[andyt]

I think those pic are of the burning in Odessa, no? That was done by the pre-West side, so aren't they the terrorists then?

[Winnipegger]

Terrorism is an act of violence designed to induce terror. Such as bombing a shopping market. Definition of terrorism is not clear, not agreed on. Kidnapping random members of public could be called terrorism. Kidnapping members of the media is intended to create terror in journalists. But kidnapping government officials would be an act of insurgence. Capturing government buildings would be an act of insurgence, or civil war. Or treason.

But that's just words. Violence is violence. Anyone dragged out of his car with a gun at his head won't care which word you use.

[PostFactum]

andyt andyt:

$1:

In the international community, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition.[1][2] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts that are intended to create fear (terror); are perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (e.g., military personnel in peacetime or civilians).

The word "terrorism" is politically loaded and emotionally charged,[5] and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of "terrorism".[6][7] In some cases, the same group may be described as "freedom fighters" by its supporters and considered to be terrorists by its opponents.[8] The concept of terrorism may be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to legitimize political or other opponents,[9] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

At the same time, the reverse may also take place when states perpetrate or are accused of perpetrating state terrorism. The usage of the term has a controversial history, with individuals such as Nelson Mandela at one point also branded a terrorist.[11]

Ok, you want the laws, I'll give them to you. According to Criminal law theory terrorism is a specific crime. And it already exists, we can't call killing of one man and killing 3 kids are the same crimes. Crime with kids is special, and because of it, the punishment for it will be much more than for man. We can't call both of this crimes "simple killing".

[andyt]

$1:

The concept of terrorism may be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[9] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

At the same time, the reverse may also take place when states perpetrate or are accused of perpetrating state terrorism. The usage of the term has a controversial history, with individuals such as Nelson Mandela at one point also branded a terrorist.[

[PostFactum]

andyt andyt:

I think those pic are of the burning in Odessa, no? That was done by the pre-West side, so aren't they the terrorists then?

For your journalists "from the ground" they were switched off because of unknown gas and than they died. If not gas they could easy hide inside of building or roof, because it is very large.

[PostFactum]

andyt andyt:

$1:

The concept of terrorism may be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents,[9] and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

At the same time, the reverse may also take place when states perpetrate or are accused of perpetrating state terrorism. The usage of the term has a controversial history, with individuals such as Nelson Mandela at one point also branded a terrorist.[

So you want to say that they are simple opponents? Subway in Moscow and Boston explosions were made by simple opponents?

[andyt]

You're sinking to FD levels here, where you use pics to claim terrorism on the pro-Russian side, then, when it's pointed out to you the fire was caused by the pro-Western side, you basically seem to be saying they terrorized themselves.

Feel free to call the pro-Russians terrorists. Not a generally accepted term, most people see it differently.

[PostFactum]

andyt andyt:

You're sinking to FD levels here, where you use pics to claim terrorism on the pro-Russian side, then, when it's pointed out to you the fire was caused by the pro-Western side, you basically seem to be saying they terrorized themselves.

Feel free to call the pro-Russians terrorists. Not a generally accepted term, most people see it differently.

That's not all pictures, I can't put all here. When I say pro-Russians I mean armored forces with Georgievska stripes, who are doing terror on East Ukraine (Unfortunately, everyone here understands about who I'm talking, but not you) I don't mean Russian patriots, which I respect as much as any else patriots of any Country.

[andyt]

OK, that clears it up. What are Georgievska stripes? Are these the green men people talk about? So basically this would be state (Russian) terror?

[PostFactum]

andyt andyt:

OK, that clears it up. What are Georgievska stripes? Are these the green men people talk about? So basically this would be state (Russian) terror?

Talk about what? Yes, we can speak about Russian terror.

[andyt]

Are you still in favor of not fighting back with these guys?

[PostFactum]

andyt andyt:

Are you still in favor of not fighting back with these guys?

Now no, because government collected information who they are, where they receive money, what are their goals, what do they use to achieve them. We have money etc. If to eat food just from fire you can get burned.

[Goober911]

andyt andyt:

Are you still in favor of not fighting back with these guys?

PostFactum PostFactum:

andyt andyt:

Are you still in favor of not fighting back with these guys?

Now no, because government collected information who they are, where they receive money, what are their goals, what do they use to achieve them. We have money etc. If to eat food just from fire you can get burned.

AndyT - This is what is referred to as Intel.

[Goober911]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/16/world ... ml?hp&_r=0

By late Thursday, miners and steelworkers had deployed in at least five cities, including the regional capital, Donetsk, though they had not yet become the dominant force there that they are in Mariupol, the region’s second largest city and the site just last week of bloody confrontations between Ukrainian troops and pro-Russian militants,.

By late Thursday, miners and steelworkers had deployed in at least five cities, including the regional capital, Donetsk, though they had not yet become the dominant force there that they are in Mariupol, the region’s second largest city and the site just last week of bloody confrontations between Ukrainian troops and pro-Russian militants,.
Continue reading the main story
Related Coverage

The workers are employees of Rinat Akhmetov, Ukraine’s richest man and a recent convert to the side of Ukrainian unity, who on Wednesday issued a statement rejecting the separatist cause of the self-styled Donetsk People’s Republic but endorsing greater local autonomy. His decision to throw his weight fully behind the interim government in Kiev could inflict a body blow to the separatists, already reeling from Russian President Vladimir V. Putin’s withdrawal of full-throated support last week.

Wearing only their protective clothing and hard-hats, the workers said they were “outside politics” and just trying to establish order. Faced with waves of steelworkers joined by the police, the pro-Russian protesters have melted away, as has any sign of the Donetsk People’s Republic or its representatives. Backhoes and dump trucks from the steelworkers’ factory dismantled all the barricades that had been erected.

Metinvest and DTEK, the two subsidiaries in metals and mining of Mr. Akhmetov’s company, System Capital Management, together employ 280,000 people in eastern Ukraine, forming an important and possibly decisive force in the region. They have a history of political activism stretching back to miner strikes that helped bring down the Soviet Union. In this conflict, they had not previously signaled their allegiance to one side or the other.

It was still too early to ascertain whether the separatists would regroup to resist the industrial workers, though none were to be found in and around Mariupol on Thursday, not even in the public administration building they had been occupying.

[Goober911]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... in_ukraine

Until a few months ago, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) was an obscurity to most Westerners in the post-Cold-War world. Now it's the stuff of headlines and is at the center of high-stakes political deal-making. The reason is Ukraine, where our organization is mustering all of its reserves to help monitor and defuse the situation. In general, I think our efforts have been admirable. We've dispatched a Special Monitoring Mission to the country to establish the facts on the ground and track security developments. We've launched a National Dialogue Project aimed at building confidence among different segments of society, and facilitated a rare meeting of Russian and Ukrainian members of parliament. We're also preparing for a massive monitoring effort during the upcoming Ukrainian election on May 25. (In the photo above, two OSCE officers observe a pro-Ukrainian rally in Lugansk on April 19.)

First, there simply must be consequences for the kind of thrashing of OSCE commitments that we've seen during the Ukraine crisis. The Helsinki Final Act is not an international treaty backed by law and efforts to turn it into one have gone nowhere. But what we can at least do is not pull any punches, publicly denouncing at the highest levels the unacceptable actions in Ukraine and insisting that the provisions that all participating States agreed to be observed. When the smoke clears in Ukraine, the OSCE chairman-in-office could call an organization-wide summit on the existential gravity of this moment. The result could be a mechanism, or at least the initiation of a process, that the organization could invoke to consider egregious violations of its tenets -- a mechanism for holding member states publicly accountable for their transgressions. Such a mechanism could help us make soft power a little bit harder.

More than ever before, the situation in Ukraine -- and within the OSCE during this crisis -- prove that we must finally adjust the consensus-based decision-making which prevents collective action against blatant violations of OSCE commitments.The OSCE as an organization must resolve that it will not be taken hostage by any one state to remain silent and helpless while human suffering and brutal aggression continue. OSCE parliamentarians have long called on the governmental side to consider new rules -- perhaps consensus minus one or two, or two-thirds-majority or some procedure that prevents a single country veto by a transgressor. Achieving this change will no doubt be a diplomatic battle royale, but this current episode has demonstrated just how much we need to take it on. What if Russia had not held up the formation and deployment of a monitoring mission to Ukraine? Official reporting from Crimea during the early stages of the unrest there could have made a real impact on Russia's calculations, not to mention those of Ukraine, its neighbors, and the international community. If the monitoring mission was created to investigate alleged violations of OSCE principles, how, indeed, can the OSCE rationalize its inability to act?

Will our organization, even with clearly needed reforms, be able to head off all conflicts between member states? Of course not. Will it have a better chance of doing so? I don't doubt it. Will the OSCE be truer to its ideals? Certainly. Make no mistake -- on the ground in Ukraine, the OSCE has given its all in trying to respond to the crisis. But if this is not to be the final act for the Helsinki Final Act, it will have to be just as vigorous in tackling the tough questions of self-reform.