Sydscott wrote:

There is not a single bit of truth in this statement. The International Investigators have categorically, and unequivocally concluded that:

- it was a BUK missile that brought the plane down;
- it was fired from Russian backed rebel controlled territory not from Ukranian Government territory;
- missiles were driven across the border from Russia into Eastern Ukraine by Russian soldiers. (The international investigation team has telephone intercepts and images to confirm this)

The only question is who actually fired the missile. We'll probably never know if it was Russian backed Rebels or the Russians themselves. But the investigation has eliminated all other possibilities through actual evidence.

anrec80 wrote:

Now they will have a choice of many other candidates, and there may be a few that get noticeable share of votes. And - please don't show them "democratic" or some other "right" ways. They have over 1000 years of their statehood, they will sort this out for themselves.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So if with a bank robbery no shots are fired, everything is fine?

So you are claiming you can have a free and fair life altering referendum organized in 10 days? That is just stupid. The UK needs 6 weeks to have a snap election and that is within a democratic framework where everything is well established in a save stable democracy. This is just the timeline, nothing else, just by the timeline it fails to meet any democratic standard of a free and fair election/referendum.

Again, the timelines are up to them. This is their referendum. And given extremely high turnout, Crimeans were perfectly fine with 10 days. That in itself doesn't make it any less free or any less fair. Had they not been - they would have largely ignored the event. If British legislature requires a minimum of 6 weeks, or British voters just feel this way - I have no problem with that, it's up to them. Each nation, each culture, each country has their own specifics and traditions, and has its right to have them.

anrec80 wrote:

Sydscott wrote:

There is not a single bit of truth in this statement. The International Investigators have categorically, and unequivocally concluded that:

- it was a BUK missile that brought the plane down;
- it was fired from Russian backed rebel controlled territory not from Ukranian Government territory;
- missiles were driven across the border from Russia into Eastern Ukraine by Russian soldiers. (The international investigation team has telephone intercepts and images to confirm this)

The only question is who actually fired the missile. We'll probably never know if it was Russian backed Rebels or the Russians themselves. But the investigation has eliminated all other possibilities through actual evidence.

Now - if this "investigation" truly believes those guilty are in Russia - they are gonna have to a) make someone in Russian law enforcement to listen to them and b) win their case in Russian court. And this case better be dang strong. All they have now is a story of a "black hole" right on a Russian border, that produces and then swallows BUKs that shoot down civil airliners.

BawliBooch wrote:

Was the last election, "free and fair" in the sense that the rest of the world understands it? Did all candidates get a fair opportunity to campaign? Were any candidates harassed by instruments of the state like the Tax/Justice Departments or intimidated in any other way?

Dutchy wrote:

True, will never happen that the current Russian regime admits that they are ultimately responsible for the murder of 298 innocent people. BUK was a Russian model from the Russian armed forces, so the Russian state is responsible, or do you claim that just everyone could walk in and take a BUK? Russian rule o law isn't truly independent so in this case irrelevant.

anrec80 wrote:

BawliBooch wrote:

Support to leaders should never be unconditional - that is inherently undemocratic. Our support for political leaders should be based on their pledged manifesto and their ability/desire to see that through. THAT is the democratic way.

We cannot tell you to stop "loving" Putin. We can however advise you that this love affair is going to leave you worse off!

Did you read my posts? It's up to Russians to decide - should their support be conditional or not. And - it's generally not. They believe Putin is running their country well - they support him. They did not think this way of their predecessor though, and he got elected in 1996 due to lack of electable alternative simply. Now they will have a choice of many other candidates, and there may be a few that get noticeable share of votes. And - please don't show them "democratic" or some other "right" ways. They have over 1000 years of their statehood, they will sort this out for themselves.

I'll omit these 20 year old stories about "photocopier boxes with USD cash" - that's overkill.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

True, will never happen that the current Russian regime admits that they are ultimately responsible for the murder of 298 innocent people. BUK was a Russian model from the Russian armed forces, so the Russian state is responsible, or do you claim that just everyone could walk in and take a BUK? Russian rule o law isn't truly independent so in this case irrelevant.

BUK is a Soviet model, can be found in many places in this world. Ukrainians have it, including the model of missile that hit the plane. But - Ukraine is not only on investigative committee, but also has veto rights on anything there. Of course you can’t investigate Ukrainians, and all you are left to do is to make up such “black hole” stories. And perhaps you should - they’ve been shooting airliners before and are quite good at it.

Dutchy wrote:

Ah, the traditional Russian gruppy's response. We will see what the JIT comes up with and what will be proven in a court of law. On the radio today: they are searching for an active Russian general. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and- ... al-delfin/

But I am sure you will never accept the outcome as long as it isn't the Russian version of the "truth".

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Ah, the traditional Russian gruppy's response. We will see what the JIT comes up with and what will be proven in a court of law. On the radio today: they are searching for an active Russian general. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and- ... al-delfin/

But I am sure you will never accept the outcome as long as it isn't the Russian version of the "truth".

What’s there to search? It’s known where he is, who he is. You just need to go to court closest to him and win the case there. That’s all.

BawliBooch wrote:

Question: Was there a referendum when Texas was annexed into the American Union? Or California? What is the legal precedence for such matters? It was wrong for Russia to have conducted the illegal referendum - they should have just done in Crimea what the Americans did in Texas and California. Or what the British did in much of their former empire.

WP:EN wrote:

A controversial referendum on the status of Crimea was held on March 16, 2014, by the legislature of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and by the local government of Sevastopol (both subdivisions of Ukraine). The referendum requested local populations whether they wanted to join Russia as a federal subject, or if they wanted to restore the 1992 Crimean constitution and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine.

anrec80 wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

The west doesn't hate Russia, even though that sometimes is the image that russian media tries to portray. But, we are not so fond of the current russian leaders, Putin is generally seen as an authoritarian leader doing his best to dismantle the last remains of democracy and turn himself into a dictator. But that doesn't mean I hate Russia and russians. Just as I don't hate the US just because I think Trump is not fit to be president.

What's your business - is Putin "authoritarian" of some sort or not? And what does he do with Russian democracy? These questions are up to Russians to answer. Given their unconditional support of President Putin, they are OK with it. Please leave it up to them.

Aesma wrote:

It's easy to get unconditional support when you jail or kill opponents, close newspapers, intimidate or kill journalists... Not many people will dare say otherwise.

Sydscott wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

MH17 was shot down by Ukrainian air defense systems.
In fact, NO evidence of Russian guilt in the Downing of MH17 is not represented so far, despite the fact that the investigation has been going for two years.

There is not a single bit of truth in this statement. The International Investigators have categorically, and unequivocally concluded that:

- it was a BUK missile that brought the plane down;
- it was fired from Russian backed rebel controlled territory not from Ukranian Government territory;
- missiles were driven across the border from Russia into Eastern Ukraine by Russian soldiers. (The international investigation team has telephone intercepts and images to confirm this)

The only question is who actually fired the missile. We'll probably never know if it was Russian backed Rebels or the Russians themselves. But the investigation has eliminated all other possibilities through actual evidence.

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So if with a bank robbery no shots are fired, everything is fine?

So you are claiming you can have a free and fair life altering referendum organized in 10 days? That is just stupid. The UK needs 6 weeks to have a snap election and that is within a democratic framework where everything is well established in a save stable democracy. This is just the timeline, nothing else, just by the timeline it fails to meet any democratic standard of a free and fair election/referendum.

Again, the timelines are up to them. This is their referendum. And given extremely high turnout, Crimeans were perfectly fine with 10 days. That in itself doesn't make it any less free or any less fair. Had they not been - they would have largely ignored the event. If British legislature requires a minimum of 6 weeks, or British voters just feel this way - I have no problem with that, it's up to them. Each nation, each culture, each country has their own specifics and traditions, and has its right to have them.

You claim this referendum is a legitimate basis for the Russian annexation. So you ask the rest of the world to recognize the will of the Crimean people, fine, I respect that, but then it is perfectly reasonable to have an opinion on the referendum. And this Pinocchio referendum fails in all basic democratic ways. And that is the point.

Snap elections in Brittian: 6 weeks
The referendum on Scottish independence: 15 October 2012 referendum accord reached --> 21 March 2013 --> referendum date announced --> 26 November 2013 presented a 670 page White Paper with an outline what an independent Scotland was to be like --> 18 September 2014 the referendum --> so almost two years in a stable, free democracy.

So the label Pinocchio referendum is just right, there is no way this was a fair, open referendum so that is no basis to the annexation as you claim over and over again.

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Sydscott wrote:

There is not a single bit of truth in this statement. The International Investigators have categorically, and unequivocally concluded that:

- it was a BUK missile that brought the plane down;
- it was fired from Russian backed rebel controlled territory not from Ukranian Government territory;
- missiles were driven across the border from Russia into Eastern Ukraine by Russian soldiers. (The international investigation team has telephone intercepts and images to confirm this)

The only question is who actually fired the missile. We'll probably never know if it was Russian backed Rebels or the Russians themselves. But the investigation has eliminated all other possibilities through actual evidence.

Now - if this "investigation" truly believes those guilty are in Russia - they are gonna have to a) make someone in Russian law enforcement to listen to them and b) win their case in Russian court. And this case better be dang strong. All they have now is a story of a "black hole" right on a Russian border, that produces and then swallows BUKs that shoot down civil airliners.

True, will never happen that the current Russian regime admits that they are ultimately responsible for the murder of 298 innocent people. BUK was a Russian model from the Russian armed forces, so the Russian state is responsible, or do you claim that just everyone could walk in and take a BUK? Russian rule o law isn't truly independent so in this case irrelevant.

Aesma wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

The west doesn't hate Russia, even though that sometimes is the image that russian media tries to portray. But, we are not so fond of the current russian leaders, Putin is generally seen as an authoritarian leader doing his best to dismantle the last remains of democracy and turn himself into a dictator. But that doesn't mean I hate Russia and russians. Just as I don't hate the US just because I think Trump is not fit to be president.

What's your business - is Putin "authoritarian" of some sort or not? And what does he do with Russian democracy? These questions are up to Russians to answer. Given their unconditional support of President Putin, they are OK with it. Please leave it up to them.

It's easy to get unconditional support when you jail or kill opponents, close newspapers, intimidate or kill journalists... Not many people will dare say otherwise.

BawliBooch wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

What's your business - is Putin "authoritarian" of some sort or not? And what does he do with Russian democracy? These questions are up to Russians to answer. Given their unconditional support of President Putin, they are OK with it. Please leave it up to them.

Support to leaders should never be unconditional - that is inherently undemocratic. Our support for political leaders should be based on their pledged manifesto and their ability/desire to see that through. THAT is the democratic way.

We cannot tell you to stop "loving" Putin. We can however advise you that this love affair is going to leave you worse off!

Scorpius wrote:

Aesma wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

What's your business - is Putin "authoritarian" of some sort or not? And what does he do with Russian democracy? These questions are up to Russians to answer. Given their unconditional support of President Putin, they are OK with it. Please leave it up to them.

It's easy to get unconditional support when you jail or kill opponents, close newspapers, intimidate or kill journalists... Not many people will dare say otherwise.

Oh, those Western tales about terrible Putin.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Aesma wrote:

It's easy to get unconditional support when you jail or kill opponents, close newspapers, intimidate or kill journalists... Not many people will dare say otherwise.

Oh, those Western tales about terrible Putin.

Ok, then Putin's opponents are extremely unlucky (or Putin lucky if that's the way you want to look at it).

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Now - if this "investigation" truly believes those guilty are in Russia - they are gonna have to a) make someone in Russian law enforcement to listen to them and b) win their case in Russian court. And this case better be dang strong. All they have now is a story of a "black hole" right on a Russian border, that produces and then swallows BUKs that shoot down civil airliners.

True, will never happen that the current Russian regime admits that they are ultimately responsible for the murder of 298 innocent people. BUK was a Russian model from the Russian armed forces, so the Russian state is responsible, or do you claim that just everyone could walk in and take a BUK? Russian rule o law isn't truly independent so in this case irrelevant.

In Roman law there is a presumption of innocence, no one may be convicted of a crime until proven guilty. You already have proof? Could you introduce you to them. Let's just that evidence that cannot be refuted. Not speculation from the media who are busy denigrating Russia is not the first dozen years.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Oh, those Western tales about terrible Putin.

Ok, then Putin's opponents are extremely unlucky (or Putin lucky if that's the way you want to look at it).

Putin has no opponents. As if to say - his opponents look like kids from a kindergarten in comparison. But it is not the fault of Putin.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Ok, then Putin's opponents are extremely unlucky (or Putin lucky if that's the way you want to look at it).

Putin has no opponents. As if to say - his opponents look like kids from a kindergarten in comparison. But it is not the fault of Putin.

Haha, of course not. Putin is the only one out of the 150m Russians who is qualified for this job. Or might it be that Putin uses legal and illegal means to get rid of some opponents?

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

True, will never happen that the current Russian regime admits that they are ultimately responsible for the murder of 298 innocent people. BUK was a Russian model from the Russian armed forces, so the Russian state is responsible, or do you claim that just everyone could walk in and take a BUK? Russian rule o law isn't truly independent so in this case irrelevant.

In Roman law there is a presumption of innocence, no one may be convicted of a crime until proven guilty. You already have proof? Could you introduce you to them. Let's just that evidence that cannot be refuted. Not speculation from the media who are busy denigrating Russia is not the first dozen years.

Yes, there is a presumption of innocence and it has to be proven in an independent court of law.

The conclusions of the investigation board were crystal clear and also of the JIT. So we will see what can be proven in court, personal accountability. Let Russia just have these Russians appear in court. I have no confidence in the Russian justice system, I probably can come up with a list which put the Russian justice system near the bottom of the list, but that is no use because you will not accept it anyway.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

In Roman law there is a presumption of innocence, no one may be convicted of a crime until proven guilty. You already have proof? Could you introduce you to them. Let's just that evidence that cannot be refuted. Not speculation from the media who are busy denigrating Russia is not the first dozen years.

Yes, there is a presumption of innocence and it has to be proven in an independent court of law.

The conclusions of the investigation board were crystal clear and also of the JIT. So we will see what can be proven in court, personal accountability. Let Russia just have these Russians appear in court. I have no confidence in the Russian justice system, I probably can come up with a list which put the Russian justice system near the bottom of the list, but that is no use because you will not accept it anyway.

Commission of inquiry findings are, and to them to wipe his ass. Evidence - no. Substantial evidence and studies are not considered. The document itself is written just long, "We can't prove anything, but to blame Putin, I swear".
And more than that - all of Europe is worn with the investigation of the disaster MH17, but why-that anybody does not conduct investigations related to mass killings of civilians in the East of Ukraine, committed by the troops of Ukraine and neo-Nazi gangs, which are called "volunteer battalions in the armed forces of Ukraine".

Scorpius wrote:

It seemed to me that a fool would have realized that the MH17 crash is a planned action to divert attention from the situation with the killings in the East of Ukraine, which are made with the support of the US and the EU.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Putin has no opponents. As if to say - his opponents look like kids from a kindergarten in comparison. But it is not the fault of Putin.

Haha, of course not. Putin is the only one out of the 150m Russians who is qualified for this job. Or might it be that Putin uses legal and illegal means to get rid of some opponents?

You are wrong. I'm not saying that Putin is so unique that he is better than all the rest of the 150 million Russian. But you must understand that a country like Russia can not be in charge of just some guy.
We had the experience, when the authorities were the people who this government were not worthy - that Gorbachev and Yeltsin. The arrival of Putin to power was very big luck for Russia - the third consecutive mediocre politician we wouldn't have survived. And for this reason, we do not choose someone who will seem to us a weak politician.
But opposition to Putin - who is this? Seriously? Navalny? He is a populist who's not even a normal political program. Hell, he even looks similar to Yeltsin (compare photos of Yeltsin in his youth, and a photo of Navalny). In addition, he is a thief. Not a smart move to elect someone convicted for stealing money. Who else? You might say what is someone like Kasparov or Khodorkovsky? But it's all "talking heads" - they do not represent something good, and totally dependent on Western curators. You say that the Nemtsov was an opponent of Putin? Haha. Yes, at least half of the population of Russia breathed a sigh of relief when this monster shot. He was one of the people responsible for the crisis in the nineties. Many of us would like to see Gorbachev on the gallows, Chubais and several tens of parasites there.
And who else can be the opposition to Putin? Clown Zhirinovsky or discredited in 1996 Zyuganov?
They are no longer considered as serious opponents of Putin.
But seriously - you let me call the names of those who in your opinion, could compete with Putin for the duration of his reign. That's right the names of the candidates and discuss. And you all platitudes about the bloody regime of the verb and specifics, this is no.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

anrec80 wrote:

Again, the timelines are up to them. This is their referendum. And given extremely high turnout, Crimeans were perfectly fine with 10 days. That in itself doesn't make it any less free or any less fair. Had they not been - they would have largely ignored the event. If British legislature requires a minimum of 6 weeks, or British voters just feel this way - I have no problem with that, it's up to them. Each nation, each culture, each country has their own specifics and traditions, and has its right to have them.

You claim this referendum is a legitimate basis for the Russian annexation. So you ask the rest of the world to recognize the will of the Crimean people, fine, I respect that, but then it is perfectly reasonable to have an opinion on the referendum. And this Pinocchio referendum fails in all basic democratic ways. And that is the point.

Snap elections in Brittian: 6 weeks
The referendum on Scottish independence: 15 October 2012 referendum accord reached --> 21 March 2013 --> referendum date announced --> 26 November 2013 presented a 670 page White Paper with an outline what an independent Scotland was to be like --> 18 September 2014 the referendum --> so almost two years in a stable, free democracy.

So the label Pinocchio referendum is just right, there is no way this was a fair, open referendum so that is no basis to the annexation as you claim over and over again.

LOL. A referendum in Britain? This is the one where openly falsified the results?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et9kE4YHwdw

I have already spoken more than once - instead of talk about the legitimacy of the referendum - go to the Crimea, do your own, independent research on the views of residents of the Crimea. Want to check - ask people their opinion. But do not tell them that they MUST vote again and again for as long as some foreigners will have no reason to put a referendum question. It doesn't work that way, and you'll get from people just aggression. Nobody likes them in their homes indicate that they should do that.

By the way, whatever the results of the referendum in Catalonia? This too is not democratic?

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

You claim this referendum is a legitimate basis for the Russian annexation. So you ask the rest of the world to recognize the will of the Crimean people, fine, I respect that, but then it is perfectly reasonable to have an opinion on the referendum. And this Pinocchio referendum fails in all basic democratic ways. And that is the point.

Snap elections in Brittian: 6 weeks
The referendum on Scottish independence: 15 October 2012 referendum accord reached --> 21 March 2013 --> referendum date announced --> 26 November 2013 presented a 670 page White Paper with an outline what an independent Scotland was to be like --> 18 September 2014 the referendum --> so almost two years in a stable, free democracy.

So the label Pinocchio referendum is just right, there is no way this was a fair, open referendum so that is no basis to the annexation as you claim over and over again.

LOL. A referendum in Britain? This is the one where openly falsified the results?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et9kE4YHwdw

I have already spoken more than once - instead of talk about the legitimacy of the referendum - go to the Crimea, do your own, independent research on the views of residents of the Crimea. Want to check - ask people their opinion. But do not tell them that they MUST vote again and again for as long as some foreigners will have no reason to put a referendum question. It doesn't work that way, and you'll get from people just aggression. Nobody likes them in their homes indicate that they should do that.

By the way, whatever the results of the referendum in Catalonia? This too is not democratic?

a sweat home movie, what a pile of shit. But what amazes me, you don't speak English and yet you are able to find this particular youtube film, do you guys keep a database on stuff like this?

Catalonia --> not a valid referendum, not up to the standard, just like Crimea indeed.

And on the Pinocchio referendum: Crimeans/Russians asked the rest of the world to regonize the annexation of the Crimea and the rest of the world said no.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Yes, there is a presumption of innocence and it has to be proven in an independent court of law.

The conclusions of the investigation board were crystal clear and also of the JIT. So we will see what can be proven in court, personal accountability. Let Russia just have these Russians appear in court. I have no confidence in the Russian justice system, I probably can come up with a list which put the Russian justice system near the bottom of the list, but that is no use because you will not accept it anyway.

Commission of inquiry findings are, and to them to wipe his ass. Evidence - no. Substantial evidence and studies are not considered. The document itself is written just long, "We can't prove anything, but to blame Putin, I swear".
And more than that - all of Europe is worn with the investigation of the disaster MH17, but why-that anybody does not conduct investigations related to mass killings of civilians in the East of Ukraine, committed by the troops of Ukraine and neo-Nazi gangs, which are called "volunteer battalions in the armed forces of Ukraine".

You believe what you want to believe, I realize that you will never be convinced if Russians are convicted in court, in absence probably. But you know that Russians were part of the initial investigation team, right? So no point in debating it with you since you will never admit and be convinced by any investigation besides the Russian one.
We have lost 198 soles in this mass murder and another 100 from other countries, may we please give a damn? Quite insensitive from you.

As for eastern Ukraine, if Putin will end sending Russian soldiers to the region for a nice holiday, of course, the soldiers are allowed to take a vehicle - tanks and the like - with them, and of course everybody understands that they are also allowed to take a weapon with them, it is rather dangerous there, so they need something to defend themselves. Such a shame your Russians boys are dying there, but your Putin doesn't pay homage to them since he can't admit he sends his army into Ukraine. But the OVSE is watching.

Scorpius wrote:

It seemed to me that a fool would have realized that the MH17 crash is a planned action to divert attention from the situation with the killings in the East of Ukraine, which are made with the support of the US and the EU.

This is so funny, you are calling people a fool for believing this "alternative" reality, and you are right, although it is probably your google translate.

As for eastern Ukraine, if Putin will end sending Russian soldiers to the region for a nice holiday, of course, the soldiers are allowed to take a vehicle - tanks and the like - with them, and of course everybody understands that they are also allowed to take a weapon with them, it is rather dangerous there, so they need something to defend themselves. Such a shame your Russians boys are dying there, but your Putin doesn't pay homage to them since he can't admit he sends
his army into Ukraine. But the OVSE is watching.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

LOL. A referendum in Britain? This is the one where openly falsified the results?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et9kE4YHwdw

I have already spoken more than once - instead of talk about the legitimacy of the referendum - go to the Crimea, do your own, independent research on the views of residents of the Crimea. Want to check - ask people their opinion. But do not tell them that they MUST vote again and again for as long as some foreigners will have no reason to put a referendum question. It doesn't work that way, and you'll get from people just aggression. Nobody likes them in their homes indicate that they should do that.

By the way, whatever the results of the referendum in Catalonia? This too is not democratic?

a sweat home movie, what a pile of shit. But what amazes me, you don't speak English and yet you are able to find this particular youtube film, do you guys keep a database on stuff like this?

Catalonia --> not a valid referendum, not up to the standard, just like Crimea indeed.

And on the Pinocchio referendum: Crimeans/Russians asked the rest of the world to regonize the annexation of the Crimea and the rest of the world said no.

once again - "rest of the world" is USA and its satellite.
In Russia and in the Crimea, we do not care about the opinion of these countries.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Commission of inquiry findings are, and to them to wipe his ass. Evidence - no. Substantial evidence and studies are not considered. The document itself is written just long, "We can't prove anything, but to blame Putin, I swear".
And more than that - all of Europe is worn with the investigation of the disaster MH17, but why-that anybody does not conduct investigations related to mass killings of civilians in the East of Ukraine, committed by the troops of Ukraine and neo-Nazi gangs, which are called "volunteer battalions in the armed forces of Ukraine".

You believe what you want to believe, I realize that you will never be convinced if Russians are convicted in court, in absence probably. But you know that Russians were part of the initial investigation team, right? So no point in debating it with you since you will never admit and be convinced by any investigation besides the Russian one.
We have lost 198 soles in this mass murder and another 100 from other countries, may we please give a damn? Quite insensitive from you.

As for eastern Ukraine, if Putin will end sending Russian soldiers to the region for a nice holiday, of course, the soldiers are allowed to take a vehicle - tanks and the like - with them, and of course everybody understands that they are also allowed to take a weapon with them, it is rather dangerous there, so they need something to defend themselves. Such a shame your Russians boys are dying there, but your Putin doesn't pay homage to them since he can't admit he sends his army into Ukraine. But the OVSE is watching.

Scorpius wrote:

It seemed to me that a fool would have realized that the MH17 crash is a planned action to divert attention from the situation with the killings in the East of Ukraine, which are made with the support of the US and the EU.

This is so funny, you are calling people a fool for believing this "alternative" reality, and you are right, although it is probably your google translate.

As for eastern Ukraine, if Putin will end sending Russian soldiers to the region for a nice holiday, of course, the soldiers are allowed to take a vehicle - tanks and the like - with them, and of course everybody understands that they are also allowed to take a weapon with them, it is rather dangerous there, so they need something to defend themselves. Such a shame your Russians boys are dying there, but your Putin doesn't pay homage to them since he can't admit he sends
his army into Ukraine. But the OVSE is watching.

first find the Russian soldiers with equipment.
Whether there is Russian army - Ukraine would have smoothed out a couple of weeks. One of the complaints about Putin, by the way, from the Russian people is that in the situation in the Donbas had not intervened, our troops, and dont knocked the crap out of the Ukrainian government.

Putin admits Russian military presence in Ukraine for first time
Russian president concedes military intelligence officers were operating in the country but insists it’s not the same as regular Russian troops

Aesma wrote:

I'm ready to accept that there is some bias in information we get in the western world, but at least we have plenty of journalists that are free to say so, do their job, and report their findings. For example it's clear there was a US intention to get Ukraine into NATO, a stupid idea.

On the other hand, Scorpius, you just give us government propaganda, that could have been written by Putin himself !

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

You believe what you want to believe, I realize that you will never be convinced if Russians are convicted in court, in absence probably. But you know that Russians were part of the initial investigation team, right? So no point in debating it with you since you will never admit and be convinced by any investigation besides the Russian one.
We have lost 198 soles in this mass murder and another 100 from other countries, may we please give a damn? Quite insensitive from you.

As for eastern Ukraine, if Putin will end sending Russian soldiers to the region for a nice holiday, of course, the soldiers are allowed to take a vehicle - tanks and the like - with them, and of course everybody understands that they are also allowed to take a weapon with them, it is rather dangerous there, so they need something to defend themselves. Such a shame your Russians boys are dying there, but your Putin doesn't pay homage to them since he can't admit he sends his army into Ukraine. But the OVSE is watching.




As for eastern Ukraine, if Putin will end sending Russian soldiers to the region for a nice holiday, of course, the soldiers are allowed to take a vehicle - tanks and the like - with them, and of course everybody understands that they are also allowed to take a weapon with them, it is rather dangerous there, so they need something to defend themselves. Such a shame your Russians boys are dying there, but your Putin doesn't pay homage to them since he can't admit he sends
his army into Ukraine. But the OVSE is watching.

first find the Russian soldiers with equipment.
Whether there is Russian army - Ukraine would have smoothed out a couple of weeks. One of the complaints about Putin, by the way, from the Russian people is that in the situation in the Donbas had not intervened, our troops, and dont knocked the crap out of the Ukrainian government.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/worl ... -osce.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30039004
http://eastwest.eu/en/opinions/riding-t ... in-ukraine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/ ... ce-ukraine

Putin admits Russian military presence in Ukraine for first time
Russian president concedes military intelligence officers were operating in the country but insists it’s not the same as regular Russian troops

You probably will brush aside those pesky western media and the OCSE mission. But can you do the same with Putin himself?

And ok, once again you say that Russia should go to war with Ukraine. If that is your mentality, you are basically at the level of "whoever is the strongest gets his way". And there you have the basic difference between you and me: I believe in the rule of law, you believe in the right of the strongest (tribal warfare and nationalism).

Nationalism can be a terrible thing, especially accepting no criticism to your country and the men who run it, even though confronted with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And you, my friend, have displayed this perfectly, to put it simple for google translate: Russia good; rest of the world bad.

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

first find the Russian soldiers with equipment.
Whether there is Russian army - Ukraine would have smoothed out a couple of weeks. One of the complaints about Putin, by the way, from the Russian people is that in the situation in the Donbas had not intervened, our troops, and dont knocked the crap out of the Ukrainian government.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/worl ... -osce.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30039004
http://eastwest.eu/en/opinions/riding-t ... in-ukraine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/ ... ce-ukraine

Putin admits Russian military presence in Ukraine for first time
Russian president concedes military intelligence officers were operating in the country but insists it’s not the same as regular Russian troops

You probably will brush aside those pesky western media and the OCSE mission. But can you do the same with Putin himself?

And ok, once again you say that Russia should go to war with Ukraine. If that is your mentality, you are basically at the level of "whoever is the strongest gets his way". And there you have the basic difference between you and me: I believe in the rule of law, you believe in the right of the strongest (tribal warfare and nationalism).

Nationalism can be a terrible thing, especially accepting no criticism to your country and the men who run it, even though confronted with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And you, my friend, have displayed this perfectly, to put it simple for google translate: Russia good; rest of the world bad.

Of which this "rule of law" can say the people who illegally invaded Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Vietnam, Korea?
Mind you, I once again repeat - you are trying to say that Russia stands against the rest of the world, but it is only the US and its satellites. The rest of the world, representing 66% of the world's population either supported Russia or abstained from the estimates.

Not the first time you mention about Italy is you have something like insulting comparison?
Trying to say that the economy of Russia and Italy comparable is foolish. Don't go on this way.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/worl ... -osce.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30039004
http://eastwest.eu/en/opinions/riding-t ... in-ukraine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/ ... ce-ukraine



You probably will brush aside those pesky western media and the OCSE mission. But can you do the same with Putin himself?

And ok, once again you say that Russia should go to war with Ukraine. If that is your mentality, you are basically at the level of "whoever is the strongest gets his way". And there you have the basic difference between you and me: I believe in the rule of law, you believe in the right of the strongest (tribal warfare and nationalism).

Nationalism can be a terrible thing, especially accepting no criticism to your country and the men who run it, even though confronted with overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And you, my friend, have displayed this perfectly, to put it simple for google translate: Russia good; rest of the world bad.

Of which this "rule of law" can say the people who illegally invaded Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Vietnam, Korea?
Mind you, I once again repeat - you are trying to say that Russia stands against the rest of the world, but it is only the US and its satellites. The rest of the world, representing 66% of the world's population either supported Russia or abstained from the estimates.

Not the first time you mention about Italy is you have something like insulting comparison?
Trying to say that the economy of Russia and Italy comparable is foolish. Don't go on this way.

No, only two countries are behind Russians actions, abstaining isn't condoning Russias annexation. I understand that you would like to frame it like that, but it doesn't work like that. So it is perfectly good to say the rest of the world doesn't condone Russians annexation.

May I ask what you try to convey/imply with: US and its satellites

GDP Per the International Monetary Fund (2016)
8th Italy: 1,850,735 MUSD
12th Russia: 1,283,162 MUSD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... P_(nominal)

You are right, Italians economy is 50% more than Russia's.

What I am trying to say: Russia isn't that important to the world's economy. Yes it has a big landmass, and yes there are 150m Russians, but you are acting like Russia is a world power and it isn't, it is a regional power at best, so comparable with Brazil in South America, or South Africa in Africa. And that is the fatal flaw in your thinking.

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

No, only two countries are behind Russians actions, abstaining isn't condoning Russias annexation. I understand that you would like to frame it like that, but it doesn't work like that. So it is perfectly good to say the rest of the world doesn't condone Russians annexation.

May I ask what you try to convey/imply with: US and its satellites

GDP Per the International Monetary Fund (2016)
8th Italy: 1,850,735 MUSD
12th Russia: 1,283,162 MUSD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... P_(nominal)

You are right, Italians economy is 50% more than Russia's.

What I am trying to say: Russia isn't that important to the world's economy. Yes it has a big landmass, and yes there are 150m Russians, but you are acting like Russia is a world power and it isn't, it is a regional power at best, so comparable with Brazil in South America, or South Africa in Africa. And that is the fatal flaw in your thinking.

Not for the Dutchman to talk about the status of the world's superpowers. About Holland in Russia is widely known, only that there is a lot of drug addicts.

Dutchy wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Scorpius wrote:

Not for the Dutchman to talk about the status of the world's superpowers. About Holland in Russia is widely known, only that there is a lot of drug addicts.

Haha, laughing out loud now, thank you for that. So in your arrogance, you think you can determine what I can and can't talk about? Damn, learn to live with freedom of speech, you might learn to love it. And there you go, you are so ignorant about The Netherlands (Holland are two provinces, not the countries name) that the only "fact" you think to know is plain wrong. If you want to try to insult me, do it with something which is at least correct, your country sucks at football is one, come on take your best shot

But indeed there are three superpowers: USA, China and EU. Russia just isn't part of it anymore by any measure, except for the number of nuclear bombs which can't ever be used.

Dutchy wrote:

And there is the denial: http://www.pravdareport.com/news/hotspo ... isaster-0/

We will see if colonel-general Nikolai Tkachev will be brought before a Dutch court and see if it is proven that he was involved in the MH17 mass murder.

Dutchy wrote:

Yes, there is a presumption of innocence and it has to be proven in an independent court of law.

The conclusions of the investigation board were crystal clear and also of the JIT. So we will see what can be proven in court, personal accountability. Let Russia just have these Russians appear in court. I have no confidence in the Russian justice system, I probably can come up with a list which put the Russian justice system near the bottom of the list, but that is no use because you will not accept it anyway.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

And there is the denial: http://www.pravdareport.com/news/hotspo ... isaster-0/

We will see if colonel-general Nikolai Tkachev will be brought before a Dutch court and see if it is proven that he was involved in the MH17 mass murder.

That's, of course, if he even bothers to show up. But more reliable way - you need to go to Russian court and win your case there.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Yes, there is a presumption of innocence and it has to be proven in an independent court of law.

The conclusions of the investigation board were crystal clear and also of the JIT. So we will see what can be proven in court, personal accountability. Let Russia just have these Russians appear in court. I have no confidence in the Russian justice system, I probably can come up with a list which put the Russian justice system near the bottom of the list, but that is no use because you will not accept it anyway.

Sure, if you have case strong enough to convince Russian prosecutors to work with you, they will appear in court. But you need to have something stronger than that "black hole" story. You don't have to believe in Russian court system, but Russians also don't have to believe in yours.

zkojq wrote:

Well I guess this thread certainly reinforces a lot of widely held stereotypes about Putin's Russia.

Dutchy wrote:

My prediction, he will not show up and it is no use to go to Russian courts to have him extradited. Political process and we have seen that in Russia lady Justice isn't blind. Then he will be tried in absentia. And all Russian groupies will say if convicted, not fair! Everybody else will say: he had a chance to come, but didn't show up, fair trial no matter what the outcome is.

But better for everyone would be if people who are accused, actually show up and refute the evidence presented against him so the judges can weigh the evidence and come to a balanced conclusion - ah well, I can dream right.

anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

My prediction, he will not show up and it is no use to go to Russian courts to have him extradited. Political process and we have seen that in Russia lady Justice isn't blind. Then he will be tried in absentia. And all Russian groupies will say if convicted, not fair! Everybody else will say: he had a chance to come, but didn't show up, fair trial no matter what the outcome is.

But better for everyone would be if people who are accused, actually show up and refute the evidence presented against him so the judges can weigh the evidence and come to a balanced conclusion - ah well, I can dream right.

Yes, your prediction is correct. Any attempt to get him extradited via a Russian court has zero chance of success - Russian constitution prohibits extradition of Russian citizens from Russia. Hence - if you truly believe you have a strong case, the best assurance of jailing him is to go to Russian court. EU and Russia, Netherlands and Russia have agreements in law enforcement cooperation. Unless you broke them down "due to situation in Crimea".

About a decade ago British made a similar attempt to demand extradition of a Russian citizens Andrei Lugovoi. They even suggested to change Russian constitution, and got a response "their brains need to be changed".

Dutchy wrote:

I am sure the Russian state will ignore any court unfavorable towards them, as we have seen by the conviction of Russia in the Greenpeace case, The Netherlands is still waiting for the money for the damages caused by the Russian state.