The Situation in the Ukraine. #9

syphilitic corpse 

See you like the chief of the world's proletariat. But don't let yourself go to offence of a long dead person. He is no worse than any typical Hollywood hero who believe he can make the world better by shooting bad guys dead. So don't jugde and you won't be judged

OK, now I see second video of rebels shooting from civilian zones

Who cares now? Ukr armed forces shot civilian areas even then the militia didn't have artillery at all. So that's the real difference? People could just abandon those suburbs already

higurashihougi wrote:

Regular wrote:Meh, Lenin statue. May his syphilitic corpse rot in his mausoleum. He is responsible for Ukraine what it is now.  In 1922 he gave them Russian lands. It should be Novorossians who should tear his monuments down. But commie sentiment is strong there.

First, it is part of the policy to go against the Russian chauvinism. At that time, Russian chauvinism was seen as a much bigger threat than the local nationalism, probably because Russia is the biggest ?  

Lenin have to keep the unity of a big alliance with a lot of races and ethnics, and in a very unstable state in the early 1920s. He had to make concessions.

That mixing up of borderlands was made because commies hoped that would make seccesions from USSR overly complex and, therefore, impossible. As we see now, that policy failed badly


-----------------------

Regular wrote:OK, now I see second video of rebels shooting from civilian zones. And it's OPLOT again. Who gave them artillery? When we have videos of professional rebels who drive away to the fields and shoot and scoot and now we have some idiots who have permanent arty positions in the city. Someone has to report this to rebel command.

But what's the difference? Human shield tactic only works if attacker actually cares about that shield.
Doesn't seem to be the case with ukrovermacht.

Yeah, I bet you the novorossiyan workers and peasants during the tzarism lived much worse under the local knyaz or kulak than in the UkrSSR.
Its a good thing anticapitalists are the majority in novorossiya. That will keep neoliberal nation destroyers from getting in. The people there can finally create a state who's policies are in their class interests.

higurashihougi wrote:
It is not much more convenient for them to maintain a centralized country with no federation entities or autonomous regions, either.

Managing a country with a lot of races and ethnics is something very exhausting.

Oh yes, because giving a chunk of land of one country to another country (nagorno-karabakh), and those countries, additionally, being mortal enemies, makes managing so much more easier

That mixing up of borderlands was made because commies hoped that would make seccesions from USSR overly complex and, therefore, impossible.

What's a joke!   USSR's national republics borders were streamlined.Look at South Ossetia that exist only because it was logistically better to include a part of Ossetia into Georgia. Crimea is another such example - it was included into Ukraine because of most ground roads (not to mention water and electricity supply lines) to it goes from Ukraine.

Sorry, but some here calling Lenin a hero...maybe you should read some of his history and declassified documents about what he ordered his little cheka and bolshewics to do you would understand that this scum set the stone for lot of problems russia has today like ukraine crap which he artificially seeded (incepted) an idea to seperate russians.
If you really going to find out about history under Lenin you don't do it from such stupid rosa glasses books of soviet union and communism but actual books among them writen by anatoli wassermann and you will not be able to avoid to read stalin and what he did and what was necessary to terminate the very same bolshewistic scum who committed genocide among russians. IF you want to call someone hero than stalin would be the anti-hero, someone who did bad things but also necessary things like termination of bolshewics who were rampaging and genociding russians. History is full of lies.

Sorry, but some here calling Lenin a hero...maybe you should read some of his history and declassified documents

May be you should read documents about all 20th century leaders? Or modern leaders? Man, you aren't living in a fairy-tale.
It's a stupid to judge historical persons from your modern point of view having no need of solving their problems and knowing not their agendas.

And still it even more stupid to take down monuments in an ape pack style to satisfy growing aggression and a witch-hunting syndrome not only because it's a f*cking monument but because it's their history, good or bad, it was and they won't be able to erase it anyway. Not to mention Lenin have no relation to that is going on in modern Ukraine.

Imagine scottish nationalist would blow down Tower and Westminster because of centuries of english royal oppression - it just dosen't make sence. Why Bandera is a hero for them then? He was just a regular military criminal, Lenin did much more for ukrainian statehood than all those banderas and other modern so-called ukrainian heroes.

 stalin would be the anti-hero, someone who did bad things but also necessary things like termination of bolshewics who were rampaging and genociding russians

Staln was a boshevic himself. He just root out those radicals like Trotsky who wanted to abolish families, raise children under the direct goverment's control, free all sexual behaviors, promote 'the endless revolution' with no regard to the losses, ect. He was a 'conservative' communist if I can say so, opposed by 'hyperliberal' ones.
And bolshevics wasn't genociding anyone. They did many systematic crimes may be (according to the modern law), but it was political repressions, not genocide.

There is a ban of artillery withing 15km from the other side.. maybe the Novorossiya have no other choice than to fight form those positions ,because of the new restrictions with the so called peace plan.. and very likely they evacuated civilians from near buildings.  

IF the latest map is any indication i find disgusting that the kiev nazis have soldiers deep inside Donetsk and could fire artillery at any time at any part of cities.. they had to clear the DOnetsk Airport long time ago.. no idea why they failing so much.. For sure Russian army is not there ,otherwise they will have cleared the donetsk airport long time ago..

A simple unmanned robot /control remote car could be sent to the airport with a camera attached to see the location of the Ukies and bomb there.. or a toy drone also could be used..

A simple unmanned robot /control remote car could be sent to the airport with a camera attached to see the location of the Ukies and bomb there..

Ukr forces not in a airport itself but in anti-atomic bunkers of the local AA base. The militia just dosen't have bunkerbusters to bomb them. Even a usual nuclear warhean is not enough to root them out

I don't want to drag this thread into endless offtopic, sorry for Lenin remark, but situation is comical if you think about it. I never thought Ukrainians can go down to such level.

higurashihougi wrote:

What I try to say is that managing a multi ethnic "entity" (federation, centralized state,...) is not easy.

Artificially drawing borders in colonial style has nothing to do with management.
---------------

Asf wrote:

That mixing up of borderlands was made because commies hoped that would make seccesions from USSR overly complex and, therefore, impossible.

What's a joke! USSR's national republics borders were streamlined.Look at South Ossetia that exist only because it was logistically better to include a part of Ossetia into Georgia. Crimea is another such example - it was included into Ukraine because of most ground roads (not to mention water and electricity supply lines) to it goes from Ukraine.

Your post makes no sense, since logistics were centrally organized anyway.

Asf wrote:

Who cares now? Ukr armed forces shot civilian areas even then the militia didn't have artillery at all. So that's the real difference? People could just abandon those suburbs already

You sound like Ukrainian apologist who basically tells the same thing when their army shells civilian sector. As I've showed in third video, some more professional rebels do take an extra step and don't give Ukrainians a reason to shell living zones. They take their arty to the fields and shoot/scoot.
Now people are not so happy when someone is shooting from their yard, listen to what people are saying in the video. Doesn't help in PR.
Oplot seems to be monkeys with guns. When did they get arty, but rebel command has to get them under the boot, get a grip on other splinter groups. I know that OPLOT is paramilitary group with ideology and groups like that go rogue like we see some rebels refusing to accept ceasefire.

Werewolf wrote:Sorry, but some here calling Lenin a hero...maybe you should read some of his history and declassified documents about what he ordered his little cheka and bolshewics to do you would understand that this scum set the stone for lot of problems russia has today like ukraine crap which he artificially seeded (incepted) an idea to seperate russians.
If you really going to find out about history under Lenin you don't do it from such stupid rosa glasses books of soviet union and communism but actual books among them writen by anatoli wassermann and you will not be able to avoid to read stalin and what he did and what was necessary to terminate the very same bolshewistic scum who committed genocide among russians. IF you want to call someone hero than stalin would be the anti-hero, someone who did bad things but also necessary things like termination of bolshewics who were rampaging and genociding russians. History is full of lies.

I wouldn't call him a hero, but I wouldn't call him an ignorant, egotistical dictator either... IMHO, he genuinely wanted to create a communist country, one that was for the working class (unlike Stalin and the tyrants). Most crimes and flawed laws etc during his time were committed not by Lenin, but those who were under him and replaced him during his "travels". During the revolution, he sided with the Bolsheviks, but afterward they parted from him instead wanted him to be replaced. - Mostly due to Trotsky. If you read up on his testament, you will find that he was very negative towards Stalin, seeing him as the power-hungry, idiotic jerk that he really was... Had Lenin lived, you wouldn't be learning about a man named "Stalin" in your history books. Lenin's biggest mistake was realizing his very own party despised him too late.

higurashihougi wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:Artificially drawing borders in colonial style has nothing to do with management.

May I ask what is your opinion and solution about the situation ?

What situation are you talking about?

As for re-drawing borders, as I said before, they served no purpose other than pissing people off.
Some republics (transnistria, belarus, ukraine) have been completely artificial, created for the sole purpose of occupying foreign territories and adding them to those republics.

higurashihougi wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

higurashihougi wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:Artificially drawing borders in colonial style has nothing to do with management.

May I ask what is your opinion and solution about the situation ?

What situation are you talking about?

As for re-drawing borders, as I said before, they served no purpose other than pissing people off.
Some republics (transnistria, belarus, ukraine) have been completely artificial, created for the sole purpose of occupying foreign territories and adding them to those republics.

So which kinds of border would you like to have ?

The situation is that we have a huge country which were highly unstable, had a good number of large minorities or self-proclaimed minorities, and there were great tensions between the races and ethnics in the country. What would you like to do ? Kill the minorities, like the Nazi scums in Kyiv ?

How about ethnic boundaries?

Your post makes no sense, since logistics were centrally organized anyway.

Oh yeah, right, tell me about it. You are complete ignorant in that question. Let's talk about Ossetia: it's a territory populated mostly by ossetians. It's cut into two peaces by Caukasus mountains, so south ossetia could be cut out from nothern part (it's administration, supply routes, ect.), it made sence to include this part into larger and more self sufficiant Georgia republic as there were no national question on any kinds of internal borders in th USSR apar from administrative ones. Or you think 'centrally organized ' means all the food, fuel, ect were directly supplied to all the corners from Moscow? The same thing with Crimea, it had most of it's electricity and water supplied from Ukraine republic.

Artificially drawing borders in colonial style has nothing to do with management.

Do you have any proofs on such statements?

Some republics (transnistria, belarus, ukraine) have been completely artificial

Again, you are totally ignorant in the things you talking about. Transnistria didn't exist until 90s then it was created because of russian and ukraine population majority rejected Moldova's govermental course.

"Transnistria became an autonomous political entity in 1924 with the proclamation of the Moldavian ASSR, which included today's Transnistria (4,000 km2) as well as an adjacent area (9,000 km2) around the city of Balta in modern-day Ukraine, but nothing from Bessarabia, which at the time formed part of Romania. One of the reasons for the creation of the Moldavian ASSR was the desire of the Soviet Union at the time to eventually incorporate Bessarabia. The Moldavian SSR, organised by a decision of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on 2 August 1940, was formed out of a part of Bessarabia (taken from Romania on 28 June, after the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact) and out of a part of the Moldavian ASSR roughly equivalent to present-day Transnistria."



"Or you think 'centrally organized ' means all the food, fuel, ect were directly supplied to all the corners from Moscow?"

Yes. Just like all those big-ass rocket factories built in the middle of nowhere weren't local initiatives.

"Transnistria became an autonomous political entity in 1924 with the proclamation of the Moldavian ASSR, which included today's Transnistria (4,000 km2) as well as an adjacent area (9,000 km2) around the city of Balta in modern-day Ukraine, but nothing from Bessarabia, which at the time formed part of Romania. One of the reasons for the creation of the Moldavian ASSR was the desire of the Soviet Union at the time to eventually incorporate Bessarabia. The Moldavian SSR, organised by a decision of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on 2 August 1940, was formed out of a part of Bessarabia (taken from Romania on 28 June, after the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact) and out of a part of the Moldavian ASSR roughly equivalent to present-day Transnistria."

So? This "prenet-day Transnistria" has little in common with Moldova which was influenced much by Romania. Which was created by the same methods a bit early, during liberation of Balkan's slavs from Ottman Empire. I don't understand on what you complaining on? All those national states have their borders drawn by ethnic means. If we speakon transnistria it was an autonomous district in Moldova SSR because of ethnic means too. So? I may be was a bit incorrect, I wanted to say there was no Tansnistrian SSR, as you were talking about vast self-sufficient republics such as Belorussia or Ukraine and Transnistria, which created it's autonomy during 90s, in a one row.

Just like all those big-ass rocket factories built in the middle of nowhere weren't local initiatives.

The USSR had a large internal republic industrialization programs. So they took a place in the middle of nowhere in a SSR and build a plant or factory on it for jobs and such. I understand fighting unemployment isn't what you expecting from a union knowing EU.

So your claims of non-existing transnistria are BS.
---

That "fight with unemployment" program was called "five year plan".
So, please tell me, what role, for example, Kiev had played in reducing Crimea's unemployment?