CFR: Ukraine Crisis, It's the Wests Fault

a reply to: tanka418

Wow...in all of that all that was really said, at least by anybody that has any real credibility, is that a wounded leader resigned. There was absolutely nothing about anybody "returning" to Russia, nor that any of the leadership was in fact a Russian national. Russian descent, Russian speaking, yes, but still Ukrainian; not Russian.

I am pretty sure they do themselves...

A local field commander, Mr Zakharchenko became the "prime minister" of the self-styled "Donetsk People's Republic" (DPR) in early August after his predecessor, Russian citizen Alexander Borodai, announced he was stepping down.

"I am a Muscovite. Donbass should be led by a genuine Donetsk native," Mr Borodai explained, adding that he would stay on as first deputy prime minister.

Commonly known by his nom-de-guerre Strelkov (which translates loosely from Russian as "Rifleman"), Igor Girkin is one of the most effective military commanders the rebels have.

With a background in the Russian military, including service in Chechnya, Serbia and Trans-Dniester, a self-proclaimed republic on the territory of Moldova, the Russian citizen commanded rebel forces in their symbolic stronghold of Sloviansk before retreating with his men to Donetsk. He says he was a reserve colonel in the FSB, Russia's Federal Security Service, until 31 March last year.

www.bbc.com...

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Notice how they make claims and when called out they dismiss the evidence and state who cares?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Notice how they make claims and when called out they dismiss the evidence and state who cares?

It is an interesting trend as of late.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Notice how they make claims and when called out they dismiss the evidence and state who cares?

Not sure if that was directed at me or not but I'll respond. The simple fact is that regardless of who is where now the US/EU/IMF/NATO pushed this confrontation not Russia. There was a time past when the West had at least some semblance of holding the higher moral ground (decades ago) but that has been squandered. Especially since 9/11.

Sure Russia got Crimea after this mess was started and Ukraine is lucky Russia didn't take the east as well. Personally I'd have shown much less restraint than Putin.

If this is about Alexander Borodai then you're right, I don't really care. I'm glad the separatists are getting some support and I'm not talking about the austerity the IMF wants to give them either.

I stand by the OP. This mess is owned by the West regardless of all the off topic things that have been posted.

a reply to: Bassago

There should be no big issue if Russian leadership is giving way to local guys. It only makes sense. Russians used their experience in making a base for locals to take over from and now locals are doing a good job and firming up the base further.

Btw, moral ground and Western foreign policy do not fit in the same sentence. In Libya, Iraq, Syria, Lebenan, Egypt, Tunisia and many many other places the "grossly immoral" western policy resulted in destruction of several million humans and further displacement of several million more. However, in the west these events are treated as if some ball game got over and they need to move on to the next weekend game.

This "sick entertainment" and "predatory business venturism" needs to be corrected or atleast should not be allowed to happen anymore.

Regime change via western methods are excessively bloody, tragic and bring further calamity to people. Till the time these western leaders think they can get away with experimenting with other countries, these evil things will keep on happening.

Western sanctions on Iraq killed more than million people in 10 years until these sanctions were modified into "smart sanctions" oil for food type programs. However, Osama Laden did not like the treatment and genocide of Iraqi people. So he and AQ did the 9-11. Results was US declared a war not only on AQ but the whole Islamic world and worst started attacking those "secular" Islamic nations like Iraq, Libya, Syria...............because they were allied with Russia. The real Islamic fanatics are in US allies like Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE etc. Most of the funding to AQ comes from those places.

Thanks to people like Putin there is some "push back" happening from the oppressed world. BRICS, SCO and similar alliances should help further in.........................containing the STUPID and CRUEL policies of the West.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Indeed! Shall have to consider that...

Although, it seems he did the honorable thing and stepped down of his own accord...

Any other examples?

a reply to: Bassago

Obviously you and a few others are really threatened by discussions you don't agree with. Don't think anyone has ever suggested I "get off ATS" before. I think you've actually set a new low here.

I don't find you threatening, I find you transparent. It is perfectly obvious that you are deliberately pretending that you do not understand the point of my post. Since you are not an idiot, I assume it is a deflecting and defaming tactic.

As for it working that way personally I don't let sites such as the NYT or WaPo or CFR hide behind "Op-Eds" and claim they aren't supporting the article. But feel free to pick and choose things as they support your POV.

You are the one who is picking and choosing. All reputable sources make it clear that editorial pieces are the opinions of the essayist and not necessarily those of the publishers. FAQ is no different, and your attempt to claim otherwise is either unbelievably ignorant (which I doubt) or transparently disingenuous.

I submit that the title of this thread be changed to reflect the truth (ie; Mearsheimer says...) or be placed in [HOAX!], since the title is so misleading as to be, at best, prevarication.

a reply to: DJW001

I submit that the title of this thread be changed to reflect the truth (ie; Mearsheimer says...) or be placed in [HOAX!], since the title is so misleading as to be, at best, prevarication.

Nope the title referenced an article which contained multiple other sources including the NY Times. I chose to go with the expanded article which referenced multiple sources so as far as I see it the OP is completely valid.

I don't find you threatening

No but you certainly seem to find the topic threatening. Why is that? It's simply an article referencing other sources which I believe to be true. If you disagree that's fine, but why so much effort to defend typical MSM talking points and propaganda about Ukraine?

I'm frankly surprised no one jumped in and screamed that "Putin shot the plane down!" again. That would simply been another western propaganda rant as well.

Since you are not an idiot, I assume it is a deflecting and defaming tactic.

Well thanks for that.. sort of. To answer I found your unsubtle response distasteful. Regardless of how you couched the words though my response to it could perhaps have more polite as well.

originally posted by: DJW001
You are the one who is picking and choosing. All reputable sources make it clear that editorial pieces are the opinions of the essayist and not necessarily those of the publishers. FAQ is no different, and your attempt to claim otherwise is either unbelievably ignorant (which I doubt) or transparently disingenuous.

I submit that the title of this thread be changed to reflect the truth (ie; Mearsheimer says...) or be placed in [HOAX!], since the title is so misleading as to be, at best, prevarication.

So...the CFR isn't a "reputable" source I bet they think otherwise.

Also, it used to be that when a publication, newspaper, magazine, published an "editorial" piece, it WAS in fact the opinion of the publisher. That's kind of "why" it's called an editorial, as opposed to an "opinion" piece.

And, did you notice the copyright at the bottom of the page?

The CFR kind of "owns" those words...

a reply to: tanka418

Again you are missing the point. The op ed piece is not from the cfr. The cfr had nothing to do with it except for putting it in their journal.

Just as the oped board of the NYT, when the make a post, is not the position of the NYT.

In this case the op is intentionally misleading people by insinuating the CFR is responsible for and endorses the article when in fact it does not and has nothing to do with it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

In this case the op is intentionally misleading people by insinuating the CFR is responsible for and endorses the article when in fact it does not and has nothing to do with it.

The CFR published the originating piece on their web site along with many other articles by the same author. They placed a good sized graphic at the top of the page claiming they are publishing it as well I'd say that meets the burden of proof of their support. As this wasn't the authors first article to be published by them it certainly suggests their support of it (or they wouldn't keep publishing them.)

Anyway try debating the points made within the articles instead of deflecting with semantics.

a reply to: Bassago

The CFR published the originating piece on their web site along with many other articles by the same author. They placed a good sized graphic at the top of the page claiming they are publishing it as well I'd say that meets the burden of proof of their support. As this wasn't the authors first article to be published by them it certainly suggests their support of it (or they wouldn't keep publishing them.)

And again, ATS is "publishing" your opinions. Does that make you the Voice of ATS? ATS keeps allowing you to publish here. Is that proof that you are the voice of ATS? Your argument is laughable, precisely because it is clear you understand it is fallacious. If RT or PressTV published something you disagreed with, you would be arguing the other way around, wouldn't you?

Anyway try debating the points made within the articles instead of deflecting with semantics.

Basically, Mearsham has been arguing for years that Putin is an insecure crybaby who might do something irrational if other countries hurt his feelings by, say, expanding NATO. In this essay, he says "I told you so." I disagree, do you? Putin is paranoid and a crybaby, but other nations cannot allow themselves to be hobbled by fear of Putin's reaction to their policies. It would be like giving in to a child who throws temper tantrums. Don't you agree?

a reply to: Xcathdra

In this case the op is intentionally misleading people by insinuating the CFR is responsible for and endorses the article when in fact it does not and has nothing to do with it.

To the bloody HELL with who is CFR or ZFR. Make your own judgements on the Ukraine situation..........like an adult and proceed with discussions. CFR does not have any authority over what is happening on the ground. For that matter even Obama or CIA or Pentagon do not have 100% truth authority. They do however are credible sources and CFR is one of the credible sources in media............that's about it. To accept the contents and information from the article is a matter of individual's own personal perspective and that is why we have intense for and against discussions on forums like ATS and others.

Problem is when a good article is published (directly or indirectly) by an established source, then you all West EVIL policy supporters start to roll on the ground and cry and complain.

Simply discuss Ukraine geopolitics not the website or think tank that published the article.

a reply to: DJW001

ATS keeps allowing you to publish here. Is that proof that you are the voice of ATS? Your argument is laughable

Again with the strawman and insults. Give it up.

If RT or PressTV published something you disagreed with, you would be arguing the other way around, wouldn't you?

I'd argue or debate against anyone I disagreed with.

Basically, Mearsham has been arguing for years that Putin is an insecure crybaby who might do something irrational if other countries hurt his feelings by, say, expanding NATO. In this essay, he says "I told you so." I disagree, do you?

I'd not take it upon myself to decide other peoples motives.

Putin is paranoid and a crybaby, but other nations cannot allow themselves to be hobbled by fear of Putin's reaction to their policies. It would be like giving in to a child who throws temper tantrums. Don't you agree?

So you know the mind of Putin now as well, impressive. When you say nations hobbled by fear you mean like fear of the US that they will do anything they're commanded by us even up to committing economic suicide or starting a World War on their own doorstep? The danger I see in this whole situation is of our making then made worse by the EU's fearful obedience to our commands.

Yeah I see a lot of that kind of fear going around. Putin not so much except for a few of the post Soviet states that still think they're under threat.

a reply to: victor7

They do however are credible sources and CFR is one of the credible sources in media............that's about it.

Most conspiracy theorists would radically disagree with you; they believe the CFR is one of the main engines of the US/Zionist conspiracy! That is why the OP has phrased the title as he has: he is trying to convey the impression that Mearsheim is some sort of whistle-blower, when in fact, he represents one of many factions within the CFR community when it comes to Russia policy.

a reply to: DJW001

Most conspiracy theorists would radically disagree with you; they believe the CFR is one of the main engines of the US/Zionist conspiracy!

Well it's good we're looking at this as a geopolitical event rather than a conspiracy.

That is why the OP has phrased the title as he has: he is trying to convey the impression that Mearsheim is some sort of whistle-blower, when in fact, he represents one of many factions within the CFR community when it comes to Russia policy.

You have absolutely no idea what I was thinking when I created this thread. What is interesting is some of the posters who agree with your stance insisted Mearsheim was NOT part of the CFR community. He's just an "op-ed" writer of no import. So which is it?

a reply to: Bassago

ATS keeps allowing you to publish here. Is that proof that you are the voice of ATS? Your argument is laughable


Again with the strawman and insults. Give it up.

It is not a strawman argument. You are claiming that by allowing Mearsheim to publish his opinions in their journal, the CFR is endorsing them. How is that different from ATS allowing you to publish here? Oh, and please don't order me to do anything, just because your flawed logic keeps blowing up in your face. Now, please, explain why you believe the two examples to be fundamentally different.

If RT or PressTV published something you disagreed with, you would be arguing the other way around, wouldn't you?

I'd argue or debate against anyone I disagreed with.

Again, you are deliberately misunderstanding the statement.

Basically, Mearsham has been arguing for years that Putin is an insecure crybaby who might do something irrational if other countries hurt his feelings by, say, expanding NATO. In this essay, he says "I told you so." I disagree, do you?

I'd not take it upon myself to decide other peoples motives.

And yet you can read the minds of the FAQ editors.

Putin is paranoid and a crybaby, but other nations cannot allow themselves to be hobbled by fear of Putin's reaction to their policies. It would be like giving in to a child who throws temper tantrums. Don't you agree?

So you know the mind of Putin now as well, impressive. When you say nations hobbled by fear you mean like fear of the US that they will do anything they're commanded by us even up to committing economic suicide or starting a World War on their own doorstep? The danger I see in this whole situation is of our making then made worse by the EU's fearful obedience to our commands.

I am merely paraphrasing Mearsheim, whom you seem to have no trouble endorsing when it seems to support your own views.

Yeah I see a lot of that kind of fear going around. Putin not so much except for a few of the post Soviet states that still think they're under threat.

If your country had been the site of Russian massacres (eg; Poland) wouldn't you be mistrustful of Russia?

a reply to: Bassago

You have absolutely no idea what I was thinking when I created this thread. What is interesting is some of the posters who agree with your stance insisted Mearsheim was NOT part of the CFR community. He's just an "op-ed" writer of no import. So which is it?

Here we go... where do I (or anyone else) say that Mearsheim is not a member of CFR. Talk about strawmen!

Edit to add: "or anyone else."

a reply to: DJW001

Here we go... where do I (or anyone else) say that Mearsheim is not a member of CFR. Talk about strawmen!

Here you go as you couldn't be bothered to look yourself. Next time try harder please.

ETA - John J. Mearsheimer - author - is not listed on the CFR website as a member.

edit on 20-8-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Edit to add:

I am merely paraphrasing Mearsheim, whom you seem to have no trouble endorsing when it seems to support your own views.

I never said I endorse him, simply agree with him on this issue.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
You can`t make this stuff up :

Europe needs a Ballistic Missile ‘Shield’ to protect against humanitarian aid convoys.

WTF ?

en.ria.ru...

Not really no... But what Russia needs is a distraction to their people while they continue their attacks on Ukraine while demonizing the west.

Now, lets see how much of the supplies the rebels will take from the people to use for themselves, like they have been consistently doing.

The Separatists were the ones making sure the civilians got the much needed aid, not Kiev.

"The West" is doing a pretty good job of demonizing themselves, no need for Russia to do it.

The more lies you tell, the more obvious it will be to many you`re lying.

All Russia has to do is keep bringing out the truth and most people will see what is happening.

The last elections to the European Parliament showed that all European citizens are not fooled by the false pro-American, anti-Russian propaganda...and by the constant stream of lies.

The more we speak the truth and the more persistent we are the greater will be the reaction.

www.zerohedge.com...

Parading prisoners is a violation of international law and the rules of warfare.

Why not point out to the far worse thing which has been going on right now ?

“Crimes against humanity” include any of the following acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

murder;
extermination;
enslavement;
deportation or forcible transfer of population;
imprisonment;
torture;
rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
persecution against an identifiable group on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious or gender grounds;
enforced disappearance of persons;
the crime of apartheid;
other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering or serious bodily or mental injury.

www.icc-cpi.int...

Even more so since we have proven examples of the Russian leadership in the rebel areas who were holding drumheads and holding summary judgment / executions for petty crimes. Those people executed were done so under Soviet Law going back to the late 1940's.

At least they get a trail, the civilians dying now of the constant shelling by the Ukrainian Army are not even getting a trail, they have been sentenced to death without it.