Ukrainian Conflict

[LeoXiao]

Looking at the situation from a more...strategic point of view, I can't think of any long-term gain that Putin gets out of taking Crimea. By taking it, he pretty much ensured the westward shift of mainland Ukraine, and also took out like a million (mostly) pro-Russian voters from the Ukrainian electorate. A far more competent option would have been to leave Ukraine to sort out its own problems while issuing propaganda about supposed fascists and corrupt oligarchs.

A possibility is that Putin is simply that worried about his domestic image and thought this would be an easy, dramatic way to show the people of Russia that he is still the strong leader who can stand up for Russians everywhere, foreign PR and strategic interests in mainland Ukraine be damned.

Originally Posted by Irenicus

Speaking of fascism and ethnic struggle, I wonder if anyone has a spare thought for the unfortunate Crimean Tartars...

So Sudetenland and Yugoslavia. Thanks Putin.

That's really worrying. I hope this blows over fast enough that nobody thinks to add actual violence to the mix.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Neither does this new provisional government, at least according to the pro-russian Ukrainians, which is who I'm referring to.

Completely wrong. There might be disputes of the level of claim of the provincial government, but Russia's claim is ZERO. You are not going to play that card. The Provincial Government members are Ukrainians. Putin is not Ukrainian. Trying to make them equivalent is simply wrong, if not outright dishonest.

[risingstar3110]

On the subject of being poor and what's not. remember that the EU solution for Ukraine in this case was to borrow money from IMF in exchanging of financial reform . This is what the Western government consider as free gift, while Latin America and Asia country took it as "the medicine that is worse than the disease"

This is not the topic of being rich or poor, but different take on economical culture. I do hear Ukrainian voicing their concern over being enslaved by the IMF under European Union influence sphere in this specific case

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Looking at the situation from a more...strategic point of view, I can't think of any long-term gain that Putin gets out of taking Crimea. By taking it, he pretty much ensured the westward shift of mainland Ukraine, and also took out like a million (mostly) pro-Russian voters from the Ukrainian electorate. A far more competent option would have been to leave Ukraine to sort out its own problems while issuing propaganda about supposed fascists and corrupt oligarchs.

A possibility is that Putin is simply that worried about his domestic image and thought this would be an easy, dramatic way to show the people of Russia that he is still the strong leader who can stand up for Russians everywhere, foreign PR and strategic interests in mainland Ukraine be damned.

Some on posted this earlier about Russia take on this:

Based on the video, i think putin will only take Crimea as an leverage to control the rest of the country, rather than just a land grab like many here thought

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

A handful positions? Including:

• both Secretary and Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council
• Deputy Prime Minister
• Minister of Defense
• Education Minister
• Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine
• Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food
• Prosecutor General of Ukraine
• Chair, National Anti-Corruption Committee

... and they tripled their seats form i think 11 to 36 after coups

Government positions typically mean members in the Cabinet. Only 4 or 5 of those are cabinet positions. I don't think the Minster of Education and Science is a member. So yes, 4 or 5 out of about 20 positions don't make "much of the government" fascist.

and uh, Svoboda won 37 seats in the 2012 election. Stop inventing facts.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

Government positions typically mean members in the Cabinet. Only 4 or 5 of those are cabinet positions. I don't think the Minster of Education and Science is a member. So yes, 4 or 5 out of about 20 positions don't make "much of the government" fascist.

and uh, Svoboda won 37 seats in the 2012 election. Stop inventing facts.

That would be even more concern then, considering that they got up to 25% seats in government cabinets, means that number of parliament seats could exponentially raise in coming elections. We could look at a hundred seats here

And serious? If even one of the US cabinet member was member of a neo-nazi party, there would have been prolonged protests across Washington DC. And we are talking about up to 5, or 25% of the cabinet here, holding very important positions in the new government in fact


PS: not sure about Ukrainie, but isn't Minister of Education a member of the cabinet in US as well, so could count up to 6 here

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Fireminer

- US: Accepted the new Ukraine government without consulting Russia beforehand.

What exactly was the alternative? Pretend that Yanuk was still the president? That's pretty useless if you actually plan to engage with the Ukraine in a dialogue.

And why exactly does the US/EU need to consult with Russia before recognizing the Ukrainian head of state? You might have a point about this being provocative if Russia was seriously insisting that Yanuk be reinstated, but as it is, all they've given is the "Yanuk will never have a political future in Ukraine but is still technically president". I'm not exactly sure why Western diplomacy has to grind to a halt because the Russian's dislike something they have no plans to do anything about.

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

That would be even more concern then, considering that they got up to 25% seats in government cabinets, means that number of parliament seats could exponentially raise in coming elections. We could look at a hundred seats here

And serious? If even one of the US cabinet member was member of a neo-nazi party, there would have been prolonged protests across Washington DC. And we are talking about up to 5, or 25% of the cabinet here, holding very important positions in the new government in fact


PS: not sure about Ukrainie, but isn't Minister of Education a member of the cabinet in US as well, so could count up to 6 here

Yes it is a concerning development. I only said the focus on far-right group is grossly overblown and is in no way a justification for an invasion.

And oh, I meant the Minister of Education is not a member of Svoboda.

[lightbringer]

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

I only said the focus on far-right group is grossly overblown and is in no way a justification for an invasion.

On the contrary, this issue is hardly getting any focus in the West outside of Russian media (which are of course not known for impartiality). Some German-speaking papers reported about it but that's almost the entire extent.

Neither is there much focus on the allegations (supported by medical evidence) that the policemen and civilians who so tragically died on Maidan were shot by the same sniper. Coupled with reports of parliament members in Kiev being threatened and beaten, and the lack of interest from the new interim government in pursuing the truth behind the shootings, they paint a rather depressing and cynical picture of their political ascent.

Clearly, now that western governments have thrown their weight behind the interim government, anything that undermines that support needs to be de-emphasized, even if we're talking about murder. After all, they need a partner in Ukraine to talk to.

As to whether this justifies an invasion - it does not. But countries have been invaded for less by the USA, and with full international support. This is the result of years of hypocrisy and double standards propagated by western governments. Russia would not be able to act this bold if we did not have all those unfortunate precedents.

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Looking at the situation from a more...strategic point of view, I can't think of any long-term gain that Putin gets out of taking Crimea.

Maintaining the Black Sea fleet's presence in the Crimea and denying the Crimea to NATO would certainly be significant long-term gains. Russia feels (legitimately) threatened by NATO expansion since 1991, which continues to encroach on Russian borders and sphere of influence. The invasions of Kosovo and Iraq did nothing to allay those fears. Crimea and eastern Ukraine are also home to many military and industrial installations dating back to the Soviet era. It would be a nightmare for Russia if these were now to be used against them.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

As to whether this justifies an invasion - it does not. But countries have been invaded for less by the USA, and with full international support. This is the result of years of hypocrisy and double standards propagated by western governments. Russia would not be able to act this bold if we did not have all those unfortunate precedents.

What double standards? If Russia got full international support and form a coalition of UN nations to stabilise Ukraine, no one would complain.

Instead, Putin just sent in unmarked soldiers who pretend they aren't Russian.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

Yes it is a concerning development. I only said the focus on far-right group is grossly overblown and is in no way a justification for an invasion.

And oh, I meant the Minister of Education is not a member of Svoboda.

You took it wrong here.

The fact that new far-right groups could infiltrate that much into the new government does not justify Russian invasion. They mostly goes under the banner of protecting the pro-Russian citizens groups anyway

But this indicated the lack of legitimate in the new Ukrainian government and will result in distrust from the local populations, especially the from Eastern side of Ukraine. This will even further undermine current government, and give Ukraine no chance against Russia militarily, financially and politically.

Originally Posted by lightbringer

As to whether this justifies an invasion - it does not. But countries have been invaded for less by the USA, and with full international support. This is the result of years of hypocrisy and double standards propagated by western governments. Russia would not be able to act this bold if we did not have all those unfortunate precedents.

This

And the Western governments lack of response over this, either due to the lack of interest or the fear of being retaliated by Russia on future conflict, will further provide the encouragement for future Western government/ superpower to go ahead with military intervention, whether it is supported by international community or not. In long term it will definitely undermine UN power, and we may see League of Nations all over again.

[AnimeFan188]

Blocked by sunken Russian ships, Ukraine's navy stays defiant:

"Russia has deliberately sunk three of its own ships to block Ukrainian navy vessels entering a lake off the Black Sea,
officers say, highlighting Moscow's determination to wear down the morale of Kiev's forces in Crimea.

The Ochakov -- a Soviet-era warship decommissioned in 2011 and set to be sold for scrap -- was towed to the entrance
to Lake Donuzlav on Crimea's western coast from the Russian base at Sevastopol on Thursday and blown up.

It capsized and, along with two smaller Russian vessels, is now blocking the narrow gap between two spits of land, its
hull beaten by rough Black Sea waves."

See:

http://news.yahoo.com/blocked-sunken...131009479.html

[lightbringer]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

What double standards? If Russia got full international support and form a coalition of UN nations to stabilise Ukraine, no one would complain.

The double standards of "international law and territorial integrity are of paramount importance... but they don't apply to us". The West does not practice what they preach so it's hard to expect the rest of the world to follow suit. Also, the relevancy of the UN went down the drain with the Iraq war. The Security Council only works when you respect its decisions. First the USA disregarded it, now Russia will also, and China will probably be next. It's a dangerous world we live in.

[sneaker]

Originally Posted by lightbringer

The Security Council only works when you respect its decisions. First the USA disregarded it, now Russia will also, and China will probably be next. It's a dangerous world we live in.

All of those are members with veto rights anyways, they have no problems respecting Security Council resolutions.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by lightbringer

The double standards of "international law and territorial integrity are of paramount importance... but they don't apply to us". The West does not practice what they preach so it's hard to expect the rest of the world to follow suit. Also, the relevancy of the UN went down the drain with the Iraq war. The Security Council only works when you respect its decisions. First the USA disregarded it, now Russia will also, and China will probably be next. It's a dangerous world we live in.

I fail to see how we should stop persecuting Russia just because America did it.

It is only a dangerous world if we let Russia get away with it. Blaming America doesn't change anything, Putin is still responsible for his own actions. Once again, I completely fail to see why we should resign to Russia's invasion when we were critical of America's attempt to bomb Syria.

Criticising America on Syria WORKED. It stopped a bombing. So why should we stop criticising Putin? Why should he be able to get away with it, just because he isn't American?

[KiraYamatoFan]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

It is only a dangerous world if we let Russia get away with it. Blaming America doesn't change anything, Putin is still responsible for his own actions. Once again, I completely fail to see why we should resign to Russia's invasion when we were critical of America's attempt to bomb Syria.

Criticising America on Syria WORKED. It stopped a bombing. So why should we stop criticising Putin? Why should he be able to get away with it, just because he isn't American?

This.

I was blasted because I was in the camp of those who wanted to see that motherfucker Al-Asad's arse kicked for reasons that looked quite valid enough (at least, I thought) at the time. Why is it OK to blast those who support the American position while it's not good to blast the Russians' position in this matter?

Typical... Always easy to blame the West for everything, but those cowards never try looking at the total dicks leading in the East even when their actions are as worth criticizing as what the West does at times.

[AnimeFan188]

Ukraine's Military Mobilizes, Prepares For Combat: Trucks, APCs, SAMs, Howitzers,
Tanks Rolling Out:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ks-rolling-out

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by AnimeFan188

Blocked by sunken Russian ships, Ukraine's navy stays defiant:

"Russia has deliberately sunk three of its own ships to block Ukrainian navy vessels entering a lake off the Black Sea,
officers say, highlighting Moscow's determination to wear down the morale of Kiev's forces in Crimea.

The Ochakov -- a Soviet-era warship decommissioned in 2011 and set to be sold for scrap -- was towed to the entrance
to Lake Donuzlav on Crimea's western coast from the Russian base at Sevastopol on Thursday and blown up.

It capsized and, along with two smaller Russian vessels, is now blocking the narrow gap between two spits of land, its
hull beaten by rough Black Sea waves."

See:

http://news.yahoo.com/blocked-sunken...131009479.html

Okay, that could be serious.

[sbg711]

Dempsey admits U.S. has "NO EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION" military forces in Crimea are Russian troops

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c448615...russian-troops

Have to love this stuff. In fact, I've read some material claiming it's highly possible that the unidentified soldiers in Crimea patrolling/blockading Crimean army bases and administrative buildings could in fact be PMCs. And very likely after the March 16th referendum the world will be presented with a contract that was signed with the PMCs in question since the end of February

Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"

YouTube

https://youtu.be/2y0y-JUsPTU

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[lightbringer]

Originally Posted by sneaker

All of those are members with veto rights anyways, they have no problems respecting Security Council resolutions.

And it's exactly this veto right that these countries are now starting to shit all over, followed by US example. That's the point.

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

I fail to see how we should stop persecuting Russia just because America did it.

Persecution sounds like a dangerous road - are you planing to go after everyone with a Russian name or passport? Where do you draw the line?

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

It is only a dangerous world if we let Russia get away with it.

No, it became dangerous starting with Kosovo. That's when things really went to shit.

Russia's not starting a conflict half the way across the globe, at least. I think the USA is much more dangerous in this respect. The tendency internationally is to paint Russia as the universal bad guy but that's far off the mark.

Not to mention, the majority of people in Crimea actually apparently want this (and honestly, given what's going on in Kiev, who can blame them). Despite all the propaganda going on on all sides, even reports from western media tend to lean this way. I would honestly be for independence rather than for annexation by Russia if I was in their shoes.

But they should in any case have a right for self-determination, and references to international law and sovereign integrity are just hot air at this point (which is the point I was trying to make). The best thing would be a fair referendum with international monitors but we all know that's not Putin's style and he'll likely squander this opportunity to get international support for his Crimean agenda in favor of keeping an iron grip on the Crimea (the bloodless annexation of which is already a fait accompli).

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Blaming America doesn't change anything, Putin is still responsible for his own actions. Once again, I completely fail to see why we should resign to Russia's invasion when we were critical of America's attempt to bomb Syria.

Criticising America on Syria WORKED. It stopped a bombing. So why should we stop criticising Putin? Why should he be able to get away with it, just because he isn't American?

Actually, what stopped that bombing was a Russian-brokered chemical disarmament deal, but let's just forget about that inconvenient little detail.

Furthermore, while I am certainly lamenting the hypocrisy and double standards as mentioned, and I cannot fathom why western governments are so eager to get into bed with ultranationalist antisemites, nowhere did I suggest that you need to stop criticizing Putin, that's just a silly notion. He's not done much for democracy and he has the Russian press in an iron grip.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by lightbringer

And it's exactly this veto right that these countries are now starting to shit all over, followed by US example. That's the point.

Persecution sounds like a dangerous road - are you planing to go after everyone with a Russian name or passport? Where do you draw the line?

Furthermore, while I am certainly lamenting the hypocrisy and double standards as mentioned, and I cannot fathom why western governments are so eager to get into bed with ultranationalist antisemites, nowhere did I suggest that you need to stop criticizing Putin, that's just a silly notion. He's not done much for democracy and he has the Russian press in an iron grip.

Don't get too much on the whole Russian vs the West things...

But maybe that's why Vallen was so up in arm over this, as he thought criticising and condemning the US was the reason why they stopped their military involvement in Syria.

Now i'm not saying that anti-war activists was for null, but it did not stop Iraq war as it just weaken political resolve to follow it through. And in this case Putin surely do determine on his act.

What could have persecuted Russia on their actions, is the UN international law. But it has lost its credibility after all of those US led invasions on East Europe and Middle Easts