×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Darth Vader Runs For President of Ukraine

samzenpus posted about 8 months ago | from the I-find-your-lack-of-voting-disturbing dept.

Star Wars Prequels 114

First time accepted submitter neuroscroll (579178) writes "An unorthodox candidate presented himself for the future early presidential elections in Ukraine: the Darth Vader himself is promising to make an empire out of a republic. He is the official candidate of the Ukrainian Internet party. From the article: 'The Sith lord, or at least an unnamed costumed protester often seen on Kiev's Independence Square flanked by his loyal stormtroopers during the winter protests, has been chosen as the official candidate of the Ukrainian Internet party (UIP) which has become known for its theatrical public stunts. "After winning intra-party primaries by a landslide, comrade Vader will be our party's candidate," said the UIP leader, Dmitry Golubov, who spent time in prison after being convicted of using the internet to run a credit card fraud scheme.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This is a TRAVESTY! (2)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 8 months ago | (#46623187)

It's un-Ukrainian! Lord Vader should remain the enforcing power of the throne - not the occupant!

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (4, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 8 months ago | (#46623233)

But now, who will run Google?

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 8 months ago | (#46623273)

But now, who will run Google?

Disney, of course, haven't you kept up with the buy-out of the Evil Empire by the Eviler Empire?

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46624155)

Vile Empire, Viler Empire... Man, they all start just looking the same after awhile...

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (4, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | about 8 months ago | (#46623253)

It's un-Ukrainian! Lord Vader should remain the enforcing power of the throne - not the occupant!

Not only that, the power which most resembles the Empire at this moment in time is Russia.

In Soviet Russia the Force is against YOU!

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (3, Funny)

Aighearach (97333) | about 8 months ago | (#46623319)

So then it makes sense, Darth Vader is running so that he can implement Emperor Putin's will.

In Neo-Soviet Russia, force uses you!

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (3)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 8 months ago | (#46624103)

Emperor Pol-Putin. Awesome. Two puns with one hyphen!

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46626873)

Emperor Pol-Putin. Awesome. Two puns with one hyphen!

Dammit, now all I can think about is poutine with pulled pork!

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (4, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 8 months ago | (#46623589)

No. The power that resembles the Empire most is the United States.

Where was the referendum in Serbia, or Libya or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Panama, or...

The US boot crushes the testicles of the world. Now, go drink your Pepsi, and read more self-congratulatory pap about the "free world".

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 8 months ago | (#46624387)

Where was the referendum in Serbia, or Libya or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Panama, or...

Did US annex any of these countries?

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (2)

aevan (903814) | about 8 months ago | (#46624599)

Didn't Palpentine have a lot of worlds he propped up with a puppet government that weren't directly in the Empire but might as well been, serving to refuel his fleets and such? Expanded Universe being rather confusing and such for the non-hardcore... but to my knowledge there wasn't JUST empire and rebels..there were a lot of 'neutral worlds' and other alliances and such..that just bent to the Empire due to military or economic power.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46625267)

The Empire probably fit the model of asymmetric federalism [wikipedia.org] best. Most systems were under the direct control of some sort of Imperial Sector office, but others such as Hutt Space or the Corporate Sector I'm pretty sure are left to their own autonomy... as long as Imperial Laws aren't broken (and the Imperials care to enforce them). I believe that citizens who lived in these areas were Imperial Citizens. It seems even Tatooine had a small Imperial presence, otherwise they like to carry of Dewbacks around on their Star Destroyers.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46625317)

Of course not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Bondsteel

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (4, Insightful)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 8 months ago | (#46625719)

Where was the referendum in Serbia, or Libya or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Panama, or...

Did US annex any of these countries?

Yes. The USA is owned and run by international corporations. Thus wars are fought at the behest of these commercial interests. When the USA destroys some place like Iraq or Afghanistan the US companies make out like bandits not only in the military industrial complex but also the mandatory US companies doing the unsatisfactory "rebuilding" effort to fix the unnecessary "shock and awe" damage. [youtube.com] The economy itself is replaced.

The borders of the country and its name can even stay the same. International corporations don't care much about borders. It's the economy that matters, and what they fight for is more privatization and deregulation. Thus these countries are indeed annexed by the rulers of the USA.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 8 months ago | (#46625959)

Not only that, we took a backseat to Europe in the Libyan deal recently. If the US was really like the Empire we'd have crushed the USSR right after WWII like Patton wanted. After that, with no one else holding nukes we'd have ruled the planet. Worldwide Pax Americana. This whining over Iraq is unbelievable. We stumbled in, knocked out Saddam's bully boys then realized we had destroyed the government of the country in the process and had to hold it together and get them back on their feet long enough to get the hell out without a bloodbath wider than the Euphrates river. It was incompetence on a global scale, hardly worthy of the Sith Lords.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 8 months ago | (#46626173)

I seriously doubt that USA had the ability to crush the USSR in 1945, regardless of Patton's opinion. It didn't have enough nukes to use them as anything other than a terror weapon, and no ability to deliver them to where they'd actually serve a strategic purpose (e.g. to attack the industrial centers in Urals).

The "whining" over Iraq is also not groundless. It's not just about what actually happened, but also about the justification for it. In all honesty, US should acknowledge it as a bad thing, a war of aggression masquerading as liberation on very flimsy pretenses, and actually started basically to satisfy the itch of a few people in power. Then apologize, and move on

But that does not really change the fact that there's a big difference between Iraq and Crimea, so much so that any analogies between the two are rather meaningless.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46627011)

If you mean to suggest Saddam and his party weren't complete monsters, I think you're swinging to the opposite extreme a little too easily, kid.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 8 months ago | (#46627071)

I'm constantly amazed by how many people think Saddam was better than Bush. I've seen it stated here many, many times.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 8 months ago | (#46627519)

I mean to suggest that Saddam was not in any significant way different from a dozen other dictatorial leaders in the same region, some of them of the countries that US considers allies (like Saudi Arabia). So using that as an excuse to invade the country only makes sense if you would also go after all the other guys.

Then, of course, there's the whole balance issue. Taking out a bloody dictator in a nice, clean coup is great and all. A full-scale invasion and occupation with more overall civilian casualties than that Saddam guy killed in 10 years prior, not so much.

In any case, the original excuse for Iraq was that it had some WMDs that it was just itching to use against US, not some human rights issues. That became a fallback story postfactum, once it was clear that WMD bait was basically bullshit through and through.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 8 months ago | (#46628119)

More civilian casualties than Saddam killed? Bullshit! Estimates of Saddam's murders run from 250,000 on the low end to over a million. This leaves out the countless maimed that had their eyes gouged out and limbs chopped off. The estimates of deaths in the Iraq war for civilians from violence is around 100-160 thousand. Those are from both sides as after the initial invasion the "insurgents" cared not who they blew up. They were happy to blow up 60 Iraqis to kill a couple of Marines in the process. The US tried to limit collateral damage but using high power weapons in an urban environment is a guarantee that innocents will die. I view the war in Iraq as a mistake but comparing the results of a warfare of invasion with a systematic genocidal campaign is fucking crazy and so are you.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 8 months ago | (#46628169)

By "civilian casualties" I count the entire death toll post-invasion, including intra-faction fighting, terrorist attacks etc. This is only fair, since destabilization of their society was a direct outcome of the war, so every death that happens now because of that instability that didn't happen before has to be weighted against what Saddam would've killed. Note, I'm not saying that US leadership is morally responsible for those deaths - this is an utilitarian calculation, not an ethical one. That's why I'm not going to address your "invasion vs genocidal campaign" angle - dead don't care about the motivation, determination, or remorse vs lack thereof of their killers.

As for your 1 million count, that includes all the deaths in the Iran war, which 1) didn't happen in the preceding 10 years, 2) being a war, is not exactly the usual state of affairs for any country, and 3) Saddam was significantly aided by US in that war. On the other hand, 100-160k count is actually on the low side, because that's the number of deaths that have been meticulously documented - it's basically a standard to which no other war or unrest of that magnitude to date has been held. The more realistic number, given that in most cases deaths do go unreported in such an environment, is several times that.

Okay, I'll grant you that it's quite possible that the overall death toll is close to what it was under Saddam - maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less. We don't really know because we don't have the accurate numbers. Either way, this doesn't exactly look like a picture of resounding humanitarian success to me. Of course, we don't really have the final numbers, either, seeing how the Iraqi government is anything but stable, the sectarian relationships are still flaring with daily terrorist attacks, and adjacent countries (most specifically, Iran and Saudi Arabia) are treating it as a convenient place to hash out their disputes, keeping the fires burning. If it blows up into a full-fledged civil war - and I'm pretty much certain that it will, within a few years at most - what death toll is there now will be peanuts in comparison.

Really, the only ones who have been the consistent beneficiaries of the invasion were the Kurds, who finally have their de facto (and soon, possibly, de jure) nation-state - but then their independence really dates back to the first war, and was maintained largely through the no-fly zone established afterwards - the new invasion only cemented it.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 8 months ago | (#46629973)

I'm not arguing that what happened in the invasion of Iraq was good or right but that it was nowhere even close to the nightmare that existed under Saddam. I mentioned only the dead that were reported due to mass murder. Not war dead from the war with Iran that he started, that's easily another million. There is no comparison with what went on under Saddam and I don't think anyone misses the crazy bastard and his two sons were even worse. Every single time I hear someone say Iraq was better off before we invaded I just fail to believe such ignorance. At least Iraq has a chance now to become well....if they can get past the factional violence. Before the US invaded they had no hope, just a living nightmare. I don't think it benefited the US at all to invade, from that standpoint I have to say it was a bad idea. I just know if I lived under a regime like that I'd welcome almost anything to save me from that kind of world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... [wikipedia.org]

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46628007)

This is centuries ago thinking. Why annex countries and give the new citizens rights and things when you can run the show via proxy? It's all upside no downside.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46626345)

The locals will eventually clean up any puppet governments left after, so no worries there. Too bad accountability to the people comes distantly second after accountability to a god in most religious texts. We Europeans had the lovely experience from that just a few hundred years ago.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46623355)

...
Hand in your Nerd Card and set aside 12 hours for the watching and re-watching of Return of the Jedi. While we're at it, toss in a viewing of Empire Strikes Back, you've probably forgotten too many lines of dialogue from that one too.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 8 months ago | (#46623391)

Wouldn't it be more efficient simply to memorize the script? Why would a real nerd bother with media he can't control the rate of consumption of?

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 8 months ago | (#46623641)

Wouldn't it be more efficient simply to memorize the script? Why would a real nerd bother with media he can't control the rate of consumption of?

There is a speed control in vlc so you can watch at any speed you like. A real geek would know that.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 8 months ago | (#46623891)

If you watch it frame by frame, you can see the scenes of wookie porn that was edited in to create the subliminal desire to mate seven foot tall hairy things.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 8 months ago | (#46624115)

the subliminal desire to mate seven foot tall hairy things.

...are you suggesting the producers were from San Francisco? Or California, at least?

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 months ago | (#46625429)

If you watch it frame by frame, you can see the scenes of wookie porn that was edited in to create the subliminal desire to mate seven foot tall hairy things.

As a six foot seven hairy thing, I am eternally grateful. Who knows how many times I've gotten laid because of a wookie fetish.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

fisted (2295862) | about 8 months ago | (#46626811)

Who knows how many times I've gotten laid because of a wookie fetish.

I know -- *checks he's actually on slashdot* -- zero of zero times.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 8 months ago | (#46623963)

But you can't understand at any speed you like. A real geek can read faster than the speed at which sped up video becomes unintelligible.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (3, Insightful)

ildon (413912) | about 8 months ago | (#46623467)

You never see the true Dark Lord, working from the shadows.

Re:This is a TRAVESTY! (1)

Big Hairy Ian (1155547) | about 8 months ago | (#46628733)

I for one welcome......... Seriously had to check the date on this one!!!!

"the Darth Vader" (4, Insightful)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 8 months ago | (#46623235)

which got me thinking, I guess Darth is a title but Vader isn't, so it would be analogous to say, "the King James", which makes sense only in reference to the King James Version of the bible. Does this mean there is a Darth Vader version of badly translated Sith teachings? If so, why am I reading this shittily written article summary instead of that?

Re:"the Darth Vader" (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 8 months ago | (#46623293)

which got me thinking, I guess Darth is a title but Vader isn't, so it would be analogous to say, "the King James", which makes sense only in reference to the King James Version of the bible. Does this mean there is a Darth Vader version of badly translated Sith teachings? If so, why am I reading this shittily written article summary instead of that?

I once worked where there was an employee with the surname Vader, I'm sure her life was just a little bit difficult due to this and morons running up to her all the time and asking how Darth is.

Re:"the Darth Vader" (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 8 months ago | (#46623591)

you could be this guy [strangecosmos.com] and be both batman AND superman at the same time.

"I find your lack of multiple concurrent superheros disturbing..."

Re:"the Darth Vader" (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46624227)

'bin' actually means 'son of'. Which I guess raises even stranger possibilities.

Re:"the Darth Vader" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46623503)

In this case, he's "the Darth Vader" because he is a person in a costume in the real world dressed as Darth Vader and there are many of those.

Re:"the Darth Vader" (1)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 8 months ago | (#46623977)

No, that interpretation is negated by the subsequent "himself."

Re:"the Darth Vader" (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 8 months ago | (#46625747)

It makes sense when you watch it with Dutch subtitles, especially the part "I am your father".

Re:"the Darth Vader" (1)

neuroscroll (579178) | about 8 months ago | (#46628823)

I've always had problems with the "the"s and the "a"s. But as "vader" means "father" in Dutch, and "darth" is coming from "dark", it makes sense to say "the Dark Father"... sortof.

RT was eating this up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46623259)

At first I thought it was Russian propaganda [rt.com] .

It won't help if he wins (4, Interesting)

cold fjord (826450) | about 8 months ago | (#46623275)

The power of a man in a Darth Vader costume is insignificant compared to the power of a Russian tank army.

Re:It won't help if he wins (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46623291)

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

webmistressrachel (903577) | about 8 months ago | (#46623561)

May the Schwarz be with you!

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | about 8 months ago | (#46625759)

May the Swartz be with you!

FTFY.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 8 months ago | (#46624133)

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

It's called dialectic materialism, my friend.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about 8 months ago | (#46624269)

I find your lack of anti-tank brigades most unfortunate. . . for you.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46623687)

Which is a shame, because even if Darth Vader were real then electing him couldn't exactly be worse than being ruled by old Vladolf Putler.

At least Darth didn't hate people just for being born gay for example. At least with Darth it was purely about hating freedom and wanting an empire.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 8 months ago | (#46624293)

Yeah, Vader can be pretty much summed up with, "Serve me, or die."

I like that. Makes it easy for a man to know where he stands with the Big Guy.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

righteousness (3421867) | about 8 months ago | (#46628349)

Nobody's born gay. Or are you saying that some boys were born with their penises up another boy's anus?

Re:It won't help if he wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46628405)

So all ladies are lesbians then. Good to know.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46628573)

Hint: It's not the sex that makes you gay. It's genetic.

But you're obviously too stupid to understand this topic, because apparently some people are also born to be stupid given you provide a perfect example.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

righteousness (3421867) | about 8 months ago | (#46628697)

If someone is born with the genetic predisposition to violence, would you call him a violent person the minute he's born? Of course not - you'd call him a violent person only if he exhibits violent behaviour once he grows up. The same with homosexuality. A person is born as an asexual. He cannot be called a homosexual until he hits puberty and exhibits homosexual behaviour.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46628863)

It's not the point of diagnosis of a genetic trait that defines your genetics. If someone is born with a pre-disposition to violence they have a pre-disposition to violence at birth, the fact that trait is not exhibited until later in life does not change the fact they have that trait.

Being a violent person and having a pre-disposition to violence are two different things, just as being born homosexual is different to performing homosexual acts, it's possible to be gay without ever even engaging in a homosexual act even. By confusing the two you're implying with your argument that if you restrain someone for life who has a pre-disposition for violence so that they can't actually be violent that you're preventing them from having a pre-disposition to violence and hence altering their genetics. That is obviously complete and utter nonsense, just like your argument and understanding of this topic.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

righteousness (3421867) | about 8 months ago | (#46628887)

What's the point of being gay if one doesn't engage in homosexual acts? To put it another way, what's the difference between a non-gay person and a gay person who doesn't exhibit homosexual behaviour? There's no difference. When we talk about gay people, we need only consider those people who actually exhibit homosexual behaviour. A non-practising gay person is irrelevant to the discussion.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46628933)

You're still really confused about this, aren't you?

I'll try one last time.

Gay isn't a thing you do, it's a thing you are.

"To put it another way, what's the difference between a non-gay person and a gay person who doesn't exhibit homosexual behaviour? There's no difference."

Well one is not gay, and the other is gay. That's the difference. Even if the gay one doesn't actively carry out homosexual acts, they're still attracted to people of the same sex, just as the non-gay person is attracted to people of the opposite sex. Even if they don't carry out the act, they're are still what they are, there's no changing that.

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

righteousness (3421867) | about 8 months ago | (#46629671)

You're the one who's confused. Let me remind you of the context under which we are discussing. You were talking about Vladimir Putin - whom you pejoratively referred to as Vladolf Putler - whereby you inferred that he "hate people just for being born gay". In the context of Putin, he has never said anything to imply that he hated people who are attracted to people of the same sex. What he did was enacted legislation against homosexual practices and propaganda. I re-emphasise - practices and propaganda, NOT attraction. So in this context, gay means people who commit homosexual behaviour, not those who're only attracted to people of the same sex, because there's no way you can legislate against attraction, is there?

Re:It won't help if he wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46628885)

So if my father was gay I would be gay, is that what you mean?

Re:It won't help if he wins (1)

Xest (935314) | about 8 months ago | (#46629047)

No, if your fathers genes were expressed exactly in you you would be a clone of your father. That's not how reproduction works, you have a chance of inheriting different traits from your father, your mother, and their ancestors before them. That means yes, you have a chance of inheriting your father's sexuality, but you also have a chance of not doing so, you could inherit your mothers sexuality, either of your grandparents, or even your great grandparents.

This is fairly basic biology, I'm amazed on a site like this there are people struggling with it.

Re:It won't help if he wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46624331)

Russia intervened in only two conflicts right now, since the collapse of URRS (United Republic of the Red Star), Chechnya and Georgia.
The first was with 'freedom-fighters', whom are the same with Boston bombers, who WERE supported by USA.
The second was started by Saakashvili 'tie-eater'.

Russia has had only two wars right now, and the West 'mainstream' medias and its SHEEP painted it's likely a warmonger, boycotted Sochi with poster of tanks and helicopters with firing missile.

If Russia is a monster I wonder what kind of the you-know-what-I-meant would be!? ha ha.

BTW, I love reading free-world newspapers, they are really food for thought:

Funeral for slain 'Robin Hood' draws Ukraine ultra-nationalists
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/26/world/europe/ukraine-right-wing/

Re:It won't help if he wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46624641)

I have had impressions with Mr. Cold Fjord before the day of the rising-star NSA.

He had style of commenting I like, citations, or precisely, selective-citations. It shows that he has read mega documents. If one person could do that, it's incredible.
Oh, also, his typing ability is incredible too.

But, it's disappointed that Mr. Cold Fjord lacks of logical mind. He up-voted posts seems to be only because it's cited documents, said before, proved that he had incredible reading ability. I have NEVER had the exciting of reading post by CF like: "That is, that kind of geeks' comments, that's the reason I read Slashdot".

BTW: what kind of professional you are Cold Fjord. Librarian!?

Re:It won't help if he wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46628171)

Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good tank army at your side, kid.

Presidential candidates (2)

Daniil Timin (3553303) | about 8 months ago | (#46623311)

Also ex-prisoner and ultra-nationalist are presidential candidates in Ukraine, read more about it here http://russianblogger.me/presi... [russianblogger.me]

Re:Presidential candidates (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46625947)

Suddenly Vader looks quite like he was the humane choice...

Re:Presidential candidates (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46626391)

It's true - this guy actually looks better than the f*ing NAZI being propped by the US, lol.

Too soon (1)

Jody Bruchon (3404363) | about 8 months ago | (#46623359)

April 1 is tomorrow, unless you're a Kiwi. Did they put you up to this?

Re:Too soon (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 8 months ago | (#46623679)

April first: the day to ignore absolutly everything you see on the internet.

Re:Too soon (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about 8 months ago | (#46623833)

OMG Ponies!!!

Wouldn't Darth be... (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 8 months ago | (#46623417)

...Romanian? Oh, that's the good Count!

So Darth is from Ukraine? Who'd have thunk it?

Re:Wouldn't Darth be... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about 8 months ago | (#46623551)

...Romanian? Oh, that's the good Count!

So Darth is from Ukraine? Who'd have thunk it?

I thought he was from somewhere along Lucas Valley Road in Marin County, California.

A few years ago I went hiking in the hills above the ranch. Had my telephoto lens and everything, ready to take some really awesome pictures.

Such a let down. No Death Star, no storm troupers, not even a stinkin' Ewok. I was nearly traumatized, but for finding a Lesser Nighthawk hiding at the base of a boulder my afternoon was salvaged.

No, what sucks is this! (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 8 months ago | (#46623571)

I was challenging Vader and was about to win the primary when, during a debate he did the forcey chokey thing on me. Fuck--I nearly died! So the rat bastard should not even be leading the party, let alone running for president!

Re:No, what sucks is this! (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about 8 months ago | (#46625941)

"This is not the candidate you're looking for..."

Does the whole Jedi Mind Trick thing work through the TV?

What is the problem here? (1)

kwiecmmm (1527631) | about 8 months ago | (#46623625)

A Sith wants to take over a small country, it doesn't seem to be an issue in my head.

It isn't like there is a power-hungry "politician" nearby who controls vast areas like an emperor.

Wait a second... Putin is the Sith Lord, Vader is his apprentice.

We need this Vader to destroy the emperor! He is the only one who can restore balance force!!!

Re:What is the problem here? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46625953)

You're dreaming of part 6 and we barely started part 4 yet...

This can't be right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46623823)

From TFA: "The party said it had paid the required 2.5m hryvnia (£136,000) registration fee for its unusual candidate."

A 136 thousand pounds ($226,813 !!) for an election filing fee? That's insane.

Re:This can't be right. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 8 months ago | (#46624463)

It's not a fee, it's a deposit. It is returned to the candidate after the elections, unless he doesn't get a certain minimum amount of votes, and is meant to discourage random people from running as a publicity stunt (which is especially a problem when elections are publicly funded otherwise). Most countries have it, but few set it that high.

In Ukraine, the deposit used to be $50k, but it was increased 5x in 2010 under Yanukovich. The same law that did it also added a stipulation that it is only returned to candidates who make it into the second round of elections (or the winner if there's no second round).

Re:This can't be right. (1)

neuroscroll (579178) | about 8 months ago | (#46628861)

The deposit is returned only if the candidate is elected or goes to the second round. There are 24 registered candidates, obviously most of them participate just to get some publicity.

Wrong character.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46623863)

Technically, Vader has nothing to do with the actual creation of the Empire. That was all Palpatine's doing. All Vader did was help wipe-out the Jedi--but Palpatine had a lot of that done without Vader, thanks to Order 66.

So really, some Senator should run and have Vader as his right-hand man. That would be much more accurate!

Masked Leaders (1)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about 8 months ago | (#46623909)

Yeah, why not have masked leaders with digital voice changers.... Couldn't be worse then we have now :/

Re:Masked Leaders (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46625961)

With some, a voice changer would actually be an improvement. Let alone a mask.

Re:Masked Leaders (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46628467)

Most of the 'religious' ones all ready wear masks in secret, A gimp mask.

Vader = Putin. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46624045)

nuff said

Begun the clone wars have... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46624137)

I'm surprised that Palputin hasn't put himself forward.

ain't gonna happen (1)

k6mfw (1182893) | about 8 months ago | (#46624567)

he will be sued into oblivion by the Star Wars Corp. for unauthorized use of costumes and trademarks.

Re:ain't gonna happen (1)

BenSchuarmer (922752) | about 8 months ago | (#46624639)

Disney (the real evil empire) bought them out

Re:ain't gonna happen (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 8 months ago | (#46625975)

Just rename Kiew to Disneytown and hand them royalties, and everything's peachy with the Mickey Mafia.

this has possibilities... (1)

bitt3n (941736) | about 8 months ago | (#46624629)

Darth Vader's campaign poster could be no more than a picture of Putin with the slogan 'DO NOT WANT'

Imperial March (3, Insightful)

Akaihiryuu (786040) | about 8 months ago | (#46624723)

Will Ukraine be changing their national anthem to the Imperial March? Cause that would be pretty awesome.

Probably the most sane candidate out there (2)

prizrak (23921) | about 8 months ago | (#46624759)

This may sound funny, but I'm serious, compared to current candidate line-up - Darth is the most sane of them all, compared to Yarosh, Timoshenko and Poroshenko he is much less extreme. If I had Ukrainian citizenship - I would definitely vote for him versus other right and ultra-right candidates.

Cthulhu should run for office, too! (2)

Ihlosi (895663) | about 8 months ago | (#46624961)

Why vote for any lesser evil?

Makes sense. (3, Insightful)

Minwee (522556) | about 8 months ago | (#46624999)

When every other candidate is certifiably loopy, there's a pretty low bar for competing with them.

Toronto mayoral candidates are currently running on platforms of smoking weed in office but not crack, getting publicly drunk without threatening to kill anyone, and only urinating in public where there are no cameras around [nationalpost.com] .

Sadly, all of these promises put them ahead of the incumbent.

President Vader's emphatic veto (1)

Gort65 (1464371) | about 8 months ago | (#46625771)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO *intake of breath* OOOooooooooo...ooo...oo..o.o...! *cough* *splutter*

Just Great (2)

quantaman (517394) | about 8 months ago | (#46625813)

First they had fascists in the government and now they'll have Sith. At the very least they should get Magneto as defence minister and fill the army up with Cylons.

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46626203)

It has come to this.

What we know... (2)

Livius (318358) | about 8 months ago | (#46626231)

is that Darth Vader managed to commit massive violations of civil and human rights and have probably the two most costly military projects in history fail on his watch, despite which he was completely ineffective in his counter-terrorism policy. His career as a public servant was a series of disasters.

So, about the same as most Earth politicians.

I find your lack of faith disturbing.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46627405)

Plenty of fascists to compete with in the political arena.

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46629531)

I thought Darth Vader had already been running the country for years on end before the Rebel Alliance unseated him a short time ago.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?