If anyone is interested in the UN Security Council discussing Ukraine there are live streams now.

Here is one, I'll link and embed, not sure if live streams embed properly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuDVD-CXQ-s

Well according to you, Ukraine already officially admitted it so what is there to investigate or discuss.

Does it work only if the assumption is that Ukraine was not a legitimate democracy prior to the euromaiden?

(First quote might not be the most fitting icemage quote. However, I don't think my question unfairly represents his position. Also takes longer when browsing jsp with phone)

This post was edited by WiziLiCe on Nov 16 2022 02:30pm

I'd like to give them the best possible interpretation, rather than assuming ill intent (which is certainly possible)

i'd answer personally that jan 6th in a vaccuum wasnt a legit threat to democracy, but the proposed measures it's spawned that trump is running on in 2024 are. they'd restrict voting so drastically its hard not to say so imo.

and as to ukraine its hard to call the 2010 presidential win either the will of the people or illegitimate. ukraine isnt exactly known for clean elections, and at the same time it's not a banana republic either. the ending tally was some 2-3% gap between the victorious russian candidate and the losing western candidate, with 55-60% of the population voting. was the coup the democratic will of the people, likely not, was it the will of the majority especially after the EU friendly agreement was abandoned, maybe.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 16 2022 02:40pm

In serious analysis, the most likely outcome of an actual insurrection that starts with nebulous mob action and then seizes upon that to send in an armed populace to take control of the capitol, would have been just that- they'd get control of the capitol. We'd have an ensuing hostage crisis, but they'd quickly find out that their jurisdiction over the country extends a few hundred yards in every direction. The capitol police aren't armed for an Olympus Has Fallen scenario nor should they be, after all they're just protecting a bunch of replaceable bureaucrats not an aristocracy.



The difference between a moral lens and pragmatic lens. We can say Russia are a bunch of bad stinkers for their invasion, but they have a clear and obvious geopolitical reason for opposing aggressive NATO expansion right up to their doorstep after Joe Biden directly stated he wouldn't defend with force what he was willing to take by force. Nothing about the Ukraine war so far has served our national interests, we're getting hammered economically and geopolitically, weakening our entire alliance while China sits back and laughs. Its like a bunch of cold war hawks still think we're in a zero sum game with the USSR, we gain nothing from their loss, and we're fighting over a piss poor country we didn't even want in the EU because it was a net burden.

Still make me laugh that ppl believe 6th Jan hoax was real. Just show how low iq people are in 2022 and whatever the magic box tell them = Absolute truth.

Its true it was all a hoax, I watched the videos with some careful image enhancement software and I can tell you that crowd was faked by using the same tech they use in hollywood to make fake crowd scenes. And the supposed 'trials' used holograms of people.

nah, they likely stall long enough to evacuate the chamber, as they did. it was only delayed long as it was because of no shots fired or guns seen. ar 15s roll up and the chamber is cleared in under 5 mins, maybe far less. then they're just armed in the empty chamber, pun intended.



i wouldnt call it an absolute win, but russia fumbling this war is a win. just as defending their hegemony is a win for them, even if they lose or barely win in the end. we took iraq easily, we struggled to hold and change it. russia is struggling to take, mostly due to restraint. good.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 16 2022 03:01pm

Agreed.



This is what I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around. There would be a point in which, given the will of the majority and disregarding outside influences, 'overthrowing the sitting government' could be considered legitimate? Or this presupposes a malfunctioning democracy?