Printable View
How does this logic work?Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
If the residents of Chinatown in Sydney decided to hold a referendum tomorrow and then declared that the area to the east of Darling Harbour was now part of the Peoples Republic of China should the Australian federal government just accept this outcome and cede sovereignty of part of Australia to China?
Should the rest of the world accept this as a legal and fair territorial acquisition?
Yeah right. The crimean people cried out for help from russian tanks just like the people of Checkoslovakia did to put down the oppressive Dubcek regime.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
Yeah, right again. Some gang of coal miners defeated the Ukraine army singlehanded without any help. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
^^
Not the same though. No historical or contemporary parallels in terms of conflict and ethnicity, and missing the paramount geographical importance.
Putin knew he was going to get shafted on Crimea, taking flack for an undemocratic acquisition of it is by far the lesser of unfavorable outcomes.
App Developers in Crimea are Getting Cut Off Thanks to US Sanctions
By Chris Mills on at
When one country annexes another there's some things you expect to happen, like airstrikes or strongly-worded letters to the UN. One consequence you probably wouldn't have predicted is no longer being able to spend your hard-earned pennies on particular apps.
In a (rather belated) response to the Russian annexation of the Crimean Peninsula last year, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order on 19th December listing a new range of sanctions against the Crimean region. The move was meant to put the economic thumbscrews on Vladimir Putin, but it's had a rather unexpected result for the people of Crimea.
The sanctions prohibit the import or export of any "good, service or technology" from the US to the region.
Among other things, that means that app developers can't make iPhone games any more, and Apple has been sending out emails to affected parties informing them. As TechCrunch reports, Crimean developers are banned from publishing apps, and have to stop using any Apple-provided software or tools immediately.
Money owed to the developers for app sales has also been frozen in escrow.
Apple isn't the first tech company to cut off Crimea, either: gaming platform Valve has apparently shut down Steam in the region, as well. Thanks to geopolitics and Putin, Crimean kids can't play Call of Duty any more.
Presumably, however, the sanctions will apply equally to all tech companies, not just Valve and Apple.
There's no indication yet that Google or Microsoft have shut down developers for their app stores; in fact, a Crimean developer interviewed by Russia Beyond The Headlines said that "Crimean developers have no problems with Google".
In the meantime, affected devs are using fairly simple workarounds, like listing a Russian or Ukrainian address. But it's still a fun (and depressing) reminder of how international posturing can affect even the lowliest Flappy Bird clone.
There are parallels for ethnicity. Chinatown is primarily populated by ethnic Chinese not caucasian Australians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo
You are saying if there was any 'conflict' between the chinese population and Australians then such an annexation would become a legally viable course of action for China to pursue?
Can you expand on this? You say because Crimea has geographically strategic importance it is a valid target for annexation?Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo
Japan and Darwin, with a limited history of conflict in the Australian region region would be a better analogy for you to use. I'm sure there is no history of conflict between China and a suburb of Sydney. The realpolitik of the Crimea is more akin to the Falklands in terms of geopolitical importance and historical and ethnic bonds. Russia has limited access to the Atlantic and Mediterranean regions. I'm sure if Russia hadn't secured Crimea it would now be in the hands of NATO proxy forces, impeding a crucial trade route to Russia and escalating the conflict significantly.
You can make a reasonable case that the Crimean peninsula belonged historically and ethnically to Russia but that does not excuse the breaking of the rules of engagement when it comes to international diplomatic relations expected of a reasonably developed G20 nation.
The Crimean peninsula was the sovereign territory of the nation of Ukraine.
Interfering in other country's political processes as the US (and probably also Russia) has been guilty of on many occasions in the past is a bit underhand but it is not in the same ball park as spitting the dummy when you come second and then forcibly annexing your neighbour's territory against that sovereign nations express will.
There is no legitimacy whatsoever to the railroad sham poll and the annexation it supposedly 'validated'.
The rules of engagement evolve slowly but they are evolving away from violence as a means of resolution and any attempt to drag the world backwards in its political evolution should be opposed in the strongest possible terms.
I think you're only seeing one side of the story, but I'll agree to disagree.
Question though... given that the region is now relatively stable after the 2014 conflict, would you agree that NATO control of Crimea, with the naval base and port at Sevastopol and domination over the narrow straights into the Sea of Azov, would increase the prospect of a far more serious military conflict between Russian and NATO forces?
Personally I cannot see how it would not escalate the situation.
I'm certainly not waving the flag for either side, when you look at both sides I don't think rhetoric based on morality has any credibility. But I think Russia did the right thing, for their own national security and for regional stability.
How do you propose this could happen? Russia has been granted the right to use this base and port.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo
Fact is that many former Warsaw Pact countries and some newly independent republics were willing to make heavy sacrifices to join the EU and NATO. They knew exactly that this is the only thing that may protect them from being reannexed by Russia some time under some pretext as now observed in Ukraine.
US want a large military presence in Ukraine, hence them creating the coup. Getting their grubby mitts on Sevastopol which is more than capable of holding a nuclear "encouragement" would be catastrophic for Russia and China.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
No wonder the merkins want to destroy Russia. No GMO? But obomba's always been the monsanto pusher around the world. He must be really angry.
Right.. so Russia didn't need to annexe Crimea then..? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
That Russian agriculture is so organic.Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
How do you define 'need' in this context?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoRight.. so Russia didn't need to annexe Crimea then..? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
You are living in the past pseudo. Nuclear war is over/finished/kaput.Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
The only thing on the minds of the developed powers in the modern world is how to get these weapons off the table permanently so that extremist nutters don't get the chance to use them. No developed nation will ever use nuclear weapons under any context for any purpose.
Umm Looper - you know that the US is about to spend $1 trillion on their latest nuclear weapon systems, right? You know this yes? Or is it "so last year" ?Quote:
Originally Posted by LooperHow do you define 'need' in this context?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoRight.. so Russia didn't need to annexe Crimea then..? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
You are living in the past pseudo. Nuclear war is over/finished/kaput.Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
The only thing on the minds of the developed powers in the modern world is how to get these weapons off the table permanently so that extremist nutters don't get the chance to use them. No developed nation will ever use nuclear weapons under any context for any purpose.
As for extremist nutters with nukes, I assume yuo mean israel with their 200+ french and US gifted Nukes that those psychos will doubtless launch sooner rather than later.
The US is developing a new nuclear weapons system? I was not aware of this. What is the name of this system?Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
I think they will name it the "another obomba lie" weapons systemQuote:
Originally Posted by Looper
PressTV-US to spend $1 trillion on nuclear arms
Upgrading is the name of the game Looper.
Obomba says he wants a world without nukes, and signs off to spend $1trillion on upgrading their current system. Harrytittletattle will like it as it will have a iphone power button on it, and shaped like an oscar.
Of course you are sort of correct; the point is not to use them (unless the dollar finally crashes to its true value of being about the same as 1 ply used toilet paper), the point is to spend the money on them because his big business backers will pocket another $1 trillion dollars, and the Fed will get another $1 trillion dollar of lovely debt on the books for its owners to claw in the 6% of.
You got nothing to say about the israelis though? Quite a campaign there to nuke Iran just on the off chance that they might pose a problem to the rogue state of israel in the future.
So no name for the new system yet. They should run a competition at the high schools to come up with a name.
from your esteemed news source 'presstv.com'
Which works out at $33 billion a year on maintenance of the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet.Quote:
“Over the next thirty years, the United States plans to spend approximately $1 trillion maintaining the current arsenal
Quite a good price I would say.
I reckon Vladimir could have built a new Black sea port some where else on the coast for less than that.
They may or may not ever be launched again but they will be used to threaten states that don't have them and don't do as they're told.Quote:
Originally Posted by Looper
You can't trust the fucker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8sReTOy4Ng
How can they be used as a believable threat when everybody knows that no civilised developed country will ever actually use them?Quote:
Originally Posted by NevernaThey may or may not ever be launched again but they will be used to threaten states that don't have them and don't do as they're told.Quote:
Originally Posted by Looper
When have they recently been used as a threat?
They could easily usefully have been used in their tactical form for bunker busting in Afghanistan. How come they were sidelined for far less powerful conventional weapons?
What is there to define?Quote:
Originally Posted by LooperHow do you define 'need' in this context?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoRight.. so Russia didn't need to annexe Crimea then..? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
Takeovers thinks that Russia having an agreement to lease the port is as good a guarantee of continuity as required. My reply was somewhat sarcastic, hence the rolleyes.
I can't think of many places in the world as strategically significant as the Crimea peninsula. Given the current realpolitik situation of the Ukraine, I think it was an astute move by the Russians to annexe it.
Maybe a century ago when warfare was waged using gunboats and naval blockades.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo
Annexation as an acceptable method of enagaging with your geographical neighbours went out of fashion a century ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo
Civilised countries do not steal territory from their neighbours anymore.
What century are you living in?
The hypocrisy of the Russian flag wavers on this thread is embarrassing.
Your heads would explode with apoplexy if the US contemplated anything vaguely similar.
And there it is... :wave:Quote:
Originally Posted by Looper
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus
Kind of ironic Pope Putin would bring up the poison word...(Litvinenko)...
What is it with this poison stuff?...
Did I read correctly that the Romans banned the use of poisoning at some point?...Heh...Bloody effective way of assuming power...
The subtler, the better...(GMO included)...