Ukraine has become a dictatorship, it's official

[Laniakea]

No, when necessary I back up my claims. When you refuse to debate properly you relieve others of that duty.

It's necessary when you make a claim. That's what proper debating is.

All that you have to do is to quit using insults so often when you make demands.

Now you're projecting again and making things personal. Not a proper debate technique.

My offer was more than reasonable considering your past behavior.

You offer of what, exactly?

Do you mean that I was in error to expect you to debate properly and politely? If you insist.

Quit playing the victim card when you can't answer a question. If you have evidence, show it. If you don't, then playing victim and claiming someone wasn't "polite" to you when they asked you to cite your evidence is only telling others that you've lost the debate and believe the only way to save face is to personally attack whoever asks you to back up your claim.
Your debate technique is not working.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's necessary when you make a claim. That's what proper debating is.

Yes, but if the other person is not following the rules then that releases the other person from following those same rules. As I have poinnted out when you are not following the rules of debate I have pointed out that a third person could ask for evidence. Also if a third person provides evidence I cannot stop him.

Now you're projecting again and making things personal. Not a proper debate technique.

No, that is not true. In the last case before you even asked me to provide evidence you made it personal by claiming that I made things up. That actually put the burden of proof upon you when you made that claim. That was where you released me from the burden of proof.

You offer of what, exactly?

When you mess up I almost always offer you a chance to atone for your sins. And then I would give you the evidence that you demand, but you never have done that..

Quit playing the victim card when you can't answer a question. If you have evidence, show it. If you don't, then playing victim and claiming someone wasn't "polite" to you when they asked you to cite your evidence is only telling others that you've lost the debate and believe the only way to save face is to personally attack whoever asks you to back up your claim.
Your debate technique is not working.

I am not playing the victim card. I am just saying that if you cannot debate following the rules of proper debate then I have no need to provide you with evidence. You seem to ignore when I provide you with evidence so it really does not matter if I did now does it?

 

[lukethethird]

Gee, I wonder if there's a difference between suspending elections during wartime and suspending elections during a LITERAL INVASION THAT YOU ARE SUFFERING.

If you really want democracy to be restored in Ukraine, put the blame where it actually belongs: On Russia. Demand they stop their invasion and retreat over their own borders. Stop spreading fascist propaganda.

There are no elections in Ukraine due to a border dispute.

 

[Estro Felino]

There are no elections in Ukraine due to a border dispute.

You know...us Italians too, we lost territories after WW2.
But we moved on and held elections.

That seems to me an excuse to install a dictatorship. And that's horrible.

 

[geomagnetism]

I'm sorry to say any country say russia is invasion country which is attacking ukraine.
even same communist country china and old ww2 ally country person's say to you who like you such a italy person will say same thing.(not blaming)
I hope you one day you will notice Russia is what's to do like old Japanese did like do.
now Russia country is doing like similar old fascist.
(but i can't aceept all(some) american's saying about atomic bombs fallen is right.)
also Russia guys did same thing Holodomor on ukraine(well this was an enitre soviet province starving but.)
also i didn't fall from upstairs. i just playing (enjoying)there

 

[Laniakea]

When you mess up I almost always offer you a chance to atone for your sins. And then I would give you the evidence that you demand, but you never have done that..

.

I don't recall asking you to be my saviour.

I am not playing the victim card. I am just saying that if you cannot debate following the rules of proper debate then I have no need to provide you with evidence. You seem to ignore when I provide you with evidence so it really does not matter if I did now does it?

Now you're not following the rules of proper debate. Claiming the role of referee in a debate is simply being manipulative.
Tell ya what, put me on ignore if you don't like my posts. Have you ever considered that? Sure beats whining about me all the time, unless that's what you are seeking to do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

.

I don't recall asking you to be my saviour.

It is service that I provide for free. You are welcome.

Now you're not following the rules of proper debate. Claiming the role of referee in a debate is simply being manipulative.
Tell ya what, put me on ignore if you don't like my posts. Have you ever considered that? Sure beats whining about me all the time, unless that's what you are seeking to do.

I can do that because I do repeatedly give you chances. I even show you how to support claims as I did yesterday. But until you at least try to change you have relieved me of any duty to give you evidence. It can never be a one way game where I am the only one following the rules.

And correcting you is a thankless task, but it is not "whining". In fact, to be honest it is a bit enjoyable for me so it definitely is not whining.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

There are no elections in Ukraine due to a border dispute.

There are no elections in Ukraine due to fact they have been invaded by Russia and millions of their citizens are now refugees fleeing war.

 

[RhySantos]

Gee, I wonder if there's a difference between suspending elections during wartime and suspending elections during a LITERAL INVASION THAT YOU ARE SUFFERING.

If you really want democracy to be restored in Ukraine, put the blame where it actually belongs: On Russia. Demand they stop their invasion and retreat over their own borders. Stop spreading fascist propaganda.

Please correct me if Im wrong,
(Please note: I am not taking sides.. Just clarifying the information that I have)
Didn't Russia start the war because a Pro-Russian President was replaced by a Pro-West president in Ukraine even though the Pro-Russian president won..
I know politics is more complicated than that..
But this is a valid point Putin has
(Again im not taking sides just trying to clarify and rationalise)

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Please correct me if Im wrong,
(Please note: I am not taking sides.. Just clarifying the information that I have)
Didn't Russia start the war because a Pro-Russian President was replaced by a Pro-West president in Ukraine even though the Pro-Russian president won..

That is correct, although there are some details missing in-between that were fairly pertinent, such as the president in 2012 attempting to remove political opposition, failing to follow-through on promises to create closer ties with the EU, censoring the press, and multiple corruption scandals that lead to a popular protest against him. When the protests started, Yanukovych sent to Russia for aid in killing protesters and attempted to pass a number of draconian anti-protest laws. He was eventually ousted from power, fled to Russia, and, as per the usual democratic process outlined in the Ukrainian constitution, he was replaced by the next-in-command for an interim before elections were held again.

Sources:

Viktor Yanukovych - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Euromaidan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Revolution of Dignity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I know politics is more complicated than that..
But this is a valid point Putin has
(Again im not taking sides just trying to clarify and rationalise)

Yanokovych was essentially outed as a Russian puppet, so saying this is a "valid point" isn't exactly accurate. You can't say it's a "valid point" that the puppet you attempted to manipulate ended up becoming so unpopular and making such obviously unpopular decisions - and then killing the people who opposed him - ends up getting ousted by the people they're leading. It seems a much more "valid point" to suggest that these events made it pretty clear that the people of Ukraine really, really didn't want to be involved with Russia. It certainly doesn't justify Russia's annexation of Crimea that concurred with the ousting, though it obviously demonstrates that what was of real concern to Putin was not who was democratically elected in Ukraine, but that he maintain power and influence in Ukraine by any means necessary.

 

[RhySantos]

You know...us Italians too, we lost territories after WW2.
But we moved on and held elections.

That seems to me an excuse to install a dictatorship. And that's horrible.

True..
But heres my opinion
Ukraine isn't a dictatorship.. Like the evidence is clear!
How can an Extremist, a Neo-Nazi, Western Puppet, a person using comedic propaganda, who possess little historical and general knowledge of his country in comparison to his rival (Putin) be a bad leader!
Zelensky is obviously a better leader than Putin!


(BTW this is sarcasm and for jocular reasons only..Don't take this seriously lol)

 

[RhySantos]

That is correct, although there are some details missing in-between that were fairly pertinent, such as the president in 2012 attempting to remove political opposition, failing to follow-through on promises to create closer ties with the EU, censoring the press, and multiple corruption scandals that lead to a popular protest against him. When the protests started, Yanukovych sent to Russia for aid in killing protesters and attempted to pass a number of draconian anti-protest laws. He was eventually ousted from power, fled to Russia, and, as per the usual democratic process outlined in the Ukrainian constitution, he was replaced by the next-in-command for an interim before elections were held again.

Sources:

Viktor Yanukovych - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Euromaidan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Revolution of Dignity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yanokovych was essentially outed as a Russian puppet, so saying this is a "valid point" isn't exactly accurate. You can't say it's a "valid point" that the puppet you attempted to manipulate ended up becoming so unpopular and making such obviously unpopular decisions - and then killing the people who opposed him - ends up getting ousted by the people they're leading. It certainly doesn't justify Russia' annexation of Crimea that concurred with the ousting, though it obviously demonstrates that what was of real concern to Putin was not who was democratically elected in Ukraine, but that he maintain power and influence in Ukraine by any means necessary.

Thanks so much brother!
Thanks for clearing my doubt too.
The information that I used was obviously kinda anti west.
Cuz the way they framed it up was:
"The west removed the Pro-Russian and put in their puppet in Ukraine"
And i agree with your conclusion.. It isn't a valid point.

 

[Tomef]

Didn't Russia start the war because a Pro-Russian President was replaced by a Pro-West president in Ukraine even though the Pro-Russian president won..

What’s your source for this idea? There wasn’t any election involved - Yanukovych won in an election run off several years before he bowed to pressure from Moscow to cancel an EU association agreement. Ukraine’s constitution allows for the removal of a head of state for acts of treason or corruption, e.g. making major policy decisions based on the wishes of a foreign power, which is what happened, following popular protests and Yanukovych ordering troops to fire on protesters.

But this is a valid point Putin has

Putin’s ‘point’ is that he should be allowed to interfere in Ukraine’s political system to ensure it remains within Russia’s sphere of influence.

 

[RhySantos]

That is correct, although there are some details missing in-between that were fairly pertinent, such as the president in 2012 attempting to remove political opposition, failing to follow-through on promises to create closer ties with the EU, censoring the press, and multiple corruption scandals that lead to a popular protest against him. When the protests started, Yanukovych sent to Russia for aid in killing protesters and attempted to pass a number of draconian anti-protest laws. He was eventually ousted from power, fled to Russia, and, as per the usual democratic process outlined in the Ukrainian constitution, he was replaced by the next-in-command for an interim before elections were held again.

Sources:

Viktor Yanukovych - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Euromaidan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Revolution of Dignity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yanokovych was essentially outed as a Russian puppet, so saying this is a "valid point" isn't exactly accurate. You can't say it's a "valid point" that the puppet you attempted to manipulate ended up becoming so unpopular and making such obviously unpopular decisions - and then killing the people who opposed him - ends up getting ousted by the people they're leading. It seems a much more "valid point" to suggest that these events made it pretty clear that the people of Ukraine really, really didn't want to be involved with Russia. It certainly doesn't justify Russia's annexation of Crimea that concurred with the ousting, though it obviously demonstrates that what was of real concern to Putin was not who was democratically elected in Ukraine, but that he maintain power and influence in Ukraine by any means necessary.

I never knew he killed protestors..
As they say .. Having no knowledge about a topic is better than only knowing very little knowledge about it
Specially in politics

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Thanks so much brother!
Thanks for clearing my doubt too.
The information that I used was obviously kinda anti west.
Cuz the way they framed it up was:
"The west removed the Pro-Russian and put in their puppet in Ukraine"
And i agree with your conclusion.. It isn't a valid point.

It's a way of framing the discussion that has been doing the rounds. The idea that "the west" (or, more specifically, America) outed Yanukovych is a fairly common talking point, but when you look at the history you realise that's far from accurate. I have to kind of love it when the "anti-West" people scream and shout about America "putting a puppet" in charge of Ukraine, when the reality is the extent of America's involvement was basically just supporting protesters and openly talking about preferring a pro-Western president. Meanwhile, they tend to downplay Russia's involvement in Ukraine, despite the fact that Russia literally tried to invade them when the pro-Russian president was ousted.

It seems they hate it when western hegemony is enforced through supporting protests against presidents who kill their political opponents, but they don't mind it when Russian hegemony is enforced... through directly killing their political opponents. Kind of makes you wonder if their position is actually against imperialism, or if it's just so against American imperialism that it is pro-Russian imperialism.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I never knew he killed protestors..
As they say .. Having no knowledge about a topic is better than only knowing very little knowledge about it
Specially in politics

It's another detail certain people tend to miss out when discussing Yanukovych. Funnily enough, they often tend to stop at the "fairly democratically elected" bit, and then skip over all the human rights violations and possible war crimes and collusion with Russia.

Funnily enough, those same people tend to very, very interested in every detail of the US' involvement in the protest, to the extent that they will constantly bring up this one phone call between diplomats discussing which presidential candidate they prefer as if it's absolute proof that both the protests against Yanukovych and the subsequent elections were all a result of US manipulation. Meanwhile, they tend to completely ignore hundreds of protesters literally being shot by Russian soldiers brought in by Yanukovych. It's incredible the lengths people go to narrativize the conflict to cast America as the sole malefactor.

 

[RhySantos]

It's incredible the lengths people go to narrativize the conflict to cast America as the sole malefactor.

I know right..
But what do you think about America in the Middle East.. (Specifically the Israeli-Palistinian conflict and the iraqi invasion)
Is it overly exaggerated or something that their right about.

 

[RhySantos]

What’s your source for this idea? There wasn’t any election involved - Yanukovych won in an election run off several years before he bowed to pressure from Moscow to cancel an EU association agreement. Ukraine’s constitution allows for the removal of a head of state for acts of treason or corruption, e.g. making major policy decisions based on the wishes of a foreign power, which is what happened, following popular protests and Yanukovych ordering troops to fire on protesters.

Putin’s ‘point’ is that he should be allowed to interfere in Ukraine’s political system to ensure it remains within Russia’s sphere of influence.

You are right.. I wrote that I was just clarifying my knowledge and wanted to know more about this..That is why I was clarifying my point with "ImmortalFlame"

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I know right..
But what do you think about America in the Middle East.. (Specifically the Israeli-Palistinian conflict and the iraqi invasion)
Is it overly exaggerated or something that their right about.

Nah, that's something they're right about. America's involvement in the Middle-East has been pretty uniformly horrific. There are other contributors too, of course.

 

[RhySantos]

Nah, that's something they're right about. America's involvement in the Middle-East has been pretty uniformly horrific. There are other contributors too, of course.

True.. And we also mustn't neglect other powers who also doing horrible things in the region.. (Even if it is not as horrifying)