You are not logged in.
Not so long ago, I went on a canoe trip into an area near the Canadian border. We picked a rocky campsite with no tree to hang our pack from. But their was a very high cliff, so we hung our packs from that down the side. Our tents were perhaps 30 feet from that. Guess what? A mother bear and two cubs "Can" figure out how to pull a pack up a cliff. They enjoyed our sausage and cheese, and did not like my protein bars. They also growled at us with red eyes when my partners shined lights on them. We were lucky, as we then sat in our tents and waited for them to finish. I calmly heard them walking by my corner maybe 3 feet from me.
Don't tempt a bear, and don't underestimate their ability to figure things out.
We fished and did well, so the trip was OK.
Use a tree if you are an eagle, don't wrestle the bears.
Clark is right, I am done with this thread. We need to focus on Mars, or at least the solar system.
Last edited by Void (2014-06-18 16:45:00)
Done.
Offline
Why would you support the Palestinians? They believe in God! I thought you were an atheist Soviet, didn't the founder of your country say that religion was the "opiates of the people"?
We could send David Petraeus over to govern Russia for them if they don't want democratic rule.
I support Israel's right to exist as a state, while similarly really regretting the predicament of the Palestinians. I don't live there and am not knowledgeable about the details around it so I won't comment on it.
I certainly believe in God, and so do most people in the ex USSR in case you didn't know.
Communism mostly just ridiculed religion, no different than Western Europe today. The churches, synagogues and mosques were there and if somebody wanted to visit them, they could, although for ideological reasons if they were perceived to be very religious, they couldn't get to high positions in society. Being openly religious was seen as a sign of stupidity or backwardness.
The Bolshevik persecution of the priests stopped by the 1930s and during the war Stalin even encouraged religion to help people pull through.
After that it was tolerated in moderation, as long as people didn't make a big show of it. Frankly for a lot of people it just made it all the more interesting and exciting and nothing happened to anyone who was into it, it was just maybe noted and might just hold them back a bit career wise. Most officials really didn't bother and just looked the other way.
Today the USSR area is much more religious on the whole, than Western Europe. Moldova for example is the most religious country in Europe. People there are literally super religious. Five minutes in the country and you notice it immediately.
The Orthodox church is having a fabulous renaissance in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova and there are a fair number of protestants too. It's the only part of Europe where the church is growing rather than losing members, and new churches are being built.
I happen to be a Lutheran Christian, and I don't think you should be so quick to put labels on people.
And Tom Kalbfus, if you read what Jesus preached about the poor, and look at how the disciples lived communally with no posessions, I don't think Jesus would have any major quarrel with socialism or social democracy. He didn't even rise up against the Romans who were not just atheist but downright idolworshippers at the time.
And they were also more brutal than modern socialist states.
I don't think he'd judge the USSR harsher than money- success and war obsessed USA, which is rolling in opulence and gluttony. The USSR had no gods, officially, but some lofty ideals. The USA worships Mammon....
Last edited by martienne (2014-06-18 17:41:35)
Offline
Jesus didn't advocate ignoring the Ten Commandments, he also preached that one should do unto others as on would wish done unto him, or the golden rule as its called. So how do you apply the golden rule to entire nations? So in exchange for taking Crimea, what is Russia giving in return? After all I'm sure Russia wouldn't want done unto it what it just did to Ukraine, do you?
Also Jesus believed one should give to the poor, not steal from others in order to give to the poor! You know the Commandment that says, "Thou shall not steal", is a protection of private property. Yep, even the ancient Israelites believed in private property and respecting it, that's why one of their ten commandments says "Thou shalt not steal!"
Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-18 17:42:39)
Offline
You *did* read the part where Tom claimed the rebels are thieves for using weapons that *they* paid for, right?
Do I have to read yet another tirade?
Offline
If you want to know what I'm responding to, yes.
As far as Christianity goes, I'm Christian - and also an anarchist, because that's the only logical way I can see to apply the [natural] law equally. If humans are forbidden to steal, that applies to everyone equally, and calling yourself a state doesn't change that. Same with violence - I'm not a pacifist, but I believe legitimacy comes from enforcing justice, not justice from being a legitimate authority. Plus, there's the matter that nowhere in the Bible is a government directly ordained by God - Israel was not supposed to have a King, and God warned them that they were asking for a tyrant. Then, in Revelation, where the Beast (State) is made in the image of the Dragon (Satan)... there's a lot of anti-state imagery in the Bible, and very little that can be construed as pro-state.
Where were we? Oh yes, the Donetsk War of Independence...
"I'm gonna die surrounded by the biggest idiots in the galaxy." - If this forum was a Mars Colony
Offline
If you want to know what I'm responding to, yes.
As far as Christianity goes, I'm Christian - and also an anarchist, because that's the only logical way I can see to apply the [natural] law equally. If humans are forbidden to steal, that applies to everyone equally, and calling yourself a state doesn't change that. Same with violence - I'm not a pacifist, but I believe legitimacy comes from enforcing justice, not justice from being a legitimate authority. Plus, there's the matter that nowhere in the Bible is a government directly ordained by God - Israel was not supposed to have a King, and God warned them that they were asking for a tyrant. Then, in Revelation, where the Beast (State) is made in the image of the Dragon (Satan)... there's a lot of anti-state imagery in the Bible, and very little that can be construed as pro-state.
Where were we? Oh yes, the Donetsk War of Independence...
That's a nice way of saying that it wants to be annexed by Russia. The people who really want independence are the people of Ukraine from Russia. The pro-Russians don't really want independence, that is why they are fighting.
Offline
Well yes, they do want to be annexed by Russia. But hey, Texas became independent in order to join the USA, and many others have done similar.
But if they want to be part of Russia, why not let them? It's their area. Alas, the trouble is finding someone neutral to conduct the referendum and keep the peace. Kyiv and Moscow can't be trusted - well, unless Moscow doesn't actually want them, but is willing to begrudgingly accept them...
"I'm gonna die surrounded by the biggest idiots in the galaxy." - If this forum was a Mars Colony
Offline
Well yes, they do want to be annexed by Russia. But hey, Texas became independent in order to join the USA, and many others have done similar.
But if they want to be part of Russia, why not let them? It's their area. Alas, the trouble is finding someone neutral to conduct the referendum and keep the peace. Kyiv and Moscow can't be trusted - well, unless Moscow doesn't actually want them, but is willing to begrudgingly accept them...
So lets be honest and not assign false labels to people like pretending they want independence, they already have independence from Russia! if Alaska wanted to be part of Russia, we're not going to let them, We already paid money to Russia for it, so their not getting it back!
Offline
Well yes, they do want to be annexed by Russia. But hey, Texas became independent in order to join the USA, and many others have done similar.
But if they want to be part of Russia, why not let them? It's their area. Alas, the trouble is finding someone neutral to conduct the referendum and keep the peace. Kyiv and Moscow can't be trusted - well, unless Moscow doesn't actually want them, but is willing to begrudgingly accept them...
Please don't give in to terrorists. Again I have to quote the poll published in The Washington Post. It states 93% of people in western Ukraine want Ukraine to remain united. In east Ukraine, 70% want to remain united. Further refining to only people in east Ukraine who speak the Russian language, 58% said they want to remain united, 27% want to be annexed by Russia, and 15% don't know. This means the people who live there don't want to become independent, and don't want to join Russia. Separatists are a minority. They're a minority with guns.
Crimea is different. The same poll shows 12% of people in Crimea want to remain united, 54% want allow regions to secede, and 34% don't know. This is why I keep saying to let Crimea go, but not one square centimetre more.
When Quebec tried to secede from Canada, we held 2 referendums. (referenda?) Separatists formed a political party, and actually won the provincial election in 1980. When they told the federal government they would secede, the government held a referendum. The separatists lost. They whined, claiming they weren't ready. The government gave in, held a second referendum in 1995. They lost that too. After that, the separatists claimed they wanted yet another referendum. The federal government passed the "Clarity Act", which states how a province could secede. Many argued that a simple majority is not enough, separating should require a 2/3 majority. After all, the United States requires 2/3 for a constitution amendment, or various other important things. In the end the "Clarity Act" gave Parliament authority to rule whether results constitute "the will of the people". My point is 2/3 is enough for Crimea to secede. The referendum in Crimea was obviously bogus, but poll figures from The Washington Post show they do have 2/3 majority.
But east Ukraine? No. They don't want to secede.
Offline
Robert think about who makes polls and publishes them in the English speaking press.
There are lies, damned lies and statistics, as anyone who took basic statistics at university knows. You can make a poll that shows anything you want it to show.
I don't think that the majority wanted to join Russia initially; they just wanted to be an autonomous region, to get rid of the language issue once and for all.
But now, the more they've seen of this new Ukraine, the less likely they are to want to have anything to do with it.
The people in question are mostly ethnic Russians, or Russian speaking Ukrainians, peppered with plenty of Jews, other ex Soviet nationalities and a few local minorities.
Anyone over the age of 22 was born in the USSR, in which there was no difference between Russia and Ukraine, and it didn't matter which Soviet republic a person lived in. The "internal passport nationality" was just a quirk, and people got treated the same regardless of which republic they lived in, within the USSR. The local language, and Russian functioned side-by-side across the USSR, without any problems.
Many of the people in Eastern Ukraine moved there in their lifetime, or their parents did, from Russia proper or anywhere else in the ex USSR, as I explained earlier. Due to it being a growth zone and a prestige project.
So please get this: They have NO loyalty to Ukraine in most cases. For most people there it's a complete CHANCE that they ended up as Ukrainian citizens. Most people there are either Russians, or some mix. They will go with whichever of the countries offers them the best quality of life.
Russia back in the 1990s was in an appalling state, and Ukraine actually looked like it might have slightly better prospects. Plenty of Russians back then, from Russia or the Baltic States actually deliberately moved to Belarus or Ukraine because the future looked brighter there. This situation has since changed, at least for Ukraine.
There are real Ukrainians who are passionate about their language and country, but they live in the West and central area of the country. People on the coast and in the East, are mostly Russian or "mixed ex Soviet". That's what I keep telling you. People there are NOT Ukrainians, and have no particular loyalty to it. Their family and friends are largely in Russia, Russian is their language. They didn't MIND Ukraine earlier, but the way things are going this will probably change.
As I explained earlier, the Coastal area and Eastern Ukraine was Russian up until the 1920s. A lot of the people who live there are a mix of Russian, Jewish, Tatar, Ukrainian, Belarussian and Greek. It was just a silly Soviet technical issue in the 1920s, that transferred the area to the Ukrainian SSR for admin reasons. If that hadn't happened, this would not even be an issue, because the area would be Russian.
Nobody ever thought that somebody would come along and try to ban Russian language in this area, or have pro-Western puppets and even Nazis, running the show there, from Kiev, or that Kiev would start killing these people for asserting their Russian identity.
Ponder why the entire Ukrainian army can't really get at these guys, on their own home turf. It's because locals are helping and protecting them.
If the rebels were a small majority, regular people would rat them out, and help the military.
Please DON'T believe the Western narrative on this because they simply aren't honest.
Last edited by martienne (2014-06-19 15:29:28)
Offline
Robert think about who makes polls and publishes them in the English speaking press.
There are lies, damned lies and statistics, as anyone who took basic statistics at university knows. You can make a poll that shows anything you want it to show.
Calling something a lie is the easiest argument to make. How do you know the Soviet Union wasn't a lie? Did World War II happen, I wasn't around when it did. How do I know historians weren't lying? What about slavery in the American South, how do I know that wasn't a lie? I never actually seen a slave working on a cotton plantation, I just have to trust the historians when they say they did.
I don't think that the majority wanted to join Russia initially; they just wanted to be an autonomous region, to get rid of the language issue once and for all.
But now, the more they've seen of this new Ukraine, the less likely they are to want to have anything to do with it.
What's wrong, don't they like chocolate candy, that is what the new President did, he was CEO of a company that makes candy. What's so terrible about that?
The people in question are mostly ethnic Russians, or Russian speaking Ukrainians, peppered with plenty of Jews, other ex Soviet nationalities and a few local minorities.
Anyone over the age of 22 was born in the USSR, in which there was no difference between Russia and Ukraine, and it didn't matter which Soviet republic a person lived in. The "internal passport nationality" was just a quirk, and people got treated the same regardless of which republic they lived in, within the USSR. The local language, and Russian functioned side-by-side across the USSR, without any problems.
I hear it was not easy to move from one part of the USSR to another, all that did was regionalize the place, people who can't move from one place to another tend to develop more regional identities, big mistake on the USSR's part because it preserved the faultlines upon which the Soviet Empire would break up. Also they did not try to Christianize the Muslims, they could have saved themselves a lot o problems with the Chechens if they did. Muslim empires don't hesitate to push Islam on their population after all! Also the R in USSR is supposed to stand for Republics, what sort of Republics were they if they only allowed one party to put up candidates, that is not representative of the people, so they aren't Republics.
Many of the people in Eastern Ukraine moved there in their lifetime, or their parents did, from Russia proper or anywhere else in the ex USSR, as I explained earlier. Due to it being a growth zone and a prestige project.
Yep, that was a project similar to Jewish settlers settling the West Bank and trying to create facts on the ground and outnumber the Palestinians living there, they did similar and worse things to Belarus.
So please get this: They have NO loyalty to Ukraine in most cases. For most people there it's a complete CHANCE that they ended up as Ukrainian citizens. Most people there are either Russians, or some mix. They will go with whichever of the countries offers them the best quality of life.
In Ukraine they had Democracy, in Russia they don't, and Communism is a Quack idea which never worked.
Russia back in the 1990s was in an appalling state, and Ukraine actually looked like it might have slightly better prospects. Plenty of Russians back then, from Russia or the Baltic States actually deliberately moved to Belarus or Ukraine because the future looked brighter there. This situation has since changed, at least for Ukraine.
There are real Ukrainians who are passionate about their language and country, but they live in the West and central area of the country. People on the coast and in the East, are mostly Russian or "mixed ex Soviet". That's what I keep telling you. People there are NOT Ukrainians, and have no particular loyalty to it. Their family and friends are largely in Russia, Russian is their language. They didn't MIND Ukraine earlier, but the way things are going this will probably change.
They'd rather have an ex-KGB officer as their President than a candy maker? The KGB spied on people, tortured people, got friends and relatives to spy on friends ad relatives and they ran the labor camps in Siberia. Honestly if you had the choice of either being Austrian or German, which would you pick? How many Germans moved to Austria during World War II and what did they do when Austria got independence again? if they preferred to be German, did they move back to Germany or did they rebel against Austria and insist that Germany annex them?
As I explained earlier, the Coastal area and Eastern Ukraine was Russian up until the 1920s. A lot of the people who live there are a mix of Russian, Jewish, Tatar, Ukrainian, Belarussian and Greek. It was just a silly Soviet technical issue in the 1920s, that transferred the area to the Ukrainian SSR for admin reasons. If that hadn't happened, this would not even be an issue, because the area would be Russian.
Well the Russians agreed to allow themselves to be ruled by the Bolsheviks and Ukraine was an independent country for 2 years after the Russian Revolution. If they were allowed to stay a separate independent country instead o being swallowed by the USSR, that would not have been an issue either. How is any of this different from what happened to the Roman Empire? The Roman Empire broke up and fractured as well, and we have successor states that don't consider themselves Roman in any way. The French aren't Roman, neither are the Spanish, or the Italians for than matter. Rome lost its identity when it expanded too much, luckily for the Russians this did not happen, they still have a Russian identity not a Soviet one.
Nobody ever thought that somebody would come along and try to ban Russian language in this area, or have pro-Western puppets and even Nazis, running the show there, from Kiev, or that Kiev would start killing these people for asserting their Russian identity.
Ponder why the entire Ukrainian army can't really get at these guys, on their own home turf. It's because locals are helping and protecting them.
The Nazis were in Ukraine during World War II, they over ran a whole bunch of Soviet Republics including part of Russia almost to Moscow.If the rebels were a small majority, regular people would rat them out, and help the military.
Please DON'T believe the Western narrative on this because they simply aren't honest.
Your forgetting the Russians with their Army outside the border, Ukraine was afraid they would do another "Georgia" that restrained them somewhat.
Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-19 17:39:39)
Offline
When I grew up, my next door neighbour was Canadian but of Ukrainian descent. His father immigrated from Ukraine. I heard how horrible it was when Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine. History recorded in Wikipedia (yes, Wikipedia) is far more complex. But this illustrates how passionate Ukrainians are about their country. And that other forum now has a second individual posting from west Ukraine. So I am talking (posting?) directly with a couple individuals who live there.
One issue here: we don't want European countries using military force to take land or resources from other European countries. If Crimea chose to leave Ukraine peacefully and join Russia, the West would have accepted that. Not sure Ukraine would, but we in the West would have. But Russia invaded. I'm trying to be realistic, point out that the method was horrible, but the result would have been the same. That's Crimea. Now there's east Ukraine.
Yes, many people will support whichever country claims to provide the best quality of life, and most security. That's why certain individuals want to destabilize east Ukraine. They want trouble, because they want fickle citizens to support the decision they want.
Tanks? Armoured personnel carriers? Shoulder launched anti-aircraft missiles? These are not weapons of "volunteer" civilians. These are restricted military weapons. That's just the big ones; there's also high calibre sniper riffles, assault riffles, and other military equipment.
I don't believe "Western" narrative. However, I do believe the Ukrainians who are actually there.
"PostFactum" provided live video news feed during the incident in Odessa. He explained that the men in black who erected barricades were Russian and Transnistria. They were there to create trouble. I watched much of it live. Citizens of Odessa ran them into the building. Then the guys inside started throwing Molotov cocktails at them, so they threw some back. Those thrown back into the building started a fire. The guys inside barricaded themselves in, so couldn't get out. They died. Stupid. But most likely done to create an "incident". I don't know why anyone would volunteer to do what they did. They started by erecting steel barricades on the street to fortify a block. So they wanted trouble. Whoever organized it probably expected them to be martyrs. Why would people from outside Ukraine go into Odessa, create trouble, knowing they would probably die? That's stupid. I can only assume they weren't told what would happen.
Late in the Odessa incident, I watched as a line of policemen in riot gear dropped their shields and walked away. They let the citizens in plain clothes do whatever they wanted to the guys in black behind the barricade. PostFactum told me what he believes that was all about. Yes, he's west Ukraine. He grew up in Lviv and lives outside Kyiv. You tell me your side.
Offline
If the guy grew up in Lviv, he is just about as extreme a Ukrainian nationalist as they come.
It's known across the whole ex USSR as the nazi town.
If that's your source, and you prefer to trust him, I won't waste my time.
Offline
I would still like Canada and Russia to get along. Good international relations. We don't have any dashboard cams in Canada, and looks like we need some. What we in Canada need is a good security system that operates when the car is parked, no one there. My vehicle has a factory installed immobilizer, but has been vandallized several times. That's something Russia could sell.
Offline
If the guy grew up in Lviv, he is just about as extreme a Ukrainian nationalist as they come.
It's known across the whole ex USSR as the nazi town.
If that's your source, and you prefer to trust him, I won't waste my time.
A diabolical chocolate maker! Maybe he makes Devil's Food cakes. You know what you sound like? A witch hunter, you accuse everyone of being a witch except the actual evil people. You know in Germany there was a 30 years war and lots of witch hunting in the 17th century, and when the real Nazis are outside the Vatican's door, the Pope would even launch a Crusade against them. Most people like yourself fail to see evil when its actually in front of them, you'd rather just chase after imaginary evil people. Regardless of what symbols you see 1% of them display the Ukrainians are only defending their nation, and its Russia and its Rebel Allies that are undertaking aggression, they don't want to lay down their arms and they started this war, starting a war that has killed a bunch of people, and all you can do is try to see Nazis everywhere in Ukraine to try and excuse it!
Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2014-06-20 04:59:23)
Offline
@martienne: Don't accuse others of being Nazi. Just because they want an independent country, not part of the USSR, does not make them Nazi. Remember the term "Nazi" neams National Socialist. Are you complaining about socialism? When you throw around names like that, you sound as bad as Tom.
@Tom: I stopped reading your stuff. Don't try to have the last word. Based on what Terraformer posted, you're using religious arguments for national policy. There's a reason we have separation of Church and State. In Canada, before Confederation, one guy stood in a square in Toronto loudly yelling anyone who follows the pope is a traitor. That caused a riot between Catholic and Protestant. Then he did it again in Montreal. We don't need fighting over religion like they did in Ireland. And all of Europe did that for a few centuries. England oscillated back and forth between Catholic and Protestant, with kings ordering anyone who didn't convert to be executed. It started when King Henry VIII was told by the pope that he couldn't divorce. So he started his own church with himself as head; that's what the Anglican Church is. When his children were king/queen, then alternated back to Catholic, then Protestant. This is one reason the Anabaptist religion was started. They're a denomination of Protestant; a major part of their religion is to say read the bible yourself. Mennonite is a denomination of Anabaptist. A minister is treated as learned, but still human. A minister can make mistakes. Read the bible yourself, that's the only religious authority. And most importantly, a king cannot tell you what to believe.
Fundamentalist Christians are as bad as fundamentalist Islam. Look at the Ku Klux Klan: they're as bad as any Islamist terrorist. When you start pounding your chest about government policy on religious grounds, you are just as bad as the Taliban.
Offline
BBC News - Ukraine conflict: Inside crisis-hit towns of Donetsk and Luhansk
Where the town ended and the forest began there was a roadblock. Not a checkpoint that vehicles could drive through, but a wall of concrete, and behind it soldiers loyal to the Ukrainian government and a group of armoured personnel carriers.
Villagers told us that the shelling was coming from behind those lines.
"I'm gonna die surrounded by the biggest idiots in the galaxy." - If this forum was a Mars Colony
Offline
@martienne: Don't accuse others of being Nazi. Just because they want an independent country, not part of the USSR, does not make them Nazi. Remember the term "Nazi" neams National Socialist. Are you complaining about socialism? When you throw around names like that, you sound as bad as Tom.
@Tom: I stopped reading your stuff. Don't try to have the last word. Based on what Terraformer posted, you're using religious arguments for national policy. There's a reason we have separation of Church and State. In Canada, before Confederation, one guy stood in a square in Toronto loudly yelling anyone who follows the pope is a traitor. That caused a riot between Catholic and Protestant. Then he did it again in Montreal. We don't need fighting over religion like they did in Ireland. And all of Europe did that for a few centuries. England oscillated back and forth between Catholic and Protestant, with kings ordering anyone who didn't convert to be executed. It started when King Henry VIII was told by the pope that he couldn't divorce. So he started his own church with himself as head; that's what the Anglican Church is. When his children were king/queen, then alternated back to Catholic, then Protestant. This is one reason the Anabaptist religion was started. They're a denomination of Protestant; a major part of their religion is to say read the bible yourself. Mennonite is a denomination of Anabaptist. A minister is treated as learned, but still human. A minister can make mistakes. Read the bible yourself, that's the only religious authority. And most importantly, a king cannot tell you what to believe.
Fundamentalist Christians are as bad as fundamentalist Islam. Look at the Ku Klux Klan: they're as bad as any Islamist terrorist. When you start pounding your chest about government policy on religious grounds, you are just as bad as the Taliban.
The Ku Klux Klan are no more Christian than the Nazi Party. The Klan wasn't well known for obeying the Golden Rule either, they are just a racist organization, who's members occasionally go to church, basically a remnant of the slave-owning south. Many Abolitionists were Christian also and they cited their faith as the reason why slavery had to be abolished. I would say that the Klan was less Christian than the Abolitionist movement that was the heart of the Republican Party. The Klan was established by Democrat slaveowners who lost their slaves after the Civil War and were mad as hell about that.
Offline
Ukraine conflict: Inside crisis-hit towns of Donetsk and Luhansk
Manning a checkpoint on the brow of the hill leading down to Metalist we found Igor.
He is a 24-year-old who has taken up arms against the government in Kiev, after being convinced by the propaganda that they are fascists who hate Russian-speakers.
Far too much propaganda on all sides. Time to actually talk. Get to know one another, live together, and stop fighting. Russian propaganda claims anyone anti-Soviet is a fascist who hates Russian-speakers. Ukrainians believe that Russia wants to wipe-out Ukraine, annex their entire country. And either assimilate or kill anyone who doesn't speak Russian. It's time to stop all that; time for everyone to respect each other.
Offline
In order to have peace you need both sides willing to agree with it.
http://news.yahoo.com/separatists-dismi … 42904.html
Russia is also sending in the tanks in response to President Petro Poroshenko's unilateral ceasefire.
http://news.yahoo.com/putin-orders-forc … 12859.html
So long as the Russians have something to gain by war, they won't want peace, if they war starts to threaten Russian cities, then they'll come to the peace table!
Offline
And nobody agrees with you, Tom. Luckilly you're not in charge.
Poroshenko is president of Ukraine. I gave some advice on that other forum. I pointed out Poroshenko has to win the hearts of average citizens in east Ukraine. This cannot be won by military force. First win their hearts, then citizens will report terrorists to Ukrainian authorities. And those insurgents who gained power by military force are not going to give it up, so they're a lost cause. The goal is not to win them over, and it certainly has nothing to do with Russia. The goal is to win over average citizens who live there. What he's doing is showing he wants peace, that he isn't the threat to the lives of Russian-speakers. This conflict is created by the insurgents. You could call them separatists, Poroshenko calls them terrorists, but to be technically correct they're insurgents. If the insurgents ignore this unilateral ceasefire, then the citizens who live there will see their lives are not threated by Poroshenko or Ukrainian authorities, their lives are threated by the insurgents.
From the second news story you linked...
The Kremlin dismissed the plan, saying it sounded like an ultimatum and lacked any firm offer to open talks with insurgents.
This sounds like Putin is worried. Remember that Poroshenko already offered to negotiate with insurgents. After they lay down their arms.
Offline
What reason do people who have been attacked by Western Ukrainian forces have to trust West Ukraine?
"I'm gonna die surrounded by the biggest idiots in the galaxy." - If this forum was a Mars Colony
Offline
Terrorists attack people in east Ukraine. Police, and now the military, is trying to free those people from terrorists.
The caption is in Ukrainian. I used Google Translate: "Urgent! In Lugansk, kidnap people right on the street May 14"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYxTkP6Pt_Y
Offline
What reason do people who have been attacked by Western Ukrainian forces have to trust West Ukraine?
Putin told them to rebel, so they did, and West Ukraine didn't like it so surprise surprise they got attacked. You know the Confederate Rebels got attacked by Union forces too when they rebelled, so how could the South trust those northerners not to attack them again? Think think think think, Aha, I got it they surrendered and stopped fighting!
Offline