Someone explain the other side of the arguement to me - Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom (2015) Discussion

[–] batigoal9-1 9 years ago

Same way Russia is not good, the West (EU and US) are also not good. They only care about their own benefit.

reply

[–] ebright99 9 years ago

What? Sober up.

Anyone got an answer that makes sense?

reply

[–] batigoal9-1 9 years ago

I'm always sober. Just because you didn't understand something it doesn't mean it didn't make sense.

Ukraine has been in a very bad shape for a long time. Large parts of its population live under bad conditions. Roughly speaking, the population is divided. On one side (and the side shown in the film) they want independency from Russia and going towards the European Union and on the other side they want independency from the European Union and going towards Russia.

The berkut police as all kinds of police and military are tools. Yanukovych, the then president of Ukraine, wanted to move towards Russia and he used the police to quell the rebellion which opposed the pro Russian path.

Those critical with the film say the film ignores the negatives of the other side which is correct. As the famous quote goes "History is written by the victors" and that's prevalent in the documentary. You never hear the other side.

reply

[–] ebright99 9 years ago

Okay so Yanukovych pulls the strings of the berkut, but what is motivating Yanukovych and his followers? Do they see a union with Russia as beneficial to Ukraine? Or maybe only beneficial to themselves? Do they ever verbally express their views of a united Ukraine/Russia? Or do they only speak with riot police?

reply

[–] batigoal9-1 9 years ago

Ukraine has been in bad shape since forever. They have reasons to be bitter on both the west (aka germany) and russia. They have failed to build a strong independent state and identity over the years and thus on a lot of ther citizen's eyes the only solution is to side with EU or russia.

There are a ton of russians living in ukraine, like 15-20% of the population, especially in the southern and eastern part of the country. Here's a graph:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Russians_Ukraine_2001.PNG

During the rebellion shown in the film and after it, the pro russian side was also protesting and fighting. When Yanukovych fell and the new government came in action, they in turn tried to suppress pro russians. Hence the military intervention of Russia capturing Crimea and the ongoing battle over Dombass, the two regions with most russians.

The motivation of the higher ups is difficult for me to say but they are extremely corrupt so I believe they definitely put personal gain above all else. Maybe they also think that's the best solution for the country too but that's definitely an afterthought.

Since things escalated after the events shown in the documentary, yea many russians or pro russians on the east and south fought for uniting with russia and to some extent it did happen as Crimea is now fully part of Russia and part of Dombass is becoming too.

It's an ongoing issue and I've read that when the typical extreme russian winter stops in combination with Russia recently pulling out their troops from Syria, the situation will go wild again. The Ukrainian government is in a very tough spot since they can't really cope with the Russian military and the rest of the world doesn't seem to give a fck.

reply

[–] aloep 8 years ago

Crimea is now fully part of Russia

No, it's not. It's an illegally occupied territory. Big difference.

It's as much "part of Russia" as Kuwait was part of Iraq after Saddam Hussein invaded it in 1990.

reply

[–] batigoal9-1 8 years ago

True there is a difference.

I don't think it's the same thought with Kuwait as just a year later an alliance started a war against Iraq. In Crimea's case, I don't think anyone has even entertained the idea of starting a war against Russia and I don't think Crimea will be changing hands anytime soon.

reply

[–] aloep 8 years ago

I believe Russia *will* have to pull out of it, one way or another. It depends how long the loathsome Putin regime actually lasts. The second Russia actually has a leader who cares about its people and not some dictatorial madman who only cares about fueling his own ego, then the first sensible thing to do would be to get out of there. Sadly, I don't see Putin leaving without massive bloodshed happening first.

Having been in Crimea several times before annexation and twice since, it's very sad to see what was once a completely stable place and a very easy place to travel in being reduced to an isolated wasteland with zero foreign investment and a horrible, inarticulate and uncharismatic moron with known mafia ties in control as "prime minister" (Sergey Aksyonov).

I dislike US foreign policy as much as anyone, but if Putin's Russia had as much influence on the global scale as the US, things would be even worse.

reply

[–] slay-er 8 years ago

I don't think you got single thing right in your post. You are so delusional and clueless it is mind-boggling.

reply

[–] aloep 8 years ago

I don't think you got single thing right in your post. You are so delusional and clueless it is mind-boggling.

Haha "delusional" and "clueless" perfectly describes you, having just read some of your other posts.

Absolutely everything I wrote there is 100% true, and clearly I know much more than you would ever know.

Sad and pathetic.

reply

[–] Xavior_Penguin 8 years ago

Crimea is Russian territory and always has been plus Putin has an 89% approval rating so I have no idea what "cares about its people" means.

~Lance

reply

[–] Strazdas (2472) 3 years ago

Crimea is a totorian terrotiry that never belonged to russia in any way other than military occupation.

Putin has an approval rating of 89% the same way Lukashenka has an approval rating of 86%. If you do not approve you go to jail.

reply

[–] fjmsoftware 8 years ago

It's not "mere presence", those fascists are governing what's left of the country after its "liberation". And interestingly enough, when the U.N. tried to adopt a resolution unequivocally condemning all forms of fascism - some time after the recent Ukraine crisis started - the only countries to oppose the bill were the U.S., Canada and Ukraine. The U.S.' lap dog the E.U. abstained. On condemning fascism, the most rotten and criminal ideology this earth has ever seen. Let that sink in for a moment.

But rest assured it's not just the fascists, it's also the fact that the Maidan was not the authentic local grassroots movement they want you to believe it was. It was prepared in advance by the North-Atlantic gang via strategically positioned NGOs as well as by politically backing "the right politicians" to come to power as a result of the protests.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-fault

reply

[–] deltonacity 8 years ago

Oh dear, an anti-western conspiracy theorist has landed here.

Putin's Russia is the most fascist state on earth.

reply

[–] fjmsoftware 8 years ago

If you weren't so dumb you'd know that some conspiracies are real and that history has proven as much. Even a short stroll through Wikipedia and its sources can educate you on that fact, like the article with the list of US-backed coups d'etat and other regime change actions already well-known and well documented.

Ukraine is just one more victim on the US' long list of international crimes perpetrated in the name of spreading corporat-- sorry, "liberal democracy", the system where you get to choose which of the 2-3 richest a-holes who could afford the most visible campaigns get to lead your country against the majority's interests for another 4 years.

(And no, Russia is not better at being democratic, it's worse, but it's still a powerful country with keen interests in what happens right next to its borders, and ignoring this simple fact has been a proof of fantastic idiocy on the part of the EU in how it dealt with the whole Ukraine situation.)

reply

[–] deltonacity 8 years ago

the list of US-backed coups d'etat and other regime change actions already well-known and well documented.

Those are not conspiracies. I know full well that the US has been involved in such, and it's no secret. Does that make it acceptable? No. And it certainly doesn't somehow prove that the US had anything to do with what happened in Ukraine.

still a powerful country with keen interests in what happens right next to its borders, and ignoring this simple fact has been a proof of fantastic idiocy on the part of the EU in how it dealt with the whole Ukraine situation

"Powerful" only because it occupies a vast area of land and has nuclear weapons. Economically it is absurdly weak given the vast natural resources and sparse population density it holds. It has more natural resources than anywhere else on earth yet it's global economy is barely bigger than that of Italy.

Borders exist for a reason, and Russia has no jurisdiction beyond its own borders. So what you're basically saying is that the will of the majority of the people should be ignored because of Russia's "interests"? And yes, the people of Ukraine *want* to look west and not be part of Putin's imaginary sphere of influence. People all across Ukraine were incredibly angry about Yanukovych's decision, especially after signing a treaty with Putin. Russia has brought nothing good to Ukraine. Rather, in its rule of Ukraine it has brought genocide (Holodomor) and subversion the national identity and use of the Ukrainian language, and since independence has courted corrupt morons like Yanukovych who have run the country into the ground.

Oh and:

the system where you get to choose which of the 2-3 richest a-holes who could afford the most visible campaigns get to lead your country against the majority's interests

Like the Russian oligarchy is any better?

reply

[–] fjmsoftware 8 years ago

"Powerful" only because it occupies a vast area of land and has nuclear weapons.

... and a pretty solid army all around. But I agree with the rest of what you said, which only further shows the scale of Western idiocy in talking about Russia like it's the worst threat on the planet or like it has imperialistic/expansionist intentions (bwahahaha) whereas all it's been doing in Crimea and the Ukraine is protecting ethnic Russians.

Borders exist for a reason

Oh spare me. Ethnicity also exists for a reason, and any country will go to great lengths to protect those belonging to its defining ethnicity no matter which side of which "border" they're on.

Russia has no jurisdiction beyond its own borders

Funny, at the beginning of your post you seemed mature enough to understand that global politics is not handled only according to the laws and treaties and principles of fair-play, and now you're going to talk this jurisdiction crap? What am I to understand, that the US has the right to break international law when it damn well pleases but Russia should never do the same to protect Russians scattered around its borders? BS. And the facts have already shown you this is pure fantasy - Russia will do what it takes, and Westerners were idiots if they seriously didn't see it coming.

the people of Ukraine *want* to look west and not be part of Putin's imaginary sphere of influence

There is no clear majority you can call "the people of Ukraine" in this context. Pro-Russian president Yanukovich had been elected by majority vote before the "Euromaidan" coup d'etat and the majority of the people in the Lugansk and Donetsk regions were also staunchly pro-Russian, which is why the "Euromaidan" coup d'etat has plunged the country into civil war and economic collapse (this is not what happens when there's a clear majority of the people who get what they want!) and also why there are now two self-proclaimed pro-Russian republics in Lugansk and Donetsk and why Crimea could be annexed without too much fuss (close to 100% Russian ethnics with a pro-Russia attitude).

The delusion you need to wake up from is that there was an overwhelming Ukrainian majority in favor of strengthening ties with the EU (NATO) and turning away from Russia. There wasn't. It was just a bunch of youngsters. If there had been an overwhelming majority, that would've made things much simpler and the transition much cleaner, but there wasn't, and that's why things got as ugly as they got.

reply

[–] deltonacity 8 years ago

Ethnicity also exists for a reason, and any country will go to great lengths to protect those belonging to its defining ethnicity no matter which side of which "border" they're on.

Why should people be given special privileges over others just because of what ethnic group they happen to be from? Those people are not Russian citizens. Furthermore, the ethnic Russian population in Crimea was not under any threat.

the US has the right to break international law when it damn well pleases but Russia should never do the same to protect Russians scattered around its borders

The US doesn't have the right to do whatever it pleases, but they have never gone so far as to attempt to change international borders by force by illegally entering the territory of a foreign country and then suddenly proclaiming that territory to be their own, despite throughout the whole 23 years of the existence of the modern Russian Federation as a political entity, it had never made a single territorial claim to that area, and it was a completely stable integral part of Ukraine with no threat of secession. Yes, America's invasion of Iraq was completely illegal, but at least they didn't intend to annex Iraq outright, and intended to pull out eventually. Russia has no intention of pulling out of Crimea and continue to use provocative and defiant language whenever the subject is raised.

which is why the "Euromaidan" coup d'etat has plunged the country into civil war and economic collapse

I don't agree with the terms "coup d'etat and "civil war" regarding the situation, but that's irrelevant. However, the reasons for the economic collapse go way beyond that of Euromaidan. More than two decades of economic mismanagement, corruption and general incompetence from its leaders have given way to the current situation. Also Russia's constant meddling has not helped things.

Crimea could be annexed without too much fuss (close to 100% Russian ethnics with a pro-Russia attitude).

Ethnic Russians were the majority, but not even close to 100%. There was very significant minorities of Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars. While there was a strong pro-Russian stance from older generations, many of the younger people (even ethnic Russians) considered themselves to be Ukrainian rather than Russian, and large numbers of them had never been to Russia and felt much closer to that of Ukraine than Russia. I spent a lot of time there prior to annexation and I not see a *single* Russian flag on the entire peninsula. Now the place is overrun with Russian flags and the place is under complete lockdown, with anyone who dares to oppose the occupation or even say that it's Ukraine being arrested and charged with "separatism" or "extremism".

The delusion you need to wake up from is that there was an overwhelming Ukrainian majority in favor of strengthening ties with the EU (NATO) and turning away from Russia

I'm not so sure about how much support there was for joining NATO, but there was and is a lot of support for joining the EU, especially in the west and central parts of the country. Even in eastern parts like Dnipropetrovsk and Zaporozhye, people I have met absolutely despise Putin.

reply

[–] explosionsinthesky 8 years ago

It's all in here, both sides, very balanced. Should be compulsory reading before starting discussions on this topic - Richard Sakwa - Frontline Ukraine: Crisis In The Borderlands https://www.amazon.com/Frontline-Ukraine-Borderlands-Richard-Sakwa/dp/1784530646

reply

[–] moveebuff1953 8 years ago

Ukraine is the breadbasket of Europe, it is rich in natural resources & because of this it has been invaded by Poland Germany & Russia.. It was forced to become part of the USSR. Ukrainians were starved (Holodomor) by Stalin's Russians. Ukrainians don't want to be controlled by other countries. They were forced to speak Polish, change religions in order to survive. That was the west side of the country. The east side of Ukraine which borders Russia Putin has taken over Crimea and has been sending in Russian troops into Ukraine. Viktor Yanukovych was Putin's puppet who was showered with wealth to bride him to sway the gov't of Ukraine not to vote to be part of the EU which Ukrainians desperately wanted. He promised that he would signed the agreement but at the last minute he betrayed his country and signed with Putin. That is why Ukrainian students started to protest. The students and later ordinary Ukrainians of all ages participated in Maidan. The were unarmed when the military started shooting them with live rounds. When Yanukovich realized that he was going to be forced to resign he fled to Russia where he remains. His palatial residence was discovered and he knew that he was "found out". He is wanted for high treason by Ukraine. Russia still wages war in eastern Ukraine but does not admit that they are Russians. Putin has & continues to deceive the west.

reply

[–] Strazdas (2472) 3 years ago

Heres an argument from the other side: Why would i want to bother with elections, fairness and openess if i can just hire some thugs to beat up and "dissappear" the loudest opposition members and rule a country like my personal playhouse.

reply