Dubstepforum.com

putin is really scary tbh

i think that he may probably be a cyborg

dubunked wrote:why is putin such an aggressive clown?

Creating the scenario that will manufacture your consent to what you wouldn't otherwise consent to.

I think there are some misconceptions here about Crimea.

Economically speaking, it is far less interesting a region to any one (including Ukraine) then some make it out to be here. It has some tourism obviously but away from the coasts, it is actually one of the poorer regions of the Ukraine and is completely dependant on central Ukraine in terms of power supply and many of its resources. About 59% of the inhabitants are ethnically Russian, only 24% are Ukraine (and only 10% of those actually speak it). The original inhabitants, the Tartans, were deported from the peninsula during the communist era, by Joseph Stalin of course. Some of them have since returned (15%) and of course, they are very anti-Russian.

The military base and historical meaning are much more important to Russia than its economic value, in fact, it would be considered a burden for Russia should they have to take control of the region, rather than a benefit.

Second: in 2007-2008 Russia intervened in Georgia: many of the inhabitants in said region (the large majority) in fact owned Russian pass-ports. So there was a certain claim to be made for Russians 'invasion' that time around. This time however, this is not the case: most of the ethnic Russians there still have a Ukrainian passport.

Lastly, Russia signed a rather significant treaty in 1994 (Treaty of Budapest) in which it guaranteed Ukrainian territorial sovereignty so it would be violating its own treaty should it invade en force (though how loyal Putin is to these treaty's could be argued).

If you ask me, this is all about destabilisation and interference, causing the countries around Russia to remain unstable and divided. I sure hope I'm right, a war in the centre of Europe would be devastating and is something we should all want to avoid (kick-ass footage on CNN aside).

Well Ukraine was looted, knocking its knees out from under it, causing it to fall into the hands of the EU/IMF or Russia. One or the other. No independence, no independent currency.

my mate was just interviewed on tv as an expert on the topic. lol he's not an expert

http://www.3news.co.nz/Wests-hands-tied ... fault.aspx

He is like, clearly a Romanian powerplay, Bucharest exerts its power over Kiev.

Classic, this is what the struggle for independence looks like.

joeki wrote:If you ask me, this is all about destabilisation and interference, causing the countries around Russia to remain unstable and divided. I sure hope I'm right, a war in the centre of Europe would be devastating and is something we should all want to avoid (kick-ass footage on CNN aside).

lol u guys get cnn?

magma wrote:

southstar wrote:

dubunked wrote:the only country that is allowed to have a "the" in front of it is the netherlands ffs.

Congo

The Congo and The Gambia are named after their main rivers and The Lebanon is named for its biggest mountain... using the The seems optional, but probably best not to. Although a quick check just showed that Gambia and Congo use it in their official English name now. I guess it's similar to referring to Dordogne in France as The Dordogne, which a lot of people seem to do.

The Ukraine apparently has its roots in Russian - perhaps someone a bit more familiar with the language can confirm - but I think it means "The Borderlands" or something similar from when it used to be the edge of the Russian Empire. Now that it's a country in its own right, I think it's probably inappropriate to keep using the The.

We're not alone in this... isn't Switzerland called Die Schweitz in German?

just looked at the avatar and thought m8son wrote this and was a bit taken aback lol

http://rt.com/news/kerry-russia-us-pretext-494/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26409401

at least it's become obvious that media propaganda is still flagrant

you'd expect the bbc to be disinterested though

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26411396

And Russian TV has been running other stories that could be used to justify further military intervention in Ukraine, both to its own citizens and world opinion.

Business daily Vedomosti noted the susceptibility of Russian people to "TV propaganda" and the idea of empire, but said that "behind the imperial propaganda there is no politics, economics or desire to support an empire".

Ukrainian politicians have, meanwhile, renewed calls for Russian TV to be dropped from the country's cable packages. "I will ask for the switching off of Russian TV channels, which are calling on Ukrainians and Russia to fight each other," said Fatherland MP Mykola Tomenko.

^that last bit is a bit ominous

Are there nukes in the ground in the Ukraine?

And why would you expect the bbc to be disinterested. They're worse than RT.

nowaysj wrote:They're worse than RT.

yeah retweets are awful

I take RT over most american sources tbh

That is because you're a commufascist. Makes sense.

guys u gotta open ur eyes what is the media trying to hide by broadcasting so much of this? false flag imo

Putin must be creaming himself over the opportunity to look strong he's got here... everyone's going to complain, but nobody's going to war with Russia unless they step a fair bit further than Crimea.

He's just overseeing the whole thing going "I dare you... I fucking DOUBLE dare you."

an old wikileaks article about ukraine http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id ... 8&q=crimea

ehbrums1 wrote:

nowaysj wrote:They're worse than RT.

yeah retweets are awful

ayyyy lmao

"The Russian military has given Ukrainian forces in Crimea until 03:00 GMT to surrender or face an assault, Ukrainian defence sources have said."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26424738

It seems Russia has also deployed troops near its Polish and Ukranian borders.