Saturday, June 21, 2014 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

A Czech anti-Maidan warrior

This guy came to Eastern Ukraine to protect Donbass and to fight against the Maidan regime:



I must say that I sort of admire him. His name is Ivo Stejskal and he is a teacher of physical education and civic education in Brno, Moravia, Czechia. He must be sort of inspiring for his (basic school, Novolíšeňská Street) students. The Czech media inform that he's a polite, likable person who gets the best ratings from his friends and colleagues.




In his broken but decently understandable (surely for me!) Russian, he told the demonstrators that he considers himself a Slav and came there to fight much like some Serbian (but also Italian!) warriors. (Stejskal is fighting in "Batallion Vostok", along with some people from the Caucasus.) He doesn't like the "genocide of the Russo-Ukrainian nation", events that happened in Odessa and other things he saw on TV, and so on. He simply had to go to the Southeast. He was partly walking, partly hitch-hiking.

In his mail to his numerous friends (who consider him a hero), he has described the phosphorus bombs deployed by Kiev which make iron and concrete burn; the shocking excess of the Kiev troops that fight against the pro-Russian forces and assault hospitals, and so on. The Czech media often join the breathtakingly dishonest anti-Russian propaganda that is popular in so many countries of the West. Thankfully, at least in this case, they resisted the temptation to fabricate character assassination of this honorable man who has no dirt on his record.




Needless to say, his decision to help carries risks. He may be killed over there and even if he survives everything nicely, he may expect up to 5 years in prison after he returns to the Czech Republic where it is illegal to serve in foreign armies (and probably in an informal military, too).

Add to del.icio.us Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (59) :


reader Gorth said...

This is wrong on so many levels. Which genocide? Of whom? Did the dog eat the evidence of that?

It is amazing how well Putin plays the useful idiot game with people in the west and some people in the former east.


reader Gordon said...

What is with you Lubos. Do you hope that the Russian bear will eat you last? Or is it Stockholm syndrome?


reader Eugene S said...

Dear Luboš, there is no "Maidan regime". Ukraine's democratically elected, legitimate president is moving expeditiously to purge his government of leftovers from Svoboda and Right Sector, for example replacing the prosecutor-general just the other day. Even before his election, the government cracked down on extremists like the Kalshnikov-toting guy who had stormed into a government office and manhandled an official on video. He sleeps with the fishes now.

Nor is there a "genocide of the Slavic people" anywhere.


reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Gorth, thanks for your question. You're clearly not following the events in the world at all so let me answer your question and inform you that several months ago, an angry mostly fascist mob in Kiev overthrew Ukraine's democratically elected government and forced the legitimate president to flee the country to save his life.


The fascist junta that replaced the previous government has decided that it would take over the whole Ukraine much like it took over some government buildings in Kiev. Because the ethnic Russian population turned out to be a hurdle, because most of these folks clearly don't like fascistically and anti-Russian-flavored apparatchiks above their hands, the fascist junta decided for ethnic cleansing of the Russian-speaking population.


It's trying to invade the Donetsk and Lugansk regions - regions that had to declare independence from the previous republic - staging siege against several cities,. throwing bombs on all buildings including hospitals and schools from aircraft, and systematically killing hundreds of Russian-speaking men - officially still "citizens of Ukraine" - as if they were terrorists.


All this anti-Russian genocide has been pretty much openly endorsed by certain powerful individuals in our part of the world.


reader neimik said...

You admire a terrorist fighting against legitimate government of an independent (and slavic) country, giving a speech standing by a statue of Lenin, among people waving red flag? WTF? When did this blog abanddon conservatism if favour of revolutionary sovietism?


reader Luboš Motl said...

Apologies, I have no idea what you're talking about and what your metaphor is supposed to mean.


As every truly human being 9n this world, I am shocked by mindless and indefensible killing of the Russian-speaking civilians, women, children, as well as their men whose only guilt is that they realize - just like I do and just like every person who hasn't been hopelessly brainwashed by mindless propaganda - that an illegitimate junta has been trying to take over the whole territory of former Ukraine and they just don't want to allow such a thing to happen without their resistance.


I am stunned by the anti-Russian comments like yours which are isomorphic to the anti-Jewish hysteria during the Nazi era and I hope that those who are spreading this hysteria to the extent that they're responsible for the deaths in Ukraine will be tried similarly to the culprits tried at the Nuremberg trials.


reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Eugene, to say the least, Poroshenko was not elected in elections that would include the territory of New Russia. He could be sensible and promising but that doesn't make him a legitimate leader in Donetsk or Lugansk.


reader Eugene S said...

According to Wikipedia (the usual caveats using Wiki as a source apply):

The elections were not held throughout Ukraine. During the 2014 Crimean crisis, Ukraine lost control over Crimea, which was unilaterally annexed by Russia in March 2014.[12][13][nb 1] As a result, elections were not held in Crimea.[4] In the Donbass region of Ukraine only 20% of the ballot stations were open due to threats and violence by pro-Russia separatists.[15] Of the 2,430 planned ballot stations (in Donbass) only 426 remained open for polling.[15] The self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic and Lugansk People's Republic, controlling large parts of the Donbass, had vowed to do everything possible to disrupt the elections.[16]


Based on this, it appears that the separatists and their comrades-in-arms from Russia (and other places, even including Czechia!) were afraid of the results of the voting so they prevented citizens from voting. Hardly evidence of a democratic mindset. Their own "elections", held earlier, were a joke (no secret balloting, etc. etc.)


It's good that you and others are scrutinizing what the Ukrainian government does in fighting the separatists and highlighting any excesses and abuses that occur (although some will inevitably occur in any violent military action) and such scrutiny should continue.


reader Luboš Motl said...

You're confused. It's the other way around. It was Yanukovitch and his Party of Regions that represented the legitimate government - and whose traces the conservative militias in Eastern Ukraine are trying to preserve.


This legitimate government was overthrown by an angry fascist-led mob, by terrorists who hijacked some government buildings in Kiev and they want to take over the whole territory of Ukraine in this way. The Maidan regime are the terrorists. Check your sign errors.


reader Ania said...

hope he will get a chance, along with other mercenaries and terrorists, to travel to Russia, in a refrigerator truck
[ interpretermag . com /a-russian-journalist-follows-up-on-cargo-200-from-donetsk/ ]


reader Luboš Motl said...

What you're writing about the ethnic Russians is nothing else than nationalistically flavored mudslinging - stupid P.R. games addressed to the stupid people.


Of course that they were afraid that in the current conditions involving the intimidation by the pro-Maidan fascist forces, a pro-Maidan president could win and become a de facto justified president of the Donetsk Region or Lugansk Region, too. This fear is completely rational and justifiable, and indeed, that's why they prevented the new president from gaining legitimacy over their cities.


You may claim that someone doesn't have a democratic mindset but it still doesn't change the fact that the coup against Yanukovitch was illegitimate along with everything that these forces did afterwards.


reader Eugene S said...

When Putin annexed Crimea, this permanently altered the balance in Ukraine between "pro-EU" and "pro-Russia" demographics in favor of pro-EU and conclusively ended any chances for Ukraine to join a Eurasian Union. He knows that and isn't interested in also annexing eastern Ukraine. I don't think Putin is strongly behind the separatists, he merely uses them as a tool to maintain turmoil and keep up the temperature of his main goal, preventing Ukraine from joining NATO.


This aim (keeping NATO out of Ukraine) is a legitimate security interest of Russia, I merely disagree with the means that Putin is employing.



Eventually, though, I think a lasting agreement will be found. At least the presidents Putin and Poroshenko are talking to each other, so hopefully the violence will soon cease.


At some point in the future, perhaps an orderly, internationally monitored referendum on indepence for Donetsk and Lugansk will be held, but that is something for Ukrainians to work out amongst themselves.


reader Luboš Motl said...

The incorporation of Crimea into Russia was forced upon Putin. The vast majority of the people of Crimea simply wanted to be protected against the chaos that exploded in the Western Ukraine. Of course that with a majority of ethnic Russians, they found it natural to ask Russia for help and protection. And of course that lots of Russians - most of Russian citizens - agreed, too. Whether Putin was exactly excited or whether it agrees with some of his strategic thinking is a complicated question. But he couldn't do anything else. Every leader who is not a complete idiot would have done exactly the same thing.

Your comments about "Ukraine's chances to join the Eurasian Union" are meaningless because Ukraine no longer exists. One can no longer describe the future of that territory by simple-minded slogans like yours. Crimea has become a downright part of Russia, and others may follow because they simply won't have any other choice.

http://motls.blogspot.com/2014/06/new-russia-can-no-longer-reunify-with.html?m=1



There may be parts of Western Ukraine where the anti-Russian, pro-fascist sentiments dominate. But one shouldn't forget that this is a completely screwed territory that is not viable. I surely don't want to pay a penny to these people who were at least slightly working, although less so than e.g. people in Donbass. The EU can't really afford another Greece, just 4 times larger.


For various reasons, even this fascist-rich part of Ukraine will inevitably have to follow the fate of the more productive, pro-Russian part of the country.


reader BobSykes said...

Actually, Right Sector has announced that it will serve as Poroshenko's private army.


Poroschenko himself is, of course, a member of the corrupt Oligarchy and has long served in Oligarchic administrations. The bogus elections that put him in power have changed nothing. And his anti-Russian diatribe that passed for an inauguration speech set a genocidal fascist agenda.


The only way to a peaceful Ukraine is partition. That would still leave the western Ukraine under a fascist junta. If you want to get back to a democratic Ukraine, which you had under Yanukovych, that will have to be imposed by Russia. The US/EU is happy with its fascist puppets.


reader Mikael said...

Hi Lubos, I can somewhat understand both parties in this conflict. On the one hand legitimacy becomes a concept of very little usefulness in the times of revolution either way. It is clearly not helping the legitimacy of the new Kiev government that they have Nazis in them. But Yanukovych is history so Poroshenko is as close to a legitimate president of the Ukraine as you can get. You may say that Ukraine as a country in its former borders does not exist anymore but there is so far nothing which is replacing it. On the other hand it is clearly the task of every goverment to ensure law and order over all of its territory and the line between a legitimate separatist and a terrorist is not so clear. I hope that all parties keep their nerves and negotiate with each other and don't initiate a civil war with no winners.


reader Gordon said...

Sorry Lubos; I read your blog every day, although the stringy stuff passes over my head. But I cannot understand how you can say that the eastern Ukraine russophones have been oppressed by the Maidan people. I also fail to understand why you think that a gangster, kleptocracy presided by a chekist dog has anything to offer to the world. Perhaps you could ask your Russian friends whether they think that their nation has not already brought enough evil into the world: ie more than seven decades of genocidal,totalitarian bolchevism


reader Gorth said...

I am quite uneasy. Thou your point if view is shared by many in Germany, Eastgermany to be precise. I wonder why that is?

Anyhow, you have two points of view. One that is put forward by Putin and his not-so-free media, and another supported by NATO, EU, US, the free press outside Russia and pretty much everyone else. You chose to believe in Putin and not the free media? You believe it is one big conspiracy between all these western countries, international organisations, media, journalists, private pollsters with the Ukrainians and right wing to kill Russians in Ukraine?

Try using occhams razor on


reader Luboš Motl said...

I am not choosing to believe any media. Like an independently thinking person, I follow what's happening - the facts - and deduce the consequences.


Your assertion that the Western media are more free than Putin's media is a matter of propaganda by itself. Russia Today in particular is vastly freer than major U.S. cable TV networks like NBC, for example. And even if the latter were freer, which they're not, it wouldn't follow that they're right. Your reasoning is just way too sloppy and idiotic at way too many levels.


reader Luboš Motl said...

The cities like Slavyansk are under siege, they are not allowed to get water - or food from Russia where they would normally import the food from - and so on.


It may be a lesser extent but when it comes to the character. what the Russian speakers face in New Russia is fully analogous to what Leningrad was facing under the Nazi siege, for example.


I am no admirer of Yanukovitch but whether someone likes him or not, he was a legitimate democratically elected president and people who violently overthrow him are just plain criminals and terrorists, whether they like to describe themselves using a rosy propaganda or not.


The level of corruption in Ukraine reflects where the nation is standing and only a complete, dangerously and hopelessly naive idiot may believe that by replacing one leader by another, the corruption or kleptocracy disappears from the country. At any rate, even if this were the case, it doesn't justify violations of the basic constitutional law that existed in democratic Ukraine.


reader Mikael said...

Dear Lubos, I read that Heisenberg was once asked whether he could describe the double slit experiment in the Heisenberg picture and he answered that he couldn't. I think it is probably not true as the simple answer Heisenberg should have given is this: For states with fixed energies the Heisenberg picture become trivial as all operators simply become constants in time. So the only interesting information is in the single initial state the Heisenberg picture needs.


reader Gene Day said...

Don’t you think a more neutral stance regarding the Ukraine conflict would be more helpful, Gordon? The cold war really is over and it is clearly unhelpful to compare Putin with past Soviet dictators.
I am not 100% with Lubos here but your irrational russophobia is showing.


reader lukelea said...

Isn't the situation in eastern Ukraine vis-a-vis Kiev analogous to the one in Kosovo vis-a-vis Belgrade? Nato forced Serbia to give up Kosovo. Maybe it should follow the same principle here?


reader Curious George said...

You must have excellent sources of information.


reader Svik said...

Sounds like the west is trying to provoke w.w. 3 by killing Russians in east ukrane. The u.n. should set up a buffer zone and drive Kiev back so they can negotiate on equal terms.

But the u.n. has no guts so this won't happen.
So soon Putin will draw a line and cut the supply routes from Kiev and drive the west troops back.

Then Obama will huff and puff. But Germany will tell him to go home because we need their gas.

The us admin is powerless because they don't have the courage to confess and trust their God who established their nation in the 911 church which is still standing by the way.

Better stock up.

Cheers


reader de^mol said...

Lubos, good on you. The neo nazi's supporters, of the Maidan regime in Kiev, try to deny the obvious. The Kiev regime clearly drew first blood. It's completely logical the ethnic Russian's, many of them descendents from the Kievan-rus empire, defend themselves.


reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Luke, if you ignore all the history, then the situations are analogous. A subset of a country is ethnically very different, is being oppressed by the parent country, and wants some independence which may be understood.


If you do pay attention to the history, and I think that you should, the situations are significantly different. Kosovo is the cradle of the Serbian statehood and culture and it has always belonged and de iure still belongs to Serbia. The ethnic Albanians may live there but they're guests who should respect the fact that they don't have the right to split the territory from the rest of the Serbia where the Serbian nation is the sovereign.


The historical situation in Eastern Ukraine and Ukraine in general is very different. The Eastern Ukraine has always been pretty much a Russian place - with some disclaimers and to a weaker extent, the same may be said about the whole Ukrainian territory - so the ethnic Russians are in no way guests and permanent minority with reduced sovereignty rights over there. Unlike the Albanians in Kosovo, they're the primary players who were always the source of the local statehood.


reader Luboš Motl said...

I approved this comment only to show what kind of reasoning and emotions rules in countries like Romania - Ania is from Bucharest - and why it is so extremely accurate to compare these people to the Nazis.


reader Chad said...

The western "free media" is a myth. Having been raised in a politically/economically powerful family and served in US military intelligence, there is nothing in our "free press" that I believe (outside of sports, etc.) unless corroborated by a reputable source.


reader Luboš Motl said...

It's plausible that Heisenberg would have a problem with such a task - it's being rumored that at some moment, Heisenberg at all would switch to the Schrödinger picture and they would only translate the papers back to his picture when they were finished – but I am really thinking in the Heisenberg picture and I would be more than happy to present the physics of the double slit experiment in the Heisenberg picture for you if I find time and you are interested!


It is simply not true that one has to talk about specific states. Every experiment, and the double slit experiment is no exception, is about the relationship between some observables measured at the beginning of the experiment and some observables measured at the end. The relation between the observables may be computed from the basic algebras they obey plus the Heisenberg equations of motion.


reader Svik said...

Is it possible that the west ukrane still hatest the east because Stalin starved them to death pre w.w. 2 by taking all the grain. Or do I have e/w history mixed up. What happened to love your enemies and treat the nice.


reader Luboš Motl said...

There's lots of hatred. A problem with this is that Stalin wasn't from Eastern Ukraine. Stalin was from Georgia.


reader Svik said...

Just read up on the 1933 forced starvation of 25% off all of ukrane e/w both. The shocking part is that the west Brit/USA news ignored this and traded with Stalin instead. Voluntary sensor ship buttered up with something ??


reader Svik said...

Also read up on the Canada/USA incubated Bandra government. Shocking. These bandera killers should not be running any thing. They killed 30000 Jews at bar yar and still deny it.

And that was just the start.


reader Mikael said...

Of course I will be interested to see this, Lubos! And I think it is a general enough topic that a large enough fraction of readers of this blog will be interested, too.


reader neimik said...

WTF? Russia is surely not 1000 years old. Russian empire started with Ivan the Terrible. Before, there were Mongols or Kievan Rus which was a state created not by Slavs but by germanic people, particulary Varangian Vikings. Great parts of Ukraine used to be part not only of Russia but of Austria, Poland, Turkey or Romania as well. Please, learn some history first.
And then try to understand that fighting fascism (which is mostly imaginary on Ukraine) with Lenin is fighting fire with gasoline.


reader John McVirgo said...

"Sounds like the west is trying to provoke w.w. 3 by killing Russians in east ukrane"



:rolls eyes


I very much doubt you have European relatives that went through the experience of the two world wars that started in Europe and killed millions.


reader John McVirgo said...

Although brave and well meaning, the guy is also clueless, uneducated, and fanning the flames of disaster for the innocent within the region.

If he wants to help, he can either train as a politician, specializing in inter-Ukrainian/Russian history, or he can set up a charity to promote right relations and understanding between Russians and Ukrainians. It's very telling that he's siding with those that share his ethnicity.


reader John Archer said...

"It's very telling that he's siding with those that share his ethnicity."

I give up. What does it tell?


reader Svik said...

If the west NATO countries keep supporting kiev to killing Russians they will get a response from russia. And this could start another war or economic chaos. I would like to prevent this.

From a NATO European.

Last time you mcenglish got on trouble we all has to go and rescue you.

If you keep supporting the ukraniam bandera Nazi who murdered at least half millon you might get into some trouble.

The commies left Russia a long time ago. And they have a eight to exist too.


reader Luboš Motl said...

I surely did mean the Kievan Rus when talking about 1,000 years.


The idea that the people of the Rus were Vikings instead of Slavs is very likely a myth. But even if it is not a myth, it's important for the present that neither Ukrainian nor Russian historians believe anything else than the fact that the Kievan Rus was a country of the Slavs.


reader Luboš Motl said...

During the war, the Banderists were arguably more cruel than the Germans. It shouldn't be shocking - it's what follows when a violent nationalist ideology is combined with the Eastern wildness instead of the Western decency.


reader Shannon said...

McVirgo is clueless and full of it ;-)


reader neimik said...

'Rus' is a viking word. Saying that Russia and Kievian Rus were the same state is like saying that Holy Roman Empire and Roman Empire were the same state, or even that France and Roman Empire are the same state. It's ridiculous.
I dont deny that a major part of Kievan Rus were Slav, but the elite was germanic (including Rurik and Oleg). Like in ancient Rome - many nations lived under roman rule, but the Romans were the elite, not let's say Berbers from North Africa - that's why we donf call Roman Empire a Berberic state (nor a Gallic state, nor Breton state....).
I dont believe in superiority of germanic people over Slavs now, but I believe in superiority of germanic people over slavic tribes then, because it's a fact. Slavs needed quite a long time to create their own stable states, and for almost all slaves civilisation came from the West. Poles were civilized by Germans, Czechs were civilized by Germans and Russians were civilized by Germans, too. Notice that great part of russian aristocracy came from Germany (mainly from Prussia) including even Catherine the Great (she was from Stettin/Sczecin). Many historical text describe typical Russians as more primitive than some other slav groups like Poles or Czechs, or even more primitive than Turks or Tatars. I agree that Russians had and still have some impressive people in their elite, but on the average.... Mr Lubos, have you been to Russia? Have you had many conversations with average Russians from, let's say, St Petersburg... not physicists or mathemathicians but average people? If yes, can you honestly say that knowledge and politeness is on the same level as knowledge and politeness of a typical Swede, French or German??
Do you live in a country where members of russian organisations would greet Russian invasion with bread and flowers)?
My rhetoric is not anti-slavic here. I was in Czech Republic, I have met some Czechs and I dont consider them to be inferior in any way, when compared to western european nations. So, my views cannot be called anti-slavic or pro-germanic, Actually, I really doubt that Russians can be called Slavs. I've seen many of them in my life, and a major part of them have striking mongol features. Even Mr Putin have cheekbones typical for Mongols, and not for Europeans (inclufing western Slavs).


You call me a nazi, but those are just words. I truly believe that readers of yoour blog are intelligent enough to distinguish labels from the facts, and the facts are clear: Mr Poroshenko is a legimate president of Ukraine, Russia is a traitor which was supposed to defend ukrainian integrity, and so called new-Russians are terrorists. Thus, you are a terrorism supporter, a persons for whom there should be no acceptance in a civilized world.


reader Peter F. said...

If anything, it tells the very real tale of tribalism with genocidal tendencies in tow.


reader John Archer said...

But we all know that already. Now listen, McVirgo was aiming at something else. And we all know that too.

Except he doesn't want to spell it out but prefers to 'communicate' by peecee innuendo instead. And that's because he's on a hiding to nothing if he makes any attempt openly to rationalise his 'position'.

But you know that. Don't you. Hence your red-herring response too. It's just more peecee fog.


reader Luboš Motl said...

It's hopeless to discuss with individuals like you who are deluded about every single statement they make.


Rus may have a Viking origin but it's still the #1 Slavic word today among those that represent the identity of the Eastern Slavs. Bohemia is a mixed Celtic-Latin word, meaning the home of the Boios, a Celtic tribe, but it's still a name for a country that's been Slavic for more than 1,000 years.


It's complete bullshit that we were made originally civilized by Germanic tribes. We had the Great Moravia in the 9th century which was the most cultural, and purely Slavic, state in the region of Central Europe and beyond. And in 863, we were brought scripture and all the cutting-edge culture of that time. It didn't come from some barbarian or Germanic tribes. It came from Bulgaria - from Cyril and Method, the missionaries. The Germanic nations only began to influence us - and redirect us from Orthodox Christianity to Roman Catholicism, and from Cyrillics-related scripts to the Latin alphabet, and so on - 100 years later. There was nothing qualitatively new or essential about that.


Yes, I have been repeatedly to Russia - one month in total - and I have discussed about many things with about 30 Russian folks in my life. If you had any other question like that, the general answer is always the same. I am the cultivated, educated person who is right. You are just a primitive Nazi with a totally idiotic twisted version of the history who is deluded about every single thing you say.


reader John McVirgo said...

Simply that there is this instinct within some people to side with an ethnic group for genetic/cultural reasons during a conflict with other ethnic groups. We need to be aware of this when claiming we're on the "right" side, and being "fair" towards other ethnic groups.


reader John Archer said...

EU politics: BBC misleads its audience on Ukraine — again.

Exterminate the BBC. Exterminate the EU.


reader scooby said...

You sound a bit like a Dalek.


reader John Archer said...

Oh, Scooby, you say the nicest things! :)


reader Pierre said...

Joining the Ukrainian rebels is like joining the communist side to fight fascist. Fight evil with evil?


The history has proven many many times that the enemy of my enemy is most probably my enemy too.


So seriousy.. Ivo Stejskal should get a medal for brave stupidity.


reader Pierre said...

Lubos just fell into a typical human paradox where he sympathizes with a group of people because it fights the other group that he dislikes.


If the group (rebels) would not fight the other group, he would not feel sympathetic to them as he would start investigating their character and morals more thoroughly.


reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Pierre, could you please explain me what is "paradoxical" about the fact that a conflict makes one care about people he wouldn't care about much otherwise, and that he tends to side with the group that looks better or at least less bad?


reader Luboš Motl said...

Indeed, it's just like joining Stalin to fight Hitler, that's exactly why I get so polarized about it, and it's a good thing to join Stalin to fight Hitler.


Stalin was a lethal threat for big subsets of his country. However, Hitler was a threat for whole other nations. Of course that a decent person has to join the lesser evil or less urgent evil to fight the really bad evil.


I've had decades to think whether I would side with the Red Army in the Second World War, and be sure that for decades, I didn't hesitate for a second that the answer is Yes. I think that people who are ambivalent about this issue are fascist scum.


reader Pierre said...

Already explained it buddy. In times of peace you would not consider most of the rebels as your friends, but as your enemy. They lie, distort, kill, show signs of greed and low morals. Same goes to the "Ukraine" side which is as despicable.


To me personally both sides are my enemy.. so I eat popcorn and watch how the aggressive individuals among the Ukrainians are killing while the innocent suffer.


In the end I think Ukraine would be better off with better connections to West than Russia. But they should not join EU if they don't want to end up poor and devastated because that's what will EU end up like (if it continues doing what it's doing).


reader Luboš Motl said...

You haven't explained anything. You haven't provided any explanation what's "paradoxical" about taking sides. You just inform us that you hate all people because they're imperfect. That's a possible attitude but it doesn't make my attitude "paradoxical".


reader Pierre said...

When was the last time you took your meds? I guess you skipped your dose there. Getting overly emotional and irrational again.


reader Peter F. said...

Your "peecee fog" might lift just a little bit if you could add together
1. the utterly common insidious factor of people's experiential priming through all the relevant kinds of imprints left behind by personal historical, non-personal historical, and pre-historical environmental sources of SH-imploring type threats - i.e. threats that cannot be successfully actively dealt with, only dealt with (or far most likely successfully coped with) by means of automatically induced "specific/synaptic hibernation" (SH);

2. that these evolutionary pressures tend to often be paralleled by a likewise environmentally presented type of evolutionary pressure/lifetime challenge in the form of procreation promoting opportunities [especially opportunities taken by the members of small populations back to which we can trace our main genetic lineage - populations that were composed of individuals that were descendants only a handful of generations-removed from our "selective sweep"-producing upright-walking and language function conferring mutation pioneering common ancestors (perhaps mainly two individuals, or more if identical twins, who lived at roughly 6000K and 100k years ago, respectively, and whose phenotype expressed a powerful pleiotropic mutation that occurred, at those approximate times, in the FOXP2 region of our DNA] such as not least importantly the opportunity to with unprecedented keenness and competence raid, kill, and usurp the territory (and gathered food resources) of, neighboring protohuman troops (typically rather closely related extended family groups the individuals of did not carry hence did not functionally and behaviorally express the then latest of these exceptionally powerful type of "ambiadvantageous" mutations.


reader John Archer said...

Jesus Christ! Are you serious?

I'm not interested in unpicking that verbiage to make sense of it. If you have anything worth saying then state it in a comprehensible fashion: you do the work — don't expect your reader to do it for you.

It's just about possible that you may have stated something worthwhile or relevant here (although I doubt it) but I'm not going to make any effort to discern it from that jumble of words.

Look:

"...small populations back to which we can trace our main genetic lineage"

Our 'genetic lineage' is the 'trace' — that's precisely what the fucking word means. See? So, you're saying trace the trace. Enough!

That's just a small example. I'm not parsing the rest of what you've written.