MH17
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 1 Guest
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
KenH 
Joined: 24 Jan 2010
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Is Wokko a Russian?
_________________
Cheers big ears |
|
|
|
 |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | | Germany did not station tanks at the border, or fund separatists ; it simply declined to commit the German taxpayer to make more loans that were unlikely to be repaid, unless Greece started to live within its means. Greece could have defaulted, but that would have meant freezing itself out of international credit markets for an extended period, and exiting the Euro. So as a sovereign nation, it decided on the lesser of two evils. Was it in Gemany's interests not to have Greece default ? Yes, of course it was - but it was hardly psychopathic to bail Greece out of a situation that Germany had done nothing to create. Did it hurt innocent Greek people ? Of course - but the responsibility for that lies with the deeply flawed Greek political system. |
Wrong, wrong and wrong! Never a greater nonsense spoken.
If you think German lenders pumped money into Greece and other EU economies based on naive good will, then we probably need to go back and do a beginner's tutorial on global finance (which I know you don't need).
Germany had excess capital derived from the windfall it was very happy to receive as a strong-performing member of a single currency undervalued due to poor performers like Greece. Germany then took that same windfall and risked it on Greek (and other) borrowers.
Yes, German lenders took a risk with their eyes wide open. Shock! Horror! If you're an institution, the risk of lending is all yours! How hard is that to grasp for people who claim to believe in free markets?
Rather than take responsibility for making high-risk investments in full knowledge that the EU divorce between fiscal policy and monetary value posed huge risks, German and other lenders used their superior position and sheer mass to impose national suffering on Greece (and other countries) in an act of political thuggery.
Even worse, they then nuttily and unsuccessfully imposed ideologically-driven extreme austerity on those countries, making them less able to pay their debts.
Just imagine if you could calculate the combined suffering of millions of people under extreme financial stress. How much harm does that equate to? How much more human grief? How much more child development damage?
You've been brainwashed into an extremely narrow narrative of events based on an "us and them" imperialism, not on what actually happened. There are no "innocent, righteous lenders", just as there is no "innocent, righteous politics".
And, in the context of this thread, Germany is the country which has most overtly coddled Putin for years—again for its own economic interest.
And that's just one of your golden EU martyrs. |
You make some good points, and the analysis you're putting forward has been well-developed by Martin Wolf and others in the Financial Times. However, it does not address the fundamental point that Greece was a willing borrower of loans that were not forced upon it. It then faced a choice of default or bail-out, a choice that was made very concrete by an election where this was almost the only issue and the consequences of each course were clear. Germany did not force Greece to take either course - it just laid out conditions on which it would advance further money so that the problem of Greek uncompetitiveness would be tackled, rather than allowed to worsen. There were no German little green men, there was no interference with the Greek election, no phoney German-orchesrated referenda. The Greek people made the choice to stay in the Euro.
Germany could have allowed the ECB to corrupt the currency by printing money, but it made the reasonable judgement that this is simply a way of transferring the Greek (and Portuguese, Irish Spanish etc) debt back to the creditor countries without addressing the underlying issue.
It is right to feel sorry for the little people who were horribly hurt by the events of 2011. Sadly, people do bear the costs of their appalling and useless governments ; but this was no Irish famine, no natural disatser met with appalling indifference and cruelty. This was a case of political corruption and chicanery which could no longer be laid off on others.
Re Putin, yes, I agree that Germany has been a bad actor, tiptoeing around Putin because of its dependency on Russian gas. Shutting down its nuclear capacity in an absurd overreaction to Fukushima (no fault lines, no open coastline in Germany) was not helpful in this regard. Cheers, probably your round at the bar.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:14 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | | David wrote: | | ^ But you'd still agree that some systems of government are objectively better than others, right? Whether or not our biases hinder our attempts to judge that impartially? |
I think certain forms of government are preferable, but that is a mile from thinking they're universally "transferable".
Government is a product of culture, so you can't simply transplant modes of government on any random culture you like. This is why indigenous development is the ideal form of development.
So, for example, I don't agree with monopoly, but you're going to struggle to rid largely homogenous, centralised cultures such as Korea and Japan of monopoly. Or, I agree a certain scale and centralisation is needed for efficiency, but you're going to struggle to impose that on dispersed, decentralised tribal societies. Or, I highly value my free speech, but you're going to struggle to convince Confucian societies that free speech is more meritorious than keeping face.
So, the problem is not that we can't identify more and less preferable conditions, nor that we can't align more and less preferable modes of government with those conditions. The problem is that those apparently preferable forms of government assume very specific geo-cultural conditions which are not universally available.
Again, this is why indigenous development is so much more reliable and preferable; people aren't stupid, but that doesn't mean they're able to re-write their own cultural code to our liking.
Moreover, there's a second confounding problem. The motive of those wishing to "bring light to the unfortunate" is frequently sinister, and if history is any guide is more likely to result in the Philippines or Bolivia than South Korea or Chile.
So, not only is the geopolitical development game a highly unpredictable one, but there are all kinds of psychotic whackos waiting in the wings ready to rape and pillage in the name of development.
Take even a third confounding problem which also plagues naive Libertarian philosophy. A group might claim it believes in "free markets" and "fair competition", but how many members of that group are willing to put their money where their mouth is and give up "unfair advantage"? Should China entrust its energy supply to US platitudes concerning "fair competition"? I mean, really. Why would anyone in their sane mind do that?
Another way of putting it is this: Do you think China loves Russia or needs Russia? Plenty of countries tolerate a Putin for completely rational reasons, such as the fact they can't trust our wondrous moral claims and have hundreds of millions of people to clothe and feed. Or, more pertinently, do you think Putin and Co. can trust US and NATO actions on its doorstep? On what known rational basis ought they? (Not agreeing with Putin, but even thuggery has its own ability to reason).
European Imperialism 101 may no longer be in vogue, but as if any of this stuff has suddenly changed, David! |
I agree with you on the importance of self-determination, but I don't know if I'd go as far as to say that 'ideal' government is dependent on existing cultural conditions. So, for instance, freeing the slaves in 1600s America may have been out of the question given the economic conditions and predominant cultural views of race, and I wouldn't necessarily support a more 'enlightened country' invading America to bring that progress about, but at the same time I don't think we need to ever shy away from saying that societies without slavery are generally better (in the utilitarian sense) than those where slavery exists.
People are people and have pretty basic needs at the end of the day. Culture gives us a certain lens to look through but I don't think it changes the fundamental aspects of our nature.
I have much more to write but it's probably not the thread for it (and customers keep coming into the shop)! 
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^I'll wait until you write more, but you're repeating a non-sequitur I've pointed out to you before: You're confusing history which turned out well with the claim that you know how intervene successfully. The two are completely different.
That is, just because you can find cases of improvement through intervention, doesn't mean you have anything close to a knowledge of how to successfully intervene in another country/culture/place. No number of current theories of development get you even close to an even vague level of confidence. In other words, you're back to gambling with other people's lives.
Even being extremely naive for a moment by (a) excluding the pestilence of bloodsuckers who inevitably corrupt such operations, and (b) pretending the general populace is willing to grant sufficient rights to the inferior, as discussed in the Iraq debates it is not moral to play kick-and-hope with other people's lives when the downside is horrific and the risk totally unquantifiable, as intervention after intervention has proven to be.
And the greater the culture gap, the lower the confidence level, excluding almost anywhere you might even consider intervening.
That leaves you with only one legitimate intervention scenario: Clear-cut cases where you know the alternative is worse than the worst case intervention scenario, namely cases of guaranteed annihilation when such radical, unpredictable surgery is worth the risk.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | Yes, Mugwump, the beer's on me!  |
Good answer !
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Morrigu 
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | | The saddest thing is to see our Media in hysteria to get the best "death story". The media are celebrating this horror as it means ratings. I have started to switch channels as soon as a story starts. The horror is real and the media treat it as a game. |
This!
I understand they have to report but really there is reporting and there is reporting with what seems totally inappropriate glee 
The disrespect with which the bodies of these poor souls who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time are being subjected to is horrific - but the media seem to be engaged in a game of " who can provide the most gruesome details" - I hope the families of those lost are avoiding avoiding avoiding!
_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.†|
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | ^I'll wait until you write more, but you're repeating a non-sequitur I've pointed out to you before: You're confusing history which turned out well with the claim that you know how intervene successfully. The two are completely different.
That is, just because you can find cases of improvement through intervention, doesn't mean you have anything close to a knowledge of how to successfully intervene in another country/culture/place. No number of current theories of development get you even close to an even vague level of confidence. In other words, you're back to gambling with other people's lives.
Even being extremely naive for a moment by (a) excluding the pestilence of bloodsuckers who inevitably corrupt such operations, and (b) pretending the general populace is willing to grant sufficient rights to the inferior, as discussed in the Iraq debates it is not moral to play kick-and-hope with other people's lives when the downside is horrific and the risk totally unquantifiable, as intervention after intervention has proven to be.
And the greater the culture gap, the lower the confidence level, excluding almost anywhere you might even consider intervening.
That leaves you with only one legitimate intervention scenario: Clear-cut cases where you know the alternative is worse than the worst case intervention scenario, namely cases of guaranteed annihilation when such radical, unpredictable surgery is worth the risk. |
As I said, I support self-determination and would only be inclined to support intervention in extreme circumstances. So I think we're on the same page on this one.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
After MH17, the EU must act against Putin and stop importing Russian gas
"The political and military leadership of the Donetsk separatists are Russians from Russia. In Putin’s “vertical of power” regime it is not credible that the Kremlin has no responsibility. It is well documented that arms as well as fighters have been flowing across the frontier from Russia into the Luhansk and Donetsk regions."
- https://theconversation.com/after-mh17-the-eu-must-act-against-putin-and-stop-importing-russian-gas-29439
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The more you read on this the more obvious it is that no one knows what the hell they're talking about. Most people knew sweet FA about that region before this tragic incident, and they still know sweet FA about it.
The only reasonable position at present is to trust none of the parties concerned, and to trust no one's purported grasp of what is an extraordinarily complex geopolitical incident in an extremely poorly understood part of the world subject to any number of powerful geo-economic interests.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ nice try, PTID, but a serious fail. It is abundantly clear that, though the details remain obscure, the main points are beyond doubt.
1: Russia is the backer of the guilty parties.
2: Russia is doing nothing to help - even after the event Russia is determined to prevent access to the scene and prevent a proper investigation until there has been time to hide and/or change the evidence.
3: Russian goon squads remain in charge on the site, Russian citizens remain in charge of the goon squads, Russia's leader remains completely unashamed and as keen as ever to expand his territory. This is just a hiccup, so far as Putin is concerned.
4: Russia's leader, Putin, is a very, very dangerous egomaniac and international nutcase of the kind not seen since Hitler died. Putin ruthlessly exploits weakness and division and civilised behaviour. Putin would love a war. Putin would enjoy a war even more than Abbott would. The only thing - the only thing - that can stop Putin's naked aggression and ruthless conquest of nearby countries (never mind what he is doing to his own people) is money. Putin's government is 100% dependent on energy exports to Europe. Without Europe's huge natural gas purchases, Putin's government could not function.
Time to drop the drawbridge on this murdering international madman. No more European money for you, Vladimir. You can stick your gas up your arse. Europe can get by without it. You can't.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
rocketronnie
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Location: Reservoir
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | The more you read on this the more obvious it is that no one knows what the hell they're talking about. Most people knew sweet FA about that region before this tragic incident, and they still know sweet FA about it.
The only reasonable position at present is to trust none of the parties concerned, and to trust no one's purported grasp of what is an extraordinarily complex geopolitical incident in an extremely poorly understood part of the world subject to any number of powerful geo-economic interests. |
A very well reasoned response. You are quite right. The situation in the Ukraine looks a lot like competing Fascisms at times. Russian backed 'ultra-nationalists', often from Russia itself are fighting the Ukrainian army and Ukrainian 'ultra-nationalist' groups in a very dirty war. Both sides are sponsored and supported by competing vested interests, the Donbas crew more overtly and less subtly by Putin's regime, and support from the West for the Ukrainians and Ukrainian 'ultra-nationalists' is more covert but occurring nonetheless.
I'm ignoring the sabre rattling going on in some quarters here and tend to think it was a tragic and stupid military accident. There's been a lot of supposition on how sophisticated BUK missile systems are. The reality is these are old stock obsolete truck based systems that do not have a particularly sophisticated system of guidance and tracking. They work off a simple radar blip. The conversations intercepted by and released by the Ukrainian intelligence service and the initial web commentary from the Donbas rebels indicate they thought it was a transport plane. Anyone expecting sophisticated behaviour from 'ultra-nationalist' Russians will be sadly mistaken. Dumb thugs is what they are mostly as anyone who has seen any of their propaganda and seen their behavior in political activity in the Ukraine and Russia will know. (and the Ukrainians aren't much better either).
How the Donbas rebels obtained the BUK system is still unresolved. Its been reported that a BUK system was captured from the Ukrainian military a couple of weeks ago. It seems that they have shot down three other aircraft in the past couple of weeks, something they have not been able to do before so that kind of fits also. That said the Russians could quite possibly given the BUK missile truck to them and trained them in its use too. That's something we are not likely to find out in a hurry. One journalist has speculated the truck is probably on the bottom of a lake by now anyway. Either way there was nothing to be gained in deliberately shooting down MH117. Its clearly been mistaken for a military target in a civil war. Is that murder? If they had deliberately targeted it yes, but given that is unlikely, its a sad and tragic accident. You can't say "Oh they were aiming to murder someone else, so its still murder" when they conceived it was a military target in a civil war. Using that logic we end up calling Allied soldiers in WW2 killing Germans in the Normandy landings murderers too. A military target in war civil or otherwise is unfortunately regarded as legitimate. We might not approve of the war itself but soldiers in war, civil or otherwise tend to try to kill each other.
Clearly the Russians have failed in making sure the crash site was secured so that objective processes of investigation took place and the sad remains of the dead were properly treated. Instead they have either directly or tacitly involved themselves in a cover up which is doing them no good internationally at all but then anyone who expects subtlety from Putin is probably fooling themselves. He is one step away from being a Fascist himself.
Talk of 'punishment' and 'justice' is easy to make but harder to achieve. This isn't Kosovo and the West don't want a direct war with Russia, just as much as the Russians don't want one with the West. No-one will touch the gas pipeline (a) because of civil dependency and profit generated in Europe from using Russian gas; and (b) because there is a lot of investment earning good returns that has gone into Russia in recent years. In international diplomacy, profit speaks very loudly.
Any investigation is now hopelessly compromised, it will reveal little or nothing we don't already strongly surmise. We may be able to determine who fired the missile but that's becoming more and more unlikely too.
Given there is no easy way to resolve this situation, tied up as it is in a very complex local situation, we need to be cautious and reasoned because there can be no winners in this situation.
_________________
"Only the weak believe that what they do in battle is who they are as men" - Thomas Marshall - "Ironclad".
Last edited by rocketronnie on Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:05 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Talking is my primary function. |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| rocketronnie wrote: | A military target in war civil or otherwise is unfortunately regarded as legitimate. We might not approve of the war itself but soldiers in war, civil or otherwise tend to try to kill each other.
|
This is why I think not enough has been asked of the Malaysian Airlines bosses, why the hell was the plane there in the first place! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
