[Quinny]

Statement from the US Department of State website.

The Rada is the most representative institution in Ukraine. Recent legislation has passed with large majorities, including from representatives of eastern Ukraine. Far-right wing ultranationalist groups, some of which were involved in open clashes with security forces during the EuroMaidan protests, are not represented in the Rada. There is no indication that the Ukrainian government would pursue discriminatory policies; on the contrary, they have publicly stated exactly the opposite.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/03/222988.htm

I find it worrying especially given the heading of the page - Diplomacy in action? I'm asking if you believe it? Suppose more important question is do they!

[Plantagenet]

Why not believe what the US state department says---their statement is completely factual.

I suppose those people who have fallen for Russian propaganda might object to it, but facts are stubborn things.

[Sixstrings]

I find it worrying especially given the heading of the page - Diplomacy in action? I'm asking if you believe it? Suppose more important question is do they!

I disagree.

I think this is the singularly most awesome thing that has ever been on a US gov website:

As Russia spins a false narrative to justify its illegal actions in Ukraine, the world has not seen such startling Russian fiction since Dostoyevsky wrote, “The formula ‘two times two equals five’ is not without its attractions.”

As an Obama voter, I'm very pleased with the President and his state department, on this. If they keep this up, I'll even vote Democrat again.

I don't really need to see a supercarrier battle group in the black sea. I just need to see competence, and some happy warrior stuff, and that they're standing up and aren't doormats for Putin. If I were british I think I'd pull my hair out over this, what a bunch of crap, everyone worried about Putin shutting off the gas. I hope that never happens to my country.

Anyhow.. Quinn..

Can you address President Obama's "10 false claims by Putin"? You had a bad thing about America for every letter of the alphabet but you're awfully quiet on this one.

[Quinny]

Many of the points rely on conflicting evidence.

I'm attempting to address the last one. Someone has voted that they believe there are no far right groups in the Ukrainian Government without any explanation. IMHO there is no justification for such a position the evidence is published and clear. The problem with such statements is they lead you to doubt the veracity of all the other points, which may have some basis in fact.

[Sixstrings]

I'm attempting to address the last one.

Take your time. Take a week, if you need it. How about starting with these:

1. Mr. Putin says: Russian forces in Crimea are only acting to protect Russian military assets. It is “citizens’ defense groups,” not Russian forces, who have seized infrastructure and military facilities in Crimea.

The Facts: Strong evidence suggests that members of Russian security services are at the heart of the highly organized anti-Ukraine forces in Crimea. While these units wear uniforms without insignia, they drive vehicles with Russian military license plates and freely identify themselves as Russian security forces when asked by the international media and the Ukrainian military.

6. Mr. Putin says: Ethnic Russians are under threat.

The Facts: Outside of Russian press and Russian state television, there are no credible reports of any ethnic Russians being under threat. The new Ukrainian government placed a priority on peace and reconciliation from the outset. President Oleksandr Turchynov refused to sign legislation limiting the use of the Russian language at regional level. Ethnic Russians and Russian speakers have filed petitions attesting that their communities have not experienced threats. Furthermore, since the new government was established, calm has returned to Kyiv. There has been no surge in crime, no looting, and no retribution against political opponents.

Let's bear in mind this state dept press release is 5 days old and a lot has changed since then. Now 30,000 Russian troops in Crimea. And they're planting MINEFIELDS for goodness sake. If you really care about human rights Quinn then you're aware how horrid landmines are.

Anyhow its good to see some truth come out, the O team was good with these get-the-truth-out things during the campaigns and coutnering Republican lies. If they can handle Republicans then they can handle this Russia Foxnews crowd. Obama admin has been here and done this before.

For example, Radon has mentioned the "ban on Russian language," but according to our state dept the new Ukrainian president didn't sign that bill. Probably under influence from US diplomats. Because we do the right thing, because that's how we roll. We're the good guys.

IMHO there is no justification for such a position the evidence is published and clear. The problem with such statements is they lead you to doubt the veracity of all the other points, which may have some basis in fact.

Could you humbly elaborate, and make the case for Putin and counter these 10 facts from the US state dept? Take your time.

[Quinny]

Can it be taken from your need for elaboration you do not consider Oleh Tyahnybok and Svoboda as far right.

Why should I make the case for Putin?

[Sixstrings]

Can it be taken from your need for elaboration you do not consider Oleh Tyahnybok and Svoboda as far right.

Can you construct that into a complete paragraph, backed with facts and explanation, that prove your argument in a logical manner.

I don't know about svoboda other than dissident and you keep saying "svoboda" all the time. And what about those minefields.. if you don't care Quinn.. then you are NOT a genuine human rights lefty.

Landmines are a big deal. If you're a lefty you should know this, already.

[radon1]

Strange function for a foreign ministry to take upon, more a "ministry of information" kind of deal.

A few observations:

I. None of the statements ascribed to Putin are citations, and there can be no assurance that they are what Putin actually said or meant. If you would like to know what Putin actually said, listen to Putin, or at least get this info from a variety of sources with diversified bias.

II. Some of these statements relate apparently to the points of legal nature. Points of legal nature can only be resolved at a court, and a foreign ministry is not a court. Putin would unlikely say something of a legal nature which he would be unable to defend on a some sort of legal basis, and challenging it in a court of law would at best turn into a never ending litigation battle (and nobody is going to do this anyway).

III. The responses represent nothing more than a set of assertions of "this is so because we said so" nature.

IV. The statements and responses are formulated in a sort of "flexible" manner. Take the following:

"10. Mr. Putin says: The Rada is under the influence of extremists or terrorists."

One of the well-know party activists of this website could respond: "Rada cannot be under influence of terrorists or extremists because it is night in Kiev now and Rada's MPs are sleeping ". Various Rada's MPs and their families have been subject to threats, harassment and violence, and their property was damaged, including situations where the MPs were coerced to vote, of which there is lots of evidence.

Note the official response to the alleged Putin's statement above: "Far-right wing ultranationalist groups, some of which were involved in open clashes with security forces during the EuroMaidan protests, are not represented in the Rada." While it would be advisable to check the validity of this statement, it is worth noting that "to influence" and "to be represented" is not the same thing. You do not have "to be represented" in a parliament in order "to influence" it, and this is probably a very well-known fact to anyone living in a country that has a parliament.

----

As regards this place as a platform for discussion, it is apparently getting overrun by trolls headed by Sick strings, who are choking it up with nonsense and general russophobia. In this circumstances an attempt at reasoning becomes an exercise in futility and waste of time, to be buried under layers of dusty spam.

[ROCKMAN]

A simplistic comparison for sure but I’m still surprised no one brought it up yet: Russian naval base in Crimea vs. US naval base in Cuba. We have about half the number of troops there as the Russians in Crimea and our base is also surrounded by minefields and barbed wire. And a somewhat similar history as to how both bases came about. And a similar dislike by the vast majority of each countries’ citizens for the presence of a foreign military on their soil:

The US first seized Guantanamo Bay and established a naval base there in 1898 during the Spanish–American War. In 1903, the US and Cuba signed a lease granting the US permission to use the land as a coaling and naval station. The lease satisfied the Platt Amendment; this amendment stated a naval base at "certain specific points agreed upon by the President of the United States" was needed to "enable the United States to maintain independence of Cuba." The US and Cuba signed a treaty in 1934, granting the US a perpetual lease; private enterprise is not allowed under the treaty. Both the US and Cuba must agree on any termination of the lease

[Sixstrings]

A simplistic comparison for sure but I’m still surprised no one brought it up yet: Russian naval base in Crimea vs. US naval base in Cuba.

this amendment stated a naval base at "certain specific points agreed upon by the President of the United States" was needed to "enable the United States to maintain independence of Cuba." The US and Cuba signed a treaty in 1934, granting the US a perpetual lease; private enterprise is not allowed under the treaty. Both the US and Cuba must agree on any termination of the lease

edit: rephrase.. good points there, there are similarities to latter 19th century america.

Russia's lease in ukraine isn't perpetual and runs into 2040ish. Don't know the latest about the ukrainian parliament canceling the lease. But everyone knows Russia will keep the naval base, and really all of crimea at least, so that's a given.

p.s. This Russia doom is getting too doomy for me. This is where I have to tune it out and become a sheeple and mostly ignore it.

[Keith_McClary]

I don't really need to see a supercarrier battle group in the black sea. I just need to see competence, and some happy warrior stuff, and that they're standing up and aren't doormats for Putin.

So if you were POTUS what would you do, exactly?

[Keith_McClary]

Can it be taken from your need for elaboration you do not consider Oleh Tyahnybok and Svoboda as far right.

Can you construct that into a complete paragraph, backed with facts and explanation, that prove your argument in a logical manner.

Q's asking you a question.

I don't know about svoboda other than dissident and you keep saying "svoboda" all the time.

The European Parliament passed a resolution condemning the party, defining it as "racist, anti-Semitic, and xenophobic" and called for pro-democratic parties in Ukraine "not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party".[26]
The current party leader (elected every two years[27]) is Oleh Tyahnybok, who has held the role since February 2004.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_(political_party)

[Sixstrings]

Q's asking you a question.

I'm inclined to believe President Obama. If Quinn wants to convince me (and the forum reading public) otherwise, then the burden is on him to construct a paragraph with a thesis sentence, some supporting sentences, and a conclusion. A logical argument, with a conclusion backed up by supporting facts that you lay out. Just saying "svoboda" doesn't mean anything.

And the topic of this thread are Obama's 10 Putin untruths -- can anyone counter those, using complete paragraphs like the state department dude does.

The European Parliament passed a resolution condemning the party, defining it as "racist, anti-Semitic, and xenophobic" and called for pro-democratic parties in Ukraine "not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party".[26]
The current party leader (elected every two years[27]) is Oleh Tyahnybok, who has held the role since February 2004.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_(political_party)

Well, the EU are wrong on that kind of thing, it's another example of democracy slipping toward totalitarianism. It's why the US is the most free. We don't ban hate groups -- we know better, it just gets worse if you were to suppress them, and besides it's not an option. We have the 1st Amendment. We've got freedom of speech and thought over here and no government committee or dictator can do anything about that.

EU is wrong on that. Germans are wrong banning nazi things. (this may sound foreign to those of you from other countries, the principle of 1st amendment free speech, defending that does not mean you agree with Nazis or racists or whatever)

But about Ukraine, have they actually banned any parties? If so, give a link or something to show that.

So if you were POTUS what would you do, exactly?

My recommendation, POTUS should have:

* launched those missiles on syria after the nerve gas red line, and hit the assad regime hard, without US boots on the ground. *then* go talk to the russians.

* On Ukraine, do probing escalations same as Putin has done, and the Russians would back down and not push it so far:

- NATO on standby in Poland, massive wargames just like the Russians did, set up a command and control just over the Ukrainian border. (in NATO-speak, there's a defense command something or other that should have already been activated regarding this crisis)
- big mass rally speech in Poland, Kennedy / Reagan style, make east euros feel secure that we're behind them. Lay out the case for the new struggle in this century: totalitarianism vs. democracy and freedom
- Western ban on all arms sales to Russia, and general military gear like those training facilities the Germans built for them
- Vigorously address all of Russia supposed concerns and reasons for invading crimea, thereby leaving them with no justification. The POTUS should even more for protecting ethnic Russians than Putin is, POTUS should be publically stating Russia will never lose their naval base. Just remove all their reasons, for this invasion, because the state dept agrees with it all anyway.

* I wouldn't make a redline about Crimea. You'd have to feel the Russians out on that one -- if we KNOW they won't give it up, then the smarter thing to do is concede that and then have the West back up the rest of Ukraine. Possibly NATO forces in Ukraine. Russians can keep the peace in Crimea, we can keep the peace in the rest of the place. But never concede to the legality of the Russian occupation -- NATO involvement would be to just hold the line, at Crimea.

If any of these tough measure were taken, then Putin would have come to the table already, that's the reality here. Or even just a few asset freezes on the right oligarchs. All it took in Georgia was George Bush sending some navy ships. Putin's smart. He doesn't want confrontation with the US. But if we are weak then he will press for full advantage.

Ultimate solution in Ukraine? I don't know. Apparently sharing it is not going to work. And maybe the O admin has concluded this and will stick to the red line about Russia getting out of crimea. Someone may have to win. It's like another Syria, the Russians just make it impossible what can you do?

[Keith_McClary]

A simplistic comparison for sure but I’m still surprised no one brought it up yet: Russian naval base in Crimea vs. US naval base in Cuba.

Also Kosovo (Serbia).

Camp Bondsteel ... is built mainly of wooden, semi permanent SEA (South East Asia) huts and is surrounded by a 2.5 m (8.2 ft) high earthen wall. The camp occupies 955 acres (3.86 km2) of land.[2] To construct the base, two hills were flattened and the valley between them was filled. In August 1999, 52 helipads were constructed on the facility's south perimeter to handle helicopter aviation.
Camp Bondsteel has many facilities on base for use by the soldiers and civilian employees who live and work there, and can hold up to 7,000 soldiers which makes it the largest US base in the Balkans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Bondsteel

[Keith_McClary]

And they're planting MINEFIELDS for goodness sake. If you really care about human rights Quinn then you're aware how horrid landmines are.

Land Mine Treaty Non-signatory states (gray)

[Sixstrings]

Land Mine Treaty Non-signatory states (gray)

US retains the right to use these, but doesn't.

Whereas Russia does:

Russian forces are laying landmines meant to cordon off Crimea from the rest of Ukraine, according to various sources.

Alexei Mazepa, the regional spokesman for Ukraine’s Defense Ministry, told the Los Angeles Times that Russian forces are “setting up minefields across the narrow strip of land that connects Ukraine with Crimea” in what appears to be an attempt to prevent Ukrainian troops from entering the region.
http://www.tol.org/client/article/24207-troops-seen-laying-landmines-north-of-crimea-protesters-stay-on-bosnias-streets.html

Hopefully some innocent civilian doesn't step on one of these, 30 years from now when this is all forgotten about -- which is precisely why landmines are so horrible.

If you cared about human rights you'd be speaking up about Russia. If you were genuine, you'd be outraged about these landmines and calling this out as being way over the line.

[radon1]

And the topic of this thread are Obama's 10 Putin untruths -- can anyone counter those, using complete paragraphs like the state department dude does.

Look, pathetic troll.

You already issued verdict to this comedy yourself - "10 Putin untruths" - a ministry is telling you what is truth and what is untruth, being essentially the "Ministry of Truth". No other explanations needed.

Looks outright ridiculous. Like Soviet Pravda explaining in the morning what is the party line today, and what is truth and what is untruth today. Have not seen anything like this for ages.

And now, sick strings, do the following. Accurately, scrupulously and diligently investigate the following points, and provide detailed responses to them, backing them up with reliable factual links:

1. Confirm that the statements ascribed to Putin are authentic Putin's words.
2. Confirm that the Ministry of Truth's responses refute "the untruths" freely of logical flaws.
3. Back up the Ministry of Truth's responses with reliable factual data.

Hopefully this will keep you busy for some time and save others from your trolling. Oh, did I mean "from your tasking".

[Sixstrings]

It's just a press release, relax. Nobody reads these. This one just got picked up by buzzfeed or one of those.

I was looking at other state department press releases. They sound wonky and dull. But here's one from Kerry in December, similarly strong language:

The United States expresses its disgust with the decision of Ukrainian authorities to meet the peaceful protest in Kyiv's Maidan Square with riot police, bulldozers, and batons, rather than with respect for democratic rights and human dignity. This response is neither acceptable nor does it befit a democracy.

As church bells ring tonight amidst the smoke in the streets of Kyiv, the United States stands with the people of Ukraine. They deserve better.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/12/218585.htm

Gee, he sounds tough when he writes.

It does sound like forum banter. Maybe the whole world has turned to trolls? And Putin, most of all, trolling all of Europe -- but he does it with armies and shutting off the gas (or threats to), tough guy invasion and minefields, paramilitaries and "masked gunmen" and ICBM test launches in the middle of it all, markets shaken and drama and handwringing all around.

I heard one Russia analyst say on CNN "Putin wants to see the West squirm."

Can't find a link for that, but here's an oped about the US squirming and not knowing what to do:

The US should stop squirming and put sanctions on Russia
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/05/us-should-put-sanctions-on-russia

(P.S. can you relax and stop the name calling? Nobody does that to you.

And the press release in question is already old and things have changed so much and change every day. Nobody needs to refute it. The big obvious one is how the Russian gov has denied the forces are Russian. If you guys are too lazy to go through these 10 untruths then I am too so let's drop it unless someone wants to get specific. So far, the only thing mentioned is what's started the thread about the Rada having banned political parties or something?

And someone said svboda or whatever, then someone said it was the EU that banned that -- so let's stay on topic or just talk about other things, what party has the new Ukraine gov banned?)

[ralfy]

Land Mine Treaty Non-signatory states (gray)

US retains the right to use these, but doesn't.

Whereas Russia does:

Russian forces are laying landmines meant to cordon off Crimea from the rest of Ukraine, according to various sources.

Alexei Mazepa, the regional spokesman for Ukraine’s Defense Ministry, told the Los Angeles Times that Russian forces are “setting up minefields across the narrow strip of land that connects Ukraine with Crimea” in what appears to be an attempt to prevent Ukrainian troops from entering the region.
http://www.tol.org/client/article/24207-troops-seen-laying-landmines-north-of-crimea-protesters-stay-on-bosnias-streets.html

Hopefully some innocent civilian doesn't step on one of these, 30 years from now when this is all forgotten about -- which is precisely why landmines are so horrible.

If you cared about human rights you'd be speaking up about Russia. If you were genuine, you'd be outraged about these landmines and calling this out as being way over the line.

"Why hasn't the U.S. signed an international ban on land mines?"

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_n ... ntion.html

Again, realpolitik rather than "outrage" drives decisions.

[ralfy]

It's just a press release, relax. Nobody reads these. This one just got picked up by buzzfeed or one of those.

I was looking at other state department press releases. They sound wonky and dull. But here's one from Kerry in December, similarly strong language:

The United States expresses its disgust with the decision of Ukrainian authorities to meet the peaceful protest in Kyiv's Maidan Square with riot police, bulldozers, and batons, rather than with respect for democratic rights and human dignity. This response is neither acceptable nor does it befit a democracy.

As church bells ring tonight amidst the smoke in the streets of Kyiv, the United States stands with the people of Ukraine. They deserve better.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/12/218585.htm

Gee, he sounds tough when he writes.

It does sound like forum banter. Maybe the whole world has turned to trolls? And Putin, most of all, trolling all of Europe -- but he does it with armies and shutting off the gas (or threats to), tough guy invasion and minefields, paramilitaries and "masked gunmen" and ICBM test launches in the middle of it all, markets shaken and drama and handwringing all around.

I heard one Russia analyst say on CNN "Putin wants to see the West squirm."

Can't find a link for that, but here's an oped about the US squirming and not knowing what to do:

The US should stop squirming and put sanctions on Russia
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/05/us-should-put-sanctions-on-russia

(P.S. can you relax and stop the name calling? Nobody does that to you.

And the press release in question is already old and things have changed so much and change every day. Nobody needs to refute it. The big obvious one is how the Russian gov has denied the forces are Russian -- I saw that myself from the Russian ambassador at the UN sec council meeting)

"Trade ties expose EU, US rift over Russia sanctions"

http://www.dw.de/trade-ties-expose-eu-u ... a-17476069

Also, it should not surprise anyone if similar reasons are given for the lack of "outrage" concerning Chinese bullying in Asia.