Ukraine's European Revolution?

[mongers]

Personally, I blame the Soviets.

[The Larch]

I wasn't aware that was the point.  I thought we were discussing the situation in Ukraine on it's own merits not simply how it plays in Russian external propaganda.  We have a good reason for giving Spellus a bad time here.  He's a good guy, and I like him a lot, but he wrong on this.  Not only is he wrong he's starting to sound like the Russian nationalists in regard to Ukraine.

I feel like I should clarify my position cause people are trying to fill it in for me.

1) Ukraine in 1991 was an unlikely, to some extent unnatural entity. 
2) Since 1991 this has become a whole lot worse.  Russia has the benefit of natural resources, but there was also always been a few competent Russian potentates and a few competent corporations (thought to be fair half of those are Sukhoi).  Ukrainian oligarchs are the scum of the earth.  They've completely despoiled the country. 
3) The political situation wasn't improved by the Orange Revolution.  It is probably not going to improve now. 
4) Giving massive amounts of military and economic aid to Ukraine would be throwing good money after bad without massive political and economic reforms, which would likely result in the kind of riots we are seeing in the South and East right now anyway.  This was going to happen.  Putin is expediting what was already nigh-on inevitable. 
5) Strengthening NATO doesn't have to mean expanding it to include Ukraine as we now understand it.  I don't think American and German boys should die so that Mariupol and Donetsk are ruled by a Kiev they are increasingly alienated from.  Instead we focus on inoculating Baltic Russian populations against this kind of insanity and build up relations with the Poles. 
6) I think giving in to the urge to give more and more support to Ukraine is playing in to Moscow's interest.  They want a conflict.  They want it to look like they are fighting the CIA.  We're playing our role in a play that is, ultimately, almost entirely about domestic Russian politics.

So you basically deny Ukraine the right to exist independently.

[Tamas]

He is not pro-Russian AT ALL

[Queequeg]

I'm pro-Russian in that I like Russia and want it to be a normal country with roads and schools and companies that isn't psychotically trying to Frankenstein the USSR.

[mongers]

I'm pro-Russian in that I like Russia and want it to be a normal country with roads and schools and companies that isn't psychotically trying to Frankenstein the USSR.

I'm pro-American in that I like America and want it to be a normal country with non-crumbling interstates and schools that all teach science and companies, not corporations endowed with super-citizenship, that isn't psychotically trying to Frankenstein the world power status of 1949.

[Admiral Yi]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

[mongers]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

I copied Spellus sentence and just changed a few things, not my fault he had too many ands, so the long sentence was irrevocable lost in the first place. 

[Razgovory]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

I copied Spellus sentence and just changed a few things, not my fault he had too many ands, so the long sentence was irrevocable lost in the first place. 

You should have changed the companies thing cause that doesn't make any sense.

[Admiral Yi]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

I copied Spellus sentence and just changed a few things, not my fault he had too many ands, so the long sentence was irrevocable lost in the first place. 

I'm pro-American in that I like America and want it to be a normal country, with non-crumbling interstates and schools that all teach science and companies which are not corporations endowed with super-citizenship, one that isn't psychotically trying to Frankenstein the world power status of 1949.

I think this works a little better.

Frankenstein as a verb is an issue, but what can you do since it's in the original.

[mongers]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

I copied Spellus sentence and just changed a few things, not my fault he had too many ands, so the long sentence was irrevocable lost in the first place. 

I'm pro-American in that I like America and want it to be a normal country, with non-crumbling interstates and schools that all teach science and companies which are not corporations endowed with super-citizenship, one that isn't psychotically trying to Frankenstein the world power status of 1949.

I think this works a little better.

Frankenstein as a verb is an issue, but what can you do since it's in the original.

Yes that's better, I also agree frankenstein is an issue, but didn't want to lose the spirit of Spellus's post.

Yes raz, I didn't know what to make of it, I'd guess he was suggesting companies run as regular, no corrupt businesses. I thought I'd take a pop at the recently 'legalised' corporations as citizens and the role they can play in politics. 

[Queequeg]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

I copied Spellus sentence and just changed a few things, not my fault he had too many ands, so the long sentence was irrevocable lost in the first place. 

You should have changed the companies thing cause that doesn't make any sense.

Roads, schools and independent, globally competitive industries that aren't Soviet-era husks that are now largely Oligarch money-printing machines?

[Eddie Teach]

Your sentence was fine but Mongers' extra clauses added ambiguity.

[Razgovory]

Your sentence was fine but Mongers' extra clauses added ambiguity.

Yes.  It causes confusion.

[Viking]

Our schools can either teach science or companies, not both.

teach teh controversy

[Barrister]

I wasn't aware that was the point.  I thought we were discussing the situation in Ukraine on it's own merits not simply how it plays in Russian external propaganda.  We have a good reason for giving Spellus a bad time here.  He's a good guy, and I like him a lot, but he wrong on this.  Not only is he wrong he's starting to sound like the Russian nationalists in regard to Ukraine.

I feel like I should clarify my position cause people are trying to fill it in for me.

1) Ukraine in 1991 was an unlikely, to some extent unnatural entity. 
2) Since 1991 this has become a whole lot worse.  Russia has the benefit of natural resources, but there was also always been a few competent Russian potentates and a few competent corporations (thought to be fair half of those are Sukhoi).  Ukrainian oligarchs are the scum of the earth.  They've completely despoiled the country. 
3) The political situation wasn't improved by the Orange Revolution.  It is probably not going to improve now. 
4) Giving massive amounts of military and economic aid to Ukraine would be throwing good money after bad without massive political and economic reforms, which would likely result in the kind of riots we are seeing in the South and East right now anyway.  This was going to happen.  Putin is expediting what was already nigh-on inevitable.
5) Strengthening NATO doesn't have to mean expanding it to include Ukraine as we now understand it.  I don't think American and German boys should die so that Mariupol and Donetsk are ruled by a Kiev they are increasingly alienated from.  Instead we focus on inoculating Baltic Russian populations against this kind of insanity and build up relations with the Poles. 
6) I think giving in to the urge to give more and more support to Ukraine is playing in to Moscow's interest.  They want a conflict.  They want it to look like they are fighting the CIA.  We're playing our role in a play that is, ultimately, almost entirely about domestic Russian politics.

I've bolded the flawed portion of your reasoning.  This tension is entirely russian-based.  There is virtually no evidence to support this being a natural popular response, and every evidence that it is russian provocateurs.