Thomas L. Friedman’s opinion at the NY Times:
…….Ukraine is not threatening Russia, but Ukraine’s revolution is threatening Putin. The main goal of the Ukraine uprising is to import a rules-based system from the E.U. that will break the kleptocracy that has dominated Kiev — the same kind of kleptocracy Putin wants to maintain in Moscow. Putin doesn’t care if Germans live by E.U. rules, but when fellow Slavs, like Ukrainians, want to — that is a threat to him at home.
Don’t let anyone tell you the sanctions are meaningless and the only way to influence Russia is by moving tanks. (Putin would love that. It would force every Russian to rally to him.) If anything, we should worry that over time our sanctions will work too well. And don’t let anyone tell you that we’re challenging Russia’s “space.” We’re not. The real issue here is that Ukrainians, as individuals and collectively, are challenging Putin’s “values.”
We couldn’t stop them if we wanted to. They’ve been empowered by globalization and the I.T. revolution. Get used to it, Comrade Putin.
Read more at Challenging Putin’s Values – NYTimes.com.
using snipers to engineer a coup against a democratically elected President is never acceptable Failing to understand that a country has a complex web of relations is another mistake. Especially when half the country has very firm ideas about what it wants is a sure recipe for disaster. But then everything the US touches turns to shit. Obama has destroyed Libya, is destroying Syria and is well on his way to destroying Ukraine. He has run joint operations with al Qaeda, Helped create millions of refugees and killed tens of thousand if not a shed load more.
If you don’t open your eyes you wont see the woods or the trees.
See ‘unfortunate assumptions’ at http://goldstocksforex.com/2014/05/01/kathryn-schulz-on-being-wrong/
I’m not sure what point you are making – are you holding up a mirror or are you directing that at me?
To (a) assume that we have all the facts at hand; and (b) that our analysis of the facts is right, while everyone else in possession of those same facts is wrong, sets us up for Wylie Coyote moments referred to by Kathryn Schulz. To accept that each of us knows little, that our sources of information may be inaccurate, that our analysis is imperfect, and that our conclusions may be wrong, may be deeply unsettling at first but leads us towards a cooperative pursuit of that abstract concept called the truth.
Fair enough. In my defence though I will add – we specialise in our interests – for me it is issues like this one – over time you get an understanding – you learn who not to trust and you begin to see patterns of behaviour. In my opinion don’t trust the MSM on foreign reporting (they have lied about every war in my lifetime); Without an understanding of the logic of empire these sorts of issues make little sense;
Words really do matter – consider – anti kiev protesters and – pro russian insurgents. Same people different meaning.
Lastly – question everything.
I agree. There are two sides to every story. Question everything.
Only two?
This is a reasoned viewpoint – you could jump to around 27 minutes to get to the guts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiBdbm_B9jg
Assertions and implications but hard evidence is lacking. What is important is that Ukraine achieves free and fair elections so they are properly represented in any negotiations over their future. I suspect that both sides, Russia and the US/EU alliance, are trying to influence the outcome and endangering lives in the process. When you start a fire, there is always a risk that you will lose control and cause a giant, unintended conflagration. Unfortunately, there is little you or I can do to stop the two sides from playing with matches.
There was of course the doctor who said the protesters and police were shot with the same bullets and despite her western leanings blamed the pro EU coup side. Don’t expect free and fair elections. Half the country disagrees with the other – as is born out with the last three Presidential elections. Also there are not just two sides. Few will support the right wing fascists from maiden square who are part orf the provisional government in Kiev. A sizable chunk will support EU integration (though why anyone would look to give up sovereignty of their currency is beyond me). And then you have what is wrongly labeled the other side. A large chunk will support a weak federalist outcome with greater regional autonomy within Ukraine and then there are the other Russian speakers who might like a return to Russia. My point here is that not all Russian speakers are separatists.
History tells me the US will push for and favour chaos with extreme violence and I’m not sure the Europeans have the will for or sufficiently independent spirit to resist that outcome.
This is afterall all about pushing the boundaries of empire – just like Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. Those in the crumple zone will suffer the consequences.
Trying to sift the evidence via youtube and social media is an exercise in futility. The first thing we should look for is motive. You can expect either side to follow their own self interest. The West would benefit most from stability, new markets and lower energy prices. Russia, I suspect, would benefit from instability and higher energy prices. Each will doing their utmost to ensure that the costs outweigh the benefits for their opponents. The bottom line is that the interests of Ukrainians rank second, for both the West and Russia, when compared to their own interests.
Trying to sift the evidence from the MSM is an exercise in futility. The motive is obvious – empire as desired by the largest corporations on earth. Many benefit from higher oil prices as they do from expanding their markets by rolling into new pastures. Ukraine has 50 million consumers and infrastructure to plunder and own. Instability on Russia’s doorstep serves no useful outcome for that country or Ukraine itself. And after Ukraine Russia is so much closer and arguably easier to destabilise for the same reasons.
I would think that the only sector that would benefit from higher energy prices would be the Oil & Gas sector. The rest will suffer from higher input costs. And the large investments of the Oil & Gas sector in Russia, which are now at risk, make me doubt that they welcome the conflict.
thanks for the discussion