Ukraine Conflict - "History never looks like history when you are living through it."

[Gfted1]

9 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Elerond  I hope you didnt type out all those countries, please tell you used cut and paste ?

Lol, the same exact thought passed my mind.

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, Elerond said:

Taiwan's ADIZ was established in 1950s, which it extends over continent China and why China these days constantly flies it military planes there .

But anyway China's territorial rights over Taiwan's airspace aren't currently recolonized by anyone including China itself

ADIZ are not airspace, they have as much basis in international law as me proclaiming myself Grand Duke of Finland and demanding a palace in Tampere, a herd of reindeer and a natty winter hat from the seaside market in Helsinki. And they're ignored the same as I would be if I made those demands too.

China absolutely, 100%, believes in its territorial rights over Taiwan's airspace. So does everyone else bar a few countries, and they recognise Taiwan's airspace over China. They simply aren't willing to risk a war about it which is a completely different proposition.

Same as Syria not trying to shoot down all those coalition jets toodling around its airspace looking for former moderate western backed rebels to bomb.

5 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

No. My only comparison to Israel was that Israel responds very, very harshly to all provocations. I believe that's something we can agree upon.  My suggestion was that Russia's neighbors should adopt some of this attitude when dealing with Russia. I have little sympathy for Israel's politics in general. But that is a completely different topic.

No, it's an awful example for two reasons. (1) Israel does it because its neighbours have no reasonable ability to respond and (2) Israel does exactly the same thing, to them, far more frequently. The first doesn't hold for Russia, the second is something you don't really want to bring attention to considering how often it's the west ignoring the rules.

If the only basis of being a good template for response is a hard response then, well, you can pick literally anyone who would give a harsh response and just ignore what an arse they were otherwise.

5 hours ago, Malcador said:

Not really, you can't be a hawk half way.

The S-400s in Syria are under Russian control, if I am recalling correctly.

The S-400 are just to defend Russia's bases. Russia gave Syria some S-300 which were used against Israel recently but hadn't been before. Though there is a massive difference between capabilities of systems designated S-300 (and even S-400 an an extent) so the names don't mean much.

Ironically, there's a decent chance a F-35 was hit by an ancient S-200 a few years ago- a hit was claimed, the rebuttal was that while missiles were fired the F-35 hit a bird. In any case, it likely would have had radar reflectors fitted so it wouldn't have been materially different from when they shot down a F-16 a few years ago with one too.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Zoraptor

[Elerond]

13 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

ADIZ are not airspace, they have as much basis in international law as me proclaiming myself Grand Duke of Finland and demanding a palace in Tampere, a herd of reindeer and a natty winter hat from the seaside market in Helsinki. And they're ignored the same as I would be if I made those demands too.

China absolutely, 100%, believes in its territorial rights over Taiwan's airspace. So does everyone else bar a few countries, and they recognise Taiwan's airspace over China. They simply aren't willing to risk a war about it which is a completely different proposition.

Yup ADIZ are unilateral declarations where country/entity will enforce rules for air traffic. 

Considering that Finland didn't have Grand Duke even when it was "Grand Duchy".

As Grand Duchy is translation from Finnish to English, officially Finland was Autonomic Grand Principality of Russia, in official list of Russia's Emperors tittles was added Grand Prince of Finland (which was one of titles of Sweden's King) when Russia 'conquered' Finland from Sweden, because Alexander I was lazy and wanted easy move of power and didn't overwrote constitution from time of Swedish rule as it make governance easier than Russian legislation, but that left Finland with more autonomy than what Alexander I meant to give it. In Finnish tittle was Suurherttua  which translates directly to Grand Duke in English, but Finnish was not official language of Grand Principality of Finland until 1883, so Grand Duchy and Grand Duke are modern twists of the original tittle.  As autonomic area Finland was governed by Diet of Porvoo (which changed to democratically elected parliament in 1906 ). Emperor appointed General Governor as his deputy and leader of Russian army in Finland, but he didn't had direct position in Finland's governance which lead problems during Alexander II's rule when Russia decrease amount of autonomy Finland had.

Above is just to say that claiming to be Grand Duke of Finland has much less recognition in international law than Taiwan's sovereignty and claim to its own airspace. Especially considering that there is still living members of Romanov family.

Here pretty decent article about what is Taiwan's position from in eyes of international law.  

Quote

 

Taiwan holds a unique position in the realm of international law. Domestically, Taiwan possesses all the qualities of a “normal country,” including citizenship, territorial jurisdiction, government, and “sovereignty.” Taiwan is sovereign by the international law definition — it’s an ultimate authority independent of other authorities in the world; however, Taiwan does not have a common recognition internationally.

According to Oppenheim’s International Law: A Treatise, recognition is a requirement for a country to become a member of the international family, and having the qualifications alone are not enough. By this definition, Taiwan is not a “normal” country like the majority of the existing nation

But compared to other “non-normal” countries, Taiwan is incredibly close to being a regular country and with far more capabilities.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, four countries — South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, and Artsakh — claimed independence and recognized one another’s sovereignty. These countries, however, barely have any diplomatic partners (Taiwan has at least maintained 15 allies to date). The passports issued by these four countries are also not recognized in most of the world, and their citizens mostly have dual-citizenship that granted them a valid passport from another country. Taiwan, in comparison, offers a passport that has visa-free access to over 150 countries.

Other “standard” countries wish to make their territories independent, but ironically Taiwan is the opposite. The official name for Taiwan is the Republic of China (ROC); even though many Taiwanese now think of Taiwan as a country independent of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the meaning of “independence” is still much debated domestically.

According to the current Constitution, the definition of ROC territories still includes mainland China. From the international law standpoint, Taiwan and Beijing are still maintaining the relationship of “one country, two governments.” James Crawford, the author of The Creation of States in International Law, also denied Taiwan as an independent country in his book as Taiwan has never explicitly claimed independence.

....

https://international.thenewslens.com/feature/taiwan-for-sale-2020/128242

 

[Malcador]

https://www.ft.com/content/ee090a48-5407-496f-b0e4-1fe78f37495d

Under the price-capping scheme, Europe would limit the availability of shipping and insurance services that enable the worldwide transport of Russian oil, mandating that the services would only be available if the price ceiling was observed by the importer. A similar restriction on the availability of US financial services could give the scheme added impact.

But in case it is -

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/26/proposed-price-cap-on-russian-oil-moves-closer-at-g7-summit

The gas cap would operate simply by European countries refusing to pay above an as-yet unspecified fixed price for Russian gas. It is argued Russia in the short term has no alternative market to sell the pipeline gas, and unless it was prepared to take a huge hit to its revenues by shutting down the pipeline altogether would have no option but to sell at the price dictated by Europe. Liquid gas would be exempted from this maximum price.

 

 

 

[Zoraptor]

17 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Yup ADIZ are unilateral declarations where country/entity will enforce rules for air traffic.

They don't enforce them though and never have, which is why it's a bad comparison. Other countries' jets fly through ADIZ persistently and ignore their demands precisely because they have no legal basis. You can at least legally shoot down foreign military planes in your actual airspace, that's not at issue, you just don't generally because generally the consequences massively outweigh the infraction. Deliberately shooting down someone's planes in international airspace because they're ignoring your arbitrary demands though...

And yes, I think at this point we're all well aware that the main criterion for being a legitimate breakaway 'country' in international law so far as the west is concerned is being a- unique and non precedent setting case- which is useful to the west. Doesn't change the fact that PRC 100% claims the airspace and territory of RoC as its own. Of course, if the Taiwanese decided to enforce their ADIZ (or territorial space, on the odd occasion China actually intrudes there rather than the ADIZ which extends over a multimillion population city) you'd fairly rapidly get a change in attitude from mainland China.

[Elerond]

36 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

They don't enforce them though and never have, which is why it's a bad comparison. Other countries' jets fly through ADIZ persistently and ignore their demands precisely because they have no legal basis. You can at least legally shoot down foreign military planes in your actual airspace, that's not at issue, you just don't generally because generally the consequences massively outweigh the infraction. Deliberately shooting down someone's planes in international airspace because they're ignoring your arbitrary demands though...

And yes, I think at this point we're all well aware that the main criterion for being a legitimate breakaway 'country' in international law so far as the west is concerned is being a- unique and non precedent setting case- which is useful to the west. Doesn't change the fact that PRC 100% claims the airspace and territory of RoC as its own. Of course, if the Taiwanese decided to enforce their ADIZ (or territorial space, on the odd occasion China actually intrudes there rather than the ADIZ which extends over a multimillion population city) you'd fairly rapidly get a change in attitude from mainland China.

They do enforce rules they have put them, that is whole point of those zones.

They make aircrafts to identify themselves, tell what is their destination etc. 

Each zone has their own rules.

Although if you mean with enforcement that will they shoot aircrafts that break the rules, then answer is usually no, but they will send fighters to do the identification and escort rule breaking aircrafts out of the zone. 

Other countries' jets fly through actual airspaces constantly and ignore their demands until their fighters come to identify the plane.

Russia and China do such constantly to their neighbors, as they know that their planes will not be shot down. 

Number of incidents where country has shot down airplane that violate their airspaces is very low. Only one which I remember is when Turkey shot down Russian SU-24 fly in their airspace in 2016. Which cause quite lot tension between Russia and Turkey. Russia even put economic sanctions against Turkey. 

Russia allies claimed that attack was strike against efforts to fight terrorism, and they accused Turkey of hypocrisy as Turkey constantly violates its neighbors airspaces.

Turkey's allies (Nato) backed Turkey and said that Turkey has right to protect its airspace. Although many of them asked parties keep their heads calm so that situation does not escalate

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, Elerond said:

Number of incidents where country has shot down airplane that violate their airspaces is very low.

A few notable ones. The Soviet Union shot down a U2 spy plane (before I was born, so no memory of the event) somewhere in the middle of the USSR

Later events (recently enough that I remember it being in the news):

The infamous KAL Flight 007 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007

The Americans shot down an Iranian passenger jet which violated Iranian airspace... or the territorial waters of the USS Vicennes or some such https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

And China forced down a US spy plane near Hainan Island. Mostly to a lot of eye rolling internationally iirc, as the Chinese effectively reverse engineered all the interesting bits before letting the plane fly back to the US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident

Ukrainian separatists shooting down a Malysian Airlines passenger jet, believing it to be a Ukrainian transport plane flying over "their" territory (because no sane operator would fly over a warzone) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17

[Zoraptor]

36 minutes ago, Elerond said:

They make aircrafts to identify themselves, tell what is their destination etc..

No they don't. They ask aircraft to identify themselves, even demand it. Military aircraft regularly ignore those demands for identification when flying through ADIZ, and nothing happens except...

Quote

..they will send fighters to do the identification and escort rule breaking aircrafts out of the zone. 

..which is also, of course, exactly what happens if a military jet approaches national airspace when there isn't an ADIZ present.

Quote

Other countries' jets fly through actual airspaces constantly and ignore their demands until their fighters come to identify the plane.

Nope, that's rare. Almost all reports about intrusions on airspace are actually about intrusions in ADIZ- or just plain old civilian air traffic control areas. Almost all actual intrusions are also short term and incidental.

Actual intrusions tend to occur where the airspace is complicated or where one side claims territory another doesn't recognise.

Quote

Number of incidents where country has shot down airplane that violate their airspaces is very low. Only one which I remember is when Turkey shot down Russian SU-24 fly in their airspace in 2016. Which cause quite lot tension between Russia and Turkey. Russia even put economic sanctions against Turkey. 

Not in their airspace. At normal cruising speed a Su24 would have been in Turkish airspace for- literally- a handful of seconds because the tongue of Turkish territory that goes into Syria is- literally- 4 km wide. They physically could not have hit it in Turkish airspace except with cannons- and that would have involved violating Syrian airspace themselves. It was well inside Syrian airspace when hit, even more so in the Turkish version. Of course the Turkish version has rather a lot of flaws- as also below. Indeed, it's rather difficult to reconcile the actual crash site with a missile not being fired before the intrusion took place.

There are a few examples of planes being shot down in other countries' airspace though, such as when Syria shot down a Turkish F4 in 2012. Normally I'd link wiki, but the story there has been... massaged somewhat, shall we say. Even the US backed Syria's version that it was hit by AAA* in Syria's airspace and crashed into international waters, yet somehow the fantasy Turkish version ended up as the one wiki uses. I guess if we want to get snarky we could also cite Air Iran flight 655 being shot down by the Vincennes too, though the circumstances obviously aren't directly equivalent.

*which is essentially proof absolute it was actively intruding, since AAA is far too short range to reach international waters.

[xzar_monty]

8 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

No, it's an awful example for two reasons. (1) Israel does it because its neighbours have no reasonable ability to respond and (2) Israel does exactly the same thing, to them, far more frequently. The first doesn't hold for Russia, the second is something you don't really want to bring attention to considering how often it's the west ignoring the rules.

Let us edit the original claim, then. Russia's neighbors should start responding to Russia's blatant and continuing provocations with much greater force. There, that's Israel removed. That was the original claim, Israel was there just for illustrative purposes, but clearly it didn't work.

It's probably not going to happen, which I think is a shame, and even if it does happen, it certainly doesn't happen because I happen to support it.

[xzar_monty]

11 hours ago, Sarex said:

Let me ask you what was the provocation during the Cuban missile crisis.

This is just whataboutism, very poor argumentation. Let us stop this. You can always counter a question with another without responding to the question posed. It's almost never pertinent.

[Sarex]

3 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

This is just whataboutism, very poor argumentation. Let us stop this. You can always counter a question with another without responding to the question posed. It's almost never pertinent.

It's really not, I'm just drawing parallels. When the US felt it was threatened it reacted very strongly and was ready for a WW3.

@Elerond I am really not sure what you wanted to say with that.

[BruceVC]

23 minutes ago, Sarex said:

It's really not, I'm just drawing parallels. When the US felt it was threatened it reacted very strongly and was ready for a WW3.

@Elerond I am really not sure what you wanted to say with that.

I responded to your question about the Cuban Missile Crisis, their are no parallels because their was  no installation of nukes in Ukraine so its not the same as the Cuban Missile Crisis  (CMC )

I dont mind you not responding to you own question but can you at least stop bringing up the same false narrative and comparison to the CMC

Or you can provide the links that support your point that there are US nukes in Ukraine or being installed in Ukraine, its not that complicated or unreasonable ?

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by BruceVC

[Elerond]

22 minutes ago, Sarex said:

@Elerond I am really not sure what you wanted to say with that.

Palestine question gets lot of press, but it is far from only area / people who want independence. It is also far from worst treated area/people

Serbia still has not recognized Kosovo, so there is closer to home target for your concern how people who want independence are seen as causing provocation towards other people who see it as their right to own the land.

80% of Russia seeks independence from Russia main, which sees such actions as provocation and punish and imprison any advocates fast and harshly 

50% of China seeks independence of main China and which see such as provocation that justifies putting entire population groups to prison camps.

And so on.

But people's struggle for independence is almost always just used as tool to attack people with different world view by pointing how those people support some people who are seen oppressing some other people. Very rarely such comes from genuine interest of people's right for independence or not being oppressed.

[pmp10]

11 hours ago, Malcador said:

https://www.ft.com/content/ee090a48-5407-496f-b0e4-1fe78f37495d

 

 

But in case it is -

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/26/proposed-price-cap-on-russian-oil-moves-closer-at-g7-summit

 

 

Europe wasn't able to resist paying in rubles but somehow will effectively enforce price-caps.
Even if this could be agreed upon in the EU (and the price of getting Hungary on-board would be considerable) Russia will just cut-off gas earlier then expected. 

[Sarex]

42 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Palestine question gets lot of press, but it is far from only area / people who want independence. It is also far from worst treated area/people

True. The things the US has done in Africa are by far the worse crimes committed in recent history (Vietnam trailing close behind).

44 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Serbia still has not recognized Kosovo, so there is closer to home target for your concern how people who want independence are seen as causing provocation towards other people who see it as their right to own the land.

First of all Kosovo doesn't really want independence, it wants to join Albania. Independence is just a way to get there. Why should we relinquish territory that is historically ours and for which there is no reason or precedence to do so, especially when doing so would open questions for other territory claims. They (the albaninans) have committed a mass exodus of Serbian people from Kosovo and Metohia and before the west intervention behaved like terrorist to the Serb population there. As for Republika Srpska, the official stance of Serbia is to support the Dayton agreement, in fact Croatia is more outspoken today about their claimed territory in Bosnia.

55 minutes ago, Elerond said:

80% of Russia seeks independence from Russia main, which sees such actions as provocation and punish and imprison any advocates fast and harshly 

50% of China seeks independence of main China and which see such as provocation that justifies putting entire population groups to prison camps.

Don't know why you are singling Russia and China here when it goes against what you said and those numbers seem overinflated to me to the point of insanity.

59 minutes ago, Elerond said:

But people's struggle for independence is almost always just used as tool to attack people with different world view by pointing how those people support some people who are seen oppressing some other people. Very rarely such comes from genuine interest of people's right for independence or not being oppressed.

Again I'm lost as to how you think that applies to anything I have said.

 

You are under the impression that I'm somehow trying to say that one thing is ok, because it happened somewhere else. That is not the case, I'm just pointing out the double standards that a lot of people here have regarding the whole conflict. Also let me straight up say that I am not overly concerned with Ukrainians or Russian and Palestine or Israel. As you have said, there are so many conflicts around the world and so many people oppressed that claiming concern for any/all of them is dishonest to say the least.

[Elerond]

28 minutes ago, pmp10 said:

Europe wasn't able to resist paying in rubles but somehow will effectively enforce price-caps.
Even if this could be agreed upon in the EU (and the price of getting Hungary on-board would be considerable) Russia will just cut-off gas earlier then expected. 

Price caps are easy to enforce, they just say companies that they can sell oil or gas under certain price. Companies will then either make loss or not buy oil and gas from market which may lead supply problems (which is why Germany for example is against it). (In many cases countries them selves are largest owners of their energy companies)

Price cap will eventually cap market price in world, as demand for oil and gas has not increased, so producers either need to cut their production or lower their prices to that cap in order to sell or not sell their products to world second largest market

@Sarex It is just to show that only things that fit people own political motivations interest them and same thing has no meaning when it does not benefit persons own agenda

Edited June 28, 2022 by Elerond

[xzar_monty]

2 hours ago, Sarex said:

It's really not, I'm just drawing parallels. When the US felt it was threatened it reacted very strongly and was ready for a WW3.

It is whataboutism. There is an important distinction to be made. If you first answer the question posed to you, you are perfectly free to continue the topic into another direction. This is all fine. But if you do not answer the question and simply dodge it by posing another question, this is mean and can be taken as an example of whataboutism. It's a question of manners and fairness.

[Sarex]

2 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

It is whataboutism. There is an important distinction to be made. If you first answer the question posed to you, you are perfectly free to continue the topic into another direction. This is all fine. But if you do not answer the question and simply dodge it by posing another question, this is mean and can be taken as an example of whataboutism. It's a question of manners and fairness.

Because your question had an already known and obvious answer which you chose to play ignorant about. But ok, I will humor you. The provocation would be the Ukrainian intention to join NATO (and as such military presence of NATO on a large part of its border) and continuous bombing of the Russian inhabited parts of Ukraine.

[Mamoulian War]

On 6/26/2022 at 3:27 PM, Darkpriest said:

This might be another aspect of when the support will end. With the economic crisis countries might have issues restocking what they have sent to UA and UA might run out of 'ammo' sooner than russians

https://rmx.news/czech-republic/czechia-has-exhausted-its-arms-reserves-supporting-ukraine-czech-pm-reveals/

 

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/return-industrial-warfare

 

NOTE: I cannot verify for any of the sources, byt the perspective is worth to consider and evaluate in terms of risks and options

The best answer to these "rumours" is this video.

 

[Malcador]

14 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Because your question had an already known and obvious answer which you chose to play ignorant about. But ok, I will humor you. The provocation would be the Ukrainian intention to join NATO (and as such military presence of NATO on a large part of its border) and continuous bombing of the Russian inhabited parts of Ukraine.

I guess only the blue team can embody Dayan's famous quote

[xzar_monty]

15 minutes ago, Sarex said:

The provocation would be the Ukrainian intention to join NATO (and as such military presence of NATO on a large part of its border) and continuous bombing of the Russian inhabited parts of Ukraine.

Are you serious in thinking that Ukraine's intention to join NATO is a provocation? Really? It is not up to Russia what Ukraine does with regards to NATO. That's entirely Ukraine's decision.

And if you think that Russia regards NATO as a threat, please stop kidding yourself. Russia's entire western front has been wide open and empty for months now, very easy for NATO to walk in. Of course NATO doesn't do that. It has never had any intention to do that. Russia knows it, this is why the west of the country was emptied. Only some Russia apologists may seriously think that Russia fears a NATO attack.

[Mamoulian War]

On 6/27/2022 at 11:05 AM, BruceVC said:

This is significant, first time since 1998,  and is another sign of what is coming for the Russian economy and its sustainability and growth due to Western sanctions 

This is first time since 1917

[Sarex]

2 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

Are you serious in thinking that Ukraine's intention to join NATO is a provocation? Really? It is not up to Russia what Ukraine does with regards to NATO. That's entirely Ukraine's decision.

But it's obvious that it's the reality of the current world order. Just as the US, as the current leader of the world, doesn't allow things to go against its interests, be it to it allies or enemies (in my example Cuba) and on a global level, so do Russia and China enforce that (or try to) in their own back yard.

It's just that you picked a carriage to hitch your horse to and are not willing to be objective. And I don't know why, it's not like you would hurt the cause of the West by being objective.

Edited June 28, 2022 by Sarex

[kanisatha]

6 hours ago, Sarex said:

The things the US has done in Africa are by far the worse crimes committed in recent history (Vietnam trailing close behind).

This is just plain silly. Clearly you don't have a good idea of the kinds of things that have happened and are even now happening in the world. All the US has done is some drone strikes which wouldn't even register on any scale of crimes or atrocities.

And on the other hand, by the reckoning of many African country governments and African humanitarian orgs themselves, what the US did to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa during the GWB Administration literally saved the continent. And every time there's a famine or pandemic in Africa, it is the US that has led the way in helping out. Never ever any sign of the likes of USSR/Russia, China, etc. doing a damn thing to help.

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

This is just plain silly. Clearly you don't have a good idea of the kinds of things that have happened and are even now happening in the world. All the US has done is some drone strikes which wouldn't even register on any scale of crimes or atrocities.

And on the other hand, by the reckoning of many African country governments and African humanitarian orgs themselves, what the US did to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa during the GWB Administration literally saved the continent. And every time there's a famine or pandemic in Africa, it is the US that has led the way in helping out. Never ever any sign of the likes of USSR/Russia, China, etc. doing a damn thing to help.

I cant agree more with the amount of aid the US has provided, and still does, to various African countries in different ways like HIV anti-retroviral drugs and there many US NGO, like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, that provide billions of dollars of humanitarian help to several African countries 

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa in 2015 was only finally contained because of a medical and military US deployment to help the people in the countries grappling with Ebola 

https://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/10/us/ebola-u-s-troops-africa/index.html

https://www.usaid.gov/ebola