Jews in Eastern Ukraine advised to "register" as Jewish by Russian paramilitaries

[Vurtual]

The problem is that 'human rights' are often used by the west as an excuse for their imperialism. And also that only certain types of rights are focused on while others ignored - like positive rights to a just economic position (the right to have a fair share of the world's wealth/the right to have a decent standard of living/right not to be exploited by some massive plutocracy). The UN focuses on the passive rights without focusing on economic justice, and so in effect it's basically just used to give a happy feeling to the imperialism.

And as for whether different countries should be 'allowed' or not to do certain things - who are we exactly to be judging anyone else? It's all very well if you believe the UN is some impartial forum to get the world's view on stuff, but everyone knows it's effectively run by the US (just look at the voting record of the general assembley compared to the security council on eg israel/palestine). Like when you hear on the 'news' that the whole 'international community' is behind something, it usually means the US, some european nations and tonga. When it's basically the security council that decides anything, that effectively means the ones with all the nukes decide what's right.

As for ukraine, undoubtledly there are genuine grievances on both sides - it's just that when you get to hear the greivances of one side in the media, it just means the other side are probably the approved baddies, rather than any inherent rightness of the people involved. Russia and the west are both horrible oligarchic tyrranies in thier own ways (though the west tends to export or outsource a large part of it's nastiness to the third world) - it's just the west is a so much better armed, and so imo are the bigger threat to the world.

 

[Shambles]

And as for whether different countries should be 'allowed' or not to do certain things - who are we exactly to be judging anyone else? It's all very well if you believe the UN is some impartial forum to get the world's view on stuff, but everyone knows it's effectively run by the US (just look at the voting record of the general assembley compared to the security council on eg israel/palestine). Like when you hear on the 'news' that the whole 'international community' is behind something, it usually means the US, some european nations and tonga. When it's basically the security council that decides anything, that effectively means the ones with all the nukes decide what's right.

I said nothing about the UN and don't see the relevance really. I was talking about actual human rights not UN human rights legislation.

 

[Vurtual]

Fair dos (i just used you as a springboard for a morning rant - i forgot to say i agree with you about rights being important, but don't think we as a country have really got a leg to stand on to intervene anywhere until we sort out our own violations of the world's rights by pinching their stuff for centuries - as individuals we can obviously judge who we like (and should)

 

[parttime crackhead]

The US loves a 3rd world country to exploit. If they can, through civil war, skelp Ukraine back into the 3rd world it'll be perfect for corporate exploitation.

 

[Shambles]

Always more than happy to help bring another rant into the world

I often tend to separate the nuts and bolts of realities from more idealistic ramblings. I was really just talking about human rights as a concept being intrinsic to every person in every country at all times. How that would be made concrete and actually be applied and bound in law is another matter and not one I feel confident pontificating about. I do ideas and and ideals, somebody else would be required to do the practicalities and hard work

I would agree that the UK has nothing much in the way of any kinda moral superiority to go tell others how they should run their affairs when it comes to a number of issues. I wouldn't say that necessarily applies across the board though as there are good things about this country which I think we do get more or less right and in many cases closer to the ideal than some other countries. I'm sure that would apply to every country pretty much - all have strengths and weaknesses, good and bad, things we could learn from and things we could teach them. I don't bang the drum for any kinda British superiority by any stretch, but I also don't hate the place or run it down for the sake of it. Good and bad, babies and bathwater and all that. In this specific instance I have no qualms in saying that British policy on homosexuality is better than Ugandan. Not to say it's perfect or that other countries don't have better but I don't know the laws of other countries in any detail at all to comment on those. And I'd still say that the basic human rights transcend time and national boundaries - they are universal whether in Uganda or Uxbridge. Or anywhere else with or without a 'U' at the beginning.

 

[ColtDan]

Oh shambollocks, you and your wise words

 

[Shambles]

The US loves a 3rd world country to exploit. If they can, through civil war, skelp Ukraine back into the 3rd world it'll be perfect for corporate exploitation.

They certainly do and certainly would. Don't really see the Ukraine situation being brought about by the US though no matter how low an opinion I may have of their foreign policy at times. Can't see them doing a great deal to intervene either - I don't think they or the EU have the balls to take on Russia so directly. No doubt a Good Thing given that could (would) turn very nasty indeed. I'm honestly not sure what I think the best course of action would be in this situation. Or even if action is helpful at all. On t'other hand, it's not good to see Ukraine being shrunk and shrivelled by having bits of it lopped off.

 

[ColtDan]

I really should make more of an input.. but i can never be assed, so this is as good as its gonna get

 

[Vurtual]

Agree obviously about rights, but as i said we need to add positive rights to a fair share (economic rights if you like) into the list of rights as they're not there currently (as i think this is even more important than all the passive rights such as sexuality etc - sort out the economic rights and the others will come easier anyway)

And, about the west not being involved in fucking up ukraine.... check this link out about Poland (for NATO) training maidan fascist people before the protests started or the vote about the EU happened

http://www.voltairenet.org/article183373.html

 

[parttime crackhead]

They certainly do and certainly would. Don't really see the Ukraine situation being brought about by the US though no matter how low an opinion I may have of their foreign policy at times. Can't see them doing a great deal to intervene either

Victoria Nuland would disagree...

I've not read any Ukraine news today but the last I saw Nuland's puppet was asking for more direct US help. Which says to me that the US wants to get involved more directly. Why else would they have him say that?

Here's a good quote.

We are going to lose Ukraine if we continue as we are going

Ukraine is their's to lose apparently.

 

[Shambles]

Snippets from Nuland call would suggest a bit more interest than the bog standard sanctions thing that's all I've really heard of being proposed thus far, yes. Hadn't seen that but can't say I'm surprised there's behind the scenes discussion that doesn't quite fit with public announcements. I'd suspect they'd much rather it had stayed behind the scenes cos I still don't think they'd want to get directly involved in a big and visible way - no Middle East style invasions and the like surely? Can't see there being an appetite for that. Take the point about US involvement being more involved than had been seen publicly until recently though.

I'm mostly more amused by the name Arseniy Yatseniuk though I must admit. Infantile but hard to resist all the same.