Чебурашка, ты настоящий друг!
United Kingdom
Durham
flag msg tools
Scheiß Inselaffen!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, let's thank Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, who has now decided to clear that one up!

Lavrov wrote:
I have read and heard much criticism regarding our decision to join the fight in Donbass


Source.

All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .
15 
 Thumb up
0.27
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bojan Ramadanovic
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One thing Russians never lacked in was the supply of 'useful idiots' in the West.
9 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vic Lineal
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
bramadan wrote:
One thing Russians never lacked in was the supply of 'useful idiots' in the West.


Useful idiots are plentiful and quite magical, because they are only "idiots" when their side loses. The thin line between useful idiots and educated foreign supporters of the shining city on the hill is historical contingency.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jasper
Netherlands
Leiden
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No one cares about the Ukraine anymore, so Lavrov can say whatever the hell he pleases, even the truth.
14 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Xuzu Horror
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
The have updated the wording on the website:

Quote:
I have read and heard much criticism that we should not have got involved into the conflicts in Donbass and in Syria.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bojan Ramadanovic
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
viclineal wrote:
bramadan wrote:
One thing Russians never lacked in was the supply of 'useful idiots' in the West.


Useful idiots are plentiful and quite magical, because they are only "idiots" when their side loses. The thin line between useful idiots and educated foreign supporters of the shining city on the hill is historical contingency.


Useful idiots are idiots when the side they are supporting calls them that.

Russian contempt for their western fellow travelers during cold war is well documented. I would be greatly surprised if the current lot has any better opinions.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jasper
Netherlands
Leiden
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bramadan wrote:
viclineal wrote:
bramadan wrote:
One thing Russians never lacked in was the supply of 'useful idiots' in the West.


Useful idiots are plentiful and quite magical, because they are only "idiots" when their side loses. The thin line between useful idiots and educated foreign supporters of the shining city on the hill is historical contingency.


Useful idiots are idiots when the side they are supporting calls them that.

Russian contempt for their western fellow travelers during cold war is well documented. I would be greatly surprised if the current lot has any better opinions.
Something about that mystifies me. I can understand being skeptical of certain claims or the anti-Russian tone of western media. But often the same people who espouse that skepticism then proceed to swallowing the Russian narrative whole hog. Which just doesn't make any sense given what we know about the difference in how Putin's Russia and the west handle things like opposition and the free press.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vic Lineal
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
bramadan wrote:
viclineal wrote:
bramadan wrote:
One thing Russians never lacked in was the supply of 'useful idiots' in the West.


Useful idiots are plentiful and quite magical, because they are only "idiots" when their side loses. The thin line between useful idiots and educated foreign supporters of the shining city on the hill is historical contingency.


Useful idiots are idiots when the side they are supporting calls them that.

Russian contempt for their western fellow travelers during cold war is well documented. I would be greatly surprised if the current lot has any better opinions.


Isn't that a universal feature of Empire structures? Wikileaks' diplomatic cables had a nice amount of US embassadors openly laughing at the allies they were reporting about. British reports from the colonies often berate and patronizingly insult the same local elite the Empire rested on, and so on.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vic Lineal
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Venga2 wrote:
Something about that mystifies me. I can understand being skeptical of certain claims or the anti-Russian tone of western media. But often the same people who espouse that skepticism then proceed to swallowing the Russian narrative whole hog. Which just doesn't make any sense given what we know about the difference in how Putin's Russia and the west handle things like opposition and the free press.


Yes, I find it completely puzzling. Here in RSP there are a couple of right-wing American libertarians who have a positive view of Russia, I imagine that as an extension of their view of the US. Nevermind that Russia openly displays the worst traits that are central to their critique of the US.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Salo sila wrote:
Well, let's thank Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, who has now decided to clear that one up!

Lavrov wrote:
I have read and heard much criticism regarding our decision to join the fight in Donbass


Source.

All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Professor of Pain
United States
St. Joseph
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
Well, let's thank Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, who has now decided to clear that one up!

Lavrov wrote:
I have read and heard much criticism regarding our decision to join the fight in Donbass


Source.

All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.

How does Slater do it?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bojan Ramadanovic
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
viclineal wrote:
bramadan wrote:
viclineal wrote:
bramadan wrote:
One thing Russians never lacked in was the supply of 'useful idiots' in the West.


Useful idiots are plentiful and quite magical, because they are only "idiots" when their side loses. The thin line between useful idiots and educated foreign supporters of the shining city on the hill is historical contingency.


Useful idiots are idiots when the side they are supporting calls them that.

Russian contempt for their western fellow travelers during cold war is well documented. I would be greatly surprised if the current lot has any better opinions.


Isn't that a universal feature of Empire structures? Wikileaks' diplomatic cables had a nice amount of US embassadors openly laughing at the allies they were reporting about. British reports from the colonies often berate and patronizingly insult the same local elite the Empire rested on, and so on.


Insofar as it is - it is a sort of thing that makes Empires decline and fall.

People who successfully build/maintain Empires are very careful to respect both their allies and their enemies - at least those allies and enemies who have any hope of being consequential.
Take for example Wellington in India (and for that matter in Spain), Tsar Alexander vis-a-vis Balts and Poles or even McArthur in Japan.

All that aside, Indian potentates and US satraps were at least pursuing some form of self-interest by aligning themselves with the power of the day - even if they were mocked behind their backs. Russian fellow-travelers for most part got nothing but scorn for their troubles.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bojan Ramadanovic
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
viclineal wrote:
Venga2 wrote:
Something about that mystifies me. I can understand being skeptical of certain claims or the anti-Russian tone of western media. But often the same people who espouse that skepticism then proceed to swallowing the Russian narrative whole hog. Which just doesn't make any sense given what we know about the difference in how Putin's Russia and the west handle things like opposition and the free press.


Yes, I find it completely puzzling. Here in RSP there are a couple of right-wing American libertarians who have a positive view of Russia, I imagine that as an extension of their view of the US. Nevermind that Russia openly displays the worst traits that are central to their critique of the US.


I am not quite sure about that.

There is a style of a US right-winger that cherishes 'open power' version of real-politik that has been the key component of Russian political thinking for centuries. Add to it the robust nationalism - often verging on official racism, cultural conservatism and generous helping of machismo and you get a recipe for a fair degree of admiration.

Furthermore there is a class of 'libertarian' does not oppose government on principle - they oppose the wussy "liberal" government which is preventing them from being the manly men that they naturally are.

Not saying that fits any particular poster here - but it is not uncommon scenario.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Elfbane wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
Well, let's thank Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, who has now decided to clear that one up!

Lavrov wrote:
I have read and heard much criticism regarding our decision to join the fight in Donbass


Source.

All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.

How does Slater do it?
Why do other people try it?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Чебурашка, ты настоящий друг!
United Kingdom
Durham
flag msg tools
Scheiß Inselaffen!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Salo sila wrote:
All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .


And right on cue!

Steven Slater wrote:
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.


Not only do you deny your denial, but the denial you didn't make was for the period of intense fighting, i.e. the time when there were Russian forces in Ukraine to deny?

Actually, I know what you were saying: the point is that you were demaning an absurd level of evidence and were refusing to consider the numerous pieces of evidence available. Whether this constitutes actual denial or not is largely unimportant.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Чебурашка, ты настоящий друг!
United Kingdom
Durham
flag msg tools
Scheiß Inselaffen!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
xuzuthor wrote:
The have updated the wording on the website:

Quote:
I have read and heard much criticism that we should not have got involved into the conflicts in Donbass and in Syria.


This is certainly closer to the Russian ("Я читал и до сих пор слышу критику о том, что мы зря ввязались в конфликт в Донбассе"). The verb he used, "ввязаться", can be translated as "meddle in" as well as "get involved in", so equally apt. I think both the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' original translation, and the fact that he puts it alongside the open military "getting involved in" Syria, is pretty indicative.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Salo sila wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .


And right on cue!

Steven Slater wrote:
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.


Not only do you deny your denial, but the denial you didn't make was for the period of intense fighting, i.e. the time when there were Russian forces in Ukraine to deny?

Actually, I know what you were saying: the point is that you were demaning an absurd level of evidence and were refusing to consider the numerous pieces of evidence available. Whether this constitutes actual denial or not is largely unimportant.
So did I deny they were intervening, or just asked for better evidence before going to war over it?

By the way what evidence was it, the word of a party to the conflict and some satellite imagery of kit (kit anyone can buy). The word of the same kind of people who do not provide full quotes or misrepresent what people said in order to make a point. In fact similar evidence to what led to the Iraq war.

Forgive me if I do not want to send anyone else to die based upon one sides version of events.

Also being involved in fighting and "meddling" are not the same, after all the Russians were not involved in fighting during the recent US elections were they?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jasper
Netherlands
Leiden
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bramadan wrote:
I am not quite sure about that.

There is a style of a US right-winger that cherishes 'open power' version of real-politik that has been the key component of Russian political thinking for centuries. Add to it the robust nationalism - often verging on official racism, cultural conservatism and generous helping of machismo and you get a recipe for a fair degree of admiration.

Furthermore there is a class of 'libertarian' does not oppose government on principle - they oppose the wussy "liberal" government which is preventing them from being the manly men that they naturally are.
Well yes, but in both cases things like freedom of speech, right to bear arms and other constitutional safeguards are also championed by said right-wingers / libertarians. So the adoration maintains its schizophrenic quality.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jasper
Netherlands
Leiden
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Salo sila wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .


And right on cue!

Steven Slater wrote:
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.


Not only do you deny your denial, but the denial you didn't make was for the period of intense fighting, i.e. the time when there were Russian forces in Ukraine to deny?

Actually, I know what you were saying: the point is that you were demaning an absurd level of evidence and were refusing to consider the numerous pieces of evidence available. Whether this constitutes actual denial or not is largely unimportant.
Dude, don't start it all over again.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Venga2 wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
All we are missing now is Steven Slater to tell us that he never actually denied Russian troops were there. . .


And right on cue!

Steven Slater wrote:
A: Did I say the Russians were not there (quote please)? I think I said I would like to see evidence before we went to war (even a cold one) over it, indeed I said that they might well be present, but I want to see better then was being provided. That I did not want us to act on another "dodgy dossier".

B: Did I say it this year?

It is possible (you know) that the Russian may have joined in after any thread I discussed this issue in had ended.

This is why I wanted hard evidence, this attitude. Maybe if you actually represented your opponents views I might be more willing to accept your asides version of any event less critically.


Not only do you deny your denial, but the denial you didn't make was for the period of intense fighting, i.e. the time when there were Russian forces in Ukraine to deny?

Actually, I know what you were saying: the point is that you were demaning an absurd level of evidence and were refusing to consider the numerous pieces of evidence available. Whether this constitutes actual denial or not is largely unimportant.
Dude, don't start it all over again.
He did that with his OP, if you do not want to talk about a subject do not raise it (even as a snide attack), if you do not want to speak to someone do not mention them (even as a snide attack).

This is just the kind of snide, snipping and dishonest attack thread I reserved the right to reply to.



Here is the sort of thing I said

"I am not dismissing it, I am saying I want to see better (and more independent) sources. It may well be true, but before we act I do not want us to pull another "dodgy dossier", and jump in based upon falsehoods."

So no I did not say they had not intervened, I wanted more evidence (independent evidence) before acting.

https://boardgamegeek.com/article/16743465#16743465

So tell me how I am misrepresenting what I said?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Чебурашка, ты настоящий друг!
United Kingdom
Durham
flag msg tools
Scheiß Inselaffen!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
]He did that with his OP, if you do not want to talk about a subject do not raise it (even as a snide attack), if you do not want to speak to someone do not mention them (even as a snide attack).


Venga was referring to me, and I'll heed his advice: in fact all the answers to your questions are present either already in this thread or in previous ones where we actually discussed the presence of Russian troops. I'd just add that with scholars such as Paul Robinson and Ivan Katchanovski, who are both critical of the current Ukrainian government and of Western anti-Russian attitudes, saying that Russia sent troops into Ukraine in summer 2015 2014, it's silly to keep asking for more evidence (not to mention the quote from Lavrov).

Before getting on your high horse about your position being misrepresented, you are doing that very thing, I think to a far worse degree: no-one is calling for war with Russia over Ukraine.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Salo sila wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
]He did that with his OP, if you do not want to talk about a subject do not raise it (even as a snide attack), if you do not want to speak to someone do not mention them (even as a snide attack).


Venga was referring to me, and I'll heed his advice: in fact all the answers to your questions are present either already in this thread or in previous ones where we actually discussed the presence of Russian troops. I'd just add that with scholars such as Paul Robinson and Ivan Katchanovski, who are both critical of the current Ukrainian government and of Western anti-Russian attitudes, saying that Russia sent troops into Ukraine in summer 2015, it's silly to keep asking for more evidence (not to mention the quote from Lavrov).

Before getting on your high horse about your position being misrepresented, you are doing that very thing, I think to a far worse degree: no-one is calling for war with Russia over Ukraine.
So why then when I said I was not willing to support a war (in 2014, the year before this evidence) based on what we had then I was attacked (and am still being attacked) for that view? It seems odd to attack someone for not supporting something you do not support.

Nor have I asked for more evidence, I have said that I have been misrepresented in that I did not ask for any evidence in 2017 (or 2016, or 2015), so this new thread should never have mentioned my posts from 3 years ago. Nor did I ever say Russia was not interfering (which can mean a lot less then military invasion) I asked for better evidence to support us intervening (and thus creating a bigger crisis), in 2014.

I am (in this thread) responding to what was said about me in it, not asking about past events.

By the way I know Venga was referring to you, that is why I said if he (meaning you) had not wanted this to start up again why the hell make this thread (which started it all up again). Indeed you manage to both say "I am not going to continue to debate this" and continue to try and make the same point about Russian intervention. How is that heading advice to to start it all up again?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Чебурашка, ты настоящий друг!
United Kingdom
Durham
flag msg tools
Scheiß Inselaffen!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
]He did that with his OP, if you do not want to talk about a subject do not raise it (even as a snide attack), if you do not want to speak to someone do not mention them (even as a snide attack).


Venga was referring to me, and I'll heed his advice: in fact all the answers to your questions are present either already in this thread or in previous ones where we actually discussed the presence of Russian troops. I'd just add that with scholars such as Paul Robinson and Ivan Katchanovski, who are both critical of the current Ukrainian government and of Western anti-Russian attitudes, saying that Russia sent troops into Ukraine in summer 2015, it's silly to keep asking for more evidence (not to mention the quote from Lavrov).

Before getting on your high horse about your position being misrepresented, you are doing that very thing, I think to a far worse degree: no-one is calling for war with Russia over Ukraine.
So why then when I said I was not willing to support a war (in 2014, the year before this evidence) based on what we had then I was attacked (and am still being attacked) for that view? It seems odd to attack someone for not supporting something you do not support.

Nor have I asked for more evidence, I have said that I have been misrepresented in that I did not ask for any evidence in 2017 (or 2016, or 2015), so this new thread should never have mentioned my posts from 3 years ago. Nor did I ever say Russia was not interfering (which can mean a lot less then military invasion) I asked for better evidence to support us intervening (and thus creating a bigger crisis), in 2014.

I am (in this thread) responding to what was said about me in it, not asking about past events.

By the way I know Venga was referring to you, that is why I said if he (meaning you) had not wanted this to start up again why the hell make this thread (which started it all up again). Indeed you manage to both say "I am not going to continue to debate this" and continue to try and make the same point about Russian intervention. How is that heading advice to to start it all up again?


I mentioned you so that you could reply if you wanted. By not "start it up again", I meant I wasn't going to repeat everything I'd already written. But, I had also forgotton how you write on oblivious of what other people actually write: I mean, I've pointed out repeatedly that no-one has ever called for "intervening" or "war", yet you keep talking as if this was on the cards.

I'm afraid I have a typo in the post you quote: it should have been "summer 2014", not "summer 2015". I'll go back and change it. The Lavrov quote is not only about 2017, but about the crisis in general (it is in the past tense, one should note).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Salo sila wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Salo sila wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
]He did that with his OP, if you do not want to talk about a subject do not raise it (even as a snide attack), if you do not want to speak to someone do not mention them (even as a snide attack).


Venga was referring to me, and I'll heed his advice: in fact all the answers to your questions are present either already in this thread or in previous ones where we actually discussed the presence of Russian troops. I'd just add that with scholars such as Paul Robinson and Ivan Katchanovski, who are both critical of the current Ukrainian government and of Western anti-Russian attitudes, saying that Russia sent troops into Ukraine in summer 2015, it's silly to keep asking for more evidence (not to mention the quote from Lavrov).

Before getting on your high horse about your position being misrepresented, you are doing that very thing, I think to a far worse degree: no-one is calling for war with Russia over Ukraine.
So why then when I said I was not willing to support a war (in 2014, the year before this evidence) based on what we had then I was attacked (and am still being attacked) for that view? It seems odd to attack someone for not supporting something you do not support.

Nor have I asked for more evidence, I have said that I have been misrepresented in that I did not ask for any evidence in 2017 (or 2016, or 2015), so this new thread should never have mentioned my posts from 3 years ago. Nor did I ever say Russia was not interfering (which can mean a lot less then military invasion) I asked for better evidence to support us intervening (and thus creating a bigger crisis), in 2014.

I am (in this thread) responding to what was said about me in it, not asking about past events.

By the way I know Venga was referring to you, that is why I said if he (meaning you) had not wanted this to start up again why the hell make this thread (which started it all up again). Indeed you manage to both say "I am not going to continue to debate this" and continue to try and make the same point about Russian intervention. How is that heading advice to to start it all up again?


I mentioned you so that you could reply if you wanted. By not "start it up again", I meant I wasn't going to repeat everything I'd already written. But, I had also forgotton how you write on oblivious of what other people actually write: I mean, I've pointed out repeatedly that no-one has ever called for "intervening" or "war", yet you keep talking as if this was on the cards.

I'm afraid I have a typo in the post you quote: it should have been "summer 2014", not "summer 2015". I'll go back and change it. The Lavrov quote is not only about 2017, but about the crisis in general (it is in the past tense, one should note).
And how was I going to reply, other then to say either you are right or you are wrong (which means starting it up again)?

As to my going on about war. Very few wars are started becasue someone wanted it, they start because people assume the other side will be sensible, so they do not have to be. As I recall there were calls to allow Ukraine to join NATO or the EU, thus forcing the Russians to risk war or withdraw, that is the kind of stupidity that leads to war (to a degree both world wars). Hell I even recall a call to send in troops (which never of course leads to war).

By the way, I cannot Find anything by Mr Katchanovski from 2014. Same with Mr Robinson. I must be looking for the wrong criteria.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.