Estonia has announced its plan of war with Russia - to quickly blow up everything and flee to Finlan

And therefore each time the Esotnian are voting, the pro-Nato-Parties win... Aha....Soso...

 

Why didn't make Russia better options?

 

As one who has never been to Russia or Estonia, I cannot imagine why in hell Russia would want to invade there. They have nothing to gain, with the possible exception of striking NATO targets if it came to that.

 

They might now after their corrupt politicians were bribed into joining NATO, before no. Estonia is also pulling the ukraine card, outlawing the Russian language....which in part led to the civil war in ukraine. Not too smart the Estonian leadership....now they are looking to replace about 1/3 of their public teachers because they can't speak Estonian.

 

Even if that were true, why would it justify an invasion?

Estonia never outlawed the Russian language. They did require state-supported schools to teach in the official language of the country, which isn't entirely unreasonable (would you be fine with state schools in the US teaching exclusively in Spanish?). People can and do still also teach their children Russian (indeed, being bilingual should be encouraged), but having them only able to speak Russian is limiting for the individuals and divisive for the country (as was intended by the people supporting it).

Also, the "civil war" in Ukraine only started after Russia took effective control across the Donbas in 2014, having failed to manipulate Ukrainian politics in their favour. That led to an immediate switch from largely peaceful campaigns for federalisation and greater regional autonomy in to a war for "independence".

 

What is this, fake news hour?

What are you rattling about "failed to manipulate ukrainian politics in their favour"? (I see you aren't American). The US government overthrew the last democratically elected President of ukraine in 2014. It's called a Coup. Russia wasn't doing jacksh*t. After the Coup, some ethnic Russian ukrainians weren't happy with said Coup, so they took to protesting. After a whole bunch of them got burned alive in Odesa by polish-ukrainian nazis, civil war broke out. Maybe you're on the fake news BBC feed? Manipulate you say? *******n, how sad and pathetic.

https://www.rt.com/russia/601218-estonian-teachers-fail-language-test/
https://www.miragenews.com/un-experts-warn-estonias-minority-language-ban-1067341/
https://www.rt.com/news/estonia-russian-language-ban-635/
https://www.rt.com/news/604366-latvia-bans-russian-language-atm/
https://www.rt.com/russia/581413-un-estonia-russian-language/

Open your eyes/use your brain. If this were the 1960s,70s,80s and the Soviet Union and Mexico were coordinating militarily and Mexico was to become a member of the Soviet Union, the US would invade Mexico in the first week of such news, not wait until after an Orange Revolution like ukraine had in 2004 or a Coup in 2014...nope not wait 18 years....in the first week.

Gimme a break with this hypocritical nonsense.

 

Yes, but I'm challenging that. My opinions are based on a broad assessment of the facts, not any particular "news" sources.

No, I'm European, which puts me, geographically, socio-politically and practically, much closer to this topic than you.

I always find it more than a little arrogant when Americans assume their country has the power to secretly cause all of these world events given all the examples of them trying but failing to manipulate the politics of other countries. The US certainly favoured Ukraine leaning towards the EU rather than the CIS (just as Russia favoured the opposite) but they don't have the ability to simply make that happen.

The Euromaiden protests occurred because the majority of Ukrainians supported the association agreement (not membership) with the EU, something their parliament have voted for and President agreed to. It was pressure from Russia that caused him to try to indefinitely delay it and the violent responses to the resultant protests he ordered that lost him what support he did have. I also find it telling that he ultimately fled to Russia and is still living there in comfort.

Given the president had fled, effectively absolving himself of his responsibilities, the Ukrainian government was left in an impossible situation because their constitution didn't account for the unpredictable scenario. They obviously had to do something and did, themselves decided on a way forward of selecting an interim president until democratic elections could be held.

During the political vacuum following Yanukovych fleeing, Russia took the opportunity to send (unmarked) troops in to the Donbas and Crimea, seizing control of those regions. They rushed through a questionable referendum then forced the Crimean regional government to vote to become Russian (reportedly at literal gunpoint) and in the Donbas, turned what were largely peaceful campaigns for more regional autonomy in to an open war for "independence". Ukraine was certainly guilty of wrongs in that conflict but to present it as entirely one-sided is simply wrong.

Far from a perfect situation at any point but not the definitive coup pro-Russians spin it as and certainly not one controlled by anyone outside, EU, Russian or American.

None of your Russian links about Estonia counter my description of the situation. The did not ban the Russian language anywhere, they required education to be provided in the official language of the nation. The fact that so many teachers didn't have a basic grasp of that language only serves to demonstrate the problem. They, and their students, are free to learn and speak Russian too, but they have to also be able to speak Estonian. I don't see why that should be so controversial.

So it would have been OK for the US to intervene in Mexican politics for their own benefit but it wouldn't be OK for them to do so in Ukraine for the same reason?

 

You're writing nonsense.

- What's that?


Is it this one?


Or is the bombing of Yugoslavia legitimate? Maybe killing Gaddafi is legitimate?

When a representative of Western culture writes about legitimacy, it's not even sad. It's funny.

 

Don't be astonished when representatives of the Western culture argue against the Eastern way of ruling. Someone like Nawalny had a fair process, you'll tell me? And that his poisoning was lawfully?

 

A "legitimate concern" is a concern that is considered legitimate. In this context, it means that the government of Estonia having a concern that Russia may attempt to invade their country (hence making plans over how they would need to respond) and that concern being legitimate because there is a real possibility (however small) of Russia actually doing that.

That is not talking about an invasion being a morally or legally legitimate act. I suspect you knew that already though, and just didn't want to answer the question. Do you agree that Estonia needs to be making plans for the possibility of a Russian invasion because that could well happen if the Estonians follow policies Putin doesn't like?

I'm not representing anyone (interesting you make that assumption about other posters), I'm only speaking for myself. I criticise Western governments when they do or say things that I think are wrong (especially my own, obviously), I even criticise some of their actions and choices on this specific issue.

 

Yeahhhhhh.....NO.

A bit naive of how the corrupt bastards in the US government work? As far as your nonsense about Yanukovych and their constitution, he was impeached (just as Trump was twice) but he was not convicted (just as Trump) and therefore could not be legally removed from the Presidency (just as Trump was NOT), so they resorted to violence....it's called a Coup. Even if Yanukovych was convicted, their Constitution required their Supreme Court to review the conviction, an additional step unlike the US Constitution. AND even if Yanukovych had been legally removed, his successor wasn't the legal successor as required by their Constitution.

My my my, seems your geographical location doesn't mean squat. You would think the Euros would know the facts but leave it to an arrogant American.

Part in red is just fake news garbage.

 

I'm not questioning the corruption, I'm questioning the capability. The EU, US and Russia clearly exerted various forms of pressure at various levels of legitimacy but (in part precisely because of that) none of them can make exactly what they wanted just happen. The fact is that Ukrainian politicians and, most importantly, Ukrainian people, played a major role in events.

He wasn't impeached at all (in part because there was no specific offence to impeach him on and, as you point out, the process would take too long). The Euromaiden protests were demanding the EU agreement, which had already been voted for in the Rada and that he had previously supported, was signed. Those protests were largely peaceful until they faced violent response, primarily from the Berkut. Yanukovych only fled after that attempted crackdown failed.

It is true that neither version of the Ukrainian Constitution has procedures for a President simply abandoning his post and fleeing (I doubt many do) but they couldn't do nothing. Whether what they actually did was the right or best thing is legitimately open to question, but I don't think it's relevant to the core topic here.

Alternatively, what you believe is Russian propaganda. I certainly don't see how you can be so sure that it isn't, at least in part. Again, I'm not denying American involvement, some that shouldn't have been, but to present them as some kind of controlling puppet masters is ridiculous. It's the binary "America bad, Russia good" mindset (and indeed, the exact opposite) that I'm objecting to.

 

No. Estonia does not need to prepare for a Russian invasion. It makes no sense for Estonia. Especially considering the historical examples when Estonians greeted any ruler with enthusiastic shouts of joy. Naturally with a solemn handing over of the keys to the city.
All the talk about Estonians preparing for war is just a smokescreen of corruption and outright theft of Estonian budget funds.

 

1. Can you prove that Navalny were poisoned? If not, I'm not interested in idle chatter.
2. Navalny was dealt with very mildly. For his crimes, he should have been dealt with as is customary in Western countries. Just like with Hussein or Gaddafi. And although Russian laws are often inappropriately humane to such characters, it would have been fair.
But I wonder why you are interested in Navalny, a criminal and twice convicted (fraud and theft) recidivist?

 

Youi'll be surprised: Yes. The anamnese of the German doctors had proven it.

Can you prove that Nawalny committed those crimes? Can you prove he had full accesss to the medical healthcare he needed during his "oh so nicely arranged" prison time?

 

Oh, some random Joe tells me about Estonian history, knowing it better than the Estionans themselves! And for sure, a random Joe knows about all the corruption the Kremlin "found" and "proved". Can you prove any of your stories? If not, I'm not interested in idle chatter.

 

1. Show me a link to the investigation materials on the poisoning of the thief Navalny, where the fact of poisoning is DOCUMENTED.
2. Have you been banned on Google? Type in Russian “Navalny kirov forest embezzlement court materials” and “Navalny mail fraud court materials”. If you don't understand Russian, use a translator.

 

https://www.charite.de/service/pres...eiten_zur_behandlung_von_alexei_nawalny_in_f/ You know how to translate?

If you wanna inform yourself on the rigtht of men to stone women, you'll read only Taliban sources, don't you? Nawalny was an anti-corruption fighter and therefore had to be removed.

 

I'm not here to please you.

 

Because you think they'll just surrender or because you don't think Putin has any interest in expanding Russian borders further in to the old USSR territory?

I'm not sure what you're basing that assessment on. You always seem to find a way to be insulting and dismissive of anywhere and anyone not associated with Russia. I really don't get it.

 

1. Ahahaha... Expected empty link with no evidence. I wouldn't expect anything else from you, though.
2. Navalny is a recidivist thief. Twice convicted for theft.

 

You don't have to make excuses.

 

And both of your assumptions are correct. First, Putin is not interested in expanding Russia's borders into the Baltic states. (He was also against expanding Russia's territory in Ukraine. It was the Washington idiots and their weak minded Ukrainian servants who provoked the Russians). At least at this point in time.
And secondly, as I wrote you above, Estonians and all Baltic states will surrender instantly. This fact proves historical processes. You can resent it, believe it or not, but it is a fact. Read history. The Baltic states are nonsense. A ridiculous historical entity. Just like Ukraine. They've never had statehood. I don't know about Estonians, but Latvians had a written language only 50 years earlier than Chukchi (a northern tribe of reindeer herders in Russia). The Chukchi were given the written language by Comrade Stalin. And Latvians got the written language 50 years earlier. The alphabet was given to them by the Germans, and the first textbook in Latvian was published by the Russians.
I think Estonians are not far from Latvians in their development. And that's a fact. Whether you like it or not, it doesn't matter.
By the way, there is a Baltic news site called Delphi. It is the most famous among these wild nations. If you read the news from this site, you will have the impression that you are reading village news from the 16th century. Amazingly primitive news.

 

So Fascist Putin wants Poland and Finland?

 

Its a well known fact that tax fraud & evasion and other financial crimes are very common crimes in Russia and very tolerated in Russian society. Even the government tolerates.....until you get in the way of Putin or criticize his policies. Then they suddenly care about financial crimes and charge you.