned in a western country. No, club wielding RCMP were simply unleashed on the crowds (who, unlike the Ukrainian "protesters" weren't even armed).

[DoomYoshi]

Ukraine has announced a "deal" with the "protesters" to diffuse the crisis and come to a power-sharing agreement. This shows how hypocritical the west is -

-When tuition fees protesters surrounded Prince Charles' car in London, banged on the windows and shouted "off with their heads!" did the UK government immediately resign and offer the protesters several ministerial portfolios in a unity coalition government? No, a nationwide manhunt was launched, the students tracked down, expelled from their universities for life, and then jailed.

-When G20 protests rocked Toronto did the Canadian government call in the Mexican foreign minister to negotiate an end? Such a notion would never even have been seriously mentioned in a western country. No, club wielding RCMP were simply unleashed on the crowds (who, unlike the Ukrainian "protesters" weren't even armed).

Are you just realizing that the West is different than the Rest?

This feigned indignation is ridiculous.

[notyou2]

Ukraine has announced a "deal" with the "protesters" to diffuse the crisis and come to a power-sharing agreement. This shows how hypocritical the west is -

-When tuition fees protesters surrounded Prince Charles' car in London, banged on the windows and shouted "off with their heads!" did the UK government immediately resign and offer the protesters several ministerial portfolios in a unity coalition government? No, a nationwide manhunt was launched, the students tracked down, expelled from their universities for life, and then jailed.

-When G20 protests rocked Toronto did the Canadian government call in the Mexican foreign minister to negotiate an end? Such a notion would never even have been seriously mentioned in a western country. No, club wielding RCMP were simply unleashed on the crowds (who, unlike the Ukrainian "protesters" weren't even armed).

The Ukraine asked for some club wielding RCMP but they are all on the ice off Newfoundland clubbing seals as it is sealing season in Canada. They make their winter hats from seal fur.

[BigBallinStalin]

re you really suggesting that one guy got things going? If not, why even bring it up (or mention that he's the sole cause of the Standing Man protests)?

The Standing Man protests were started by one man. It's not even a question for debate. I wasn't talking about EuroMaidan, just one particular meme associated with it. You had no idea what I was even talking about, as is apparent from your response.
-------------

I've already mentioned how unsuccessful US interventions for promoting democracy have been, so reread what I said?

So on one hand, the protestors are stupid for actually supporting US interests against their will, but on the other hand, they are stupid because supporting US interests doesn't always work?

Of course, different people face different profit motives--e.g. rent-seekers and dumb people.

Oh, I get it. Dumb people are dumb because they are listening to what the American government tells them to do instead of 2 Yankee internet forum-goers? I like how your valuation of goods supersedes theirs.

No, that's not what I'm saying. Lemme know when you've calmed down.

[DoomYoshi]

What are you saying then?

It sounds to me that you are saying people who value things differently than you do are not only objectively wrong, but dumb.

[BigBallinStalin]

What are you saying then?

It sounds to me that you are saying people who value things differently than you do are not only objectively wrong, but dumb.

Okay. So, there's a theory about revolutions. Dual-power thesis states that revolutions aren't really driven by "mass uprisings," but rather between elite groups. Whichever one wins after the revolution always says that "the People" were with them the whole time. One group of "the people" supported the defeatists, but they won't get up to object because they'll get crapped on even more. Another group, which supported the victorious elite group--at different degrees throughout the revolution, will rah-rah and cheer their favored side. Another group, which I believe is the largest, are the ones that don't care enough. They obviously have nothing to lose when the Victors say that "the People" were with them, and they have something to lose if they object to the lies of the Victors. This is why revolutions seem driven by "popular uprisings." Charles Tilly disagrees.

So, that's one dynamic. Here's the other:

Consider the costs and benefits of joining a revolution. In order for the profit of doing so offset the cost, you would have to expect a great enough gain from a successful revolution. One problem is your individual contribution to the probability of success is negligible. You may as well do nothing and reap the same benefits. This is called the free-rider problem. It explains some aspect of the problem in Ukraine.

Now, why would anyone join the revolution/uprising? There's many avenues of profit. One is rent-seeking, which is self-explanatory. Another is that they don't realize how little their individual efforts matter in (a) swaying the success of the revolution and (b) swaying the probability of getting a government, which they expect they'll get. Even if you're contributing to (a), you might not be contributing to (b) accidentally. For example, you're out in the streets hoping for change, and if you win, you get something which Ukrainian insiders and their US-NATO backers have developed. Thus, the term "useful idiots" is applicable here. Many well-intended people who voted for Obama come to mind; they have this unreal view of politics.

[DoomYoshi]

What are you saying then?

It sounds to me that you are saying people who value things differently than you do are not only objectively wrong, but dumb.

Okay. So, there's a theory about revolutions. Dual-power thesis states that revolutions aren't really driven by "mass uprisings," but rather between elite groups. Whichever one wins after the revolution always says that "the People" were with them the whole time. One group of "the people" supported the defeatists, but they won't get up to object because they'll get crapped on even more. Another group, which supported the victorious elite group--at different degrees throughout the revolution, will rah-rah and cheer their favored side. Another group, which I believe is the largest, are the ones that don't care enough. They obviously have nothing to lose when the Victors say that "the People" were with them, and they have something to lose if they object to the lies of the Victors. This is why revolutions seem driven by "popular uprisings." Charles Tilly disagrees.

so...

So, that's one dynamic. Here's the other:
In order for the profit of doing so offset the cost, you would have to expect a great enough gain from a successful revolution.

False dichotomy. you are viewing it from the terms of US diplomats. Look at it from the perspective of somebody waking up. They could go shave, read the paper, go their crummy job and come home to a bitchy wife. Or they could go play hero in relatively safe trench conditions, screw rebellious chicks, live off adrenaline, mescaline and coffee.

Or take an alternate approach. They could go to their crummy job, while all their coworkers and friends went to support something. After the revolution (successful or not), they will be just a bit farther from all their friends, not privy to the inside jokes and shared tales. Look at those who "supported Gaddafi" in Libya by simply doing their jobs. The sewage guy who was the only guy who knew how to do his job was fired because he "worked for Gaddafi".

I know that in our (yes, I live here too) Ivory Tower world, it is easy to think of revolutions as being one faction against another. In day to day terms, for real people, it is just a lifestyle choice. Me deciding to use Firefox may have been written about as a "browser war" but for me, I was just looking for something new (that reminded me of Netscape).

[AslanTheKing]

ukraine was a part of the austro hungarian empire,
the blacksea fleet of russia is in ukraine harbours and they have access through the dardanelles to the mediterranean
or quick access to the suez canal
it is a very strategic country for russia, thats why ukraininans have great energydeals with russia
if ukraine becomes a EU Country, russia is in trouble
do you remember the peking olympic games?
where russia invaded georgia ( not georgia in us)
this is going to turn really ugly for the ukrainian people

[BigBallinStalin]

What are you saying then?

It sounds to me that you are saying people who value things differently than you do are not only objectively wrong, but dumb.

Okay. So, there's a theory about revolutions. Dual-power thesis states that revolutions aren't really driven by "mass uprisings," but rather between elite groups. Whichever one wins after the revolution always says that "the People" were with them the whole time. One group of "the people" supported the defeatists, but they won't get up to object because they'll get crapped on even more. Another group, which supported the victorious elite group--at different degrees throughout the revolution, will rah-rah and cheer their favored side. Another group, which I believe is the largest, are the ones that don't care enough. They obviously have nothing to lose when the Victors say that "the People" were with them, and they have something to lose if they object to the lies of the Victors. This is why revolutions seem driven by "popular uprisings." Charles Tilly disagrees.

so...

Revolutions aren't driven by 'the little people'.

So, that's one dynamic. Here's the other:
In order for the profit of doing so offset the cost, you would have to expect a great enough gain from a successful revolution.

False dichotomy. you are viewing it from the terms of US diplomats. Look at it from the perspective of somebody waking up. They could go shave, read the paper, go their crummy job and come home to a bitchy wife. Or they could go play hero in relatively safe trench conditions, screw rebellious chicks, live off adrenaline, mescaline and coffee.

Actually, it's not only from the POV of US diplomats. What I just said can equally apply to everyone else.

Or take an alternate approach. They could go to their crummy job, while all their coworkers and friends went to support something. After the revolution (successful or not), they will be just a bit farther from all their friends, not privy to the inside jokes and shared tales. Look at those who "supported Gaddafi" in Libya by simply doing their jobs. The sewage guy who was the only guy who knew how to do his job was fired because he "worked for Gaddafi".

I know that in our (yes, I live here too) Ivory Tower world, it is easy to think of revolutions as being one faction against another. In day to day terms, for real people, it is just a lifestyle choice. Me deciding to use Firefox may have been written about as a "browser war" but for me, I was just looking for something new (that reminded me of Netscape).

Nothing that you said really changes the fact that people face different tradeoffs throughout the eventual (?) success of a revolution. Most people really don't care. It's like US politics and European politics. Most fucks given are at the executive levels, and we're talking about a slight majority who at the most will sit down, watch a political debate/talk show, go to sleep and maybe vote once every four years. There's very little involvement.

What percent of Ukrainians are actually in the streets protesting? <1%, so that's why I don't buy your romantic story. No one really cares that much. They do want their 'crummy' job because it's safer. If you're young and have high discount rates (i.e. don't care much about your future, don't have much to lose), then you'll more likely to go 'protest' to bang chicks--just like 1970s America in the college campuses.

As far as government employees go, sure, they have more to lose/win--depending on who they pick. But again, how many are protesting? <1%.