shickingbrits wrote:You mean the protestors funded by the US and shot by the CIA? That's a convincing argument that a country who voted in a pro-Russian leader is anti-Russian.
oh yeah you're one of those conspiracy theorists, now let's hear all your diatribes about the WTC inside job and all that shit.... The people of ukraine are clearly split between the pro europeans who aspire to join the EU and stop being russian puppets, and the pro russian and want to join Russia because they feel differently. Depending on the region there is more or less of each. The elections have been totally screwed many times in ukraine, so if there was a pro russian leading it was clearly due to kgb crap and the majority was fed up with this shit.
The people of Canada are clearly split between the NDP and Liberals.
I wonder what people would say if China was caught funding a protest movement aimed at ousting Harper for a pro-China leader, staged a few atrocities to blame on Harper and put all the international pressure it could muster on making Harper step down.
Would you say China infringed on Canada's sovereignty, created terrorist acts and forced the country to a pro-China stance or would you say, hey some Candians are pro-China and some aren't.
Keep trying to propagandize, I would hold you in higher esteem if you were more honest.
(Yes I know Harper is pro-China, but for the sake of argument)
A better example,
Quebec has been talking once again about independence, which is more or less a pipe dream but with wide (not decisive) support.
Do you think it would be ok for Putin to start a movement in Quebec, manufacture international hate against Canada, promise them billions of dollars and appoint a puppet to lead there?
Dude, basically you are accusing the US's secret services to do exactly what I m accusing the russian secret services of doing in ukraine. We are not insiders so if we continue this conversation, it will be plain bollocks as it will be a epenis fight where we will accuse each other to mix facts and convictions. I will not make you change your mind nor will you make me change mine. Putin acts like freakin marlon brando in the godfather CUBIC. If you are fine with this sneaky corrupt dictator trying to rebuild an empire through diplomatic tugs of war well it s your problem. As far as I know you are allowed to think and say what you want in your country, don t think you would have that chance if you were russian. Mostly if you were from a russian ethnic minority.
shickingbrits wrote:You mean the protestors funded by the US and shot by the CIA? That's a convincing argument that a country who voted in a pro-Russian leader is anti-Russian.
I presume saxy is more teasing with betiko then implying the carriers to end up in my country... after all I wonder if anyone would want to see french ships in the middle of the oldest lake in Europe and one of the oldest lakes on the Planet.
You would never have to worry about illegal fishing again.
shickingbrits wrote:I wonder what people would say if China was caught funding a protest movement aimed at ousting Harper for a pro-China leader, staged a few atrocities to blame on Harper and put all the international pressure it could muster on making Harper step down.
Ukraine had a pro-Russian leader. It was in no way in Russia's interest to destabilize the country. It was in the US and EU's interest to do so. The protest was supported by the west.
So your take is that Putin is so stupid that he would send snipers in to randomly shoot people to garner international condemnation when that would be just about the only way that he could lose Ukraine?
Harper loves China, long time. Harper is busy getting some of that money.
And the US no doubt funded the opposition in Ukraine and the opposition lost. If China funds BC politicians and they lose and China funds a protest and all of the sudden produces evidence that random shootings should be attributed to the winning party, let me know.
Hopefully contract law will be observed. It would be a shame if a respected nation like France got a reputation for being an untrustworthy contract-breaker.
Ukraine had a pro-Russian leader. It was in no way in Russia's interest to destabilize the country. It was in the US and EU's interest to do so. The protest was supported by the west.
So your take is that Putin is so stupid that he would send snipers in to randomly shoot people to garner international condemnation when that would be just about the only way that he could lose Ukraine?
you're talking about a man elected through a farce election manipulated by russia. so yeah, people protested, how strange right?
mrswdk wrote:Hopefully contract law will be observed. It would be a shame if a respected nation like France got a reputation for being an untrustworthy contract-breaker.
I have spent the last 8 minutes searching for a contract (according to Wiki, signed June 7, 2011, but the source is shit), but my search was fruitless. I can't even find the January agreement signed by the governments. Every other government other than the States is crap. I can go on state.gov and find every single agreement anyone in the State Department has ever signed. I can't find shit in France or Russia.
Sure Betiko, Russia was manipulating the elections. So were the EU and US. Why do you ignore the EU and US manipulation and blame Russia for the same activities?
I'm guessing for the same reason that you attribute the sniper attacks to Russia without any plausible reason.
mrswdk wrote:Hopefully contract law will be observed. It would be a shame if a respected nation like France got a reputation for being an untrustworthy contract-breaker.
We have a truce in a no spoils game. I attack you. Due to "contract law", you still can't attack back, because that would be breaking the contract.
shickingbrits wrote:Sorry Doom, when you breach the contract you subject yourself to the punitive clauses in it and free the other party from all commitment.
Well, sabotage, it depends on the contract. I'm sure you've reached your conclusion after reading the French-Russian contract, right?
While you're on your roll, maybe you can dazzle us with your ferocious understanding of adjudication for matters of international trade.
shickingbrits wrote:You mean the protestors funded by the US and shot by the CIA? That's a convincing argument that a country who voted in a pro-Russian leader is anti-Russian.
Are you truly a moron or do you just like to act that way?
shickingbrits wrote:Sorry Doom, when you breach the contract you subject yourself to the punitive clauses in it and free the other party from all commitment.
Ukraine had a pro-Russian leader. It was in no way in Russia's interest to destabilize the country. It was in the US and EU's interest to do so. The protest was supported by the west.
So your take is that Putin is so stupid that he would send snipers in to randomly shoot people to garner international condemnation when that would be just about the only way that he could lose Ukraine?
you're talking about a man elected through a farce election manipulated by russia. so yeah, people protested, how strange right?
The west didn't believe this at the time ...
Organisation for Security & Cooperation in Europe wrote:KYIV, 8 February 2010 - Ukraine's run-off presidential election confirmed the international election observation mission's assessment that the electoral process met most OSCE and Council of Europe commitments. In a statement issued today, the observers noted that the election consolidated progress achieved since 2004.
"Yesterday's vote was an impressive display of democratic elections. For everyone in Ukraine, this election was a victory. It is now time for the country's political leaders to listen to the people's verdict and make sure that the transition of power is peaceful and constructive," said João Soares, President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and Special Co-ordinator of the OSCE short-term observers.
Ukraine had a pro-Russian leader. It was in no way in Russia's interest to destabilize the country. It was in the US and EU's interest to do so. The protest was supported by the west.
So your take is that Putin is so stupid that he would send snipers in to randomly shoot people to garner international condemnation when that would be just about the only way that he could lose Ukraine?
you're talking about a man elected through a farce election manipulated by russia. so yeah, people protested, how strange right?
The west didn't believe this at the time ...
Organisation for Security & Cooperation in Europe wrote:KYIV, 8 February 2010 - Ukraine's run-off presidential election confirmed the international election observation mission's assessment that the electoral process met most OSCE and Council of Europe commitments. In a statement issued today, the observers noted that the election consolidated progress achieved since 2004.
"Yesterday's vote was an impressive display of democratic elections. For everyone in Ukraine, this election was a victory. It is now time for the country's political leaders to listen to the people's verdict and make sure that the transition of power is peaceful and constructive," said João Soares, President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and Special Co-ordinator of the OSCE short-term observers.
My understanding was the first time he was elected it was a farce, thus the orange revolution, but the second time, 2010, he won and it appeared to be a fair election.
No the CIA killed Ukrainian protestors because Ukraine was pro-Russian and by killing protestors they could incite international condemnation of the Ukrainian government thereby installing a pro-US government in its place.
Had those protestors, and random people, not been sniped, then there was no way for the US to install their puppet.
Ukraine had a pro-Russian leader. It was in no way in Russia's interest to destabilize the country. It was in the US and EU's interest to do so. The protest was supported by the west.
So your take is that Putin is so stupid that he would send snipers in to randomly shoot people to garner international condemnation when that would be just about the only way that he could lose Ukraine?
you're talking about a man elected through a farce election manipulated by russia. so yeah, people protested, how strange right?
The west didn't believe this at the time ...
Organisation for Security & Cooperation in Europe wrote:KYIV, 8 February 2010 - Ukraine's run-off presidential election confirmed the international election observation mission's assessment that the electoral process met most OSCE and Council of Europe commitments. In a statement issued today, the observers noted that the election consolidated progress achieved since 2004.
"Yesterday's vote was an impressive display of democratic elections. For everyone in Ukraine, this election was a victory. It is now time for the country's political leaders to listen to the people's verdict and make sure that the transition of power is peaceful and constructive," said João Soares, President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and Special Co-ordinator of the OSCE short-term observers.
My understanding was the first time he was elected it was a farce, thus the orange revolution, but the second time, 2010, he won and it appeared to be a fair election.
shickingbrits wrote:No the CIA killed Ukrainian protestors because Ukraine was pro-Russian and by killing protestors they could incite international condemnation of the Ukrainian government thereby installing a pro-US government in its place.
For the record, I quietly backed out of the room when this was said ...
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
mrswdk wrote:Hopefully contract law will be observed. It would be a shame if a respected nation like France got a reputation for being an untrustworthy contract-breaker.
We have a truce in a no spoils game. I attack you. Due to "contract law", you still can't attack back, because that would be breaking the contract.
I don't think you thought very hard about that analogy.
All this Russia talk makes me miss BaronVonPwn. Anyone have word from him or have his letters requesting Levi's, bread and western toilet paper been intercepted?
I don't even know if he made it down to the Mikey Rourke fight.
