Ukraine burns

[Cultist]

This is just painful to read and listen to. Please, stahp.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Cultist

[Volourn]

He's not wrong. Even if he is being a hypocrite. So is Putin and Russia. Both sides are. *shrug*

[Hildegard]

 

Not really new means, and I'm not sure the comparison is fair. Plurinational countries don't exactly have a stellar track record of success and stability throughout history, and breakup after an uneasy while is the usual outcome. Also Crimea had been a part of Russia for longer than (modern) Ukraine has existed, so it's not surprising that the majoritarian ethnic group is Russians. This is not Russians coming into Crimea in the past 20 years and voting for secession after completely changing the demographic composition of the peninsula. Looks like you are trying to establish a parallel between Russians in Ukraine and immigrants in Europe, but it's a bit of a stretch.

 

 

I know it ain't new that is why I used commas. Also I was not implying that this situation in Ukraine is the exact same as a possible scenario with immigrants in Europe. Was just talking about a modus operandi where you by various means have one group of people that are the majority in some region, have them vote in favor of independence or annexation by some other state and they can change internationally recognized borders. Of course that alone is often far from what it takes to pull off something like that. Aside the history and the demographics of the Crimea the only factor that manages something like that is power of one entity that overpowers the other.

 

Like NATO with Kosovo and like Russia with the Crimea and possibly the Eastern Ukraine. The only 'legitimacy' of Russia which is going to allow them to overtake this situation in their own favor is their military supremacy and readiness to act militarily. Not referendums, not votes, not demographics, not historic circumstances, not public opinion and any kind of such things. 

 

So in essences you have a group that is a majority in one region, back them up with any kind of adequate brute force, have them vote it out to make things legitimate in the eyes of the world and you change borders of countries. 

[obyknven]

 Oby is salivating at the taste of Ukranian blood. It's funny that Putin and his alckies claim this is to defend Russians yet Putin has no problem murdering fellow Russians WHO LIVE IN RUSSIA. LMAO On top of that, Cremia isn't Russian. It's Ukranian. This is an invasion.  The Cremian Russians are in less danger from fellow ukranians than theya re from Putin's Russia.

 

 

"Didn't Russia (and a lot of Europe0 condemus for our invasion? Pat calling the kettle black?"

 

Yup. Putin has shown - no surprise to me - he is a hypocrite. No excuse for invading sorveign countries, RIOHT Putin? LMAO

 

Of course, Western gov't are cowards just like the Russian gov't is. All talk no action. And, the Ukranians will be the ones to suffer.

Nonsense.

1. I am ethnic Ukrainian.

2. Nobody yet killed (in difference with NATO invasions)

3. This is not war but military exercise - Putin want test new units.

4. We just await when people of Kiev overthrow impotent usurpers. By insider reports everyone in Kiev are angry and hate Maidaners (who actually is 15 year old chaws) and oligarhic "government". Today all don't like US and EU - they do nothing real to help, only blah-blah. Russia in difference with this do so many for protect of Crimeans (by very high price - our markets are fallen).  Now people understand who can be true bro.

5. Putin is not conqueror Attila-style. He is spy and businessman, he use totally different methods. Intrigues, multitasked abd multiturned campaigns, psyhological tricks.

6. You can have unique possibility watch game of thrones IRL. You can hate him but he is true politic, in difference with Western posers.

5. We troll West - Western politics... show own incompetency

 

 

President Obama: "No country has a right to send in troops to another country unprovoked."

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/440582472363831296

  He is just political corpse, why such people rule on the West?

 

6. Our credo is "Let's the World burn". US/EU treats only make Apocalypse closer and we like it. Destroy world because of NWO elite stupidity is funny. In such situations also popular Russian slogan is "We need moar of Hell!" - if situation is terrible let's make it even worse, some sort of darkest humor ever. Your politicans don't understand this and play with fire.

[Zoraptor]

Can't remember who said it but Crimea would have no problem as a sovereign nation. It has enough population, indeed it has significantly more than Kosovo, it has enough natural resources and if people were to talk about the ability to defend themselves then Ukraine isn't a proper country, let alone any country with a small population. Such as Kosovo, which still has a- to all intents and purposes permanent- NATO presence. I'm sure, however, that a to all intents and permanent purposes Russian presence in Crimea would be Different, just Different, Because.

 

While not exactly the same situation, the rhetoric is hilariously ironic.

 

International politics is perhaps the most ironic of all things. Quite apart from the US saying you don't just run around invading countries there's also Britain holding a referendum on the status of the Malvinas, while they are under their 'military occupation', and using that as a pretext to hold them from their rightful owners* in the Land of Silver, Maradona and financial crises. Oh, and the soft economic sanctions from various South American countries against them are just vindictive!

 

And, of course, Kosovo.

 

The other side is not the one who violated the sovereignty of another state after two days of minor protest.

 

The other other side set aside the democratically elected government elected primarily be the east. Not worried at all about their disenfranchisement, are we, after all the side which lost the elections will do what we want, so all's good?

 

Just a minor nit pick, instead of "supporting" Crimean independence "orchestrating" would be far more appropriate ( i.e. the German ww2 refernce someone mentioned above )

 

Nah, that's rubbish. Everyone has accepted that there is a very strong secessionist or unificationist sentiment in Crimea- everyone, including those in Kiev else they would not have been talking about 'punishing' secessionist sentiment, a comment I imagine the 'president' is regretting now. It suits Russia's interests and they will, of course, support it for that reason, but it is home grown. The comparison to Germany in 1938 is ridiculous anyway, but if we have to do it then who is Neville Chamberlain? Please let it be William Hague, it would make my day if he aimed for Churchill and achieved Chamberlain as well as Shatner.
 

 

Because it looks like more Russian single minded self interests aggression like in Georgia.

 

Still not read the OSCE or HRW report, or even the nice easy to read wikipedia article I provided? Ah well, not surprised, you can lead a horse to the fountain of enlightenment, but you can't make it drink.

 

First of all he didn't gave it to "Ukraine" but he made adjustments to districts within the soviet union which Ukraine was part of.

 

That's sophistry. He gave it to Ukraine, one day it was part of Russia, next it was part of Ukraine. That's like describing Georgian ethnic cleansing as "unfortunate reaction to secessionism" or whatever weasel words Hitchens used. A palatable way to describe something that is unpalatable when someone else does it.

 

Russia has no more claims to either districts of former Soviet union, then imperialist UK to any of its colonies or Germany to territories of Nazi Germany.(even if they have a nice German majority) Otherwise tomorrow they can decides to invade Belarus for example.

 

And there's the irony again. Decisions made by Uncle Joe Stalin or Nikita Krushchev must be respected! So says the west! But only the decisions we like!

 

*Nah, the population is British and wants to be British, that's enough for me and anyone reasonable. It just, for some peculiar reason, the goal posts shift mysteriously around when it's other people using the same logic.

[Meshugger]

Can't remember who said it but Crimea would have no problem as a sovereign nation. It has enough population, indeed it has significantly more than Kosovo, it has enough natural resources and if people were to talk about the ability to defend themselves then Ukraine isn't a proper country, let alone any country with a small population. Such as Kosovo, which still has a- to all intents and purposes permanent- NATO presence. I'm sure, however, that a to all intents and permanent purposes Russian presence in Crimea would be Different, just Different, Because.

 

While not exactly the same situation, the rhetoric is hilariously ironic.

 

International politics is perhaps the most ironic of all things. Quite apart from the US saying you don't just run around invading countries there's also Britain holding a referendum on the status of the Malvinas, while they are under their 'military occupation', and using that as a pretext to hold them from their rightful owners* in the Land of Silver, Maradona and financial crises. Oh, and the soft economic sanctions from various South American countries against them are just vindictive!

 

And, of course, Kosovo.

 

Sshhhhhhhhh! Do not poke the Balkanese on this board. We do not need another pie throwing contest when we already have this one.

[Sarex]

Sshhhhhhhhh! Do not poke the Balkanese on this board. We do not need another pie throwing contest when we already have this one.

 

Damn dude, I just got my pie out of the oven...

[Gorgon]

 

I found this link interesting, if it's true.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2570335/Former-British-Ambassador-Moscow-warns-Russia-invaded-Ukraine-difficult-avoid-going-war.html

 

 

(apologies if this has been brought up already)

Yep. But USA don't want into war against Russia, and just throw away this treaty into garbage. Any treaty with USA about protection is useless paper, Georgians can prove this.

Most lul'z thing is how China watch this Russian performance in Ukraine, but thinknig about Taiwan and other ilsand's.  

 

 

Actually there is quite a bit of historical precedence of not interfering in immediate spheres of interest. The US forces would not enter Ukraine, instead it would give military aid and training, and just sit back and wait for the Russians to leave on their own. Worked very well in Georgia and Afghanistan. 

[Mor]

Actually there is quite a bit of historical precedence of not interfering in immediate spheres of interest. The US forces would not enter Ukraine, instead it would give military aid and training, and just sit back and wait for the Russians to leave on their own.

The problem is that Ukraine give up its Nuclear arsenal the third largest(iirc it was larger then the one of France and UK combined) for security and territorial assurances from Russia/USA/...

 

so the lesson here(other than do not trust Russia) is that anyone interested in securing its border should get some nukes ... Because if Ukraine would have placed its nuclear arsenal on war time reediness, Putin wouldn't be so smug and the whole world would be there trying to resolve the issue...

 

Worked very well in Georgia and Afghanistan.

That is a matter of perspective

 

EDITED.

Edited March 4, 2014 by Mor

[Valsuelm]

 

Actually there is quite a bit of historical precedence of not interfering in immediate spheres of interest. The US forces would not enter Ukraine, instead it would give military aid and training, and just sit back and wait for the Russians to leave on their own. Worked very well in Georgia and Afghanistan. 

 

 

Comparing Afghanistan and Georgia to Ukraine/Crimea is like comparing apples and oranges to Aliens/UFOs. Georgia and Afghanistan were/are two very different situations, and Ukraine/Crimea is even more different.

 

The strategic importance of Ukraine/ Crimea to Russia is arguably second to none except Russia itself. There are few if any similar situations to compare it to in the modern world. Any competent leader of Russia would be willing to go to war over external influences attempting to wrest control of it away, which is what the west is doing through back channels. The situation is much more comparable in strategic important value to say how Ireland is to the U.K., but even then maybe not so much. The EU/US/UK aren't messing around on Russia's block right now, or even in their backyard, they're messing around on Russia's back porch, and it's leaders would be smart to back off. Unfortunately for the world in this and many other regards, it's leaders aren't smart (we as a people don't hold them accountable).

 

Here's a synopsis article that might put things in perspective simple like for you if aren't familiar with the history of the region:

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/2014/03/02/memo-to-obama-this-was-their-red-line/

[alanschu]

I think the situation is complicated by the fact that there are treaties involved, however.

[Mor]

Comparing Afghanistan and Georgia to Ukraine/Crimea is like comparing apples and oranges to Aliens/UFOs. Georgia and Afghanistan were/are two very different situations, and Ukraine/Crimea is even more different.

 

The strategic importance of Ukraine/ Crimea to Russia is arguably second to none except Russia itself. There are few if any similar situations to compare it to in the modern world. Any competent leader of Russia would be willing to go to war over external influences attempting to wrest control of it away, which is what the west is doing through back channels. The situation is much more comparable in strategic important value to say how Ireland is to the U.K. ...

Are you suggesting that if tomorrow 'Republic of Ireland' decided to drop the EU and join Russian economic union. That the UK wold be justified to invade it to "protect" British people within or due to its "strategic importance" to UK ?! Edited March 4, 2014 by Mor

[Gorgon]

The point I was making was that the US would not interfere directly inside the Russian sphere of influence. Cold war dynamics that still apply. Georgia is case in point, as Oby pointed out. If not Georgia, then certainly not the Ukraine.  

[alanschu]

It's a constant risk though. Analogies to 1930s Europe seem appropriate enough. If people keep pushing... I'm sure Germany didn't expect the UK and France to feel that Poland was worth meddling with either. But they had a treaty which brought them into the war when they decided to honor it.

Edited March 4, 2014 by alanschu

[Mor]

 

The other side is not the one who violated the sovereignty of another state after two days of minor protest.

The other other side set aside the democratically elected government elected primarily be the east. Not worried at all about their disenfranchisement, are we, after all the side which lost the elections will do what we want, so all's good?

 

WTF are you talking about?! we was talking about something completely unrelated. As for this, your usual one trick whore argument: but but but it was "democratically elected" bla bla bla, it was also democratically dissolved by vote of no confidence after use of live ammo against protesters which claimed the lives of 70+ Ukrainians. And there is no "do what we want", there would be election and Ukrainian decide what they want, even if the "west"/Russia don't like it.

 

 

Just a minor nit pick, instead of "supporting" Crimean independence "orchestrating" would be far more appropriate ( i.e. the German ww2 refernce someone mentioned above )

Nah, that's rubbish. Everyone has accepted that there is a very strong secessionist or unificationist sentiment in Crimea ...

 

Nah?! I am familiar with Crimean sapartism movement for a long time. In fact it was initiated by local Tatars, until Stalin "disabused" them of the notion with Russian iron fist. What I don't understand how it negates what I said, unless you are unaware of two decade long of Russian propaganda and support for separatism in Crimea, especially when talks of deal with EU came about.

 

 

First of all he didn't gave it to "Ukraine" but he made adjustments to districts within the soviet union which Ukraine was part of.

That's sophistry. He gave it to Ukraine, one day it was part of Russia, next it was part of Ukraine. That's like describing Georgian ethnic cleansing as "unfortunate reaction to secessionism" or whatever weasel words Hitchens used. A palatable way to describe something that is unpalatable when someone else does it.

 

The opposite is the true, you try to imply that because the district was moved between two administrative division within soviet union in the 1950s, it gives Russia legal grounds today, which is BS.

 

Soviet Union is no more, Crimea is part of independent Ukraine and in 1994(?) Russia signed agreement to respect Ukrainian sovereignty and protect its territorial integrity. Since then Russia got upset that yet another country is moving toward to the EU, so they decided to went with dirty soviet era politics and Russian iron fist, in violation of their previous commitments and Ukraine national sovereignty.

 

And there's the irony again. Decisions made by Uncle Joe Stalin or Nikita Krushchev must be respected! So says the west! But only the decisions we like!

The only irony here is Putin PR BS about respecting sovereignty of other states or whatever Putin daily pravada produce to justify its actions. Because while the "west" or rather the international community is trying to resolve issues through talk and negotiations, Russian bully knows only one way the brute force way(protiv loma net preoma, right?). But sure deflecting it to the "west"... Edited March 4, 2014 by Mor

[Valsuelm]

 

Are you suggesting that if tomorrow 'Republic of Ireland' decided to drop the EU and join Russian economic union. That the UK wold be justified to invade it to "protect" British people within?

 

 

While that wouldn't quite be the same as what's going on in Ukraine as it is not as simple as the Ukraine dropping Russia for the EU (despite what most western news stories are saying) nor is there a Russian equivalent to the EU, without a doubt if the tables were turned and such a thing were to occur in today's world you would see the U.K. act in similar manner, and without a doubt many in the west would see it as perfectly ok.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Speaking of hitler, there's this : http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372353/eurasianist-threat-robert-zubrin It may seem like a paranoid rant, but sure would explain a lot.

[Zoraptor]

it was also democratically dissolved by vote of no confidence after use of live ammo against protesters which claimed the lives of 70+ Ukrainians. And there is no "do what we want", there would be election and Ukrainian decide what they want, even if the "west"/Russia don't like it.

What, in circumstances where the only 'protection' provided to the parliament was from the protesters, Right Sector etc? With that you can argue that Oliver Cromwell was a good democrat, what with getting 'elected' dictator for life by parliament. Especially since we have video of one of the goons threatening to hang the new interior minister, their nominal friend.

 

It was also against, wait for it, an international agreement signed by amongst others three EU foreign ministers and the political opposition (at that time), abrogated almost instantly.

 

Nah?! I am familiar with Crimean sapartism movement for a long time. In fact it was initiated by local Tatars, until Stalin "disabused" them of the notion with Russian iron fist. What I don't understand how it negates what I said, unless you are unaware of two decade long of Russian propaganda and support for separatism in Crimea, especially when talks of deal with EU came about.

Ah, so people only want to break away because of propaganda, not because their government got couped- unless they're breaking away from someone you don't like, such as Stalin? Can't say I'm surprised.

 

The opposite is the true, you try to imply that because the district was moved between two administrative division within soviet union in the 1950s, it gives Russia legal grounds today, which is BS.

No, I'm saying it was an arbitrary switch made at the whim of, basically, a dictator, which was meant to have no practical change, which did not take the wishes of the people living there into account in the slightest, and which was made by someone whose decisions would be regarded as questionable by default by the west. If they didn't agree with the decision for political reasons, at least.

 

Soviet Union is no more, Crimea is part of independent Ukraine and in 1994(?) Russia signed agreement to respect Ukrainian sovereignty and protect its territorial integrity. Since then Russia got upset that yet another country is moving toward to the EU, so they decided to went with dirty soviet era politics and Russian iron fist, in violation of their previous commitments and Ukraine national sovereignty.

Crimea should never have been regarded as part of Ukraine.

 

And international agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on, when they become inconvenient. There is, for example, the Anti Ballistic Missile treaty, abrogated by the US and the agreement that allowed Germany to reintegrate, also abrogated by the west. Oh, and of course the agreement that said Yanokovich would stay President until new elections, as mentioned above. What's that, irony, again?

 

The only irony here is Putin PR BS about respecting sovereignty of other states or whatever Putin daily pravada produce to justify its actions. Because while the "west" or rather the international community is trying to resolve issues through talk and negotiations, Russian bully knows only one way the brute force way(protiv loma net preoma, right?). But sure deflecting it to the "west"...

The only irony here is Obama's PR BS about respecting sovereignty of other states or whatever Obama daily CNN produce to justify its actions.

 

Because the west is perfectly happy to resolve issues through drones/ targeted assassinations, invading Iraq, splitting off Kosovo, aiding this that or the other rebel group, bombing Libya, supporting overthrows of democratically elected governments, supporting Israeli colonisations and annexations, and a host of other examples but they all just Don't Count against them since they are Different, Just Because. The west, as with everyone, talks negotiations only when they're either sure they'll get what they want from them, or they want nothing done at all, or when the stakes are too high for other actions. When they want to take action, even violent military action, they'll pull a Nike and just do it. Maybe not quite as readily as Russia may, but then the list of countries invaded or attacked by Russia recently is- objectively- considerably shorter than that attacked by those issue talking negotiation loving western countries.

[Hurlshort]

When does Putin stop being President, anyways?  Obama is out in less than 3 years, but I really have no idea how Russia handles terms.

[ShadySands]

I don't think there is a maximum amount of time but I think he can only serve two consecutive (now 6 year) terms which is why they briefly had Medvedev

Edited March 4, 2014 by ShadySands

[Valsuelm]

I don't think there is a maximum amount of time but I think he can only serve two consecutive (now 6 year) terms which is why they briefly had Medvedev

Yup. We could conceivably see Putin be the Russian president until 2024 under current laws there as his most recent term started in 2012.

[obyknven]

Russia on 'wrong side of history': Obama on Ukraine

http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/russia-on-wrong-side-of-history-obama-on-ukraine-114030400145_1.html

 

Pentagon suspends military engagements with Russia

https://www.ksl.com/?nid=235&sid=28928415&title=pentagon-suspends-military-engagements-with-russia--cold-cold-cold--disney-dish-deal

 

Obama, please, reject New start treaty also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_START

 

Other Americans threats looks laughable also. For example 70% of Russian economics belongs to foreighn companies - any economical sanctions against Russia = economical sanctions of US against yourself. It's can only cause World economical crisis, nothing more. It's looks like Obama is American Gorbachev, he want destroy US for something. He is just non-competent.

[obyknven]

Insider info about reaction of Russian society to Crimean crisis.

 

4200 people answered

 

Q. Do you support intervention to Ukraine

A  yes - 56.8%, no - 19.6%

 

 

Q. Do you want personally participate in intervention to Ukraine as soldier

A  yes - 52%

 

 

Q. What next country must be become target for our intervention

By range from most supported

1 Baltic states

2 USA

3 Japan

4 Israel

 

Q Do you prepare suffer because sanction against Russia.

A.  Yes - 50.4%

 

 

Pro-west "liberals" in Russia in hysteria now. Their image about mad evil Russian dictator make fail. IRL Putin is just populist and give to people whet they want.

If someone conducts similar sociological research in NATO countries... what results can be in this case?

[Flouride]

When does Putin stop being President, anyways?  Obama is out in less than 3 years, but I really have no idea how Russia handles terms.

 

When he damn pleases. I think there was a law that you can only do 2 consecutive terms in a row or maybe it was 3 which is why he had his 2nd in command as president for one term at least then returned back to power.

[obyknven]

Explanation about economical sanctions also.

http://youtu.be/2tFsAkpBFRc

 

IRL - EU, US and NATO can do nothing, Western threats is just bluff

 

Actually we yet can except all bad things if West leave own russophobic rhetoric (everything what can harm to Russia is good) and use own influence to force Ukrainian usurpers return to democratic solution of Ukrainian crisis. Anyway entire Ukraine not needed for us now - they don't have moneys,  their economics and education system are destroyed with  help of US/EU "friends" (in past Ukraine is most developed hi-tech region of USSR). Europe must join Ukrainians to yourself, feed them, educate them, restore their country... Ukrainians return to us once someday, when leave own illusions about "happy life in EU", we can wait.