Ukrainian Conflict

[Netto Azure]

Originally Posted by sbg711

Total checkmate, courtesy of Vladimir Putin.

Quite the quandary NATO is in. But then again it's quite rational considering that in Moscow's eyes "since the Clinton administration in the 1990s, the U.S.-led West has been on a steady march toward post-Soviet Russia, began with the expansion of NATO in the 1990s under Clinton. Bush then further expanded NATO all the way to Russia’s borders."

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

Congratulations on another step towards reclaiming the Sudetenland.

The Germany/Czechia parallel isn't really accurate. The Sudetenland had Germans in it, but it was never part of Germany. That area belonged to the Hapsburgs perhaps, but not the Prussian iteration of the German nation. Also, while incorporating the Sudetenland Germans into Germany may have made sense, the Czechs were totally not German, not even Germanic. To get to that level of ridiculousness the Russians would have to try conquering Poland.

But even apart from that, present-day Ukraine is somewhat of an artificial construct, being an amalgamation of two completely opposite forces. The borders are not as distinct today, but generally, the western part, annexed from Poland in 1939, certainly bears no love towards Russia, while the eastern part is basically the fount of Russian culture, with Kiev being the historical center of Russian civilization. That these two parts have relatively peacefully coexisted in one country since the fall of the USSR without falling apart is already a miracle.

This, pretty much.

[Fireminer]

It's both like the parallel, yet also the opposite of North and South Korea here!

[Utsuro no Hako]

Originally Posted by Netto Azure

Quite the quandary NATO is in. But then again it's quite rational considering that in Moscow's eyes "since the Clinton administration in the 1990s, the U.S.-led West has been on a steady march toward post-Soviet Russia, began with the expansion of NATO in the 1990s under Clinton. Bush then further expanded NATO all the way to Russia’s borders."

Isn't that sort of like an abusive father complaining that ever since he was found passed out drunk in the middle of a park, Child Protective Services has been trying to steal his children away?

[konart]

Originally Posted by Utsuro no Hako

Isn't that sort of like an abusive father complaining that ever since he was found passed out drunk in the middle of a park, Child Protective Services has been trying to steal his children away?

More like Child Protective Services took his kids away, but he quit drinking and wants his kids back

[Haak]

And decides to do so by pointing a gun at the child who can't decide whether he prefers the child protection services or not. XP

Totally unrelated to his past history of alcohol abuse ofcourse. XP XP XP

[Fireminer]

You forget that the Child Service also works only for their selfish needs! Think that is child adoption for reduced tax.

[konart]

Originally Posted by Haak

And decides to do so by pointing a gun at the child who can't decide whether he prefers the child protection services or not. XP

Totally unrelated to his past history of alcohol abuse ofcourse. XP XP XP

Not pointing, just holding in his hand. Just in case.

I gave you life. It is on me to take it away from you.

Taras Bulba. (by Nikolai Gogol)

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by konart

Not pointing, just holding in his hand. Just in case.

In case of what? You can't just stop at that and not explain why you need a gun around a child "just in case".

[konart]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

In case of what? You can't just stop at that and not explain why you need a gun around a child "just in case".

In case if so called "Child Protective Services" will try to take the kid from his father.

Note that nobody here tries or wants to take whole Ukraine as part of Russian Empire, just part(s) that historically are russian and do not want to be a part of new system

[sbg711]

Pierre Omidyar co-funded Ukraine revolution groups with US government, documents show

http://pando.com/2014/02/28/pierre-o...ocuments-show/

[Haak]

Originally Posted by konart

Not pointing, just holding in his hand. Just in case.

*wink* *wink*

[sbg711]

YouTube

https://youtu.be/llbLIloCfdg

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[konart]

There is no going back for Crimea now anyway.
Kiev will send many of them to prison for treason and if Crimea becomes independent Turkey, as they already said, will claim their rights - http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/25693129.asp

[Haak]

Originally Posted by sbg711

http://pando.com/2014/02/28/pierre-o...ocuments-show/

I didn't realise coups only cost $400,000. Nor did I realise CHESNO was responsible for the "coup". I thought it was the Neo-Nazis. XP

On The Meaning Of Journalistic Independence

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by konart

In case if so called "Child Protective Services" will try to take the kid from his father.

If the child is a girl it is completely moral. CPS isn't in this case and should be charged with kidnapping, then have their headquarters raided by the Spetznaz.

Originally Posted by konart

Note that nobody here tries or wants to take whole Ukraine as part of Russian Empire, just part(s) that historically are russian and do not want to be a part of new system

The problem is Kiev and Crimea. Kiev is the capital and a cultural pot, AND it is the capital. The capture of Kiev by anti-Russian elements would technically mean that the entire of Ukraine is in "Western" hands, but Crimea is the military capital with a naval base housing the Russian Black Sea fleet, their main battle group comparable to that of the Pacific 7th Fleet.

Not only that, Sevastapol is the 2nd largest port in Ukraine after the port of Odessa, and is the terminal point where East European goods move to Western Europe due to its DMZ-like nature between Russia and EU.

[sbg711]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...hould-back-off

Both John Kerry's threats to expel Russia from the G8 and the Ukrainian government's plea for Nato aid mark a dangerous escalation of a crisis that can easily be contained if cool heads prevail. Hysteria seems to be the mood in Washington and Kiev, with the new Ukrainian prime minister claiming, "We are on the brink of disaster" as he calls up army reserves in response to Russian military movements in Crimea.

Were he talking about the country's economic plight he would have a point. Instead, along with much of the US and European media, he was over-dramatising developments in the east, where Russian speakers are understandably alarmed after the new Kiev authorities scrapped a law allowing Russian as an official language in their areas. They see it as proof that the anti-Russian ultra-nationalists from western Ukraine who were the dominant force in last month's insurrection still control it. Eastern Ukrainians fear similar tactics of storming public buildings could be used against their elected officials.

Kerry's rush to punish Russia and Nato's decision to respond to Kiev's call by holding a meeting of member states' ambassadors in Brussels today were mistakes. Ukraine is not part of the alliance, so none of the obligations of common defence come into play. Nato should refrain from interfering in Ukraine by word or deed. The fact that it insists on getting engaged reveals the elephant in the room: underlying the crisis in Crimea and Russia's fierce resistance to potential changes is Nato's undisguised ambition to continue two decades of expansion into what used to be called "post-Soviet space", led by Bill Clinton and taken up by successive administrations in Washington. At the back of Pentagon minds, no doubt, is the dream that a US navy will one day replace the Russian Black Sea fleet in the Crimean ports of Sevastopol and Balaclava.

Since independence, every poll in Ukraine has shown a majority against Nato membership, yet one after another the elites who ran the country until 2010 and who are now back in charge ignored the popular will. Seduced by Nato's largesse and the feeling of being part of a hi-tech global club, they took part in joint military exercises and even sent Ukrainian troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.

The deposed Viktor Yanukovych, for all his incompetence, corruption and abuse of power, was the first president to oppose Nato membership in his election campaign and then persuade parliament to make non-alignment the cornerstone of the country's security strategy, on the pattern of Finland, Ireland and Sweden. Nato refused to accept it. As recently as 1 February, before the latest crisis, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the empire-building secretary general, told a security conference in Munich: "Ukraine must have the freedom to choose its own path without external pressure." The implication was clear: if only it were not for those beastly Russians, Ukraine would be one of us. Had Rasmussen said: "Ukraine has chosen nonalignment and we respect that choice," he would have been wiser.

It is not too late to show some wisdom now. Vladimir Putin's troop movements in Crimea, which are supported by most Russians, are of questionable legality under the terms of the peace and friendship treaty that Russia signed with Ukraine in 1997. But their illegality is considerably less clear-cut than that of the US-led invasion of Iraq, or of Afghanistan, where the UN security council only authorised the intervention several weeks after it had happened. And Russia's troop movements can be reversed if the crisis abates. That would require the restoration of the language law in eastern Ukraine and firm action to prevent armed groups of anti-Russian nationalists threatening public buildings there.

The Russian-speaking majority in the region is as angry with elite corruption, unemployment and economic inequality as people in western Ukraine. But it also feels beleaguered and provoked, with its cultural heritage under existential threat. Responsibility for eliminating those concerns lies not in Washington, Brussels or Moscow, but solely in Kiev.

[Haak]

Yes of course, the hysteria is coming from Washington - Not Kremlin. XP

[sneaker]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

The Germany/Czechia parallel isn't really accurate. The Sudetenland had Germans in it, but it was never part of Germany. That area belonged to the Hapsburgs perhaps, but not the Prussian iteration of the German nation.

Of course Austria/Habsburg had already ceased to exist at that point, being incorporated into Greater Germany.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by konart

There is no going back for Crimea now anyway.
Kiev will send many of them to prison for treason and if Crimea becomes independent Turkey, as they already said, will claim their rights - http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/25693129.asp

Off topic but how many languages are you fluent in O__o


Also, I can't believe how no one in NATO's East European states is openly protesting how the alliance is going to potentially draw them into a war no one wants if they interfere