Slashdot Mirror
Ukraine Asks Zuckerberg to Discipline Kremlin Facebook Bots
mi writes "Ukrainian media is reporting (link in Ukrainian), that Facebook is getting increasingly heavy-handed blocking Ukrainian bloggers. The likely explanation for the observed phenomenon is that Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia and is headed by a Russian citizen (Catherine Skorobogatov). For example, a post calling on Russian mothers to not let their sons go to war was blocked "Due to multiple complaints". Fed up, Ukrainian users are writing directly to Zukerberg to ask him to replace Catherine with someone, who would not be quite as swayed by the "complaints" generated by Russian bots.
Ah yes, only the most reliable sources at Slashdot...
But anyway, the more likely explanation is that like many social media platforms, Facebook uses automated systems to deal with thousands and thousands of content complaints every day. Usually, after a certain number of complaints, the system automatically blocks the content, and the original poster has to challenge the block. Keep in mind that due to the volume of content complaints that these types of services get, humans rarely get involved in the beginning, it is simply all automated.
It's possible and even probable that the complaints themselves are âoeorchestratedâ by people with political aims, perhaps even government employees. But that doesn't mean that Facebook is somehow âoecooperatingâ with the Russians because the head of their Russian office is, well, Russian.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Are you using Facebook... Stop using it and take the power from that twit.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
...Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia...
Whose brilliant idea was that?
Funny that the Ukrainians think Zuckerberg cares. He's the worst kind of anti-freedom, in-bed-with-the-government, limousine socialist there is. Mr. Open-All-The-Borders hides behind his armed guards at his gated mansion so he wont have to be burdened with the consequences of his actions. Appealing to Zuckerberg to stop blocking their social media efforts is going to have about as much effect as appealing directly to Putin to stop invading.
Here's a tip, my Russian friend: if you want to pretend to be a neutral observer on the Ukrainian conflict in an internet forum, then you'd do better to proofread your post again and again until you manage to remove the little telltale signs that your native language is Russian. No informed reader of your post above is going to be convinced you don't have a significant dog in this fight.
It *is* a military assault, and it is orchestrated by Russia... but it is still a game. For example, Russia is not attempting to gain control of the airspace over Ukraine (heaven forbid they try, there are NATO air resources all around the place and those might get involved, resulting in a far larger-scale war).
It is just that for politicians to play "chicken", thousands of soldiers have to die.
On this level of the game, Russia intensively re-supplies and re-mans rebel fighters, hoping that the Ukraininan government grows desperate and starts negotiations on very favourable terms. (It pays to remember that the Ukraininan government previously proposed negotiations, during a ceasefire, but rebels rejected this.) Meanwhile, the Ukraininan government is trying to solicit foreign financial and military aid, to outlast and push back the offensive and negotiate when very serious economic sanctions have been enacted against Russia.
For the soldiers who die, and the civilians who die from collateral damage, rest assured, this is not a game, and I (as an anarchist) would very much prefer if some helpful person would take out the trash that is called Vladimir Putin (and if it's necessary, then also Petro Poroshenko, though it must be said that he did't start this - he was hired when shit was alreadu spinning with the fan).
Yes, because anyone who speaks Russian (or Ukrainian) obviously wouldn't know anything about the situation in Russia or Ukraine. Better listen to armchair pundits who never leave their easy chairs in New York.
Oh wait.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
"...rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne troops into another country is just like what they did in Czecheslovakia or Poland or Hungary or a dozen other countries over the last 50 years..."
Sorry, that's utter rubbish.
1. If Russia had been "rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne [sic] troops" into Ukraine, it would have been subdued within a week at most - just as Czechoslovakia (sp) and Poland and Hungary were subdued, despite being far better organized than Ukraine today.
2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR. Of course, if you are desperate to have a Hideous Giant Foreign Enemy at all times, and you can't do better than Mr Putin, have at it. But do remember that he can push a button and destroy all life on earth, so the USA has no advantage whatsoever in that regard. And do, please, remember that he is human and can get angry or make mistakes. So please - for all our sakes - don't push him too hard. If you are one of those Rapture nutcases, please just go and kill yourself, and leave the rest of us out of it.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Get a perspective or something.
When the "local militias" chose to take over Donetsk International Airport in June, and were ousted by Ukrainian marines, the coffins were sent mostly to Russia and Chechnia. Yeah right, locals took up arms to defend themselves.
Yes, there are some locals fighting. They are not the most agressive, and their numbers are dropping. There is scarecely any equipment seized by locals left. Nearly all of the heavy equipment has been deliberately supplied by Russian state.
Seriously, setting up a social networking site is technically very simple. We have thousands of them. Why are the Ukrainians using an American system that has been compromised by crippling political correctness, is administered by Russians... aka the enemy, and all the other crap you could possibly windge on about facebook.
Why use it? Just set up your own social network, get people to join, and let the kids send profane selfies at each other.
Problem solved.
Happily ever after.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
If Russia didn't care about international opinion/backlash you are probably correct except for the possible insurgency after the fact. They manifestly care about international opinion though Putin seems to really enjoy playing the game.
Yes, because anyone who speaks Russian (or Ukrainian) obviously wouldn't know anything about the situation in Russia or Ukraine. Better listen to armchair pundits who never leave their easy chairs in New York. Oh wait.
In short, Russians are about as well informed today as the German people were in 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland. You got much more accurate information out of London and New York both in 1939 and today.
A person in New York would be so better informed than a person in Russian that it would be ridiculous. Russian media and nearly all discussion is Kremlin controlled. There is no free flow of information to make reasoned judgments upon unless you are in the west. So some of the nonsense coming out or Russia is not intentional, its all its people have been told. When they refer to the Ukrainians as Nazi's its not really a historical reference. They actually think a neo-Nazi coup has taken place in Kiev. They have never hear the truth that a corrupt President feared growing calls for investigation and prosecution, that his security services used deadly force about peaceful protesters to quiet these growing calls, took his money and fled, and was replaced in new elections called for after abandoning his post.
In the West we can watch the RT network (a Kremlin controlled network) and dozens of other networks with political biases ranging from the far left to the far right. We can compare and contrast. In Russia you get RT's perspective and only the information they provide.
And for those going to more modern news sources, to social networks, well you see what is happening on facebook. More heavy Kremlin influence in the Russia.
Now I know you are a hard core Russian. You are denying your despot government never did anything in Hungary? What happened in 1956 is so well documented that only a moron who believes his own lies could possibly deny it happened.
-- Will program for bandwidth
Putin... has reaped significant benefits from this already. His popularity ratings have rosen signigicantly since the war started - unfortunately the natural reaction of people during a war is to rally behind their leaders.
(Especially if the leaders have previously seized control over mass media, dictating what kind of messages television and radio will convey. For your information, unless you are from there, only print and internet media remain contested territory in Russia. TV and radio are under firm state control.)
He had incentive to seize Crimea and tell bold-faced lies about it during the process. His image as a strongman depends on overcoming Ukraine.
Regarding winter... they don't need winter. They are already undergoing economic collapse, with infrastructure supplying a (previously) 2-million city destroyed and smaller towns unplugged too (from not only gas, but electrical and water supply). Yet I must admit, the folks in Harkiv still seem to manufacture those cheap hydraulics which I buy from them. Ukraine *is* very dependent on gas, but it also has a dozen of locally operated nuclear power stations. The latest craze in Kiev seems to be buying electric heaters.
2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR
Not really. In the eyes of most of the world, the names may have changed, but you still act the same.
-- Will program for bandwidth
You know, maybe some of us should complain to Slashdot about the Obama/Poroshenko-bots that reliably and consistently troll every single story about this conflict? You know, the ones who imply that anyone who even slightly skeptical about the propaganda we're all being fed, must be Russian or a paid Kremlin propagandist?
Suck on this. I'm a native English speaker from the UK, I have never been to Russia, I have been reading Slashdot for about 14-15 years, posting for most of that time too. And the Anonymous Coward tells it like it is. Poroshenko has claimed Ukraine was invaded like ten times already. He claimed he was being "invaded" by a fucking aid convoy, including after Putin's honesty about it's contents had been verified by international journalists and the Red Cross. In fact he asserted he'd shell said convoy, so the Red Cross chickened out, but the crazy Russians just drove right in there and delivered that aid anyway.
So as a native speaker, please heed my call - let's all stop abusing the English language shall we? We know what an invasion looks like. It looks like what the USA did to Iraq. It looks like Russian flags flying above Kiev and Russian tanks rolling down the streets to the parliament building. It does not look like journalists scrabbling around presenting the testimony of a milkmaid in a farcical attempt to find an army, as the Guardian did only a few days ago. Now condemn Putin for militarily supporting the rebels if you like (though the proof of this is wafer thin as well), just be aware that this is something many countries do, including the ones that are currently being most shrill about Ukraine. So such an argument doesn't have much impact, unfortunately, though I wish we lived in a world where it did.
Seriously, who cares about Facebook postings anyway? Are these people a bunch of 12 year olds?
I don't need a FB account to know that I probably can't differentiate between official propaganda, astroturfers, shills and real eye-witness reports - on both sides.
Maybe Ukraine should buy more ads on FB - that usually helps...
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
I guess you dont know how to do a google search. Russia has not gone all out but they are there.
They trades socialist for fascist. In other words, now we don't need to hate them for being so different, we can hate them for showing us the ugly side of ourselves.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Bad bot. Bad bot. No cookie!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
As Ukraine is under military assault by Russia at the moment, they should abandon any complaint monitoring for the time being.
That turns out not to be the case. The Ukrainian army - which is rapidly running out of effectives who are willing to lay down their lives for billionaire Nazi oligarchs - has been severely mauled by the militias formed to defend the area around Donetsk and Lugansk. As Americans would form militias to fight for their homes if an army trundled into their state and began bombarding city centres.
Turns out? Turns out?
The legal government led by the newly democratically elected president of the Ukraine was winning and driving the rebels out of even their stongholds like Luhansk, before the Russians decided to openly intervene instead of just sending "soldiers on holliday" and anti-maylasia air systems.
Now, as in the latest few days the Ukraines are withdrawing, they havn't lost any engagements yet, but are moving to better prositions and waiting for international reactions before engaging the invading Russian troops.
But they'll still get the World Cup because Sepp Blatter is a Douche (with a capital D).
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
https://twitter.com/CanadaNATO...
100.000? I would suggest he send 200.000. Ukraine is not a small country like Georgia, a 100.000 is not enough if he wants to take all of it.
Still it would be a stupid thing to do. He needs to keep a soft hand approach to maintain whatever fig leafs that is his plausible denibilty and avoid reopening the iron curtain thereby completely destroying the modern Russian economy. When not only the US and Europe but also China and Japan strongly disapproves with your actions and are invoking sanctions, you are really setting yourself up for some serious isolation.
My considered opinion is that the Ukrainian military is not motivated, not trained, not equipped, not professional, and not reliable. They are heading for the hills because they can't endure the battle which is their duty. They will have a long, long, long wait if they wait for mommy in the form of "international reaction" to punish their bullies.
My assessment does not rely on the completely unsupported phantasm of OMG Russian troops. I don't give it because it pleases me that the situation is this way, but I decline to warp my view of the situation to fit my fantasy of how things ought to be.
Funny, grandparent did not show me any "telltale signs" at all, and I am pretty sensitive to awkward phraseology one finds in non native speakers. Not that being a non native speaker is in any way naughty or evil. His post is actually well composed, thoughtful, highly cogent (unlike yours), and makes excellent points.
Perhaps you would be good enough to elaborate on these "telltale signs". You can regard that as calling bullshit if you so wish.
It is parent who strikes me as being very partisan. That's not a bad thing per se, except when you believe you are accomplished anything by spouting blather and no meaningful debate.
But you are not willing to present a single shred of credible evidence of any Russian military formations rolling into Ukraine. You also suffer from an amusing mania in which you view Russian military prowess not just in due earned respect, but positive awe as some kind of superhumans. How you expect 1000 troops with no air support to have any significant effect against a nation of 50 million is just baffling. That is, if that nation were motivated. But we all know the Ukraine military is not motivated, not trained, not equipped, and not capable, don't we?
My considered opinion is that the Ukrainian military is not motivated, not trained, not equipped, not professional, and not reliable. They are heading for the hills because they can't endure the battle which is their duty. They will have a long, long, long wait if they wait for mommy in the form of "international reaction" to punish their bullies.
My assessment does not rely on the completely unsupported phantasm of OMG Russian troops. I don't give it because it pleases me that the situation is this way, but I decline to warp my view of the situation to fit my fantasy of how things ought to be.
Actually it turns out I was wrong, they have been engaging the invading forces heavily and lost, though also it appears the group called "Mothers of Russia" are starting to report about missing sons and bodies coming back.
"Ukrainian politicians, if they want to have a hope in hell of keeping control of their own country, should stop blaming others for the deep dark hole that they got their country into, for their own internal civil war, and sort it out amongst themselves, pronto. Otherwise, Ukraine will end up being parceled out between Russia, Romania, Hungary and Poland."
Which would be probably the best solution anyway.
I don't think he denied anything, the fact you are equating the USSR and Russia is a problem though. Ukraine was part of what happened in Hungary so why are you blaming only Russia? Ukraine was as much a core of the USSR as Russia was back then.
(heaven forbid they try, there are NATO air resources all around the place and those might get involved, resulting in a far larger-scale war).
NATO will not go to war with Russia over Ukraine. None of the members of NATO have that obligation since Ukraine is not a member, and moreover, none of them want to risk lives to defend Ukraine. It's a similar situation to Hungary in the 50s......did anyone help them? Of that situation, Krushkev said:
"In a newspaper interview in 1957, Khrushchev commented "support by United States ... is rather in the nature of the support that the rope gives to a hanged man."
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
... watching American lefties' discomfort in all this. Especially older American lefties.
"Can't ever say that Russia is the bad guy, but Russia clearly is the bad guy all too obviously ... head must explode now like a 1960's sci-fi robot caught in a contradiction ..."
I suppose you have a source for this...? Oh, BTW, a russian source will not impress me.
Mundus Vult Decipi
Ukraine needs to STOP attacking it's own people and begin TALKING.
Russia would then have no NEED to intercede.
When you bomb your own people you shouldn't GET any help to do it, only to STOP it.
Ukraine needs to STOP attacking it's own people and begin TALKING.
And Russia needs to stop attacking other people...
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Is there a *reliable* way to donate money to Ukraine and Ukraines army ?
I'm not GP, but the two tell-tale signs that I'm seeing are the spelling of "Abhasia" (direct transliteration of Russian "x" into "h" - it doesn't make sense for an English speaker, because the sounds are very different, which is why normal transliteration is "kh") and "08.08.08" (date format with dots and leading zeroes that is normally used in Russia, and it's also one of the few countries that refers to that conflict by the date alone, much like 9/11 in US).
They are unapologetically acting like the USSR; using the old national song as the basis of russia's national anthem is like the Germans taking up "deutchland, deutchland uber alles".
Guess what the official state anthem of the Federal Republic of Germany is?..
If Russia had been "rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne [sic] troops" into Ukraine, it would have been subdued within a week at most - just as Czechoslovakia (sp) and Poland and Hungary were subdued, despite being far better organized than Ukraine today.
Czechoslovakia and Hungary were subdued in an open invasion - the Soviet troops that were rolling in on the tanks did not disguise their allegiance or which state sent them. And comparison doesn't work on many other levels. In Czechoslovakia, in particular, there was pretty much no open resistance. In Hungary, resistance was fierce, but poorly organized and very poorly equipped - basically, they had small arms, but little else, and definitely no artillery or armor. In Ukraine, the undercover Russian troops are facing the Ukrainian military, complete with UAVs, artillery, tanks and air support. It's not a "pacification" operation, it's modern warfare, almost at a full scale (the only thing that's missing is air support on the separatist/Russian side - though they already use UAVs for recog).
It's a bit more complicated.
Ukrainian military right now basically consists of three distinct parts. One is the regular army - those are reasonably well equipped (all the usual stuff, artillery, tanks, air etc - if somewhat outdated), but poorly motivated. The other is the National Guard, which was basically recreated and stuffed with mostly ex-MVD and internal troops - these are neither well equipped nor well motivated (many of them were on the "wrong" side of Maidan).
Then there is that part of the National Guard that consists of the volunteer batallions - Azov, Dniepr, Donbas, Aidar etc. These consist mostly from people who were on Maidan and wanted to keep the fight going, but also from the newly reinvigorated far right groups like Right Sector (in particular, Azov is almost 100% neo-Nazi, and they aren't even hiding that fact - take a look at their insignia, and if you're not familiar with the symbolism, look up Schwarzezonne and Wolfsangel). Now these guys are very motivated, and they are one of the few units which sometimes even refuse to retreat against direct orders to do so, and are generally very battle efficient. However, they are not well equipped - in many cases the state didn't even issue a proper uniform, so they're wearing the stuff that was crowdsourced for them, and they have very little heavy armor or artillery.
Negotiations under a ceasefire? Yeah, sure.
If you actually follow the news, at the time of proposed negotiations Ukrainian army was being pummeled by the rebels. Ceasefire would have allowed the Ukrainian army to break out of the encirclement. As it happened, about 400 Ukrainian soldiers had to drop their weapons and escape into _Russia_. I'm not joking, Ukrainian military personnel had to flee to their enemy, and then Russia simply let them return to Ukraine.
Maybe you're thinking about the earlier "Poroshenko's peace plan"? It was even more ridiculous, that 'plan' called for rebels to put down arms and surrender. In exchange (but without any guarantees) there might have been some nods towards the official status (but not as a state language) of Russian language and some 'decentralization'. Only an idiot would have accepted such a plan, and rebels are most certainly not idiots.
Rebels consolidated control over their areas and also won several tactical victories before the 'invasion'. If anything, this 'invasion' can be associated with more aggressive push towards capturing Mariupol. I.e. with offensive operations.
Personally, I have a lot of doubts that the 'invasion' is really real. It looks more like Kiev tries to frantically shift the blame from the extreme stupidity of Ukrainian military commanders who simply use soldiers as cannon fodder.
But at the same time it is interesting how many shills leap out of the woodwork in any news article which is critical of Russia or Israel. Clearly these countries have teams of people who make concerted efforts to drown out, berate, brow beat or otherwise pooh pooh any story no matter how credible it is.
all the interwebz says there are russian troops and weapons fighting in ukraine.
Hm... The old USSR anthem was actually quite nice. It had zero references to the USSR being the supreme nation or anything. Unlike the anthems of certain countries (see: "The Star-Spangled Banner" as an example).
"You know, maybe some of us should complain to Slashdot about the Obama/Poroshenko-bots that reliably and consistently troll every single story about this conflict? You know, the ones who imply that anyone who even slightly skeptical about the propaganda we're all being fed, must be Russian or a paid Kremlin propagandist?"
No, we don't think that, we just think you're naive and stupid. But those who clearly are Kremlin propagandists (maybe not paid, just naive native Russians) with their broken English and undisguised love of Putin should just as well be allowed to be called out on it.
I wouldn't pretend to defend everything the Ukrainian army has done, but I'm still siding with Ukraine on this because everything from shooting down of a civilian airliner to annexed Crimea's Tatar population having their houses marked with X's and the disappearance of those who protest that annexation are all kinds of evil created by Putin that simply cannot be defended.
What you don't do is help your case with arguments like this, which are trivially debunked:
"Poroshenko has claimed Ukraine was invaded like ten times already."
So? Maybe that's because he is?
"He claimed he was being "invaded" by a fucking aid convoy, including after Putin's honesty about it's contents had been verified by international journalists and the Red Cross."
Why on Earth are you lying about this? The Red Cross themselves explicitly said they were only allowed to examine about 35 of 70 lorries that crossed the border and so could not support it, a bunch of journalists got a glimpse inside some they weren't supposed to see and they were basically empty. Why? What was going to be put in them at the border?
"We know what an invasion looks like. It looks like what the USA did to Iraq."
Oh I see, you're one of those people who in 2003 was, like many of us saying "The Iraq war is wrong!" but unlike the rest of us you're unable to let something go from 11 fucking years ago? That doesn't paint you as someone rational we should listen to. This has nothing to do with Iraq - that happened, it was an unacceptable fuckup, but it was a fuckup perpetrated by a regime who hasn't been in power for 6 years.
"It looks like Russian flags flying above Kiev and Russian tanks rolling down the streets to the parliament building."
This is just stupid. Why do you feel an invasion has to be fully fledged? Are you saying that Israel didn't in fact recently invade Gaza because they only kept tanks on the outskirts, only sent troops into the streets, and didn't raise the Israeli flag over Gaza? Putin has done what he's done because plausible deniability allows him to cast doubt on whether Russia deserves full blown sanctions, he was hoping he could take over Eastern Ukraine and not have anyone able to hold him immediately responsible for it. Unfortunately for him due to a variety of fuckups such as Russian soldiers being captured in Ukraine, and tanks that are operated by no one in the world other than the Russian military (T-72BMs) now turning up it's pretty clear it's Russia in there and no one else:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...
What's worse is that this is exactly what they did a few months ago in Crimea and now even admit it - why are you so adamant that they wouldn't do the same in Eastern Ukraine as they admitted to doing there? Something which is, for what it's worth, a war crime- dressing a professional army as civilians is a breach of international law, and unlike Bush who was simply arguably a war criminal, Putin is a self-admitted war criminal.
But you keep defending a war criminal based on half-assed information if it makes you feel like a cool counter-culture hipster or whatever you think you are.
Using the age old argument of "America fucked up once, so this isn't Putin and if it was it'd be justified anyway" makes you look like an exceptional kind of idiot. The world isn't that black and white, and two wrongs don't make a right.
Rebels consolidated control over their areas and also won several tactical victories before the 'invasion'. If anything, this 'invasion' can be associated with more aggressive push towards capturing Mariupol. I.e. with offensive operations.
Personally, I have a lot of doubts that the 'invasion' is really real. It looks more like Kiev tries to frantically shift the blame from the extreme stupidity of Ukrainian military commanders who simply use soldiers as cannon fodder.
See http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...
The rebels were losing ground everywhere and suddenly resurged a place they had no men and no foothold, and exactly where we have pictures of more than a 100 russian tanks driving over the border.
Oh, puhlease. BBC simply relays Ukrainian media. And as we all know, Ukrainian media can now outdo Goebbels in bending the truth.
This site http://voicesevas.ru/ has been providing pretty reliable information since the start of the conflict. They have a pretty up-to-date interactive map: http://cassad.net/?do=warmarke... , and here's their map for Aug 10-17: http://voicesevas.ru/img/66833... ( http://voicesevas.ru/news/yugo... ). As you can see, they were conducting several offences, including the ongoing destruction of an encircled Ukrainian army division.
"Putin... has reaped significant benefits from this already. His popularity ratings have rosen signigicantly [sic] since the war started - unfortunately the natural reaction of people during a war is to rally behind their leaders".
That would be why, after years of war against many nations, Obama's approval rating is 43%. No, Putin's approval rating is sky-high because he speaks for Russians and acts in their interests. (And, incidentally, Russia is not engaged in a war at the moment).
Obama's rating is in the toilet because Americans know very well he does not represent them and couldn't care less about their interests (except for the 1%, of course).
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
"Ukrainian media can now outdo Goebbels in bending the truth".
As can the BBC nowadays, sadly.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
"Now I know you are a hard core Russian".
Gosh, that will come as a big surprise to my family and friends. In fact I am a British citizen (Scots-Irish), with a degree in history and a conservative libertarian bent.
I don't know where you come from, but your English comprehension seems poor. I stated that when the Soviets invaded Hungary and those other nations, the invasion was sudden and utterly overwhelming. Within hours or days there were Russian tanks and soldiers everywhere, and the local government had disappeared and been replaced.
As for the situation in South-East Ukraine, there is no need to drag in fictional Russian forces. Surely you can think for yourself of cases from history when hastily-formed citizen militias defeated professional armies? How about the American War of Independence? Vietnam? The Jews who - starting as a small minority of the populace - defeated the British armed forces and founded the state of Israel? Or, indeed, the Ukrainian and Russian partisans who struck powerful blows against the invading German forces in 1941-4?
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR
Not really. In the eyes of most of the world, the names may have changed, but you still act the same.
As previously mentioned, I am not Russian. I am merely a person who tries to learn the facts and evaluate them logically and as dispassionately as possible.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR.
Which is just another lie. You are the same.
Yes, Russia is smaller than USSR - but it seems you have a plan to remedy that.
And that is why you have lost all credibility. We cannot trust anything you say.
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
Ukraine was part of what happened in Hungary so why are you blaming only Russia? Ukraine was as much a core of the USSR as Russia was back then.
I am old enough to have lived through the cold war. We often referred to USSR (and even the Warsaw Pact) as "Russia" - using the names interchangeably - because it appeared to be one and the same. Of course, that was grossly ignorant and disrespectful to the other republics and states.
However, it now appears as it it wasn't so far off the mark anyway. The former "allies" of the Warsaw Pach - especially Poland - have wasted no time warning about the real intentions of Russia. And they should know - having lived almost 50 years in the shadows of what was effectively the continuation of the Russian Empire.
Talk to Estonia and the other Baltic states as well. They had a big hurry getting into NATO once they wrested themselves free from the "Russian federation". Little love was lost for their old big "ally" in the east.
What has emerged is an image of Russia consistently bullying their neighbor states, forcing them into becoming "friends", Russian domination of local people, even when russians were in the minority (they could always call on big brother). That was how the USSR and the Warsaw block was held together, and also why - when it finally broke - disrupted so astonishingly(!) fast.
This is nothing but Russia rising again after having licked its wounds for a couple of decades. And Russia (and I regretfully have to accept - the Russian people) have not changed in their aspirations.
What we see is pure 1920-1930 style fascism where a powerful nation prepares the population for conquests of weaker states by building a narrative of being "victims" while their true destiny is to be masters, hence they must strike back.
During the Kursk accident I was shocked by how many russians believed the propaganda and dangerous(!) allegations coming out of the Navy that a NATO submarine/torpedo had sunk Kursk. I thought: "Shouldn't they know better by now?".
During the illegal occupation of Crimea by the "green men", Putin claimed that they were just concerned citizens taking protecting their families by organizing self-defense against a perceived enemy.
We now know that Putin was lying. He even admitted as much. The occupation was set in motion from Russia, and the green men was regular Russian troops.
But what got the best of me was that Russians were never outraged by this blatant and dangerous violation of international laws and treaties. They applauded it!
And now it repeats, and we have russians here claiming the same thing as during the Crimea occupation.
When the MH17 was shot down, the rebels first believed they had shot down a Ukrainian plane. And they bragged about it on Twitter and Facebook. The news that the separatists had downed another Ukrainian plane even reached ITAR-TASS and Russia Today, where many Russians must have read it. When it became clear that it was civilian the news disappeared without a trace, without notice and without explanation.
The Russians who followed that initial news and how it was transformed into allegations against Ukraine, why didn't they stop and wonder. It is staring the Russian public in the face, and they refuse to acknowledge it. I blame them for that. I blame all Russians for that.
I have lost all respect for Russians. There may be good Russians, but from now on they will have to prove that they are not lying scumbags before I want to have anything to do with them. Sorry, but that is how it is.
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
"none of them want to risk lives to defend Ukraine". How do you know?
Which country do you think wants to? None of them have even pretended to do anything, other than pointless sanctions.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
The maps doesn't really disagree, they are just painted differently. If you double check with google maps on the side, the areas where the BBC map and Russian propaganda map disagrees are uninhabited areas of corn field that probably neither side bothers to defend. Pick you poison. The BBC maps was more informative as it showed Luhansk to be surrounded which it was.
The maps show important several divergences, like separated Lugansk and Donetsk (in reality they never were). Or the lack of clashes away from the rebel-controlled area.
If the BBC maps are copied from the official military intelligence then it's no wonder that rebels don't have trouble encircling Ukrainian military.
"Must I really remind you that Obama has not managed to make himself a "president for life" yet, and is scheduled to exit during the next elections?"
Not really. With an approval rating like that, he couldn't get enough votes. Anyway, he will be replaced by another carbon copy sock puppet, just as he himself replaced Dubya. The Americans and British make a big song and dance about their holy ritual of electing a new leader every few years, but what is wrong with a president for life? Isn't a good president for life better than a succession of uncoordinated nonentities, all reversing each other's minor decisions for visual effect while continuing to follow the same plan? Plato thought so, anyway.
"Must I really remind you that Obama has a credible opposing party, even if they look like the other side of the same pancake?"
You contradict yourself. If they look "like the other side of the same pancake" - as they do - they are NOT "a credible opposing party". As Gore Vidal put it, the USA is ruled by a single party with two right wings. After Democrats made a huge effort to elect Obama, they found to their horror that things went on exactly as they had under Dubya.
"Must I remind you that the US electoral system, while it is a horrible mess and reliable collapses into a two-party system with minimal differences between the parties (no other reason than game theory needed), produces reliable alteration of the persons holding power?"
Must I remind you that a "reliable alteration of the persons holding power" is meaningless if they all carry out the same policies and obey the same masters?
"Must I remind you that the private-owned mass media of the US, while helpfully serving commercial interests, are not subject to direct state control?"
That is one of the neatest tricks the USA (and other "Western" nations) has perfected. As you say, there is no formal censorship - and yet, as if by magic, the MSM presstitutes publish exact replicas of what they are told by Washington, London, Paris, Berlin - yes, and now Kiev - without ever allowing a hint of contradictory facts or opinion to see the light of day? If you want to know how it's done, read the books (e.g.) "Disciplined Minds" and "Why Are We the Good Guys?" In a sentence, everyone from the most junior reporter to the chief editor knows what kind of stories will lead to fame, favour and fortune - and which will lead to a cardboard box in a back alley.
"Must I also remind you that the US underwent the same process which Putin is enjoying, when Bush was president and 9/11 happened? The process of leaders gaining popularity via war is nothing new to human society. The popularity goes away with time and wearines, though".
Putin's rating has not fallen below 60% since 2000. When, pray, are time and weariness going to set in?
"Additionally, need I remind you that the US population has (mostly) never seen Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan as serious threats, or even threats to their fellow countrymen. Meanwhile, state-controlled media has effectively created an illusion in Russia, that Ukraine is not governed by representatives chose by its very people. As for the separatists, they prevented people in districts occupied by them from voting altogether".
If, as you claim, "the US population has (mostly) never seen Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan as serious threats," why did they support the infliction of over 2 million deaths and countless more injuries, massive homelessness, and destruction of their infrastructure? Is it because they don't care, or is it because they actually no power at all over what the government in Washington does in their name?
All your arguments are based on the arbitrary, and unsupported, assumption that Russians (including Putin) are bad and untrustworthy, whereas Americans (including Obama and Bush) are good and trustworthy. Needless to say, the very mention of Bush and Obama blows that theory out of the water. Try experimenting with objectivity one day, and see if you like it. Consider that, as Ale
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
"And according to your links, only one side's sources are capable of providing reliable information on this conflict: the Russian ones".
My views are based on a careful study of reports and opinion from all sources: USA, UK, France, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, India, China... I also notice which sources are consistent, logical, and fit with the facts. And which sources seem curiously identical to the statements of their governments. It is quite easy to work out who is telling the truth.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
e.g.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014...
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Also a thought, the new Ukrainian slogan: "Hail to Ukraine! Hail to Heroes!" is taken DIRECTLY from the WWII. From the nazi-allied Ukrainian forces that had committed multiple war crimes against Poles and had zero effect on the regular USSR army. Kinda fits the situation today.
That would be the MH17 with the black boxes covered by unprecedented secrecy agreements, holes from cannon shells in the fuselage, and that has disappeared from mainstream discourse?
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
FB is for pics of the grandchildren's birthday cake, for FBI agents acting like children, etc.
Politics doesn't sell.
Block them all and let God sort them out.
--
Kill them all and let God sort them out -- Massacre at Béziers, 22 July 1209
The United States will start to do to Russian Federation what it did to the Soviets. We will squeeze and wait. And after 30 years of being squeezed... Russia will probably fracture again. Probably in the far east... and then humbled again... we will offer Russia peace, friendship, and a place at the table. We'll see how small Russia needs to get before it is willing to behave itself.
Only problem w/ this theory. To split up Russia, there would need to be a large population which can be broken away from Russia on ethnic, religious or other lines. For the Soviet Union, there were those 14 other 'republics' that automatically gained independence once Boris Yeltsin pulled Russia out of the Soviet Union, making the latter a caricature of itself before it was dissolved.
But today's Russia is more or less a homogenous nation. What you're wishing for would have been possible had the Siberians, say, been a different ethnic people from the Russians. They're not. Granted, there are Mongoloid Shaman people in Krasnoyarsk going Eastwards, but not in the numbers that would constitute a viable nation. Fact remains that Russians are a homogenous majority from the Baltic to the Bering Straits.
Yeah, there are renegade groups like the Chechens & Tatars who would like independence. Guess what - unlike Ukraine, which has borders w/ several other countries, both a Chechnya & a Tatarstan would be landlocked countries within Russia - much like Lesotho - and would be at the mercy of Russia for all of their needs. Also, since Russians from other ex-Soviet republics, be it Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, et al are returning to Russia, it just bolsters Russian numbers even more.
I do think the Russians would do well to populate Siberia (not gulag style) so that they stop leaning heavily on Ukraine or Georgia or other such countries.
Well, having proofed various essays by Russian speakers, the grammar errors seem to be similar (mind you, other languages may also have errors of the same nature).
* about a 1000 Russian soldiers
* war of 08.08.08 in Abhasia and Georgia shown
* in not at all stupid
* 100,000 troops, full backing of the Russian tanks
Funny, grandparent did not show me any "telltale signs" at all, and I am pretty sensitive to awkward phraseology one finds in non native speakers. Not that being a non native speaker is in any way naughty or evil.
That's because your native tongue is one of the Slavic languages. For list of telltales, see some of the other replies.
His post is actually well composed, thoughtful, highly cogent (unlike yours), and makes excellent points.
A reply of a partisan for the other side of the argument. Otoh, I don't like it when it starts to devolve into ad hominems, either.
It is parent who strikes me as being very partisan.
And that, of course, is what makes an argument.
Vsevo Khoroshevo,
Sysrammer
Update: I reviewed your other posts, and the English is generally good. So, I presume 1) You let someone else use your account, 2) possibly because there was a shift change. Perhaps one of your staff of linguist/programmers is a bit weaker or is less experienced, and needs more training.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
* in not at all stupid
Good catch. Ignoring the "in", as I think that's just a typo, the phrase "not at all stupid" sounds Slavic to me. I can't pinpoint why, exactly. Perhaps it's a subtle pattern I picked up from my teachers long ago.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain