I never once called for military intervention in Crimea, but unlike you I am at least principled enough to oppose invading other countries on trumped up pretenses even when the country invading isn't the US.
By the way as others said, if you were that upset by America's 'armageddon' why weren't you strapping on some guns and defending the citizens of the world? In fact, why weren't you in Chechnya before defending them from Russian aggression while we're at it?
As far as observers being shot at, seeing as Russia explicitly invited them, if there were proof they were being shot at/prevented from entering the country, this would be very important evidence. It would seem to be the sort of thing that would solidify any international law case against Putin and Russia. Therefore, the fact that all we have are word of mouth accounts, its seems rather far fetched. If they were being shot at, I guarantee CNN would be there getting the footage.
Why would I strap on? I oppose US intervention in damn near everything. I certainly never supported losing good American kids over another country's problems.
I have to say I am really impressed by Ukraine's restraint so far. Russia has been constantly attempting to provoke a shooting war and Ukraine has been too smart (so far at least) to take the bait.
Now we even have Russian troops attacking Ukranian installations outside of Crimea. I have no doubt that the apologists here will declare that all right and good as well of course.
Why would I strap on? I oppose US intervention in damn near everything. I certainly never supported losing good American kids over another country's problems.
So you oppose what is happening in Crimea but you aren't calling for military intervention? You don't want to go to war with Russia over this, you just want to sour relations and damage our economy over it? What human suffering has been introduced by this "invasion"? Where is the great injustice? What unpardonable sin has been committed? Please enrich our knowledge from your deep well of wisdom.
Your argument there seems to be that Russia trusts those observers enough to invite them into the country to monitor the elections but you don't trust them to tell the truth about being shot at?
Your argument there seems to be that Russia trusts those observers enough to invite them into the country to monitor the elections but you don't trust them to tell the truth about being shot at?
When considering evidence the reputation of the witness has to be taken into consideration.
We have two opposing stories:
One story, there were poll observers.
Second story, people trying to observe the polls were not allowed in the country.
So lets see, RT was on site interviewing poll observers, and their names are known. With names independent news agencies can later interview those witnesses. Six months from now CNN, Foxnews,,,, whoever can go and interview those people. Ten years from now a historian can interview those witnesses.
Then we have anther site not listing exact names, no video, no pictures,,, nothing to backup their claim. So independent sources can not verify this story. There is nobody to interview as the names of the witnesses are not known.
Names of observers who were shot at?
Video of observers being shot at?
You cant be serious. Now you are justifying RT because in some distant future real media sources might be able to verify their reporting?
So you dispute the words of the official international monitoring party requested by Russia to monitor their elections?
Yes, I dispute anything that can not be independently verified.
Truth does not fear investigation.
How do you have the means to independently verify anything happening in the Crimea?
During an interview with RT the lady gave her name and what organization she was with.
With that information foxnews, cnn, cbs news, abc news,,, whoever can contact that lady and do any interview.
Lets say fox, cnn, cbs news, abc news,,,, whoever wanted to talk to the people who claimed they were shot and denied entry. Who are those people and where are they?
Wikipedia also list some of the poll Monitors:
Charalampos Angourakis (Greek),
Johan Bäckman (Finnish),
Mateusz Piskorski (Polish),
Nenad Popovi
Sorry tapatalk didn't like the rest of your post and cut it off!
None of that is you independently verifying anything, it's just you trusting certain media organisations. There's a reason that trusted organisations are used to monitor elections rather than people individually selected by involved parties.
So you have no witnesses for cross examination?
Not sure what your argument is here.
To form a well rounded opinion we need to hear both sides of the story.
Russia Today has been honest and forth coming with interviews and exact details.
Outside news sources have been ignoring details.
If there was really voter fraud, dont you think there would be youtube videos about it? People like Alex Jones and sites like beforeitenews would be all over it.
There is very little out there to imply voter fraud.
To form a well rounded opinion we need to hear both sides of the story.
Russia Today has been honest and forth coming with interviews and exact details. It is the exact details that lends credibility to RT.
Outside news sources have been ignoring details. How can foxnews, cnn,,,, or other US based news sources report the news without boots on the ground?
If there was really voter fraud, dont you think there would be youtube videos about it? People like Alex Jones and sites like beforeitenews would be all over it.
There is very little out there to imply voter fraud.
I think that you have an overly narrow view of what constitutes a legal election.
Now that Crimea has broke away from Ukraine, look for other parts to revolt as well.
If Russia moves on the rest of Ukraine the Ukrainians may finally act to defend themselves. It'd be the start of a war that we are obligated by treaty to participate in.
We think things are bad now? I bet the Ukraine does a full breakup before or shortly after it joins the EU.
People may be stupid, but they are not dumb,,, well some of them are dumb.
The EU and the Euro are on the way to collapse. Do we "really" expect the Ukraine people to be part of the EU train wreck?
Crimea was faced with two choices:
1. Get pulled into the EU, and either go bankrupt, or have to pay for someone elses bankruptcy.
2. Protect their economy and economic future and join Russia. At least Russia is not having to bailout Greece or Spain.
The writing is on the wall, the EU needs fresh meat to survive and Ukraine was going to be that fresh meat. Crimea said "screw this, I am out of here."
The EU is over there crying, but, but, but we need fresh economies to pillage. What are we supposed to do now?
Now that Crimea has broke away from Ukraine, look for other parts to revolt as well.
We think things are bad now? I bet the Ukraine does a full breakup before or shortly after it joins the EU.
Your argument there seems to be that Russia trusts those observers enough to invite them into the country to monitor the elections but you don't trust them to tell the truth about being shot at?