Ukraine-in-a-thread

[Husar]

Well what with Obama getting it and then bombing the shit out of civilians and then the 'peaceful' EU gets it and stirs up a hornets nest in The Ukraine by trying to bribe its citizens to overthrow a legitimate democratically elected government, it sure had better taste nice.

Why do you love Putin?

[InsaneApache]

Why do you love Putin?

C'mon you can do better than that mate. It's embarrassing.

[Husar]

C'mon you can do better than that mate. It's embarrassing.

You don't need to feel embarassed, the entire thread is embarassing by now.

[Rhyfelwyr]

When I think about it, I can't see this ending in anything else other than the annexation of Eastern Ukraine. Having annexed Crimea, Putin will know that it is no longer possible to put a friendly government in Kiev by electoral means. I don't see what he has to gain by his continuing involvement in the country unless he wants to annex part of it.

[Rhyfelwyr]

OK, a huge development. Separatists shoot down Ukraine army helicopters (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27250026).

[Sarmatian]

So the majority of people in the East (as it is happening in Odessa or Kharkiv) would put up with the current government in Kyiv if the situation were not "stimulated" by the Kremlin (militarily) and Yanukovych (financially).

Most would have put up with Yanukovich if they weren't stimulated to try something else.


OK, a huge development. Separatists shoot down Ukraine army helicopters (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27250026).

It's mind-boggling how Kiev didn't miss a single opportunity to make its position even worse.

[Gilrandir]

OK, a huge development. Separatists shoot down Ukraine army helicopters (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27250026).
Does anyone still believe that those are just everyday normal Ukrainian people you meet in the street? One more report says that a minefield was detected in the suburbs of Slovyansk. How versatile are normal everyday mundane routine people! They
can plant mines and handle those things you bring down helicopters with (I even don't know how they are called).

[Brenus]

Gilrandir, I can do this. Laying a mine field is quite easy (dig a hole, put the mine, cover). And Somalis put down a Black-hawk(s) with R.P.G which are just upgraded Panzerfaust. Stop being so... i even don't know how to qualify your attitude. Helicopters are fragile machines and easy to destroy...

[Gilrandir]

Gilrandir, I can do this. Laying a mine field is quite easy (dig a hole, put the mine, cover). And Somalis put down a Black-hawk(s) with R.P.G which are just upgraded Panzerfaust. Stop being so... i even don't know how to qualify your attitude. Helicopters are fragile machines and easy to destroy...
Do you know how to start a mine into operation mode? I don't. And Somalis have had decades of war experience so they can drive tanks, I believe. Moreover, those military men who were watching the helicoters being brought down claimed that they were attacked using two "guns" (don't know the correct term): one shot was intercepted by the "heat trap", as they put it, the second got the machine - according to them it testifies to the previous experience of the shooters. But have it your own way -
let's have a poll: how many people here who had nothing to do with handling military equipment (this is what being an everyday normal person amounts to, in my view) can bring down a helicopter or plant a mine and switch it on to "stand by" (if I'm putting these things correctly)?

[Husar]

Don't mines come with a manual?

As for taking down a helicopter, it's not hard a Brenus says. Professionals wouldn't use guns but missiles but you can already bring down most helicopters using rifles. Especially when they are stationary.

Quite a few "everyday normal persons" also have army experience from when they were young, or are you claiming the rebels are all everyday normal standardized women and children?

[Sarmatian]

In other news, all observers have been released from custody and Russian Deputy Prime Minister makes a joke about the newest batch of sanctions of western santcions.

"After analyzing the sanctions against our space industry, I suggest that the USA bring their astronauts to the International Space Station using a trampoline."

In addition, a rather interesting article (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/05/02/russia-doesnt-really-want-ukraine-it-just-wants-piece-it/) about the situation.

It argues that, all the chest-thumping and shouting of principles aside, no one really wants Ukraine. Indeed, who will want to stay and clean the mess after the party?

[gaelic cowboy]

It argues that, all the chest-thumping and shouting of principles aside, no one really wants Ukraine. Indeed, who will want to stay and clean the mess after the party?

Good then maybe the Ukrainians can have it so instead of yer friend in the Kremlin

[Sarmatian]

Good then maybe the Ukrainians can have it so instead of yer friend in the Kremlin

That is what you come up with? Really? :shame:

[gaelic cowboy]

That is what you come up with? Really? :shame:


I find it disturbing that somehow this is nothing more than an internet point scoring excercise to you.


All you do is post various defences of russian fascism naturally under the guise of being some kind of geopolitical jedi.


I told you before there is a difference between knowing/understanding about russian geopolitics and being its cheerleader.

I can understand why they do it but I will never accept that they should be allowed to do it.


You make me sick

[Sarmatian]

You make me sick

I think it would surprise you just how indifferent I am about your well-being.

[gaelic cowboy]

I think it would surprise you just how indifferent I am about your well-being.


No it doesnt


I think your an odious influence on this forum.

There are far too many people posting all sorts of bile on this forum and I for one have had an enough of it.

[Sarmatian]

No it doesnt


I think your an odious influence on this forum.

Oh, I'm sorry. I'll toe the official party line from now on.



There are far too many people posting all sorts of bile on this forum and I for one have had an enough of it.

I'm not the only one?

Anyway, that means you're leaving, right? I'm gonna miss your meaningless one-liners. Well, what can I do, it seems your mind is set. Ta-ta.

[gaelic cowboy]

Oh, I'm sorry. I'll toe the official party line from now on.



I'm not the only one?

Anyway, that means you're leaving, right? I'm gonna miss your meaningless one-liners. Well, what can I do, it seems your mind is set. Ta-ta.


only meaningless to a crypto-fascist cheerleading thug like you Sarmatian , have fun with your dreams of pan slavic domination.

Another 70 years of vodka swillled thuggery, famine and despotism.


No doubt it will all crash in flames again mostly cos your too thick to learn the lesson the last time.



yes it does appear I will be off

[Sarmatian]

Another 70 years of vodka swillled thuggery, famine and despotism.

Replace vodka with whiskey and you get Ireland.



No doubt it will all crash in flames again mostly cos your too thick to learn the lesson the last time.

yes it does appear I will be off

I don't really care about pan Slavism and the situation in Ukraine haven't got anything to do with that in the slightest anyway. So, hopefully this is your last meaningless one-liner. I wish I could say it's been a pleasure, but we both know that would be a lie.

[Kadagar_AV]

I find it disturbing that somehow this is nothing more than an internet point scoring excercise to you.


All you do is post various defences of russian fascism naturally under the guise of being some kind of geopolitical jedi.


I told you before there is a difference between knowing/understanding about russian geopolitics and being its cheerleader.

I can understand why they do it but I will never accept that they should be allowed to do it.


You make me sick

It is that, and also a way to sharpen ones arguments towards other people IRL.

Don't feel sick about it.

I only get sick when people get absolutely personal. An idea - though - is always up for grabs.



I for one am trained to hate the Red Threat. I am also trained to have some amount of logical thinking.

Don't assume too much about your fellow posters :)

[Kadagar_AV]

dp, mods please del :)

[Rhyfelwyr]

I think Sarmatian is just being reasonable and not buying into the usual pro-West hype.

The Fox article is dodgy though - it speaks of the Rose Revolution in Ukraine, which seems to be a pretty basic factual error (I guess they mean the Orange Revolution). Also at one minute it portrays Russia as strong, and then weak the next.

The reality is that Russia is facing the same problems as Ukraine in terms of demographic decline, corruption etc.

[Sarmatian]

I don't really understand his problem. It's not like we have any influence, we're just discussing stuff that happens around the world and we happen to have different opinions. I don't agree with his opinion, but I never resorted to insults.

If I were to frequent a Russian forum, where most of the members presumably would be pro-Russian, celebrating annexation of Crimea and such, I believe I would be accused of holding a pro-western view.

My point has been rather consistent that Europe should play a long game with Russia, and stop provoking it. Putin's rating was slightly below 50% before the crisis. Now it's at incredible 80%. Does it take a genius to figure it out? With these kinds of moves, west is actually helping him stay in the office. Using Russian nationalism and fear of western encirclement, he actually completely bypasses the questions we want Russian voters to ask - corruption, democracy, diversification of the economy, media freedom and so on. Even if that proves insufficient to get him out of the office in the next elections, it would at least require him to invest energy and time into those issues. As soon as the West appears hostile, all other issues become much, much less important in Russia.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I don't really understand his problem. It's not like we have any influence, we're just discussing stuff that happens around the world and we happen to have different opinions. I don't agree with his opinion, but I never resorted to insults.

If I were to frequent a Russian forum, where most of the members presumably would be pro-Russian, celebrating annexation of Crimea and such, I believe I would be accused of holding a pro-western view.

My point has been rather consistent that Europe should play a long game with Russia, and stop provoking it. Putin's rating was slightly below 50% before the crisis. Now it's at incredible 80%. Does it take a genius to figure it out? With these kinds of moves, west is actually helping him stay in the office. Using Russian nationalism and fear of western encirclement, he actually completely bypasses the questions we want Russian voters to ask - corruption, democracy, diversification of the economy, media freedom and so on. Even if that proves insufficient to get him out of the office in the next elections, it would at least require him to invest energy and time into those issues. As soon as the West appears hostile, all other issues become much, much less important in Russia.

His problem is that you don't seem to have a problem with Putin, you seem to think it's OK for him to be wandering into bits of Ukraine and taking over, like he accidentally tripped and he fell into the country.

Putin is a Fascist, he is bad for Russia, and he maintains power because he denies Russians freedom of information.

Violence has now suddenly broken out in Odessa - 42 dead in a few days - you think the FSB or GRU had nothing to do with that, at all?

Putin manipulated the Ukrainian political system to get his man in Office who was supposed to guide Ukraine back to the Motherland, about 1/3 of the way through that process a significant percentage of Ukrainians (not a majority) revolted, causing a political crisis, and that man fled for his life - before the depths of his crimes could be discovered.

Then Putin invaded Crimea - then violent protests led by "Cossacks" broke out in Russia's Eastern industrial base - those have now spread to Odessa, giving Putin a pretext to annex a corridor all the way up to the the Transdnistrian region of Moldova.

Things progress as he has foreseen - including the lack of Western or Ukrainian willingness to spill blood, theirs or others'.

It is VERY clear that Putin is enacting a Grand strategy in Ukraine, not dissimilar to the one my Byzantine Emperor is enacting in my current Crusader Kings campaign.

[Pannonian]

Putin manipulated the Ukrainian political system to get his man in Office who was supposed to guide Ukraine back to the Motherland, about 1/3 of the way through that process a significant percentage of Ukrainians (not a majority) revolted, causing a political crisis, and that man fled for his life - before the depths of his crimes could be discovered.

.....

It is VERY clear that Putin is enacting a Grand strategy in Ukraine, not dissimilar to the one my Byzantine Emperor is enacting in my current Crusader Kings campaign.

Any chance of reloading the game and this time not encourage the Ukrainians to revolt? You know, like waiting for the next election to replace the Russian patsy, like most democratic countries do.

[Gilrandir]

Don't mines come with a manual?

As a normal everyday Ukrainian I don't know. Do grenades, cartridges, rifles, missiles, sabers and cannon balls come with a manual? You tell me.


As for taking down a helicopter, it's not hard a Brenus says. Professionals wouldn't use guns but missiles but you can already bring down most helicopters using rifles. Especially when they are stationary.

Those ones that were brought down were on the move. And what about avoiding "light/heat traps"? Are you good at doing that?

[Gilrandir]

In other news, all observers have been released from custody
SBU made public an intercepted conversation between the head of separatists in Slovyansk Girkin (aka Strelok "the Shooter") and Lukin, the head of the Russian mission that is considered to have been instrumental in freeing hostages.
http://zn.ua/UKRAINE/sbu-obnarodovala-peregovory-lukina-i-strelka-dokazyvayuschie-prichastnost-rf-k-zahvatu-inspektorov-obse-separatistami-144349_.html
In it they agree the details of Lukin's arrival (I wonder, how the latter knows Strelok's telephone number? Or was it some radio channel connection - then how does he know the frequency?) Strelok says that he knows of this mission and has no objections to it because he had been ordered to free the hostages, although he claims that he was ordered to cooperate with Lukin only, not with Europeans. I read it as one more proof that separatists in Ukraine are under direct commands from Russia.

[Sarmatian]

His problem is that you don't seem to have a problem with Putin, you seem to think it's OK for him to be wandering into bits of Ukraine and taking over, like he accidentally tripped and he fell into the country.

My problem with Putin is academic, not personal. I'm not a citizen of Russia nor I live in Russia.

Unlike you or him, I don't tend to make too much difference between "democratic" and "fascist" military interventions. If we can discuss in a civil manner American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan or potential invasion of Syria, talk about pros and cons, ulterior motives, crimes etc... I don't really see why we must foam at the mouth and insult one another when it's about Russian intervention in Ukraine.

It's not fair, but here's a newsflash: a lot of what happens in the world isn't fair, and I don't see how one dead Ukrainian is different from one dead American, or one dead Russian, or one dead Iraqi.



Putin is a Fascist, he is bad for Russia, and he maintains power because he denies Russians freedom of information.

There already is a thread about Putin.


Violence has now suddenly broken out in Odessa - 42 dead in a few days - you think the FSB or GRU had nothing to do with that, at all?

Does that surprise you? Did you think that western intelligence agencies have a patent on involvement in Ukraine (and other parts of the world)? Did you expect Russians to sit on the sidelines and do nothing?


Putin manipulated the Ukrainian political system to get his man in Office who was supposed to guide Ukraine back to the Motherland, about 1/3 of the way through that process a significant percentage of Ukrainians (not a majority) revolted, causing a political crisis, and that man fled for his life - before the depths of his crimes could be discovered.

Manipulated how exactly? He was elected, in what every single serious independent international organization called free, transparent and regular elections.

If you believe that corruption and criminal activity in Ukraine was limited to Yanukovich and Party of Regions, you either don't know what you're talking about or you are incredibly biased. You could safely lock up 3/4 of Ukrainian politicians for that and more, including those involved in Maidan.


Then Putin invaded Crimea - then violent protests led by "Cossacks" broke out in Russia's Eastern industrial base - those have now spread to Odessa, giving Putin a pretext to annex a corridor all the way up to the the Transdnistrian region of Moldova.

That won't happen. Crimea had special significance and absolute majority of the population was in favour of returning to Russia so the annexation was painless. Eastern and southeastern Ukraine are different. Even though majority is against the current government and Kiev and NATO, they aren't in favour of joining Russia. Declaring independence on the Kosovo model is a possibility, and the longer Maidan government continues to practice its idiotic policy, the more realistic that possibility becomes.


Things progress as he has foreseen - including the lack of Western or Ukrainian willingness to spill blood, theirs or others'.

There is on lack of willingness on the part of the Maidan government, there's a lack of means.


It is VERY clear that Putin is enacting a Grand strategy in Ukraine, not dissimilar to the one my Byzantine Emperor is enacting in my current Crusader Kings campaign.

Only one totally blind to what's been happening for the last 25 years can say something like this. Russian rhetoric from the 1990 to 2014:

1) Don't use our temporary weakness to enlarge NATO
2) Please don't enlarge NATO
3) Please don't enlarge NATO any more
4) Now we're getting really uncomfortable, please stop
5) Please stop, you will force us to react
6) If you do this, we won't able to ignore it.
7) We will react
8) This is the last warning.
9) No, this is the last warning
10) *All hell breaks loose"

If you have been paying even minute attention to the relations of the West and Russia you would have known this. The red line was always Ukraine and any serious research center dealing with Russia confirmed that. Even former western ambassadors in Moscow confirmed that. On many, many, many, many occasions.
Ukraine didn't want to be in NATO, most of NATO didn't want Ukraine in NATO, Russia didn't want Ukraine in NATO... It is sad because all of this was fucking needless. If you stir a hornet's nest, eventually you will get a response which you won't like.

[Gilrandir]

There is on lack of willingness on the part of the Maidan government, there's a lack of means.

You were the one to claim that the means is the illegal use of the army (which should be avoided) and thugs like Right Sector (which is terrible).

[Sarmatian]

You were the one to claim that the means is the illegal use of the army (which should be avoided) and thugs like Right Sector (which is terrible).

The use of army against own citizens is illegal. That's what police is for.
But, what stopped the use of army is the fact that there's a bigger chance the army will simply surrender their weapons and vehicles than actually fight. Stuff like that really hurts the credibility of Maidan government.

Arming the thugs of Right Sector and similar groups (I know they planned to form a national militia out of those, I don't know whether it was actually done) is a possibility, they wouldn't have objections about shooting protesters in the east, but it takes time and money, and it raises the concern of to whom will those groups actually be loyal to. After a deal was made with Yanukovich, it was the Right Sector who refused to honour it and stormed the government buildings.
The mother of all unknowns is, of course, what will Russian army do. Russia would hope to avoid moving the army across the border but if the conflict escalates enough, it may happen.

I don't think it will happen. Yesterday I've read responses to Lavrov's plea to the West to use its influence on Maidan government to stop the escalation of conflict, and for the first time, Obama and German foreign minister explicitly mentioned that both sides need to refrain from violence. It may be nothing but I have a hunch that the West is withdrawing the blank check to Kiev and will pressure them to talk with eastern regions and include them in a dialogue on constitutional reform.

[HoreTore]

The use of army against own citizens is illegal.

What?

Since when?

[Husar]

As a normal everyday Ukrainian I don't know. Do grenades, cartridges, rifles, missiles, sabers and cannon balls come with a manual? You tell me.

Those ones that were brought down were on the move. And what about avoiding "light/heat traps"? Are you good at doing that?

A simple internet search can already be helpful in this case: http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m18a1/components-of-the-m18a1-c.shtml

I think sabers and cannon balls do not come with a manual, just like most things in the 18th century and before didn't come with a manual. Modern day sabers may have one though, like a small leaflet that tells you how to oil it to keep it in pristine condition or so. The army may have made some however:
http://www.drillpad.net/DPsword_Army.htm
http://www.anesi.com/prsefs.htm

For the others you can most likely find manuals. To be good with a rifle you will also need skill and training of course, but a mine just needs to be placed and whether it hits also depends on whether someone steps on it or not, so it's a bit different regarding the skill requirement (I'll assume most non-idiots will find a way to hide it).

Bringing down a helicopter on the move just requires you to lead a bit if you use unguided ammunition. Freedom fighters all around the world can bring down helicopters, nothing new or spectacular there.

Avoiding light/heat traps is simple.


What?

Since when?

Since 1949 when the constitution banned it in all proper countries.

[GenosseGeneral]

Well, if those shot down helicopters you are talking about are the Ukrainian army helicopters shot down over Slawyansk, then a simple rifle is NOT enough. Those are Mil24 gunships, the very type against which the US had to provide Stinger suface-to-air missiles against during the Soviet war in Afghanistan.
Ukrainian sources indicate, that indeed comparable systems were used. Separatists also have access to RPGs, and not only the average RPG-7, but more modern types thought I can not tell which exactly.

You certainly can not safely use these after just reading a manual, on the other military knowledge is probably rather widespread in Ukraine due to universal conscription in Soviet and newer times, as well as widespread paramilitary/reserve training in schools and universities.
Add to this the Afghanistan veterans who have actual fighting experience, and defectors former Berkut members as well as some Russian military advisors and voila - there certainly is a recruitment pool from which an armed rebel group can be formed rather easily.

And apparently, this is what is happening:
Headlines of a major Ukrainian newsite, today (amongst others):
"Near Slavyansk, 4 Ukrainian soldiers died, 30 wounded"
"The fight for Slavyansk: Photo and video" http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/3358448-boi-za-slaviansk-5-maia-foto-y-vydeo
"South-Eastern army left policestation in Slavyanoserbsk"
"Ukrainian airpower eliminates armored train near Slavyansk"

Fact: Certain areas of Ukraine have turned into a war zone, the whole of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts are very close to becoming one, in many other cities violent clashes between separatists and supporters of Ukrainian unity.

The soil for a full scale civil war is, unfortunately, very fruitful.

[HoreTore]

The M72 is basically just "pull out, aim, click". I can't imagine the RPG being that much harder.

Having said that, however, there's absolutely no question of whether or not the Russian army is present within Eastern Europe. Of course they are, and since they are not using proper insignia, Putin shows himself as a war criminal yet again.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

My problem with Putin is academic, not personal. I'm not a citizen of Russia nor I live in Russia.

I have a problem with Putin because he makes the lives of the Russian people worse - short term economic gain for long term oppression and systemic collapse built into the system.


Unlike you or him, I don't tend to make too much difference between "democratic" and "fascist" military interventions. If we can discuss in a civil manner American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan or potential invasion of Syria, talk about pros and cons, ulterior motives, crimes etc... I don't really see why we must foam at the mouth and insult one another when it's about Russian intervention in Ukraine.

Well, for starters, Putin has been annexing European provinces for about half a decade now - that's different to what the US does where it goes in and breaks stuff until the fighting stops. When we invade Syria (much more "when" than "if" now) we will end up leaving the Syrians in charge.


There already is a thread about Putin.

Nice dodge.


Does that surprise you? Did you think that western intelligence agencies have a patent on involvement in Ukraine (and other parts of the world)? Did you expect Russians to sit on the sidelines and do nothing?

It surprises me that you admit it.


Manipulated how exactly? He was elected, in what every single serious independent international organization called free, transparent and regular elections.

Except the last one - but it's not the elections he manipulates, it's everything else.


If you believe that corruption and criminal activity in Ukraine was limited to Yanukovich and Party of Regions, you either don't know what you're talking about or you are incredibly biased. You could safely lock up 3/4 of Ukrainian politicians for that and more, including those involved in Maidan.

No, but he was the worst one (which is why Putin backed him).


That won't happen. Crimea had special significance and absolute majority of the population was in favour of returning to Russia so the annexation was painless. Eastern and southeastern Ukraine are different. Even though majority is against the current government and Kiev and NATO, they aren't in favour of joining Russia. Declaring independence on the Kosovo model is a possibility, and the longer Maidan government continues to practice its idiotic policy, the more realistic that possibility becomes.

That'll be what the 40,000 combat troops are for.

[/quote]There is on lack of willingness on the part of the Maidan government, there's a lack of means.




Only one totally blind to what's been happening for the last 25 years can say something like this. Russian rhetoric from the 1990 to 2014:

1) Don't use our temporary weakness to enlarge NATO
2) Please don't enlarge NATO
3) Please don't enlarge NATO any more
4) Now we're getting really uncomfortable, please stop
5) Please stop, you will force us to react
6) If you do this, we won't able to ignore it.
7) We will react
8) This is the last warning.
9) No, this is the last warning
10) *All hell breaks loose"

If you have been paying even minute attention to the relations of the West and Russia you would have known this. The red line was always Ukraine and any serious research center dealing with Russia confirmed that. Even former western ambassadors in Moscow confirmed that. On many, many, many, many occasions.
Ukraine didn't want to be in NATO, most of NATO didn't want Ukraine in NATO, Russia didn't want Ukraine in NATO... It is sad because all of this was fucking needless. If you stir a hornet's nest, eventually you will get a response which you won't like.

We still don't really want them in NATO overmuch, but if they want to join that's fine. If things keep going this way, and after Russia annexes Donetsk, they probably will, and we'll let them.

The fact that Russia sees NATO as an existential threat shows how Russia as a Nation perceives the world, and why Russia is dangerous.

[Fragony]

Am I the only one who never heard of this http://www.holodomorct.org/history.html

[Husar]

Well, if those shot down helicopters you are talking about are the Ukrainian army helicopters shot down over Slawyansk, then a simple rifle is NOT enough. Those are Mil24 gunships, the very type against which the US had to provide Stinger suface-to-air missiles against during the Soviet war in Afghanistan.
Ukrainian sources indicate, that indeed comparable systems were used. Separatists also have access to RPGs, and not only the average RPG-7, but more modern types thought I can not tell which exactly.

I didn't know they were gunships, I thought of Mi-8s or so. You can still bring them down with guns but you're right that it's a lot harder. However, Gilrandir's argument was that:


Moreover, those military men who were watching the helicoters being brought down claimed that they were attacked using two "guns" (don't know the correct term): one shot was intercepted by the "heat trap", as they put it, the second got the machine - according to them it testifies to the previous experience of the shooters.

Which was basically that shooting them down requires skill and it wasn't done with missiles but with "guns" (or so I understood it at first).
However, upon reading it again, they probably used Iglas or Strelas (the russian equivalents to Stingers) and the "heat traps" were flares, which are used to distract the IR-seeker of the missiles. But those MANPADS are usually not hard to use, you look through the optics, point at the helicopter, wait for a que that tells you the seeker locked onto a heat source and pull the trigger. What kind they had and how they got them would be the more interesting question in this case, but remember that some army units already switched to the rebel side.


You certainly can not safely use these after just reading a manual, on the other military knowledge is probably rather widespread in Ukraine due to universal conscription in Soviet and newer times, as well as widespread paramilitary/reserve training in schools and universities.
Add to this the Afghanistan veterans who have actual fighting experience, and defectors former Berkut members as well as some Russian military advisors and voila - there certainly is a recruitment pool from which an armed rebel group can be formed rather easily.

I just explained how to use them and I have never really used one outside of a computer simulation. Then again they are meant to be simple to use because you don't have a lot of time for procedures when a gunship zips over your head at 300km/h.
What looks unsafe to you about this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av2BzaXF6lg
It's not like the thing burns their unprotected faces when it launches, as with all rocket/missile launchers it's probably a good idea not to stand directly behind it when it's launched but otherwise I don't see the big safety hazard compared to many other weapon systems.

[Gilrandir]

The use of army against own citizens is illegal. That's what police is for.

According to the law, Ukrainian army may be used inside the country if the police and SBU forces aren't sufficient to handle the situation.
And I'm not sure whether the terrorists in Slovyansk might be legitimately included into what is understood as "Ukrainian citizens". Many of them are the citizens of Russia, others openly defy Ukrainian laws and humane principles in general torturing the captives.

[Gilrandir]

Am I the only one who never heard of this http://www.holodomorct.org/history.html
I certainly have. But what does it have to do with the current situation in Ukraine?

[Gilrandir]

The mother of all unknowns is, of course, what will Russian army do. Russia would hope to avoid moving the army across the border but if the conflict escalates enough, it may happen.

I don't think it will happen. Yesterday I've read responses to Lavrov's plea to the West to use its influence on Maidan government to stop the escalation of conflict, and for the first time, Obama and German foreign minister explicitly mentioned that both sides need to refrain from violence. It may be nothing but I have a hunch that the West is withdrawing the blank check to Kiev and will pressure them to talk with eastern regions and include them in a dialogue on constitutional reform.
I believe that what Russia wants is upset the situation in Ukraine in general and the oncoming elections in particular. Turning Donetsk and Lugansk regions (and Odessa if possible) into anarchy zones suits the pupose excellently. As long as it can be done by the means it is being done now Putin will not invade openly.

[Sarmatian]

Having said that, however, there's absolutely no question of whether or not the Russian army is present within Eastern Europe. Of course they are, and since they are not using proper insignia, Putin shows himself as a war criminal yet again.

If that's the going rate, we can lock up most of world leaders away instantly.

On the other hand, aren't you the least bit troubled by the total absence of evidence about direct involvement of the Russian army?


I have a problem with Putin because he makes the lives of the Russian people worse - short term economic gain for long term oppression and systemic collapse built into the system.

That's funny because in this very thread you mentioned, when arguing for direct western intervention in Ukraine, that Russia should be kept impotent, sidelines and impoverished and how the west thought it could be achieved by diplomatic and political means, but since it failed, a direct intervention is now necessary.



Well, for starters, Putin has been annexing European provinces for about half a decade now - that's different to what the US does where it goes in and reaks stuff until the fighting stops. When we invade Syria (much more "when" than "if" now) we will end up leaving the Syrians in charge.

And Syrians would be in charge as long as they govern within set parameters. If they stray, another batch of Syrians will be placed in charge and same rules applied.

You sure you aren't mixing reality and some EU game? Which provinces have Putin annexed?


Nice dodge.
It's not a dodge, it is a complex subject that would derail the thread. If you want, I'll post a reply there.



It surprises me that you admit it.

I have never denied it, but I'm glad we're in agreement that both Russian and the Western intelligence agencies are involved in Ukraine.


Except the last one - but it's not the elections he manipulates, it's everything else.

Really? 80 various NGO's funded from the West, mostly USA, were involved in Ukraine, to help the opposition. One opposition TV station was funded entirely from the west, and who knows how many newpapers, magazines and various pressure groups.


No, but he was the worst one (which is why Putin backed him).

Based on what criteria, please?


We still don't really want them in NATO overmuch, but if they want to join that's fine. If things keep going this way, and after Russia annexes Donetsk, they probably will, and we'll let them.

Russia won't annex Donetsk.


The fact that Russia sees NATO as an existential threat shows how Russia as a Nation perceives the world, and why Russia is dangerous.

Really? The alliance is specifically designed to fight Russia. That's the basis of it, the sole reason for its existence. And that alliance is continuously inching nearer and nearer to Russia, trying to encircle it, breaking promises that it wouldn't do so, for the last quarter of a century. And you're surprised that Russia see that as a threat.

Not to mention that NATO (or its leader and core members) has started/been involved in the most military and political interventions in the world since ww2, by far.

[Beskar]

On the other hand, aren't you the least bit troubled by the total absence of evidence about direct involvement of the Russian army?

Sarmatian, think about it carefully. How are they meant to get the evidence?

A trained covert-ops group working in guerrilla warfare, able to act independently from higher-command to operate. How are they going to get the evidence?

Send in the Seals to round up members touted as 'Ukrainian Citizens' in an armed gunfight, and somehow get the answers out of classified individuals or even have them confess within the span of a week or face great international outcry and propaganda how the USA is firing on Ukrainian citizens?

You can only really use circumstantial evidence or your fingers are burnt.

[HoreTore]

If that's the going rate, we can lock up most of world leaders away instantly.

Are you seriously suggesting that not wearing proper insignia is not a war crime....?


On the other hand, aren't you the least bit troubled by the total absence of evidence about direct involvement of the Russian army?

I'd say it's a total absence of evidence that the Russian army is not involved, and a ton of evidence they are...

[Pannonian]

What's going on in Ukraine must seem like paradise for US Second Amendmenteers. Everyone with a mind to it with near unlimited access to all kinds of weaponry, fighting against a federal government seeking to push them down. A tad entertaining from this distance, and thank goodness/I dearly hope that we (Britain) don't get involved.

[Sarmatian]

Sarmatian, think about it carefully. How are they meant to get the evidence?

A trained covert-ops group working in guerrilla warfare, able to act independently from higher-command to operate. How are they going to get the evidence?

Send in the Seals to round up members touted as 'Ukrainian Citizens' in an armed gunfight, and somehow get the answers out of classified individuals or even have them confess within the span of a week or face great international outcry and propaganda how the USA is firing on Ukrainian citizens?

You can only really use circumstantial evidence or your fingers are burnt.

I'm not familiar with the exact methodology, but since OSCE was involved in similar missions in many areas in Europe, and have been able to prove or disprove, I'd guess they have a working system.

Then there the good old "law of average" rule. As GC said, how come not a single Russian soldier was captured, dead or alive? It's been going on for a while and on a rather large geographic area, and involving a rather large number of Russian professionals, if we are to believe western press and Kiev. How come none of them lost his weapon or some other part of his equipment, which would prove where it's been made or to whom it belongs to? If the number of Russian troops is so big to have taken control of a large part of Ukraine, how are they effectively organized within Ukraine? There has to be some lines of communication - how come not a single phone call was intercepted, or a written order? Or communication between them and the protest leadership? Communication between Kremlin and protest leadership?

Aside from a few photographs that wouldn't stand to kindergarten scrutiny, we haven't seen anything to prove that there are masses of Russian professionals in eastern Ukraine.

DISCLAIMER: When I say Russian soldier, I mean a professional serving in Russian Armed Forces, not an ethnic Russian who took up arms and is currently in eastern Ukraine.


Are you seriously suggesting that not wearing proper insignia is not a war crime....?

Are you seriously suggesting that we shouldn't consider war crimes based on the crime itself, but on who committed it?


I'd say it's a total absence of evidence that the Russian army is not involved, and a ton of evidence they are..

Knock yourself out. I'm all ears, or eyes, in this case.

[HoreTore]

Are you seriously suggesting that we shouldn't consider war crimes based on the crime itself, but on who committed it?

What on earth are you talking about? I have considered the war crime based on the crime itself, the act of not wearing correct insignia. As Putin is commander in chief of the Russian army, that makes him a war criminal.


Knock yourself out. I'm all ears, or eyes, in this case.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/defence_university_director_hunt_for_little_green_men_is_on_again/7188693

Yeah, that's right. All I can be bothered to give is a lazy linky I found on google after a 3-second search.

[Sarmatian]

What on earth are you talking about? I have considered the war crime based on the crime itself, the act of not wearing correct insignia. As Putin is commander in chief of the Russian army, that makes him a war criminal.

Stop dodging it. You know full well what was my point.


http://yle.fi/uutiset/defence_university_director_hunt_for_little_green_men_is_on_again/7188693

Yeah, that's right. All I can be bothered to give is a lazy linky I found on google after a 3-second search.

That is your evidence? An article full of guesses, written by a guy who is 2000km away from and who has seen eastern Ukraine in a picture once?

“There could very well be Russians there. The hunt for the “little green men” is on again, just like in Crimea. Just who exactly are these troops that are taking over the government buildings and police stations?"

An article full of "in my opinion", "there could very well be"...? Try harder.

[HoreTore]

Stop dodging it. You know full well what was my point.

No, I honestly do not. You will have to be more explicit, I'm afraid.

[Sarmatian]

No, I honestly do not. You will have to be more explicit, I'm afraid.

Very simple. You know as well as I do that troops without insignia have been used by most of the powerful countries in the world when they were meddling in the affairs of the rest of the world.

When you apply a rule or a law, you must apply it equally to everyone, otherwise it becomes oppression, victimization or discrimination. That in practice would mean locking up most heads of state, from Washington to Beijing, as war criminals. Good luck with that.

[Brenus]

“Are you seriously suggesting that not wearing proper insignia is not a war crime....?” No it is not. Or a lot of British Commandos were guilty of war crime were operating in Occupied Europe during W.W.2.

“I have considered the war crime based on the crime itself, the act of not wearing correct insignia. As Putin is commander in chief of the Russian army, that makes him a war criminal.” What are you speaking about? The US President was a war criminal because Cpt W. Calley My Lai massacre?
And what war crime are you speaking about?

[Fragony]

I certainly have. But what does it have to do with the current situation in Ukraine?

Maybe a lot

[HoreTore]

Very simple. You know as well as I do that troops without insignia have been used by most of the powerful countries in the world when they were meddling in the affairs of the rest of the world.

When you apply a rule or a law, you must apply it equally to everyone, otherwise it becomes oppression, victimization or discrimination. That in practice would mean locking up most heads of state, from Washington to Beijing, as war criminals. Good luck with that.

Find the thread here on the misuse of Red Cross insignia by the US army in Afghanistan, read my comments in said thread, and go stuff your allegations of hypocrisy.

[HoreTore]

“Are you seriously suggesting that not wearing proper insignia is not a war crime....?” No it is not. Or a lot of British Commandos were guilty of war crime were operating in Occupied Europe during W.W.2.

“I have considered the war crime based on the crime itself, the act of not wearing correct insignia. As Putin is commander in chief of the Russian army, that makes him a war criminal.” What are you speaking about? The US President was a war criminal because Cpt W. Calley My Lai massacre?
And what war crime are you speaking about?

Didn't you read the Geneva (http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Article.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=C5D71B78117289FBC12563CD0051DB3C) conventions (http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/9ac284404d38ed2bc1256311002afd89/3ea868be16bcbb86c12563cd0051db0b) while you were in the army?

[Sarmatian]

Find the thread here on the misuse of Red Cross insignia by the US army in Afghanistan, read my comments in said thread, and go stuff your allegations of hypocrisy.

Then what was your point? Apart from the fact that the leaders of two foreign countries most significantly involved in Ukrainian crisis are war criminals?

[HoreTore]

Then what was your point? Apart from the fact that the leaders of two foreign countries most significantly involved in Ukrainian crisis are war criminals?

My point was that Putin is a war criminal.

[Brenus]

Not all of them , no.

So in 1977, they decided it was illegal to wear enemies insignia and uniforms. Right. Not to wear unmarked uniforms. So what is your point? For what I remember, if you wear identification during the fight, you are considered as a combatants and susceptible to the Geneva Conventions Protection. So until the soldiers are engaged, they can wear civilian suits if they want.
So, according the links you provide, actually, the Russians Soldiers (if there is any) didn't break the Geneva Convention nor Commit war Crimes (even in your broad definition of war-crimes).

You didn't answer about the war-crime you refer to.

[HoreTore]

Not all of them , no.

So in 1977, they decided it was illegal to wear enemies insignia and uniforms. Right. Not to wear unmarked uniforms. So what is your point? For what I remember, if you wear identification during the fight, you are considered as a combatants and susceptible to the Geneva Conventions Protection. So until the soldiers are engaged, they can wear civilian suits if they want.
So, according the links you provide, actually, the Russians Soldiers (if there is any) didn't break the Geneva Convention nor Commit war Crimes (even in your broad definition of war-crimes).

You should re-read the links.

The purpose of the uniform is to distinguish military personnel from civilians. In other words, avoid the confusion currently seen in Ukraine. Due to Russian stupidity and underhanded ways, the Ukrainian government could be thinking that the Russians have already moved into Ukraine, considered it an act of war and moved into the east in full force, gunning down everyone in sight. Then discovered that the vast majority were harmless civilian protesters...

That's why we wear uniforms. Just like you don't :daisy: with the red cross emblem, you don't :daisy: around with uniforms.


You didn't answer about the war-crime you refer to.

The war crime I'm referring to is the removal of army insignia.

[Husar]

The war crime I'm referring to is the removal of army insignia.

Apparently it's a war crime if you use someone else's insignia, but just removing them does not constitute a war crime according to this list:
http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/summary-of-crimes-international-criminal-court/

[Sarmatian]

My point was that Putin is a war criminal.

Under the circumstances, that is pertinent to the discussion about as much as your invasion of Sweden is to the relations of Norway and Sweden

[Brenus]

It is prohibited to make use in an armed conflict of the flags or military emblems, insignia or uniforms of neutral or other States not Parties to the conflict.

It is prohibited to make use of the flags or military emblems, insignia or uniforms of adverse Parties while engaging in attacks or in order to shield, favour, protect or impede military operations.

"You should re-read the links." Done: Nothing about not wearing insignia. Or/and removal of insignia.

[HoreTore]

Under the circumstances, that is pertinent to the discussion about as much as your invasion of Sweden is to the relations of Norway and Sweden

What nonsense is this? Am I not allowed to call Bush a war criminal either, since that won't shut down Gitmo? What kind of logic is that?

Putin is a war criminal. And a wanker.

EDIT:

....and I must say that I am disappointed that you, who are usually very concerned about civilian casualties in a conflict, so easily dismisses a violation of one of the top measures to prevent civilian deaths in a conflict.

[HoreTore]

Apparently it's a war crime if you use someone else's insignia, but just removing them does not constitute a war crime according to this list:
http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/summary-of-crimes-international-criminal-court/

Well.... If you really want to get anal about it, crossing a border with armed personnel without invitation or a declaration of war also makes you a war criminal ~;)

[Beskar]

I'm not familiar with the exact methodology, but since OSCE was involved in similar missions in many areas in Europe, and have been able to prove or disprove, I'd guess they have a working system.

Then there the good old "law of average" rule. As GC said, how come not a single Russian soldier was captured, dead or alive? It's been going on for a while and on a rather large geographic area, and involving a rather large number of Russian professionals, if we are to believe western press and Kiev. How come none of them lost his weapon or some other part of his equipment, which would prove where it's been made or to whom it belongs to? If the number of Russian troops is so big to have taken control of a large part of Ukraine, how are they effectively organized within Ukraine? There has to be some lines of communication - how come not a single phone call was intercepted, or a written order? Or communication between them and the protest leadership? Communication between Kremlin and protest leadership?

Aside from a few photographs that wouldn't stand to kindergarten scrutiny, we haven't seen anything to prove that there are masses of Russian professionals in eastern Ukraine.

DISCLAIMER: When I say Russian soldier, I mean a professional serving in Russian Armed Forces, not an ethnic Russian who took up arms and is currently in eastern Ukraine.

I am not sure how well versed you (or myself, on that matter), but this is how I believe it works, based on what has happened in the past conflicts, even as dated as World War 2 French Resistance.

Foreign power sends in a few agents/instigators who has access to local support. This could be as little as 1 in 10,000 in terms of those involved. These work as a covert backbone to the operation which run messages through secret channels, or maybe even something such as pre-planned virtually no contact scenarios.

The pictures and suggestions spoke of a small team, so lets say, 10 men tops, who operate with Spetsnaz efficiency. Along with these field agents who are behind the scenes, this would be a very small number involved directly. Indirectly, arms may be smuggled through channels by Russia through Ukrainians or Black-market/Mobs. As for the operations of those 10 men, they do their hits then sod off, leaving the local patriots to cover/hold the territory and gains.

We could be talking as little as a room full of people from Russia directly involved in the events in Ukraine. This is assuming there is common support from the local population (as if there is no support.. nothing matters).

There are also Ukrainian groups which work via a proxy, so working for Russia but by themselves, some of the various partisan groups in the area do shows signs of this.

Then there is the ongoing propaganda machine, various surveillance and other measures which are being employed by the Russian state.


Now, from this information, how are you able to get the evidence and what constitutes as ground-breaking evidence? It is obvious that Russia is meddling in the affairs (along with other powers) so that is any innocent card through out of the window already, they are involved. Now, you have to find out how directly involved they are, and even then, where is the line drawn and how are you going to get hard concrete facts on something clearly happening but proving is something different altogether.

Before you think I am demonising Russia, yes, you can argue that the 'West' is doing the same thing too. But the whole point of these statements is to show the question of evidence as an arguing point is something that cannot be done. Whilst evidence does exist somewhere, I don't think we will have access to it, it is the very nature of these groups not to leave a trail behind.

[Brenus]

“That's why we wear uniforms.” Yeah. However, if you wear identification during the combat, it is enough to be recognised as a lawful combatant. This could be a national armband…

“Due to Russian stupidity and underhanded ways, the Ukrainian government could be thinking that the Russians have already moved into Ukraine, considered it an act of war and moved into the east in full force, gunning down everyone in sight.” Yes, I see your point. The Ukrainian Forces thinking (as for the moment they have no solid evidence) there are Russian Forces inside a building killed every body but there were unarmed civilians, so Russia is guilty because….. the Ukrainians believed they were Russians… Yeah… Right… Sure…. The Russians are clearly the War Criminals…:huh:

“If you really want to get anal about it, crossing a border with armed personnel without invitation or a declaration of war also makes you a war criminal” Hmmm? So NATO bombing Serbia (as they cross international borders and were not invited is as such a War Criminal Organisation, so any decision made under an illegal Organisation are Illegal… I LIKE IT!!!!

[HoreTore]

“Due to Russian stupidity and underhanded ways, the Ukrainian government could be thinking that the Russians have already moved into Ukraine, considered it an act of war and moved into the east in full force, gunning down everyone in sight.” Yes, I see your point. The Ukrainian Forces thinking (as for the moment they have no solid evidence) there are Russian Forces inside a building killed every body but there were unarmed civilians, so Russia is guilty because….. the Ukrainians believed they were Russians… Yeah… Right… Sure…. The Russians are clearly the War Criminals…:huh:

Due to the exact same reasons we do not appreciate Hamas' underhanded ways, which has undoubtedly upped the casualty count in the Israel-Palestinian conflicts.

But realizing that Hamas are dicks does not mean you can't condemn Israel for excessive brutality.


....And the (justified) bombing of Serbia was announced prior to the start of the operation.

[Brenus]

“And the (justified) bombing of Serbia was announced prior to the start of the operation.” Yeah, I remember why.
Wasn’t for ethnic Cleansing (which didn’t happen before the bombing) and the use of excessive use of force against a minority which was part of the country… Yeah….
Can you remind me what Putin is saying about the Russian Minorities in Ukraine?
So you are telling me the Russians were justified in the invasion of Crimea (and potentially others parts) as it was announced prior the operation as Putin clearly said he will not allowed the killing of these minorities (as you notice, the actual facts it didn’t happened is not an obstacle according to you).

“But realize that Hamas are dicks does not mean you can't condemn Israel for excessive brutality.” Yeah. I agree. So… the hypothesis of Russian Special Forces presence when the Ukrainian Forces storm a building and might kill unarmed civilians (that is your start position) is the fault of Russia because Israel has a heavy hand in Palestine…

So, to summary (don’t hesitate to correct me if I am wrong), if forces, thinking that the people in a building are very special forces or dangerous individuals, they might kill innocents but it will be the fault of the ones who might have been there but were not? Did I get it right?

[HoreTore]

“And the (justified) bombing of Serbia was announced prior to the start of the operation.” Yeah, I remember why.
Wasn’t for ethnic Cleansing (which didn’t happen before the bombing) and the use of excessive use of force against a minority which was part of the country… Yeah….
Can you remind me what Putin is saying about the Russian Minorities in Ukraine?
So you are telling me the Russians were justified in the invasion of Crimea (and potentially others parts) as it was announced prior the operation as Putin clearly said he will not allowed the killing of these minorities (as you notice, the actual facts it didn’t happened is not an obstacle according to you).

Putin can use whatever justification he wants to invade, so long as he announces his intention before committing troops. He has not done so in Ukraine.


“But realize that Hamas are dicks does not mean you can't condemn Israel for excessive brutality.” Yeah. I agree. So… the hypothesis of Russian Special Forces presence when the Ukrainian Forces storm a building and might kill unarmed civilians (that is your start position) is the fault of Russia because Israel has a heavy hand in Palestine…

So, to summary (don’t hesitate to correct me if I am wrong), if forces, thinking that the people in a building are very special forces or dangerous individuals, they might kill innocents but it will be the fault of the ones who might have been there but were not? Did I get it right?

First of all, I said "harmless civilian protesters", not "unarmed civilians". It's pretty damned obvious they are armed, no matter what their country of origin is. Still, there is a huge difference in the use of force you would employ against trained army elements of a hostile nation, and a rag-tag band of your own citizens. The Ukraine government currently cannot be sure of which one they are dealing with, which is due to Putin's disregard of the laws of war, best evidenced in Crimea.

If the Ukrainian government employs excessive brutality, I'll happily condemn them just like I happily condemn Israel. I will still think Putin is a dick, just like I still think Hamas are dicks.

[Brenus]

“Putin can use whatever justification he wants to invade, so long as he announces his intention before committing troops. He has not done so in Ukraine.” Are you sure of this? I do remember Putin saying he will not stay doing nothing if the Russian Minorities are under threats (18th of March speech)? So, now, he can do it?

“First of all, I said "harmless civilian protesters", not "unarmed civilians"” Yeah, big difference… Funny enough, few years after I left the army, I was still quite good in using weapons (or using mines). What category I would be put in (and no bad intention in the wording) “harmless civilians protesters” or “special forces under cover”?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That's funny because in this very thread you mentioned, when arguing for direct western intervention in Ukraine, that Russia should be kept impotent, sidelines and impoverished and how the west thought it could be achieved by diplomatic and political means, but since it failed, a direct intervention is now necessary.

No - I argued that, through diplomatic means, it was anticipated that Russia could be made prosperous and democratic, but now that it has decided to backslide into an autocratic hellhole it's time to up-armour and move the tanks from Germany to the Baltic Republics.


And Syrians would be in charge as long as they govern within set parameters. If they stray, another batch of Syrians will be placed in charge and same rules applied.

You sure you aren't mixing reality and some EU game? Which provinces have Putin annexed?

Because Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan are obedient vassal states?

No, they are not. What does that tell you?


It's not a dodge, it is a complex subject that would derail the thread. If you want, I'll post a reply there.

He ticks all the Fascist boxes - show me a box he doesn't tick and I'll allow there might be a smidge of nuance but the topic is not really "complex". The question of whether he was always a Fascist might be more complex, but it's not currently relevant.


I have never denied it, but I'm glad we're in agreement that both Russian and the Western intelligence agencies are involved in Ukraine.

The US and EU openly funds anti-corruption, pro-democracy, movements in both Ukraine and Russia. I'm sure there are intelligence agents involved but it's still a far cry from the Russian "Cossacks".


Really? 80 various NGO's funded from the West, mostly USA, were involved in Ukraine, to help the opposition. One opposition TV station was funded entirely from the west, and who knows how many newpapers, magazines and various pressure groups.

See above, unlike Putin's FSB operation this is all a matter of public record - something you continue to ignore.


Based on what criteria, please?

Quantity of public money stolen? Closeness to Vladimir Putin?


Russia won't annex Donetsk.

Lots of people said that about Crimea.


Really? The alliance is specifically designed to fight Russia. That's the basis of it, the sole reason for its existence. And that alliance is continuously inching nearer and nearer to Russia, trying to encircle it, breaking promises that it wouldn't do so, for the last quarter of a century. And you're surprised that Russia see that as a threat.

NATO exists to defend it's members against Russian aggression - the Former Warsaw Pact members and the Baltic Republics fear Russian aggression, they took the opportunity to "switch camps" as soon as they were free of Soviet control, overtures were immediately made to NATO and the EU in the early 90's, the fact that countries like Romania and Bulgaria took a decade and a half to get to a point were they could be admitted reflects the damage the Soviet Empire did to their societies and economies.


Not to mention that NATO (or its leader and core members) has started/been involved in the most military and political interventions in the world since ww2, by far.

Since WWII we were involved in a Proxy War with the USSR - the USSR invaded Afghanistan, was actively involved in both Korea and Vietnam, in both those conflicts it was Communist forces who were the aggressors.

Since 2001 the landscape has been somewhat different, the Coalition invasion of Afghanistan was unavoidable given sentiment at the time, and the invasion of Iraq was a result of two personalities coming into conflict, one of which is now out of office for the rest of his life, and the other was hung by his own people.

[Sarmatian]

What nonsense is this? Am I not allowed to call Bush a war criminal either, since that won't shut down Gitmo? What kind of logic is that?
Putin is a war criminal.

You're allowed to call Putin, Bush and anyone else what you like. I don't know the wording of the conventions. If what Brenus said is true, you are wrong and wearing no insignia isn't mentioned in the Geneva convention.

Even if you are, it is irrelevant to the discussion. If all of us are guilty of something, none of us is guilty of anything. If all politicians on that level are guilty of that, your statement, while accurate, is irrelevant for the discussion.


And a wanker.

I agree.


EDIT:

....and I must say that I am disappointed that you, who are usually very concerned about civilian casualties in a conflict, so easily dismisses a violation of one of the top measures to prevent civilian deaths in a conflict.

I'm always concerned about casualties, especially civilians. Why do you think I've been mentioning dialogue so many times? As long as Kiev refuses to negotiate, there is little hope of that.


Due to the exact same reasons we do not appreciate Hamas' underhanded ways, which has undoubtedly upped the casualty count in the Israel-Palestinian conflicts.

But realizing that Hamas are dicks does not mean you can't condemn Israel for excessive brutality.


....And the (justified) bombing of Serbia was announced prior to the start of the operation.

Ukraine was a disaster waiting to happen. This scenario could have happened 10 years ago. In 2004, during Yanukovich/Yuschenko row about whose election fraud was bigger, about 100,000 Yuschenko supporters blocked Maidan, demanding new elections. The other side wanted to transport about 40,000 Donetsk miners to Kiev. Kuchma personally turned them back, because he understood there would almost certainly be a bloodbath if they get off the buses in Kiev.

At one point, one has to say enough. Just because majority in Kiev are pro-western, that doesn't give them the right to think their opinion (and vote) is worth more than that of other Ukrainians (ignoring for the moment ultra nationalists who were transported from Lviv region). You're unhappy with the government? Tough. Wait for elections. That is how democracy works.


I am not sure how well versed you (or myself, on that matter), but this is how I believe it works, based on what has happened in the past conflicts, even as dated as World War 2 French Resistance.

Foreign power sends in a few agents/instigators who has access to local support. This could be as little as 1 in 10,000 in terms of those involved. These work as a covert backbone to the operation which run messages through secret channels, or maybe even something such as pre-planned virtually no contact scenarios.

The pictures and suggestions spoke of a small team, so lets say, 10 men tops, who operate with Spetsnaz efficiency. Along with these field agents who are behind the scenes, this would be a very small number involved directly. Indirectly, arms may be smuggled through channels by Russia through Ukrainians or Black-market/Mobs. As for the operations of those 10 men, they do their hits then sod off, leaving the local patriots to cover/hold the territory and gains.

We could be talking as little as a room full of people from Russia directly involved in the events in Ukraine. This is assuming there is common support from the local population (as if there is no support.. nothing matters).

There are also Ukrainian groups which work via a proxy, so working for Russia but by themselves, some of the various partisan groups in the area do shows signs of this.

Then there is the ongoing propaganda machine, various surveillance and other measures which are being employed by the Russian state.


Now, from this information, how are you able to get the evidence and what constitutes as ground-breaking evidence? It is obvious that Russia is meddling in the affairs (along with other powers) so that is any innocent card through out of the window already, they are involved. Now, you have to find out how directly involved they are, and even then, where is the line drawn and how are you going to get hard concrete facts on something clearly happening but proving is something different altogether.

Before you think I am demonising Russia, yes, you can argue that the 'West' is doing the same thing too. But the whole point of these statements is to show the question of evidence as an arguing point is something that cannot be done. Whilst evidence does exist somewhere, I don't think we will have access to it, it is the very nature of these groups not to leave a trail behind.

There is a very big difference between Russian directing the protesters and a mass of Russian professional soldiers on the ground.

I initially believed that there is quite a lot of Russian professionals there to be honest. After seeing that that there is literally no evidence, I now believe their influence is considerably smaller than I originally imagined, and much smaller than Kiev and most of the press would have us believe. At this point I'd say we're talking about a small unit of special forces that appeared at few key points a few times and that's it.

That doesn't change the principally Russia broke the rules. The important difference is that it shows that, by and large, this is local population that is on the streets. Russia isn't orchestrating them but only aiding them.

There are other important hints that Russian influence is far smaller that previously thought. Some mistakes simply would not have happened if professional military is in charge of things. Also, if Russia was really pulling the strings, we wouldn't really witness the struggle for power between local self-proclaimed leaders.

Anyway, I didn't read anything in your post that could be regarded as demonising Russia. It is a nice example of how a different opinion can be expressed without cheap shots and sensationalism. :bow:

[Sarmatian]

No - I argued that, through diplomatic means, it was anticipated that Russia could be made prosperous and democratic, but now that it has decided to backslide into an autocratic hellhole it's time to up-armour and move the tanks from Germany to the Baltic Republics.


That's not how I remember it, but ok. I was wrong.


Because Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan are obedient vassal states?

No, they are not. What does that tell you?

Afghanistan was the first country to recognize independent Kosovo. That was surely a foreign policy priority for them, being invested in region so much.


He ticks all the Fascist boxes - show me a box he doesn't tick and I'll allow there might be a smidge of nuance but the topic is not really "complex". The question of whether he was always a Fascist might be more complex, but it's not currently relevant.

Putin is anything but a simple topic.


The US and EU openly funds anti-corruption, pro-democracy, movements in both Ukraine and Russia. I'm sure there are intelligence agents involved but it's still a far cry from the Russian "Cossacks".

See above, unlike Putin's FSB operation this is all a matter of public record - something you continue to ignore.

Go back to my post about Serbia in 2000. Pro-democracy, anti-corruption groups are (mostly) a front for political activism. Even if we ignore intelligence agencies, you are free to check the amount given to such groups in Ukraine and compare to amounts give to other countries with comparable level of corruption.


Quantity of public money stolen? Closeness to Vladimir Putin?

Perceived corruption index and other measurable data was comparable to Yuschenko period. The other argument is so silly I won't even comment on it.


Lots of people said that about Crimea.

Agreed. Even myself, but the situation on the ground is different. Crimea could be taken without a shot and have most of the population celebrate it. Eastern and southeastern Ukraine are different. At best I can see them declare independence, but even that only after a long stalemate.


NATO exists to defend it's members against Russian aggression - the Former Warsaw Pact members and the Baltic Republics fear Russian aggression, they took the opportunity to "switch camps" as soon as they were free of Soviet control, overtures were immediately made to NATO and the EU in the early 90's, the fact that countries like Romania and Bulgaria took a decade and a half to get to a point were they could be admitted reflects the damage the Soviet Empire did to their societies and economies.

To do damage to something, that something has to exist before hand. Bulgaria and Romania were practically feudal societies after ww2. I'm willing to bet that most of the stuff that works there was built during communist period.

Even though most of eastern European countries now like to blame all problems on the communism and the Soviet Union, the sad fact is that most of the schools, hospitals, airports, roads, railroads, bridges, universities... were built between 1945 and 1990. The local kleptocrats are now struggling to keep the paint job fresh.
In many ways, even civil rights were improved, like gender and racial equality. That doesn't mean that Soviet Union wasn't an oppressive regime, it just shows in how pathetic state most of eastern Europe was pre-ww2.


Since WWII we were involved in a Proxy War with the USSR - the USSR invaded Afghanistan, was actively involved in both Korea and Vietnam, in both those conflicts it was Communist forces who were the aggressors.

Since 2001 the landscape has been somewhat different, the Coalition invasion of Afghanistan was unavoidable given sentiment at the time, and the invasion of Iraq was a result of two personalities coming into conflict, one of which is now out of office for the rest of his life, and the other was hung by his own people.

There were military interventions prior to the year 2000. Hint: check South America, Africa, Asia.

[Beskar]

There is a very big difference between Russian directing the protesters and a mass of Russian professional soldiers on the ground.

Mass of Soldiers would be a stupid move and I don't think anyone worth their salt would do it, but I do believe there may be multiple specialist teams involved and direction support. I think the Crimea incident did involve some troops from the naval base, but I don't think the same is occurring in the east Ukraine to any real extent. I feel Crimea was a piece of the pie Russia felt it could afford to take, whilst Eastern Ukraine could be seen as a nice prize, but it would be overextending/being greedy, more a possibility for the future.

(Counter-Balance is the revolutionary government joining/wanting Nato/EU influence, but through less aggressive measures)


At this point I'd say we're talking about a small unit of special forces that appeared at few key points a few times and that's it.
This is pretty much how I see it as well.


That doesn't change the principally Russia broke the rules. The important difference is that it shows that, by and large, this is local population that is on the streets. Russia isn't orchestrating them but only aiding them.

Agree. I believe similar with Maiden and the West, such as those flyers handed out to protesters you have linked previously. I would be more shocked if the West was not involved. I don't think the West has put any 'feet on the ground' as it were though, that being the key-difference. (They are probably stationed if needed as backup, but haven't actually done it yet)


There are other important hints that Russian influence is far smaller that previously thought. Some mistakes simply would not have happened if professional military is in charge of things. Also, if Russia was really pulling the strings, we wouldn't really witness the struggle for power between local self-proclaimed leaders.
This is the difference between directing and leading the protests. Having small teams assisting is a lot more 'safer' diplomatically and cleaner, but you lose a lot of direct control with the affiliated groups. If Russia was completely behind it, closer to how it was with Crimea, there is a clear difference.


Anyway, I didn't read anything in your post that could be regarded as demonising Russia. It is a nice example of how a different opinion can be expressed without cheap shots and sensationalism. :bow:

Hah, thank you. I do have my opinions, funnily, before this whole thing 'broke out', I suggested Ukraine might be better separated politically and it sadly looks like it is heading that way but with more violence for the locals.

[Husar]

Well.... If you really want to get anal about it, crossing a border with armed personnel without invitation or a declaration of war also makes you a war criminal ~;)

Israel bombing Iraqi nuclear facilities was announced then? How about the raid to kill Osama bin Laden? Was that announced or preceded by a declaration of war to Pakistan or maybe an invitation? What about all the drone strikes? A loophole because drones are not personnel?

[Brenus]

“Since WWII we were involved in a Proxy War with the USSR - the USSR invaded Afghanistan, was actively involved in both Korea and Vietnam, in both those conflicts it was Communist forces who were the aggressors.” Err, you should read a little more. USSR didn’t invade Afghanistan, and in Vietnam at least it was not the Communists the aggressors but the US (to do the things simple). And China was much more involved in Korea than USSR. Your assessment is political, not factual.

By the way, NATO (1949) preceded Warsaw Pact (1955)…

[HoreTore]

Israel bombing Iraqi nuclear facilities was announced then? How about the raid to kill Osama bin Laden? Was that announced or preceded by a declaration of war to Pakistan or maybe an invitation? What about all the drone strikes? A loophole because drones are not personnel?

These are all issues condemned because of a lack of a declaration, Husar...

[HoreTore]

I'm always concerned about casualties, especially civilians. Why do you think I've been mentioning dialogue so many times? As long as Kiev refuses to negotiate, there is little hope of that.

...Which is why I find it so hard to understand how easily you dismiss an action which is highly likely to increase the number of civilian deaths. Proper uniforms makes it clear who's who. A lack of proper uniforms blurs the lines. And when the lines are blurred, people start getting confused about who to shoot at. That translates to unnecessary civilian deaths.

There is no way so many Afghan civilians would have died if the Taliban wore proper uniforms.

[Sarmatian]

...Which is why I find it so hard to understand how easily you dismiss an action which is highly likely to increase the number of civilian deaths. Proper uniforms makes it clear who's who. A lack of proper uniforms blurs the lines. And when the lines are blurred, people start getting confused about who to shoot at. That translates to unnecessary civilian deaths.

There is no way so many Afghan civilians would have died if the Taliban wore proper uniforms.

First off, I absolutely deplore using the army against own citizens. That is the job for the police. Even Milosevic, a corrupt bastard thug he was, used only police in Kosovo (prior to the bombing, which allowed him to declare martial law and do whatever he wanted after that point).

Secondly, my opinion is that Russian profesionals aren't present en masse in eastern and southeastern Ukraine. Armed people there are citizens of Ukraine and not a part of any army and thus can't wear a uniform, any type. They wear St. George ribbons, which is the closest it can get to wearing an insignia as civilians.

Thirdly, placing blame on those not wearing the uniforms instead of those doing the shooting is kind of reversing cause and effect.

I don't honestly see how else this crisis can end except through a comprehensive dialogue on constitutional reform or civil war. It is getting bigger by the day, and unless something is done soon, nothing will be able to stop a total civil war from stating. Even now you have different opinions in the east - some advocate independence, some want more autonomy, some want to join Russia, some want to march on Kiev. It's getting out of hand.

[HoreTore]

The problem is caused by the actions done in Crimea.

As Russian forces were present in Crimea without insignia, how on earth can we say with confidence that the people in eastern ukraine are not russian forces in disguise?

Putin has deliberately blurred the line between civilian and soldier, and that's a recipe for disaster.


....And I note how you did not mention the ones in the east who wants to stay as an integrated part of Ukraine.

[Sarmatian]

The problem is caused by the actions done in Crimea.

Which were caused by the actions done in Kiev. That doesn't excuse Russian action, but it is important to note what was spark that caused the whole thing to explode.


As Russian forces were present in Crimea without insignia, how on earth can we say with confidence that the people in eastern ukraine are not russian forces in disguise?

Based on evidence from international organizations, we can with some confidence say that people in the east are not Russian forces in disguise. We can't confirm either with a 100% certainty. I wouldn't say that the smart and sensible thing in that case is to order more shooting.


Putin has deliberately blurred the line between civilian and soldier, and that's a recipe for disaster.

You're clinging to a view that isn't backed by evidence on the ground and are blaming those who aren't dressing to show whether they're legitimate or illegitimate targets, instead of those doing the shooting.



....And I note how you did not mention the ones in the east who wants to stay as an integrated part of Ukraine.

Those preferring status quo presumable aren't involved at all. I speficially mentioned divisions among the protesters. Cheap shot, mate.

[HoreTore]

Which were caused by the actions done in Kiev. That doesn't excuse Russian action, but it is important to note what was spark that caused the whole thing to explode.

Nonsense.

The actions done in Kiev didn't prompt Putin to order his troops to remove their insignia and blurr the line between soldier and civilian. Sorry.

He could have entered Crimea in proper uniform, observing the laws of war. He chose not to do so, which puts civilian lives in needless peril. That makes him a war criminal, and a wanker.

[Husar]

These are all issues condemned because of a lack of a declaration, Husar...

Yet I do not remember you calling Obama a war criminal in the same way you call Putin one. And there is far more proof that Obama sent Seal Team Six there than the "educated guessing" by "experts" that Putin is the one commanding soldiers around in Eastern Ukraine. Not to forget that one of them turned out to be a mafia actor...

[HoreTore]

Yet I do not remember you calling Obama a war criminal in the same way you call Putin one. And there is far more proof that Obama sent Seal Team Six there than the "educated guessing" by "experts" that Putin is the one commanding soldiers around in Eastern Ukraine. Not to forget that one of them turned out to be a mafia actor...

Obama has faced criticism for entering Pakistani territory without permission.

The problem is that we do not know how much Pakistan allows the US to do in Pakistan, so it's hard to tell if it actually was illegal. There's no doubt that Pakistan approves of some US presence in Pakistan, but just how much? Unknown.

Further, the US has declared since 9/11 that they would hunt Osama wherever he may be, as well as their intention to do it by sending troops. That's a declaration, isn't it?

[Husar]

Obama has faced criticism for entering Pakistani territory without permission.

The problem is that we do not know how much Pakistan allows the US to do in Pakistan, so it's hard to tell if it actually was illegal. There's no doubt that Pakistan approves of some US presence in Pakistan, but just how much? Unknown.

Yeah, and the Peoples' Repblic of Donetsk also asked for Russians to come.


Further, the US has declared since 9/11 that they would hunt Osama wherever he may be, as well as their intention to do it by sending troops. That's a declaration, isn't it?

Putin also declared he would send troops wherever Russian citizens are in dire need of help, that's also a declaration, so what is your problem again?

[Gilrandir]

A tad entertaining from this distance, and thank goodness/I dearly hope that we (Britain) don't get involved.
Sounds somehow familiar... Can we attribute those thoughts to Chamberlain in Munich 1938? Yet, you did get involved then, and sooner than most other nations who opposed Hitler.

[Gilrandir]

If the number of Russian troops is so big to have taken control of a large part of Ukraine, how are they effectively organized within Ukraine? There has to be some lines of communication - how come not a single phone call was intercepted, or a written order? Or communication between them and the protest leadership? Communication between Kremlin and protest leadership?


There are a lot of interceptions and SBU makes public some of them, but they are all in Russian like the one I have already referred to:
http://zn.ua/UKRAINE/sbu-obnarodovala-peregovory-lukina-i-strelka-dokazyvayuschie-prichastnost-rf-k-zahvatu-inspektorov-obse-separatistami-144349_.html
They also showed Russain passports, Avakov and the head of the National Guard claim that many of the terrorists in Slovyansk are "of non-Slavic, i.e. Chechen nationality".

[Gilrandir]

The actions done in Kiev didn't prompt Putin to order his troops to remove their insignia and blurr the line between soldier and civilian. Sorry.

He could have entered Crimea in proper uniform, observing the laws of war. He chose not to do so, which puts civilian lives in needless peril. That makes him a war criminal, and a wanker.
What many people here seem to fail to realize is that Putin has successfully tried his hand in a new kind of war which doesn't require any tanks moving in columns or planes bombing the cities. Exporting insignialess soldiers who do the job from inside the country with the active support from the hired "oppressed" local Russophiles was the tactics appiled in Georgian war in 2008 and now in Ukraine. Wherever Russian-speakers are present Putin finds it expedient to practice the same approach. I think his appetite is getting whetted, so we may yet see a similar scenario in, say, Latvia or Kazakhstan.

[Sarmatian]

He could have entered Crimea in proper uniform, observing the laws of war. He chose not to do so, which puts civilian lives in needless peril. That makes him a war criminal, and a wanker.

Interesting spin.

Taking control of territory while not actually killing anyone is a war crime, and taking control of territory and killing hundreds of thousands while doing it is lawful action. I love it.


There are a lot of interceptions and SBU makes public some of them, but they are all in Russian like the one I have already referred to:
http://zn.ua/UKRAINE/sbu-obnarodovala-peregovory-lukina-i-strelka-dokazyvayuschie-prichastnost-rf-k-zahvatu-inspektorov-obse-separatistami-144349_.html
They also showed Russain passports, Avakov and the head of the National Guard claim that many of the terrorists in Slovyansk are "of non-Slavic, i.e. Chechen nationality".

So, your proof of Russian professionals being present in eastern Ukraine is a visit of Russian envoy being sent to negotiate release of OSCE observers?

From my, very limited admittedly, understanding of Russian, nothing in the conversation proves there are Russian professional soldiers in eastern Ukraine. I'd like to see a video with English subtitles instead of Russian, though.

Sounds somehow familiar... Can we attribute those thoughts to Chamberlain in Munich 1938? Yet, you did get involved then, and sooner than most other nations who opposed Hitler.

It's not a world war until Japanese invade Manchuria.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That's not how I remember it, but ok. I was wrong.

I may have used the word "neutralise" at one point, but impoverishing Russia was never the way to do that.

As far as the "West" was concerned Russia had thrown off it's oppressors and was emerging blinking into the light of democracy, there was no reason to stimy that.


Afghanistan was the first country to recognize independent Kosovo. That was surely a foreign policy priority for them, being invested in region so much.

Maybe they think Serbia is like Russia?


Putin is anything but a simple topic.

True, but the question of whether he's a Fascist or not is a fairly simple one, he ticks all the boxes, including the whole personality cult topless martial arts thing.

He's actually a better Fascist than Hitler or Mussolini in terms of how he "does" Fascism - which isn't to say he's slaughtering Jews etc.


Go back to my post about Serbia in 2000. Pro-democracy, anti-corruption groups are (mostly) a front for political activism. Even if we ignore intelligence agencies, you are free to check the amount given to such groups in Ukraine and compare to amounts give to other countries with comparable level of corruption.

Perceived corruption index and other measurable data was comparable to Yuschenko period. The other argument is so silly I won't even comment on it.

Well, you're judged by your allies.

Aside from that, helping organise protesters is one thing, helping shoot down helicopters is something else.


Agreed. Even myself, but the situation on the ground is different. Crimea could be taken without a shot and have most of the population celebrate it. Eastern and southeastern Ukraine are different. At best I can see them declare independence, but even that only after a long stalemate.

I don't know that we can predict what Putin will do - but it's really just a question of his calculation. The assumption was that Crimea would be too expensive, it wasn't, so you have to ask how much Ukraine's Gas Fields, Coal Mines and Armament Factories are worth.


To do damage to something, that something has to exist before hand. Bulgaria and Romania were practically feudal societies after ww2. I'm willing to bet that most of the stuff that works there was built during communist period.

Even though most of eastern European countries now like to blame all problems on the communism and the Soviet Union, the sad fact is that most of the schools, hospitals, airports, roads, railroads, bridges, universities... were built between 1945 and 1990. The local kleptocrats are now struggling to keep the paint job fresh.
In many ways, even civil rights were improved, like gender and racial equality. That doesn't mean that Soviet Union wasn't an oppressive regime, it just shows in how pathetic state most of eastern Europe was pre-ww2.

It's a common misconception that Western Countries were vastly more developed prior to WWII, even in the late 80's we were drinking water from a well on my farm, mains water came in around 1990, reliable power came 1990.

I can't speak for Bulgaria as I don't know much about the history of the country, but Romania was (prior to WWII) a functioning Constitutional Monarchy, like Italy the system was overthrown by a Fascist dictator. Romania SHOULD be on the same level of economic and social development as Italy, but it isn't because they have endemic corruption left over after the collapse of the Communist regime. Actually, Romania should be HIGHER up the economic and social ladder than Italy if anything given its trajectory prior to WWII.


There were military interventions prior to the year 2000. Hint: check South America, Africa, Asia.

Also - Cold War.

[Gilrandir]

So, your proof of Russian professionals being present in eastern Ukraine is a visit of Russian envoy being sent to negotiate release of OSCE observers?

From my, very limited admittedly, understanding of Russian, nothing in the conversation proves there are Russian professional soldiers in eastern Ukraine.

It is a proof that those who made Slovyansk into their stronghold have direct channels of communicating with Russia and obey their orders. Lukin came not to NEGOTIATE, everything has been decided before he came to Ukraine, his visit is just a pretense of negotiation. And it is a proof that Russia could have stopped and can stop the conflict any time it wished. Conclusion: Russia is interested in aggravating the conflict.
P.S. Sorry, can't provide any subtitles, but I have given the gist of the conversation in the post where I gave this link for the first time. That is if you trust what I have given as a gist.

[Sarmatian]

Maybe they think Serbia is like Russia?

Maybe. Maybe they think Kosovo is on Mars. Possibilities, endless possibilities.


Well, you're judged by your allies.


True, very true.


I don't know that we can predict what Putin will do - but it's really just a question of his calculation. The assumption was that Crimea would be too expensive, it wasn't, so you have to ask how much Ukraine's Gas Fields, Coal Mines and Armament Factories are worth.

Not a whole lot.


It's a common misconception that Western Countries were vastly more developed prior to WWII, even in the late 80's we were drinking water from a well on my farm, mains water came in around 1990, reliable power came 1990.

In terms of industrial output, they were. That doesn't mean they had internet in French and British countryside in 1930's.


I can't speak for Bulgaria as I don't know much about the history of the country, but Romania was (prior to WWII) a functioning Constitutional Monarchy, like Italy the system was overthrown by a Fascist dictator. Romania SHOULD be on the same level of economic and social development as Italy, but it isn't because they have endemic corruption left over after the collapse of the Communist regime. Actually, Romania should be HIGHER up the economic and social ladder than Italy if anything given its trajectory prior to WWII.

Compare industrial output of Italy and Romania pre-ww2 and get back to me.


Also - Cold War.

Excuse me?



It is a proof that those who made Slovyansk into their stronghold have direct channels of communicating with Russia and obey their orders. Lukin came not to NEGOTIATE, everything has been decided before he came to Ukraine, his visit is just a pretense of negotiation. And it is a proof that Russia could have stopped and can stop the conflict any time it wished. Conclusion: Russia is interested in aggravating the conflict.
P.S. Sorry, can't provide any subtitles, but I have given the gist of the conversation in the post where I gave this link for the first time. That is if you trust what I have given as a gist.

That's not what I got from accompanying article, but as I don't speak Russian, I'll have to take your word for it.

[HoreTore]

Interesting spin.

Taking control of territory while not actually killing anyone is a war crime, and taking control of territory and killing hundreds of thousands while doing it is lawful action. I love it.

Nah, I consider the 2nd Chechen war to be a war crime as well, but for other reasons than not wearing proper insignia.


Or were you confusing me with someone who believes Russia has a more aggressive foreign policy than, say, the US...?

[Brenus]

“There is no way so many Afghan civilians would have died if the Taliban wore proper uniforms.” Mama mia!!! I even don’t want to image the death toll if Iraqis wouldn’t have proper uniforms…

“What many people here seem to fail to realize is that Putin has successfully tried his hand in a new kind of war” Hardly new, hardly new. Was done in Vietnam by the French and the USA…

“hired” I like this. If your politicians have the same level of political analyse you go for a civil war that will finish either by a partition or an ethnic cleansing…

“Georgian war in 2008” that was started by a “democratic” leader who wanted to ethnically cleanse the others by forces like Tudjman did. He fortunately failed. You may notice that no one in the world wants to remember his name now…

“shoot down helicopters is something else” which is how Slovenia started the dislocation of Yugoslavia…
Now burning alive 40 Russian separatists/Putinists/terrorists, that is something else... Long live democracy...
"Turchynov, who’d said earlier this week that “the vast majority of law enforcement officers in the east are incapable of performing their duties", "The criminals suffered heavy losses: many killed, wounded and taken prisoner.” in "Stars and Stripes".
Kill them all, God will recognise his own.

[a completely inoffensive name]

What's going on in Ukraine must seem like paradise for US Second Amendmenteers. Everyone with a mind to it with near unlimited access to all kinds of weaponry, fighting against a federal government seeking to push them down. A tad entertaining from this distance, and thank goodness/I dearly hope that we (Britain) don't get involved.

8/10 I laughed heartily.

[Gilrandir]

“hired” I like this. If your politicians have the same level of political analyse you go for a civil war that will finish either by a partition or an ethnic cleansing…

SBU provides a lot of proof that little green men in the east were and are supported by recruited locals and Crimeans. For example, there is a memo (or instruction) which stipulates the main objectives of stormtroopers. This memo says that after a local police station is captured the stormtroopers will be approached by the recruited locals among which the taken in the station weapons should be freely distributed. It also says a lot on the way the stormtroopers should behave putting a special stress on encouraging local women (with children, if possible) to be present in and around the captured buildings.


“Georgian war in 2008” that was started by a “democratic” leader who wanted to ethnically cleanse the others by forces like Tudjman did. He fortunately failed. You may notice that no one in the world wants to remember his name now…

As far as I know, Georgia was provoked into retaliating offensive after disguised Russian troops and locals from South Ossetia repeatedly used artillery to shell Georgian territory. This is what Russia was hoping to repeat in Crimea.

[Husar]

SBU provides a lot of proof that little green men in the east were and are supported by recruited locals and Crimeans. For example, there is a memo (or instruction) which stipulates the main objectives of stormtroopers. This memo says that after a local police station is captured the stormtroopers will be approached by the recruited locals among which the taken in the station weapons should be freely distributed. It also says a lot on the way the stormtroopers should behave putting a special stress on encouraging local women (with children, if possible) to be present in and around the captured buildings.

Sounds just like the memo that tells protesters how to dress and behave when they want to overthrow a ruler America does not like anymore. So we're still at the level of superpowers will do whatever they deem necessary to extend/keep their own power and its the proxies who get to bear the weight of war. So why should Russia always back down and take it in the back by the USA? Because the USA have the better PR experts in the West (so good that even Putin hires them) and excell at hiding their dirty laundry?

And why should the EU take another country with a wrecked economy? If the West should take Ukraine, I suggest the USA take care of it and leave the EU out of it, they always say themselves that our economy is far worse off than ours. "**** the EU" and so on. Why should the EU suffer to prop up new allies that will only do what America tells them anyway? For those who think EU countries are not America's puppets, remember the case where Austria forced a President of a sovereign country to land because there was a small chance he was hiding Snowden (who is not really a criminal for any European country as far as I know) in his plane.

With all the "Putin is this and that"-rhetoric, I wonder why I should care? Last I heard he is actually trying to get the separatists and the government to negotiate and the government keeps saying no while sending more military to the East.
If they are really fighting Russian elite units, why do they keep doing so given that their desolate, low-morale military shouldn't stand much of a chance of winning either the fight or the hearts and minds of the locals?

[Gilrandir]

With all the "Putin is this and that"-rhetoric, I wonder why I should care? Last I heard he is actually trying to get the separatists and the government to negotiate and the government keeps saying no while sending more military to the East.
If they are really fighting Russian elite units, why do they keep doing so given that their desolate, low-morale military shouldn't stand much of a chance of winning either the fight or the hearts and minds of the locals?
SBU intercepted a conversation between Barkashov, the leader of the Russian National Unity party (the nazi party from Russia whose connection with Ukrainian separatists I tried to expose, but Sarmatian didn't believe me) and a Boitsov, the leader of an unregistered separatist organization "Orthodox Donbass".
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/1645528-sbu_perekhvatila_peregovory_separatistov_s_moskvoy_audiozapis.htm
The gist: Boitsov is panicking and wants to cancel the referendum as nothing is ready and they won't have the results they wish. He begs for Russian open military intervention. Barkashov tells him to stop being childish as no one in Russia expects them to really hold a referendum. They should fill the ballots themselves and announce any results of the referendum they want (just not 100% or 99% support, but something around 89%). Boitsov asks whether they should include any other questions (like federalization) into the ballots, but Barkashov forbids it and tells him that many people in Russia (including political leaders like Zhirinovsky and Zyuganov) continue to put a pressure on Putin to persuade him to intervene.

[Sarmatian]

In a rather surprising twist, Putin called on separatists to postpone the referendum. In the conversation with Swiss president, Didier Burkhalter, Putin also called on the army to stop the attacks.

He called the presidential elections on 25th of May a "step in the right direction", but reiterated that constitutional reform needs to precede any nationwide elections. linky (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/07/ukraine-crisis-putin-referendum-autonomy-postponed)

It appears both West and Russia agreed that OSCE should play a bigger role in Ukraine.

Thoughts?

[Husar]

Boitsov asks whether they should include any other questions (like federalization) into the ballots, but Barkashov forbids it and tells him that many people in Russia (including political leaders like Zhirinovsky and Zyuganov) continue to put a pressure on Putin to persuade him to intervene.

That can't be true because Putin planned to intervene all along. I know that for sure because he is the second coming of Hitler.
And the amount of leaked phonecalls is new, but why would they have more credibility than all the leaked videos that turned out to be fake? Why do Russian officials continue to use insecure phone lines to discuss tactics after so many have already been leaked?
Why does Russia sometimes supposedly send conflicting messages to the rest of the world, yet it is a dictatorship under the iron hand of Putler?

Oh and if this is true, it just shows that they should use western PR agencies more often because our press made the 49% support for the Maidan movement seem like 89% support without explicitly saying so. Next time Barkashov gets a level-up, he should invest some exp in the PR-skill. Then again Maidan never needed a referendum on anything, it was enough to abduct the children of some MPs to make them vote the right way and then forget about the abductions while blaming Russia for everything.

[Sarmatian]

The leaked telephone call would be significant if the parties involved were significant. One one side we have an unknown leader of an unknown, unregistered organisation in Ukraine while on the other there is a leader of an unregistered neo-nazi organisation in Russia.

[Gilrandir]

And the amount of leaked phonecalls is new, but why would they have more credibility than all the leaked videos that turned out to be fake? Why do Russian officials continue to use insecure phone lines to discuss tactics after so many have already been leaked?
Why does Russia sometimes supposedly send conflicting messages to the rest of the world, yet it is a dictatorship under the iron hand of Putler?

The amount is not new - as I have said I see and hear a lot more then I share here, I just didn't venture to mention them expecting the reaction I get now (in which I was right). OK, you may disbelieve it if you wish. But I wonder you doubt the ability of secret sevices to tap even official phonecalls after the Merkel eavesdropping scandal. But Barkashov is not a Russian official - I'm not sure whether his party is legal in Russia, so the security of his calls is a lot less than the officials are believed to enjoy.

[Gilrandir]

The leaked telephone call would be significant if the parties involved were significant. One one side we have an unknown leader of an unknown, unregistered organisation in Ukraine while on the other there is a leader of an unregistered neo-nazi organisation in Russia.
It's not about significance, it
1) proves the involvement of Russian nazis into Ukrainian conflict;
2) proves that Ukrainian separatists obey orders from Russia;
3) proves that "the referendum" they plan on May 11 will be as big a fraud as was the Crimean one.

[Sarmatian]

It's not about significance, it
1) proves the involvement of Russian nazis into Ukrainian conflict;
2) proves that Ukrainian separatists obey orders from Russia;
3) proves that "the referendum" they plan on May 11 will be as big a fraud as was the Crimean one.

It proves none of those things.

If the Russian nazi was talking to, say, Pushilin, than it could be said that it proves 1). If someone important enough from Kremlin was dictating orders to someone important among the protesters it would prove 2) and 3).

As it stands, it proves that there is nazi organization in Russia and that its leader isn't very keen on democracy, and that apparently there is an organisation called Orthodox Donbas whose leader is apparently Boitsov who also isn't very keen on democracy.

[Kagemusha]

It's not about significance, it
1) proves the involvement of Russian nazis into Ukrainian conflict;
2) proves that Ukrainian separatists obey orders from Russia;
3) proves that "the referendum" they plan on May 11 will be as big a fraud as was the Crimean one.

What it proves to me is that there is likely a CIA or other Western detachment now eavesdropping at Ukraine, compared to only earlier FSB communications surveillance which leaked the earlier pro western calls, which consisted some quite shady information

My stand in this issue has not changed one bit. This is a clash of interests between the West and Russia and Ukrainians are the ones to suffer from it, but large powers do not care for such.

[Gilrandir]

It proves none of those things.

If the Russian nazi was talking to, say, Pushilin, than it could be said that it proves 1). If someone important enough from Kremlin was dictating orders to someone important among the protesters it would prove 2) and 3).

As it stands, it proves that there is nazi organization in Russia and that its leader isn't very keen on democracy, and that apparently there is an organisation called Orthodox Donbas whose leader is apparently Boitsov who also isn't very keen on democracy.
What you seem to fail to understand (or choose to) is that Boitsov behaves as if it is in his power to cancel or to go on with the referendum. It means that he is not just the leader of some unimportant and unknown organization. Why, a couple of months ago Right Sector was an unknown organization as well. There are several organizations among the separarists in the city of Donetsk; but whichever of them he might belong to is not that important. What is important is that he seems responsible for connection and cooperation with Russian nazis who coordinate the activities of separatists, at least in terms of strategy (including the question(s) in the ballots).

[Brenus]

“It means that he is not just the leader of some unimportant and unknown organization.” That means he is in a delusional phase, no more.

“There are several organizations among the separarists in the city of Donetsk”. But, but, I thought it was Putin who was behind all… You stop to tell us it all due to Putin master plan, and now there are others….? It becomes more and more difficult to understand… :dizzy2:

Hey, a great idea, the Russian Nazi who are not in power could ally with the Ukrainian Nazi who are in power and…. All right, I see the flaw: The Ukrainian Nazis are yet in power…

[Gilrandir]

“It means that he is not just the leader of some unimportant and unknown organization.” That means he is in a delusional phase, no more.

Yet his phase does not prevent him from being in charge of the separatist referendum and obeying orders from Russain nazis.

“There are several organizations among the separarists in the city of Donetsk”.
But, but, I thought it was Putin who was behind all… You stop to tell us it all due to Putin master plan, and now there are others….? It becomes more and more difficult to understand… :dizzy2:

Brenus, stop being so... I can't even think of an appropriate word for it. There are several groups of separatists in the city of Donetsk (as well as all over the East) who may be at odds as for the tactics they use but generally agree on the opposing the current government in Kyiv and general orientation towards Russia. Maidan wasn't homogeneous either yet you prefer to paint it as a unified and well-trained detachment of nazis under a direct command from EU and USA. And now you want to say just the opposite of separatists.


Hey, a great idea, the Russian Nazi who are not in power could ally with the Ukrainian Nazi who are in power and…. All right, I see the flaw: The Ukrainian Nazis are yet in power…
I marvel at all these ruminations about Ukrainian nazis at power (referring to contradictory percentage of them both in the parliament and the government) from a person whose nation took Le Pen into the second round of presidential elections not so long ago.

[Gilrandir]

In a rather surprising twist, Putin called on separatists to postpone the referendum. In the conversation with Swiss president, Didier Burkhalter, Putin also called on the army to stop the attacks.

He called the presidential elections on 25th of May a "step in the right direction", but reiterated that constitutional reform needs to precede any nationwide elections. linky (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/07/ukraine-crisis-putin-referendum-autonomy-postponed)

It appears both West and Russia agreed that OSCE should play a bigger role in Ukraine.

Thoughts?
Some people on the forum here were optimistic after the Geneva paln. It turned out it was a vain hope. So I don't believe Putin is being sincere now, only lip service to seem to repudiate what separatists are doing. He can stop them in no time without OSCE or any other mediation.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Some people on the forum here were optimistic after the Geneva paln....

I was not among those optimistic. At this stage, I am limiting my optimism to the hope that it does not degenerate into out-and-out civil war.

[Brenus]

“There are several groups of separatists in the city of Donetsk” Not what you said before. You said it was organised by Putin.

“you prefer to paint it as a unified and well-trained detachment of nazis under a direct command from EU and USA.” Never. Read what I wrote. I wrote that was a social movement that was taken by Nazi.

“from a person whose nation took Le Pen into the second round of presidential elections not so long ago.” And your point is?

[Gilrandir]

“There are several groups of separatists in the city of Donetsk” Not what you said before. You said it was organised by Putin.

The fact of being fomented by Russia and financially supported by Yanukovych does not mean that separatists form a single team. Just like Maidan which you claim to have been financed and supported by the West.


“from a person whose nation took Le Pen into the second round of presidential elections not so long ago.” And your point is?
The danger of Nazis coming to power in France is greater than you would like to see in Ukraine. The presence of those who you brand as nazis in the Ukrainian parliament I explain as a repercussion caused by the regime of Yanukovych: before the last parliamentary elections in 2012 the support of Svoboda hadn't allowed it to overcome the 5% of votes barrier to get into the Verkhovna Rada. When everything calms down this support will again ebb. Even now the rating of Tagnybok is around 2%. The same cannot be said of France as a peaceful and prosperous democracy swung drastically in the direction of nazism. Hungary likewise.

[Sarmatian]

Protesters chosen to ignore Putin call to postpone the referendum.

Kremlin spokesman said (http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-we-need-more-info-after-ukraine-rebels-defied-putin-2014-5) that, in light of Kiev refusing to stop the military action and protesters refusing to postpone the referendum, Moscow will need "more information and additional analysis".

How's the question gonna be phrased? Is it known?

[Gilrandir]

How's the question gonna be phrased? Is it known?
Separatists plan to hold referendum in 2 stages. The first will be held on May 11 and the question is "Do you support the independence of Donetsk people's republic?" The second one is to be held on May 18 and they plan to ask if anyone wants to join Russia (the exact wording of the second stage question isn't yet known).

[Rhyfelwyr]

I find it odd that the deaths of 20 protesters in Eastern Ukraine is getting so little coverage. It is only mentioned in passing on the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27344029) in an article dealing with a different issue.

The Western media went nuts when protestors were killed at Maidan - where is the outrage for those in the east?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Does it have to be said? One was promoting a western style democracy, the other thinly veiled fascist counter-revolution. Hardly the same.

What has led you to believe that the Eastern protesters are fascists?

I would also not call them counter-revolutionaries, since they are seeking secession and are not trying to put their own men back in power in Kiev.

And even if you disagree with their politics, it is quite something for you to come and say that their lives count for less because of it. Let's face it, it was those in Maidan that were protesting against a democratically elected government, and who then proceeded to remove protection of minority rights (Russian language status) and put several Nazi's in power. Those in the East are resisting that, and I refuse to believe that their lives count for less because of it.

[Brenus]

“The danger of Nazis coming to power in France is greater than you would like to see in Ukraine. The presence of those who you brand as nazis in the Ukrainian parliament I explain as a repercussion caused by the regime of Yanukovych: before the last parliamentary elections in 2012 the support of Svoboda hadn't allowed it to overcome the 5% of votes barrier to get into the Verkhovna Rada. When everything calms down this support will again ebb. Even now the rating of Tagnybok is around 2%. The same cannot be said of France as a peaceful and prosperous democracy swung drastically in the direction of nazism. Hungary likewise.” Still, what is your point?

“The presence of those who you brand as nazis in the Ukrainian parliament” Are you denying they are Nazi?

“which you claim to have been financed and supported by the West.” Supported yes (and nothing wrong with this, I just don't think EU and USA should support Nazi), when did I claimed they were financed?

[Husar]

Does it have to be said? One was promoting a western style democracy, the other thinly veiled fascist counter-revolution. Hardly the same.

Err, I'm not even sure whether the protesters are for a separation from Ukraine or even a counter-revolution. Some of them just want Kiev to listen to their concerns, which deal a whole lot with them losing their jobs if Kiev cuts all the ties with Russia and everyday stuff like that. If that makes them deserving to get shot, then we know where the fascists are...

[Husar]

Obviously all these deaths are unfortunate, but I don't find it difficult to pick one side over the other here. Moral relativism can go too far, and often does, in my opinion.

Want about the 40 pro-Russian protesters who got killed in Odessa? And how the other side is making fun of them in pictures like this?
http://kommunisten-online.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/odessa_verbrennen.jpg

There are even doubts whether they all burned as some seem to have been strangled or had their necks broken.

[Viking]

Want about the 40 pro-Russian protesters who got killed in Odessa? And how the other side is making fun of them in pictures like this?
http://kommunisten-online.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/odessa_verbrennen.jpg

There are even doubts whether they all burned as some seem to have been strangled or had their necks broken.

There are suggestions (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10808244/Ukraine-crisis-mob-frees-separatist-heroes-as-anarchy-grips-Odessa.html) people in the building were combatants:


In the attic, which appeared entirely untouched by fire, a home-made wooden shield and improvised clubs lay among what looked to be a Molotov cocktail factory.

This (http://youtu.be/0rgf5n2HiMw?t=1m16s) video footage may also show a pro-Russian firing an SMG in Odessa earlier in the day; protected by police lines while doing so.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Obviously all these deaths are unfortunate, but I don't find it difficult to pick one side over the other here. Moral relativism can go too far, and often does, in my opinion.

I do find it difficult to pick a side in this conflict, and moral relativism has nothing to do with it. The current government is unelected, includes a number of Nazis, and is killing protesters by the dozens. Are they really the good guys?

[HopAlongBunny]

This whole debacle seems to raise questions about legitimacy.
The gov't appears to lack legitimacy; the security forces seems to hesitant to restore order; the ability of "rebels" to occupy public buildings w/o much resistance is striking.
The "rebels" seem to represent rather narrow, perhaps even foreign interests; they may lack popular support, but they do not seem to elicit popular opposition or outrage.

I fear the people of the Ukraine have yet to speak, or have any voice in yet another competition among elites.

[Rhyfelwyr]

All revolutionary movements will have home-grown fringe elements that aren't to be trusted or supported, i.e. the Nazis on both sides. But when you compare the total platform of both sides, it comes down to who they are supported by. Any people who want to be part of Russia are people who want to be part of an overtly Fascist nearly third world kleptocracy. Its a dumb cause, especially compared to the idealists on the other side who wanted to remake their own corrupt government into something western-looking.

They only look to the West because of their concept of Ukrainian national identity. They have given us no reason whatsoever to believe that they actually espouse Western ideals. On what do you base your assertion that the Western-looking parties are less corrupt?

You speak of fringe elements, and yet the overwhelming majority of the unelected Kiev government voted to remove the official status of a minority language (Russian) - something that can hardly be seen as being in the spirit of a tolerant, democratic state.

And again you slander those in the East as being Russian stooges. What do you base this on? Do you believe there is no organic Russian-identifying population in Eastern Ukraine? They are attracted to Russia because they see themselves as Russian, not because it is a "third world kleptocracy" - they are already living in one of those.

[Brenus]

Except that the claim of Nazi in the pro-Russian side is not really proved when the reality of Nazi in Ukrainian actual executive power is.

[Husar]

There are suggestions (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10808244/Ukraine-crisis-mob-frees-separatist-heroes-as-anarchy-grips-Odessa.html) people in the building were combatants:

"Combatants"? Like the ones who threw molotovs at policemen on Maidan? Back then they were called protesters and western politicians brought them cookies...


This (http://youtu.be/0rgf5n2HiMw?t=1m16s) video footage may also show a pro-Russian firing an SMG in Odessa earlier in the day; protected by police lines while doing so.

Or it may show a pro-government Hitler firing a semi-automatic potato gun with mustard gas cartridges at little babies, hard to tell from the video. Okay, okay, it's a short AK and they have red armbands, suggesting that they are war criminals for wearing the other side's uniforms while they stage this video.


I fear the people of the Ukraine have yet to speak, or have any voice in yet another competition among elites.

Eh, they do speak, there are even protests, but everybody is too preoccupied with painting their side white and the other side black to listen to the people in the middle. Such as this woman from the german article I linked who said they don't want to break ties with Russia but they also do not want to join Russia, they just want friendly relations and not a 100% pro-west course where ties with Russia are cut, resulting in factories being closed and jobs being lost.

[Viking]

"Combatants"? Like the ones who threw molotovs at policemen on Maidan? Back then they were called protesters and western politicians brought them cookies...

They offered the exact people carrying molotov cocktails support? I think that requires some evidence.


Or it may show a pro-government Hitler firing a semi-automatic potato gun with mustard gas cartridges at little babies, hard to tell from the video. Okay, okay, it's a short AK and they have red armbands, suggesting that they are war criminals for wearing the other side's uniforms while they stage this video.

If you are in doubt over which side he belongs to, just watch the video from the beginning. The thing I cannot confirm is that the SMG is authentic and firing live rounds.

[Husar]

They offered the exact people carrying molotov cocktails support? I think that requires some evidence.

I don't think so.


If you are in doubt over which side he belongs to, just watch the video from the beginning. The thing I cannot confirm is that the SMG is authentic and firing live rounds.

Or that he is not aiming into the air above peoples' heads.
As for the side they're on, I mentioned that they're wearing the red armbands of eastern protesters and this makes them war criminals because they're obviously the pro-western types, as can be seen by the riot shields and helmets they looted on Maidan. The evidence is damning but that's not my point.

[Gilrandir]

Want about the 40 pro-Russian protesters who got killed in Odessa?
Wrong!!!! Out of 40 deaths the first 10 to happen were those shot by the pro-Russian protesters. They were among the football fans who were marching through the city in support of Ukraine's integrity. Pro-Russians started the shooting, often from behind the policemen (who had red bands identical with pro-Russains). Then the enraged fans chased them and got them besieged in the Trade Unions building. The pro-Russians got barricaded there and started to throw down Molotov cocktails. The fans responded likewise. The fire in the building started at the fourth floor (where due to the height of the bulding people from below couldn't have ranged). Evidently it was caused by cocktail mishandling. Then some pro-Russians got suffocated in the vapors, others couldn't get out because they had sealed themselves from within, still others jumped down from on high to death.

[Gilrandir]

I find it odd that the deaths of 20 protesters in Eastern Ukraine is getting so little coverage. It is only mentioned in passing on the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27344029) in an article dealing with a different issue.

The Western media went nuts when protestors were killed at Maidan - where is the outrage for those in the east?
Those in Mariupol are hardly to be called protesters - most of them were Chechens and Russian mercenaries who were storming the city police station.

[Gilrandir]

“The danger of Nazis coming to power in France is greater than you would like to see in Ukraine. The presence of those who you brand as nazis in the Ukrainian parliament I explain as a repercussion caused by the regime of Yanukovych: before the last parliamentary elections in 2012 the support of Svoboda hadn't allowed it to overcome the 5% of votes barrier to get into the Verkhovna Rada. When everything calms down this support will again ebb. Even now the rating of Tagnybok is around 2%. The same cannot be said of France as a peaceful and prosperous democracy swung drastically in the direction of nazism. Hungary likewise.” Still, what is your point?

Before blaming others one should make sure one's own country is nazi-proof.

“The presence of those who you brand as nazis in the Ukrainian parliament” Are you denying they are Nazi?

I term them ultra-nationalists.


“which you claim to have been financed and supported by the West.” Supported yes (and nothing wrong with this, I just don't think EU and USA should support Nazi), when did I claimed they were financed?
Well, perhaps not you personally, but many people who are of the like mind here. For them supported=financed. I apologize if I was wrong.

[Gilrandir]

I do find it difficult to pick a side in this conflict, and moral relativism has nothing to do with it. The current government is unelected, includes a number of Nazis, and is killing protesters by the dozens. Are they really the good guys?
You may have noticed that so far the governmental forces are killing people in Slovyansk (lately in Mariupol as well where a detachment of separatists - Chechens and Don cossaks from Russia has arrived by way of Lugansk). They are not protesters but Russian GRU officers and mercenaries from Russia (mostly Chechnya). One of the reasons the progress of the operation is so slow is that the "fascist" government don't want to shoot where protesters (not terrorists) could be hurt.

[Gilrandir]

As for the side they're on, I mentioned that they're wearing the red armbands of eastern protesters and this makes them war criminals because they're obviously the pro-western types, as can be seen by the riot shields and helmets they looted on Maidan.
What makes many (not all, mind you) protesters in the East war criminals is taking hostages at will (those who have registraton in western regions, journalists, international observers, Red Cross volunteers, local pro-Ukrainian activists, sometimes ordinary people - miners, for example), holding hostages in Slovyansk SBU building (and other suchlike places), maltreating (to put it mildly) them, murdering them at will, shooting those apparently peaceful people who don't stop at checkpoints (a whole family was killed thus, a girl of 10 survived and is currently at hospital), shooting clergy (an orthodox priest - Moscow patriarchy, by the way - who came to a checkpoint to remonstrate), shooting people in their homes (a woman in Slovyansk went out to her balcony and was shot by a sniper - some say she tried to make a photo from the balcony). I may not even mention looting car saloons, bank robberies and the like.
Well, I'm ready for "we don't believe you". You might as well not. But most of what I report is getting corroborated later by the sources you trust. "Most" because something is not reported at all. Perhaps it is considered too insignificant to be reported, such as many people here wonder about little attention paid to Odessa or Mariupol in western media. Individal casualties (like the ones I mentioned) are mostly ignored by them. Usually I wait until something leaks out and is mentioned here, only then I can put in my spoke. Even thus I often get branded a sensationalist.

[Brenus]

“Before blaming others one should make sure one's own country is nazi-proof.” Dictatorship? By the way, Le Pen was not elected, so, until today France is Nazi-Proof. I still don't see the point: What is relevant to the crisis in Ukraine in the fact that Le Pen went on the 2nd tour in 2007 then was crushed?

“I term them ultra-nationalists.” I have my answer. Thanks.

“Well, perhaps not you personally, but many people who are of the like mind here.” :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: "If it was not you, it was your brother", J. de la Fontaine (17th Century), "The Lamb and the Wolf" Copied from Phedre

“One of the reasons the progress of the operation is so slow is that the "fascist" government don't want to shoot where protesters (not terrorists) could be hurt.” As in Odessa I suppose.

[Sarmatian]

.







Use multi-quote, please.

[Gilrandir]

“Before blaming others one should make sure one's own country is nazi-proof.” Dictatorship? By the way, Le Pen was not elected, so, until today France is Nazi-Proof. I still don't see the point: What is relevant to the crisis in Ukraine in the fact that Le Pen went on the 2nd tour in 2007 then was crushed?

If someone gets into the second round of the presidential election it means that he is the second popular politician in the country. If being second popular means to be crushed then you certainly have a strange understanding of being crushed.


“One of the reasons the progress of the operation is so slow is that the "fascist" government don't want to shoot where protesters (not terrorists) could be hurt.” As in Odessa I suppose.
I have explained what happened in Odessa. The deaths were not caused by the army or even police (however dubious the latter's behaviour might have been). So you can hardly blame government in shooting at anyone in Odessa.

[Gilrandir]

Use multi-quote, please.

Still not good at it. But I'm gonna improve one of these days.

[Sarmatian]

Still not good at it. But I'm gonna improve one of these days.

Hover mouse in the lower right corner of the post you wanna quote. A tool tip will appear with the text "multi-quote this message". Click there for all posts you wanna quote (2,5, 10, 20..), and click reply to thread.

[Rhyfelwyr]

You may have noticed that so far the governmental forces are killing people in Slovyansk (lately in Mariupol as well where a detachment of separatists - Chechens and Don cossaks from Russia has arrived by way of Lugansk). They are not protesters but Russian GRU officers and mercenaries from Russia (mostly Chechnya). One of the reasons the progress of the operation is so slow is that the "fascist" government don't want to shoot where protesters (not terrorists) could be hurt.

If what you say is true, then that does paint things in a very different light. Is there anything in the way of evidence to indicate that those killed where foreign mercenaries/soldiers?

[Brenus]

“I have explained what happened in Odessa. The deaths were not caused by the army or even police (however dubious the latter's behaviour might have been). So you can hardly blame government in shooting at anyone in Odessa.” No, they were just… slow.

“If someone gets into the second round of the presidential election it means that he is the second popular politician in the country. If being second popular means to be crushed then you certainly have a strange understanding of being crushed.” Nope, that means he’s got the 2nd highest rate (16.86%) of the candidates (12) (as only 2 candidates can go for the 2nd tour). So, Le Pen got more than the third one (and others) but still didn’t reach even 20%, which is still a lot. So, he was crushed because all the others voted against him, so 80% against 20% and that is why I said he was crushed. And, five years later, he failed at 10.44%, he was a distant fourth.
And again, you try to create an artificial point in order:
1st: to justify your position about Nazism
2nd: to try to cover-up the fact that Nazi are in your executive
3rd: Carry on pretending Putin’s hand everywhere which allows you to deny reality.
So, that was your point.

Now, I will make your job even worst:
I am against people annexing other’s country (In Ukraine as in Kosovo)
I am against military intervention by foreign powers, (in Ukraine and in Kosovo)
I am against foreign Secret Services intervening in Ukraine (CIA & FSB)
I am for social demands and political changes.
I do not support Putin but I understand how and why he did it.

[Sarmatian]

Maybe we can try to steer the discussion in another direction, instead of reiterating what's been said many times already - what do you think how long will this last and how will it end?

[Viking]

Unless Russia invades, the final outcome could be anything. Too many important wild cards. It could largely be over in two weeks from now, or it could still be going on 10 years from now on in a different shape (cf. e.g. Abkhazia).

[Gilrandir]

Hover mouse in the lower right corner of the post you wanna quote. A tool tip will appear with the text "multi-quote this message". Click there for all posts you wanna quote (2,5, 10, 20..), and click reply to thread.
Thanks. I kind of figured that out but if I quote 5 or more posts it will make my reply overlong and thus unreadable.

If what you say is true, then that does paint things in a very different light. Is there anything in the way of evidence to indicate that those killed where foreign mercenaries/soldiers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39vKSrwqFJg
The guys in the video congratulate war veterans in Donetsk on the Victory Day.
Besides, Avakov and the National Guard's commander-in-chief claim that there are Chechens. I don't think they are good at distinguishing representatives of numerous Caucasian nationalities, but the fact that they have "non-Slavic" appearance is what the officials insist on. The same information is corroborated by virtually all major Ukrainian TV channels (owned by different "oligarchs" - Poroshenko, Akhmetov, Firtash). Moreover, I saw an interview with a wounded Ukrainian soldier who claimed that besides mercenaries many of the terrorists are ex-convicts which is indicated by their tatoos (the tatoo symbolismis a developed sign system among criminals). Locals also state that a considerable part of protesters are the unemployed in which the cash-strapped towns in Donbas abound. I may dwell on it, but I'm afraid I will face accusations of sensationalism and bias again. So, it is your choice whether to trust my reports or not.


Nope, that means he’s got the 2nd highest rate
You have my answer.

[Brenus]

“You have my answer.”: Nope. Less than 17 % is a ridiculous score and he got it only because 12 candidates. So, comparing actual Nazis in power with a Nazi getting around 17 % and then failed to get representatives in Parliament is just a distraction, a smoke screen of what happens in Ukraine, in your executive that harbours open Nazi.

I, contrary to you, don't deny that Le Pen is a Nazi. I vote against him. And will do against his daughter. I don't try to coulour them as "extreme Nationalist". Nazi they are.

"So, it is your choice whether to trust my reports or not." I don't, when I see how you try to twist stories. You have an agenda, which is your right, but as it is too obvious, you failed to convince me you provide fair information and comments.

[Fragony]

She's no nazi but I don't trust the FN voters really. I don't think I like them very much.

[Sarmatian]

During Victory Day parade, governor of Kherson equated Hitler and Stalin. After being booed by the crowd, a women carrying a young child came up, grabbed the microphone from him. After the governor moved and continued, another man came up and did the same.

Talk about a lousy sense of timing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A05s6GrztbQ




Unless Russia invades, the final outcome could be anything. Too many important wild cards. It could largely be over in two weeks from now, or it could still be going on 10 years from now on in a different shape (cf. e.g. Abkhazia).

True. I don't think Russia will invade, unless something extraordinary happens. Anti-Kiev sentiment appears to be growing as government continues to use the army.

The important question is what's gonna happen after the referendum today...

[The Lurker Below]

That was an incredible video to me. And here in my home we sing about "land of the free." 9 out 10! If only some people in the crowd would have busted out megaphones and started drowning out the speaker.

[GenosseGeneral]

What makes many (not all, mind you) protesters in the East war criminals is taking hostages at will (those who have registraton in western regions, journalists, international observers, Red Cross volunteers, local pro-Ukrainian activists, sometimes ordinary people - miners, for example), holding hostages in Slovyansk SBU building (and other suchlike places), maltreating (to put it mildly) them, murdering them at will, shooting those apparently peaceful people who don't stop at checkpoints (a whole family was killed thus, a girl of 10 survived and is currently at hospital), shooting clergy (an orthodox priest - Moscow patriarchy, by the way - who came to a checkpoint to remonstrate), shooting people in their homes (a woman in Slovyansk went out to her balcony and was shot by a sniper - some say she tried to make a photo from the balcony). I may not even mention looting car saloons, bank robberies and the like.
Well, I'm ready for "we don't believe you". You might as well not. But most of what I report is getting corroborated later by the sources you trust. "Most" because something is not reported at all. Perhaps it is considered too insignificant to be reported, such as many people here wonder about little attention paid to Odessa or Mariupol in western media. Individal casualties (like the ones I mentioned) are mostly ignored by them. Usually I wait until something leaks out and is mentioned here, only then I can put in my spoke. Even thus I often get branded a sensationalist.

Just found an article by the German Sueddeutsche about this, although it goes not too much into details. http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/konflikt-in-der-ukraine-schreckensherrschaft-in-der-volksrepublik-donezk-1.1957136

There is indeed widespread lawlessness right now in Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts. Last week another self-defence was formed - by car dealers, to protect their property from looters. Abduction, torture and sometimes murder of activists occured already during Jan/Feb and in Crimea, seems like intimidation is again used, this time to repress pro-Ukrainian voices in the East. I have my doubts, though, that detained separatists are treated in a way Amnesty International would approve.

[Gilrandir]

“You have my answer.”: Nope. Less than 17 % is a ridiculous score and he got it only because 12 candidates. So, comparing actual Nazis in power with a Nazi getting around 17 % and then failed to get representatives in Parliament is just a distraction, a smoke screen of what happens in Ukraine, in your executive that harbours open Nazi.

I, contrary to you, don't deny that Le Pen is a Nazi. I vote against him. And will do against his daughter. I don't try to coulour them as "extreme Nationalist". Nazi they are.

Svoboda got 10.44% which is much less than 17% of Le Pen. Tyagnybok is gonna have around 2-3% (despite the number of candidates almost twice as much - 21). So nazi sentiment in France is (or was is 2007) much more evident than it is now in Ukraine. I have explained the reasons which caused the rise of Svoboda's popularity. What you fail to see behind the smoke screen you put: a democtratic and well-to-do western nation (without any tribulations, corruption, language issue and external threat) brought a nazi into the second round. It doesn't matter what happened next - your country is (or was, I don't know about now) experiencing a strong sympathy to nazis. Here I speak not of their representation in power, but of their popular support. If the latter is there, the former will come.
And as for me, I don't vote against anyone, I vote for someone.

"So, it is your choice whether to trust my reports or not." I don't, when I see how you try to twist stories. You have an agenda, which is your right, but as it is too obvious, you failed to convince me you provide fair information and comments.
I was not addressing you in this post as I know your attitude. And you have my pity: thinking that I communicate here with a purpose to beguile anyone. Instead, I see what you are rubbing in with every comment of yours: who can trust a person from the country where nazis are in the executive? Since you are fond of citing historic figures, I can respond likewise: Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. Or applying that to you: soon you will finish your every post in this thread with "Don't forget that there are nazis at power in Ukraine."

[Gilrandir]

Just found an article by the German Sueddeutsche about this, although it goes not too much into details. http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/konflikt-in-der-ukraine-schreckensherrschaft-in-der-volksrepublik-donezk-1.1957136

There is indeed widespread lawlessness right now in Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts. Last week another self-defence was formed - by car dealers, to protect their property from looters. Abduction, torture and sometimes murder of activists occured already during Jan/Feb and in Crimea, seems like intimidation is again used, this time to repress pro-Ukrainian voices in the East. I have my doubts, though, that detained separatists are treated in a way Amnesty International would approve.
You fail to convince Brenus or (perhaps) Sarmatian. Or you do convince them now since there are no nazis in Bundestag or Bundesrat. Lucky you are! When I spoke of it nobody believed a represenative of a nazi-ridden nation.

[Sarmatian]

The referendum is over and about 89% of people voted in favour.

The question itself was ambiguously phrased - it could be translated as "independence" or "self-reliance". The literal translation would be: "Do you support the Act of self-reliance of Donetsk Peoples' Republic?". It mentions a specific act - is there a text of that act somewhere?

Anyway, It certainly raises the stakes for Kiev. If they continue with "anti-terrorist action", the referendum does provide more legitimacy to Kremlin, if it decides to get involved.

[Gilrandir]

The referendum is over and about 89% of people voted in favour.

Didn't I mention the figure? Still no trust to what I share as I have my "agenda".
I may report on the way the referendum was held... perhaps not. Wait for information from reliable sources.

The question itself was ambiguously phrased - it could be translated as "independence" or "self-reliance". The literal translation would be: "Do you support the Act of self-reliance of Donetsk Peoples' Republic?". It mentions a specific act - is there a text of that act somewhere?

The "officials of DPR" say that now they are authorized to adopt such an act. Isn't it ridiculous to support that which doesn't exist? They also say that they are not going to separate from Ukraine. What on earth was the use of holding referendum?

[Ironside]

The referendum is over and about 89% of people voted in favour.

The question itself was ambiguously phrased - it could be translated as "independence" or "self-reliance". The literal translation would be: "Do you support the Act of self-reliance of Donetsk Peoples' Republic?". It mentions a specific act - is there a text of that act somewhere?

Anyway, It certainly raises the stakes for Kiev. If they continue with "anti-terrorist action", the referendum does provide more legitimacy to Kremlin, if it decides to get involved.

It's also a parody of an election. To show that everything is going on correctly to the journalists, they had the voting boxes transparent and no envelopes. You know, so everyone could see exactly what you voted.

Kremlin will of course consider it legitimate.

[Sarmatian]

The "officials of DPR" say that now they are authorized to adopt such an act. Isn't it ridiculous to support that which doesn't exist? They also say that they are not going to separate from Ukraine. What on earth was the use of holding referendum?

The purpose, I presume, is to put pressure on Kiev, because the official line was that they're dealing with foreign mercenaries and terrorists. The referendum shows that the greater autonomy is indeed the wish of the majority of population, and Russia can use it to demand representatives from the east on the negotiating table.

The legality of it is dubious, I agree. Even with the best of intentions, polling in what is a basically a war zone is bound to be difficult to pull off.


It's also a parody of an election. To show that everything is going on correctly to the journalists, they had the voting boxes transparent and no envelopes. You know, so everyone could see exactly what you voted.

Kremlin will of course consider it legitimate.

So? You fold the piece of paper a few times before putting it in the box. That's how we voted Milosevic out, and that's how elections are done in Serbia all the time. Every single one of them, after Milosevic, was judged free, democratic and transparent according to all relevant international organizations.

I'm also willing to bet that general elections in Ukraine before were done in a similar way.

What kind of protection would an envelope provide against someone who wants to alter the votes after the polling stations have been closed, anyway?

[Husar]

Envelopes are a waste of money and CO2. I've never used an envelope but we don't use transparent boxes here so my vote might just get shredded inside...

[GenosseGeneral]

There are some more serious concerns about the validity of this referendum:

1. The low number of poll stations. Those already indicate, that the turnout stated by the separatists is unlikely.

2. Aged voters' registers. Those used were mostly from 2012, in some places even earlier.

3. No closets for voters. Especially given the fact, that armed separatists are present in a lot of places and do everything to intimidate people opposing them, it is fairly reasonable for people not to show their opposition against the separatists.

4. No proper identification of voters and "voting for family members". In a lot of places, people had not to show any documents in order to vote. ALso voters were allowed to vote for their absent wifes, parents etc.

After all, we can agree, that this referendum and its outcome are in no way legitimate or representative for the whole population of the Donbass.
However, we must not deny, that a large proportion of the local population indeed went there and voted for independence from Kyiv. I think numbers in the range from 20-50 % might be resaonable, taking into consideration the results of earlier polls.
The government in Kyiv is widely not accepted as the legitimte government and with every day of the current status, this worsens. Those citizens, who want to stay in Ukraine are appalled by the fact, that their government is not able to protect them. Many of those , who probably not accept the current government and want a stronger federalization of Ukraine, yet still stay there, might be driven to a more radical opinion by the use of violence and de-facto occupation of their towns by the national guard.
I think there is a myriad of in-between opinions amongst people in Eastern Ukraine, and using only two labels, "Pro-Ukrainian" and "Pro-Russian" does not cover this complexity at all. People maybe cheer for Putin, but still want to stay in Ukraine. They maybe hate their government and oppose the use of military force in their area, but still do not want to become a part of Russia.
More interesting is the question, how this will go on. In my opinion, it is very important for Ukraine to get a) a more legitimate government ASAP by holding the elections in two weeks and b) to start talks with represenatatives of the DPR, preferably not the ones commanding armed gangs of terrorists.

[Sarmatian]

There are some more serious concerns about the validity of this referendum:

1. The low number of poll stations. Those already indicate, that the turnout stated by the separatists is unlikely.

2. Aged voters' registers. Those used were mostly from 2012, in some places even earlier.

3. No closets for voters. Especially given the fact, that armed separatists are present in a lot of places and do everything to intimidate people opposing them, it is fairly reasonable for people not to show their opposition against the separatists.

4. No proper identification of voters and "voting for family members". In a lot of places, people had not to show any documents in order to vote. ALso voters were allowed to vote for their absent wifes, parents etc.

After all, we can agree, that this referendum and its outcome are in no way legitimate or representative for the whole population of the Donbass.
However, we must not deny, that a large proportion of the local population indeed went there and voted for independence from Kyiv. I think numbers in the range from 20-50 % might be resaonable, taking into consideration the results of earlier polls.
The government in Kyiv is widely not accepted as the legitimte government and with every day of the current status, this worsens. Those citizens, who want to stay in Ukraine are appalled by the fact, that their government is not able to protect them. Many of those , who probably not accept the current government and want a stronger federalization of Ukraine, yet still stay there, might be driven to a more radical opinion by the use of violence and de-facto occupation of their towns by the national guard.
I think there is a myriad of in-between opinions amongst people in Eastern Ukraine, and using only two labels, "Pro-Ukrainian" and "Pro-Russian" does not cover this complexity at all. People maybe cheer for Putin, but still want to stay in Ukraine. They maybe hate their government and oppose the use of military force in their area, but still do not want to become a part of Russia.
More interesting is the question, how this will go on. In my opinion, it is very important for Ukraine to get a) a more legitimate government ASAP by holding the elections in two weeks and b) to start talks with represenatatives of the DPR, preferably not the ones commanding armed gangs of terrorists.

Based on opinion polls and other information, I'd say between 30% and 50% of people is for independence.

However, if the question is more autonomy within Ukraine, I'd say 70%+ of people would support it in a heartbeat.

Irregularities aside, it is a clear indication that people in the east want more autonomy and that dialogue must be started. I'd also add that before anything else, Ukrainian army or national guard, I'm not sure what it is anymore, should stop attacking and blockading towns. That should be a priority before a dialogue can start.

[Pannonian]

What it shows is that we (the west) will not have a clear mandate to go in. If we go in, it will be because we are anti-Russia and want to do something to oppose Russia. It won't be because we are pro-anything and want to do something constructive.

[Ironside]

So? You fold the piece of paper a few times before putting it in the box. That's how we voted Milosevic out, and that's how elections are done in Serbia all the time. Every single one of them, after Milosevic, was judged free, democratic and transparent according to all relevant international organizations.

I'm also willing to bet that general elections in Ukraine before were done in a similar way.

What kind of protection would an envelope provide against someone who wants to alter the votes after the polling stations have been closed, anyway?

That's why so few of them did fold anything.

The envelopes are there so that the state can't know how I voted. They know that I voted and how the people in this poll station voted, but they don't know my vote. That's a quite useful cover for retaliation, in particular if there's armed factions involved.

It's not a game breaker, but if that's the parts you show off for the propaganda, that's bad.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Oh look: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27369980

Russia backs the militants and their referendums.

At this point, without UN troops, Ukraine has entered into terminal collapse, I think.

[Pannonian]

Oh look: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27369980

Russia backs the militants and their referendums.

At this point, without UN troops, Ukraine has entered into terminal collapse, I think.

And what do you expect UN troops to do? Go in there without an agreed on mandate and unilaterally impose their set of rules which a significant part of the country they're hosted in won't agree with? Were you a fan of Tony Blair's foreign policy, Iraq and all?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

And what do you expect UN troops to do? Go in there without an agreed on mandate and unilaterally impose their set of rules which a significant part of the country they're hosted in won't agree with? Were you a fan of Tony Blair's foreign policy, Iraq and all?

I would venture that you are both correct. Without a countervailing military force, the course for Ukraine is set. Putting that military force in there, however, would become a decade-long venture that would define itself as it went -- with all of the attendant problems thereunto appertaining.

[Husar]

Oh look: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27369980

Russia backs the militants and their referendums.

:laugh4:


East Ukraine separatists back union with Russia

Russia has called for dialogue and "implementing" the result, but Ukraine and the EU declared the poll illegal.
[...]
Russia has called for dialogue between the militants and Kiev with the participation of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

How exactly do you arrive at the conclusion that Russia backing the separatists at all is somehow new or noteworthy at this point?
Russia has been calling for talks for almost a week now and nothing about that has changed. What also hasn't changed is that Kiev doesn't want to negotiate anything, even Yanukovich was more willing to sit down with the people opposing him than they are now.

I'm not sure what kind of sensation you're trying to present here.

[Pannonian]

I would venture that you are both correct. Without a countervailing military force, the course for Ukraine is set. Putting that military force in there, however, would become a decade-long venture that would define itself as it went -- with all of the attendant problems thereunto appertaining.

And this time, it won't be a fragmenting Yugoslavia or Iraq that the UN/Anglo-American troops would be dealing with, but a country next door to Russia that the Russians would have a reasonable claim to influence in. All the shouts for intervening in Ukraine have no realistic ideas of what we're working towards, but are based solely on what we're working against (Russia).

[Brenus]

“And as for me, I don't vote against anyone, I vote for someone.” :verycool: That is because you don’t have habits of democracy…

“Don't forget that there are nazis at power in Ukraine.” I will certainly not allow you to forget it.

“Svoboda got 10.44% which is much less than 17% of Le Pen.” My point: we didn't have Nazi in government when they represented 17%, you have them when they represent 10.44% (according to you).

“I was not addressing you in this post”: I am really surprised and shocked…

"At this point, without UN troops, Ukraine has entered into terminal collapse, I think." No, according to a German Newspapers (Bild am Sonntag) , 400 US mercenaries are now fighting with the very democratic government of Ukraine.~:)
I wonder if they wear Uniforms?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

And this time, it won't be a fragmenting Yugoslavia or Iraq that the UN/Anglo-American troops would be dealing with, but a country next door to Russia that the Russians would have a reasonable claim to influence in. All the shouts for intervening in Ukraine have no realistic ideas of what we're working towards, but are based solely on what we're working against (Russia).

So you were not of the opinion that "Saddam is bad" was enough justification for Gulf II? Even with the "An Al Queada member once changed planes in Bagdad" add-on?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

:laugh4:




How exactly do you arrive at the conclusion that Russia backing the separatists at all is somehow new or noteworthy at this point?
Russia has been calling for talks for almost a week now and nothing about that has changed. What also hasn't changed is that Kiev doesn't want to negotiate anything, even Yanukovich was more willing to sit down with the people opposing him than they are now.

I'm not sure what kind of sensation you're trying to present here.

Well, over the weekend it was "no, hold the Referendums later" now it's "implement the result."

As these were referendums on independence it would seem Russia now wants those regions independent of Ukraine, and those regions say they want to join Russia - even though 48 hours ago the Kremlin was saying it wasn't the right time to be holding referendums.

the guys in the Kremlin Press Office must has whiplash.

[Husar]

Well, over the weekend it was "no, hold the Referendums later" now it's "implement the result."

As these were referendums on independence it would seem Russia now wants those regions independent of Ukraine, and those regions say they want to join Russia - even though 48 hours ago the Kremlin was saying it wasn't the right time to be holding referendums.

the guys in the Kremlin Press Office must has whiplash.

I could swear that Putin already said about a week ago that once the referendums are done, the results should be implemented.
And now it seems like the pro-russian hardliners have manifested their power in the east to a large degree, what would it look like if these regions were to stay with Ukraine? Should a bunch of violent protesters with a real chance to become presidents of their own banana republics including a militia/army just give up their power and shut up? I find that rather unlikely, should have negotiated earlier instead of treating the concerns of the eastern regions with a higher dose of army.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Let eastern europe surrender to Putin. Western Europe has been the only ones who really understood what liberty was about. Even then, the English are only ones who had the common sense as to how to implement proper governments to protect it.

[Husar]

Let eastern europe surrender to Putin. Western Europe has been the only ones who really understood what liberty was about. Even then, the English are only ones who had the common sense as to how to implement proper governments to protect it.

Yes, sometimes the tree of liberty just has to be watered with the data of innocents.
I do wonder though, how a sense can be common if only the English had it?

[Greyblades]

Hah. If common sense was an english attribute UKip wouldnt be prevelant.

[HopAlongBunny]

Unfortunately, as outside observers we are dependent on "reports".
We are at the mercy of whatever data or communications the factions wish to release.
If I had control of data and communications for Alberta, I could easily make the case that 90% of Albertans wish to be annexed by Newfoundland, Quebec, or Texas; depending on which group of loonies I restricted my collection to.
I treat reports from the Ukraine as seriously as I treat reports from the Flat Earth Society.

[Brenus]

So, we have now a "Kosovo" solution in Crimea (which now look a mild solution comparing with a possible civil war- Crimea, not Kosovo-) and a "Bosnianisation" of Eastern parts of Ukraine (belonging to Ukraine but strong links with Russia). And this is the optimistic view, short off civil war, refugees, ethnic cleansing and others niceties...
Well well well.
So, a part of the usual "Putin is responsible of it" and the "hired" "so-called" and others offensive and misleading vocabulary, does someone has an idea how to resolve this crisis (excluding the bombing campaign usual one which has good perspectives to fail)?

Because the matter is not to know if the results of the consultation are lawful, legitimate or not, but if they are true, at up to which level. Let's say if "only" 20% of the population would be for Independence, the police solution would be a solution. Not easy, but a solution. More than 20%, it starts to be tricky.

The denial and the stigmatisation of what we call the Pro-Russians didn't really addressed the problem. So, what to do to convince these Ukrainian citizens that they are Citizens of Ukraine? Short of batons and baseball bat I mean.

[Viking]

On Russian Cossacks (http://time.com/95898/wolves-hundred-ukraine-russia-cossack/) in Ukraine:


The Wolves' Hundred, a Russian paramilitary force with a dark history, is carrying on the fight in eastern Ukraine in the place of Russian soldiers. TIME interviewed its commander and his men about their motives and links to the Russian state


About a month ago, soon after arriving in eastern Ukraine, a group of Russian paramilitaries known as the Wolves’ Hundred seized an old truck from a local police station and used some spray paint to give it a makeover. They did not remove the blue siren from the roof, as it seemed to lend them an air of authority as they drove around the towns that they control. But on the hood of the black, Russian-made Hunter SUV, they drew their insignia — the snarling head of a wolf in profile.


It was only after the collapse of the Soviet Union that they saw a state-sponsored revival. In 2005, Putin signed a law reinstating the Cossack tradition of service in the Russian armed forces. They were given the right to guard the national frontiers and serve alongside the Russian police and military as an official militia force with government paychecks.



Their aim, as professed by the fighters themselves, is to destroy the state of Ukraine and absorb most, if not all, of it into Russia. “Write this down: There is no such thing as Ukraine,” says Mozhaev, who goes by the nickname Babay, or Bogeyman. “There are only the Russian borderlands, and the fact they became known as Ukraine after the [Bolshevik] Revolution, well, we intend to correct that mistake.”

[Fragony]

Hah. If common sense was an english attribute UKip wouldnt be prevelant.

Only Brittish party that actually does have common sense. I would vote for then in an instant if I could, Nigel Farrage is a boss.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So, we have now a "Kosovo" solution in Crimea (which now look a mild solution comparing with a possible civil war- Crimea, not Kosovo-) and a "Bosnianisation" of Eastern parts of Ukraine (belonging to Ukraine but strong links with Russia). And this is the optimistic view, short off civil war, refugees, ethnic cleansing and others niceties...
Well well well.
So, a part of the usual "Putin is responsible of it" and the "hired" "so-called" and others offensive and misleading vocabulary, does someone has an idea how to resolve this crisis (excluding the bombing campaign usual one which has good perspectives to fail)?

Because the matter is not to know if the results of the consultation are lawful, legitimate or not, but if they are true, at up to which level. Let's say if "only" 20% of the population would be for Independence, the police solution would be a solution. Not easy, but a solution. More than 20%, it starts to be tricky.

The denial and the stigmatisation of what we call the Pro-Russians didn't really addressed the problem. So, what to do to convince these Ukrainian citizens that they are Citizens of Ukraine? Short of batons and baseball bat I mean.

Why are you so obtuse about this? You're smarter than that.

The majority of the current unrest is because of Russia's tacit support of the Rebels, if Russia refused to countenance the breakup of Ukraine the unrest following the political crisis in February would be managable.

Instead, Russia annexed Crimea and moved into an offensives stance on Ukraine's Eastern border. Now Russia deploys Cossacks and probably Spetznaz in Ukraine, and supports independence referendums. Several towns in Dontesk refused to hold the referendum, demonstrating that the region is not homogeneous and currently there is no effective Civil administration.

Deployment of Western troops in large numbers on Ukraine's western border begins to look necessary, war with Russia becomes a real possibility, or we just let Russia annex whatever it wants from Ukraine once the country breaks up.

Given Western unwillingness to act - due to public exhaustion - there will be no military option, at all.

What will happen will be that Russia will expand to take Ukraine's natural resources and its armament factories, the major T-80 production plant was in Ukraine before the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia will want that to enhance their military capacity and they'll be able to supply components like ceramic modules for the armour that Ukraine has been lacking.

The West now needs to move into "damage limitation", buttress as much of the Ukrainian state as possible, use economic guarantees to make Ukraine at least as appealing as Russia for the mildly discontented, and facilitate the evacuation of Ukrainians from Cossack-held areas.

[Sarmatian]

^ This is so full of fail I don't know where to begin.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

^ This is so full of fail I don't know where to begin.

Come back after Russia has dismantled Eastern Ukraine and the bloody, beaten, rump has been absorbed into NATO.

Ultimately, the defining moment was the Russian decision to annex Ukrainian territory before a Presidential Election.

[Pannonian]

Come back after Russia has dismantled Eastern Ukraine and the bloody, beaten, rump has been absorbed into NATO.

Ultimately, the defining moment was the Russian decision to annex Ukrainian territory before a Presidential Election.

Would the Maidan protestors have accepted this elected president, or would they overthrow him again like they did the last one that was elected?

[Gilrandir]

Based on opinion polls and other information, I'd say between 30% and 50% of people is for independence.

The observers (inofficial, of course) claim that in Donetsk region the turn up number was around 33%, in Lugansk region - 24%. The northern half of the latter is an argicultural area (unlike the mining and industrial south) and it stays pro-Ukrainian, allows no separatists on its territory and participated in no referendum.

I'd also add that before anything else, Ukrainian army or national guard, I'm not sure what it is anymore, should stop attacking and blockading towns. That should be a priority before a dialogue can start.
They neither attack nor blockade. They hold Slovayansk under siege (which proves to be not very efficient). Otherwise they watch the roads and man the checkpoints. In Mariupol the National Guard responded to a SOS from the local police attacked by terrorists. After the attack was repulsed it withdrew from the city which is now patrolled by local druzhinniki (a kind of militia). The National Guard (or any other governmental armed forces) don't stay in the towns from which terrorists were evicted (Kramatorsk, for instance). The problem is that when they leave there is no one to keep order as local authorities and police often refuse to resume control being afraid that terrorists will return (and sometimes they do). So as often as not people having weapons (ex-criminals including) wander at will in such towns and take justice (or rather injustice) into their hands.


That's why so few of them did fold anything.

The envelopes are there so that the state can't know how I voted. They know that I voted and how the people in this poll station voted, but they don't know my vote. That's a quite useful cover for retaliation, in particular if there's armed factions involved.

It's not a game breaker, but if that's the parts you show off for the propaganda, that's bad.
In Ukraine, as long as I can remember myself there were no envelopes and the boxes were always transparent.


“And as for me, I don't vote against anyone, I vote for someone.” :verycool: That is because you don’t have habits of democracy…

“Svoboda got 10.44% which is much less than 17% of Le Pen.” My point: we didn't have Nazi in government when they represented 17%, you have them when they represent 10.44% (according to you).

So this is what democracy is about: a party gets a fair percentage of votes and then you just disregard it (and the people who voted for it) forming a government.
As for the percentage according to me, it would be quite easy for you to check (of course, in the sources that don't follow my agenda :batman:).

[Sarmatian]

Come back after Russia has dismantled Eastern Ukraine and the bloody, beaten, rump has been absorbed into NATO.

Ultimately, the defining moment was the Russian decision to annex Ukrainian territory before a Presidential Election.

I'd say the defining moment was when some 100 000 people from Kiev, supported by nationalists from western regions, decided they can use violence to change electoral will of 50 million Ukrainians.

Well, we can agree to disagree.

[Gilrandir]

I'd say the defining moment was when some 100 000 people from Kiev, supported by nationalists from western regions, decided they can use violence to change electoral will of 50 million Ukrainians.

On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine (not all of which were nationalists). And you forgot the abominable nazis and Right Sector. Oh, my bad, it is Brenus who is to keep watch so that we shouldn't forget about them.
And not 50 million Ukrainians voted for Yanukovych. The margin between him and Tymoshenko in the second round was about 3% - 12 481 266 (48,95%) against 11 593 357 (45,47%).

[Pannonian]

On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine (not all of which were nationalists). And you forgot the abominable nazis and Right Sector. Oh, my bad, it is Brenus who is to keep watch so that we shouldn't forget about them.
And not 50 million Ukrainians voted for Yanukovych. The margin between him and Tymoshenko in the second round was about 3% - 12 481 266 (48,95%) against 11 593 357 (45,47%).

Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.

[Sarmatian]

On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine (not all of which were nationalists). And you forgot the abominable nazis and Right Sector. Oh, my bad, it is Brenus who is to keep watch so that we shouldn't forget about them.
And not 50 million Ukrainians voted for Yanukovych. The margin between him and Tymoshenko in the second round was about 3% - 12 481 266 (48,95%) against 11 593 357 (45,47%).

Even if the margin was one single vote, he was still democratically elected by 50 million Ukrainians. That doesn't mean that 50 million of Ukrainians voted for him, it means they were all allowed to cast their vote and after all those that wished to, did, he was the one they elected. Democracy 101.

On the other hand, there were a few hundred thousand people on Maidan, mostly from Kiev and western Ukraine who decided that the entire electoral process is bad because they really don't like Yanukovich.

There was this women in ancient Greece, called Pandora and she found a box... I trust you see where I'm going with this.

[Greyblades]

Only Brittish party that actually does have common sense. I would vote for then in an instant if I could, Nigel Farrage is a boss.

Oh yes, in the midst of an economic downturn a nationalistic party gains traction thanks to a charismatic leader who rails at the restictions imposed by the rest of europe. Oh sure he talks a good talk and he's right about a lot of things but it's hard to ignore the fact that he's backed by a lot of people so extreme the other parties didnt want anything to do with them, and wouldn't be even considered without that leader to hide behind. I am hardly enthused.

Best case scenario is that farage is naiively thinking he can do the good thing while at the same time keeping the rest of his party from turning Britain into greece, he will fail.

[Pannonian]

Oh yes, in the midst of an economic downturn a nationalistic party gains traction thanks to a charismatic leader who rails at the restictions imposed by the rest of europe. Oh sure he talks a good talk and he's right about a lot of things but it's hard to ignore the fact that he's backed by a lot of people so extreme the other parties didnt want anything to do with them, and wouldn't be even considered without that leader to hide behind. I am hardly enthused.

Best case scenario is that farage is naiively thinking he can do the good thing while at the same time keeping the rest of his party from turning Britain into greece, he will fail.

I've received lots of campaign leaflets from UKIP, BNP and other right wing wingnuts. I will vote against them with pleasure in the next election.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.

A classic concern throughout the world. Parliamentary/Representative legislatures seem to work well only where the concept of such has been institutionalized. Otherwise it degenerates to the same-old same-old cliques and warlordism with different trappings.

[Pannonian]

A classic concern throughout the world. Parliamentary/Representative legislatures seem to work well only where the concept of such has been institutionalized. Otherwise it degenerates to the same-old same-old cliques and warlordism with different trappings.

Hence my belief that a belief in the sanctity of democracy is more important than whoever gets into power. Whoever gets elected holds office until the next election. That's the bedrock of any democracy. Tamper with that, and you don't believe in democracy.

[Fragony]

Hence my belief that a belief in the sanctity of democracy is more important than whoever gets into power. Whoever gets elected holds office until the next election. That's the bedrock of any democracy. Tamper with that, and you don't believe in democracy.

Is there are democracy to believe in then? We aren't a democracy anymore. We only have a say in local matters but no country in the EU can overrule the EU. Might seem like we can, but that simply isn't true.

[Viking]

I'd say the defining moment was when some 100 000 people from Kiev, supported by nationalists from western regions, decided they can use violence to change electoral will of 50 million Ukrainians.

Well, we can agree to disagree.

So, if a few thousand anti-Obama protesters turned up outside the White House; a fraction of them violent, we should expect Obama to travel to Seattle and then become impeached by the Congress? Somehow, the focus on the behaviour of the protesters seems a bit misguided when it comes to what happened in Kyiv..

It's the responsibility of the law enforcement to make sure that violence does not threaten basic democratic process. If it is unable to do that, then something somewhere is probably quite messed up.


Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.

It's not too uncommon for controversial issues to force a government out of office. In Ukraine, the controversial issue was European integration.

[Pannonian]

Is there are democracy to believe in then? We aren't a democracy anymore. We only have a say in local matters but no country in the EU can overrule the EU. Might seem like we can, but that simply isn't true.

Well, whatever democracy we have left allows me to vote against these UKIP :daisy:s when the time comes.

[Sarmatian]

So, if a few thousand anti-Obama protesters turned up outside the White House; a fraction of them violent, we should expect Obama to travel to Seattle and then become impeached by the Congress? Somehow, the focus on the behaviour of the protesters seems a bit misguided when it comes to what happened in Kyiv..

It's the responsibility of the law enforcement to make sure that violence does not threaten basic democratic process. If it is unable to do that, then something somewhere is probably quite messed up.


That's a flawed comparison.

It is quite hard to enforce it when you have a collection of the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations cheering the protesters on and enforcing sanctions if you try. In the end, it was solved through a dialogue, early elections agreed, government of national unity in the meantime, constitutional reform... but it wasn't good enough. It had to be a revolution. Well, now they have their revolution and it came back to bite them in the ***

[Viking]

That's a flawed comparison.

It is quite hard to enforce it when you have a collection of the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations cheering the protesters on and enforcing sanctions if you try. In the end, it was solved through a dialogue, early elections agreed, government of national unity in the meantime, constitutional reform... but it wasn't good enough. It had to be a revolution. Well, now they have their revolution and it came back to bite them in the ***

Sanctions and foreigners cheering are irrelevant. In a healthy democracy, violent protesters cannot force a change in government. It's not happening. Quite a few of them would end up in prison instead.

[Sarmatian]

Sanctions and foreigners cheering are irrelevant. In a healthy democracy, violent protesters cannot force a change in government. It's not happening.

If you say so.

[Pannonian]

Sanctions and foreigners cheering are irrelevant. In a healthy democracy, violent protesters cannot force a change in government. It's not happening. Quite a few of them would end up in prison instead.

So why the hell were we funding them, if there were no prospect of anything happening to our benefit in Ukraine? And if things were happening because Ukraine wasn't a healthy democracy, why were we cheering them on rather than help them towards becoming a healthy democracy? Going by your reasoning, western backers were either wasting our money (which deserves formal censure) or exploiting the Ukrainians (which deserves condemnation for its amorality, although I'd be slightly easier with that than the charge of wasting our money).

[Viking]

If you say so.

Look around in the world and tell me when and where it is happening. How do you do it? In a functioning and healthy democracy.

[Sarmatian]

Look around in the world and tell me when and where it is happening. How do you do it? In a functioning and healthy democracy.

According to the same principle, eastern protesters get off the hook,too, because it wouldn't be possible to do what they did in a healthy democracy, and apparently there is nothing wrong with using violence for a political goal in an unhealthy democracy.

[GenosseGeneral]

It's not too uncommon for controversial issues to force a government out of office. In Ukraine, the controversial issue was European integration.

Nope, it was shameless corruption and abuse of power by Yanukovich and his buddies. What then brought hundreds of thousands on the street, was the fear that they could NOT get rid of them in the next election. People began to see this as a real possibility after the Belarus-like, insanely brutal breaking up of the Euromajdan on Nov 30th last year.

Actually I was somewhat surprised by the reaction of Moscow to the appeal by Strelkov towards Russia to lead "peace keepers" into the Donbass. It was rather mild, the Russian ministry of forreign affairs just said, the current conflict should be solved by negotiations between Kyiv, Donetsk and Luhansk.
Still, I do not think the final decision has been made and I can imagine, that there are a lot of different opinions on how to proceed between the various ministries and subdivisions.

Meanwhile, a commander of a national guard battalion asked Ukrainian media to concentrate more on the success of the ATO, "[because] already 54 terrorists have been eliminated" over the course of the fights. That is the kind of situation Ukraine is facing right now, where a good proportion of the country is in open, armed revolt against its government. I guess even from the Kremlin's perspective things have gotten out of hand lately, yet it is hard to say whether this will just strengthen the hardliners.

[Sarmatian]

Nope, it was shameless corruption and abuse of power by Yanukovich and his buddies. What then brought hundreds of thousands on the street, was the fear that they could NOT get rid of them in the next election. People began to see this as a real possibility after the Belarus-like, insanely brutal breaking up of the Euromajdan on Nov 30th last year.


Shameless corruption and abuse of power? Compared to Switzerland, sure. Compared to Ukrainian opposition, no difference at all.

[Brenus]

“The majority of the current unrest is because of Russia's tacit support of the Rebels, if Russia refused to countenance the breakup of Ukraine the unrest following the political crisis in February would be managable.”
You do know that I can easily fixed it for you: “The majority of the current unrest is because of EU/USA tacit support of the Rebels, if EU/USA refused to countenance the putsch in Ukraine the unrest following the political crisis in February would be manageable.” There you go.

“As for the percentage according to me, it would be quite easy for you to check” I don’t question it. It makes the present of Nazi in your executive even worst. You even can tell they are only 2% if you want. Less they are representative of the Ukrainians, more it is difficult for you to justify their presence in the Ukrainian executive (and I don’t say Parliament).

“On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine” and they were not here to have what they’ve got. I presume they wanted a better life (jobs, pensions, schools for the kids etc.) in a united Ukraine and in peace with all their neighbours… They’ve got racist corrupted thugs instead of corrupted thugs.

“abominable Nazis” Funny that, you really think that Nazi are not THAT abominable, do you?

[Viking]

So why the hell were we funding them, if there were no prospect of anything happening to our benefit in Ukraine? And if things were happening because Ukraine wasn't a healthy democracy, why were we cheering them on rather than help them towards becoming a healthy democracy? Going by your reasoning, western backers were either wasting our money (which deserves formal censure) or exploiting the Ukrainians (which deserves condemnation for its amorality, although I'd be slightly easier with that than the charge of wasting our money).

Which specific funding are you talking about now? People have their reasons for cheering/not cheering the Euromaidan protesters; I have mine.

Generally speaking, it's of course possible to view Yanukovych himself as an obstacle (one of many) to a healthier democracy; such that as long as the alternative is better, getting him out of the picture or forcing him to change would benefit Ukrainian democracy. Whether or not this actually is the case is a topic of its own.


According to the same principle, eastern protesters get off the hook,too, because it wouldn't be possible to do what they did in a healthy democracy, and apparently there is nothing wrong with using violence for a political goal in an unhealthy democracy.

That a small number of gunmen is able to take over a number of cities by force does indeed show that something is not as it should be - that much is obvious.

That still doesn't mean that violent protesters anywhere in the world automatically could "get off the hook". What it means is that the system doesn't work.

[Pannonian]

Which specific funding are you talking about now? People have their reasons for cheering/not cheering the Euromaidan protesters; I have mine.

Generally speaking, it's of course possible to view Yanukovych himself as an obstacle (one of many) to a healthier democracy; such that as long as the alternative is better, getting him out of the picture or forcing him to change would benefit Ukrainian democracy. Whether or not this actually is the case is a topic of its own.

The British newspaper The Guardian once ran a campaign against GW Bush for his second term. Those Americans who heard of this said the Brits should shut up and mind their own business. As a Guardian reader, I felt the Americans were entirely correct. If a Norwegian newspaper tried to intervene in British politics, I would not take it kindly.

[Viking]

The British newspaper The Guardian once ran a campaign against GW Bush for his second term. Those Americans who heard of this said the Brits should shut up and mind their own business. As a Guardian reader, I felt the Americans were entirely correct. If a Norwegian newspaper tried to intervene in British politics, I would not take it kindly.

As a principle, it clearly doesn't work because countries can declare war on other countries (GWB is an excellent example here..) - if you are unlucky, your country is next. In that case, the politics of that country clearly is your business.

Morally, it is also dubious. Should we not try to interfere with what goes on in North Korea because it's not our country?

[Pannonian]

As a principle, it clearly doesn't work because countries can declare war on other countries (GWB is an excellent example here..) - if you are unlucky, your country is next. In that case, the politics of that country clearly is your business.

Morally, it is also dubious. Should we not try to interfere with what goes on in North Korea because it's not our country?

If you're willing to put up with the consequences, then go ahead and interfere. In this case, you interfered, but you didn't like the consequences and are crying foul because the other side followed your lead and took it further. You wanted Yanukovich deposed, and he was. Now you should be able to stomach the consequences of seeing Yanukovich deposed and not whine about the game being unfair. No-one forced you to play the game in the first place.

[Fragony]

If you're willing to put up with the consequences, then go ahead and interfere. In this case, you interfered, but you didn't like the consequences and are crying foul because the other side followed your lead and took it further. You wanted Yanukovich deposed, and he was. Now you should be able to stomach the consequences of seeing Yanukovich deposed and not whine about the game being unfair. No-one forced you to play the game in the first place.

What's this then

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rQnXo2HMriQ

Who provoked who?

[Viking]

If you're willing to put up with the consequences, then go ahead and interfere. In this case, you interfered, but you didn't like the consequences and are crying foul because the other side followed your lead and took it further. You wanted Yanukovich deposed, and he was. Now you should be able to stomach the consequences of seeing Yanukovich deposed and not whine about the game being unfair. No-one forced you to play the game in the first place.

I did not condone the use of violence against security forces in Kyiv. In theory and principle, I am all for secessionist referendums; but we have to be sure that they are actually measuring the will of the people rather than being mere propaganda pieces for vocal and eager minorities. I don't suppose I have to create a list of issues with the polls in Crimea and Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

[Fragony]

I did not condone the use of violence against security forces in Kyiv. In theory and principle, I am all for secessionist referendums; but we have to be sure that they are actually measuring the will of the people rather than being mere propaganda pieces for vocal and eager minorities. I don't suppose I have to create a list of issues with the polls in Crimea and Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

Let them have it. It's too dangerous. This is all the doing of some extremily stupid eurocrats who gave Russia a perfect excuse, Russia can't be blamed for making the best out of it, it just works that way. Idiots.

[Gilrandir]

The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy.
I have answered it: the Ukrainian people accepted the result in 2010, but

it was shameless corruption and abuse of power by Yanukovich and his buddies. What then brought hundreds of thousands on the street, was the fear that they could NOT get rid of them in the next election. People began to see this as a real possibility after the Belarus-like, insanely brutal breaking up of the Euromajdan on Nov 30th last year.




“As for the percentage according to me, it would be quite easy for you to check” I don’t question it. It makes the present of Nazi in your executive even worst. You even can tell they are only 2% if you want. Less they are representative of the Ukrainians, more it is difficult for you to justify their presence in the Ukrainian executive (and I don’t say Parliament).

According to the returned constitution, the parties who got the greatest support can form the government.

“On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine” and they were not here to have what they’ve got. I presume they wanted a better life (jobs, pensions, schools for the kids etc.) in a united Ukraine and in peace with all their neighbours… They’ve got racist corrupted thugs instead of corrupted thugs.

Now we have your hatred gathering momentum: you tell us that THE WHOLE new government are nazis and that they are not only nazis but racists as well. What next - a picture of a concentration camp for Russian speakers being built in Donetsk?
Meanwhile in Hungary THE PRIME MINISTER FROM JOBBIK demands autonomy and double citizenship for Hungarians in Transcarpathia. Will we hear any denouncing words about a democratically elected nazi prime minister?

[HoreTore]

If you want to write something IN ALL CAPS, make damned sure it's correct.

Victor Orban is the prime minister of Hungary, and he's the leader of the Fidesz party. All the other ministers are also from Fidesz. Jobbik is not part of the government coalition. While they do offer some support for Fidesz, they remain an opposition party.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That's a flawed comparison.

It is quite hard to enforce it when you have a collection of the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations cheering the protesters on and enforcing sanctions if you try. In the end, it was solved through a dialogue, early elections agreed, government of national unity in the meantime, constitutional reform... but it wasn't good enough. It had to be a revolution. Well, now they have their revolution and it came back to bite them in the ***

It wasn't Maidan that forced the change, it was the people who died at Maidan. The protesters themselves were, all said and done, a more rowdy version of the Occupy movement - the authorities could have just ignored them, but they offended Yanakovych, so Berkut opposed them with violence, and stationed snipers around the Maidan.

What happened on that day in February still isn't clear, but even if it was not government snipers, the prior actions of the government allowed people to believe it was.

Now, in the East we have Cossacks and armed insurrection.

You want to talk about faulty comparisons?

Start with the two Ukrainian protest movements, they share very little in common.

[Husar]

It wasn't Maidan that forced the change, it was the people who died at Maidan. The protesters themselves were, all said and done, a more rowdy version of the Occupy movement - the authorities could have just ignored them, but they offended Yanakovych, so Berkut opposed them with violence, and stationed snipers around the Maidan.

What happened on that day in February still isn't clear, but even if it was not government snipers, the prior actions of the government allowed people to believe it was.

So at first you present something as a fact and then you say it may not be a fact but that doesn't matter apparently since you agree with the outcome. So maybe no Russian speakers were hunted and killed by west-ukrainian neo nazis but the prior actions of the Maidan-movement and -government allowed people to believe it was actually happening. And what now?


Now, in the East we have Cossacks and armed insurrection.

You want to talk about faulty comparisons?

Start with the two Ukrainian protest movements, they share very little in common.

Really?
As for filthy, dirty separatists who want to destroy the country, the pro-western Ukrainians had their own: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukraine-facing-civil-war-lviv-declares-independence-yanukovich-rule-1437092

[Pannonian]

It wasn't Maidan that forced the change, it was the people who died at Maidan. The protesters themselves were, all said and done, a more rowdy version of the Occupy movement - the authorities could have just ignored them, but they offended Yanakovych, so Berkut opposed them with violence, and stationed snipers around the Maidan.

What happened on that day in February still isn't clear, but even if it was not government snipers, the prior actions of the government allowed people to believe it was.

Now, in the East we have Cossacks and armed insurrection.

You want to talk about faulty comparisons?

Start with the two Ukrainian protest movements, they share very little in common.

So those who died at Maidan at the hand of the then Kiev government are martyrs, while those who died in eastern Ukraine at the hands of the now Kiev government are insurrectionists.

Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.
General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies...
General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!

[Brenus]

“Now we have your hatred gathering momentum:” Ma ma ma, it was a figure of speech, a rhetoric effect. Just one small word of difference… *sight*
By the way Nazi equals racist, that is the all point of the ideology (killing Russian, Jews etc).

“it was the people who died at Maidan.” Including the police officers who died of massive wave of heart attacks if you believe that the “people” in Maidan didn’t use weapons. Probably something in their diet in the Cantina…

"If you want to write something IN ALL CAPS, make damned sure it's correct." You are asking too much. Our friend prefers headlines to facts.

[Gilrandir]

If you want to write something IN ALL CAPS, make damned sure it's correct.

Victor Orban is the prime minister of Hungary, and he's the leader of the Fidesz party. All the other ministers are also from Fidesz. Jobbik is not part of the government coalition. While they do offer some support for Fidesz, they remain an opposition party.
My mistake. I'm sorry. That makes Orban's claims reasonable and justified. It a pure coincidence these claims appeared after Jobbik had gotten into the parliament.

[HoreTore]

My mistake. I'm sorry. That makes Orban's claims reasonable and justified. It a pure coincidence these claims appeared after Jobbik had gotten into the parliament.

Fidesz is a conservative party in the same mould as the UK Tories. I will make no excuses for them, as I find conservative politics despicable in general.

Fidesz has their own problems, but they are not nazi's. They are not dictated by Jobbik either, and Jobbik has been in parliament for a long time now. They have little to do with this statement. What you see is simply a typical statement from a European conservative party with an inferiority complex.

[Gilrandir]

“abominable Nazis” Funny that, you really think that Nazi are not THAT abominable, do you?
They are. But (once again) you seem to be disgusted and terrified if Svoboda SAYS something abomonable. So far what they DID was threatening, bullying and law-cancelling (although the latter couldn't have been done with the majority at parliament - including the Party of Regions deputies - supporting them).
Now let's see what was DONE against Maidan protesters, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWkonOkHjoE
miners in Donetsk region
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onV6rwxlgFY
and pro-Ukrainians in Lugansk region.
http://www.vesti.az/news/203312
The separatists admit shooting the whole family
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LprGj1KN9fg
They battered and raped a woman taxi driver who was bringing Ukrainian soldiers cigarettes.
http://news.siteua.org/%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0/539671/%D0%92_%D0%9A%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B0%D 1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8B_%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0 %BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%89%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%83
I say nothing of looting jewelry stores, "borrowing" cars from locals, bullying school principals into letting them open the schools to hold the referendum and so on.
You are ready to pay no attention, condone or even justify all of this because:
1) this is done by no nazis;
2) this is done by those who claim to oppose the nazis.
Whatever crimes Maidan supporters may have done, it was against law enforcement bodies and deputies both of whom were considered to be protecting the Yanukovych regime. The crimes in the east target not (so much) these categories, but ordinary, normal everyday people from the street. Yet you don't mind until the nazi involvement is identified (in which you don't believe).

[Gilrandir]

Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.
Don't take it as a personal insult (I'm sure you won't - as a true Brit you can keep a stiff upper lip), but you and some others make a repetitive mistake: you take the system of coordinates, or the scale of notation, of the country you live in, put this grid onto a (more or less) alien society and expect it to work in a similar way and make similar conclusions.
A couple of years ago (when the Yanukovych regime was in full swing) my wife happened to meet a woman she had studied at the University with. This woman had married a local prosecutor. She was driving a jeep (we won't speculate on how her husband with his monthly salary of 500$ could afford such a car, new apartment and supporting a family with 2 kids). Talking to her my wife found out that she drove it without any driver's license. When she was asked whether she wasn't afraid of any accidents this woman said: "Let others be afraid - my husband is a prosecutor. Every time anything happens he deals with the problem."
Is it a likely story for the UK? Or was it in times of Churchill or Attlee? I don't think so. With a century/ries-long tradition of democracy, justice and law-abidance you can wait for the next elections to change the leader you don't like.
In modern Ukraine politicians who got the power disregarded the interests of people completely trying to stuff their pockets with money as soon and as much as possible. Even so Ukrainians were commonly recognized as a passive and politically apathetic nation prone to take anything lying down and living up to the motto "It is none of my business". They were ready to wait for the next elections, as you put it. The elections came and went, but they brought no improvement. On the contrary, the situation aggravated. Yanukovych took it to the edge. People realized that the next elections would be elections only in name - as they are in Russia or Belarus. We will have an everlasting tyrant much more criminal and corrupt than Lukashenko or Putin without any hope of replacing him. Ukraine became a powder cellar waiting for a match. The match was lit by Yanukovych himself with that UE AA idea of his. The rest you know.

[Pannonian]

Don't take it as a personal insult (I'm sure you won't - as a true Brit you can keep a stiff upper lip), but you and some others make a repetitive mistake: you take the system of coordinates, or the scale of notation, of the country you live in, put this grid onto a (more or less) alien society and expect it to work in a similar way and make similar conclusions.
A couple of years ago (when the Yanukovych regime was in full swing) my wife happened to meet a woman she had studied at the University with. This woman had married a local prosecutor. She was driving a jeep (we won't speculate on how her husband with his monthly salary of 500$ could afford such a car, new apartment and supporting a family with 2 kids). Talking to her my wife found out that she drove it without any driver's license. When she was asked whether she wasn't afraid of any accidents this woman said: "Let others be afraid - my husband is a prosecutor. Every time anything happens he deals with the problem."
Is it a likely story for the UK? Or was it in times of Churchill or Attlee? I don't think so. With a century/ries-long tradition of democracy, justice and law-abidance you can wait for the next elections to change the leader you don't like.
In modern Ukraine politicians who got the power disregarded the interests of people completely trying to stuff their pockets with money as soon and as much as possible. Even so Ukrainians were commonly recognized as a passive and politically apathetic nation prone to take anything lying down and living up to the motto "It is none of my business". They were ready to wait for the next elections, as you put it. The elections came and went, but they brought no improvement. On the contrary, the situation aggravated. Yanukovych took it to the edge. People realized that the next elections would be elections only in name - as they are in Russia or Belarus. We will have an everlasting tyrant much more criminal and corrupt than Lukashenko or Putin without any hope of replacing him. Ukraine became a powder cellar waiting for a match. The match was lit by Yanukovych himself with that UE AA idea of his. The rest you know.

"Were you still up for Portillo?"

You won't get that reference, but I'm talking about the 1997 UK general election. People got fed up with the widespread corruption of the Conservatives, not to mention their 18 continuous years in power, and organised themselves to vote them out in the general election. They researched each constituency to see who was the most likely candidate to beat the standing Tory, and voted for their likely candidate. The result: without such a massive swing in the popular as would explain the parliamentary results, the Conservatives were voted out en masse, with Labour achieving by far the biggest majority they've ever had, and the Lib Dems doubling their number of MPs and more. Also the first independent MP since pre-WWII, with both main opposition parties standing down for that election, and a 30k swing against a notoriously corrupt Tory MP (a constituency typically involves 35-40k votes).

All of that within the existing electoral rules.

I believed in democracy, I worked within the bounds of my democracy, and I got the result I wanted because enough people agreed with me. There have been elections since then where I didn't get the result I want, as more people disagreed with me than agreed with me. I'm ok with that too. That's democracy.

[Slyspy]

So those who died at Maidan at the hand of the then Kiev government are martyrs, while those who died in eastern Ukraine at the hands of the now Kiev government are insurrectionists

Given that the first were seeking a change in government while the latter are seeking a change in nationaltiy I think the difference is not that surprising.

[Pannonian]

Given that the first were seeking a change in government while the latter are seeking a change in nationaltiy I think the difference is not that surprising.

Would that argument excuse us sending in the Army against the Scots?

[Pannonian]

Given that the first were seeking a change in government while the latter are seeking a change in nationaltiy I think the difference is not that surprising.

Would that argument excuse us sending in the Army against the Scots?

[Gilrandir]

"Were you still up for Portillo?"

You won't get that reference, but I'm talking about the 1997 UK general election. People got fed up with the widespread corruption of the Conservatives, not to mention their 18 continuous years in power, and organised themselves to vote them out in the general election. They researched each constituency to see who was the most likely candidate to beat the standing Tory, and voted for their likely candidate. The result: without such a massive swing in the popular as would explain the parliamentary results, the Conservatives were voted out en masse, with Labour achieving by far the biggest majority they've ever had, and the Lib Dems doubling their number of MPs and more. Also the first independent MP since pre-WWII, with both main opposition parties standing down for that election, and a 30k swing against a notoriously corrupt Tory MP (a constituency typically involves 35-40k votes).

All of that within the existing electoral rules.

I believed in democracy, I worked within the bounds of my democracy, and I got the result I wanted because enough people agreed with me. There have been elections since then where I didn't get the result I want, as more people disagreed with me than agreed with me. I'm ok with that too. That's democracy.
I don't challenge what you believe. I just tried to explain that the democracy you write about takes awhile to build and Ukraine has been less than a quarter of a century on this way. I think when it was that old in GB you had similar problems.

[Pannonian]

I don't challenge what you believe. I just tried to explain that the democracy you write about takes awhile to build and Ukraine has been less than a quarter of a century on this way. I think when it was that old in GB you had similar problems.

You should have organised yourself better, rather than give up democracy altogether. You said earlier on that Yanukovich had a clear majority in the last election. According to just about every democracy in the world, this gave him the right to form a government. You overthrew the will of the people just because you disagreed with whom they voted in. And all because you couldn't wait another year to make your wishes felt in the next election.

I believe in honest, upright government. But I believe in democracy more. If you give up the latter, there is no argument to be made for the former.

[HoreTore]

You should have organised yourself better, rather than give up democracy altogether. You said earlier on that Yanukovich had a clear majority in the last election. According to just about every democracy in the world, this gave him the right to form a government. You overthrew the will of the people just because you disagreed with whom they voted in. And all because you couldn't wait another year to make your wishes felt in the next election.

I believe in honest, upright government. But I believe in democracy more. If you give up the latter, there is no argument to be made for the former.

This ignores the fundamental nature of an emerging democracy.

The trick in an emerging democracy isn't to get people elected. That part is easy. The trick is to un-elect them. See Egypt.

In western countries, our executives and legislatives are kept in firm control by a very powerful bureaucracy. Emerging democracies do not have this, usually because the existing bureaucracy formed an integral part of the power structure of the old dictatorship. Nowhere is that more evident than in the USSR.

As Ukraine lacks the unelected guarantuee for a continued democracy our countries have, they have to settle for the next best thing: overthrow the government when it starts showing sign of autocracy.

That's just what happened in Ukraine last november. Yanu's brutal crackdown on a completely peaceful protest sparked extremely well-founded fears that he would be less inclined to step down in a future election loss.

Thus, the only action available to the Ukrainian people who do not desire a second dictatorship in 25 years was to overthrow the bastard.



That the old wannabe dictator has strong support in parts of the country is just as unsurprising as their willingness to use violence to oppose a democratic process.

[HoreTore]

Would that argument excuse us sending in the Army against the Scots?

If the Scots disbanded the democratic process for their claim to sovereignty, and turned to violence instead:

Yes.

A clear yes.

[Sarmatian]

I don't challenge what you believe. I just tried to explain that the democracy you write about takes awhile to build and Ukraine has been less than a quarter of a century on this way. I think when it was that old in GB you had similar problems.

You won't help advance it by resetting all progress every few years.

2015 (or 2014) elections would have been monitored by every major international organization. If they reported fraud, no one would question the right of the people to enforce the electoral result. Even those who would, would have to keep their mouth shut in public and grumble behind closed doors.

[Pannonian]

If the Scots disbanded the democratic process for their claim to sovereignty, and turned to violence instead:

Yes.

A clear yes.

A pro-union supporter was beaten up a couple of months back by some pro-independence supporters, for being pro-union (she put up posters in her office and wore a badge). A pro-independence spokesperson directed the blame at the person who was beaten up (IIRC for speaking out of turn). There are numerous anecdotal accounts of prejudice and hatred against English, and even against known pro-union individuals. All condoned or even encouraged by the party currently governing Scotland.

And despite that, I'll still respect the result of their referendum later this year. Because I believe in democracy.

[Sarmatian]

If the Scots disbanded the democratic process for their claim to sovereignty, and turned to violence instead:

Yes.

A clear yes.

Does it also apply to those who disband the democratic process and perform a violent revolution or only against those wishing to secede/more autonomy?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Hence my belief that a belief in the sanctity of democracy is more important than whoever gets into power. Whoever gets elected holds office until the next election. That's the bedrock of any democracy. Tamper with that, and you don't believe in democracy.

I have listened to this argument -- which you have made at several points in this now aged thread -- and I have not disagreed. I am not averse to a recall vote - though I believe such recall vote procedures must be in place PRIOR to the election of a given candidate to be used to recall them and that the standard for recall needs to be pretty high (not 50% +1 vote).

To the everlasting glory of the British Empire, it is England and her former colonies who have, in most cases, the longest tenure in actually practicing democracy and institutionalizing it. Even in these countries, power still distorts the perfect rule of law -- but in many other places the rule of law functions only by Mao's definition.

[Gilrandir]

You won't help advance it by resetting all progress every few years.

Yet I think that current events in Ukraine didn't reset all the progress. First of all, having been democratically elected Yanukovych undemoctratically and arbitrarily usurped the powers not granted at his accession. He thus forswore democracy and by his further behavior showed that he would stick at naught to hold on to what he had grabbed. Secondly, and more importantly to my mind, powers-that-be started to realize that they can't go on flagrantly abusing power indefinitely and even a most patient nation can finally make them foot the bill. These lessons of budding democracy will (hopefully) teach those who are about to step in. I guess the birth of every democracy had growing pains of similar kind. Think of the USA or your Serbia.

[HoreTore]

Does it also apply to those who disband the democratic process and perform a violent revolution or only against those wishing to secede/more autonomy?

See my post above the one you responded to.


A pro-union supporter was beaten up a couple of months back by some pro-independence supporters, for being pro-union (she put up posters in her office and wore a badge). A pro-independence spokesperson directed the blame at the person who was beaten up (IIRC for speaking out of turn). There are numerous anecdotal accounts of prejudice and hatred against English, and even against known pro-union individuals. All condoned or even encouraged by the party currently governing Scotland.

And despite that, I'll still respect the result of their referendum later this year. Because I believe in democracy.

A random fight =/= parading around with AK47's, threatening war.

[Sarmatian]

Yet I think that current events in Ukraine didn't reset all the progress. First of all, having been democratically elected Yanukovych undemoctratically and arbitrarily usurped the powers not granted at his accession. He thus forswore democracy and by his further behavior showed that he would stick at naught to hold on to what he had grabbed. Secondly, and more importantly to my mind, powers-that-be started to realize that they can't go on flagrantly abusing power indefinitely and even a most patient nation can finally make them foot the bill. These lessons of budding democracy will (hopefully) teach those who are about to step in. I guess the birth of every democracy had growing pains of similar kind. Think of the USA or your Serbia.

My Serbia isn't any better than Ukraine. Corruption, poverty, thuggery, abuse of power... 15 years of democracy didn't do anything to change that. Armpit of Europe and that's insulting armpits.

We've had free elections since, that's true. Media switched from backing Milosevic to backing the one who pays the most, a saint or a scumbag, it doesn't matter.

In that regard I sympathise with you, and understand most of the issues, but the sad truth is that you've expelled one corrupt thug and installed several corrupt thugs in his place. Even if Russia didn't get involved, nothing would have changed for the better in the life of ordinary people. In reality, you've marched and suffered for a change in foreign policy.

Even in the best case scenario, you would have been worse off.
In the worst case scenario, you won't have a country any more. You're somewhere in between now, and it can go in either direction.

The idiots you brought to power proved to be total amateurs (which shouldn't be surprising considering their resumes) who had no idea how to deal with issues in your own country and how to deal with an angry power next door.

You were defeated in October. It'll just take a few months more to sink in. And that is what makes me sad. An excercise in futility.


See my post above the one you responded to.


He hasn't been in power for a single term. By all indications, it wasn't any worse in terms of corruption or thuggery than previous was. If a revolution is justified whenever we feel someone might abuse power, that's no better than putting in jail someone who might commit a crime.

If he lost the elections and refused to step down, bring him down, I agree.
If he cheats, bring him.

But bringing him down because he might do that, that's a coup, nothing to do with democracy.

[Gilrandir]

In that regard I sympathise with you, and understand most of the issues, but the sad truth is that you've expelled one corrupt thug and installed several corrupt thugs in his place. Even if Russia didn't get involved, nothing would have changed for the better in the life of ordinary people. In reality, you've marched and suffered for a change in foreign policy.

People were so fed up with one corrupt thug that they idealistically wanted to have non-corrupt ones but those we have now are better for a change. And they are interrim corrupt thugs, as you remember.


The idiots you brought to power proved to be total amateurs (which shouldn't be surprising considering their resumes) who had no idea how to deal with issues in your own country and how to deal with an angry power next door.

If you want a total change of faces up there you are to bring the new faces in. It means amateurs as pros are not new but old ones. But the current government has both the new and the old, so at least some resumes seemed reliable.

You were defeated in October. It'll just take a few months more to sink in. And that is what makes me sad. An excercise in futility.

I don't get what you mean by October, yet I don't agree on futilty. You sound like Homer Simpson: "Bart, you tried hard and you failed. Conclusion: never try again."
As I have explained, there are some lessons to learn both for politicians and average people.



He hasn't been in power for a single term. By all indications, it wasn't any worse in terms of corruption or thuggery than previous was. If a revolution is justified whenever we feel someone might abuse power, that's no better than putting in jail someone who might commit a crime.

If you mean Yanukovych then he was. No other president, no matter how corrupt he may have been, didn't arouse such aversion that could lead to violence.


If he lost the elections and refused to step down, bring him down, I agree.
If he cheats, bring him.
But bringing him down because he might do that, that's a coup, nothing to do with democracy.
In 2004, one of my colleagues said: "Choosing between Yushchenko and Yanukovych I opt for the former, because if we don't like him we will be able to change him for someone else. Not so Yanukovych". So, don't you ever underestimate the power of the dark side of the Force, padawan.

[Pannonian]

If you mean Yanukovych then he was. No other president, no matter how corrupt he may have been, didn't arouse such aversion that could lead to violence.

Really? You have your post-Yanukovich government that you wanted, and a significant portion of your country is engaged in an open armed struggle against it. If violent aversion against a politician is the bar you set legitimacy against, the current Kiev government is the least legitimate one you've had since the fall of the USSR.

[Gilrandir]

Really? You have your post-Yanukovich government that you wanted, and a significant portion of your country is engaged in an open armed struggle against it. If violent aversion against a politician is the bar you set legitimacy against, the current Kiev government is the least legitimate one you've had since the fall of the USSR.
First of all, it is not the government we wanted. It is a compromise and iterrim government.
Second of all, I spoke of presidents, and we have none so far.
Third of all, violent aversion was grounded on some facts, it was not just a whim of a group of wilful protesters who started to hate him out of the blue.
Fourth of all, please, don't start this legitimacy thing all over again or I will... I will do something ghastly... The thing Sarmatian hates most of all: I will STOP USING MULTI-QUOTE.

[HoreTore]

By all indications, it wasn't any worse in terms of corruption or thuggery than previous was.

Yes, it was. He chose to employ brutal thugs to break up a peaceful demonstration back in November.

That justifies his overthrow.


The chance of overthrowing a leader who is powerful enough to refuse to step down after losing an election is slim. Not getting him before it comes to that is a major gamble, as that's one of the two most common ways a dictator appears(along with the slightly more common military coup).

Batista, Ne Win, Nasser, etc. The peoples of Cuba, Burma, Egypt and many more all employed a "let's just wait and see if he steps down"-attitude. It did not work out well.

[Pannonian]

First of all, it is not the government we wanted. It is a compromise and iterrim government.
Second of all, I spoke of presidents, and we have none so far.
Third of all, violent aversion was grounded on some facts, it was not just a whim of a group of wilful protesters who started to hate him out of the blue.
Fourth of all, please, don't start this legitimacy thing all over again or I will... I will do something ghastly... The thing Sarmatian hates most of all: I will STOP USING MULTI-QUOTE.

So this isn't the government you wanted. Fantastic! Why don't you go to the Maidan again and protest again until you get the government you want? After all, that's your modus operandi, is it not?

[Beskar]

So this isn't the government you wanted. Fantastic! Why don't you go to the Maidan again and protest again until you get the government you want? After all, that's your modus operandi, is it not?

They are going to hold elections, and the people will vote the government they want.

[Pannonian]

They are going to hold elections, and the people will vote the government they want.

They were going to hold elections anyway just like the last time, and the people will vote in the government they want just like the last time. What will happen if a group doesn't like the government who's been voted in? The Maidan protesters have already set the precedent that people can force the overthrow of a government outside the electoral process if they want. What if protesters in another city demand that the newly elected government step down because they don't like the elected government? Would they have the same weight as the protesters did in Kiev?

[Sarmatian]

Yes, it was. He chose to employ brutal thugs to break up a peaceful demonstration back in November.

That justifies his overthrow.

This is my personal favourite video of peaceful protesters.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhbzhrfY1Lo


The chance of overthrowing a leader who is powerful enough to refuse to step down after losing an election is slim. Not getting him before it comes to that is a major gamble, as that's one of the two most common ways a dictator appears(along with the slightly more common military coup).

Batista, Ne Win, Nasser, etc. The peoples of Cuba, Burma, Egypt and many more all employed a "let's just wait and see if he steps down"-attitude. It did not work out well.


That's a ridiculous concept to me. I can not support an action contrary to democratic principles because a president might refuse to step down.

It worked in Serbia, btw. Milosevic refused to recognize the results of the elections in September 2000, people forced him to.


They were going to hold elections anyway just like the last time, and the people will vote in the government they want just like the last time. What will happen if a group doesn't like the government who's been voted in? The Maidan protesters have already set the precedent that people can force the overthrow of a government outside the electoral process if they want. What if protesters in another city demand that the newly elected government step down because they don't like the elected government? Would they have the same weight as the protesters did in Kiev?

A fair solution would be to move the capital to Donetsk now, so they can overthrow a government they don't like.

[HoreTore]

This is my personal favourite video of peaceful protesters.

....And the date of this video is?

[Beskar]

They were going to hold elections anyway just like the last time, and the people will vote in the government they want just like the last time. What will happen if a group doesn't like the government who's been voted in? The Maidan protesters have already set the precedent that people can force the overthrow of a government outside the electoral process if they want. What if protesters in another city demand that the newly elected government step down because they don't like the elected government? Would they have the same weight as the protesters did in Kiev?

This happened for months and months, it wasn't a Saturday afternoon. There is a clear difference. If unrest was at such a high-level, there should have been new elections getting sorted.

[Pannonian]

This happened for months and months, it wasn't a Saturday afternoon. There is a clear difference. If unrest was at such a high-level, there should have been new elections getting sorted.

So all protesters need to do to overthrow a government they don't like is last for months? Like I said, the Maidan protesters were utterly idiotic to show Russia the lead which the latter are in a far better position to capitalise on than western backers of the Maidan. However anyone wants to argue it, the Maidan protesters demonstrated that ordinary rules of democracy need not apply in Ukraine, that focused campaigning can override democracy. That's the game they played of their own accord, without anyone forcing them to, and that's the game that they'll have to play from now on, until new rules are settled on by all sides.

[Sarmatian]

....And the date of this video is?

What's the difference?

If your point is who started the violence, protesters did. Twice.


This happened for months and months, it wasn't a Saturday afternoon. There is a clear difference. If unrest was at such a high-level, there should have been new elections getting sorted.

And early elections later in the year were agreed, complete with a constitutional reform and a government of national unity (ie. representing all relevant parties), as a safeguard that one side couldn't interfere with electoral process.

[Beskar]

So all protesters need to do to overthrow a government they don't like is last for months? Like I said, the Maidan protesters were utterly idiotic to show Russia the lead which the latter are in a far better position to capitalise on than western backers of the Maidan. However anyone wants to argue it, the Maidan protesters demonstrated that ordinary rules of democracy need not apply in Ukraine, that focused campaigning can override democracy. That's the game they played of their own accord, without anyone forcing them to, and that's the game that they'll have to play from now on, until new rules are settled on by all sides.

Actually, it is a breakdown of democracy if people feel they need to be camped outside Downing Street and the Houses of Parliament none-stop for over a long course. It is a perfect expression of democracy that the government is doing something wrong.

The fact for this to occur, is that people would have to take time off work, pay to be able to food and provide for themselves, be resident in subpar conditions. No one in their right mind would ever choose to do it unless things have simply gotten so bad, we are inherently lazy and people go everyday putting on a false smile just to get through the day without making it harder for themselves.

But if such a widespread and mass protest occurred. lasting for months and months, and you are saying the government should tell them to shut-up and go home, I wonder what your version of democracy is. :shrug:


And early elections later in the year were agreed, complete with a constitutional reform and a government of national unity (ie. representing all relevant parties), as a safeguard that one side couldn't interfere with electoral process.

That is a good way to handle it, the government also appealed a few of the laws and was in full-withdrawal over some of the big mistakes they made. It is unfortunate it blew up into the mess it did with the things like snipers shooting and the populace getting whipped up in a fury.

After that with the president standing down, the government should be a place holder for elections are the earliest convenience so the people of Ukraine ended up with a proper governing body again.

[HoreTore]

What's the difference?

So what's the date then?

[Brenus]

“You are ready to pay no attention, condone or even justify all of this because:” Your problem is you are not paying attention on what others said or wrote.
My position in the Ukrainian affairs, and I think it is the one of those qualified as Pro-Putin, is I don’t support the land grabbing, or foreign intervention others than sympathies or similar. I don’t mind the cookies nor do I mind moral help.
What I am against is the propaganda and the outrages of some when Russia did exactly what the West did. I am against the black and white good pro-EU and bad Pro-Russians.
Violence and putsch are ok in one side, not on the other.
I am fed-up of the hypocrisy.
In case of Ukraine, start yourself to consider the “Pro-Russians” as Ukrainians citizens and stop to the denying, then perhaps, perhaps as things are going really wrong, you might be able to live in the same country. But all the vocabulary you use, all the pseudo-news you dispatch, shows that not your intention.

[Sarmatian]

So what's the date then?

I have no idea. Presumably sometime in 2014.

What's the difference and what's your point?



That is a good way to handle it, the government also appealed a few of the laws and was in full-withdrawal over some of the big mistakes they made. It is unfortunate it blew up into the mess it did with the things like snipers shooting and the populace getting whipped up in a fury.

After that with the president standing down, the government should be a place holder for elections are the earliest convenience so the people of Ukraine ended up with a proper governing body again.

President "stood down" after violent seizure of government building and impeached after parliament members were threatened and bullied in the parliament and in their homes.

[HoreTore]

I have no idea. Presumably sometime in 2014.

What's the difference and what's your point?

In other words, a minimum of one month after Yanu sent Berkut into the Maidan to bash skulls.

In other words, Yanukovich started this whole thing when he revealed his autocratic face.

[Sarmatian]

In other words, a minimum of one month after Yanu sent Berkut into the Maidan to bash skulls.

In other words, Yanukovich started this whole thing when he revealed his autocratic face.

That's not true. The first act of violence was protesters attacking the police cordon.

In other words, they started this whole thing when they've switched from peaceful demonstrators to violent activists attacking the police and trying to take over civil institutions.

And then they did it a second time after a deal was made.

In fact, when they got for a government response was actually mild in comparison what they would have got if they tried to pull the same thing of in USA, UK, France or Russia.

[HoreTore]

That's not true. The first act of violence was protesters attacking the police cordon.

Okay, and what date was this?

[Sarmatian]

Okay, and what date was this?

I can't remember, it's been some time between now and then. I think it was November. That of course doesn't have to be true, I wasn't there, I just read about it. I'm pretty sure there are conflicting reports as to "who threw the first punch".

It doesn't really matter, though. Anything that happened before February 18 was rather mild and reversible.

EDIT:

Actually, a wiki timeline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_November_2013_attack_on_protesters#30_November_attack_on_protesters) says that first protesters appeared on the night of 21st November (some 2000) and a larger rally was held on 24th in which a small group attempted to storm government building.


After a small group of protesters attempted to storm the Government Building, police used tear gas to disperse them.[17] Protesters also used tear gas and some fire crackers (according to police protesters were first to use them).[18] According to the General Prosecutor's Office, more than 400 people were injured from 24 November to 13 December, including 200 policemen and 18 students.[19]

The roughly similar number of injured police officers and protesters in the first several weeks should also give you a clue.

[Pannonian]

Actually, it is a breakdown of democracy if people feel they need to be camped outside Downing Street and the Houses of Parliament none-stop for over a long course. It is a perfect expression of democracy that the government is doing something wrong.

The fact for this to occur, is that people would have to take time off work, pay to be able to food and provide for themselves, be resident in subpar conditions. No one in their right mind would ever choose to do it unless things have simply gotten so bad, we are inherently lazy and people go everyday putting on a false smile just to get through the day without making it harder for themselves.

But if such a widespread and mass protest occurred. lasting for months and months, and you are saying the government should tell them to shut-up and go home, I wonder what your version of democracy is. :shrug:

Put a Ukrainian spin to it. Russia picks a border city to run a protest from. Funds protesters to camp in protest inside said city, keeping them fed, watered, paid, etc. Does the elected government step down because of this manifest lack of confidence in the government?