J
josie_L
Guest
That’s not what ridgerunner is doing!
- Status
P
pepipop
Guest
Jharek, knows more about Irish history than I ever will - as I’m not a historian, by nature.
Allegedly, Ireland lost its’ sovereignty years ago after asking for a bailout to pay off the bank bond holders, (as no doubt will be the case for Ukraine, in due course).
We say between ourselves, mostly in jest, that we’re actually ruled by Germany, as they rule the roost at the EU. So if Putin doubled our salaries/pensions and we remained as a republic - who knows, as I’m sure none of us ever wanted to be ruled by Germany either.
It’s all completely hypothetical anyway - Putin has no intention of taking over anywhere else.
,independent.ie/lifestyle/the-week-ireland-gave-up-its-sovereignty-29796376.html
*The week Ireland gave up its sovereignty
t was like a physical punch in the gut. Outside on Merrion Square, frozen snow glittered on the streets. But it was nothing compared to the icy chill which hung in the air of the press centre in Government Buildings on the desolate night of Sunday, November 28, 2010, as the packed room watched a group of strangers from the IMF, EU and ECB settle into seats just vacated by the Taoiseach and two cabinet ministers.
This Troika was our new government now – unelected, unwanted and absolutely indispensable. Three Kings bearing a bitter gift of €85bn for a broken nation teetering on the edge of the precipice. Thirty pieces of silver in exchange for our hard-won, precious sovereignty.*
J
josie_L
Guest
Are you saying the U.S. wants to take over the world by virtue of how many military bases it has around the globe?
S
Son_of_Niall
Guest
Really? Then please explain what he is “doing”.
J
josie_L
Guest
He isn’t targeting any ethnic group (he’s half Irish).
J
josie_L
Guest
Proof has been given throughout this thread. Putin is no friend of the Catholic Church.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
On March 29, 2014 the Batkivshchyna party officially nominated her and on March 31 Central Election Commission officially registered her as a candidate for presidential election. Also, are you claiming that Yulia Tymoshenko is a completely honest individual and that she did not bribe the Supreme Court in 2003, and that she did not evade taxes in 1996, and that she did not misuse public money in several deals? You claim that she was unjustly jailed, but she was tried and convicted in a court of law, unlike Yanukovich who is said to be corrupt, but has never been tried or convicted. Why do you oppose putting convicted criminals in jail?
T
Tomdstone
Guest
It is worse than that. When asked by parliamentarian Nestor Shufrych “what should we do now with the 8 million Russians that stayed in Ukraine. They are outcasts”… she replies: “They must be killed with nuclear weapons.”
This is very dangerous to kill 8 million Russian speakers with nuclear weapons, because not only would Russian speaking women and children be killed, but the radioactivity caused by this nuclear explosion would affect people in the surrounding countries, including for example, Romania and Moldova.
veteranstoday.com/2014/03/24/tymoshenko-8-million-ukraine-russians-must-be-killed-with-nuclear-weapons/
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Under the leadership of President Putin, the Catholic Church has one of the most beautiful Cathedrals in the world operating with six or so Masses every day in Moscow.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Ease up, Niall. I wasn’t debating it. Exploring is not debating.
It was coincidental; confluence of opinions that are very unusual in the U.S., all from the same place, and I wondered just a bit whether there is something about Ireland or Irish politics that lead people to have views that might be considered unusual in the U.S. In the U.S., it would be extremely unusual to have three vehement Putin supporters spending a great deal of time on a Catholic website arguing in favor of Putin. One of them, in fact, compared the Ukrainian situation to that of the “troubles” in No. Ireland. Another brought up preference for Putin over Enda Kenny. That has meaning to them somehow. As an American, I don’t know what that means, exactly,
Is there, perhaps, something about the EU generally or the U.S. that makes people in some parts of Europe favor a guy like Putin? Not so very long ago, the Irish view of America was greatly more favorable than that of, say, Italians. Now it has reversed. Why?
During both WWI and WWII, many Irish favored the Germans because they hated the Brits. Even the Irish Americans in WWI had to be cajoled and persuaded to “fight for England” as they saw it. My own grandfather disfavored entry into WWI because of it. There was a reason why Irish Americans could find it in themselves to support the Kaiser or even (momentarily only) Hitler.
Yes, I know some, even in the U.S. were momentarily (for the most part momentarily) dazzled by Putin’s claim to be the “protector of Christianity”, but I think his warring on Christians in Ukraine has dispelled that.
When others bring it up, Niall, it is not out of the way for me, who am half Irish myself, to explore the thinking.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Ah! Now I also better understand the reference to “The Habsburgs” and the antipathy toward them. It’s “code” for Germany or German influence, or German influence in the EU. And, yes, this, to some, is part of the age-old Teutonic/Slavic struggle, so the Slav Empire looks good to one who resents what one thinks of as the Teutonic one.Jharek, knows more about Irish history than I ever will - as I’m not a historian, by nature.
Allegedly, Ireland lost its’ sovereignty years ago after asking for a bailout to pay off the bank bond holders, (as no doubt will be the case for Ukraine, in due course).
We say between ourselves, mostly in jest, that we’re actually ruled by Germany, as they rule the roost at the EU. So if Putin doubled our salaries/pensions and we remained as a republic - who knows, as I’m sure none of us ever wanted to be ruled by Germany either.
Is it common in Ireland to think of Germany as an oppressor? Kind of looks like it.
Not to create paranoia or anything, but the largest single ethnic origin in the U.S. is German, not English. Hard for Americans to much resent Germany nowadays, perhaps for that reason. If one’s name is something like “Schmidt” or “Gutchenritter”, anti-Germanicism can be generated, but it doesn’t come easy.
P
pepipop
Guest
It’s not a question of being anti-Germany or anti-anyone, it’s because we were all devastated in 2010 when we had to ‘ask’ for a bailout under terms and conditions that meant we weren’t in control anymore - we were sold out, and most of it went to pay the banks bond holders. (Ukraine will be in the same position soon enough.)
We don’t have any animosity towards Germany or anyone else, or see anyone as an oppressor… As I said, it is said in jest that we’re ruled by Germany only because they’re the ‘boss’ of the EU.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Sure, there are lots of Western tourists in Moscow. It really wouldn’t do to destroy it. But the Russian E.O. Church holds that the Latin Catholic Church (and Ukrainian, Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox) Churches should not be in Russia at all. Look it up. Earlier I posted a quote by bishop Hilarion in which he basically says the Russian E.O. is territorial and disputes their presence in Ukraine. Please do not claim there is no unity between the Russian E.O. and official Russian nationalism.
J
josie_L
Guest
I think you need to look a little further/deeper than that.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
yes, I get it. I got it back in post 479 when you said:
“We say between ourselves, mostly in jest, that we’re actually ruled by Germany, as they rule the roost at the EU. So if Putin doubled our salaries/pensions and we remained as a republic - who knows, as I’m sure none of us ever wanted to be ruled by Germany either.”
So, some, at least, in Ireland resent being in hock to Germany and see Putin in a more favorable light because he is clearly an enemy of the EU in which, you say, Germany is the dominant influence. I get that too.
There is a difference between what Americans think about Germany and what, apparently, some Europeans think about Germany. That’s very plain, and it is at least explanatory of the previous references to “the Habsburgs” and seeming happiness at the notion of pushing the “Habsburgs” back. It just didn’t make any sense to me before. Nor do I think most Americans would understand that reference.
It also makes one better understand why you and others considered EU membership such a dark future for Ukraine. If Ireland is now deeply in hock to German bankers, many Irish would not think well of it.
P
pepipop
Guest
You’re reading more into this than what I responded. You asked a hypothetical question, I answered it in relation to Ireland’s current position.
The EU/Germans have absolutely nothing to do with my thoughts on the Russian/Ukraine scenario - absolutely zilch.
It was the West, including NATO, getting too close to Russia’s territory, the coup d’etat aided by the EU/USA forcing Putin to look after his naval base - aside from the fact that Crimea wanted out of Ukraine anyway.
Including. the on-going ‘cold war’ hysteria in the Western media, since February, against Russia stating that Putin was going to take over the world, etc., etc., as debated numerous times already on this thread.
K
KyivAndrew
Guest
That’s the problem with relying on RT in links, as you have with this quote. It’s a doctored tape and Tymoshenko revealed which parts in the tape were not hers including this ridiculous one on nukes. The Russian secret service would never lie of course, especially about phone calls they have intercepted on people they consider enemies. The tape is not in English obviously; do you understand and speak Russian and/or Ukrainian?
Tomdstone, have you ever actually listened to Yulia Tymoshenko speaking in Ukrainian or watched her speaking on Ukrainian television (WITHOUT English subtitles) and understood what she is saying?
P
pepipop
Guest
Those facts were really interesting. I never ever knew either fact but have just looked both of them up.As I’ve said, I’m useless at history!
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Oh, but you know, the U.S. agreed that Ukraine would not be incorporated into NATO when Russia promised to leave Ukraine inviolate. That deal is now broken by Putin, though it’s hard to know what NATO will do now that it no longer has that obligation. Obama will keep the agreement anyway, but his successor might not.
We sure have seen a lot of condemnation of the EU in this thread vis a vis the embrace of Russia, the Habsburg threat, German economic hegemony and such. But Ok. If I read too much into it, I did.
You have to realize it’s really not odd for a person in one country to wonder about the political moods of those in other countries, particularly if one is confronted with several very consistent expressions of a point of view coming from one country that are entirely different from the nearly universal view in one’s own country.
I don’t think there is any “cold war hysteria” in the west, or even in the western media. Well, I will admit the Swedes got pretty upset when Russian warplanes did overflights. Can’t blame them too much for that, and it may be just as well for ongoing Swedish security that it happened. And, of course, the Poles can’t be greatly blamed for being nervous, having lived under Russian rule under the Soviets and the Tsars, and watching Russia move itself west. Oh, and the Baltic states have Russian minorities too, so they would naturally be nervous about Russian ethnic revanchism on the march. They’re pretty small countries, after all, and small countries next door to territorially aggressive neighbors probably worry more than far distant larger countries.
No, I think the basic view in the west is that territorial aggression and treaty-breaking are simply territorial aggression and treaty-breaking. Not much more to know. Makes the west as distrustful of Putin as it probably should have been all along, but wasn’t. Makes George Bush look foolish for his “looked into Putin’s soul” remark. Makes McCain look smarter with his “looked into his eyes and saw three letters; K.G. and B” remark.Makes Hillary Clinton look foolish with her “reset button”. Makes Obama look weak for having backed down on the missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic and on doing the unilateral disarmament thing. Makes him look foolish in telling Medvedev to “tell Vladimir” he would have “more flexibility” after his re-election. Politically, Obama sure doesn’t have it now.
I could be wrong, but I think the main internal effect in the west will be growing distrust of the left and its feckless ideologies.
The west needs a wakeup call now and then that there actually are aggressors in the world. It was hard learned in the 20th Century, and will always be hard learned, it seems, for free and prosperous societies. That’s one of the failings of free societies that don’t really think of grabbing others’ territory but assume the business of the world is business. Some countries’ leaders are aggressors. It’s just a shame that Ukraine is now the one to pay the price for western somnolence and trust of the untrustworthy.
Nobody in the west thinks Putin is going to take over the world; only that he’s a definite threat to the rest of Ukraine, possibly the Baltic states, the rest of Georgia and Moldova, possibly (but improbably) Poland, and VERY doubtfully Sweden and Finland. Putin could reasonably believe the Poles, Swedes and Finns would fight, and that the Swedes, at least, are exceedingly well armed despite their historic neutrality. Obama may be a Chamberlain, (is one, in my opinion, and more’s the pity) but Poland, Sweden and Finland would fight when the first spetznaz boot crossed the border. One doubts Putin can retain popularity if that happened. And in Poland’s case, the Russian supply lines would be anything but secure, crossing even an occupied Ukraine. It’s a rather narrow front from Belarus alone. Again, it is terrible that the Ukrainians have to be the ones to pay the price for the safety of others.
In sum, nobody really expects Putin to conquer anything other than Ukraine, perhaps not all of that. Some will expect him to conquer the remainder of Georgia and Moldova. If Putin gets too close to Kiev, it becomes different. The “stans” are probably safe. Russia doesn’t need another Chechnya, and certainly not several more. (One wonders what a stimulus Putin has perhaps given to the Islamic arms trade.)
I don’t much doubt whatever Putin leaves of Ukraine will have a tough go of it. Nor do I doubt the EU will expect austerity of it, and a serious attempt at systematic reforms and economic development. But at least part of Ukraine will, more likely than not, remain free. And as little regard as I have for Biden, I truly do hope his company’s efforts at developing frackable gas in whatever Russia does not conquer of Ukraine, bear fruit in abundance.
And, unless Hillary Clinton gets elected in 2016, and possibly even if she does, Putin will not be facing another compliant Obama.
This whole subject has been very interesting. As I said, though, it’s terrible that Ukrainians are the ones who are paying and will continue to pay the price for a timely bit of western education.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Oh, but you know, the U.S. agreed that Ukraine would not be incorporated into NATO when Russia promised to leave Ukraine inviolate. That deal is now broken by Putin, though it’s hard to know what NATO will do now that it no longer has that obligation. Obama will keep the agreement anyway, but his successor might not.
We sure have seen a lot of condemnation of the EU in this thread vis a vis the embrace of Russia, the Habsburg threat, German economic hegemony and such. But Ok. If I read too much into it, I did.
You have to realize it’s really not odd for a person in one country to wonder about the political moods of those in other countries, particularly if one is confronted with several very consistent expressions of a point of view coming from one country that are entirely different from the nearly universal view in one’s own country.
I don’t think there is any “cold war hysteria” in the west, or even in the western media. Well, I will admit the Swedes got pretty upset when Russian warplanes did overflights. Can’t blame them too much for that, and it may be just as well for ongoing Swedish security that it happened. And, of course, the Poles can’t be greatly blamed for being nervous, having lived under Russian rule under the Soviets and the Tsars, and watching Russia move itself west. Oh, and the Baltic states have Russian minorities too, so they would naturally be nervous about Russian ethnic revanchism on the march. They’re pretty small countries, after all, and small countries next door to territorially aggressive neighbors probably worry more than far distant larger countries.
No, I think the basic view in the west is that territorial aggression and treaty-breaking are simply territorial aggression and treaty-breaking. Not much more to know. Makes the west as distrustful of Putin as it probably should have been all along, but wasn’t. Makes George Bush look foolish for his “looked into Putin’s soul” remark. Makes McCain look smarter with his “looked into his eyes and saw three letters; K.G. and B” remark.Makes Hillary Clinton look foolish with her “reset button”. Makes Obama look weak for having backed down on the missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic and on doing the unilateral disarmament thing. Makes him look foolish in telling Medvedev to “tell Vladimir” he would have “more flexibility” after his re-election. Politically, Obama sure doesn’t have it now.
I could be wrong, but I think the main internal effect in the west will be growing distrust of the left and its feckless ideologies.
The west needs a wakeup call now and then that there actually are aggressors in the world. It was hard learned in the 20th Century, and will always be hard learned, it seems, for free and prosperous societies. That’s one of the failings of free societies that don’t really think of grabbing others’ territory but assume the business of the world is business. Some countries’ leaders are aggressors. It’s just a shame that Ukraine is now the one to pay the price for western somnolence and trust of the untrustworthy.
Nobody in the west thinks Putin is going to take over the world; only that he’s a definite threat to the rest of Ukraine, possibly the Baltic states, the rest of Georgia and Moldova, possibly (but improbably) Poland, and VERY doubtfully Sweden and Finland. Putin could reasonably believe the Poles, Swedes and Finns would fight, and that the Swedes, at least, are exceedingly well armed despite their historic neutrality. Obama may be a Chamberlain, (is one, in my opinion, and more’s the pity) but Poland, Sweden and Finland would fight when the first spetznaz boot crossed the border. One doubts Putin can retain popularity if that happened. And in Poland’s case, the Russian supply lines would be anything but secure, crossing even an occupied Ukraine. It’s a rather narrow front from Belarus alone. Again, it is terrible that the Ukrainians have to be the ones to pay the price for the safety of others.
In sum, nobody really expects Putin to conquer anything other than Ukraine, perhaps not all of that. Some will expect him to conquer the remainder of Georgia and Moldova. If Putin gets too close to Kiev, it becomes different. The “stans” are probably safe. Russia doesn’t need another Chechnya, and certainly not several more. (One wonders what a stimulus Putin has perhaps given to the Islamic arms trade.)
I don’t much doubt whatever Putin leaves of Ukraine will have a tough go of it. Nor do I doubt the EU will expect austerity of it, and a serious attempt at systematic reforms and economic development. But at least part of Ukraine will, more likely than not, remain free. And as little regard as I have for Biden, I truly do hope his son’s company’s efforts at developing frackable gas in whatever Russia does not conquer of Ukraine, bear fruit in abundance.
And, unless Hillary Clinton gets elected in 2016, and possibly even if she does, Putin will not be facing another compliant Obama.
This whole subject has been very interesting. As I said, though, it’s terrible that Ukrainians are the ones who are paying and will continue to pay the price for a timely bit of western education.
- Status