Ukraine-in-a-thread [Archive] - Page 12

Gilrandir

06-10-2014, 16:01

“Victory in euroelections 2014. And victory it is when a party gets more votes than the others, 50% or no 50%.” Nope. A victory is democracy is when your party comes to power. In the 50’s & 60's the Communist Party was the most numerous and powerful party in France but never won, because the rest was against them. Same for the FN. Even 30 % will still leave 70 % against. So the FN became the first party in the European elections, but is still not a winner. That is the rule of democracy, you see… 70 % trumps 30 %.

The electoral system which functions in Ukraine is proportional. You may get as few votes as you like (say, 20%) but if you get more than your rivals (say, 19%, 16% and 12%) you win the elections. It is a strange thing for me to count not the votes you get but the votes you didn't. Perhaps these are peculiarities of the French electoral system.

“Le Pen's runner up spot in 2007.” Sorry, I might become blind… Did Le Pen became French President and did his party won Parliamentary elections? Without me knowing it?

OK, my final message regarding Le Pen (now I believe he is a fascist - to give me so much trouble is inhuman). Le Pen DIDN'T WIN ANYTHING BUT HE WAS THE SECOND BEST CANDIDATE FOr PRESIDENCY IN 2007. Conclusion: NAZISM HAD A FAIR SUPPORT IN FRANCE IN 2007 and HAS NOW (see the results of Euroelections). Period.

“I don't know what organization is named after a nazi.”: “One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” You’ve got your answer: Joseph Goebbels.

No, I have YOUR answer. Since you don't trust me I may as well doubt (especially after your Tyagnybok photo and the story you accompanied it with) credibility of the quotation you gave. So, the source, please.

“It was the attitude you advocated regarding having an army at peace time, remember?” Err, when and where?

Immediately under my "remember?" I'm gonna save you trouble finding it and will repeat your post again, so read your lips:

“With NATO reinforcing its detachments in Baltic states, Poland and Romania I would say no.” Did war is upon Russia? No. So useless deployment…

And still, nothing proving these are mercenaries.

I have to repeat my question: what proof would make you believe in the presence of mercenaries?

Crossing a border to a safe heaven is a common practice in guerrilla war fair, and that is why, if a political solution is not found, this can go for a long time.

Terrorists always cross the border FROM Russia INTO Ukraine, not vice versa (unless dead in the caskets). Since when a war zone has become a safer place then Russian Rostov region?

“Then the Ukrainan democracy is what you ask for: the coalition of Udar, Batkivshchina and Svoboda was formed which nominated the government. It is logical that the latter included representatives of all three parties.” So the actual Ukrainian includes Nazi. I never deny this, that the Ukrainian Parties formed a coalition with Nazi. I am against it, but I can’t deny the reality of the Ukrainian political life.

It is not only the reality it is THE LAW OF DEMOCRACY - to let the winners divide the power among themselves. If you don't like it, well, follow Pannonian's advice: wait for the next elections.

but your entire argument is that the West has some secret fucking global agenda to screw Russia now and forever
According to Brenus, everybody has agenda: Nato, US, Europe, even me (you too, I suspect), but not Putin - he is acting on a hunch thus is entitled to do whatever he likes.

The minority in the east won't last long without Russian support once the new president's assault begins, and the majority of Ukrainians are ready to exact the kind of vengeance on the East
The latter is wrong. Ukrainians all over the country (even and especially in the West) show their readiness to harbor refugees from the East (which they do) and sympathize with those who are left in the war zone. It is the terrorists (most of whom are aliens, as I have remarked many times) that unlikely to expect any mercy.

And by the way, I don’t dispute the presence of Russian Special Forces in Ukraine.

Is it much better than mercenaries?

Russia got what she could save (from Russian’s point of view), had never the intention to invade Ukraine (with what?) and succeeded to neutralize it.
At the beginning of spring I saw an interview of Illarionov, up to 2008 an advisor of Putin. He claimed that Russia as early as 2004 had a plan of invading Ukraine, biting away Crimea and the South East . They started to draw it after the Orange revolution when Putin realized that he Ukraine may get out of hand.

Husar

06-10-2014, 17:04

Oh I seeeee.

Those were NATO snipers on that cold day in February - because that was the turning point, then the ex-President abdicated his job and fled to Russia.

Implicit behind the analysis you posted is the suggestion that Russia has been even more involved than is currently apparent, or that NATO has been doing "wet work" instead.

That's not what I read in the article or heard in the interviews in the videos.

What I read and saw is that US involvement is far greater than none and that US NGOs in the area are working together with the local groups that supported the Maidan movement, possibly also in more violent ways.

Brenus

06-10-2014, 19:00

“The only evidence you can point to comes in the form of hot gas out your backside.” : Ohhh, you believe that everyone has the some process of thinking than you… If this process is not alien to you of course…
Anyway, you are out of the equation…

“OK, my final message regarding Le Pen (now I believe he is a fascist - to give me so much trouble is inhuman). Le Pen DIDN'T WIN ANYTHING BUT HE WAS THE SECOND BEST CANDIDATE FOr PRESIDENCY IN 2007. Conclusion: NAZISM HAD A FAIR SUPPORT IN FRANCE IN 2007 and HAS NOW (see the results of Euroelections). Period.” See, I agree: The failure of the successive Governments to heard the vox populis (not sure of my Latin) opened the door to the Extreme-right. Not really the place to develop, but the lack of backbones and the absolute disdain from the leading political Class for the result of vote (i.e. European Treaty signed after a Referendum where the French had said no) just push the populations to either abstention (my case until recently) either vote for a “nuisance” party.

“So, the source, please.” No prob: http://www.dailykos.com/

“With NATO reinforcing its detachments in Baltic states, Poland and Romania I would say no.” Did war is upon Russia? No. So useless deployment…” This is nothing about having an army in peace time, this is about futile gesticulation and useless deployment: Do you know how many planes France sent there: the big amount of 2. And they belong to the Escadrille Normandie-Niemen, which received the Order of the Red Banner and the Order of Alexander Nevky for their participation along the Red Army to the fight again Nazism. The stupidity and the incompetence of the French Government at his peak!!!

“I have to repeat my question: what proof would make you believe in the presence of mercenaries?” I gave the answer to our flatulent friend: Name of hiring companies, premises, you know, business cards, if I want to join (figures of speech). When I left the army, I was ask to go for mercenaries, there are coded advertising in specialised newspapers (as mercenaries are illegal in France), so this kind of things. Then of course, a bench of prisoners waiting for a fair court hearing would be nice as well…

“Terrorists always cross the border FROM Russia INTO Ukraine, not vice versa (unless dead in the caskets). Since when a war zone has become a safer place then Russian Rostov region? “ You really think it is a one-way ticket? All fighters, terrorists or not, need a safe place to rest, train, re-arm. The Algerians had Tunisia, the Viet-minh had China (I speak of the French anti-guerrilla campaign). So, whoever are the ones (terrorist, freedom -fighters, separatists etc.) the Ukrainian Army will have to fight, if it is the choice made, will have to face a elusive enemy, who will choose when and where to hit, then retreat in Russia proper.

“According to Brenus, everybody has agenda: Nato, US, Europe, even me (you too, I suspect), but not Putin - he is acting on a hunch thus is entitled to do whatever he likes.” You are right, I really have to make effort for you to understand. Putin has an agenda: Protect Russia. As others leaders, he is not nice. As others leaders, he use force, special operations. And yes, I have goals (or agenda). Don’t you? You don’t make plan for your life, you know, holidays, trip to visit family, pension… I do. Sorry if I am the only one.

“2008” Really? What an opportunist, telling the West what they want to heard…

Gilrandir

06-10-2014, 19:52

“So, the source, please.” No prob: http://www.dailykos.com/

Followed the link, couldn't find the article.

“I have to repeat my question: what proof would make you believe in the presence of mercenaries?” I gave the answer to our flatulent friend: Name of hiring companies, premises, you know, business cards, if I want to join (figures of speech). When I left the army, I was ask to go for mercenaries, there are coded advertising in specialised newspapers (as mercenaries are illegal in France), so this kind of things. Then of course, a bench of prisoners waiting for a fair court hearing would be nice as well…

Mercenaries are illegal elsewhere, but you want me to give to you some informationn you admit to be secret and encoded? Russia is sure to take care it stays secert. What I may offer is a kind of investigation held by a journalist who went to an army enlistment center in Russia saying that he wants to participate in the war in Donbas. They told him (off the record, of course) that this was not a place to come for it but gave him an address where he should apply and will be given all the information (including the payment conditions). He called and agreed on a meeting but didn't dare to come. To me it is evident that hiring mercenaries is performed and Russian authorities are fully aware and sympathetic (to put it mildly) to that. I don't doubt they (or Yanukovych, not unlikely) finance it.

“According to Brenus, everybody has agenda: Nato, US, Europe, even me (you too, I suspect), but not Putin - he is acting on a hunch thus is entitled to do whatever he likes.” You are right, I really have to make effort for you to understand. Putin has an agenda: Protect Russia. As others leaders, he is not nice. As others leaders, he use force, special operations.

His goal is to make Russia into super power again and restore the USSR in its former borders. As he put it, Russia is wherever Russian is spoken and understood.

And yes, I have goals (or agenda). Don’t you? You don’t make plan for your life, you know, holidays, trip to visit family, pension… I do. Sorry if I am the only one.

You had explained my agenda as a secret purpose I pursue in communication at this forum. Yet it doesn't go any further than informing people outside Ukraine of events here from an insider. Among the latest news: Strelok deposed Ponomarev from his position of the "popular mayor of Slovyansk" for his "unseemly activity".

Brenus

06-10-2014, 20:16

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/02/1281474/-Ukraine-Ethnic-Purity-Extremists-Neo-Nazis-threaten-Russians-Jews-non-whites: I am not good at this...

Looks like it works...

"You had explained my agenda as a secret purpose I pursue in communication at this forum." Never. I said you had an agenda, a pro-Ukrainian Government one. Never said it was secret, and I even said I understand it. I said it biased (and still) your judgment in term of politic to follow. Not I think you have any power, in thinking in term of debating the situation. No secret purpose, an honest biased opinion, pro-Ukrainian, anti-Putin one.

"you admit to be secret and encoded?" Not in that sense of secret. You buy a periodic selling weapons, or militaria, when you find advert for "security Agents needed in whatever country" you understand what they are recruiting. Blackwater was a mercenaries Agency employed in Iraq.
And apparently in Ukraine:
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/05/19/363309/us-blackwater-mercenaries-in-ukraine/

Brenus

06-11-2014, 07:42

“Oh THAT'S your evidence? Blackwater?” Err, evidence of what? I never claim US mercenaries in Ukraine. I gave an example of Mercenaries Company … I am the one who want evidence, if you read what I wrote.:laugh4:

“Blackwater, in many ways, was under more restrictions than regular Soldiers.” That is still make them mercenaries… Dear, dear, you are the one twisting semantics, you twisting reality as well.

“that is an ignorant comparison.” That you acknowledge just there “they were there (in Iraq) as part of something that was most certainly a recognized and formal military effort”. So not being a part of Regular soldiers but part of the Military effort, that what is required in being mercenaries, no?

“And that article is crap in terms of supporting your argument” I made NO argument: again, you answer to a claim you imagine I did. Start to become a pattern.

“You believe that there is still a cold war going on, and that The West should frame all of its decisions in Eastern Europe on the idea that Russia is a special nation whom the rules do not apply to” Misunderstandings here: It is not what I think that matters, but what Russia thinks and see. And what I try (apparently in vain) is to show that what Russia see the installation of Missiles bases in Poland, Czech Republic and other military bases all around her territory as a threat. You might consider it is spreading democracy, they might consider it as a political move to surround them with soldiers coming from an aggressive military Alliance that didn’t stop to start illegal wars…
When you see or at least try to grasp their point of view, well, it helps in understanding who does what and why.
It doesn’t make it right; it doesn’t make it legal or even needed. But these are facts that can’t be ignored.
And claiming to be the Right ones in a struggle between Good and Evil doesn’t help in the understanding of the global strategy.

I will not comment on the rant of Good USA and Bad and Weak Europe, but following your “explanation”, how Europe did benefit of the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq (for the last one, can I remind you that all French Companies were banned to any contracts with Iraqis Companies because France as sovereign nation didn’t follow order to go to battle on lies, deceptions and more lies from the US and UK administrations)? I am very curious of your answer(s) and looking forward for it (them).

“Not us, because Europe will soon be economically irrelevant for us” Hmm, probably why USA and Europe are negotiating a Transatlantic Treaty nowadays… Now, you convince me of the pertinence of all your fine and accurate analyses.:2thumbsup:

“Oh, the USA seems to prefer the Kiev government, so the Russians must be totally justified in breaking every international law ever in order to exert their will against Ukriane... please.. give me a break” Well, you find perfectly acceptable to break international laws when Governments were hostile to US or even only looking hostile… Of course, silly me, it is in the PAST, it doesn’t count…
Yeah, you should take a break…

Gilrandir

06-11-2014, 16:38

"you admit to be secret and encoded?" Not in that sense of secret. You buy a periodic selling weapons, or militaria, when you find advert for "security Agents needed in whatever country" you understand what they are recruiting.
Apparently I can't go to Russia, buy a magazine there and scan it for the ads you mentioned. So I base my judgement on logics and (partly) on Putin's words:
Are there any foreigners fighting in Donbas? Yes.
Are they regular Russian army? Putin: No.
Conclusion: in the world where money walks this spells mercenaries.

I said you had an agenda, a pro-Ukrainian Government one. Never said it was secret, and I even said I understand it. I said it biased (and still) your judgment in term of politic to follow. Not I think you have any power, in thinking in term of debating the situation. No secret purpose, an honest biased opinion, pro-Ukrainian, anti-Putin one.

I calit not agenda but patriotism.

Brenus

06-11-2014, 19:00

"Conclusion: in the world where money walks this spells mercenaries." Conclusion based on preconceptions. We have French Muslim fighting against Assad and they don't do it for money but by ideology...

Seamus Fermanagh

06-11-2014, 19:15

Mercenaries and Foreign volunteers have been part of most conflicts -- usually without any policy efforts on the part of the parent governments of the volunteers. For every Condor Legion effort, there is a Lincoln Brigade AND an Eagle Squadron. For every Lawrence there is a Lafayette or an Elphinstone.

You need more than simple participation by persons of X entity to make a clear case of policy enactment.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-11-2014, 22:27

That's not what I read in the article or heard in the interviews in the videos.

What I read and saw is that US involvement is far greater than none and that US NGOs in the area are working together with the local groups that supported the Maidan movement, possibly also in more violent ways.

NATO = US Bloc.

The Maidan protest was like the occupy protest, it could have been ignored but the sitting Ukrainian President's ego, and probably Putin, demanded something be done - eventually snipers killed 60-odd people - then the president fled and was impeached - then Russia invaded and annexed Crimea.

The West may have been involved in promoting the Maidan, but the Maidan was not responsible for this crisis - so.

Pannonian

06-11-2014, 23:02

Husar

06-12-2014, 00:06

NATO = US Bloc.

The Maidan protest was like the occupy protest, it could have been ignored but the sitting Ukrainian President's ego, and probably Putin, demanded something be done - eventually snipers killed 60-odd people - then the president fled and was impeached - then Russia invaded and annexed Crimea.

The West may have been involved in promoting the Maidan, but the Maidan was not responsible for this crisis - so.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26248275
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/03/timeline-ukraine-political-crisis-201431143722854652.html

It wasn't as simple as you say, there was quite a bit of back and forth with a lot of the opposition ignoring the deal the opposition leaders struck with Yanukovich.

That the president and Putin demanded something be done is just a guess. A lot of the violence began around the time Yanukovich was finally willing to negotiate and protesters chose not to negotiate with him and ignore those who did.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-12-2014, 01:09

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26248275
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/03/timeline-ukraine-political-crisis-201431143722854652.html

It wasn't as simple as you say, there was quite a bit of back and forth with a lot of the opposition ignoring the deal the opposition leaders struck with Yanukovich.

That the president and Putin demanded something be done is just a guess. A lot of the violence began around the time Yanukovich was finally willing to negotiate and protesters chose not to negotiate with him and ignore those who did.

20 February: Kiev sees its worst day of violence for almost 70 years. At least 88 people are killed in 48 hours. Video shows uniformed snipers firing at protesters holding makeshift shields.

21 February: President Yanukovych signs compromise deal with opposition leaders.

22 February:

President Yanukovych disappears
Protesters take control of presidential administration buildings
Parliament votes to remove president from power with elections set for 25 May
Mr Yanukovych appears on TV to denounce "coup"
His arch-rival Yulia Tymoshenko is freed from jail

That's the important bit.

Bear in mind, these protesters have been penned in since November, then there's 48 of bloodshed and Yanukovych sees his position is untenable after that, he finally (quite suddenly, actually) capitulates to the key demand of early elections - but of course by that time the protesters would rather have his head on a spike - then he flees.

Who were those snipers, is the question, because they were the catalyst for everything.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-12-2014, 01:10

What would you call the response of the current Ukrainian government in eastern Ukraine?

Civil War - but that's a different issue. Yanakovych was facing a street protest - the incoming president faces armed insurrection which has already killed, what, 50 Ukrainian service personnel and several civil servants?

Gilrandir

06-12-2014, 14:11

Husar

06-12-2014, 17:49

20 February: Kiev sees its worst day of violence for almost 70 years. At least 88 people are killed in 48 hours. Video shows uniformed snipers firing at protesters holding makeshift shields.

21 February: President Yanukovych signs compromise deal with opposition leaders.

22 February:

President Yanukovych disappears
Protesters take control of presidential administration buildings
Parliament votes to remove president from power with elections set for 25 May
Mr Yanukovych appears on TV to denounce "coup"
His arch-rival Yulia Tymoshenko is freed from jail

That's the important bit.

Bear in mind, these protesters have been penned in since November, then there's 48 of bloodshed and Yanukovych sees his position is untenable after that, he finally (quite suddenly, actually) capitulates to the key demand of early elections - but of course by that time the protesters would rather have his head on a spike - then he flees.

Who were those snipers, is the question, because they were the catalyst for everything.

And here are the bits you keep leaving out:

14-16 February: All 234 protesters arrested since December are released. Kiev city hall, occupied since 1 December, is abandoned by demonstrators, along with other public buildings in regions.

18 February: Clashes erupt, with reasons unclear: 18 dead, including seven police officers, and hundreds more wounded. Some 25,000 protesters are encircled in Independence Square.

The question is why the government released protesters to ease the tensions and then "clashes erupt for unclear reasons". Now you will probably say that Yanukovich wanted to make them feel safe and then kill them all and I could claim that some parties didn't want tensions to ease and stifled up more violent protesters to escalate the situation. But we couldn't objectively say who would be right, could we? If seven police officers get killed, that's not really a non-violent protest.

Pannonian

06-12-2014, 18:40

And here are the bits you keep leaving out:

The question is why the government released protesters to ease the tensions and then "clashes erupt for unclear reasons". Now you will probably say that Yanukovich wanted to make them feel safe and then kill them all and I could claim that some parties didn't want tensions to ease and stifled up more violent protesters to escalate the situation. But we couldn't objectively say who would be right, could we? If seven police officers get killed, that's not really a non-violent protest.

That's why I don't get the disgust with which PVC describes the crackdown by the previous government, while he excuses the crackdown by the current government. I'm minded of the difference between their "filthy hun weasels fighting their dirty underhand war" and our "brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty".

Personally, I didn't have much of a problem with what the previous government did, and I don't have much of a problem with what the current government is doing. Their country, their government, not my business. It's amusing though to see the ethical contortions people get into as they try to mark a difference between "us" and "them", when both sides are doing the same things.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-13-2014, 07:58

Gilrandir

06-13-2014, 12:28

It's a good question - but it's not material to the invasion of Crimea or the Civil War.

Ukraine showed restraint for some time, great restraint, all it got them was jeering from the sidelines.
Meanwhile 3 tanks from Russia have crossed into Ukraine and entered Donetsk by way of Makeyevka.
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/2126831-rossiyskie_tanki_s_kamazami_voshli_v_donetsk_video_kolonny.htm
They are T-70 or T-72 which are not on the Ukrainian army roster.
Now Husar will tell us that:
1) anyone can drive them;
2) driving them as easy as driving a car;
3) anyone can operate them in a battle as they come with a manual;
4) Russia is not the source where the separatists obtained them.
And Brenus will add:
1) see how inventive can rioting populaces be if they have a noble cause to fight for - they assembled them out of lawnmowers and coffee-grinders;
2) Putin is saving all he can by sending volunteer (non-mercenary) lawnmowers and coffe-grinders to Donetsk.

Sarmatian

06-13-2014, 12:47

Trust me, when Russia gets seriously involved, you'll know.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-13-2014, 13:56

Trust me, when Russia gets seriously involved, you'll know.

Or maybe they are doing "war on the cheap" like so many other Great Powers in the past....(and present?).

Gilrandir

06-13-2014, 14:16

Trust me, when Russia gets seriously involved, you'll know.
So we should make light of it and stop finding fault with Russia. These are trifles that deserve just a passing glance before we get back to discussing really important issue: how many nazis are there in the Ukrainian government.

Sarmatian

06-13-2014, 14:39

The really important issue is that at least 80% of the people in the region is unhappy with the putsch in Kiev and would like to have their rights better protected. They didn't secede and they have been calling for a dialogue with the central government but the central government has been refusing it consistently and is at the moment interested only in how much heavy weaponry it can bring against its own citizens.

Clean up your own house before trying to find dirt in other.

Pannonian

06-13-2014, 14:54

Viking

06-13-2014, 15:15

The front lines are starting to get an interesting composition..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsXEzYOO5Zs

One special forces group, fighting separatists in Eastern Ukraine, is bringing together many self-declared neo-fascists.

The volunteers joining the so-called Azov battalion, raised by Ukraine's interior ministry, includes men from Russia, Sweden and Italy who believe in national socialism.

Al Jazeera's David Chater reports from Mariupol.

(source) (http://www.aljazeera.com/video/europe/2014/06/neo-fascists-train-fight-ukrainian-rebels-20146916493486659.html)

So, neo-fascists who presumably hate the EU are indirectly fighting for the pro-EU bloc. There's also a Russian dude interviewed in that video; wonder what his motives are.

----

An interesting (and perhaps realistic) video:

Wearing a Ukrainian scarf in Moskva vs. a wearing huge Russian flag in Kyiv:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcXXgrD1Ye8#t=21

At least the current Ukrainian government isn't using snipers against its own citizens. Tanks and attack helicopters are much more civilised.

You don't have much argument if you have to resort to referring to gunmen as citizens rather than insurgents.

GenosseGeneral

06-13-2014, 16:07

Well, they have been interesting from the beginning. On the separatist side fight Chechnyans and Russian "cossacks" - nationalist militants, many of whom have fought in the Russian war in Chechnya.

Oh and yeah, those "battaillons" deployed by the Ukrainian government (or which deploy themselves - with some it is hard to tell) are also more than shady. They claim to get their weaponry and equipment as donations from concerned citizens.
This whole mess becomes muddier every single day and it is really hard to verify any information.
Just the latest mysteries:
1. Has the Ukrainian army used phosphorous shells against Slovyansk? -> the alleged phosphour shells turned out to be illuminating shells.
2. Is the Ukrainian army systematically shelling Slovyansk and even using Grad launchers?
3. Where do the 2-4 tanks come from, which turned up on the separatist side yesterday? Some claim they are from Russia, some say stolen from a Ukrainian army base, some say taken from a Ukrainian base in Crimea.

Husar

06-13-2014, 17:19

Brenus

06-13-2014, 18:55

Meanwhile 3 tanks from Russia have crossed into Ukraine and entered Donetsk by way of Makeyevka.
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/...eo_kolonny.htm
They are T-70 or T-72 which are not on the Ukrainian army roster.
Now Husar will tell us that:
1) anyone can drive them;
2) driving them as easy as driving a car;
3) anyone can operate them in a battle as they come with a manual;
4) Russia is not the source where the separatists obtained them.
And Brenus will add:
1) see how inventive can rioting populaces be if they have a noble cause to fight for - they assembled them out of lawnmowers and coffee-grinders;
2) Putin is saving all he can by sending volunteer (non-mercenary) lawnmowers and coffe-grinders to Donetsk.

3 TANKS… It is all the Rokososvky’s offensive all again… Now, T70 and T72 were modern in the err… 70’s and in the roster of the Red Army. Ukraine was part of the Red Army, so it is highly probable that the Ukrainian Reserve have some in warehouse. So you miss again…
Then yes, 1) anyone can drive a tank (I did) and 2) yes it is easier than a car, as you don’t have to be really careful of other vehicles.
Apparently your 3 tanks spearing head of Zhukov’s Army (I change the name of the Russian General, you did notice) didn’t engage (I can’t watch the link, my anti-virus blocks it). So again one of claim falls flat.
And even if they would, I do think Ukraine as Russia maintained conscription, so you will find former trained soldiers in a rebellion. Even now, at 55, I can probably still trained conscripts in basic tanks (APC in my case) combat tactics, which, to be fair, are not THAT complex…
And answer yet to your 4th “evidence”.

You apparently ignored that Tanks were invented from agriculture Tractors (big lawnmowers, if you prefer) but why should the insurgents built tanks when they just to help themselves in the Ukrainian Army warehouses… Cheaper and time saving…
And I didn’t get your comment about Putin saving blab la bla. Please explain the joke, I really didn’t get it

Sarmatian

06-13-2014, 19:14

T70 is a ww2 tank, out of use for a very long time.

T72 is still in use, both in Ukraine and in Russia, so it's another fail.

Husar

06-13-2014, 19:43

Well, this little cutie pie is a T-70: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-70

As for the T-72, there have been many versions and the T-90 is essentially a T-72BU.
I simply can't tell from the video which version is driving around there and neither do I know who exactly owns which version as I'm just a tank fanboy who knows dangerous half-truths and not a military expert/spy. I can clearly tell that they use ERA-blocks so they are obviously modernized T-72s but which version exactly I do not know, could be somewhere from the late 80ies or newer.

And yes, Ukraine has >1000 of them stored according to wikipedia, but the truck ahead of them has a Russian flag, not what I'd expect Ukrainian government forces to use. The reason they can't be Russian though is that the third one is missing a track cover in the front and we all know that Russia only sends super-equipped soldiers with perfect equipment into the city. It's obviously a covert NATO operation using a Russian flag to commit war crimes and blame Russia afterwards. Or Putin is finally coming to deliver us with the three worst tanks he could find in his arsenal.

Viking

06-13-2014, 20:23

Or Putin is finally coming to deliver us with the three worst tanks he could find in his arsenal.

Don't cast your tanks before swine, as the saying goes.

Brenus

06-13-2014, 21:29

“And no matter how much Brenus would like you all to think they're easy to drive and operate, its worth noting that in Russia the T-72 has a fierce reputation for removing your limbs if you're not careful around the auto-loader.” True, we had autoloader in on the AMX 13 Canon, it is not as much a risk. No accident reported in my regiment, during the 4 years I served. Every year we trained hundred conscripts in using them… It doesn’t take genius, no disrespect intended, to maneuver a tank. After, all is about training…

"T70 is a ww2 tank, out of use for a very long time" I am :shame:... Too fast to answer, copy and paste betrayed me...:shame::shame:

Sarmatian

06-13-2014, 21:59

Anyway, I'm reserving judgement. We all know Russia is trickling supplies and men into eastern Ukraine, but all of these reports of the T-72s are based on cell-phone footage that can't be verified.

They could have came from Russia, but the fact remains that there are more than a thousand of them in Ukraine.

In regards to training, we must not forget that most Ukrainian men, especially those over 35 years old, have had military training for at least a year and many of those in tank warfare.

Pannonian

06-13-2014, 22:26

One might say the AMX-13 was designed with a bit more regard for human limbs than the Soviet-built T-72. It isn't hard to drive a tank--we threw infantrymen in the driver's hatch all the time, but when it comes to the finer points of tank warfare you need someone who is intimately involved with the Machine on a daily basis. They need to know how to fix obscure little things that break, and they need to be able to operate all of the stations in a rudimentary fashion in case your gunner or TC get popped, and so on. Granted, I only worked on M1A1s and M1A2s, but I was a professional tanker for 5 years. You don't just throw a bunch of under-trained crunchies in there. The Abrams could kill an unwary crew-member with ease, and it didn't even have an Auto-Loader.

Anyway, I'm reserving judgement. We all know Russia is trickling supplies and men into eastern Ukraine, but all of these reports of the T-72s are based on cell-phone footage that can't be verified.

Isn't it sufficient to think positive thoughts and play loud music from loudspeakers?

Brenus

06-13-2014, 22:38

“Granted, I only worked on M1A1s and M1A2s, but I was a professional tanker for 5 years.” I was Mechanized Infantry, so working from APC AMX 13 then AMX 10. Working with tanks (and in) is a dangerous business that is for sure. Heat, munition, fuel and lack of space don’t go very well.
13177
I just made the remark because Gilrandir seems to think that military work is highly technical and takes years to master (e.g. story about mines field and AA missiles). In fact, most of the armies build very simple weapons as it is not engineers who are fighting in the front line. In 2 months, basic training, 4 months to specialise (a tank driver was 3 weeks in a training camp), and gunners were 1 months basic, then training.
The main problem was training as Company (5 platoons in France, at that time) or even as Regiment (5 Companies), as it cost a lot and need a huge logistic in travelling by train to the training Centres. In 5 years, I participated in 2 open-land training at the Army level, including the entire Division.
But, to succeed to have 3 tank trained crews don’t need the personnel and personal help of Putin.

"Isn't it sufficient to think positive thoughts and play loud music from loudspeakers?"
Hardly
13178

Pannonian

06-13-2014, 22:45

"Isn't it sufficient to think positive thoughts and play loud music from loudspeakers?"
Hardly

I think you'll find that I'm right (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuStsFW4EmQ).

Brenus

06-13-2014, 22:54

“In 5 years on active duty, I spent almost as much time in the field as not.” Oh, we were on the field, but at the platoon level. Let’s say 2 weeks a month (average) then “special” training, practicing infantry combat (special combat villages for Urban Fight) and every 3 months (average) company training (Mechanised Infantry). And of course, walkies, a lot of them by night, and Commando March (at least 2 a month) (that is 8 km in less than 1 hours, weapon and back pack at 15 kg. so you half run and half walk).
13179
13180
13181
13182
13183

Cost me a divorce...

Brenus

06-14-2014, 09:21

"What the hell is that tight-rope thing in your second pic?"
It is this:
13188

Commando Training Camp No1 Montlouis (for Mountain Combat) and Colioure (Sea OPS).

13189

The obstacles are design to challenge the will and control fear. And to make your life a hell (4 hours of sleep every 2 days , and not compulsory) per week, plus close-combat, explosive, and various entertainments as you being a prisoner and escaping...

I am very proud to be able to wear it (5 on the 17 original platoon at the start).
13190

Gilrandir

06-14-2014, 14:03

Personally, I didn't have much of a problem with what the previous government did, and I don't have much of a problem with what the current government is doing. Their country, their government, not my business.
This is a really reasonable thing to do: visiting the thread and saying your are not interested in the subject. It is like going shopping having no desire and need to buy anything.

The really important issue is that at least 80% of the people in the region is unhappy with the putsch in Kiev and would like to have their rights better protected. They didn't secede and they have been calling for a dialogue with the central government but the central government has been refusing it consistently and is at the moment interested only in how much heavy weaponry it can bring against its own citizens.

I have been explaining a couple of times what I'm going to repeat now. To talk to someone you must find someone with authority to talk to. Who is (or are) these someone in Donbas? Who are those that can claim they represent the popular sentiment of Donbas? Yanukovych and his posse? Evidently not. The party of Regions deputies? They are despised over there now and enjoy no support being considered traitors and/or corrupt traitors. Moreover, some of them are accused of financial and spiritual support of terrorists. Strelkov and Gubarev and Pushilin? They don't want any talks bent on fighting (and I don't think they should be talked to). Local administration heads and city mayors? Some of them escaped the region, others were supplanted (or kidnapped and held captive) by DPR and LPR "popular mayors", so none of them have support or powers to exercise control over districts and cities. Local deputies? See above. The real authorities in Donbas now are big enterprise CEO backed by oligarchs who own them (mostly Akhmetov). But while they are the people respected and valued by the locals, they can't always control the situation thus be responsible for keeping their side of agreement if any is reached. Sensible conclusion: hold local elections asap to discuss any topics further with the winners. Elections can't be held in war conditions. So first one should mop up terrorists to make the elections possible.

Clean up your own house before trying to find dirt in other.
So you can discuss the shortcomings of corruption in Ukraine only after you terminate it in Serbia? Evidently your corrupt politicians have all been already hanged (I dare not think by what).

Ukraine was part of the Red Army, so it is highly probable that the Ukrainian Reserve have some in warehouse. So you miss again…

Not really. Since Soviet times most army garrisons to be deployed in Ukraine (especially tanks) were and are to be found in western parts of the country to intercept any attack from Nato. In the east the only army detachments are now border guards and internal troops. So those tanks can't have been hijacked locally.

And it is not about 3 tanks posing a serious threat (two of them have been already destroyed) as many people here considered my information to signify. It is about heavy weaponry transported across the border which couldn't have been done without Russian authorities acquiescence or (more probably) active assistance.

And I didn’t get your comment about Putin saving blab la bla. Please explain the joke, I really didn’t get it
If I were you I would say something like "Of course you don't". But I won't.
I'm glad you took it as a joke, though. It was meant to criticize your belief that Putin only reacts and saves without having any pre-conceived strategy or plan. I have already mentioned Putin's adviser's disclosures of his strategy Ukraine-wise. His plan now is to keep the conflict smouldering with all the consequences it might incur. And I must admit he wins a move (or more) in his game so far, and it is mosly because he has had the plan developed for quite a time and followed it.
The problem was (and still is) that Ukraine never considered Russia as a prospective adversary and Ukrainain defense ministry and SBU have been (and perhaps still are) controlled and inundated by Russian agents (including at the top level, like two last defense ministers and two last SBU chiefs were ex-Russian citizens). FSB felt at ease working inside Ukrainian secret services as advisors and aides. So they were "deep in the counsels" and indeed directed much of what was done by SBU.

Pannonian

06-14-2014, 14:23

This is a really reasonable thing to do: visiting the thread and saying your are not interested in the subject. It is like going shopping having no desire and need to buy anything.

If only our decisionmakers at the time were as disinterested as I was in the internal goings on in Iraq. The situation would likely have been no worse than it is now, and we wouldn't have wasted billions in achieving nothing of use. That was my argument at the time. Why is it any business of ours? Why should we make it our business? After the eff up that was Iraq, the same arguments apply for Ukraine.

Gilrandir

06-14-2014, 15:29

If only our decisionmakers at the time were as disinterested as I was in the internal goings on in Iraq. The situation would likely have been no worse than it is now, and we wouldn't have wasted billions in achieving nothing of use. That was my argument at the time. Why is it any business of ours? Why should we make it our business?

You can copy paste this message every time there is any discussion since it seems your attitude to the events outside GB. Let me quote your compatriot (JRRT) again: The wide world is all about you: you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out.

After the eff up that was Iraq, the same arguments apply for Ukraine.
As they did for Czechoslovakia and Austria in 1938, but somehow it was different for Poland in 1939.

Pannonian

06-14-2014, 17:48

You can copy paste this message every time there is any discussion since it seems your attitude to the events outside GB. Let me quote your compatriot (JRRT) again: The wide world is all about you: you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out.

As they did for Czechoslovakia and Austria in 1938, but somehow it was different for Poland in 1939.

Yeah, right. A Ukrainian lecturing a Brit on the evils of WW2. Remind me again, what did your lot do during that conflict? Both pro-Russians and anti-Russians worked with the Nazis at different times during that war, didn't you? As for Britain then and Britain now, the difference is, as Anglophobes never tire of reminding us, we no longer have an empire. We're just another nation state within the EU, and if net contributions to the EU funds is any guide, we're outsized by Germany, France and Italy.

Brenus

06-14-2014, 17:54

“It was meant to criticize your belief that Putin only reacts and saves without having any pre-conceived strategy or plan.” And in what this 3 tanks prove me wrong? Even if you are right that these 3 tanks were de facto sent by Putin it is not a proof of a plan. If the tanks (and more than 3) would have appear immediately at the start of the insurrection manned by the hordes of Chechens mercenaries all very well equipped and trained (as Putin is plotting all this for now more than 5 years), that would be a proof.
As it stands, it is the worst long-planned operation. To find one worst, you have to go to Narvik.
But it is a good reaction, and unexpected move (Create the unexpected, in Dune, for the one who read the series. The original one, not the pale followers)!

“His plan now is to keep the conflict smouldering” Hey, MY plan, I explained this few threads above… Remember, neutralisation of Ukraine, when some here were just telling Putin near the gob Ukraine with millions of soldiers and heavy tanks just ready to do this…

“Ukrainain defense ministry and SBU have been (and perhaps still are) controlled and inundated by Russian agents (including at the top level, like two last defense ministers and two last SBU chiefs were ex-Russian citizens). “ The good 5th Column is back…
Where is your Pasonaria, by the way? Did she left the country?

Gilrandir

06-14-2014, 19:44

Yeah, right. A Ukrainian lecturing a Brit on the evils of WW2. Remind me again, what did your lot do during that conflict? Both pro-Russians and anti-Russians worked with the Nazis at different times during that war, didn't you?
In January 1941 the population of Ukraine was 41,5 mln and in 1945 - 27,4 mln. My lot bore the brunt of German assault and lost 14 mln people doing that (8 of them died, the rest taken away to Germany, Syberia, Middle Asia and so on). Your lot was skulking behind the Strait of Dover and fighting petty warfare in Africa until in 1944 it finally found time to open the western front (greatly succored by the USA in it) against Germany when it had been beaten back with great loss in the east. Churchill himself congratulated "those that worked with Nazis" (as you call them) after the Stalingrad Battle. So don't imagine your country a single-handed winner of WWII.
As for collaboration, I have expressed my point of view: EVERYBODY was a collaborator - Chamberlain (read the UK) in Munich, Stalin in 1939, Bandera in 1941. And EVERYBODY was fighting nazis in 1945: the UK, Stalin and Bandera.

Gilrandir

06-14-2014, 19:57

“His plan now is to keep the conflict smouldering” Hey, MY plan, I explained this few threads above… Remember, neutralisation of Ukraine, when some here were just telling Putin near the gob Ukraine with millions of soldiers and heavy tanks just ready to do this…

Doing that he would have to face much more serious consequences and keeping the pot boiling the way he is doing lets him make a pretence he is not involved. And he is doing that well since you (and not only you) believe him.

“Ukrainain defense ministry and SBU have been (and perhaps still are) controlled and inundated by Russian agents (including at the top level, like two last defense ministers and two last SBU chiefs were ex-Russian citizens). “ The good 5th Column is back…

One more proof of it is today's Ukrainian army plane brought down. Those who did it accidentally happened to be in the vicinity of the Lugansk airport, accidentally were aware of the time the plane was going to land and accidentally shot it in the complete darkness from an accidentally brought missile.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-14-2014, 22:15

Meanwhile 3 tanks from Russia have crossed into Ukraine and entered Donetsk by way of Makeyevka.
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/2126831-rossiyskie_tanki_s_kamazami_voshli_v_donetsk_video_kolonny.htm
They are T-70 or T-72 which are not on the Ukrainian army roster.
Now Husar will tell us that:
1) anyone can drive them;
2) driving them as easy as driving a car;
3) anyone can operate them in a battle as they come with a manual;
4) Russia is not the source where the separatists obtained them.
And Brenus will add:
1) see how inventive can rioting populaces be if they have a noble cause to fight for - they assembled them out of lawnmowers and coffee-grinders;
2) Putin is saving all he can by sending volunteer (non-mercenary) lawnmowers and coffe-grinders to Donetsk.

Oh come on guys, he got both your registers perfectly, even down to Brenus's famous "I type so fast the words are out of order" style.

The really important issue is that at least 80% of the people in the region is unhappy with the putsch in Kiev and would like to have their rights better protected. They didn't secede and they have been calling for a dialogue with the central government but the central government has been refusing it consistently and is at the moment interested only in how much heavy weaponry it can bring against its own citizens.

Clean up your own house before trying to find dirt in other.

And Kiev is unhappy about the armed revolt in the East, which most recently included shooting down a transport plane, killing 9 crew and 40 soldiers.

Gilrandir is fundamentally correct that you cannot have a dialogue on the constitution with a region that is in armed revolt and has declared independence. If "at least 80%" don't want to secede then you have to look at those "referendums" as complete jokes, but they were organised by the only people with any degree of authority in the region, enough to hold referendums at gunpoint, are not part of the "at least 80%".

As far as those tanks go, NATO is very clear that they lack markings (have been repainted) and come from Russia. That may not be true, but it's credible.

Brenus

06-14-2014, 22:24

“And he is doing that well since you (and not only you) believe him.” No no no no… You were expecting a full onslaught from the Russian Army. Some here wanted to unpack the tanks, and sent the troops… You believed in it. I was the one (with few others) to say Putin never planed the all thing, but he was good enough to seize the opportunity offered on a plate by the storming of the Ukrainian Parliament, the coup against an elected President and the non-respect of the agreement built under the EU eyes… You believe that the insurgent movement is only done by mercenaries, and as for all beliefs it doesn’t need proof.
I was just observing and having conclusion: so before you, I told that Putin wouldn’t invade Ukraine, before you I told that he had the means to keep a nice unrest to keep NATO out of Ukraine, creating the buffer he wanted (as I see it).

“One more proof of it is today's Ukrainian army plane brought down. Those who did it accidentally happened to be in the vicinity of the Lugansk airport, accidentally were aware of the time the plane was going to land and accidentally shot it in the complete darkness from an accidentally brought missile.” Sure it needs a fifth column to succeed to do this.
Well, the Mujahidin were quite successful in doing this around Kabul during the Soviet War, just in sitting around with missile, which have thermo capacity. So when you have a look for the sight, you can see the temperature and that help in launching a missile. Then you have as well light Intensification that will do the same job in see in the darkness.
So, you seat, you wait to see a big military looking plane, you get-up (because flame behind the launcher) you wait for the missile to sing, press the button, job done. Wash you hands. As I said before, Army materials are simple of use…
Why do you want always complex explanations when it could be so simple? The Viet-Cong did millions of damage on US Air Force in launching light mortar attacks on the US Air Field…

"Brenus's famous "I type so fast the words are out of order" style." :laugh4: And I am the one accused to distort others' words: I wrote "copy and paste". My typing speed is an absolute disaster... :laugh4:

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-15-2014, 00:42

Sarmatian

06-15-2014, 07:26

And Kiev is unhappy about the armed revolt in the East, which most recently included shooting down a transport plane, killing 9 crew and 40 soldiers.

Gilrandir is fundamentally correct that you cannot have a dialogue on the constitution with a region that is in armed revolt and has declared independence. If "at least 80%" don't want to secede then you have to look at those "referendums" as complete jokes, but they were organised by the only people with any degree of authority in the region, enough to hold referendums at gunpoint, are not part of the "at least 80%".

As far as those tanks go, NATO is very clear that they lack markings (have been repainted) and come from Russia. That may not be true, but it's credible.

Referendums were held to legitimize their actions. Like Kiev, they weren't democratically elected, but unlike Kiev, they at least don't pretend they are.

If we could find someone to hold dialogue with in every conflict in the last half a century, I don't see why it's impossible now.

Brenus

06-15-2014, 09:11

"You once told me the reason you get your prepositions and conjunctions wrong is that you type so quickly, and you know you can do better." I didn't do this kind of things. I rarely recognise my mistakes (talk to my wife on this) and if I do, I do it differently. In the case you mentioned, I would have mention English as not my 1st language, or QWERTY keyboard. So, I think there is a identity confusion there. Mistakes I do are because I type slowly and painfully, my thoughts (or brain if you prefer) are ahead, so spelling mistakes (as personal, personnel etc) happened. Not because I type very fast. That would be a blatant lie.

I like the NATO sources... Very reliable and you can trust them, for sure.

Husar

06-15-2014, 09:12

You once told me the reason you get your prepositions and conjunctions wrong is that you type so quickly, and you know you can do better.

Anyway, NATO has now released some int on the Tanks identifying them as unmarked T-64 MBT's

http://aco.nato.int/statement-on-russian-main-battle-tanks.aspx

Apparently ten unmarked tanks were in a training area in Russia, now three unmarked tanks are seen across the broder in Ukraine. This would seem to suggest that Russia is sending arms, but possibly not crews, into Ukraine. What they may be doing is training Ukrainians or Russian reservists, rather than using regular tankers. Of course, they may need to retrain their own tankers to fight the T-64 as the model is no longer in service in Russia.

T-64 makes sense, and NATO should be good enough at properly identifying those. According to Wikipedia Ukraine has T-64B and T-64BV in addition to the T-64 BM "Bulat" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Ground_Forces#Strength_and_Military_Equipment) that is shown in the NATO comparison picture to "prove" they are not Ukrainian. Now guess what a T-64BM looks like: http://s1131.photobucket.com/user/JimWarford5/media/T-64BV_Ukraine_Mar2014_5.jpg.html

Oh woops, it's a Ukrainian one and looks just like the tanks in the video. Of course NATO wants to blame Russia for everything since that gives NATO relevance and importance again. I trust their tank identification skills but not so much their analysis and conclusion. And I still wonder why Russia would use unmarked tanks and then fly a huge Russian flag on the leading vehicle? Might as well keep the markings then.

Brenus

06-15-2014, 09:26

“And I still wonder why Russia would use unmarked tanks and then fly a huge Russian flag on the leading vehicle? Might as well keep the markings then.” Pfff, that is a part of the very well planned deception plan within the long prepared Putin’s plan to invade Ukraine without invading but sending Chechens Mercenaries. You could ask why Chechens with a very distinctive accent and appearance, but hey, a guy able to send special under-cover special forces with funny hat is obviously up to something. Even some disguised in old woman having surgery between 2 photo shots. What looks like un-professional is in fact very well professionally prepared plan in order to fool people in believing it is so unprofessional that it can be only unprepared. Only a very long well prepared plan can give an image of un-preparation.
See, you fall for it.

Gilrandir

06-15-2014, 11:30

You were expecting a full onslaught from the Russian Army. Some here wanted to unpack the tanks, and sent the troops… You believed in it. I was the one (with few others) to say Putin never planed the all thing, but he was good enough to seize the opportunity offered on a plate by the storming of the Ukrainian Parliament, the coup against an elected President and the non-respect of the agreement built under the EU eyes…

After what Putin did in Crimea it was natural to believe he would do it elsewhere. Or do you still believe that green men were Crimean self-defense forces? If Putin had had all south-east rioting and had seen firm popular pro-Russian sentiment over there he would have invaded. But he doesn't need Donbas and Lugansk region alone, poor and donated. Moreover, the loyalty of people to Ukraine in all regions he deemed pro-Russian was an eye-opener for him (and for me too). But I have already said it.

You believe that the insurgent movement is only done by mercenaries, and as for all beliefs it doesn’t need proof.

You seem to have a very short memory or read the posts superficially. I expressed my opinion (based on the judgements of local journalists from Donbas). I will do it again specially for you: BY NOW the compostion of the insurgents (as you call them) is about 15-20% local and the rest are from Russia and Crimea. Do you remember my semantic argument with Pannonian after that on whether Crimea is still Ukraine or already Russia?

“One more proof of it is today's Ukrainian army plane brought down. Those who did it accidentally happened to be in the vicinity of the Lugansk airport, accidentally were aware of the time the plane was going to land and accidentally shot it in the complete darkness from an accidentally brought missile.” Sure it needs a fifth column to succeed to do this.
Well, the Mujahidin were quite successful in doing this around Kabul during the Soviet War, just in sitting around with missile, which have thermo capacity. So when you have a look for the sight, you can see the temperature and that help in launching a missile. Then you have as well light Intensification that will do the same job in see in the darkness.
So, you seat, you wait to see a big military looking plane, you get-up (because flame behind the launcher) you wait for the missile to sing, press the button, job done. Wash you hands. As I said before, Army materials are simple of use…
Why do you want always complex explanations when it could be so simple? The Viet-Cong did millions of damage on US Air Force in launching light mortar attacks on the US Air Field…

Talking to you is really tiresome. You make everyone reiterate their arguments over and over again. It is NOT ABOUT COMPLEXITY OF USING WEAPONS. It is about separatists knowing when and where to expect planes to land. Do you believe they have been sitting in the bushes since the proclamation of LPR?

Anyway, NATO has now released some int on the Tanks identifying them as unmarked T-64 MBT's

http://aco.nato.int/statement-on-russian-main-battle-tanks.aspx

Apparently ten unmarked tanks were in a training area in Russia, now three unmarked tanks are seen across the broder in Ukraine. This would seem to suggest that Russia is sending arms, but possibly not crews, into Ukraine. What they may be doing is training Ukrainians or Russian reservists, rather than using regular tankers. Of course, they may need to retrain their own tankers to fight the T-64 as the model is no longer in service in Russia.
One more proof: separatists aka terrorists used (I don't know how to translate them) ?volley fire machines? "Grad" (hitting vegetable warehouse, not Ukrainian army).
http://www.autoconsulting.com.ua/article.php?sid=30795
After using it they escaped and military experts examined the Grads. They discovered markings testifying to the fact they belong to the 18 motorized infantry brigade of guards deployed in Chechnya.

Referendums were held to legitimize their actions. Like Kiev, they weren't democratically elected, but unlike Kiev, they at least don't pretend they are.

So you consider 2012 parliamentery elections in Ukraine not democratic? You were frothing trying to prove the opposite to me! Or are the presidential elections of 2014 not democratic?
As for separatists, they call everything "people's" or "popular" (mayors, governors, republics) thus claiming they represent the people of the area thus legitimizing their claim.

Brenus

06-15-2014, 13:20

“After what Putin did in Crimea it was natural to believe he would do it elsewhere”: Putin had troops in Crimea, the one legally stationed there by treaty, So, it was quite easy to him to give orders to these troops to at least stop any possibility of resistance from loyal Ukrainian troops, just in saying he will not tolerate bloodshed. And it works. But you admit this was based on fear, not on facts.

“Or do you still believe that green men were Crimean self-defense forces?” With the back-up of Russians regulars, largely plausible, more than thousands and thousands of well-paid and trained Chechens, that is for sure…

“he would have invaded.” But, you told us here that the Russian Populations were brain-wash by RT, didn’t you? So how come this part of population didn’t want to join (thing I remember vaguely Sarmartian more or less said)? And again, it is guess for you “he would”.

“I expressed my opinion (based on the judgements of local journalists from Donbas)” Never trust the media, I am telling you…

“It is about separatists knowing when and where to expect planes to land.” And again and again, there is no need of a 5th column to know what happened on an airport. During NATO bombing, the Serbs knew the flights from Italy because someone with a mobile phone just rang another mobile phone. Then, yes, just waiting in a bush payoff: It is called an ambush. So the where planes lands is not really a mystery, when is question of patience and determination. Every hunter will tell you it is always the key (in taking pictures as well).

And by the way, the origins of weapons are a proof of nothing: All countries sell weapons, and black market provides what is needed. The US and Germany provided Croatia with Eastern Military Hardware as the then Croatian Rebels/insurgents were familiar with it from the Former East-Germany stock-pile.
And I doubt that only one particular (and only) unit is equipped with a specific weapon.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-15-2014, 16:40

Referendums were held to legitimize their actions. Like Kiev, they weren't democratically elected, but unlike Kiev, they at least don't pretend they are.

If we could find someone to hold dialogue with in every conflict in the last half a century, I don't see why it's impossible now.

I suppose that depends on your perspective.

Here, what the Rada did would be considered entirely legal and not at all shocking - British Prime Ministers have been ousted before. Likewise, in the US Congress can impeach the President.

If what you are saying is that, in Ukraine, the Legislature cannot remove the Executive in extremis, then that would imply that the executive is far too powerful.

T-64 makes sense, and NATO should be good enough at properly identifying those. According to Wikipedia Ukraine has T-64B and T-64BV in addition to the T-64 BM "Bulat" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Ground_Forces#Strength_and_Military_Equipment) that is shown in the NATO comparison picture to "prove" they are not Ukrainian. Now guess what a T-64BM looks like: http://s1131.photobucket.com/user/JimWarford5/media/T-64BV_Ukraine_Mar2014_5.jpg.html

Oh woops, it's a Ukrainian one and looks just like the tanks in the video. Of course NATO wants to blame Russia for everything since that gives NATO relevance and importance again. I trust their tank identification skills but not so much their analysis and conclusion. And I still wonder why Russia would use unmarked tanks and then fly a huge Russian flag on the leading vehicle? Might as well keep the markings then.

They probably aren't Russians in the truck, they might by in the tank. We know there are Russian "Cossacks" in Ukraine from groups that enjoy Russian state sponsorship.

An alternative scenario - Separatists looted Ukrainian tanks which were then taken to russian to be put through their paces and so crews can be trained.

If you want to say those tanks in Russia didn't subsequently roll into Ukraine you have to offer an alternative explanation as to why a single Russian Tank Company arrived at a training base whilst everyone else was leaving. Russia doesn't do a lot of operation at the company level as far as I know, their doctrine doesn't support that sort of thing.

Gilrandir

06-15-2014, 19:18

An alternative scenario - Separatists looted Ukrainian tanks which were then taken to russian to be put through their paces and so crews can be trained.

If you want to say those tanks in Russia didn't subsequently roll into Ukraine you have to offer an alternative explanation as to why a single Russian Tank Company arrived at a training base whilst everyone else was leaving. Russia doesn't do a lot of operation at the company level as far as I know, their doctrine doesn't support that sort of thing.
The tanks can't have been looted (although looting has become a favorite business in DPR and LPR) as tank detachments are not deployed in the east. As the experts found out, these are Ukrainian tanks - but from Crimea. Ten of them were ferried to Rostov region, then three of them loaded onto special platforms and transported to the border. From there they moved on their own. The other seven were photographed (from a satellite) still stationed in the field near Rostov. Other unpleasant things are being prepared now in Crimea with Ukrainian planes (captured by Russians in March) which are made ready to be used against anyone and then Ukraine will be blamed for it.

“he would have invaded.” But, you told us here that the Russian Populations were brain-wash by RT, didn’t you? So how come this part of population didn’t want to join (thing I remember vaguely Sarmartian more or less said)? And again, it is guess for you “he would”.

The most brainwashed parts appeared to be in Donbas where the terrorists found grateful soil. This is why they can't move on. And after what they have been doing even the brainwashed saw what it can lead to. This is how the estrangement of pro-Russian locals was achieved with the hands of terrorists themselves. The result: during ATO in Mariupol NOT A SINGLE LOCAL came out to stop Ukrainian army. And this tendency is sure to continue elsewhere.

“I expressed my opinion (based on the judgements of local journalists from Donbas)” Never trust the media, I am telling you…

And not only journalists. One of the locals in Mariupol admitted that all "fighters for a cause" there had been replaced by criminals and foreigners (I like aliens better) about a month ago.
But you seem unwilling to follow your own advice: you trust media in one matter (like that Goebbels story of yours) and want me not to in other matters. Unlike me, you base ALL your judgements on events in Ukraine from media sources.

“It is about separatists knowing when and where to expect planes to land.” And again and again, there is no need of a 5th column to know what happened on an airport. During NATO bombing, the Serbs knew the flights from Italy because someone with a mobile phone just rang another mobile phone. Then, yes, just waiting in a bush payoff: It is called an ambush. So the where planes lands is not really a mystery, when is question of patience and determination.

According to you it all looked like this: a plane took off from some Ukrainian airport. Some disinterested person watching it taking off (in blind night) at once guessed who were on board, where it was heading and when it would land. He called Lugansk and armed separatists at once moved out to meet it.
My story: someone from Ukrainian military (or SBU) who was aware of the mission informed the terrorists about it.
Which story seems more plausible?

Brenus

06-15-2014, 20:50

“plane took off from some Ukrainian airport. Some disinterested person watching it taking off (in blind night) at once guessed who were on board, where it was heading and when it would land. He called Lugansk and armed separatists at once moved out to meet it.”
No. That is your story. My explanation is instead a very complex one I go for simple one. So, few sympathisers of the insurgents having an AA missile, decide to observe and strike. "What can we do to shoot a plane and escape?", they asked themselves. "Hmmm", is the answer. "Oh, I’ve got an idea!", said one. "Do tell", said another. "What if we go near a base, by night and we shoot at a transport?". "Look good for me" said another one. "We will damage the Ukrainian Air Force and reputation and we will escape". "Good Point", said the first one, "let’s do it".
See: No need 5th column.
And if you think it is not possible it is how Al Qaida shot a plane from a Courier Company in Iraq few years ago. Because the plane was high (altitude), the pilot succeeded to land with damaged engine… Just in waiting near the airport…

“The interior minister, Arsen Avakov, said on Facebook.
He said national guard and interior ministry units were involved, as well as special armed forces.
One national guard field commander said the rebels had destroyed an armoured personnel carrier during the fighting. Another said four members of the national guard had been wounded in the fighting but none had been killed.” No one resisted? You know that the bullets that wounded your soldiers were shot by mercenaries. And if I believe what I read, the town changed hands few times: So what exactly do you mean by “NOT A SINGLE LOCAL came out to stop Ukrainian army”?
“The government said there had been many casualties after an operation to expel separatists in the city began at dawn on Friday.” From Aljazeera.

http://aje.me/1lgK0k4

“(like that Goebbels story of yours)” oh, it is not the only one. The first time I heard about it in was in French media. Then I had to find one in English, and not from RT or Russia. I just picked one. Did you find out it was not true? I doubt it… Did you liked the pictures of the extreme nationalists in National Socialist Uniforms by the way?
There, another one:
http://www.accuracy.org/release/fascist-forces-in-ukraine/

Sarmatian

06-15-2014, 21:56

I suppose that depends on your perspective.

Here, what the Rada did would be considered entirely legal and not at all shocking - British Prime Ministers have been ousted before. Likewise, in the US Congress can impeach the President.

If what you are saying is that, in Ukraine, the Legislature cannot remove the Executive in extremis, then that would imply that the executive is far too powerful.

It can be done, but not while you're threatening MP's and their families if they don't vote how you want them to vote, a fact you consistently try to ignore.

HoreTore

06-15-2014, 22:14

It can be done, but not while you're threatening MP's and their families if they don't vote how you want them to vote, a fact you consistently try to ignore.

That's happened in every revolution since ever, a fact you are quite fond of ignoring.

It was major feature of the entire French revolution, including the decision to chop Louis.

I still maintain that the French revolution was a victory for humanity.

EDIT: It was, on the other hand, not a feature of the American revolution, who did their stuff in secrecy with no public knowledge of the decisions being taken.

Brenus

06-15-2014, 22:30

“Which story seems more plausible?” Forgot to answer this one, sorry. So, your story is: one spy, well inform as having access to the fly plans of all planes (few days before of course, even the SECRET ones) decided it was good idea to shoot it down. So, he/she phoned his/her friends in the Eastern Ukraine and told them to go to the market, to buy a AA missile, then to come in town (just put the missile in the trunk, no control, serious), find the good spot then wait. As always plane was on time, no confusion possible.
Then go back home, same road, just drop the launcher is some river or pond, nobody will find it.
Is it plausible: not.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-15-2014, 23:04

It can be done, but not while you're threatening MP's and their families if they don't vote how you want them to vote, a fact you consistently try to ignore.

Would there have been a majority to impeach the President otherwise?

If so, then the fact is not material - if not then you may have a point, but you still have to account for a President who abdicated his office WITHOUT formally resigning and therefore instituted a Constitutional Crisis.

You would have got the same result without the beatings after a couple more days, but time was considered of essence to the members of the Rada at the time. So basically - while I don't condone the beatings I don't consider them material.

AND STILL all that would have happened had Putin not invaded Crimea would have been an early election.

The wider crisis was authored by Putin's decision to annex Ukrainian territory.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-16-2014, 01:29

The NATO analysis of the convoy (including tanks being transported) which was observed leaving the surveilled Russian encampment on the border right before the tanks appeared in eastern Ukraine seems perfectly legit, unless your* position is that NATO satellite imagery is all fake. In which case, once again, we can't argue with such a viewpoint. At the very least, the possibility (perhaps even probability) of them being russian-supplied has to be acknowledged, even if they are crewed by ukrainian separatists (which they probably are).

If we gave the Ukrainian government some M60A3s we could have a retro tank fight. :laugh4:

*Not anyone specifically...

Well, we don't actually know those are the SAME tanks, to be fair, and it may come out that those tanks in Russia were still on loaders when the photo's in Ukraine were taken. That still begs the question of why a tank company was out on its lonesome in what was until recently a disused barracks.

there's really no way to explain THAT.

Sarmatian

06-16-2014, 08:43

That's happened in every revolution since ever, a fact you are quite fond of ignoring.

It was major feature of the entire French revolution, including the decision to chop Louis.

I still maintain that the French revolution was a victory for humanity.

EDIT: It was, on the other hand, not a feature of the American revolution, who did their stuff in secrecy with no public knowledge of the decisions being taken.

No, no, I agree completely. It was a revolution and not an impeachment.

Would there have been a majority to impeach the President otherwise?

If so, then the fact is not material - if not then you may have a point, but you still have to account for a President who abdicated his office WITHOUT formally resigning and therefore instituted a Constitutional Crisis.

You would have got the same result without the beatings after a couple more days, but time was considered of essence to the members of the Rada at the time. So basically - while I don't condone the beatings I don't consider them material.

AND STILL all that would have happened had Putin not invaded Crimea would have been an early election.

The wider crisis was authored by Putin's decision to annex Ukrainian territory.

That is irrelevant. If British MP's were bribed to vote a certain way, would you accept their defence that they would have voted like that anyway, even if they weren't paid? Or if they were forced instead of bribed?

President never abdicated, he was forced out. There were many examples in recent history where head of state and/or government were forced to move to another city when governing from the capital became impossible for various reasons.

And lastly, holding elections when you have done everything you can do disorganize and push the opposition to the sidelines has nothing to do with democracy. If it has, we might as well accept Belarus and Iran as democratic countries.

Husar

06-16-2014, 11:38

It's perfectly fine, they also did it here after the glorious national socialist revolution that would last a thousand years when they barred the communist delegates from entering the Reichstag in the first place.

Gilrandir

06-16-2014, 14:40

And by the way, the origins of weapons are a proof of nothing: All countries sell weapons, and black market provides what is needed. The US and Germany provided Croatia with Eastern Military Hardware as the then Croatian Rebels/insurgents were familiar with it from the Former East-Germany stock-pile.
And I doubt that only one particular (and only) unit is equipped with a specific weapon.
Again you fail to see my message: it was not about the ORIGIN of the weapons, but about the markings on them which REGISTER or ASSIGN them to a certain detachment (in that case, a Russian army detachment).

"What if we go near a base, by night and we shoot at a transport?". "Look good for me" said another one. "We will damage the Ukrainian Air Force and reputation and we will escape". "Good Point", said the first one, "let’s do it".
See: No need 5th column.
And if you think it is not possible it is how Al Qaida shot a plane from a Courier Company in Iraq few years ago. Because the plane was high (altitude), the pilot succeeded to land with damaged engine… Just in waiting near the airport…

There is an small but very important (as Gorbachev used to say) fallacy in your chain of reasoning. There are no regular flights to Lugansk whether of military planes or any others. The plane that was brought down was the first to head for it in a week or two. So the terrorists can't be spending weeks in the ambush (which you tried to describe with such a power of imagination explaining to me its essence as if I were a five-year old kid) hoping for a stray plane. In fact, the acting defense minister claimed that they were informed through dispatchers.

And if I believe what I read, the town changed hands few times: So what exactly do you mean by “NOT A SINGLE LOCAL came out to stop Ukrainian army”?
“The government said there had been many casualties after an operation to expel separatists in the city began at dawn on Friday.”

Of course there were. But those were the terrorists (and possibly collateral damage). I meant the absence of the situation when local "rioting populaces" (as you call them) come before APCs and infantry to stop their propulsion. By now they have realized the "advantages" of being citizens of DPR/LPR.

“(like that Goebbels story of yours)” oh, it is not the only one. The first time I heard about it in was in French media. Then I had to find one in English, and not from RT or Russia. I just picked one. Did you find out it was not true? I doubt it… Did you liked the pictures of the extreme nationalists in National Socialist Uniforms by the way?
There, another one:
http://www.accuracy.org/release/fascist-forces-in-ukraine/
Here we go again. I doubted not the credibility of the story, but YOUR ABSOLUTE RELIANCE on media and ADVISING ME TO AVOID such reliance. As I said, besides media (Ukrainian, Russia, western) I communicate to people around me. Some of them have recently come from the east, others have relatives there, still others have their husbands, brothers, acquaintances serving there. So my vision of events is fuller than yours, but you fail to see that.

That is irrelevant. If British MP's were bribed to vote a certain way, would you accept their defence that they would have voted like that anyway, even if they weren't paid? Or if they were forced instead of bribed?

For Ukrainian MPs, it was not about voting this or that way. It was (and regretfully still is) about voting per se. Out of 450 deputies barely 300 usually come to work and vote. So coming to vote was (and is) what people want them to do.

President never abdicated, he was forced out. There were many examples in recent history where head of state and/or government were forced to move to another city when governing from the capital became impossible for various reasons.

That's what Yanukovych had planned to do when he was heading for Kharkiv. Why he didn't do that is a poser. But if he had done it, that would have led to immediate splitting of the counrty.

And lastly, holding elections when you have done everything you can do disorganize and push the opposition to the sidelines has nothing to do with democracy.
In a hindsight I can claim that the current government did everything to organize elections while Russia did everything to disorganize them. Not holding elections under such conditions would have been a greater evil than holding them the way they were.
And as the results of the elections (acknowledged democratic and legitimate by all, including Russia) showed, the opposition was pushed to the sidelines by itself, namely by its behavior and attitude to the conflict in the east.

Brenus

06-16-2014, 18:23

Gilrandir

06-17-2014, 06:29

“markings on them which REGISTER or ASSIGN them to a certain detachment (in that case, a Russian army detachment)” Ah, yes… Of course… The marking, the serial numbers… Now, you have to explain where did you (not you, but the one you trust) find out what weapons were assigned to these units? My experience of French Army does not give me any knowledge about that. Do they have access to the manufacturers’ data? And of course, the history of transfer/repair of these weapons?

You see, in your case it is not about facts, it is about trust. My father-in-law is a retired military man, and he says that in the Soviet armed forces each tank (he served in a tank detachment) had a detachment number on it. I'm sure the same tradition is kept in the Russain army. Simple as that. No need to unravel mystic figures and encoded messages on them.

“The plane that was brought down was the first to head for it in a week or two.” Oh, the Air Force didn’t use the Airport… I bet they did.

This is a serious argument. I said they did. But the previous usage was weeks ago. Sitting for weeks all nights through near the airpot is a type of assignment soldiers get at any war, right.

“but YOUR ABSOLUTE RELIANCE” No. I read and watch news, from different sides, and I try to analyse, based on experience and history (personal & History). You just rely on stories that give your side the role of Goods against Evil. No one inch of analyse on how things happened, only Putin’s long planned seizure of Ukraine, expect he doesn’t want it obviously… No blame for the Good Ukrainian Government bombing very reluctantly towns and populations after the failure of sending soldiers…

I have said in what way I'm more informed than you are, and I will not repeat that (although you seem to enjoy making your opponents do this). As for my "good vs evil" vision of the situation: I'm well aware of shortcomongs of the present Ukrainian government, incompetence of many military and law enforcement officials, low professional skills of most army detachments, ruinations the war causes to eastern towns, dissatisfaction and mistrust of many people in the east and other things you rejoice mentioning. The same could have been said present aplenty during WWII in the countries that were opposing Hitler, yet many (I will make so bold as to include you into those many) considered it a good vs evil struggle. But unlike you, I don't fail to see obvious things:
1) Putin is an agressor. He used the moment when "a brotherly nation" (as he keeps calling Ukrainians) had an internal conflict to bite away a piece of territory from a country he has the treaty of friendship and cooperation where Russia promised to honor Ukrainian integrity. While doing that he was not acting on a hunch but put into practice the plan he had had long prepared (as Illarionov confessed).
http://www.profi-forex.org/novosti-mira/novosti-sng/ukraine/entry1008214437.html
This is his speech at a meeting of some nato committee at Vilnius May 31. I can't find a translation of it, but I'm sure one can do it. Or you can try to find what he says on Ukraine and Putin elsewhere.
2) Putin voiced many times his adherence to the "Russian world" idea, claiming that Russia is everywhere Russian is spoken and openly stating that modern south-eastern Ukraine was and is not Ukraine but "Novorossia" (New Russia). His rhetoric regarding Crimea and south-eastern Ukraine is the same (we gotta protect Russians and Russian-speakers who are threatened with extermination by Kyiv junta). He is known for returning the Soviet style thinking into Russian internal and external policy, reviving positive attitude to Stalin in the society and many other things to make clear that he deems himself a restorer of the lost dignity and the country that was of old. Thus I assume he will do everything he can to reach that goal.
3) What is beng done in the east is an evil, but Ukrainian army doesn't bomb towns trying to kill everyone inside. It targets terrorists who often chose residential disrticts to shoot from (including private houses, schools, kindergartens, and churches). In fact, I'm surprised with restrain they show as many people insist on being more decisive.

Only mercenaries (of course well paid) no legitimate fear and concern from the Russian Minorities (I put plural as I suppose they are unique in their habits and customs): all black and white in a secure mental world…

Not only mercenaries, but I'm tired of reiterating it. You admit the painful and slow way in which you type so you want others to type things twice or thrice to get even with them and make them suffer as much? In your confidence in the idea of rioting populaces you choose to disregard Strelkov's admission that he can't find locals willing to fight.
SBU made public videos of interrogating separatists and they give all the information on how much they are paid (300$ a day), the price that is put on killing Ukrainian officers (5000$) and privates (500$). But you will again say you don't trust it.
As for Russian minorities, it is good you admit you suppose. No unique habits and customs, I would call them Soviet people rather that Russian. The only thing Russian they have is the language. Otherwise it is just nostalgia for the country they had. But again, if you don't trust it, make your own search and find that out from the sources you trust.

Brenus

06-17-2014, 07:14

“You see, in your case it is not about facts, it is about trust. My father-in-law is a retired military man, and he says that in the Soviet armed forces each tank (he served in a tank detachment) had a detachment number on it. I'm sure the same tradition is kept in the Russain army. Simple as that. No need to unravel mystic figures and encoded messages on them.” So, you know what serial numbers were allocated to every Russian Units? No. So, someone told you that these weapons were allocated, so you trust them. How did they get them, when was it done and how did they get the information… Mystery… So you trust them, not me. As it is not only the Russian army, I think all manufacturers (as I explained it to you) do this. Even cars are identified by serial numbers. However, weapons get lost, repair, and change. So except if the weapons allegedly belonging to Chechenia based units (what a piece of chance) were issued very recently you might discover that they were sent somewhere else/other units or simply sold as it was customs in the 90’s.
Now, you still failed to answer: what are the sources of your information?

“But the previous usage was weeks ago.” How do you know that? Are you part of the intelligence community? Have you access to confidential military information?

“Sitting for weeks all nights through near the airport is a type of assignment soldiers get at any war, right.” Yes. It might be. Ask your father in law about Long Range Recon Team. During the Kosovo War, the longest assignment was for troops hiding and reporting, then guiding air attacks. They dropped from the sky, dug in, and didn’t move, and this can be for weeks and weeks in the same hole.
But here we don’t speak of regular soldiers. We speak of a team wanted to shot down a plane (as they were equipped with an AA missile). So, the best place to shoot down a plane is ….. an airport. Now, if you want to kill soldiers, you go to barracks.

“But you will again say you don't trust it.” Oh, I am sure they did. The propaganda war needs this kind of show. Now, did they mention who paid them? I am sure Putin himself did… But the way, this kind of things will make any fair trail out of the window… Oh, perhaps Ukrainian Government doesn’t want them to go on trial. Still no news of the sniper?

Yes, Putin is the aggressor. He took Ukrainian territory. I never even dispute this. But because I didn’t went in the full “evil” only mode (and few of us) you and others transformed as in Pro-Putin when we just remind you and others that Putin did exactly what we have done sot so long time ago.
As Putin making speeches about protecting fellow countrymen and interests, all Administrations in all Countries have it. Some even launched full scales invasions to do exactly this.
What I said is the coup that gave power to extremists in Kiev with openly Nazi components was perceived as a threat by Russian Minorities. Putin exploited it.
Your constant qualification of the insurgents as terrorists (or mercenaries) is political, as it denies them any legitimacy or real concern. You blame the aliens, as you qualify them.
As it is the stance of the Ukrainian government as well, it doesn’t augur well for Ukraine future.

Gilrandir

06-17-2014, 15:13

So, you know what serial numbers were allocated to every Russian Units? No. So, someone told you that these weapons were allocated, so you trust them. How did they get them, when was it done and how did they get the information… Mystery… So you trust them, not me. As it is not only the Russian army, I think all manufacturers (as I explained it to you) do this. Even cars are identified by serial numbers. However, weapons get lost, repair, and change. So except if the weapons allegedly belonging to Chechenia based units (what a piece of chance) were issued very recently you might discover that they were sent somewhere else/other units or simply sold as it was customs in the 90’s.
Now, you still failed to answer: what are the sources of your information?

http://censor.net.ua/news/289937/nami_zahvachena_sistema_grad_rossiyiskoyi_18yi_motostrelkovoyi_brigady_baziruyuscheyisya_v_chechne_g eneralleyitenant
http://chechenews.com/developments/19128-1.html
http://inforesist.org/en/lieutenant-general-homchak-we-captured-a-system-grad-of-the-russian-18th-motorised-brigade-based-in-chechnya/
http://ursa-tm.ru/forum/index.php?/topic/93143-%D1%83%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5-%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0-%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8-%D0%B1%D0%BC-21-%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4-%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81/
Does it quench your thirst for a source? I believe not. Because you just won't trust it. So it is useless to offer you any sources - you will qualify it all as propaganda.

“But the previous usage was weeks ago.” How do you know that? Are you part of the intelligence community? Have you access to confidential military information?

Lugansk airport is the only location in the city under control of Ukrainian army. It was closed for flying on June 2. Since that date no civil or military plane has landed there as the marines warned everyone of a constant threat of storming it by separatists.
The source:
http://kp.ua/politics/456033-luhanskyi-aeroport-v-luiboi-moment-mohut-atakovat-opolchentsy-lnr

Ask your father in law about Long Range Recon Team.

:laugh4: My father-in-law was not an officer but an ensign (a rank intermediate between soldiers and officers) and served in the Far East first and then in Eastern Germany. By my wife's admission the major pastimes of Soviet military were drinking and pilfering army property. When they went on an exercise it spelled a drinking binge. Now I wonder how NATO could be afraid of such an army.

“But you will again say you don't trust it.” Oh, I am sure they did. The propaganda war needs this kind of show. Now, did they mention who paid them? I am sure Putin himself did…

They are rank and file. Do you expect them to expose the whole chain of hands that the payment went through until it reached them? Even if they did the Ukrainian officials wouldn't reveal that while the investigation is on the way.

Yes, Putin is the aggressor. He took Ukrainian territory. I never even dispute this. But because I didn’t went in the full “evil” only mode (and few of us) you and others transformed as in Pro-Putin when we just remind you and others that Putin did exactly what we have done sot so long time ago.

So these "we" bit off chunks of the countries with which you had a friendship treaty and included those chunks into thier country? Name those mysterious "we" and the countries you circumsized.

As Putin making speeches about protecting fellow countrymen and interests, all Administrations in all Countries have it. Some even launched full scales invasions to do exactly this.

...and this is why what he is doing is logical, average and commendable thing that in no way makes him look evil? Be like others and "villain" won't apply to you?
- You are guilty of murder, Richard Roe!
- But, your honor, others have done it before.
- Oh, have they? Oops, then you are not guilty.

Your constant qualification of the insurgents as terrorists (or mercenaries) is political, as it denies them any legitimacy or real concern. You blame the aliens, as you qualify them.
As it is the stance of the Ukrainian government as well, it doesn’t augur well for Ukraine future.
The current composition of insurgents does not let me qualify them otherwise. But if Ukrainian government acknowledges them a negotiation party (as Moldovan and Georgian government did way back) then Donbas will turn into Transdniestria or Abkhasia. So my recipe:
1) seal the border with Russia;
2) offer them a choice between leaving, surrendering or being destroyed;
3) when the east is free of "insurgents" hold local elections;
4) negotiate with the winners whatever is relevant.

Brenus

06-17-2014, 18:31

Seamus Fermanagh

06-17-2014, 19:45

...
“1) seal the border with Russia;
2) offer them a choice between leaving, surrendering or being destroyed;
3) when the east is free of "insurgents" hold local elections;
4) negotiate with the winners whatever is relevant.” Great, ethnic cleansing as solution.:oops:

This reads more like rebellion suppression 101 as far as I can tell. The 102 semester goes into a bit more "hearts and minds" as an add-on but that pretty much sums up the curriculum.

Brenus

06-17-2014, 22:57

Gilrandir

06-18-2014, 11:24

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: On 4 links 3 in Cyrillic and the other showing a MRL destroyed… Well done… Yeah, pure propaganda. I can’t stop laughing… More, more...

Lugansk airport: Ah, nothing better than article for Governmental organisation to know the truth, even better in Cyrillic. I am sure that if military airplanes land or take off, they will tell the public… You really make me laugh…

You are apprehensive to Cyrillic (one was in English, btw) ? If I provided some Polish or Croatian references, would you be able to understand them? Why not, they use Latin alphabet. Now padawan, remember you must: if you don't know the language, familiar characters will help you to understand it not.
I told you I have access to more sources than you do and try to give the gist of information. You demanded sources and I provided them. You can't read them so you call it propaganda. Do you always call everything you don't understand propaganda? What loads of propaganda must Egyptian hieroglyphs seem to you!
But, summing it all up (the same as with Sarmatian): you believe what you like to believe no matter how strong may the evidence be. No use to try to convince you in anything.

“1) seal the border with Russia;
2) offer them a choice between leaving, surrendering or being destroyed;
3) when the east is free of "insurgents" hold local elections;
4) negotiate with the winners whatever is relevant.” Great, ethnic cleansing as solution.:oops:
I have shown more than once that the people who are fighting against the Ukrainain army now are mostly aliens. I will not reiterate but I will give you something I haven't said before: Strelkov is a citizen of Russia, Borodai (the prime minister of DPR) is a citizen of Russia, Bezler (the defense minister of DPR) is a citizen of Russia. They have nothing to do with Ukraine so they can't be a party to negotiations. Moreover (again, as I have mentioned) BY NOW they enjoy no support from the locals who are tired of war and looting. Getting rid of them has nothing to do with ethnic cleansing. If one goes by your chain of resoning, one must expect such cleansings in all the cities and towns from which terrorists had been evicted. Were there any in Mariupol, Krasny Liman or anywhere else? They are as mythical as the Right sector atrocities and nazis threats you augur.
There is no ethnic division in Donbas as to the attitude to the events: most people there (whether Ukrainian, Russian or any other nationality) are distrustful of current Ukrainian government. To be able to negotiate their claims it is neccessary for them to choose representatives. That is why local elections are a must.

Gilrandir

06-18-2014, 11:30

Except it is impossible to seal the border with Russia, of course (needs troops, material and time Ukraine has not). IF Russia allowed it, or the EU that doesn't want its supply in gaz cut.
So the unique way to flash the insurgents is to flash the populations. So Ethnic Cleansing...
Refugees from the east are assisted by the Ukrainian army in their attempts to find a peaceful exit from the war zone, they are temporarily settled in available premises and hosting households (free of charge), catered (free of charge), their kids are sent to resting camps by the sea (free of charge), volunteers do their best to provide the refugees with the most neccessary things (free of charge) and ease their hardships as much as possible, the new president created a special agency which will deal with their problems - if that's what you mean by ethnic cleansing then .....

Brenus

06-18-2014, 20:00

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-18-2014, 23:45

Great, ethnic cleansing as solution.:oops:

But Brenus!

According to russia, Ukrainians are just uncouth Russians!

You know, like Austrians are just uncouth Germans and they should both be under one government and...

Wait, who's idea was that now?

Anyway - this doesn't sound like ethnic cleansing to me, it sounds like the unpleasant reality that the East has completely fallen apart - the only visible authority is the separatists, but you and Sarmation keep claiming they don't speak for the people - so they can't be negotiated with.

Husar

06-18-2014, 23:59

You know, like Austrians are just uncouth Germans and they should both be under one government and...

Wait, who's idea was that now?

That idea was around even before the unification of Germany and was indeed considered as an option by some at the time.

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

I don't know who was the single first person to think of it but it certainly wasn't the guy you were thinking of most likely.

Gilrandir

06-19-2014, 06:32

“Now padawan, remember you must: if you don't know the language, familiar characters will help you to understand it not” Translate in English or French please: “familiar characters will help you to understand it not” means what exactly? Not in pseudo-Jedi, I do play Star-wars The Old Republic on line, and no one speak like this. I know you try to be funny at my expenses; it doesn’t work so explain what you tried in vain to tell.

“You are apprehensive to Cyrillic” No, I am completely ignorant of Cyrillic. So what is your point?

My point is: You complain you can't read the articles I linked because they use Cyrillic script. So you think if they used Latin script you would understand them? The abilty to read the characters (letters, hieroglyphs etc) that are used for writing doesn't mean that you will understand the message written with the help of them. For exapmle: the Polish language uses Latin script, but I doubt you would understand something written in it.
Conclusion: it is senseless to complain of the script, one should complain of the language.

“I have shown” No. You just come-up with stories (you are not the only one) of man with funny hat and others old woman or a burned Multi-Rocket launcher on wheel and pretend they are proofs that Putin is behind all this… Hardly proof, in one side or other…

This is an OFFICIAL statement of the Ukrainian foreign ministry addressing Russia in which the Ukrainian side claims that the "Igla" missile launcher which was captured in Donbas has the accompanying documents which testify to the fact that it belongs to a Russian army detachment based in Krasnodar territory. As the documents prove, it was still there (in a warehouse) as late as April 14 2014. A piece of propaganda?
http://mfa.gov.ua/ua/press-center/comments/1665-komentar-mzs-ukrajini-shhodo-nelegalynoji-peredachi-rosijsykoju-federacijeju-ozbrojeny-teroristichnim-ugrupovannyam-shho-dijuty-u-donecykij-i-lugansykij-oblastyah
A hint: if I'm really interested in what is written in the language I don't understand I resort to online translators.

“I told you I have access to more sources than you do and try to give the gist of information.” Oh, that is a bit of assumption my dear… You have no idea…

“you believe what you like to believe no matter how strong may the evidence be.” You still think that I am like you.

It is almost impossible to hold an intelligent discussion with a person whose belief in one's one infallibility is unflagging, whose disdain to the interlocutor is evident, whose desire and ability to admit mistakes equals zero, who doesn't follow his own advice and openly sided with one party claiming impartiality.

Brenus

06-19-2014, 07:01

“According to russia, Ukrainians are just uncouth Russians!” So you agree with Putin now? You think he got a point?

“the only visible authority is the separatists, but you and Sarmatian keep claiming they don't speak for the people” You probably misread what I wrote. Gilrandir is the one denying any legitimacy to the separatists are they are all aliens and mercenaries and paid by Putin.

“My point is: You complain you can't read the articles I linked because they use Cyrillic script” Point taken, but this is a distraction, a smoke screen, on the fact you present to support your claim articles not in the Forum agreed language. When I did, I warned the reader and it was to show a gesture.
Then you put the blame on other because they don’t use a automatic translator. This is due to experience. I tried once to translate from English to French and the result was hilarious (at best)…

“This is an OFFICIAL statement of the Ukrainian foreign ministry” Oh, and the official Statement should convince me?
The official statement of Ramses’ Battle of Kadesh is a pure monument of Propaganda.
But “It is almost impossible to hold an intelligent discussion with a person whose belief in one's one infallibility is unflagging, whose disdain to the interlocutor is evident, whose desire and ability to admit mistakes equals zero, who doesn't follow his own advice and openly sided with one party claiming impartiality”.

“Whatever else the case may be, lots of civilians are getting hit whether by government forces or insurgents.” So perhaps is time to look for political solutions, to hope for military solutions. You can make peace only with you enemies, so better to do it before slaughter…
The entire Ukrainian story is a disaster… A social unrest becoming a civil war, amputation of one country of territory, reactivation of the Cold War etc…

Gilrandir

06-19-2014, 07:14

“This is an OFFICIAL statement of the Ukrainian foreign ministry” Oh, and the official Statement should convince me?
The official statement of Ramses’ Battle of Kadesh is a pure monument of Propaganda.
But “It is almost impossible to hold an intelligent discussion with a person whose belief in one's one infallibility is unflagging, whose disdain to the interlocutor is evident, whose desire and ability to admit mistakes equals zero, who doesn't follow his own advice and openly sided with one party claiming impartiality”.
If you remember (which I doubt) in my very first post in this thread I said that I don't claim impartiality and I'm openly pro-Ukrainian.
If you remember (which I doubt) I also wrote that I readily admit my mistakes and apologize. While you admitted that you have a problem with that (and asked to address your wife for confirmation).
The entire Ukrainian story is a disaster… A social unrest becoming a civil war, amputation of one country of territory, reactivation of the Cold War etc…
And of course the only side to blame in it is the stupid Ukrainians who started all this to-do. As for civil war, the conflict becomes such when a part of the populace fights another. By now, the fighting sides can't be qualified as such.

Better to amputate a festering limb than keep it around, thinking you can keep bandaging it or whatever.
I'm afraid that the inflammation will be transported into the healtier parts of body by the hell of an infector.

Kagemusha

06-19-2014, 13:17

Oh I agree. One way or the other, if the East becomes too involved in a sense of persecution from the ukrainian government, there simply won't be peace. The two options are then ruthlessly stamp it out (something that doesn't work too well these days) or just let the territory go. Obviously the latter is preferable to the former.

But the fact remains that letting that happen (and indeed, letting it happen not too long ago with Crimea!) is simply giving Russia more and more encouragement to do this sort of thing. Look to the middle east for other examples of countries taking it upon themselves to militarily involve themselves in their neighbors' affairs, under the guise of civil unrest. It is simply rampant, and the states that are the worst about it have always been supported in the UN Security Council by Russia. This sort of thing is their answer to US Military supremacy on the world stage, not just in Russia but in all kinds of disaffected countries that oppose the status quo: Low-intensity conflict that they know the west will back down from. It doesn't bode well for the future, and my stance is still that we should get out of Europe. The best defense against Russia is to simply not have Russia as a problem. Have fun Europe! Of course, that'll never happen. But I can wish. :shrug:

Do you sincerely think that it is Europe that forces the hand of US in foreign policy rather then other way around? Which side of the pond is the dominant side in the NATO?

Gilrandir

06-19-2014, 14:49

“This is an OFFICIAL statement of the Ukrainian foreign ministry” Oh, and the official Statement should convince me?
The official statement of Ramses’ Battle of Kadesh is a pure monument of Propaganda.

It is the first time Ukrainian foreign office made such a statement. And you don't go further than reactin to words "official" and "propaganda". I mean the documents proving that two months ago the weapon officially belonged to a Russian army unit and now it is used by terrorists. Or are they fake?

Seamus Fermanagh

06-19-2014, 18:14

Brenus:

Yes, official documents and statements should always be evaluated with a hermeneutic of suspicion -- "spin" is not that unusual.

On the other hand, to always dismiss such pronouncements as fatuous is to take it too far in the opposite direction.

A healthy skepticism is what is wanted here.

Brenus

06-19-2014, 18:39

“If you remember (which I doubt) in my very first post in this thread I said that I don't claim impartiality and I'm openly pro-Ukrainian.” Yeah, I know, but you admit the rest so good. That was the aim of it.

“If you remember (which I doubt) I also wrote that I readily admit my mistakes and apologize. While you admitted that you have a problem with that (and asked to address your wife for confirmation).” No. You apologized for Personal Attack, not for mistakes.

“While you admitted that you have a problem with that (and asked to address your wife for confirmation).” So, your point is? I saw no mistake to apologize for in my comments or analyses about Ukraine until now, Putin didn’t invade Ukraine, (I remember using the term Bosnianisation), he does help a rebellious movement, etc. So what mistake or error did I make?

“And of course the only side to blame in it is the stupid Ukrainians who started all this to-do.” Is it your view of the crisis? I disagree
.
“I mean the documents proving that two months ago the weapon officially belonged to a Russian army unit and now it is used by terrorists. Or are they fake?” I don’t know. As I don’t know which kind of documents you speak about. However, it could be log-book (that are easily fake, which doesn’t mean they are), or units marking which are even easier to paint.
I explain for the non-specialist in Army things (not the log-book, anyone know how you can fake documents, especially when you probably use the same).
All vehicles in an army have a sign of identification or Tactical Symbol:
i.e. a square with a point in the center is Artillery. Infantry is a square with the 2 diagonals, Tank an oval in a square.
My Regiment being a Mechanized Infantry in an Armored Division was a rectangle with 2 diagonals and the oval. Then the marking would be completed with the Armored Division, (6th), Regiment (153) on the top angles, and the Company and Platoon at the bottom angles (3rd and 3rd).
So if it this kind of proofs, it is even easier to fake, Just need a little bit a paint, cardboard and a good knife.

Right, can't delete the picture, can't see the marking so useless...

On the other hand, to always dismiss such pronouncements as fatuous is to take it too far in the opposite direction. Agree, and I don't. I just try to show Gilrandir that he can't claim in one hand Putin prepare it all for a long time, then make stupid mistake like this (the guy was KGB for the sake of who you want).

A healthy skepticism is what is wanted here. Agree. And it what I hope I do.

Kagemusha

06-19-2014, 18:53

I think that's a pointless chicken-egg question. Regardless of who started what (and I don't think its one-sided), its time for us to re-evaluate what's best for America, IMO. :thumbsdown:

No it really is not. While i agree you that more isolationist policies for US would be beneficial and i think it would be best for Europe as well in the long run. You still cant simply ignore influence that countries naturally try to acquire over each other, nor can you paint it so that only the "bad" countries do that.

Sarmatian

06-19-2014, 21:18

But Brenus!

According to russia, Ukrainians are just uncouth Russians!

Not really, no.

Anyway - this doesn't sound like ethnic cleansing to me, it sounds like the unpleasant reality that the East has completely fallen apart - the only visible authority is the separatists, but you and Sarmation keep claiming they don't speak for the people - so they can't be negotiated with.

By proper democratic standards, no one in Ukraine is legitimate representative of the people, that much is true. If we try to apply those standards, we're gonna end up in a bit of a mess as no one could talk to anyone else, so that's not the best way to go.

Also, I never said separatists don't speak for the people, and actually calling them separatists has been proven wrong, since they didn't try to secede after the referendum. Federalists would be a much more appropriate term.

Don't get me wrong, Europe's been screwed too, but the only thing keeping a united Europe from completely running the global agenda is the fact that Europeans are too stuck up to unite! Why should we pay for that? The Cold War is over, there is absolutely no threat of an international communist agenda doing anything to harm the American way of life. If Russia wants to invade eastern Europe, its not our problem.

That may very well be your sentiment but I think Kage's trying to say that US has been pushing for Ukraine in NATO, while EU was against, for the most part.

I don't see USA "stepping down", but, due to other factors, its influence will be comparatively diminished in the coming decades,

Sarmatian

06-20-2014, 06:37

Oh, this again. You see, such rumors will always exist as long as we have an aggressive foreign policy. Just another reason to get out of Europe, so your media and leaders can stop using us as a scape-goat to avoid domestic policies. :shrug:

You think I'm wrong?

Gilrandir

06-20-2014, 06:42

Also, I never said separatists don't speak for the people, and actually calling them separatists has been proven wrong, since they didn't try to secede after the referendum. Federalists would be a much more appropriate term.

Oh, really? What about proclaiming independence (new states are called DPR and LPR, remember?), appointing governments, ministers, mayors and asking Russia to protect them by sending its troops?

“If you remember (which I doubt) I also wrote that I readily admit my mistakes and apologize. While you admitted that you have a problem with that (and asked to address your wife for confirmation).” No. You apologized for Personal Attack, not for mistakes.

You power of forgetting seems extraordinary. I call Hore Tore as a witness. I (basing my conclusions on a British documentary) made a statement on Germany using Soviet airfields near Murmansk in 1940. Hore Tore pointed to high improbability of it and I agreed. There were other minor cases which you are sure to have forgotten.

“While you admitted that you have a problem with that (and asked to address your wife for confirmation).” So, your point is?

You deem yourself infallible, never admit mistakes and have problems with apologizing. A trace of character you admitted yourself.

“I mean the documents proving that two months ago the weapon officially belonged to a Russian army unit and now it is used by terrorists. Or are they fake?” I don’t know. As I don’t know which kind of documents you speak about. However, it could be log-book (that are easily fake, which doesn’t mean they are), or units marking which are even easier to paint.

As you can perfectly see in the photo, there is no log book. The papers that went with the "Igla" and presented in the picture: the "packing list", the "checking note" and a list of revision dates all with signatures.

Brenus

06-20-2014, 07:44

“I (basing my conclusions on a British documentary) made a statement on Germany using Soviet airfields near Murmansk in 1940”: What are you speaking about? In which thread? I never debate about that, I never heard or read about this?

“You deem yourself infallible, never admit mistakes and have problems with apologizing.” Now, I understand how you reach conclusion. You don’t read what others say, you translate it in Gilrandirian: When and when did I say I was infallible, and the fact I have problem for apologizing proves the second point wrong. In one sentence you summarised your system of analysing: Wrong Information (see above), assuming, inner-contradictions, and of course, a total absence of self-derision.

“list of revision dates all with signatures.” This is part of a log-book. In fact all what you present is part of manual and documentation. So, yes, it might be fake, it might be just made-up. No one of this document I can’t made (or others) at home with scanner and patience…

And about restrain:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/06/17/russian-journalists-ukraine/10712849/

Tell me, if this story from US Today, not RT, is true, the 2 journalists were filming Refugees. So how come they were killed by a mortar attack? Or the restrain of your government stop at attacking refugees (free of charges of course)?

Viking

06-20-2014, 09:52

And about restrain:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/06/17/russian-journalists-ukraine/10712849/

Tell me, if this story from US Today, not RT, is true, the 2 journalists were filming Refugees. So how come they were killed by a mortar attack? Or the restrain of your government stop at attacking refugees (free of charges of course)?

MOSCOW (AP) — Two Russian journalists for a Russian state-owned TV channel died Tuesday in eastern Ukraine after being hit by mortar fire, the Rossiya 24 network said.

USA Today are citing AP who in turn appear to be citing Rossiya 24, a channel that earlier have been caught (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0b88656a-a2fb-11e3-9685-00144feab7de.html#ixzz35AQslGmO) relaying flat-out fabrications:

Published 3 March, 2014

Yevgeny Savchenko, governor of Russia’s Belgorod region, had a worrying message this weekend. Thousands of refugees, he told Rossiya-24 television, were pouring into his region from neighbouring Ukraine, escaping what he called the chaos in the country.

[...]

On Ukraine’s border with Belgorod on Sunday, 40km from east Ukraine’s biggest city of Kharkiv, things looked rather different. As occasional cars approached, they were waved through by bored-looking Ukrainian border guards.
“Do you see anything at all here?” said a watch commander, swinging his arm towards the quiet border post. “It has been quiet for days.”

Gilrandir

06-20-2014, 10:16

“I (basing my conclusions on a British documentary) made a statement on Germany using Soviet airfields near Murmansk in 1940”: What are you speaking about? In which thread? I never debate about that, I never heard or read about this?

The same here thread. And it is not about you debating it, it is the example of a mistake I made and admitted it.

Now, I understand how you reach conclusion. You don’t read what others say,

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Look who's talking now! A person who needs reminding twice every other message of others and very often his own as well.

And about restrain:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/06/17/russian-journalists-ukraine/10712849/

Tell me, if this story from US Today, not RT, is true, the 2 journalists were filming Refugees. So how come they were killed by a mortar attack? Or the restrain of your government stop at attacking refugees (free of charges of course)?
First of all, USA Today has a high reputation indeed. Only The Sun surpasses it in credibility.
Second of all, I may offer my explanation which is based on the information Ukrainian officials voice almost every day: terrorists often shell residential areas to later accuse Ukrainian army of it.
Third of all, it is an eye-opener for everybody: journalists killed at war. How could it have happened? Perhaps because they try to penetrate into the places where the fighting is the thickest?
Forth of all, as Ukrainian officials say, those journalists didn't have their accredidation.
And finally, Russian journalists were caught several times assissting "insurgents" (bringing them weapons and directing their fire) and after that they were just evicted from the country but not persecuted.
Conclusion: my arguments are no worse than yours, yet you doubt everything I say but you deem only your information right and your position infallible. You deny the obvious: Putin keeps stirring the pot by letting reinforcements come to Ukraine from Russia. Russians supply weapons to the "insurgents". Russians have leading positions in DPR and LPR "bodies of power".
As for inner-contrdictions - you are guilty of it yourself: you demand from me official information (like the update on snipers) but when I provide some which is available (results of SBU interrogating terrorists who reveal their salaries and name persons that pay them) you disbelieve it. What is then the use of asking?
Again it is a matter of trust: you trust what you see and read, I trust what I see and read. It is like discussing which is tastier - pizza or ice cream.

Gilrandir

06-20-2014, 10:21

USA Today are citing AP who in turn appear to be citing Rossiya 24, a channel that earlier have been caught (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0b88656a-a2fb-11e3-9685-00144feab7de.html#ixzz35AQslGmO) relaying flat-out fabrications:
In case you are interested: here is the site which aims to expose fakes created by Russian (and other) "journalists". One of the latest was phosphorus shells used by the Ukrainian army which turned out to be videos from Iraqi war.

http://www.stopfake.org/

Husar

06-20-2014, 10:44

Viking

06-20-2014, 13:39

The last days there has been talk about those 3 mystery tanks. Today, we got introduced to an entire mystery column. From AP:

https://i.imgur.com/LUADQZ2.jpg

http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Ukraine/cc490e11174e4bd7846adf1ac5221891/14/0

Pro-russian troops in tanks, several armored vehicles, and tracks drive on a road in the direction of Donetsk not far from Debaltseve, Donetsk region, eastern Ukraine, Friday, June 20, 2014. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

https://i.imgur.com/jsYZsqN.jpg

http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Ukraine/ca59fe426c8347ac95b432a73fb423de/15/0

Pro-russian troops ride on a tank on a road in the direction of Donetsk not far from Debaltseve, Donetsk region, eastern Ukraine, Friday, June 20, 2014. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

I assume it's the same column that can be seen in this video, supposed to have been shot earlier today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhK2Bxbtvhg

In case you are interested: here is the site which aims to expose fakes created by Russian (and other) "journalists". One of the latest was phosphorus shells used by the Ukrainian army which turned out to be videos from Iraqi war.

http://www.stopfake.org/

Noted.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-20-2014, 13:45

Husar

06-20-2014, 14:03

So now that Putin has almost finished operation annexation in eastern ukraine, he is coming for the baltic states:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10909540/RAF-Typhoons-intercept-Russian-bomber-and-fighters.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2661593/MoD-scrambles-fighter-jets-multiple-Russian-planes-spotted-Baltic-airspace.html

Sarmatian

06-20-2014, 15:46

Uh, yup. The US may have had preferences one way or the other, but as far as "pushing" goes, the US did little to nothing in Ukraine prior to Yanukovich being pushed out. Claims to the contrary are all propaganda from laughable sources, so far. :shrug:

*I'm not ruling it out, I'm just not convinced. Especially not by "news" specials from RT or whatever

"A 2009 Gallup poll asked Ukrainians whether they saw NATO as a threat or protection for Ukraine; 40% saw NATO as a threat, 17% saw NATO as protection, and 33% saw NATO as neither"

NY Times - NATO allies oppose Bush on Georgia and Ukraine (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/world/europe/03nato.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) - April 3rd, 2008

President Bush threw the NATO summit meeting here off-script on Wednesday by lobbying hard to extend membership to Ukraine and Georgia, but he failed to rally support for the move among key allies.

Guardian - Bush backs Ukraine and Georgia for Nato membership, April 1st, 2008 (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/01/nato.georgia)

George Bush this morning said he "strongly supported" Ukraine's attempt to join Nato, and warned he would not allow Russia to veto its membership bid.

Speaking in Kiev after a meeting with Ukraine's president, Viktor Yushchenko, the US president said both post-Soviet Ukraine and Georgia should be allowed to join the alliance – despite vehement objections from Russia.

CNN - Bush stirs controversy over NATO membership April 1st, 2008 (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/01/ukraine.analysis/)

U.S. President George W. Bush has not wasted any time stirring the pot on his latest visit to Europe for the NATO Summit starting in Bucharest, Romania, Wednesday...

...The only snag for Bush in his latest ambition is that his eagerness to welcome the former Soviet Republics into NATO is not shared by several of the other 25 members of NATO.

Washington Post - Bush Pressing NATO to Set Membership Path for Ukraine, Georgia (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040100686.html)

President Bush challenged NATO on Tuesday to expand its frontiers deep into the heart of what was once the Soviet Union, daring European allies to defy Kremlin saber-rattling and provoking a debate within an organization still trying to define its post-Cold War mission.

Washington Post - Bush Visits a Ukraine Deeply Split Over Bid to Join Western Alliance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/31/AR2008033100702.html), April 1st, 2008

... But by the time President Bush arrived here Monday to hail the emerging democracy and urge the NATO alliance to put Ukraine on the path to membership, the mood on the square had changed. "Yankee Go Home," read one sign. "NATO Hands Off Ukraine," read another. A hand-painted banner unfurled around the square used a four-letter obscenity to describe what both Bush and NATO should do.

There you go. All American sources, except one British, all confirming that US has been pushing Ukraine into NATO, against the wishes of the population and against the wishes of European NATO countries, all of them two years before Yanukovich was even elected.

That's two minutes of googling, btw. There are thousand of articles more on the subject, both before and after 2008, if you wish to inform yourself more.

Brenus

06-20-2014, 18:56

“relaying flat-out fabrications:” So the two Russian Journalists are still alive? And you did note I said “If”.

“You deny the obvious: Putin keeps stirring the pot” Where and when did I do that? I always said that Putin had an interest in keeping Ukraine out of NATO hands, and civil war is quite a good system.

“terrorists often shell residential areas to later accuse Ukrainian army of it.” Most probably, but it doesn’t mean they always do. However, you are to one who didn’t even imagine that the famous sniper could have been sent by the ones actually in power. Manipulation is in both side, only you deny it, not me.

“Forth of all, as Ukrainian officials say, those journalists didn't have their accredidation.” Yeah, good reason to kill them, especially is they take pictures of refugees…

“And finally, Russian journalists were caught several times assissting "insurgents" (bringing them weapons and directing their fire) and after that they were just evicted from the country but not persecuted.” And this is the best one…

“you deem only your information right and your position infallible” Yet another example of you not reading what I wrote “if this story from US Today, not RT, is true,”. I saw 3 wars so I know the value of journalism in war.

“you demand from me official information” Ask, not demand, as you will probably never in position to answer this question…

“What is then the use of asking?” Actually, I try to shake your certitudes, the black and white mental attitude… I probably lose my time, but I have hope for you…

Viking

06-20-2014, 19:07

“relaying flat-out fabrications:” So the two Russian Journalists are still alive? And you did note I said “If”.

My main point was that the information was not independently verified by USA Today journalists; they had nobody at the scene. More specifically the information that they were filming refugees as they were hit.

Brenus

06-20-2014, 20:51

“My main point was that the information was not independently verified by USA Today journalists; they had nobody at the scene.” I agree, but this is true for all the Media. They are supposed to check their sources are they? But they don’t. In both side they just repeat the International Agencies messages.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-20-2014, 23:21

"A 2009 Gallup poll asked Ukrainians whether they saw NATO as a threat or protection for Ukraine; 40% saw NATO as a threat, 17% saw NATO as protection, and 33% saw NATO as neither"

NY Times - NATO allies oppose Bush on Georgia and Ukraine (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/world/europe/03nato.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) - April 3rd, 2008

Guardian - Bush backs Ukraine and Georgia for Nato membership, April 1st, 2008 (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/01/nato.georgia)

CNN - Bush stirs controversy over NATO membership April 1st, 2008 (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/01/ukraine.analysis/)

Washington Post - Bush Pressing NATO to Set Membership Path for Ukraine, Georgia (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040100686.html)

Washington Post - Bush Visits a Ukraine Deeply Split Over Bid to Join Western Alliance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/31/AR2008033100702.html), April 1st, 2008

There you go. All American sources, except one British, all confirming that US has been pushing Ukraine into NATO, against the wishes of the population and against the wishes of European NATO countries, all of them two years before Yanukovich was even elected.

That's two minutes of googling, btw. There are thousand of articles more on the subject, both before and after 2008, if you wish to inform yourself more.

Err.....

All of these refer to a different administration. The current job-holder has....how does one phrase it delicately....a somewhat different approach to foreign affairs.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-21-2014, 01:45

That idea was around even before the unification of Germany and was indeed considered as an option by some at the time.

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

I don't know who was the single first person to think of it but it certainly wasn't the guy you were thinking of most likely.

Not really, no.

Mother Russia defines Ukrainian as the patois of Russian, just as the Parisian French define Occitan as a patois of French.

Russia does not recognise a separate "Ukrainian" identity.

By proper democratic standards, no one in Ukraine is legitimate representative of the people, that much is true. If we try to apply those standards, we're gonna end up in a bit of a mess as no one could talk to anyone else, so that's not the best way to go.

So the last election to the Rada was completely fake?

No.

The Parliament is elected - the President is elected - the separatists seized power with RPG's.

I don't buy into "these guays are a bit dirty, so they're as bad as these guys." If we start going down that road we'd have to ask if US politicians are "Representatives of the People".

Also, I never said separatists don't speak for the people, and actually calling them separatists has been proven wrong, since they didn't try to secede after the referendum. Federalists would be a much more appropriate term.

They unilaterally declared independence after fixed referenda - "separatists" is a polite term for them, it's also accurate. Russian stooges might be accurate too, but it's hard to tell.

That may very well be your sentiment but I think Kage's trying to say that US has been pushing for Ukraine in NATO, while EU was against, for the most part.

I don't see USA "stepping down", but, due to other factors, its influence will be comparatively diminished in the coming decades,

There's no evidence of pushing, there's some evidence of encouragement but the US doesn't have a hard policy on this, like it does with, say, Israel. Until relatively recently Russia was considered a friendly nation, and I think the US looked to Ukraine as a bridge towards Russia. As such, co-operation between Ukraine and NATO was desirable, integration was not.

Brenus

06-21-2014, 10:00

Pannonian

06-21-2014, 11:27

Brenus

06-21-2014, 11:29

Ask the Academie... I fact, ask French Canadians... They have a hard line approach on this one...

Pannonian

06-21-2014, 11:46

Ask the Academie... I fact, ask French Canadians... They have a hard line approach on this one...

"“Parisian French define Franglais as an abuse of French.”

Gilrandir

06-21-2014, 14:46

"A 2009 Gallup poll asked Ukrainians whether they saw NATO as a threat or protection for Ukraine; 40% saw NATO as a threat, 17% saw NATO as protection, and 33% saw NATO as neither"
All American sources, except one British, all confirming that US has been pushing Ukraine into NATO, against the wishes of the population and against the wishes of European NATO countries, all of them two years before Yanukovich was even elected.

A funny thing to note: now the results of the poll are (or would be) quite different with a strengthening of pro-nato stance and it was achieved by Russia. What insidious people Americans are! They in some way persuaded Russia to attack Ukraine to make Ukraine join NATO to piss off Russia.

“terrorists often shell residential areas to later accuse Ukrainian army of it.” Most probably, but it doesn’t mean they always do.

Not always. Sometimes it is the Ukrainian army who shells the residential areas - but only as a response to separatists who shell the army detachments positioning their mortars or whatever in those areas.

However, you are to one who didn’t even imagine that the famous sniper could have been sent by the ones actually in power. Manipulation is in both side, only you deny it, not me.

Did you see the videos with the snipers? They always worked from behind the Berkut lines and kept communicating with them. I can't imagine the then opposition providing a way for the snipers into the rear of governmental forces and subordinating them to the police.

“Forth of all, as Ukrainian officials say, those journalists didn't have their accredidation.” Yeah, good reason to kill them, especially is they take pictures of refugees…

It is strange for me to explain to an ex-military man such things: when you shell some site within the city from a mortar you don't actually see it. The absence of accreditation means that they penetrated Ukraine illegally without notifying Ukrainian officials about that.

“you demand from me official information” Ask, not demand, as you will probably never in position to answer this question…

Agreed. Wrong word. "Eagerly inquired" would have suited it better (you see, I admit my mistake :yes:).

“What is then the use of asking?” Actually, I try to shake your certitudes, the black and white mental attitude… I probably lose my time, but I have hope for you…
What Russia is doing will remain as black. But what Ukraine is doing is not white, as I have mentioned my awareness of incompetence, mismanagement, treason and other shortcomings of what is being done by my country. It is evidently not white, let us term it as Cambridge blue.
What color scale would you apply for it? 60 shades of gray?

Brenus

06-21-2014, 16:50

“but only as a response to separatists who shell the army detachments positioning their mortars or whatever in those areas.” How do you know this? How do you know it is ONLY? You can’t. You JUST CAN’T. When will you accept the simple fact that you can’t…

“Did you see the videos with the snipers?” Yes I did.
“They always worked from behind the Berkut lines” Well, if you want the Police to be accused of shooting the crowd, it is what has to be done. And about keeping contact, you just assume that is what they do. Now, you might believe as well that all Riot Policemen knew all members of the Police… That is the advantage to wear a uniform, no body ask for ID.
My suspicion comes from the total incapacity of the actual power to identify the at least one sniper when the now officials have all the documentation in their possession. How is it possible? Nothing?

“The absence of accreditation means that they penetrated Ukraine illegally without notifying Ukrainian officials about that.” Strange that I have to explain, but when you are member of an organisation that report from the other side of the government, it is extremely difficult to obtain accreditation. And it is still doesn’t explain the killing.
To be fair, I watched the video shown by RT, and there is clearly APC on the shelled zone, which can make it as legitimate target. You can see as well, few refugees, but it is not a massive column.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-21-2014, 20:14

“Parisian French define Occitan as a patois of French.” Patois is a word defining a local language. Not a patois of French or from an other main stream of language. It was the word used before “local language”. The French definition of the word Patois is: « relatif à un dialecte local, régional » or « dialecte parlé dans une région, un lieu géographique » , so a local/regional dialect, spoken in a region, a geographical area.

The Occitan is the patois spoken in the OC region, old name for the South West Region that were match by the Oil language in the North.
Technically, French Canadian would be a patois. However, the word has now a very negative connotation. Only very badly educated Parisian would use this word. The problem of course is very badly educated and Parisian often go in pair.

I don’t know why you insist on “Parisian” French, as French, as language, is defined by the Académie Française created by in 1635 by the King Louis the XIII, suppressed by the French Revolution (that is for the myth of French Revolution “imposing” French on the poor Britanny) then restore by Napoleon.

The King resided where?

Paris.

The Revolutionary Constitution defined the language of the republic as what?

Parisian French.

Parisian French is the patois of the Parisian Region - because Paris rules France it has become the Lingua Franca (pun absolutely intended). However - both Occitan and Parisian are INDEPENDENTLY descended from vulgar Latin dialects. One notes, also, that your French definition describes a Patois as a "dialect" implying a deviation from a "standard" language. Occitan is a seperate language to French, just as Castillian Spanish is.

Now - compare to the way Ukrainians are viewed in Russia.

Sarmatian

06-22-2014, 00:44

Every last one of those expresses an international preference in a legitimate way. Not a one of them is your smoking gun.

Let's put legitimacy aside for a moment - after this it's quite hard to claim there was no coherent foreign policy towards Ukraine and that US didn't pressure both Ukrainian leadership and some European NATO allies (most notably France and Germany).

Err.....

All of these refer to a different administration. The current job-holder has....how does one phrase it delicately....a somewhat different approach to foreign affairs.

GC claimed US didn't have anything to do with anything in Ukraine prior to Yanukovich being ousted.

Mother Russia defines Ukrainian as the patois of Russian, just as the Parisian French define Occitan as a patois of French.

Russia does not recognise a separate "Ukrainian" identity.

How did you manage to find Russia free for a Q&A session? I've been trying for ages.

Please, no more rvg-like insights into Russian Soul

So the last election to the Rada was completely fake?

Different circumstances.

No.

The Parliament is elected - the President is elected - the separatists seized power with RPG's.

Elected MP's forced by threats of violence to vote a certain way or flee the city. Their decisions and presidential elections are as legitimate as those referenda in the east.

They unilaterally eclared independence after fixed referenda - "separatists" is a polite term for them, it's also accurate. Russian stooges might be accurate too, but it's hard to tell.

They declared self-rule, not independence, like Lviv did before Yanukovich was ousted.

There's no evidence of pushing, there's some evidence of encouragement but the US doesn't have a hard policy on this, like it does with, say, Israel. Until relatively recently Russia was considered a friendly nation, and I think the US looked to Ukraine as a bridge towards Russia. As such, co-operation between Ukraine and NATO was desirable, integration was not.

It probably isn't as hard as Israel, and I don't doubt it was much less of a priority for Obama than it was for Bush, but the basic strategy and the ultimate goal didn't change.

Sarmatian

06-22-2014, 01:18

Uh, no. Legitimacy is the whole crux of the issue. Whatever the US did in Ukraine prior to the revolution, it was never anything more than diplomatic pressure. And weak pressure at that. Now compare that to what Russia has been doing! The moral equivalency argument you keep trying to use has absolutely no merit with me, whatsoever. It is flat out wrong.

I'm not even interested in moral equivalency, morality rarely has anything to do with politics, I'm again talking about a cause and a consequence. You tried to portray this as a purely European problem and used it as an example of why should US be more isolationist. The fact is, USA played its hand and Russia, traditionally, overreacted. Besides those two countries and Ukraine, the rest of Europe had very little to do with the entire thing.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-22-2014, 03:10

How did you manage to find Russia free for a Q&A session? I've been trying for ages.

I'm going off the think Viking posted about Russia giving no official recognition to the Ukrainian language, it does for other minority languages.

Different circumstances.

Elected MP's forced by threats of violence to vote a certain way or flee the city. Their decisions and presidential elections are as legitimate as those referenda in the east.

After the 80 protestors were shot and the President fled, there are some reports of beatings in Rada - not enough to have actually changed the outcome of the vote. It's not ideal - but the beatings were more about the majority punishing the ousted presidents supporters than actually enforcing their will - they'd already done that.

They declared self-rule, not independence, like Lviv did before Yanukovich was ousted.

they're replacing Ukrainian symbols with Russian ones, and asking Outin to send troops.

We're not stupid Sarmation - if Putin had accepted those regions would already be part of Russia.

It probably isn't as hard as Israel, and I don't doubt it was much less of a priority for Obama than it was for Bush, but the basic strategy and the ultimate goal didn't change.

Again - Ukrainian integration into NATO presupposes ultimate Russian integration (as a major player) but in the short to medium term Ukrainian integration was not desirable.

It was not pursued as policy - co-operation was.

The post-Cold War integration of the Baltics, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria etc. began in the 1990's at the urging of those countries to protect them from future Russian aggression.

We now see that those concerns were entirely justified.

Gilrandir

06-22-2014, 06:16

“but only as a response to separatists who shell the army detachments positioning their mortars or whatever in those areas.” How do you know this? How do you know it is ONLY? You can’t. You JUST CAN’T. When will you accept the simple fact that you can’t…

So you think they shoot just for fun seeing (and aiming at) no partucular target? More logical is to think that they want to suppress the fire opened by separatists. Like you do, I apply my experience and analyze things.

“They always worked from behind the Berkut lines” Well, if you want the Police to be accused of shooting the crowd, it is what has to be done. And about keeping contact, you just assume that is what they do.

The videos were not the only evidence. The intercepted audio communication was also made public in which the snipers were talking about Berkut starting an offensive so they had to move on with it or change their deployment.

My suspicion comes from the total incapacity of the actual power to identify the at least one sniper when the now officials have all the documentation in their possession. How is it possible? Nothing?

What the officials now say on their inabilty to identify the snipers: prior to any investigation all the documents with orders were destroyed and all the weapons to be taken for expertise were transported to Crimea. The investigation has no palpable evidence to prove the affiliation of the snipers and it can't base its conclusions on assumptions. Videos and audios just indicate (I'm not sure whether they can be officially accepted as evidence) that the snipers existed and they kept contact with the police.

“The absence of accreditation means that they penetrated Ukraine illegally without notifying Ukrainian officials about that.” Strange that I have to explain, but when you are member of an organisation that report from the other side of the government, it is extremely difficult to obtain accreditation.
Practically all Russian journalists work against the Ukrainian government reporting from places either controlled by separatists or the government, yet they are officially accredited.

Brenus

06-22-2014, 12:02

“We now see that those concerns were entirely justified.” Yeap, remind me of “we attack to prevent an ethnic cleansing” , then when the war started, Ethnic Cleansing happened, then the “see, we were right” thing… Self-justification and good conscience, carry-on…

“More logical is to think that they want to suppress the fire opened by separatists.” Nope. Logic tells me that the Governmental Forces are pushing on, so they attack identified targets.

“snipers were talking about Berkut” If true, your Prosecutor should be able to identify who shoot and who gave the orders if they were part of the anti-riot police. As nothing came-up the surface, I suppose this is not real information, but more a rumour.

“prior to any investigation all the documents with orders were destroyed and all the weapons to be taken for expertise were transported to Crimea.” Makes me laugh, sorry… So, before the storming of the Parliament and the fall of the President in power, all evidences were extracted towards Crimea, as of course, Crimea was near to be taken by separatists. THEY knew it even before it happened… When all this did happened? Who, how? No, I afraid it is another story…
Chronology:
18 February: Clashes erupt, with reasons unclear: 18 dead, including seven police officers, and hundreds more wounded. Some 25,000 protesters are encircled in Independence Square.
20 February: Kiev sees its worst day of violence for almost 70 years. At least 88 people are killed in 48 hours. Video shows uniformed snipers firing at protesters holding makeshift shields.
22 February:
President Yanukovych disappears
Protesters take control of presidential administration buildings
Parliament votes to remove president from power with elections set for 25 May
23-26 February: Parliament names speaker Olexander Turchynov as interim president. An arrest warrant is issued for Mr Yanukovych, and the acting president warns of the dangers of separatism. Members of the proposed new government appear before demonstrators, with Arseniy Yatsenyuk nominated prime minister. The elite Berkut police unit, blamed for deaths of protesters, is disbanded.
27-28 February: Pro-Russian gunmen seize key buildings in the Crimean capital, Simferopol. Unidentified gunmen in combat uniforms appear outside Crimea's main airports. At his first news conference since fleeing to Russia, Mr Yanukovych insists he remains president.
So, as shown is the chronology, your (or the OFFICIAL) one is just not possible as the Unit was disbanded immediately... And they couldn't know Crimean Events...
To be possible, to collect all document and to move ALL of them, the ones doing it should have been Clairvoyants, and the following of events largely proves they ere not.

Viking

06-22-2014, 13:32

Elected MP's forced by threats of violence to vote a certain way or flee the city. Their decisions and presidential elections are as legitimate as those referenda in the east.

What evidence do you have to support these claims? Which time period(s) are we talking about? With Yanukovich or post-Yanukovich?

Gilrandir

06-22-2014, 15:40

“More logical is to think that they want to suppress the fire opened by separatists.” Nope. Logic tells me that the Governmental Forces are pushing on, so they attack identified targets.

This pushing on of yours has resulted in nothing but Governmental forces keeping the same positions around the besieged cities. The main objective of them until now is to prevent terrorists from proliferating.

“snipers were talking about Berkut” If true, your Prosecutor should be able to identify who shoot and who gave the orders if they were part of the anti-riot police. As nothing came-up the surface, I suppose this is not real information, but more a rumour.

They held converse with each other not with Berkut. How can you identify unknown people talking with each other?

“prior to any investigation all the documents with orders were destroyed and all the weapons to be taken for expertise were transported to Crimea.” Makes me laugh, sorry… So, before the storming of the Parliament and the fall of the President in power, all evidences were extracted towards Crimea, as of course, Crimea was near to be taken by separatists. THEY knew it even before it happened… When all this did happened? Who, how? No, I afraid it is another story…
Chronology:
18 February: Clashes erupt, with reasons unclear: 18 dead, including seven police officers, and hundreds more wounded. Some 25,000 protesters are encircled in Independence Square.
20 February: Kiev sees its worst day of violence for almost 70 years. At least 88 people are killed in 48 hours. Video shows uniformed snipers firing at protesters holding makeshift shields.
22 February:
President Yanukovych disappears
Protesters take control of presidential administration buildings
Parliament votes to remove president from power with elections set for 25 May
23-26 February: Parliament names speaker Olexander Turchynov as interim president. An arrest warrant is issued for Mr Yanukovych, and the acting president warns of the dangers of separatism. Members of the proposed new government appear before demonstrators, with Arseniy Yatsenyuk nominated prime minister. The elite Berkut police unit, blamed for deaths of protesters, is disbanded.
27-28 February: Pro-Russian gunmen seize key buildings in the Crimean capital, Simferopol. Unidentified gunmen in combat uniforms appear outside Crimea's main airports. At his first news conference since fleeing to Russia, Mr Yanukovych insists he remains president.
So, as shown is the chronology, your (or the OFFICIAL) one is just not possible as the Unit was disbanded immediately... And they couldn't know Crimean Events...
To be possible, to collect all document and to move ALL of them, the ones doing it should have been Clairvoyants, and the following of events largely proves they ere not.
1. Yanukovych was spotted (by the surveillance cameras) collecting his belongings and moving them out before the described chronology (16-18 February).
2. How do you read the word "disbanded"? In Ukraine it means issuing an ordinace proclaiming that the unit exists no more. It doesn't mean that the people were arrested or detained. After the ordinance, being out of job, they were free to go anywhere they liked. What they did is returned to their bases in eastern and southern regions, very often keeping their weapons (who could have dared to stop an armed band in the commotion of those days) . Since a significant part of them were Crimea-based units, they moved that way (and were met as heroes over there, btw). Many of them then, feeling betrayed by the government, eagerly participated in Crimean events on the pro-Russian side and are still doing it in Donbas.
3. Since the snipers were not official police or army detachments, their arms disappeared together with them rendering them unavailable for expertise. The likeliest place of them was thought to be Crimea since by now they couldn't have been detected anywhere where Ukrainian police can reach. I believe that the weapons can be in Russia by now.
4. Did I say that the documents were collected and moved out? As the interior minister Avakov claimed, when he entered the office it had all traces of hurried destruction of documents bearing on Maidan events. This destruction is reported to have commenced simultaneously with Yanukovych's packings.

Sarmatian

06-22-2014, 21:46

That's not true at all. The whole question of ties to the EU might have been something the US would prefer, but it is still ukrainians seeking ties to THE EU. This is all about Europe, but you point at us just because Bush had preferences? Its silly.

EU /= NATO.

I'm going off the think Viking posted about Russia giving no official recognition to the Ukrainian language, it does for other minority languages.

So? Norwegian is not an official language in Sweden, that doesn't mean Sweden thinks all Norwegians are Swedish.

After the 80 protestors were shot and the President fled, there are some reports of beatings in Rada - not enough to have actually changed the outcome of the vote. It's not ideal - but the beatings were more about the majority punishing the ousted presidents supporters than actually enforcing their will - they'd already done that.

So what's the threshold? How many beatings before it becomes illegal?

they're replacing Ukrainian symbols with Russian ones, and asking Outin to send troops.

We're not stupid Sarmation - if Putin had accepted those regions would already be part of Russia.

They didn't apply and he didn't, so your point is moot.

Again - Ukrainian integration into NATO presupposes ultimate Russian integration (as a major player) but in the short to medium term Ukrainian integration was not desirable.

It was not pursued as policy - co-operation was.

That's your view.

The post-Cold War integration of the Baltics, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria etc. began in the 1990's at the urging of those countries to protect them from future Russian aggression.

We now see that those concerns were entirely justified.

We're again justifying a cause with a consequence.

What evidence do you have to support these claims? Which time period(s) are we talking about? With Yanukovich or post-Yanukovich?

Ample reports on the subject after Yanukovich was ousted. Party of Regions MP's were forced to flee the capital and those who left were instructed how to vote by threats of violence to them and their families.

Brenus

06-23-2014, 07:03

“How can you identify unknown people talking with each other?” So they were not part of the Police forces? Do I understand it right? Is it what you are saying?

“I believe that the weapons can be in Russia by now.” Yeah, you believe. But they could be either destroyed (why keep them?) or in the safe of your Extreme-Right/Nazi as much as we know… Provocations can be used by all sides… Again, you choose the most dramatic path instead to choose the most pragmatic one.

“This destruction is reported to have commenced simultaneously with Yanukovych's packings.” To destroy documents need more time than you think. But all right, let’s pretend that they were so efficient that they did it. You still should have witnesses, few tracks left as forensic, you can’t destroy all evidences: the Nazi tried it in the last MONTHS during the fall of the Regime in 1944 and 1945 and failed. Then, you have the contradiction of the snipers not being part of the police, so why the police would have to destroy documents?

“As the interior minister Avakov claimed” Ahhh, so if the interior minister Avakov claimed… By the way, the guy got the job thanks to the Coup, so all what he can say is to be taken with gloves.

Gilrandir

06-23-2014, 12:04

“How can you identify unknown people talking with each other?” So they were not part of the Police forces? Do I understand it right? Is it what you are saying?

They were not part of internal troops nor of Berkut officially acting on the scene. They are suspected to have been some other special assignment force or privately hired by the regime of Yanukovych (his older son is rumoured to have done it).

“I believe that the weapons can be in Russia by now.” Yeah, you believe. But they could be either destroyed (why keep them?) or in the safe of your Extreme-Right/Nazi as much as we know… Provocations can be used by all sides… Again, you choose the most dramatic path instead to choose the most pragmatic one.

Once again, they were acting FROM BEHIND police lines and IN ACCORDANCE with them which points to one side only. And how is your approach more pragmatic - to blame "my extreme right/nazis" in anything violent or cruel that was being done? It is the easiest path and the one which doesn't require any analysis you are so proud of employing: they are the ultimate evil so they are responsible for any murders, atrocities, bullyings, weapon hidings and other fellonies. No need of evidence or investigation - they are guilty by default.

“This destruction is reported to have commenced simultaneously with Yanukovych's packings.” Then, you have the contradiction of the snipers not being part of the police, so why the police would have to destroy documents?

The documents are suspected to have contained orders to officially deployed governmental forces to let through or to cooperate in some way with the said snipers.

You still should have witnesses, few tracks left as forensic, you can’t destroy all evidences

Witnesses can only say that they saw people on the roofs and heard shots after which protesters were knocked about in heaps. Forensic experts confirm that the wounds were caused by sniper rifle bullets very often shot from on high, but to identify which weapons were used they should have some for expertise and they have them not.

“As the interior minister Avakov claimed” Ahhh, so if the interior minister Avakov claimed… By the way, the guy got the job thanks to the Coup, so all what he can say is to be taken with gloves.
Speaking of contradictions: you want to have some official information from the side you don't trust and are biased against. How that will help you to discover the truth?

Viking

06-23-2014, 13:42

So? Norwegian is not an official language in Sweden, that doesn't mean Sweden thinks all Norwegians are Swedish.

There is no real Norwegian minority living in Sweden. I also think that Norwegian and Swedish have a greater rate of mutual intelligibility (90-95%?) than Russian and Ukrainian. Some sources claim that Russian and Ukrainian are largely not mutually intelligible.

Almost two million Ukrainians are permanent citizens of Russia. For how long they have been that is a good question:

In moving to Russia, both Botezatu and Romanenko chose a path that millions of other Ukrainians have taken. Nearly two million people described themselves as Ukrainian in Russia's 2010 census, and many more Russians are of mixed Ukrainian heritage. Putin said last month there are three million Ukrainian citizens currently working in Russia.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/04/russia-ukraine-crisis-minority-under-pressure-2014423104132154242.html

Ample reports on the subject after Yanukovich was ousted. Party of Regions MP's were forced to flee the capital and those who left were instructed how to vote by threats of violence to them and their families.

Then surely you can produce at least one reliable link to back up your claims. Quick searches yielded no results.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-23-2014, 14:27

EU /= NATO.

NATO basically - EU + US + Anglosphere + Turkey.

The EU is a major constituant part of NATO, to the extent that EU policy never runs counter to NATO policy.

So? Norwegian is not an official language in Sweden, that doesn't mean Sweden thinks all Norwegians are Swedish.

And yet, Swedes recognise Norwegian as a separate language despite Norway having been historically ruled from either Sweden or Denmark, off and on, for the last thousand years.

So what's the threshold? How many beatings before it becomes illegal?

Assault is always illegal - you're asking the wrong question.

They didn't apply and he didn't, so your point is moot.

I've seen them on TV repeatedly ask for Russian military support, with Russian (not Ukrainian) flags between them.

That's your view.

It makes more geopolitical sense than yours.

We're again justifying a cause with a consequence.

The cause of those countries' desire to join NATO was the historical tendency of Russia to enforce it's political aims with tanks - see Prague Spring. Russia forced all those countries to join either the Soviet Union or the Warsaw Pact at gunpoint and kept them subservient by force.

With the exception of Bulgaria all those countries are also, historically, orientated West rather than East and when Russian power collapsed they sort to return to their historical orbit.

Gilrandir

06-23-2014, 14:39

There is no real Norwegian minority living in Sweden. I also think that Norwegian and Swedish have a greater rate of mutual intelligibility (90-95%?) than Russian and Ukrainian.

AFAIK, there two varieties of Norwegian - landsmal and bokmal. How much are those mutualy intelligible and close/far from Swedish?

Some sources claim that Russian and Ukrainian are largely not mutually intelligible.

My friend moved to Moscow close on 20 years ago, got married and now has two kids. They come to Ukraine to visit his parents now and then where his kids are exposed to Ukrainian, particularly watching Ukrainian TV. So his son complains that he can hardly understand what he hears. Yet, older generations of Russians who have had an experience of the Soviet "melting pot" of nations are better at comprehending Ukrainian. Some Russian TV journalists, who can't work under the censorship Putin introduced, moved to Ukraine and even host their TV shows. They are good at understanding Ukrainian and can even say a phrase or two in it (unlike the former Ukrainian Prime Minister Azarov who is still a laughing stock due to his extraordinary abilty of "speaking two languages simultaneously", as they joked, or was said to be speaking Azarian).

Sarmatian

06-23-2014, 16:23

There is no real Norwegian minority living in Sweden. I also think that Norwegian and Swedish have a greater rate of mutual intelligibility (90-95%?) than Russian and Ukrainian. Some sources claim that Russian and Ukrainian are largely not mutually intelligible.

In terms of percentages, Ukrainians make up less than 2% of population in Russia. There are about 150,00 people from former Yugoslavia in Sweden, less than 2%. Sweden doesn't recognize Serbo-Croatian as an official language. I take it you see where I'm going with this...

In Ukraine, the situation is different, more or less half of population uses Russian as a first language.

Hopefully we can drop this, as reality on the ground is different, and frankly, it's silly to even compare it.

Then surely you can produce at least one reliable link to back up your claims. Quick searches yielded no results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VivY94Cp0s0

This is one PoR MP being victimised, called traitor and threatened to have his cojones cut off and raped by the entire army, among other things.

Pro-Russian presidential candidate was beaten in Kiev after giving an interview to a TV station, and when the ambulance came, Right Sector people didn't allow him to go to hospital and instead took him to prosecutor's office (which is controlled by their man).

C'mon, if you're gonna have a hard stance on this, at least try not to limit yourself to western mass media, which is as biased as RT and then some.

Brenus

06-23-2014, 19:29

“you want to have some official information” No. I want some information that can been seen and scrutinised. No vague assumptions based on political point of view.

“they were acting FROM BEHIND police lines” So were Partisans in WW2 and after. And some were even wearing enemies’ uniforms… So again, not really a proof, because the question is why, according to you, the Former President would have a NEED to employ para-militaries wearing Police Uniforms? Makes no sense at all: I can understand to use para-militaries in order to do the bad job anonymously, but then why putting them in Police distinctive Uniforms, which all the media against you will immediately identify? Then why to employ para-military when you have all the “regular” forces at your disposal? Again, it makes no sense. It defeats what you want to do…

“The documents are suspected to have contained orders to officially deployed governmental forces to let through or to cooperate in some way with the said snipers.” Of course… Destroyed documents might…. Well, the reality is we don’t know: all is speculation (they are suspected). Why? Police didn’t have snipers to do the job? The former President could have done what your actual is doing, call them rebels, mercenaries, separatists and so on, then bomb them, machinegun them, and job done.

“Witnesses can only say that they saw people on the roofs and heard shots after which protesters were knocked about in heaps.” So, in the amount of police officers who were in duty during the riots, you have none that came to tell that he spoke with at least one sniper to coordinate the attack. And you accept it as a truth? There were no sympathiser within the police who could give one evidence, a hint, of the cooperation between the Riot Police (who themselves were under sniper fire, do not forget) at all? Smell fishy this story…

“ IN ACCORDANCE with them” Witnesses and testimonies, proof, please… As you mentioned, perhaps not intentionally before, all these are speculations and hypothesis.

The fact is when you are in tense situation as the Riot Police was, if in the corner of your eyes you see a friendly uniform, you don’t ask questions. As simple as that. Now, it proves nothing in one side or the other. Yes, perhaps the Former President was perhaps as stupid as you describe him and certainly was a thug, but perhaps your extreme-right/Nazi are as brutal and without conscience as their models were. But, at the moment being, the ones who gain from the snipers firing at the crowd under the eyes of cameras are the extreme-right/Nazi. That is the reason I want more proofs and less political stances.

Viking

06-23-2014, 21:33

AFAIK, there two varieties of Norwegian - landsmal and bokmal. How much are those mutualy intelligible and close/far from Swedish?

The short answer is that you'll get roughly the same results no matter which of them you compare with each other (e.g. sometimes Nynorsk (in the beginning called Landsmål) is closer to Swedish, sometimes Bokmål is). The long answer would be too long to be relevant for this thread. ~;)

In terms of percentages, Ukrainians make up less than 2% of population in Russia. There are about 150,00 people from former Yugoslavia in Sweden, less than 2%. Sweden doesn't recognize Serbo-Croatian as an official language. I take it you see where I'm going with this...

In Ukraine, the situation is different, more or less half of population uses Russian as a first language.

Hopefully we can drop this, as reality on the ground is different, and frankly, it's silly to even compare it.

If a significant part of the Ukrainian population has lived in what is now the Russian Federation for many, many generations, then that's different. The Yugoslavs haven't been living in Sweden for that many generations, and quite a few of them are probably losing ther original language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VivY94Cp0s0

This is one PoR MP being victimised, called traitor and threatened to have his cojones cut off and raped by the entire army, among other things.

According to the description accompanying the video, he was a 'separatist leader'. This (http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2014/03/11/7018400/) link seems to say that he was detained by the SBU (turned in by Lyashko and his gang?) for being a 'separatist leader'.

Even if true, it doesn't make the stuff that seems to have happened appropriate. But if true, it's not a simple case of an 'MP being beaten and threatened'.

Pro-Russian presidential candidate was beaten in Kiev after giving an interview to a TV station, and when the ambulance came, Right Sector people didn't allow him to go to hospital and instead took him to prosecutor's office (which is controlled by their man).

C'mon, if you're gonna have a hard stance on this, at least try not to limit yourself to western mass media, which is as biased as RT and then some.

I'm reading a link (http://rt.com/news/ukraine-presidential-candidates-attacked-516/) from RT.com and I am unable to make it fit with your narrative:

Oleg Tsarev was attacked after being trapped inside the ICTV media building following his appearance on the ‘Svoboda Slova’ chat show, according to the statement released by Tsarev’s office.

“It was with great difficulty that government’s security forces were able to recapture Oleg Tsarev from the angry mob. He was severely beaten and is in serious condition,” the press office said.

[...]

However, despite claims by Tsarev’s press service that the presidential candidate was “in critical condition,” Tsarev appeared in front of cameras. In the video, spread via Youtube, he was able to give an interview.

The Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s office has opened a criminal case into the violent attack on the presidential candidate, the office reported.

For all I know, he and Dobkin could have been offered police protection afterwards.

Sarmatian

06-23-2014, 21:58

Even if true, it doesn't make the stuff that seems to have happened appropriate. But if true, it's not a simple case of an 'MP being beaten and threatened'.

I'm reading a link (http://rt.com/news/ukraine-presidential-candidates-attacked-516/) from RT.com and I am unable to make it fit with your narrative:

For all I know, he and Dobkin could have been offered police protection afterwards.

What can I say, look it up yourself. Just read some news articles from a few months back. The entire thing stinks like an army of giant skunks.

You can not have democratic presidential elections when candidates are beaten up on a street or proper function of a parliament when mp's are threatened, or when there's a fascist organisation sitting in front of the parliament threatening renewal of violence if the vote doesn't go according to plan.

Viking

06-23-2014, 22:49

What can I say, look it up yourself. Just read some news articles from a few months back. The entire thing stinks like an army of giant skunks.

You can not have democratic presidential elections when candidates are beaten up on a street or proper function of a parliament when mp's are threatened, or when there's a fascist organisation sitting in front of the parliament threatening renewal of violence if the vote doesn't go according to plan.

All I see is you failing to provide adequate evidence for the claims you've made. Violence against politicians happens in literally every country on the planet. What you need to provide evidence for is that the violence/threats could realistically have had a significant impact on the outcome of the elections.

All I've seen thus far are two isolated incidents whose aftermath have not been reported on.

The areas of Ukraine where the two assaulted candidates were the most likely to have significant support was areas where separatist leaders declared the Ukrainian presidential elections illegal (http://en.itar-tass.com/world/732741)in their claimed territory, because "it's not part of Ukraine anymore":

DONETSK, May 22. /ITAR-TASS/. The self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic will not take part in Ukraine’s snap presidential elections scheduled for May 25, Vladimir Makovich, a deputy chairman of the presidium of the Donetsk republic’s Supreme Council said on Thursday.
“The Ukrainian authorities claim they are still organizing elections on the territory of the now former Ukraine,” he said at an extraordinary session of the republic’s legislature and added that Donetsk lawmakers had banned presidential election.

This they went on to enforce on the election day (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27564955):

Election day is a washout in Donetsk city: none of the almost 500 polling stations are open and no election commission is operational. Some have been seized by armed separatist groups; in others, staff have been threatened and voter lists removed. Perhaps the most important election in Ukraine since independence in 1991 is simply not going to happen in one of the country's biggest cities.

Sarmatian

06-24-2014, 06:09

All I see is you failing to provide adequate evidence for the claims you've made. Violence against politicians happens in literally every country on the planet.

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Yeah, whatever. Carry on.

Husar

06-24-2014, 06:57

All I've seen thus far are two isolated incidents whose aftermath have not been reported on.

Isn't that part of the problem? That shady things go on but because it's "our side" doing them, the press doesn't investigate further but when "they" do something shady, the press tries to report it all day long and go to great lengths to blame it on Putin. It's almost like the 300 movie, where "our guys" are the glorious free spirits and "they" are all just stupid puppets of the evil dark ruler. That's propaganda.

Viking

06-24-2014, 15:14

Isn't that part of the problem? That shady things go on but because it's "our side" doing them, the press doesn't investigate further but when "they" do something shady, the press tries to report it all day long and go to great lengths to blame it on Putin. It's almost like the 300 movie, where "our guys" are the glorious free spirits and "they" are all just stupid puppets of the evil dark ruler. That's propaganda.

There are plenty of pro-Russian media organisations writing in English and other languages people like the two presidential candidates can report their stories to.

Husar

06-24-2014, 16:59

There are plenty of pro-Russian media organisations writing in English and other languages people like the two presidential candidates can report their stories to.

Just like all the dissidents in the GDR could have reported their stories to the New York Times?
And even if they did, it would be discarded as propaganda lies by all the clever westerners who know never to believe anything a Russian says.

Viking

06-24-2014, 20:21

Just like all the dissidents in the GDR could have reported their stories to the New York Times?

Not sure what you are trying to say with that.

And even if they did, it would be discarded as propaganda lies by all the clever westerners who know never to believe anything a Russian says.

That does not prevent the sources I mentioned from producing great volumes of their content. I think a lot of people read their stuff, too.

Husar

06-24-2014, 20:54

Not sure what you are trying to say with that.

They've already been threatened to vote a certain way, why wouldn't they have been threatened to stay away from the press as well?

That does not prevent the sources I mentioned from producing great volumes of their content. I think a lot of people read their stuff, too.
I thought you were insinuating that such content would be a valid source for the argument in this thread, because otherwise I'm not sure how it would help us in this discussion.

Viking

06-24-2014, 21:29

They've already been threatened to vote a certain way, why wouldn't they have been threatened to stay away from the press as well?

If they are too scared to talk about this, one really wonders how Sarmatian got to know about it. If they are too scared to talk anonymously to the press, then there's a high chance that they'd flee to a safer place, from which they can dare to talk to the press. I mean, what would MPs feel safe doing if they can't even feel safe talking to the press? Should they spend the next months voting against their own wishes? Or would they rather start as street vendors and wait for better times?

I thought you were insinuating that such content would be a valid source for the argument in this thread, because otherwise I'm not sure how it would help us in this discussion.

They might not be terribly trustworthy, but if a propaganda machinery hasn't picked up a story it would love to be able to publish, then all the more reason to be suspicious about it. Once specific claims have been made, they can be verfied or falsified.

Gilrandir

06-25-2014, 06:45

Pro-Russian presidential candidate was beaten in Kiev after giving an interview to a TV station, and when the ambulance came, Right Sector people didn't allow him to go to hospital and instead took him to prosecutor's office (which is controlled by their man).

1. Tsarov WAS SAVED from the angry mob by Right Sector which he HIMSELF admitted and THANKED Right Sector for it. I have mentioned it as a queer thing to happen and you made a remark that it doesn't paint Right Sector any whiter.
2. Prosecutor's office was NEVER controlled by Right Sector. At the time of the election campaign it had been held by a Svoboda representative who was replaced a week ago by Yarema, the former vice prime minister (from Batkivshchina).
Svoboda and Right Sector are competing parties.

“they were acting FROM BEHIND police lines” So were Partisans in WW2 and after. And some were even wearing enemies’ uniforms… So again, not really a proof, because the question is why, according to you, the Former President would have a NEED to employ para-militaries wearing Police Uniforms? Makes no sense at all: I can understand to use para-militaries in order to do the bad job anonymously, but then why putting them in Police distinctive Uniforms, which all the media against you will immediately identify? Then why to employ para-military when you have all the “regular” forces at your disposal? Again, it makes no sense. It defeats what you want to do…

The snipers WERE NOT WEARING police uniform. They were dressed in black uniforms bearing no insignia and had a yellow band bound above their elbow. And as for the sense of using them: you can make them do unpleasant things and escape accusations of doing such things.

“Witnesses can only say that they saw people on the roofs and heard shots after which protesters were knocked about in heaps.” So, in the amount of police officers who were in duty during the riots, you have none that came to tell that he spoke with at least one sniper to coordinate the attack. And you accept it as a truth? There were no sympathiser within the police who could give one evidence, a hint, of the cooperation between the Riot Police (who themselves were under sniper fire, do not forget) at all? Smell fishy this story…

One from the police to have come and said it should have been a high-ranked officer and you can find no sympathisers among such lot as making a carreer in the police meant serving the regime, covering up for its crimes and being paid for it. Police (as well as customs, courts and prosecutors) were (and perhaps still are) the most corrupt part of the state system in Ukraine.

“ IN ACCORDANCE with them” Witnesses and testimonies, proof, please… As you mentioned, perhaps not intentionally before, all these are speculations and hypothesis.

If I write something I do it with awareness. So far, all the investigation has yielded no official results leading to a trial. That is why such information may be considered speculations and I present it as such to avoid you accusing me of giving data lacking proofs.
Yet I know that three Berkuts now are held in custody and were charged with using fire arms against protesters. The investigation is under way. I don't know whether they are alleged snipers or not.

But, at the moment being, the ones who gain from the snipers firing at the crowd under the eyes of cameras are the extreme-right/Nazi. That is the reason I want more proofs and less political stances.
France expanded its territory as a result of WWI. Does it mean that France started it? The net result of some event may be misleading as an explanation of its origin.

You can not have democratic presidential elections when candidates are beaten up on a street or proper function of a parliament when mp's are threatened, or when there's a fascist organisation sitting in front of the parliament threatening renewal of violence if the vote doesn't go according to plan.
The answer is

Should they spend the next months voting against their own wishes?

The majority that was formed in the Verkhovna Rada in February still fuctions and includes the deputies which you report to have been threatened. So they have been threatened for four months already?

Brenus

06-25-2014, 06:52

Well, the problem is if you challenge 1 thing in the Freedom's Lovers and Pro-European, Champion of of the fight for Liberty, Ukrainian Pro-West bit of story, you become an agent of Evil Putin, supporting fascism and communism, in his long term goal to take Ukraine (and it probably only the starter).

"The snipers WERE NOT WEARING police uniform." Well, we were told by our media they were Police. It was clearly SAID they were part of the police.

"France expanded its territory as a result of WWI." Sorry? I think you should reconsider your sources or be less vague. If you refer to Alsace-Lorraine, it was French before the Franco-Prussian war, so it was reunified with France. Now, if you speak of Colonial territories, that another story...

Gilrandir

06-25-2014, 10:07

"The snipers WERE NOT WEARING police uniform." Well, we were told by our media they were Police. It was clearly SAID they were part of the police.
http://fakty.ua/177137-dokazano-lyudej-na-majdane-ubivayut-snajpery-video-foto
So much for the reliability of your sources.

"France expanded its territory as a result of WWI." Sorry? I think you should reconsider your sources or be less vague. If you refer to Alsace-Lorraine, it was French before the Franco-Prussian war, so it was reunified with France. Now, if you speak of Colonial territories, that another story...

The area of France in June 1914 was less then it was by the Treaty of Versailles. If we start talking of reunifucation business then GB may forward a claim to "reunify Aquitaine and Normandy with England".
As for Ukrainian events, for the time being the ultimate gainer is Russia which annexed Crimea. Can we then conclude that the snipers were Russians?

Sarmatian

06-25-2014, 10:07

1. Tsarov WAS SAVED from the angry mob by Right Sector which he HIMSELF admitted and THANKED Right Sector for it. I have mentioned it as a queer thing to happen and you made a remark that it doesn't paint Right Sector any whiter.
2. Prosecutor's office was NEVER controlled by Right Sector. At the time of the election campaign it had been held by a Svoboda representative who was replaced a week ago by Yarema, the former vice prime minister (from Batkivshchina).
Svoboda and Right Sector are competing parties.

According to Reuters and New York times, he was seized by the Right Sector from the ambulance. Maybe they were trying to save him from the doctors?

Gilrandir

06-25-2014, 14:46

According to Reuters and New York times, he was seized by the Right Sector from the ambulance. Maybe they were trying to save him from the doctors?
Why did he then thank Right Sector thugs? Perhaps the doctors were scarier than them?:laugh4:
My guess is that the angry mob were not letting the ambulance through so Right Sector escorted him out of the car and out of the crowd.
Anyway, look at him now - safe and sound and representing separatists in the negotiations (in spite of the fact the prosecutor has given an arrest warrant on him).

Sarmatian

06-25-2014, 15:40

Why did he then thank Right Sector thugs? Perhaps the doctors were scarier than them?:laugh4:

Incidentally, I couldn't find anywhere that he thanked Right Sector.

EDIT.

I did find something. Transliteration issues (Tsarev, Tsarov, Tsaryov, Tsariov...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BpXHUMuwSSo

Is this him thanking them? He's stripped to the waist and covered in bruises and held in something that appears to be a government building, due to metal doors and CoA on the far wall (prosecutor's office perhaps?).
It definitely doesn't look like a hospital.

Could it be that he only thanked Right Sector while being held up by the Right Sector and never mentioned it again? I wonder... Food for thoughts, at least.

Gilrandir

06-25-2014, 16:55

Is this him thanking them? He's stripped to the waist and covered in bruises and held in something that appears to be a government building, due to metal doors and CoA on the far wall (prosecutor's office perhaps?).
It definitely doesn't look like a hospital.

Could it be that he only thanked Right Sector while being held up by the Right Sector and never mentioned it again? I wonder... Food for thoughts, at least.
It is the very video I meant. It is most likely the prosecutor's office. He is stripped because the mob tore away the clothes off him. He thanks Right Sector at 2.16 - 2.34, that is if you trust me at least in matters of translation. He says "I'm grateful to the guys that saved me". The journalist goes "Do you know that those guys were Right Sector?" and he responds "Yes, I do".

Kadagar_AV

06-25-2014, 16:59

Isn't this rather spot on...

"Salami tactics"

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

Brenus

06-25-2014, 20:04

Seamus Fermanagh

06-25-2014, 21:37

So, someone steals your money...

This is a deduction on your corporation's taxes on the basis of lost profit that did not result from your own decisions/business efforts.

you take it back...

Your corporation FURTHER deducts the cost associated with this monetary recovery as a non-standard business expense

and you call it a profit….

Only called a profit in the shareholder's unofficial summary sheet....as far as the G goes, the whole thing is a deduction.

Modern Money Management for the WIN!

Brenus

06-25-2014, 22:59

"Modern Money Management for the WIN!" Not THAT modern, but, Capitalism made money on everything... Privatising profits and making private debts public are the keys of good Capitalistic Government, then succeeded to convince the populations that THEY live over their means... It is soooo beautiful that I can cry in watching it.
And, the best ones paid a fortune because they were the best before the crisis they are responsible for are replaced by new best ones paid fortune as well because they are the best to repair what the former bests did (but they kept their bonuses because it was their contract). Note that a Capitalistic Governments never challenge bankers pay-out but do not hesitate to re-negotiate contract of civil servants. There are contracts which you can, and those you can't.
And the best part is you still have poor who really believe that the riches created jobs. I am sure that even Napoleon after Austerlitz didn't feel so proud than our modern politicians realising that their subjects definitively have not a clue......

Gilrandir

06-26-2014, 06:42

“So much for the reliability of your sources.” :laugh4:. You’re right.:laugh4: I shouldn’t trust the BBC and others when they told us the snipers were from the Ukrainian Police sent by the former President… I will be more cautious next time.:yes:
Tell me, what the little symbol on your pictures represents? Radio Svoboda… Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty… Yeah…

You missed two important things:
1. There were videos and pictures NOT ONLY by the media you seem to despise so much.
2. Videos and pictures speak for themselves needing no comment from any media which you may or may not trust. See, you could understand them without having to understand the Cyrillic above and below them.

“Government snipers shot back, killing at least 70 people and wounding hundreds of others, according to a protest doctor.”: Daily Mail. 20/02/2014
Harrowing footage has emerged which shows a group of anti-government protesters being picked off by special force snipers while progressing through Kiev's Independence Square.: International Business Time, 20/02/2014
“Civil War in Ukraine - Video footage of military snipers engaging unarmed people. Raw Footage. Please be advised of severe violence.” Military.com, 20/02/2014
“Ukrainian police fire at protesters in Kiev” The Guardian, 20/02/2014
“Footage emerges purporting to show snipers from the Ukrainian security forces shooting at protesters in Kiev” The Telegraph, 20/02/2014

Judging from the highlights, some media you refer to made two mistakes:
1. They called the riots civil war. If we believe it then we have plenty of civil wars anywhere the government starts shooting at protesters and protesters start burning things in the street.
2. Government forces did shoot at protesters, BUT THOSE WERE NOT SNIPERS. They were Berkuts using AK-whatever its number. As you may have seen in the videos, snipers formed a separate unit acting on its own.

I think I had good reason to believe that the western Media were telling us that the snipers were form the Government side.But as you said, I was too hasty to believe them.

For me (as well as for the media you referrred to) it is obvious that the snipers were ON the Government side. The investigation being held now tries to prove that they were FROM the Government side and that proving seems to be a problem.

See, I can recognise my mistakes sometimes. :bow:

:hail:
This is the first admission you MIGHT make mistakes.
But irony aside, you again seem to contradict yourself: you are sure the snipers were sent by the government but you try to convince me that they were sent by Nazis who are at power now.

Aquitaine and Normandy never belonged to England, but to the Duke of Normandy who happened to be the King of England… To re-brush your understanding of feudalism, Lords and Vassals link could be a good idea…

Even after English monarchs stopped being Dukes of Normandy they retained claim to their French domains which caused many a war. So reunifucation is a dangerous thing to start. Putin did, even giving medals for participating in the notorious reunification.

“As for Ukrainian events, for the time being the ultimate gainer is Russia which annexed Crimea. Can we then conclude that the snipers were Russians?” That is if you believe (but as you believe Putin organised the all thing, so you might after all) that Russians are Fortune-Tellers seeing the future.
Your claim is similar: nazis who sent snipers were fortune tellers who knew they would ultimately benefit from it, and they did.

Brenus

06-26-2014, 07:18

“There were videos and pictures NOT ONLY by the media you seem to despise so much.” Again you translate in Gilrandirian what I wrote: I don’t despise Media, I am just terribly aware of their power of manipulation.

“Videos and pictures speak for themselves needing no comment from any media which you may or may not trust. See, you could understand them without having to understand the Cyrillic above and below them.” :laugh4:. That is the worst sentence I read in this thread. Images are telling what their authors/makers want to show you. I did understand the message from the pictures you show, no need of translation, as I know what YOU want to show.
Now, I could have say that the sniper didn’t shot 1 time in the video. So, I see a team of men in black, one being a sniper and then they leave the place, then image of shots against a crowd. And the montage suggests there is a link between the two. So pictures show me what they want me to believe, not actual facts.

“Judging from the highlights, some media you refer to made two mistakes” It was not mistake, it a way to sell. Come on, you don’t believe all what is the media and the big titles… Or perhaps you are, if they are official…

“The investigation being held now tries to prove that they were FROM the Government side and that proving seems to be a problem.” Investigation led by an Extreme-Right affiliated Prosecutor who had ignored/rejected all other possibilities, so I think he will find what he wants.

“This is the first admission you MIGHT make mistakes.” Not really, but there…

“Even after English monarchs stopped being Dukes of Normandy they retained claim on their French domains which caused many a war.” Oh yeah, I can claim I am the heir of Russia as well because my family came from the illegitimate son of Princess Anastasia after she escape from the Bolshevik Death Squad.
English Monarchs lost the 2 things which in the Middle-Ages would have back-up them: In battle first, as they lost the war, and lost the legal side (by tricks of French lawyers at the time). The first one is the most convincing. And they lost their title as having a rebellion against their Lord, they were stripped by him of their lands (and the tittle was link with the lands).

“Your claim is similar: nazis who sent snipers were fortune tellers who knew they would ultimately benefit from it, and they did.” No. First I don’t say for sure they did it. YOU claim that the government did it. I reject no possibilities.
Possibility is Extreme Right/Nazi had a plan of action, implemented it and gained. No need to see future for this. No risk at all, no possible lost (only if extreme bad luck) and all possibilities open. They created the opportunity and size it. So where is the need to foresee the future there? They created it, not predict it.
What they didn’t predict was first, other parts of Ukraine Reaction, then Putin fast thinking and sizing opportunities to secure its own interest (well, he was supposed to take care of Olympic Games, wasn’t he?). To be fair, nobody saw it.

Gilrandir

06-26-2014, 07:49

“There were videos and pictures NOT ONLY by the media you seem to despise so much.” Again you translate in Gilrandirian what I wrote: I don’t despise Media, I am just terribly aware of their power of manipulation.

I was careful enough to use "seem". By it I made a reservation that my supposition may be wrong.

Images are telling what their authors/makers want to show you. I did understand the message from the pictures you show, no need of translation, as I know what YOU want to show.
Now, I could have say that the sniper didn’t shot 1 time in the video. So, I see a team of men in black, one being a sniper and then they leave the place, then image of shots against a crowd. And the montage suggests there is a link between the two. So pictures show me what they want me to believe, not actual facts.

If numerous pictures and videos show the same for me it is an indication that it is the real fact. And those pictures are so much mine as yours - I didn't make them, so I don't want to show anything. I just linked what I saw.

“The investigation being held now tries to prove that they were FROM the Government side and that proving seems to be a problem.” Investigation led by an Extreme-Right affiliated Prosecutor who had ignored/rejected all other possibilities, so I think he will find what he wants.

You are falling behind events (and my posts). The prosecutor you refer to is out of job for a week. The new one has nothing to do with Svoboda or Right Sector.

“Your claim is similar: nazis who sent snipers were fortune tellers who knew they would ultimately benefit from it, and they did.” No. First I don’t say for sure they did it. YOU claim that the government did it. I reject no possibilities.

Yet you advocate snipers having been sent by Nazis as the likeliest option.

Possibility is Extreme Right/Nazi had a plan of action, implemented it and gained. No need to see future for this. They created the opportunity and size it. So where is the need to foresee the future there? They created it, not predict it.

To use your rhetoric, it is a fair sample of Brenusian dialectics containing self-contradictions: Nazis might have had a plan. Putin had no plans whatever. You ardently believe in both, suspecting nazis in all possible sins and denyng the leader of a nation ability to plan his actions in case another nation (whose separate identity for him is questionable) gets out of hand.

No risk at all, no possible lost (only if extreme bad luck) and all possibilities open.

14 Svoboda members were shot by snipers. No possible loss? Yeah, right.
Now let's imagine genuine Brenus in response: Nazis will stick at nothing to get what they want and even kill their own adherents.

Brenus

06-26-2014, 18:58

Gilrandir

06-27-2014, 06:20

“Now let's imagine genuine Brenus in response: Nazis will stick at nothing to get what they want and even kill their own adherents.” They proved it: Never heard to the Night of the Long Knives? Hitler and his SS killed without mercy the SA and Ernst Rohm: Nothing out from imagination in this.

AFAIK that was not just an arbitrary and random bunch of assassinations. There were competing wings within the nazi party that was "purged" by Hitler. So you are saying that all those Svoboda members killed by snipers were dissidents deliberately chosen as targets by snipers hired by Tyagnybok? Your imagination is worth the Prix Goncourt.

“Nazis might have had a plan. Putin had no plans whatever.” Oh, again you are missing the point. Nazis have a plan. Putin organised and adapted to situation provided by Nazi. He planned to take Crimea in reaction of what happened, and it is now obvious he never planned to take Ukraine as shown by the low level of soldiers sent to the borders.

I will rephrase my vision once again: Maidan movement was something that appeared to be out of anybody's plans. Everything that happend on Maidan after November 30 was impromtu adaptation to the situation. Putin (as Illarionov stresses, and I'm inclined to believe him) after the events of 2004 in Ukraine had a plan developed against such situations which (i.e. the plan) was aimed at annexing the whole South-east of Ukraine when the opportunity knocked. When it did knock, the plan was put into execution (remember "the Crimea reunification medals" with dates that precede Yanukovych's escape?). The fact that it didn't go all the way has an explanation which I have offered - Putin had been misinformed by his sources on Russophile nature of the majority of those regions. And it is no wonder as Ukrainains themselves were surprised to find out how partriotic they are.

“If numerous pictures and videos show the same for me it is an indication that it is the real fact” If you watch the video, you can’t escape the fact all channels present the same pictures and films. Same unique origin I would say. And a fact is always subject to interpretation...

It would be good if you remembered your final sentence while interpreting pictures and videos, like the one with Tyagnybok gesture.

I like when you imitate what I write.

I keep re-reading the bold over and over again. It is a good sign when (as Status Quo used to sing) "there's something 'bout you baby I like".

Brenus

06-27-2014, 07:00

Gilrandir

06-27-2014, 07:37

AFAIK that was not just an arbitrary and random bunch of assassinations. There were competing wings within the nazi party that was "purged" by Hitler.” I like when you try to find excuses for Nazi… However, it doesn’t dismiss the fact that they did, so their ideology based on use of violence allowed them to do so.

In response let me quote yourself:

You built a story on my text, putting words I never wrote...

If you don't see the difference between excuse and explanation, well, I do. But if you insist, I may apply the same approach to you and say that you are constantly finding excuses for Putin and his russism.

“So you are saying that all those Svoboda members killed by snipers were dissidents deliberately chosen as targets by snipers hired by Tyagnybok?” Did I? No, I said there is a possibility that the crowd were killed by Nazi in order to create chaos, gaining International sympathy in blaming the Government and then size power, which was exactly what did happened.

Let me dare to reconstruct events according to your interpretation of them: Tyagnybok hired a squad of snipers and attired them in the same uniform. Then they wormed their way into the quarter held by the police and openly moved hither and thither trying to find a better location to start shooting while the police were standing and watching them doing it. As an option: they asked Berkuts to let them behind their lines promising they would shoot at protesters. All this while the snipers were talking between each other as if Berkuts were aware of their agenda.
To me it sounds insane.

Now, except if the figures you gave about the percentage of people supporting the Extreme-Right are wrong, the high percentage of targets by killed by the snipers belonging to this movement is rather suspect. Or, the entire movement was in the hands of the Nazi, or something is fishy in term of statistic or figures.

Out of 100+ people killed by snipers (they are called here the Heavenly Hundred, btw) 14 were Svoboda members. Do you call it a high percentage considering the fact that they were admitted by many the most militant part of protesters who bore the brunt of fighting?

“Your imagination is worth the Prix Goncourt.” You built a story on my text, putting words I never wrote, and I am the one with imagination? Well, yeah, I have, thanks you, but not in this case.

Imagination is a thing that, once you have it, keeps working all the time. You can't switch it off at will.

Brenus

06-27-2014, 19:32

“Out of 100+ people killed by snipers” Including the Police Officers? 50 + by firearm, 20 by beating plus 17 Police Officers are the figures I’ve got from BBC. So we take off the 17 Police Officers and the 20 by beating, left 50+.
From the 03-APR-2014:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26866069
Do you like the picture of the Peaceful Demonstrator with a sniper rifle/hunting gun?

“14 were Svoboda members” So, even by the figures you provided, that makes around 14 %. What was the percentage did the Nazi represent in last elections? That was far less than that if I remember well, as you were gloating it was less than the FN in France…
Now, if we speak “only” of the killed by firearms (and in the opposition side), that goes up to 28 %. Not bad.

“you are constantly finding excuses for Putin and his russism.” Expected of course I don’t. I expressed few times my view about taking bits of territory to others, whatever sides you are from and reasons you find…

“Let me dare to reconstruct events according to your interpretation of them” You do it again. I stopped long time ago to try to explain what others do or did. But be free to carry on.

“To me it sounds insane.” To me too, but hey, it is your story… Your problem is you always go for the most complex explanation…

“You can't switch it off at will” Of course you can. You should try…That is the difference between entertainment and real life…

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-28-2014, 00:37

Why aren't we talking about this ceasefire - the one this un-democratic president unilaterally declared?

You know, the one the East has flirted with a bit but can't really stick to?

Gilrandir

06-28-2014, 11:57

I think its obvious that the fighting in eastern ukraine is out of the hands of either Putin or the Chocolate King at this point. Putin might appreciate that, but its bad news for Ukraine. I do not think the ceasefire (such as it is...) will last long, but I hope I'm wrong. :shrug:
Poroshenko proclaimed armistice and the Russain citizen Borodai (AFAIK "the prime minister of DPR") in return proclaimed ceasefire. I don't know what is the difference between the two, but separatists observe neither. They keep shelling Ukrainian army's positions, brought down another helicopter and attack checkpoints. So I see no point in continuing either since the separatists do not keep the promises they took upon themselves. Why they don't - I see two reasons:
1. They want to use "the ceasefire" as a chance to forestall any further offensive of the Ukrainian army by strenghtening their positions, planting mines, bringing more reinforcements and weapons (they still hold three border posts in Southern Lugansk region) and inflicting as much damage as possible (including blowing up railways both on their territory and outside it).
2. They would like to negotiate but they can't control all the gangs that there are. According to different estimates there are from 10 to 40 different groups within DPR and LPR which are sometimes at odds and carry on their own wars against Ukraine. For example, Strelkov and Gubarev acknowledge neither the armistice nor the ceasefire.
In either case negotiations will bring no result but deepening chaos in terrorist-kept areas and prolonging sufferings of people there.
13422
The map shows areas (in beige, if I can call that color so) held by separatists.

Gilrandir

06-28-2014, 13:14

“To me it sounds insane.” To me too, but hey, it is your story… Your problem is you always go for the most complex explanation…

Your explanation is "Nazis are at the bottom of it all" and of course it is the easiest one.

Brenus

06-28-2014, 14:13

Gilrandir

06-28-2014, 14:53

"Your explanation is "Nazis are at the bottom of it all" and of course it is the easiest one.": says the one you believe(d?) that Putin is/was responsible and planned it all. And again, you read what you want. I wrote “Possibility is Extreme Right/Nazi had a plan of action, implemented it and gained”.
So where did you read “Nazis are at the bottom of it all”? Not in my intervention(s).
And I can’t resist: “If you don't see the difference between” hypothesis “and explanation, well, I do”. Fixed for you.:laugh4:

My logics is close to yours: Putin had a plan and jumped at the opportunity to implement it. Others before him let the things in Ukraine happen the way they did. This difference was enough to cause the present crisis and he still feeds the fire (by letting separatists in Ukraine be reinforced and weapon-supplied) and pretends he has nothing to do with it.
What you now call a hypothesis sounded like supposition bordering on assurance before. If you try to find arguments supporting it (or arguments against other hypotheses) it means that you favor it as the likeliest option.

About the Map: The blue and Yellow (very patriotic indeed, with all this little Ukrainian Flags) are held by the Governmental Power and the beige is the one control by the separatists? It is a huge part…
I'm not sure whether there is any sarcasm in your attitude to my patriotism, but if there is, it is ill-aimed - it was not me who designed the map. Otherwise you read it correctly.
As for how huge the separatist-held part is, it depends on your perspective - on what you had imagined and expect to see. Russian media try to present it as the whole of Donetsk and Lugansk regions. Contrary to their reports, the map shows that there some parts (northern part of Lugansk region and south-western part of Donetsk region) unaffected by the separatist virus at all. The beige was larger two or three weeks ago so it is not so huge as it was or might have been. But it still takes about 30% of the total Donetsk+Lugansk regions with both regional capitals. Well, you can take a guess at percentage yourself.

Gilrandir

07-01-2014, 11:47

Called it. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28101812) This one's far from over.
The map appended to the article is wrong. I have already said that the northern part of Lugansk region was never affected by separatists, has not allowed them onto there territory, took no part in "the referendum", voted in the presidential elections and was always pro-Ukrainian. Somewhat similar situation was in south-western Donetsk region: although the separatists initially tried to spread their influence there, it was not lasting and soon they were evicted. The current map showing areas held by separatists is in my post on the previous page.
Also, there have been some curious developments.
An interview of a separatist who changed sides was made public.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzOsqAMeeiQ
What he (and some others) says corroborated what I've been saying here: weapons are shipped from Russia, Don cossacks are actively involved controlling railroads in Lugansk region, people are paid for fighting and as a bonus for killing Ukrainian officers and soldiers, criminals are now an essential part of the separatists. He gives also some new information which I heard rumor of and didn't dare to post: drugs are distributed freely among the separatists.
Another piece of news (this time from Ukraine's Defense minisrty): Russian mercenaries start to flee the war zone. The officials offer two explanations:
1. Their contracts might have expired.
2. They made sure (or were informed) that Russia is not going to interfere openly on a large scale so staying where they are becomes downright dangerous.

Gilrandir

07-01-2014, 11:54

Some people here said that I had a wrong reading of Putin's words as to the involvement of Russian troops into annexing Crimea. I claimed that he admitted it while Sarmatian disagreed. It seems that my reading tallies with that of BBC:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28030004

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-01-2014, 12:01

Called it. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28101812) This one's far from over.

We'll see. The exemplary conduct of Ukraine's forces in Crimea got them jack, so if Russia won't demand the rebeles stand down, there's no point.

Some people here said that I had a wrong reading of Putin's words as to the involvement of Russian troops into annexing Crimea. I claimed that he admitted it while Sarmatian disagreed. It seems that my reading tallies with that of BBC:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28030004

I think only Sarmation thought there weren't massed Russian troops there.

Sarmatian

07-01-2014, 12:04

We'll see. The exemplary conduct of Ukraine's forces in Crimea got them jack, so if Russia won't demand the rebeles stand down, there's no point.

I think only Sarmation thought there weren't massed Russian troops there.

Of course there were/are Russian troops in Crimea. They've been there since the breakup of USSR

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-02-2014, 02:35

Of course there were/are Russian troops in Crimea. They've been there since the breakup of USSR

Bullshit.

Even Puin admits Russian troops invaded sovereign Ukrainian Territory - he gave out medals after the annexation.

They're quite nice medals, to be fair, but don't give me any of this treaty crap. If the Ruskies were following the treaty they wouldn't have blockaded the Ukrainians inside their bases.

Stop playing Quisling

If you support the Tsar in his quest to unify all Slavs, just bloody well say so - stop pretending like this was anything but annexation and invasion.

Sarmatian

07-02-2014, 13:09

Bullshit.

Even Puin admits Russian troops invaded sovereign Ukrainian Territory - he gave out medals after the annexation.

Look, Tito received a Grand Cordon of the Order of Leopold. That means Belgium invaded Yugoslavia. :laugh4:

Did any of those medals actually went to a Russian soldier? No? Ok, then.

They're quite nice medals, to be fair, but don't give me any of this treaty crap. If the Ruskies were following the treaty they wouldn't have blockaded the Ukrainians inside their bases.

Those soldier didn't wear any insignia.

Stop playing Quisling

If you support the Tsar in his quest to unify all Slavs, just bloody well say so - stop pretending like this was anything but annexation and invasion.

That's it. You got me.

For the record, I don't condone annexation of Crimea, I'm just highly amused by your bias (insert Blackadder quote about spies).

Gilrandir

07-02-2014, 16:12

I think only Sarmation thought there weren't massed Russian troops there.
The reason for disagreement was not about Russain troops being present or absent, but about their participation in capturing major administrative buildings and blockading Ukrainian garrisons which Putin first denied and later admitted. Sarmatian claimed that he did not admit it and tried to interpret Putin's words of "Russian soldiers standing behind the Crimeans' backs" figuratively. Me and BBC took them literally.

Gilrandir

07-02-2014, 16:16

One more interview of a turncoat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL4iNVk3EXI&src_vid=WzOsqAMeeiQ&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_1739339075
The most essential in it is his admission that terrorists shell residential areas and later blame the Ukrainian army. It was this last straw that made him change sides, he says.

Viking

07-02-2014, 17:33

Sarmatian

07-02-2014, 17:51

How do you verify that the video is real?

You don't. You choose to believe it. That's how propaganda works.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-03-2014, 00:43

Did any of those medals actually went to a Russian soldier? No? Ok, then.

I was under the impression they were issued.

Those soldier didn't wear any insignia.

Yeah, but they were Russians, and serving soldiers too from the garrisons, primarily. Marines and Special Forces.

Even Putin has admitted this.

Why won't you?

Husar

07-03-2014, 01:41

Maybe because people write his nickname wrong 90% of the time.

Gilrandir

07-03-2014, 06:40

How do you verify that the video is real?
There is no way to do it, as Sarmatian noted. But there is some circumstantial evidence which makes the video genuine, as I believe.
1. The information of defecting separatists is one of the new developments. Until now no separatists have been reported to change sides. The last two or three days the Ukrainian military in the war zone repeatedly claim that more and more separatists express their wish to quit and offer their services: they either are ready to fight under the Ukrainian banner (and then they are considered on probation) or (which is more often) to report on their former colleagues giving away places where they are concentrated, take their training, keep weapons and so on. Both are done with a view to amnesty.
2. The earlier information on mercenaries trying to escape to Russia indicates that they consider their situation precarious (to put it mildly) and simpler, "ordinary" folk, who are locals and have nowhere to escape to, are beginning to realize that too. They both start to sense which way the wind is blowing.
3. I have seen other videos where people (including a boy of 12-13 who with his family fled from his home town) claim that terrorists place their mortars in residential areas and start shelling both Ukrainian army positions and the vicinity as well. A couple of days ago in Slovyansk (during "the armistice") locals tried to protest against it but they were dispersed and some of them were forced to partcipate in digging trenches for separatists.
4. Ukrainian media may make mistakes (and it is no wonder in the situation like this) which amount to giving the unchecked information. But, AFAIK, Ukrainian side was never cought concocting "staged videos", such as Russians may do.
The way the guy in the video speaks, his vernacular and behavior, is typical of the people of the region. The story he tells is also typical: having no job and a small kid he was allured by the promised payment. His initial distrust and bias against the citizens of other parts of Ukraine was fanned by brainwashing and threats of "Bandera-followers coming and massacring the whole population of Donbas". Later he saw the looting which made him averse and finally witnessed the mentioned residential areas' shelling. Now he wants to reunite with his family which was evacuated to Russia as he was pesuaded (by his new commanders) that the moment Ukrainians find out that he was fighting against them they would capture his wife and kid and start blackmailing him.
His plans for future are astonishing but symptomatic, to my mind. After finding his family he wants to migrate to western Ukraine (which he is (or was) so apprehensive to) where people will not know about his past, find any job (even manure carting will do) and forget all the horrors of the war.
All this considering, I'm inclined to believe the video.

Sarmatian

07-03-2014, 07:07

I was under the impression they were issued.

Yeah, but they were Russians, and serving soldiers too from the garrisons, primarily. Marines and Special Forces.

Even Putin has admitted this.

Why won't you?

Putin never admitted it. What Gilrandir takes for admission of their presence is really a confirmation of support, without any indication what that support may have been. Interpreting that as "we have boots on the ground" is quite ludicrous.

Now, whether or not Russian professionals were actually involved makes little difference. The entire thing was most certainly sponsored by Russia. Whether they sent some professionals, or some veterans, or some super-secret special forces, or some volunteers or some "private security firm" doesn't matter. Bottom line - Russia was involved. That's a fact.

That doesn't make it ok, it just makes it business as usual in the world. It's been happening and will continue to happen. Smaller countries will get screwed when it is in the interest of bigger countries.

Maybe because people write his nickname wrong 90% of the time.

Yeah, I was wondering about that. Sarmatian or Sarmation. This being a TW forum, I would guess most people wouldn't have a problem with Sarmatian, as in member of Sarmatian tribe. Does Sarmation mean anything?

Gilrandir

07-03-2014, 08:06

Putin never admitted it. What Gilrandir takes for admission of their presence

Not me alone. Me and BBC. As Mr. Bonacieux put it, "I was cheated on not alone. France was cheated on as well. It is a conspiracy against me and France." :laugh4:
But you miss the point. The issue was not whether Russian military were or weren't involved. The issue was that Putin lied and then was caught lying.

GenosseGeneral

07-03-2014, 08:13

Putin never admitted it. What Gilrandir takes for admission of their presence is really a confirmation of support, without any indication what that support may have been. Interpreting that as "we have boots on the ground" is quite ludicrous.

Now, whether or not Russian professionals were actually involved makes little difference. The entire thing was most certainly sponsored by Russia. Whether they sent some professionals, or some veterans, or some super-secret special forces, or some volunteers or some "private security firm" doesn't matter. Bottom line - Russia was involved. That's a fact.

Those were certainly Russian troops, no super-secret-Special Forces. Some of the better equipped forces, though, very likely Marines, maybe VDV as well.
How I know that? Well, I have seen the pictures. For instance, they had certain optics mounted on their rifles which are solely available to Russian forces as well VSS and (allegedly, I haven't seem them on footage from Crimea) even rifles from the AK100-series.

Gilrandir, you cannot deny though, that Ukrainian forces are shelling and bombing towns and cities in the Donbass. That civilians are killed in these attacks is not astonishing. I don't think, for instance, that the shells fired by the battery in this vid differentiate between separatist positions and people's homes. https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com%2Fapps%2Fyt-fb-app%3Ffb_source%3Dtimeline%26redirect_uri%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.youtube.com%252Fattribution_link% 253Fa%253Dz6zXGrg345M%2526u%253D%25252Fwatch%25253Fv%25253D1it-SuKSh2Q%252526feature%25253Dshare%26ref%3Dprofile&h=IAQHoWgLM&enc=AZP7wAh6U73yztEtM-nzNWvd2siJsI3Ues0csaKRVmhKl3z6jChsB6boXXoi26OzzwY6BInL6h0HwvdW2KSO1GydR75LmK2P4NzNqb97viKSWMBr9nVOaZ SSTsbItsyvuRI1yP1MVJMfdSFk1EVKHMXG38ONy9ak7Ylbc3zNsqJ3vPpO37tZPUV0325STlSMh_b7YUi7hR5resi45vM4JcWvoJ QTbsZQoIVSxZbgN-zHW9t02YZEUhYZU5KyVELYG7VfuDWaqRGxTor9gEBR_SM9iPVXVDwVyo7-0S3BmLsBc03eHSrUA1EKO33CB7gxg7zcx2ULeFkgVa6-V4RIVaZ_5ZUzEnweLqH_FPv-I9hyYU1j0t29HhPkFflUYS7MUwb_6vxwLi0n_bo5kFzkKkTtYZ8R68_i_e1xESRXTFYgsZCZq7HPeZERNLQIbuUibfs&s=1

Gilrandir

07-03-2014, 08:30

Gilrandir, you cannot deny though, that Ukrainian forces are shelling and bombing towns and cities in the Donbass. That civilians are killed in these attacks is not astonishing.
I don't deny it and I never did. I just want others to see that it is not like Americans bombing Dresden in WWII. That is, it is not "bombing cities and towns" but rather bombing places in cities and towns where separatists are. Collateral damage mainly occurs when Ukrainian army shells residential areas in response to separatists attacking them from there and is not done deliberately for any other purposes (unlike what separatists are doing).

GenosseGeneral

07-05-2014, 11:50

Breakin news: The separatists have abandoned Slovyansk and moved into Donetsk. I am not sure, whether this makes the situation better or worse.

Viking

07-05-2014, 12:27

Still haven't seen any footage from Slavyansk.

Viking

07-05-2014, 23:25

According to BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28177020) and this video, the Ukrainian forces have also retaken Kramatorsk.

The pro-Russian gunmen abandoned the cities of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, as well as some smaller towns, in the north of Donetsk region.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMI-qJGvmsM

Will be interesting to see what follows next. Donets and Luhansk are large cities. In theory, they should be hard to defend for smaller forces.

Gilrandir

07-06-2014, 12:12

According to BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28177020) and this video, the Ukrainian forces have also retaken Kramatorsk.

+ Druzhkivka and Kostyantynivka

Donets and Luhansk are large cities. In theory, they should be hard to defend for smaller forces.
On the contrary, small groups of terrorists can disperse all over the city and afflict Ukrainian forces for quite a long time.

Viking

07-06-2014, 12:50

Gilrandir

07-06-2014, 13:35

If the separatists allow the Ukrainian forces to enter the city, they would have to resort to guerrilla-like tactics, which they would not be able to sustain for long. The way I see it, they either have to attempt to hold the city a lot like a regular army would, or they are done for.
Strelkov said that for them it would be much more convenient to act in a big city. They know that the Ukrainian army got an order to avoid shelling residential areas, so they would place snipers in apartments (much as they did in Slovyansk) and would probably resort to the tactics you mentioned acting in small groups (of 3-5) and destabilizing situation for as long as they can.
Holding the city as a whole is not possible since, first of all, it is not so much fortified as Slovyansk was (and can't be owing to the size of the city), and second of all, the Ukrainian army already has a foothold within it - the airport.

GenosseGeneral

07-06-2014, 13:39

It is really hard to tell, whether the rebels will be able to actually defend Donetsk or not. That largely depends also on the degree, to which Kyiv can still exert influence over local police and security forces (probably to a very little degree) and on the support the separatists can get from the population. I can imagine that people in Donetsk have seen how Slovyansk looks like and don't want this to happen in their city. On the other hand, the fact that Ukrainian forces have shelled residential areas might as well increase resistance against the "Kyiv junta".
But if the separatists were really able to defend Donetsk, why haven't they taken the city completely earlier on? It seems like they could move around the Donbass freely earlier on (note the "parade" of the Vostok battaillon). Also some of the bloodiest battles was the one for Donetsk airport about 2-3 weeks ago, in which at least 33 separatists died.
Latest news is, that the airports of Donetsk and Luhansk (both currently under government control, according to Ukrainian news sources) are under attack again, under use of mortars and "Grad"-launchers, fired from residential areas. It is definitely a rationale of the separatists to make the government attack residential areas from air or with artillery.

To me, the "moving" of the separatists seems like a somewhat daring, but well calculated strategic move. While Ukrainian forces cautiously move into Kramatorsk and Slovyansk, both of which have been mined before, the separatists try to take at least parts of Luhansk and Donetsk in order regroup there. On footage taken in Slovyansk, you can see that the most elite Ukrainian units (special forces of the SBU) are currently busy there. As long as the separatists hold the airports, they might also be evacuated by airlifts to Russia or receive reinforcements. It depends on their supporters in Moscow.
The separatists had to leave a quite large quantity of weaponry behind in Slovyansk, most from what I have seen were MANPADs and/or anti-tank missiles. They seem to be able to sustain coordinated attacks, though, once again demonstrating that they are far more professional than just a bunch of locals who grabbed rifles.

I fear that the current, open military resistance might turn into terrorism, if the separatists loose on the open field. They certainly have the means to make this a very nasty asymmetrical war, if the Russian 'tourists', especially the Chechens, stay in the Donbass.

EDIT: I just stumbled upon a map, showing which areas are controlled by which side.
http://kor.ill.in.ua/m/610x0/1460846.jpg?v=635402553180051272
Note that it is in Ukrainian though (but you can unfortunately barely read anything on it anyway). Just note that it shows the Donetsk and the Luhansk region, parts being controlled by the government are painted in Ukrainian national colours, whereas separatist-controlled regions are the striped parts.The 2 explosions in the center roughly mark Kramatorsk and Slovyansk. In this map, Luhansk and Donetsk are both marked as separatist-controlled, although they are on the very edge of that area.
Note that the source is the Ukrainian national security and defence council, so basically the gremium in charge of the government's operation in the area.

Viking

07-06-2014, 20:49

Strelkov said that for them it would be much more convenient to act in a big city. They know that the Ukrainian army got an order to avoid shelling residential areas, so they would place snipers in apartments (much as they did in Slovyansk) and would probably resort to the tactics you mentioned acting in small groups (of 3-5) and destabilizing situation for as long as they can.
Holding the city as a whole is not possible since, first of all, it is not so much fortified as Slovyansk was (and can't be owing to the size of the city), and second of all, the Ukrainian army already has a foothold within it - the airport.

As far as I know, the airport in Donetsk is cut off from the rest of the Ukrainian forces. It's not a position they can easily take more land from.

If they get foothold in the city, they can place snipers on high-rise buildings and get a decent idea of everything that moves below, they can launch patrols into all of the city etc. They'd be able to really employ their superiority in numbers and hardware. Plus the stuff below ↓

I fear that the current, open military resistance might turn into terrorism, if the separatists loose on the open field. They certainly have the means to make this a very nasty asymmetrical war, if the Russian 'tourists', especially the Chechens, stay in the Donbass.

They would have most locals turn against them if they did that. In war, being seen as the current aggressor and cause for the war's continuation makes people negatively affected resent you, unless they are convinced that there is a really good reason for the war's continuation.

Foreign fighters, of whom there are many, should be especially vulnerable to a lack of local support. They need structures to support them.

Gilrandir

07-07-2014, 06:16

As far as I know, the airport in Donetsk is cut off from the rest of the Ukrainian forces. It's not a position they can easily take more land from.

Yet they can bring in reinforcements by air and launch a combined attack both from within the city and from without.

They would have most locals turn against them if they did that. In war, being seen as the current aggressor and cause for the war's continuation makes people negatively affected resent you, unless they are convinced that there is a really good reason for the war's continuation.

Foreign fighters, of whom there are many, should be especially vulnerable to a lack of local support. They need structures to support them.
They don't care. By now they seem so desperate that they continue fighting in spite of any civilian casualties and infrastructure damage they may cause, probably even trying to enhance both. They still hope that if it creates a picture deplorable enough Russia may somehow interfere (even if by sending "peacekeepers" as it did in Abkhasia).

Viking

07-07-2014, 12:09

Yet they can bring in reinforcements by air and launch a combined attack both from within the city and from without.

The airbridge is not safe, as has been demonstrated earlier. Until the airport is linked up with the Ukrainian-held territories, it'll remain a defensive position.

They don't care. By now they seem so desperate that they continue fighting in spite of any civilian casualties and infrastructure damage they may cause, probably even trying to enhance both. They still hope that if it creates a picture deplorable enough Russia may somehow interfere (even if by sending "peacekeepers" as it did in Abkhasia).

If they have a majority of the local population against them and Ukrainian forces in the city, they are dead meat soon enough. It'll just be a matter of time.

Gilrandir

07-08-2014, 15:26

If they have a majority of the local population against them and Ukrainian forces in the city, they are dead meat soon enough. It'll just be a matter of time.
In Slovyansk by the end of occupation locals were against the terrorists, yet they could do nothing against the armed people. If you have a gun and a posse of your kind beside you, you can disregard the locals' opinion.

Viking

07-08-2014, 20:05

In Slovyansk by the end of occupation locals were against the terrorists, yet they could do nothing against the armed people. If you have a gun and a posse of your kind beside you, you can disregard the locals' opinion.

↓↓

If they have a majority of the local population against them and Ukrainian forces in the city, they are dead meat soon enough. It'll just be a matter of time.

The more locals they have against them, the more likely that hideouts, troop sightings etc. are reported to the government forces. That's what I am talking about.

I suppose one of the reasons that the government forces are reluctant to enter more cities is the risk that previous scenarios where the armour is stopped by angry locals, with armed separatists sneaking up to them, will be repeated. It could also end with nasty street fighting that could destroy much property and cause great civilian casualties.

-----

Supposedly, there is some talk about arms delivery from Russia in this video, but my Russian is not anywhere near good enough to decipher it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAOnrGxpdgk&feature=youtu.be

Gilrandir

07-09-2014, 08:54

Supposedly, there is some talk about arms delivery from Russia in this video, but my Russian is not anywhere near good enough to decipher it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAOnrGxpdgk&feature=youtu.be
The guy who is talking to separatists is Kurginyan, the notorious Russian who organized marches in Moscow in support of Crimea annexation and in protest against Maidan (promising to nip in the bud all attempts to have Maidan in Moscow).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgOVUdOXgYk
He heads the movement called "Essence of the time" vehemently supporting Putin's politics.
As for the video, at the ouset Kurginyan seems unconscious of the identity of his interlocutors and is greatly pleased when he learns that he is talking to Gubarev. DPR leaders upbraid him that Russia's support is not sufficient and that most weapons that Russia delivers to Donbas are outdated or subject to malfunctioning. Kurginyan agrees but he says that they can't deny the very fact of Russian support, insufficient as it may be, and promises to try to convince Russia to enhance the weapon supply. He sees the reasons of its insufficiency in the fact that weapons are provided not by Russian authorities but by Russian "civil society". How Russian civil society can come by tanks, missile launchers, APCs, spitfires and other things is not explained while Ukrainian military found whole arsenals of weapons in Slovyansk (most of them brand-new) with accompanying documents proving their source being Russian army detachments, not mythical shops Putin spoke of nor civil society imaginary storehouses or hoards.
http://glavred.info/politika/geletey-pokazal-zahvachennoe-u-boevikov-slavyanska-rossiyskoe-oruzhie-opublikovany-foto-284459.

Husar

07-09-2014, 11:42

Maybe you should watch Lord of War. It's a bit over the top but apparently after the cold war ended one could buy almost anything out of former soviet arsenals provided one had enough money to do so.

Pannonian

07-09-2014, 12:06

Maybe you should watch Lord of War. It's a bit over the top but apparently after the cold war ended one could buy almost anything out of former soviet arsenals provided one had enough money to do so.

There's a T-34 on a disused plot in east London, its gun pointing at the local council's office after they denied the tank's owner permission to build there. Graffiti is the camo of choice, but it gets repainted from time to time depending on who feels like climbing over the fence with a bucket and a brush.

Husar

07-10-2014, 00:11

There's a T-34 on a disused plot in east London, its gun pointing at the local council's office after they denied the tank's owner permission to build there. Graffiti is the camo of choice, but it gets repainted from time to time depending on who feels like climbing over the fence with a bucket and a brush.

Yes, I heard of that story. Are you suggesting that the owner gifts it to the Ukrainian army to help them out?
Arnold Schwarzenegger also has a personal tank and there is a tank driving event company or what you call it in the UK as well where people can drive Centurions. Not to forget Bovington has working tanks. Merkel wouldn't dare cross the channel.

Viking

07-10-2014, 08:54

GenosseGeneral

07-10-2014, 09:33

There were also recorded a number of incodents were separatists took tanks from WWII memorials. I doubt a T34 which stood outside for 4 decades is of any use, but from an iddological point of view it makes sense to use those vehicles "to again free the Donbass from fascists".

Husar

07-10-2014, 09:54

Pretty convenient then that all those privately owned tanks were lined up at the Ukrainian border, ready with ammunition and operators. Not a single one of them got caught by Russian law enforcement, either. Remarkable.

They also stole quite a few from the Ukrainian army apparently, but who said that Russian law enforcement is trying hard to enforce anything on that huuuuge border which is hard to control? And how should policemen stop tanks anyway? Nothing remarkable there.

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/07/09/ukraine-separatist-t-64-in-pieces-after-ammo-explosion/

Viking

07-10-2014, 14:44

They also stole quite a few [tanks] from the Ukrainian army apparently

What's your evidence?

but who said that Russian law enforcement is trying hard to enforce anything on that huuuuge border which is hard to control?

The Russians are likely to have the border with Ukraine under extra surveillance currently - particularly the part that borders Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts, which is the area where Russian tanks would have to enter.

Earlier (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?146724-Ukraine-in-a-thread&p=2053598646&highlight=#post2053598646), I posted about AP photos (http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Ukraine/bd4bd97f048249d086076f982c7dabbe/9/0) of a military column belonging to the separatists just outside Debaltseve (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Debal'tseve/@48.3443459,38.4429497,10z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x40e06cbacd8d4763:0x451cc6338f920 7c0), which is close to Horlivka and Donetsk.

https://i.imgur.com/LUADQZ2.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/jsYZsqN.jpg

On the same day, there are lots of videos uploaded to social media that appears to show the same column at different places (look for the different flags; there are 2 black and orange flags, 1 Russian imperial flag and 1 Crimean flag). One of the first sightings is in Krasnodon (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Krasnodon/@48.3294901,39.8773853,11z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x411e2420348e6f43:0xd4d5099d0edecb5f) early in the morning, right the next to the border with Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lg_9EvDKM8

The upload date says 19 June, but it seems (http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/confused-by-how-youtube-assigns-dates-russians-cite-false-claim-on-syria-videos/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0)that's YouTube's local US time:

As YouTube has previously confirmed to The Lede, its computers automatically assign a date to each video based on the current time in California when the upload begins, which can differ from the date in the user’s time zone.

which is to say that the video was uploaded early Ukrainian time, consistent with a claim that it was filmed early in the morning.

There is a lot more footage with geolocation at this blog (http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.no/2014/06/russia-sends-substantial-reinforcements.html). The guy behind the blog seems to often find patterns where there might not be any, but this time I think he is on the track.

Sarmatian

07-10-2014, 15:04

That's your evidence? Couple of photos and an out of focus recording of military vehicles moving inside Ukraine?

You've really got Putin by cojones with this.

Viking

07-10-2014, 15:08

Most of the footage is available through the blog link. There's strong evidence that a massive column of military vehicles moved from the border with Russia towards Donetsk on 20 June. What you make out of that is up to you.

Husar

07-10-2014, 16:45

NATO also has the border under surveillance and has previously tried to interprete this or that. But even they don't seem to have any evidence of tanks actually crossing the border to show around as propaganda.

Viking

07-10-2014, 17:47

We don't really know what NATO (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27849437) got:

It should be noted that they come from civilian satellites. This is for two reasons: firstly, they can be verified with the satellite operator; and secondly, because getting clearance for the public use of images from the military is very difficult to obtain for fear of giving away capabilities.

A senior Nato officer told me, however, that military satellite material covering the same locations gives added evidence of Russian involvement.

nor do we know what they are capable of getting in theory; herein the probability that NATO would be able to prove that the tanks came from Russia with their current assets.

Husar

07-10-2014, 18:31

Just remember how easy it is to find a ship on the ocean or say, a plane that was lost over the ocean. And there aren't even trees on the ocean that could block your view. Taliban kept going into and out of Afghanistan even though the world's most expensive and strongest military was trying to prevent that.

Viking

07-10-2014, 19:25

Just remember how easy it is to find a ship on the ocean or say, a plane that was lost over the ocean. And there aren't even trees on the ocean that could block your view.

We don't have extensive enough satellite and/or radar coverage to cover every random square kilometre of the ocean. The Ukraine-Russia border is a hotspot area under extra surveillance.

Taliban kept going into and out of Afghanistan even though the world's most expensive and strongest military was trying to prevent that.

Often impossible to tell insurgent apart from civilian when the resolution is relatively low. A tank or a convoy of tanks will be more distinct.

Meanwhile, there are reports that some separatists are deserting (http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_306481/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=BTZKtRBV):

In another sign of deteriorating morale among rebels, several dozen militia fighters in Donetsk abandoned their weapons and fatigues Thursday, telling their superiors they were returning home.

"Russia abandoned us. The leadership is bickering. They promise money but don't pay it. What's the point of fighting?" said 29-year old Oleg, a former miner who served in the Kalmius battalion.

Husar

07-10-2014, 23:17

We don't have extensive enough satellite and/or radar coverage to cover every random square kilometre of the ocean. The Ukraine-Russia border is a hotspot area under extra surveillance.

That still doesn't mean they see everything and maybe Russia just doesn't care about people driving tanks into Ukraine. That they are not behind it does not necessitate that they oppose it.

Often impossible to tell insurgent apart from civilian when the resolution is relatively low. A tank or a convoy of tanks will be more distinct.

Yet nobody seems to see them until they turn up in Ukraine. Maybe it's because they are driven out of a garage in Ukraine.

Viking

07-10-2014, 23:31

That still doesn't mean they see everything

Civilians could have seen it and reported it. The odds simply stack against any movement of tanks inside Russia without the government knowing it. There's been active insurgency inside Russia for decades, they should have systems in place to spot irregular troop and vehicle movements as they could be hostile.

and maybe Russia just doesn't care about people driving tanks into Ukraine.

I am still curious to see evidence for privately owned fully operative tanks in Russia. Passive support is still support; wouldn't make the situation much better.

Yet nobody seems to see them until they turn up in Ukraine. Maybe it's because they are driven out of a garage in Ukraine.

Or, it is because they were transported without insignia by regular Russian units on the Russian side of the border and thus do not appear suspicious given the current number of Russian troops and armour in the area.

Husar

07-11-2014, 00:49

I am still curious to see evidence for privately owned fully operative tanks in Russia. Passive support is still support; wouldn't make the situation much better.

You're probably right about the private tank thing, seems a lot more common in the western world.
So it's probably support from mother Russia after America gave weapons to Assad's enemies.

Not nice to be on the receiving end I guess.

Or, it is because they were transported without insignia by regular Russian units on the Russian side of the border and thus do not appear suspicious given the current number of Russian troops and armour in the area.

Didn't Russia say the troops were relocated away from the border?

rvg

07-11-2014, 01:11

That's your evidence? Couple of photos and an out of focus recording of military vehicles moving inside Ukraine?

You've really got Putin by cojones with this.

Umm Qasr stands strong.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-11-2014, 04:06

Someone sent me this:

http://alfa-tsentr.ru/en/

Viking

07-11-2014, 15:28

You're probably right about the private tank thing, seems a lot more common in the western world.

So there are no criminal tank gangs revving it up at their conventions after all? That's a bummer.

So it's probably support from mother Russia after America gave weapons to Assad's enemies.

Not nice to be on the receiving end I guess.

It's very nice, of course. Trouble is Putin won't fess up to doing any such thing.

Didn't Russia say the troops were relocated away from the border?

Here's a news report (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/kiev-nato-allege-new-russian-troop-buildup-just-across-the-ukrainian-border/2014/06/19/5002b196-f7c9-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html) from 19 June, the day before the mystery column appeared near the border with Russia:

DNIPROPETROVSK, Ukraine — As government troops and insurgents were locked in heavy battles in eastern Ukraine on Thursday, NATO’s chief said a new Russian military buildup was underway near the border.

[...]

In what NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen called “a very regrettable step backwards,” he estimated that Russia has redeployed “at least a few thousand” troops near the border with Ukraine.

Husar

07-11-2014, 15:44

It's very nice, of course. Trouble is Putin won't fess up to doing any such thing.

I don't find that troubling at all, there are enough people on th internet to lecture us about why he is behind this and why he is the second coming of Hitler.

GenosseGeneral

07-11-2014, 22:50

Someone sent me this:

http://alfa-tsentr.ru/en/

That English site is pretentious as hell. While I have no doubt that this company exists and that many of its employees have served in one of the various 'spetsnaz' law enforcement and military units, their 'map of services' in the Russian section says nothing about air defence capabilities and the like. They offer the typical services of civilian private security: Bodyguards, guard for objects, protection for (money) transports etc.
Note however, that 1-2 weeks ago, Russian lawmakers introduced a new law concerning private military companies in Russia.

But tanks are definitely something someone has to obtain from a government source and as Viking already said, Russia has rather tight domestic security policies in place, not a miracle given the ongoing conflict in Dagestan. Thus it requires Russian law enforcement and police to close their eyes rather tightly in order not to note columns of KAMAZ and tanks passing over the border.
If there was the political will to stop those activities, they would stop fairly quickly. Recently I haven't heard about any major columns attempting to break through the border though.

Viking

07-12-2014, 22:04

I was reading this (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28277928) BBC article when I saw this photo of a guy in Donetsk wearing an Eastside Fire and Rescue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastside_Fire_and_Rescue) T-shirt.

https://i.imgur.com/6PFin3q.jpg

Must be a sinister conspiracy behind it.

Brenus

07-12-2014, 23:03

“President Petro Poroshenko vowed to retaliate, saying: "For every soldier's life, the militants will pay with tens and hundreds of their own." Source BBC.
“Chief of the German General Staff Wilhelm Keitel ordered that for every German occupation soldier killed in Serbia, a hundred Serbian civilians would be executed, while fifty Serbian civilians would be killed for every wounded German soldier.” Source History.
No comment.

Viking

07-12-2014, 23:36

It's war rhetorics and means "we will not let up the attacks on separatist positions". Comparing it to WW2 nazi retribution on civilians is ridiculous.

Viking

07-12-2014, 23:47

Well of course it is. But the fact remains that the Ukrainian strategy involves a lot of collateral damage. They don't have the means or the technical skill (I'm not sure if its either or both?) to do it any other way. Poroshenko is saying they will not shy away from that collateral damage in order to win, which is a dangerous strategy.

It's unlikely that they will be able to kill more separatist fighters than they already do without risking ridiculous amounts of civilian casualties, which is to say that in the end, it is empty rhetorics. It's not going to translate into anything else than perhaps an increased bitter resolve.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-12-2014, 23:58

Well of course it is. But the fact remains that the Ukrainian strategy involves a lot of collateral damage. They don't have the means or the technical skill (I'm not sure if its either or both?) to do it any other way. Poroshenko is saying they will not shy away from that collateral damage in order to win, which is a dangerous strategy.

Eh - America blew up lots of buildings, despite being the most advanced Power in the world.

You were a squaddie - what sucks more than QCB in an Urban environment?

Lets be honest - the Ukrainian Government has to crush this rebellion, or the country will disintegrate and Russia will eat the scraps. They don't have unlimited manpower, so they have to soften the target first.

It sucks, but it's clearly necessary from a mathematical point of view.

Husar

07-13-2014, 00:44

It sucks, but it's clearly necessary from a mathematical point of view.

In the same way it was necessary to kill the jews for their gold teeth in order to finance the war. From a purely mathematical point of view of course...

If comparing Poroshenko's speech to a nazi speech was ridiculous, what was comparing Putin's speech to Hitler's speech then? I thought the argument was "if they say the same things, they are alike!"...

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-13-2014, 00:56

Ironically - it's easier to justify killing your own people than someone else's.

At the very least, the Separatists have Grad Rockets and, to prevent mass casualties, the Army needs to use counter-battery fire which is extreemly dicey in an Urban environment.

We'll know more in a decade or so.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-13-2014, 01:00

In the same way it was necessary to kill the jews for their gold teeth in order to finance the war. From a purely mathematical point of view of course...

If comparing Poroshenko's speech to a nazi speech was ridiculous, what was comparing Putin's speech to Hitler's speech then? I thought the argument was "if they say the same things, they are alike!"...

Putin was compared to Hitler not because he's a new Hitler, but because it represents a similar gestating threat, and because he has demonstrated that he's a Fascist out to invade countries and take land, and because the West is singing LA LA LA just like it's 1939.

Jury's out on the new Ukrainian President, but (as previously stated) all the exemplary performance of the Ukrainian Armed forces in Crimea merited was a tube of lube from the US and advice from the Brits on how to bend over and brace so that it doesn't hurt as much.

So, if he now wants to kill all the Rebels with a rusty railroad spike - I can see why his patience is at an end.

Brenus

07-13-2014, 09:11

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-13-2014, 14:25

Man killed in Russia: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28283502

Well, one wonders if it was a Ukrainian army shell, or a separatist shell.

Naturally, this greatly increases the chance of a Russian intervention.

Viking

07-13-2014, 16:04

“I can see why his patience is at an end.” I can see it as well, like the SS were very upset and out of patience with the Partisans, so were justified to burn alive babies in a church… Funny enough, they followed what they leaders/superiors were saying perhaps as "empty rhetoric".
What do you think: If a Ukrainian Ultra-Nationalist (as Gilrandir qualified them once) start to kill "separatists" in frenzy, will the Ukrainian President be sent to the Hague for war-crime?

As comparing Nazi with others see comment from Husar.

If a leader says "kill civilians", he has done something bad regardless of whether civilians are killed or not.

If a leader says "kill enemy combatants" and some soldiers later kill civilians, he can't be blamed unless you got something more to pin on him.

Brenus

07-13-2014, 16:13

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-13-2014, 16:50

"If a leader says "kill civilians"," Err, he just did exactly this. "Rebels/militants" are civilians... Or if he wants, he can say they are soldiers, but the political price of this would be to recognise the Independentist Movement as a legitimate power...

The Geneva convention defines Civilians as those not engaged in combat, yes?

Ergo, the Rebels are not Civilians.

He tried a unilateral ceasefire - it was not well observed so now the Rebels will be crushed, there will be collateral damage.

I'm not happy about it, but this is not a situation created by the current Ukrainian President, he's just the one who has to deal with it.

Brenus

07-13-2014, 18:18

I afraid not: Civilians are persons who are not a member of his or her country's armed forces or militias. So, the militants are civilians. Remember, “Terrorist”, “separatists” “rebels” and “mercenaries”: Well, they are civilians. The definition of civilians is not based on carrying weapons, sorry.
And even if suddenly they become combatants, to tell to kill 100 for one become a war crime. The President gave a direct order (as Chief of the Armed Forces) :” For every soldier's life, the militants will pay with tens and hundreds of their own.” So, what is your opinion about it?
Just remind you that when Putin did his speech at the Duma about protecting the Russians everywhere, he was qualified as new Hitler, no question of “empty rhetoric” for him, as the Russian Tanks were obviously warming-up at that time.
They are just late, that is...

Viking

07-13-2014, 22:08

You didn't make a distinction between legality and morality in your argument. From a legal point of view, the separatists could be pretty much anything depending on which laws you want to look at or create. From a [common] moral point of view, the separatists are combatants, not civilians.

Comparing Putin to Hitler makes sense in some respects because Putin actually does things that can be seen as parallels to what Hitler did, plus Putin seems to have quite a lot of power personally, having been president in a semi-authoritarian country for so long.

The one case where there really are similarities between Hitler and Putin, is Putin's annexation of Crimea vs Hitler's annexation of Austria. Crimea is full of Russian speakers, Austria was full of German speakers. Whether the annexation marked the start for a more aggressive foreign policy like with Hitler, remains to be seen. I personally doubt it now, but at the same time, I would not be too surprised. Annexing parts of another sovereign country with the use of military force is quite an extreme act, even if no lethal force was used.

Brenus

07-14-2014, 07:25

“You didn't make a distinction between legality and morality in your argument.” ? Morality? Legality? A head of State, who was involved in the toppling of an elected Government and the storming of official buildings is now telling than the ones who actually replicated what he was involved in are to be shot at the ratio of tens to hundred for one.
So, can you tell me where are the legality or the morality in this? As I mentioned, in both cases, it is a call to murder, just a war crime or a crime against humanity…

“Comparing Putin to Hitler makes sense in some respects because Putin actually does things that can be seen as parallels to what Hitler did, plus Putin seems to have quite a lot of power personally, having been president in a semi-authoritarian country for so long.” So comparing any invaders to Hitler make sense? What is a semi-authoritarian country? Be careful on your answer as you will find that a lot of countries might qualified for this (i.e. the countries voting against the EU constitution and were still forced to signed for it).
Putin did what we did several times (read precedent comments, I will not repeat them again and again) in the last decades.

“Annexing parts of another sovereign country with the use of military force is quite an extreme act, even if no lethal force was used.” Agree, but Putin didn’t start the process, NATO did in carving parts of another sovereign country or making political changes. And they bombed countries in doing it (shock and owe, remember?). So is NATO more Hitlerian than Putin?

Viking

07-14-2014, 15:02

“You didn't make a distinction between legality and morality in your argument.” ? Morality? Legality? A head of State, who was involved in the toppling of an elected Government and the storming of official buildings is now telling than the ones who actually replicated what he was involved in are to be shot at the ratio of tens to hundred for one.

I am sure you have solid evidence for Poroshenko being involved in the storming of government buildings.

As for the toppling of a democratically elected president, he was toppled by an equally democratically elected parliament, so much of a moot point without involving legality.

So, can you tell me where are the legality or the morality in this? As I mentioned, in both cases, it is a call to murder, just a war crime or a crime against humanity…

A call to murder would be "take no POWs". This was a sign to the separatists and the Ukrainian hawks that Poroshenko is not letting up his military offensive despite massive losses.

So comparing any invaders to Hitler make sense?

Nope, annexation by force with an ethnic argument does.

What is a semi-authoritarian country?

For example, that's a country where independent media actively is worked against (http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-ad-ban-hurts-television/25449900.html) and where opposition politicians conveniently happen to be doing all sorts of illegal stuff so that they cannot pose a threat after all. For starters.

Agree, but Putin didn’t start the process, NATO did in carving parts of another sovereign country

In a war they did not start, which makes a world of difference between them. Kosovo can easily rejoin Serbia if it so wishes; NATO will not stop it, nor is it necessarily in NATO's interest that it does not.

Seamus Fermanagh

07-14-2014, 17:16

Que sera, sera.

Arguing the finer points of morality and legality is, however well intentioned, rather moot.

Anyone out there aside from the current participants willing to bleed to change things? If not, say prayers for those who have been and will be harmed. When the bloodshed winds down in a few months or years, learn how to cope with what emerges.

Que sera, sera.

Brenus

07-14-2014, 18:58

“Nope, annexation by force with an ethnic argument does.” So carving Serbian territory to give to Ethnic Albanian matches your definition.

“A call to murder would be "take no POWs".” So to put a target, a benchmark on the killing (tens to hundred for one) is not a call for murder? You have a strange definition of call for murder… You definition of human rights and value of human life is at least very selective…

“Kosovo can easily rejoin Serbia” :laugh4:After the covering-up of the ethnic cleansing? You sweep all the ones who wanted to do this first and then you call for a referendum… That is what NATO did (or failed to stop), then you are telling me that is your point of view for democratic change? At least Putin didn’t have to do the first part in Crimea.

As the “semi-authoritarian country” did you read the article from Radio Free Europe? I doubt it as you won’t have chosen it as sample: “According to the Association of Communication Agencies of Russia, free broadcast channels account for more than 97 percent of the country's television advertising market, raking in $4.4 billion last year”: A truly dictatorship, I see now.

“I am sure you have solid evidence for Poroshenko being involved in the storming of government buildings”.
“Poroshenko has held government posts and participated in the Maidan, the popular uprising that led to the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych.” In The Washington Post: Key words: Participated, led to, Overthrow.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/interview-with-ukrainian-presidential-candidate-petro-poroshenko/2014/04/25/74c73a48-cbbd-11e3-93eb-6c0037dde2ad_story.html

“As for the toppling of a democratically elected president, he was toppled by an equally democratically elected parliament, so much of a moot point without involving legality.” Yeah, with armed mob patrolling the streets. Pétain did the same in France in 1040: it is still a farce, a mascaraed and a sham. You vote what I am telling you to vote, in fact I even don’t have to tell what to vote, a glance in the street filled with huge men with baseball bats and sharp pointy things is usually enough.

Viking

07-14-2014, 19:42

“Nope, annexation by force with an ethnic argument does.” So carving Serbian territory to give to Ethnic Albanian matches your definition.

Hitler annexed Austria for Germany, Putin annexed Crimea for Russia, NATO annexed nothing.

“A call to murder would be "take no POWs".” So to put a target, a benchmark on the killing (tens to hundred for one) is not a call for murder? You have a strange definition of call for murder… You definition of human rights and value of human life is at least very selective…

Soldiers and militants kill each other in war; that's what war is about. How would the Ukrainian military kill more separatists than it already does through its aim to reclaim its territory without some sort of no POW-policy?

“Kosovo can easily rejoin Serbia” :laugh4:After the covering-up of the ethnic cleansing? You sweep all the ones who wanted to do this first and then you call for a referendum… That is what NATO did (or failed to stop), then you are telling me that is your point of view for democratic change? At least Putin didn’t have to do the first part in Crimea.

NATO ended a nasty ethnic war and has no major stake in what the country borders look like in the area. Putin did a landgrab and is therefore almost per definition interested in seeing Crimea stay within Russia.

As the “semi-authoritarian country” did you read the article from Radio Free Europe? I doubt it as you won’t have chosen it as sample: “According to the Association of Communication Agencies of Russia, free broadcast channels account for more than 97 percent of the country's television advertising market, raking in $4.4 billion last year”: A truly dictatorship, I see now.

This is the point:

"If implemented, these amendments could lead to cutting off private small- and medium-scale channels from their principal source of revenue, which is advertising," OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatovic said on July 7. "That could further limit media pluralism and free flow of information in Russia."

In many aspects, it's bad in Russia, and getting worse in still more. Of course, independent TV channels are not too bad as long as they don't pose too much trouble for the authorities.

“I am sure you have solid evidence for Poroshenko being involved in the storming of government buildings”.
“Poroshenko has held government posts and participated in the Maidan, the popular uprising that led to the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych.” In The Washington Post: Key words: Participated, led to, Overthrow.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/interview-with-ukrainian-presidential-candidate-petro-poroshenko/2014/04/25/74c73a48-cbbd-11e3-93eb-6c0037dde2ad_story.html

In other words, no evidence that he encouraged people to storm government buildings. Which is kind of logical that he would not be doing, since it quickly could come right back at him should he become president.

“As for the toppling of a democratically elected president, he was toppled by an equally democratically elected parliament, so much of a moot point without involving legality.” Yeah, with armed mob patrolling the streets. Pétain did the same in France in 1040: it is still a farce, a mascaraed and a sham. You vote what I am telling you to vote, in fact I even don’t have to tell what to vote, a glance in the street filled with huge men with baseball bats and sharp pointy things is usually enough.

I have never seen any evidence presented indicating that any of the mobs in the street at any time actually possessed such leverage.

Kralizec

07-15-2014, 00:04

“Annexing parts of another sovereign country with the use of military force is quite an extreme act, even if no lethal force was used.” Agree, but Putin didn’t start the process, NATO did in carving parts of another sovereign country or making political changes. And they bombed countries in doing it (shock and owe, remember?). So is NATO more Hitlerian than Putin?

I'm only going to reply to this part (maybe more later), because this one gets under my skin.

I assume you're referring to the Serbia/Kosovo episode, and I admit that the western countries were wrong then. Russia was right in opposing it. Russia was at the same time tremendously hypocritical in opposing it. At roughly the same time, they were supporting seperatist rebellions in numerous post-Soviet republics.

'The West' has done countless of things wrong and is continuing to do so, but to suggest moral equivalency to the likes of Putin's Russia is weapons-grade bullshit.

Brenus

07-15-2014, 07:08

“NATO annexed nothing.” No? So there is NO US base in Kosovo?

“Soldiers and militants kill each other in war; that's what war is about” Yeah, but what is about here is a President allegedly elected for all Ukrainian Citizens telling to kill 10 to 100 others. That is a call to murder.

“NATO ended a nasty ethnic war and has no major stake in what the country borders look like in the area” NATO did raged an ethnic war, just choosing a side. You can agree with it, just don’t deny it.

“Of course, independent TV channels are not too bad as long as they don't pose too much trouble for the authorities.” Isn’t true in all Countries? Can you give me one UK Channel that is not spreading the official economic theory or report social movement?

“I have never seen any evidence presented indicating that any of the mobs in the street at any time actually possessed such leverage.” Really? You should read or travel a little bit more (see “Orange Revolutions” and other Revolutions including French one). So you are saying that armed mob had no influence at all on the vote, whatsoever? All right, you are trolling me, are you?

“no evidence that he encouraged people to storm government buildings.” So he didn’t participate of the toppling of a legally elected President (and the storming was part of it)? I really stop to believe Media, as you are better informed.

“I have never seen any evidence presented indicating” That reminds me the actual sentence used in the UK by the Government that never see any evidence between unemployment and Poverty, or cuts and use of food bank… Another one you can use: “We are taking the matter very seriously and we will spare no effort in tackling the problem.”

“but to suggest moral equivalency” Yeah, because when we do it , it is right, when Putin is doing it is wrong… The difference, I think, between you and me is I am against in both cases. To be fair, I wasn’t always. I believed in the “right” of intervention, for good of course. Then I saw how we pick and choose who is the nice guys and the bad guys. So I just remember under which pretexts Europe invaded all the rest of the world: all are the highest Human Rights: Anti-slavery Campaign, Protection of Minorities and spreading Democracy… It is just the River-boat policy, square and simple.

Gilrandir

07-15-2014, 12:43

They also stole quite a few from the Ukrainian army apparently, but who said that Russian law enforcement is trying hard to enforce anything on that huuuuge border which is hard to control? And how should policemen stop tanks anyway? Nothing remarkable there.

It is not the problem of someone stopping someone at the border - it is how the second someone are allowed to reach the border. The latter has a sipmle explanation: the turncoats claim there are training camps in Rostov region from where reinforcements (and weapons) are sent to Ukraine. How can military training facilities exist in a [semi-totalitarian] country without its president condoning (read encouraging) it? A rhetorical question.
Conclusion: Russian government unofficially supports separatists weapon-wise, people-wise, propaganda-wise, finance-wise. The proofs are provided by the captured weapons accompanying documents and separatists' evidence. I even saw a video where a (presumably Russian) correspondent was interviewing the newly-arrived separatists and they said that that they were enlisted through governmental voyenkomaty - something like military enlistment offices.

“NATO annexed nothing.” No? So there is NO US base in Kosovo?

Had there been a US military base in Kosovo before its separation from Serbia? No.
Had there been a Russian military base in Crimea before its annexation? Yes. Russia had before what Nato received after.

Sir Moody

07-15-2014, 14:02

“NATO annexed nothing.” No? So there is NO US base in Kosovo?

having a base is not an equivalent to annexing and you know that so stop trying to pull this shtick

had Nato gone in secured the territory and then added said territory to an existing Nato country then and only then would it be Annexing

What they did was carry out a poorly thought out military intervention in an attempt to weaken the hostile Serbian Government and create a Western friendly Government - it was a bad idea we can all mostly agree on that - it is NOTHING like what Russia pulled with Crimea

Viking

07-15-2014, 14:51

“NATO annexed nothing.” No? So there is NO US base in Kosovo?

By that logic, the US has annexed quite a few countries in this world.

“Soldiers and militants kill each other in war; that's what war is about” Yeah, but what is about here is a President allegedly elected for all Ukrainian Citizens telling to kill 10 to 100 others. That is a call to murder.

If Poroshenko says "we will leave no stone unturned in the hunt for separatists", do you expect to see great numbers soldiers turning stones in Eastern Ukraine? You don't, because you realise that the literal interpretation does not make much sense practically.

“NATO ended a nasty ethnic war and has no major stake in what the country borders look like in the area” NATO did raged an ethnic war, just choosing a side. You can agree with it, just don’t deny it.

They didn't start it, but they ended it. Whether they ended it the best way possible is not relevant to the original point of comparison vs Crimea.

“Of course, independent TV channels are not too bad as long as they don't pose too much trouble for the authorities.” Isn’t true in all Countries? Can you give me one UK Channel that is not spreading the official economic theory or report social movement?

If you want to come up with a real counterargument, look for examples where independent media has been shut down for dubious reasons.

“I have never seen any evidence presented indicating that any of the mobs in the street at any time actually possessed such leverage.” Really? You should read or travel a little bit more (see “Orange Revolutions” and other Revolutions including French one). So you are saying that armed mob had no influence at all on the vote, whatsoever? All right, you are trolling me, are you?

If a mob is to have any influence, they need to realistically be able to actually exert violence. That law enforcement is not capable of arresting an armed mob does not mean that the mob is magically able to whack anyone they like to. Pockets of the city were their domain, not all of it.

“no evidence that he encouraged people to storm government buildings.” So he didn’t participate of the toppling of a legally elected President (and the storming was part of it)? I really stop to believe Media, as you are better informed.

There is nothing wrong in demonstrating against a government with the aim of getting rid of it. It could only be wrong if certain methods were used.

Sarmatian

07-15-2014, 14:55

having a base is not an equivalent to annexing and you know that so stop trying to pull this shtick

had Nato gone in secured the territory and then added said territory to an existing Nato country then and only then would it be Annexing

What they did was carry out a poorly thought out military intervention in an attempt to weaken the hostile Serbian Government and create a Western friendly Government - it was a bad idea we can all mostly agree on that - it is NOTHING like what Russia pulled with Crimea

But, 15 years after, no one is ready to recognize it as a mistake or to do anything to rectify it.

Anyway, each passing day makes Russian intervention more likely. Even though many here think of Russia as the Empire from Star Wars in which Putin as the emperor makes all the decision, reality is the Putin also has to balance different political currents in Russia. Violence and murders of Russian civilians makes it that much easier for interventionists to make their case.

Ukraine needs to finish this quickly and with as little bloodshed as possible. Unfortunately, I'm not totally convinced that Poroshenko is 100% in control of the National Guard.

Sir Moody

07-15-2014, 16:20

But, 15 years after, no one is ready to recognize it as a mistake or to do anything to rectify it.

The horse has bolted on that one...

Brenus

07-15-2014, 19:49

“They didn't start it, but they ended it.” They pick a side and crushed the opposition, looking the winners they championed carried on an ethnic cleansing which they did nothing to stop. They just did exactly the same thing than Milosevic during the war, without the excuse of the war.

“having a base is not an equivalent to annexing and you know that so stop trying to pull this shtick” that is called a Protectorate in Colonial terms: allegedly independent but not at all…

“had Nato gone in secured the territory and then added said territory to an existing Nato country then and only then would it be Annexing” So creating an artificial state and installing a base on it is not annexing? Because you may note NATO could have forced Milosevic out of power, secure the entire Serbian Territory and put a constitution for all Serbian Citizen the same rights and duties. No. They choose to carve a territory; they make sure it was not viable and that it couldn’t join another country (except EU) in order to annex it. Because if you really want peace there, you can as well decide that the Albanian part joined Albania, and the Serbian part stayed in Serbia. But in both case, this wouldn’t fit the plan to have a NATO (US) base for free in a country you totally control. So annexation it is.

“it is NOTHING like what Russia pulled with Crimea” True, Crimea was Russian before a Communist dictator gave it to Ukraine as a “wedding” gift. As Kosovo was never NATO before (Albanian were Maoist and Serbian Yugoslavs so Titist/communists).
Now, you may as well considered that countries should be divided following ethnic lines, so in doing this you would agree with Putin.

“By that logic, the US has annexed quite a few countries in this world.” Few, yes (Panama is one coming to mind).

“You don't, because you realise that the literal interpretation does not make much sense practically.” No, but killing or shelling others, that you can expect some to do it, if they think they will get away with it, or if they will “just” follow orders. No leaders said to turn the stones, some did say to kill 10 to 100 for one, and, oh surprise, they were obeyed. And again, it is not if he meaned it or not, but the fact he said t. It is a call for murder, and I even don’t understand why you try to deny it.

“where independent media has been shut down for dubious reasons.” Won’t bother with that, there are enough radio stations or TV whose licences were not renew for whatever reason, or sold to private companies (TF1 for France, or TV5 licence not renewed, some, oops, 20 years ago).

Sir Moody

07-15-2014, 19:56

“it is NOTHING like what Russia pulled with Crimea” True, Crimea was Russian before a Communist dictator gave it to Ukraine as a “wedding” gift.

With this logic the UK should be taking back half the world... you know it doesn't work that way so stop talking crap

Putin's Russia did a land grab - pure and simple - it was a classic annexation right out of every Empire builders play book - no matter how you try it is not even slightly similar to anything Nato has ever tried (and lets hope they never do...)

on a side note "Wedding gift"? they had to sign over their nukes - it was a bribe to make sure the new Ukraine was not a member of the Nuclear family - pure self interest on Russia's part - as was seizing it back illegitimately now the Ukraine is in turmoil

Brenus

07-15-2014, 21:45

"on a side note "Wedding gift"? they had to sign over their nukes" in 1954?

"you know it doesn't work that way so stop talking crap" get your fact right, then we decide who is "talking crap".

"it is not even slightly similar to anything Nato has ever tried" Your opinion, not based on hard fact (sovereign nation, international borders, bombing campaign, carving territory -against a signed treaty-, installing puppet regime, ethnic cleansing. So what is the difference with Putin, a part the fact that Putin didnt have to bomb Ukraine?). It is both time land grabbing, but one you agree with. I disagree with both.

"With this logic the UK should be taking back half the world" Oh, half of the World is populated by British?

Sir Moody

07-15-2014, 22:38

"on a side note "Wedding gift"? they had to sign over their nukes" in 1954?

oh please don't be trite - the USSR left nukes in Ukraine when it collapsed - the US and Russia signed an agreement with the Ukrainian government signing over Crimea in return for the Nukes - Russia has now broken said treaty so unless you are suggesting they should return the nukes Putin had no leg to stand on - and he knows that

"it is not even slightly similar to anything Nato has ever tried" Your opinion, not based on hard fact (sovereign nation, international borders, bombing campaign, carving territory -against a signed treaty-, installing puppet regime, ethnic cleansing. So what is the difference with Putin, a part the fact that Putin didnt have to bomb Ukraine?). It is both time land grabbing, but one you agree with. I disagree with both.

do you even read our posts? I have already said disagreed with Natos actions in Serbia but what Nato did is not equivalent at all - and while YOU may consider the Bosnian government "puppets" I suspect they would disagree with you - Nato set up a totally new country which as a sovereign state would be completely in its rights to ask Nato to leave - Putin invaded a country with soldiers with no insignia and brought a part of it under his control - they are completely different levels on the Tyranny scale ...

"With this logic the UK should be taking back half the world" Oh, half of the World is populated by British?

You never said populated you said "owned" - the British empire spanned 1/3 of the world and using your logic could seize it back - hell the Italians could claim Roman lineage and claim most of Europe - as I said before you are being stupid and you know it

and additionally now who is thinking like a Nazi - Ethnic lines do not and should not draw a countries borders up - its a dark path to walk down if you start to try and claim that...

Sarmatian

07-15-2014, 22:42

oh please don't be trite - the USSR left nukes in Ukraine when it collapsed - the US and Russia signed an agreement with the Ukrainian government signing over Crimea in return for the Nukes - Russia has now broken said treaty so unless you are suggesting they should return the nukes Putin had no leg to stand on - and he knows that

I'm not sure that Crimea was specifically mentioned in the document.

Sir Moody

07-15-2014, 22:55

I'm not sure that Crimea was specifically mentioned in the document.

no true but Crimea was part of Ukraine which (obviously) was - its a bit late for Russia to redraw the borders with the ink having been dry for 20 years

or more specifically

The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;

which Russia was clearly in breach of when it seized Crimea

Brenus

07-15-2014, 23:31

“Bosnian government "puppets" is in….. Bosnia I Herzegovina, not in Kosovo… I think you are mixing-up events and places…

“oh please don't be trite” Before this date, Crimea was part of Russia, a Communist dictator decided it was Ukrainian. This has nothing to do with nuclear weapons.

“what Nato did is not equivalent at all” In what aspects exactly? You keep repeating this as a mantra but what is the difference, in term of how and results? I give you that Milosevic never exerted as much violence against the Albanians in Kosovo as the actual darling of the western democracies used in Ukraine against Russian Minorities…

“You never said populated you said "owned": My mistake. However, Crimea is populated by Russians who happened, at least their grand-fathers, of Russian Nationality. It is not a reason because a dictator gave it to another part of his empire that it makes it legitimate. Queen Victoria gave the Congo area to the Belgium King; this doesn’t make the Congolese Belgium.

“its a dark path to walk down if you start to try and claim that...” Agree, but you are the one saying that carving part of Serbia to create a Albanian “state” was legitimate, not at all land grabbing and annexation by a power of someone else territory, not me.

“Nato set up a totally new country which as a sovereign state would be completely in its rights to ask Nato to leave” That is a complete and total colonialist approach. NATO has and had no mandate to create a state. NATO is a military alliance, designed first as defensive, not to conduct aggressive wars. I even can believe you wrote that. So what do you reproach to Putin? To do exactly this? Which is, by the way, what I said from the start: Putin is doing what we did in Kosovo… We opened the door, and he just crossed it.

and about breach of treaty: "Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act and annex 2,": Resolution 1244 (1999) Adopted by the Security Council at its 4011th meeting, on 10 June 1999.
So what about Putin is so exceptional?

Sir Moody

07-15-2014, 23:44

Before this date, Crimea was part of Russia, a Communist dictator decided it was Ukrainian. This has nothing to do with nuclear weapons.

Before it was part of Russia it was part of the Crimean Khanate - before that the Byzantine Empire, before that the Cimmerian Kingdom (both Roman puppet version and Greek ruled version) and so on and so on - do all of these groups get to make a claim? should they start lining up their occupiers?

Gilrandir

07-16-2014, 06:30

“no evidence that he encouraged people to storm government buildings.” So he didn’t participate of the toppling of a legally elected President (and the storming was part of it)?
I must confess: I supported Maidan morally and a little bit financially. So, when my grandchildren ask me fifty odd years later what I was doing in winter 2013/2014 I would say I was busy toppling Yanukovych.

“it is NOTHING like what Russia pulled with Crimea” True, Crimea was Russian before a Communist dictator gave it to Ukraine as a “wedding” gift. As Kosovo was never NATO before (Albanian were Maoist and Serbian Yugoslavs so Titist/communists).

I'm getting tired of this "gift" poppycock. Once again: IT WAS NOT A GIFT! A significant part of Ukrainian territory with population of 1.5 million and the city of Taganrog as its center was assigned to Russia IN RETURN for Crimea.
13632
The map is pretty much accurate, but there is a mistake: the green-colored territory to the east of present-day Ukraine was given to Russia not in 1924, but in 1954.

I give you that Milosevic never exerted as much violence against the Albanians in Kosovo as the actual darling of the western democracies used in Ukraine against Russian Minorities…

What is being done in Donbas is being done not against any minorities but against those who try to separate Donbas from Ukraine whatever their ethnicity may be.

Gilrandir

07-16-2014, 07:02

A head of State, who was involved in the toppling of an elected Government and the storming of official buildings is now telling than the ones who actually replicated what he was involved in are to be shot at the ratio of tens to hundred for one.

I think it is about time one put an end to this likening of Maidan and events in Donbas. Let us see what both did during approximately the same time they last.
1. Maidan started as a peaceful protest and remained such for about 1.5 months in spite of the violence used against it. Even when Maidaners got violent, most their weapons were bats and makeshift sharp things.
Eastern protesters started arming themselves with firearms from the inception.
2. When Maidaners did capture administrative buildings, it happened two odd months later.
Easterners did it as a start of protests.
3. The administrative buildings Maidaners stormed first of all were city halls and local regional admimistrations.
Easterners started with SBU and police offices to get at the weapons.
4. Maidaners were generally tolerant to the opponents and there were in fact two Maidans the second of which gathered (or was gathered) by the supporters of Yanukovych.
In Donbas, it is unthinkable to have an opposite view. The recalcitrant are violently supressed or flee.
5. When Maidaners said they would not obey Yanukovych they didn't set up with popular mayors, governors and the like, which appeared to be a hallmark of Eastern protests (and Crimea as well).
6. Maidan protesters never held referendums, proclaimed any quasi-states, called for other countries to bring in their army, or expressed their wish to separate from Ukraine and join someone else, all of which are the Eastern approach to protests.
7. Maidaners didn't kidnap people, torture them, demand ransoms, turn administrative buildings they captured into dungeons, take other people's cars and businesses, burn sport buildings as it is the custom in Donbas.
8. During Maidan about 2 dozen governmental servicemen and 100 civilans were killed. The casualty figures in the East are somewhat different, to put it mildly.
Conclusion: evidently there is a strong helping hand which directed (and is still much involved in) Eastern protests. Unless it withdraws the conflict will last for quite a time.

Viking

07-16-2014, 09:22

“By that logic, the US has annexed quite a few countries in this world.” Few, yes (Panama is one coming to mind).

And Germany and the UK.

“had Nato gone in secured the territory and then added said territory to an existing Nato country then and only then would it be Annexing” So creating an artificial state and installing a base on it is not annexing? Because you may note NATO could have forced Milosevic out of power, secure the entire Serbian Territory and put a constitution for all Serbian Citizen the same rights and duties. No. They choose to carve a territory; they make sure it was not viable and that it couldn’t join another country (except EU) in order to annex it. Because if you really want peace there, you can as well decide that the Albanian part joined Albania, and the Serbian part stayed in Serbia. But in both case, this wouldn’t fit the plan to have a NATO (US) base for free in a country you totally control. So annexation it is.

It wasn't NATO that carved Kosovo from Serbia, it was the Kosovars that did that themselves through armed insurgency and later their parliament.

In order for NATO's operation to be comparable to Putin's Crimean adventure, there should have been peace in Serbia; then NATO came and occupied Kosovo. That's not what happened.

“You don't, because you realise that the literal interpretation does not make much sense practically.” No, but killing or shelling others, that you can expect some to do it, if they think they will get away with it, or if they will “just” follow orders. No leaders said to turn the stones, some did say to kill 10 to 100 for one, and, oh surprise, they were obeyed. And again, it is not if he meaned it or not, but the fact he said t. It is a call for murder, and I even don’t understand why you try to deny it.

If you are referring to shelling mentioned in the article, then remember that we do not know who did it, nor do we know why it happened. There is no pattern to back up your claim that the shelling had anything to do with what Poroshenko said.

Sarmatian

07-16-2014, 13:21

no true but Crimea was part of Ukraine which (obviously) was - its a bit late for Russia to redraw the borders with the ink having been dry for 20 years

or more specifically

which Russia was clearly in breach of when it seized Crimea

The other part of the document also mentions "economic pressure" which EU, US and Russia are guilty of much before Crimea.

Otherwise, key words are "self-defence" or "otherwise in accordance with the charter of the UN". As we have seen, Charter of the UN apparently allows for a lot of stuff.

It wasn't NATO that carved Kosovo from Serbia, it was the Kosovars that did that themselves through armed insurgency and later their parliament.

In order for NATO's operation to be comparable to Putin's Crimean adventure, there should have been peace in Serbia; then NATO came and occupied Kosovo. That's not what happened.

That's actually exactly what happened with Crimea. There was an armed insurgency and a referendum for independence and to join Russia immediately.

Kosovo didn't even have a sham referendum.

The only difference is that Kosovo remained independent and didn't join any other state, at least for now.