View Full Version : Ukraine-in-a-thread
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
[
13]
14
15
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.
What happened in Crimea was that Russian forces, seemingly regular ones only lacking insignia, blocked all Ukrainian military bases. Russian warships also openly prevented Ukrainian ones from leaving their bases.
Supposedly, the Crimean parliament voted to hold a referendum, but it is uncertain whether or not this was a legitimate vote. Reports (http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/Voting-fraud-secured-pro-Russian-majority-in-Crimean-parliament-7496130.html#.UxzBxxR7ybH) suggest that it was far from legitimate:
After the demonstrations had continued for several weeks, the masked soldiers entered the Crimean parliament building. The elected representatives who showed up were stripped and had their cell phones confiscated. No journalists were allowed in. Behind closed doors – while armed soliders were watching – they sacked the government, announced a referendum on independence from Ukraine and elected Sergey Aksyonov to be prime minister. In the elections in 2010, Aksyonov’s party, Russian Unity, won only 4 per cent of the votes and 3 of the 100 seats in the assembly.
Rules require that at least 51 representatives be present in order to hold a qualified vote. The new goverment says 61 members of parliament took part. Aftenposten’s research shows, however, that only 36 were present.
- The system which registers who voted, and what we voted for or against, shows I did cast a vote. But I was not there. Neither were a large majority of my colleagues, says Sumulidi. Representative Irina Klyuyeva also participated in the vote, according to the official records, but she was not present either.
Or to put it this way: if the democratic procedures for Crimea had been followed, Crimea may have remained within Ukraine. It is uncertain exactly how much support the unification with Russia had and there is no specific reason to trust that the numbers from the referendum are the real ones.
Why the need to rush things in Crimea? The fact that they did adds to the likelyhood of that the outcome of all this was already decided in advance and that the people behind it wasn't really interested in whether a majority of the population actually supported it or not.
Kosovo's declaration of independence happened during a normal parliamentary session, as far as I know. Compare that with the stormed parliament of Crimea.
By the way, why does the Serb-dominated areas in northern Kosovo remain within Kosovo? It would make sense for them to be with the rest of Serbia.
Gilrandir
07-16-2014, 16:33
It is uncertain exactly how much support the unification with Russia had and there is no specific reason to trust that the numbers from the referendum are the real ones.
Tatars estimate the real pro-Russian referendum votes at 36%.
“And Germany and the UK.” So, I see you agree that Panama is an artificial creation from the US in order to secure a strategic asset…
“it was the Kosovars that did that themselves through armed insurgency and later their parliament.” Nope. The KLA was in full retreat at that time. Only NATO bombing saved them and put them in power, in the luggage. We let them have their fun then they signed what we wanted, where we wanted, when we wanted. If not they can negotiate with Serbia, when they feel it...
“there should have been peace in Serbia” You mean like in Ukraine now? So Putin would have just to wait the bloodbath to start then it would be ok?
“then NATO came and occupied Kosovo. That's not what happened.” No, what happened is NATO bombed Serbia then occupied part of its territory, then gave it (well, more a loan than really a gift) to the Albanians, then dictated a sham constitution that gave no one satisfaction, put a vice-Roy in the job, then let the natives live how we want them to live.
“then remember that we do not know who did it, nor do we know why it happened.” I know and I saw enough manipulations to be careful about who did what. What I am saying is a President of a Country shouldn’t call for murder. Because it is an opened door for extremists to do exactly what he told them to do: Radovan KARADIZ as far as I know, killed no one himself. He is in The Hague for Srebrenica because he is rightly considered as one the keys elements that allowed this to happen.
You can’t call for murder and then pretend it was not your intention but just a figure of speech.
“By the way, why does the Serb-dominated areas in northern Kosovo remain within Kosovo?” Because each time they tried we sent the troops… To be fair, we would do the same if the Albanians decided to join Albania. They asked, we said no, they knew their place, they obeyed.
Seamus Fermanagh
07-16-2014, 18:40
“And Germany and the UK.” So, I see you agree that Panama is an artificial creation from the US in order to secure a strategic asset....
The USA did not create Panamanian separatism, there was a sizeable sentiment that way as it was. We did....foster it....just a bit though.
"Russian-Crimean public works project," :laugh4: No, just protection of gazoduc so Europe will have access to needed supplies...
“And Germany and the UK.” So, I see you agree that Panama is an artificial creation from the US in order to secure a strategic asset…
You don't think it's wise to have bases in zones of ethnic conflict like in Kosovo? The US pulled out of Iraq, and we see what happens there.
“it was the Kosovars that did that themselves through armed insurgency and later their parliament.” Nope. The KLA was in full retreat at that time. Only NATO bombing saved them and put them in power, in the luggage. We let them have their fun then they signed what we wanted, where we wanted, when we wanted. If not they can negotiate with Serbia, when they feel it...
The point was that with no Kosovan insurgency, no independent Kosovo today.
“there should have been peace in Serbia” You mean like in Ukraine now? So Putin would have just to wait the bloodbath to start then it would be ok?
I'm not so sure any bloodbath would have started without Putin. For starters, at least two separatist leaders are Russian nationals: Borodai and Strelkov (an FSB colonel until 2013 by his own admission (https://twitter.com/SimonOstrovsky/status/487679481570942976)).
“then NATO came and occupied Kosovo. That's not what happened.” No, what happened is NATO bombed Serbia then occupied part of its territory, then gave it (well, more a loan than really a gift) to the Albanians, then dictated a sham constitution that gave no one satisfaction, put a vice-Roy in the job, then let the natives live how we want them to live.
And how exactly was this "sham constitution" dictated?
“then remember that we do not know who did it, nor do we know why it happened.” I know and I saw enough manipulations to be careful about who did what. What I am saying is a President of a County shouldn’t call for murder. Because it is an opened door for extremists to do exactly what he told them to do: Radovan KARADIZ as far as I know, killed no one himself. He is in The Hague for Srebrenica because he is rightly considered as one the keys elements that allowed this to happen.
You can’t call for murder and then pretend it was not your intention but just a figure of speech.
I like to think that they got something better on Karadžić than an isolated incidence where he said "For every soldier of our own killed, the enemy will pay with tens and hundreds of their own soldiers".
“By the way, why does the Serb-dominated areas in northern Kosovo remain within Kosovo?” Because each time they tried we sent the troops…
Sounds like a bad decision.
To be fair, we would do the same if the Albanians decided to join Albania. They asked, we said no, they knew their place, they obeyed.
You mean they asked to join Albania? Found this (http://www.economist.com/node/8558447) from 2007:
Yet neither in Kosovo nor in Albania have politicians advocating union ever made headway. A poll in Kosovo in 2005 found that whereas more than 90% backed independence, fewer than 10% wanted union with Albania. This points to a conclusion that Albanian nationalists hate: younger Albanians in Kosovo have developed a Kosovar identity of their own. It is not that they do not feel Albanian; rather that they see no contradiction in feeling Kosovar as well.
Sarmatian
07-16-2014, 21:59
What happened in Crimea was that Russian forces, seemingly regular ones only lacking insignia, blocked all Ukrainian military bases. Russian warships also openly prevented Ukrainian ones from leaving their bases.
Which is somehow worse than NATO bombing the hell out of military and civilian targets, so that Kosovo can become independent?
Supposedly, the Crimean parliament voted to hold a referendum, but it is uncertain whether or not this was a legitimate vote. Reports (http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/Voting-fraud-secured-pro-Russian-majority-in-Crimean-parliament-7496130.html#.UxzBxxR7ybH) suggest that it was far from legitimate:
Or to put it this way: if the democratic procedures for Crimea had been followed, Crimea may have remained within Ukraine. It is uncertain exactly how much support the unification with Russia had and there is no specific reason to trust that the numbers from the referendum are the real ones.
Just about everything is illegal and illegitimate in Ukraine these days. Yanukovich impeachment was illegal, which means he's still the president according to the constitution, which means elections could not have been held for a new president, which means Poroshenko's presidency is not legal, and he can't command Ukrainian armed forces etc...
Why the need to rush things in Crimea? The fact that they did adds to the likelyhood of that the outcome of all this was already decided in advance and that the people behind it wasn't really interested in whether a majority of the population actually supported it or not.
Why the need to rush things in Kiev? A deal was made, elections were supposed to be held.
Kosovo's declaration of independence happened during a normal parliamentary session, as far as I know. Compare that with the stormed parliament of Crimea.
After the region was ethnically cleansed of non-Albanians and undesirable political options removed.
By the way, why does the Serb-dominated areas in northern Kosovo remain within Kosovo? It would make sense for them to be with the rest of Serbia.
I don't know. Why is the Serbian part of Bosnia not allowed a referendum? You tell me....
“You don't think it's wise to have bases in zones of ethnic conflict like in Kosovo?”: Yeah, sure, it is like to put a plaster on the wound you inflict on yourself… So, for how long? We created Kosovo under the pretext the Albanians couldn’t live within Serbia but apparently the Serbs in Kosovo can live with the Albanians (and the Kosovar Albanians suddenly love the Kosovar Serbs).
“The point was that with no Kosovan insurgency, no independent Kosovo today.” So, without an Insurgency in Crimea no call for reunification with Russia… It is funny how powers react fast when needed, in some specific occasions…
“I'm not so sure any bloodbath would have started without Putin” The shooting, snipers and others clashes happened when Putin was busy with the Olympic Games, so, you can’t put this one on his door. Gilrandir wrote (I was busy toppling Yanukovych) that he went in the street to topple the former president and all events followed this political aim.
I still maintain, and nothing until now disproved this, that both US/EU and Russia were surprised by the events and both played theirs cards. Just Putin had a better hand and created the unexpected.
“two separatist leaders are Russian nationals: Borodai and Strelkov” And?
“And how exactly was this "sham constitution" dictated?” Easy, sign here, here and here or you negotiate with Serbia (UNMIK enacted a "Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government).
“Found this from 2007:” I don’t think so. In all demonstrations in Kosovo or in Macedonia from Albanians, you will have the Albanians flags, or during wedding. All the young Albanians I spoke with when working there were very Albania orientated. Families sent their kids to Tirana, not to Pristina or Tetovo. I don’t know who did manage this polls, but my empiric experience would tell it is not true (I managed a programm financed by EU and European Bank for Development in the region, 2 in fact, 1 before the Albanian Insurrection (2001) (and no independence this time EU/US didn’t want it) and after, first in Ohrid, Debar, second near Skopje and Tetovo, Gostivar). I can’t say my approach is scientific, but I really doubt of this figure.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
07-17-2014, 01:18
Which is somehow worse than NATO bombing the hell out of military and civilian targets, so that Kosovo can become independent?
The violence started AFTER the Russians moved in, NATO (however misguided) was responding to things the Serb army was already doing.
Why the need to rush things in Kiev? A deal was made, elections were supposed to be held.
The president RAN, that's why.
I don't know. Why is the Serbian part of Bosnia not allowed a referendum? You tell me....
Because the politicians on all sides couldn't agree to work together after Tito died.
Why are their Hindu's in Pakistan and Muslims in India?
“The violence started AFTER the Russians moved in” Where? In Maidan? There is still no violence in Crimea, the only violence is actually in Eastern Ukraine and there is no Russian Forces involved (at least officially/proved). The violence started there after the toppling of the President and few ill-advised movements from the provisional government. To try to separate events as Gilrandir did is irrelevant (and goodies and badies).
During all the times when the demonstrations were for social and economic improvements none of the “Russian” movements started. It started when the President run for his life and when suddenly it became political, and a shift from Russia to EU in short. So, the “Russian” side didn’t have to start from scratch, they just picked-up after the storming and ousting of the President (whom they elected if I have to believe the media). It then that Putin played his card and moved in Crimea, not before, so your claim just don’t match with chronology.
From BBC:
21 November: President Yanukovych's cabinet abandons an agreement on closer trade ties with EU, instead seeking closer co-operation with Russia. Ukrainian MPs also reject a bill to allow Yulia Tymoshenko to leave the country. Small protests start and comparisons with the Orange Revolution begin.
Early December 2013: Protesters occupy Kiev city hall and Independence Square in dramatic style, turning it into a tent city. Biggest demonstration yet sees 800,000 people attend demonstration in Kiev.
(My comment: That is 15 days, not 1 month and half as proclaimed by Gilrandir, by the way)
16-23 January: Parliament passes restrictive anti-protest laws, Days later two people die of gunshot wounds as clashes turn deadly for first time. Third death reported as the body of high-profile activist Yuriy Verbytsky is found. Protesters begin storming regional government offices in western Ukraine.
28-29 January: Prime Minister Mykola Azarov resigns and parliament annuls the anti-protest law. Parliament passes amnesty bill promising to drop charges against all those arrested in unrest if protesters leave government buildings. Opposition rejects conditions.
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.
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
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.
1 March: Russia's parliament approves Vladimir Putin's request to use force in Ukraine to protect Russian interests. Pro-Russian rallies are held in several Ukrainian cities outside Crimea, including the second-biggest city Kharkiv. Barack Obama tells Mr Putin to pull forces back to bases.
Ccl: Violence started in Ukraine long before Russian invaded Crimea…
“Because the politicians on all sides couldn't agree to work together after Tito died.” So, 20/30 years after, they still can’t have a referendum? Strange isn’t it?
http://youtu.be/Zeh0FlTpbbo
YouTube videos uploaded yesterday appear to show Grad rockets being fired from Russian territory towards Ukraine. The Interpreter has geolocated (http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-149-russian-tanks-and-artillery-reach-donetsk/#3365) them, and have more updates here (http://www.interpretermag.com/russia-this-week-lurid-anti-ukraine-propaganda-broadcast-on-state-tv/#1430):
1430GMT: The citizen reporter in Gukovo who filmed Grad rockets taking off from Russia and flying into Ukraine has had his page removed from VKontakte, Russia’s most popular social network.
Dmitry Tlustangelov was relaxing at the lake in Gukovo with his family yesterday when he caught sight of smoke across the water and videotaped it with his camera phone. A little boy’s voice is heard saying, “What is that?” And he replies, “It’s a Grad.”
[...]
From his profile, we can see that Tlustangelov, age 20, who studied at the police academy, makes an unlikely hero for Maidan. His entries show him proudly wearing the black-and-orange St. George ribbon of Russia nationalists and pro-Russian separatists, and his VK entries are filled with the things typical of his age and views — Russian nationalist inspirational sayings, anti-Ukrainian jokes and memes, and a crude, racist joke about Obama.
“You don't think it's wise to have bases in zones of ethnic conflict like in Kosovo?”: Yeah, sure, it is like to put a plaster on the wound you inflict on yourself… So, for how long? We created Kosovo under the pretext the Albanians couldn’t live within Serbia but apparently the Serbs in Kosovo can live with the Albanians (and the Kosovar Albanians suddenly love the Kosovar Serbs).
Again, NATO did not start the war in Kosovo. And again, NATO did not create an independent Kosovo, the Kosovars did that. NATO allowed the Kosovan militants to win, and what they did with their victory was up to them as long as it was democratic.
If you want to find examples of where Russia actually did something that compares to what NATO did in Kosovo, go to Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Except from the war with Georgia, I have no major issues with what Russia did there and that I know of, and I think that Western policy here is badly mistaken.
“The point was that with no Kosovan insurgency, no independent Kosovo today.” So, without an Insurgency in Crimea no call for reunification with Russia… It is funny how powers react fast when needed, in some specific occasions…
There was no insurgency in Crimea, it was an invasion without insignia.
“I'm not so sure any bloodbath would have started without Putin” The shooting, snipers and others clashes happened when Putin was busy with the Olympic Games, so, you can’t put this one on his door.
I am thinking about the stuff that goes on in the east. What happened in Kyiv pales in comparison.
“two separatist leaders are Russian nationals: Borodai and Strelkov” And?
That's potential evidence pointing in a certain direction.
“And how exactly was this "sham constitution" dictated?” Easy, sign here, here and here or you negotiate with Serbia (UNMIK enacted a "Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government).
I see all kinds of nationalities involved in UNMIK.
“Found this from 2007:” I don’t think so. In all demonstrations in Kosovo or in Macedonia from Albanians, you will have the Albanians flags, or during wedding. All the young Albanians I spoke with when working there were very Albania orientated. Families sent their kids to Tirana, not to Pristina or Tetovo. I don’t know who did manage this polls, but my empiric experience would tell it is not true (I managed a programm financed by EU and European Bank for Development in the region, 2 in fact, 1 before the Albanian Insurrection (2001) (and no independence this time EU/US didn’t want it) and after, first in Ohrid, Debar, second near Skopje and Tetovo, Gostivar). I can’t say my approach is scientific, but I really doubt of this figure.
Kosovo had no flag of it own at that point, so I don't know which flag you want them to fly. The article brings it up:
Over the next few months this debate will intensify, not least because Kosovo will need a flag. Today Kosovo Albanians use Albania's; but if Kosovo becomes independent, it will need its own. Prominent in the discussion will be Migjen Kelmendi, who edits a paper written in Kosovo's Albanian dialect, as opposed to the standard literary form. He says that when Kosovo was oppressed by Serbia, “I had to identify with Albanianism.” Now, he feels proud about being a Kosovar as well.
Which is somehow worse than NATO bombing the hell out of military and civilian targets, so that Kosovo can become independent?
It's a bit more complicated (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Račak_massacre) than supporting independence.
Just about everything is illegal and illegitimate in Ukraine these days. Yanukovich impeachment was illegal, which means he's still the president according to the constitution, which means elections could not have been held for a new president, which means Poroshenko's presidency is not legal, and he can't command Ukrainian armed forces etc...
I just the word legitimate specifically. If it's claimed to be legal but turns out to be illegal, then that's shady. In this case, it's a matter of measuring the democratic legitimacy, not legality, of what happened. If only a minority of the MPs supported it or if some of them were forced into supporting it, then that's relevant.
Why the need to rush things in Kiev? A deal was made, elections were supposed to be held.
As you said, a deal was made in Kyiv. The politicians there did not rush things. In Crimea, some MPs had so little time that they found it necessary to storm the parliament with gunmen.
After the region was ethnically cleansed of non-Albanians and undesirable political options removed.
That's of course cheating, but unless there is a realistic way to return the expelled successfully, it's the hard reality. Like in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh.
Gilrandir
07-17-2014, 11:54
Gilrandir wrote (I was busy toppling Yanukovych) that he went in the street to topple the former president and all events followed this political aim.
it is again Brenus at his best: perverting others' words. Where did I say that I "went in the street"? I said I was supporting Maidan morally and a little bit financially.
By my saying that I was busy toppling Yanukovych I wanted to show that I (as well as millions of Ukrainians) can claim as much credit for ousting Mr Y as Poroshenko who you try to make responsible for toppling the legitimate president. And an addition: I don't try to defend Poroshenko (I didn't vote for him), but it is ridiculous to put him in charge of a movement which didn't have anyone in charge, in fact.
“The violence started AFTER the Russians moved in” Where? In Maidan? There is still no violence in Crimea, the only violence is actually in Eastern Ukraine and there is no Russian Forces involved (at least officially/proved).
http://www.depo.ua/rus/life/dvoe-letchikov-sbitogo-pod-luganskom-an-26-pogibli-snbo-17072014125700
In the article Council for National Security and Defense (RNBO) of Ukraine officially states that Ukrainian transport plane AN 26 which was brought down near Lugansk on 14 July could not have been hit by local separatists since it was hit at the height of 6.5 km. It was done either by the land-based missile complex "Panzer" (not sure if I translated it correctly) or from a plane with an X-24 air-to-air missile. Both options are not available for separatists and could only have been used by the Russian army (unless "Panzer" was operated by separatists from the Russian territory).
Plus the video from Gukovo above by Viking.
But I expect these are not proofs for Brenus. He waits for Putin to say: "Read my lips: Russia is directly involved in Eastern Ukraine". But even if he does Brenus will find figures of speech used by Putin which deny the admission.
To try to separate events as Gilrandir did is irrelevant (and goodies and badies).
I compared the two movements which others before me (namely Brenus, Sarmatian and Husar) had equated. It was done not in terms you describe; I just exposed the discrepancies which others didn't notice or chose to disregard.
So, the “Russian” side didn’t have to start from scratch, they just picked-up after the storming and ousting of the President (whom they elected if I have to believe the media). It then that Putin played his card and moved in Crimea, not before, so your claim just don’t match with chronology.
The medals Putin distributed don't match the chronology either. So are we to believe him or you?
Early December 2013: Protesters occupy Kiev city hall and Independence Square in dramatic style, turning it into a tent city. Biggest demonstration yet sees 800,000 people attend demonstration in Kiev.
(My comment: That is 15 days, not 1 month and half as proclaimed by Gilrandir, by the way)
Again misinterpretation (or is it manipulation you are so good at?). The approximate figure of 1.5 months was given by me as the term of non-violent protests. Occupying the Square of Independence (as well as the City Hall) didn't result in any casualties.
YouTube videos uploaded yesterday appear to show Grad rockets being fired from Russian territory towards Ukraine. The Interpreter has geolocated (http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-149-russian-tanks-and-artillery-reach-donetsk/#3365) them, and have more updates here (http://www.interpretermag.com/russia-this-week-lurid-anti-ukraine-propaganda-broadcast-on-state-tv/#1430):
There are other unsavoury things: Ukrainian planes (bearing Ukrainian insignia) captured by Russians in Crimea are reported to have been made ready for usage. One of such planes is suspected of having dealt a missile blow against a residential area in Snizhne (Donetsk region) as Ukrainian aviation's flights were suspended for a couple of days after An 26 was brought down.
GenosseGeneral
07-17-2014, 15:58
The Ukrainian Council of National Security and Defence claims, that a Ukrainian SU-25 was shot down by a Russian plane and even more worrying, also claims that troops in Russian uniforms without insignia have been spotted on Ukrainian soil.
Taking into account, how the conflict has begun to cross the border over the last days (there have been more incidents similar to the one Viking has brought up, though without any proof besides accounts of Ukrainian forces), as well as the new wave of sanctions against Russia, I fear that a tipping point in Moscow has possibly been reached.
Concerning the jet: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28345039#TWEET1186366
Oh and Gilrandir, I suppose you mean the Pantsir?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1
Wow, looks like this took an unexpected turn. Passenger plane shot down?
Plane -> ground
Let's blame Newton, but wtf?
Fisherking
07-17-2014, 17:37
http://news.sky.com/story/1302864/malaysian-plane-shot-down-with-295-on-board
Yep!
That's really horrible, 300 people who had nothing to do with the entire conflict.
It actually does sound like the rebels were "playing" with stuff they did not fully understand.
Some reports say they claimed to have shot down an AN-26 transport in the area around the same time the passenger plane was shot down...
Of course it is also somewhat strange that airlines still used to fly over that area until now.
Malaysian Airlines is not having a good year...
Rhyfelwyr
07-17-2014, 18:46
Came across this and can't quite believe it. What on earth has happened here?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
07-17-2014, 19:30
That's really horrible, 300 people who had nothing to do with the entire conflict.
It actually does sound like the rebels were "playing" with stuff they did not fully understand.
Some reports say they claimed to have shot down an AN-26 transport in the area around the same time the passenger plane was shot down...
Of course it is also somewhat strange that airlines still used to fly over that area until now.
I believe that's the plane that the Ukrainians said must have been downed by Russia because it was flying too high to be hit by shoulder mounted missiles. A lot of people said "that's silly, they wouldn't be flying that high, why pressurise the Cabin - etc." The obvious answer being "to avoid the smaller missiles.
This latest incident suggests that the rebels do have the capability to hit plains at high altitude - although incidents of friendly fire from Patriot Batteries in the Middle East show that regulars can make this sort of mistake too.
So Either a Russian screwed up, A Ukrainian screwed up - or a Rebel screwed up. Either way, it was done with "real" Air-defence tech, so it it was the rebels that had to come from Russia.
First tanks to stand up to Ukrainian tanks - and now AA batteries to protect against Ukrainian Jets?
I seriously hope that NATO has a plan to move into Ukrainian if this escalates, because if Russia is becoming directly involved then that is unquestionable an Act of War and we need to respond with a formal declaration in that case.
“The medals Putin distributed don't match the chronology either”
So, the “secret “medals, seen only by Pro-Ukrainian actual Government, have the date 20-02-14 to 18-03- 2014. So not only Putin knew when he will invade Crimea (but made a mistake during the printing) before the operation started, but he as well knew when it will ended. He is definitively better than his NATO counterparts who were absolutely surprised by the Serbian refusal to bow to bombing campaign…
This guy is a crack champion…
Let’s say he did, that means he got around 3 to 4 weeks to design and produce a medal that nobody have seen and was not distributed… Err, it take less than that to do so.
So how the people reached the conclusion it was produced before the war not only started but finished is beyond imagination: well, there is name for this: propaganda.
Let examine the dates will you? The 20th of February, who is in power: Surprise: Yanukovich was still in power.
So following the “secret” medal theory, Putin knew the storming of the Parliament, knew that the deal of the 21st of February will be just a piece of paper before it happened, then decided to make a medal in advance (err, how long, in your opinion, as apparently ¾ weeks ahead is not enough)? Do note that the ones supporting the idea link the date of the medal with the shooting on Maiden which according to BBC happened the 20th (and the 18th, but the propagandists don’t mind of facts that doesn’t match the point they want to force upon populations).
So can you explain the choice of the 1st date (from the Russian Point of View)? Looking forward to your answer(s)…
“So are we to believe him or you?” As mentioned they were never distributed, so check your facts, and this answer your question.
“Again, NATO did not start the war in Kosovo.” NATO started the war with Serbia. Serbia didn’t attack NATO, as much as I know, before NATO offensive.
“And again, NATO did not create an independent Kosovo” Yes it did, as the Countries composing NATO imposed a Peace Treaty, then decided not to respect it in creating an Independent Kosovo, tailoring a Constitution signed freely by the side favoured by NATO.
“There was no insurgency in Crimea, it was an invasion without insignia.” I am sure I read something about storming official building and Local Parliament voting for the return of Crimea in Russia…
Ah yes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26643141
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26609667
http://gawker.com/ukraine-warns-of-separatism-as-pro-russia-protests-erup-1530432058
“What happened in Kyiv pales in comparison.” Agree.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.600998
“That's potential evidence pointing in a certain direction.” In what aspect? Only by nationality?
“Kosovo had no flag of it own at that point, so I don't know which flag you want them to fly” Good point. :2thumbsup:
About Racak, this was stage by William Walker, head of the CIA at that time in the region (funny enough, I rented the house he lived in in Croatia later). None of the forensic evidences shown any traces of massacre, but bodies were carried and disposed as needed for media/propaganda machine to allow NTO intervention.
http://tenc.net/articles/Johnstone/Recak.html
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
07-17-2014, 20:20
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27344029
'Children cheered the soldiers, who marched past wearing their new orange and white ribbon medals, won for "the return of Crimea".'
Medals seen by everyone, Brenus, not secret at all.
"Children cheered the soldiers, who marched past wearing their new orange and white ribbon medals, won for "the return of Crimea"." is the comment of the article, not part of the article. Now, if the journalist is able to see the difference between the medal worn by the veteran on pictures and the medal allegedly made before the war to celebrate a victory after the war, officially never distributed. He might have see the medal celebrating the victory over Germany, mind you, as it was why Putin was in Ukraine which is, orange and black, or the one for the defense of Moscow, or others, as apparently the USSR loved orange and white for the medals during and after WW2 ...
But as the journalist describes the scene, he had a lot of opportunities to take pictures of the soldiers proudly wearing these medals, marching through the streets, did he? So, were are they? He had a splendid occasion to confound the villainy of Putin and didn't size the moment? Cm'on, that was his carrier piece of luck and he missed it, what a shame!
You see, when soldiers receive medals, it is a proud moment. Lot and lot of pictures, sometimes families there, sometimes not, but be sure that the Military PR is there. So, it shouldn't be this difficult to have let's say at least one company receiving the awards. No? Nothing, and I desperately gloogled, changing the wording... Nothing. So it is probably the most secret massive distribution of medals never seen in History...
Still a mystery then...
Now, I don't doubt it will be a Medal for this. Then it will be time to tell how much you were right, and hopefully it will be Orange and white, with the appropriate dates at the back.
Fisherking
07-17-2014, 21:54
http://news.yahoo.com/rebel-suggests-insurgents-shot-down-malaysia-plane-mistake-174750060.html
I believe that's the plane that the Ukrainians said must have been downed by Russia because it was flying too high to be hit by shoulder mounted missiles. A lot of people said "that's silly, they wouldn't be flying that high, why pressurise the Cabin - etc." The obvious answer being "to avoid the smaller missiles.
This latest incident suggests that the rebels do have the capability to hit plains at high altitude - although incidents of friendly fire from Patriot Batteries in the Middle East show that regulars can make this sort of mistake too.
So Either a Russian screwed up, A Ukrainian screwed up - or a Rebel screwed up. Either way, it was done with "real" Air-defence tech, so it it was the rebels that had to come from Russia.
Concerning the flight altitude, 10km is absolutely standard, even between relatively close airports airplanes fly as high as possible to save fuel and become faster in the thinner air. There is absolutely no reason for airplanes to fly lower even if there are only pot-smoking peace activists on the ground.
If it was a Buk, then the range was hardly a problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system#Operators
A 70kg warhead is also quite devastating to any kind of plane that happens to be close to the explosion. Add in the fact that an airliner will not have warning systems and not try to evade until it is already too late and you have a real desaster if you cannot properly identify the plane you are aiming at before you shoot. I would assume that armies are aware of the civilian flights in the area and can distinguish flight patterns etc. but for rebels that is far less likely. Russians wouldn't have any reason to take such a risk.
The US didn't use their long-range advantage of radar guided missiles in Vietnam precisely because pilots had to identify their targets with their eyes before they were allowed to shoot. One would assume that Russia might employ similar rules since I'm not sure what they would gain by firing at an airliner. Not to forget that an airliner might actually survive smaller missiles as fired by most airplanes while the Buk with its enormous warhead would probably not leave much of the airplane.
Papewaio
07-17-2014, 23:45
At least they have found this airplane. Malaysia airlines isn't having a very good run lately.
I do wonder the sanity of civilian air flights over an inflammed hot spot.
If they have one more high-profile incident, I think Malaysia airlines will be dissolved, that PR image would be horrendous for business.
Seamus Fermanagh
07-18-2014, 01:59
If they have one more high-profile incident, I think Malaysia airlines will be dissolved, that PR image would be horrendous for business.
Or perhaps they can merge with Carnival cruise lines.....I'll just keep on shuffling along after that one. Gotta go, gotta go.
Gilrandir
07-18-2014, 05:58
The Ukrainian Council of National Security and Defence claims, that a Ukrainian SU-25 was shot down by a Russian plane and even more worrying, also claims that troops in Russian uniforms without insignia have been spotted on Ukrainian soil.
An addition to Su-25 being brought down: Ukrainian experts claim they have spotted inversion traces (if I translated the term correctly) after missiles launched from a Russian plane.
Oh and Gilrandir, I suppose you mean the Pantsir?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1
I did. Still too poor at rendering military-connected stuff.
So not only Putin knew when he will invade Crimea (but made a mistake during the printing) before the operation started, but he as well knew when it will ended.
He knew the latter because the medals were given out in April or May (not sure which) when the Crimean operation was well over. Russia had more than a month to mint the medals.
So can you explain the choice of the 1st date (from the Russian Point of View)? Looking forward to your answer(s)…
I can't explain. I can only speculate on the date that is a fait accompli. My speculation is well known to you (and much disbelieved and/or disliked by you): Putin had had a plan ready (since 2004) and when he saw which way the wind was blowing he kicked it off. The kicking off date is minted on the medals. But it doesn't mean that on this date something noticeable happened in Crimea. The operation started elsewhere and invasion forces were made ready.
You see, when soldiers receive medals, it is a proud moment. Lot and lot of pictures, sometimes families there, sometimes not, but be sure that the Military PR is there. So, it shouldn't be this difficult to have let's say at least one company receiving the awards.
In the same interview where Putin said his much disputed here "behind the back" phrase (ask Sarmatian where he found the English translation of it if you need a reference) he said that medals were sure to be distributed but who recieved them will remain a secret for quite a time.
One more thing to report: after the Gukovo Grad firing video was published Russian internet users started to demand from the author to delete it saying that it makes it much more difficult to deny Russian involvement in Ukraine against the general background of disbelief to what Russia says. Evidently they are mistaken as to the disbelief. There people even on this forum who still believe what Russia says.
As for the passenger plane brought down, Putin blamed it on Ukraine since it happened above its territory. How do you like the hypocrisy?
Now are there any doubts about Russia as a source of weapons for separatists or Russia supporting them in all ways? Can we now say that Russia is a state that supports terrorism?
And finally, it is about time we remembered Pannonian's incantation: I don't want to hear anything about Ukraine unless it touches us. Now it did.
“Russia had more than a month to mint the medals.” So no needs to do it in advance, I agree. So why the 2nd date would be right, and not the first one? Makes no sense…
“My speculation is well known to you”,: Yes it is, and at least this one makes sense. All nations have contingency plan, we, the French, had plan in case of Red Army flooding in Germany… I am not adverse on this one which is a light and credible alternative of “Evil Putin planned it all” which was on the market before. It still doesn’t explain the medal story… The French didn’t had a Campaign Medal ready with the date when the Russian Offensive would start and when the victory against them would have been achieved…
“he said that medals were sure to be distributed but who received them will remain a secret for quite a time.” That is in the realm of possibilities, so Medals will be made and distributed, fine, but not yet. So no distribution of Medals to the troops, so no “secret” medals, so journalist lying (again). As said one of them: “do not allow Truth to stand against a good story”.
“Putin blamed it”: Nope, according to what I just read, Putin said “Ukraine bores responsibility” as the Ukrainian Government broke the Cease Fire (according to him again).
Unfortunately the propaganda machine in both side will go now go full speed ahead to exploit this tragedy, which changes nothing about the roots of the conflict.
“Now are there any doubts about Russia as a source of weapons for separatists” Yes, because according to Separatists sources (so I heard in BBC), the separatist sized the system when they took 1 airport (or base) from the Ukrainian Army.
“Can we now say that Russia is a state that supports terrorism?” You never stop to claim it, so you will carry on louder.
Gilrandir
07-18-2014, 12:40
“Russia had more than a month to mint the medals.” So no needs to do it in advance, I agree. So why the 2nd date would be right, and not the first one? Makes no sense…
Those who minted the medals know better when the operation started and when it was over, so the both dates are right. As I have said, the plan was started to be implemented when Yanukovych was still persident. This is what is the most outrageous thing.
“My speculation is well known to you”,: Yes it is, and at least this one makes sense. All nations have contingency plan, we, the French, had plan in case of Red Army flooding in Germany…
There is a whole world of difference between contingency plans against invasion and plans to capture a part of another country at a propitious moment. Does France have such plans regarding Scotland (to honor The Auld Alliance), Rhur district or Sardinia?
“Putin blamed it”: Nope, according to what I just read, Putin said “Ukraine bores responsibility” as the Ukrainian Government broke the Cease Fire (according to him again).
I read that he said Ukraine was responsible because the plane was shot down above the Ukrainian territory. Following this logics, the UK is responsible for the plane that fell on Scotland in 1986 (not sure about the date). The one bearing resposibility is the one who is to blame, no?
“Now are there any doubts about Russia as a source of weapons for separatists” Yes, because according to Separatists sources (so I heard in BBC), the separatist sized the system when they took 1 airport (or base) from the Ukrainian Army.
Lately no Ukrainian aiports or bases have been captured by the separatists - they have been only retreating. If it did happen it was at least a month or more ago. If we believe their story: they had the deadly weapon but were not using it for a month or more nonwithstanding the dire straits they were in. Ukrainian planes were attacking their positions and they had the Buk up the sleeve but didn't play the card? Nonsense!
Here is a likelier story: they received the Buk yesterday in the morning (it was filmed by eye-witnesses and boasted about by terrorists themselves in the social networks) and used it on the same day.
In the following video they rejoice over the plane brought down mistaking its identity. Then they find it out, but the notorious Kozitsyn (the very Don cossacks' ataman who gave orders to kidnap OSCE mission) says: "It doesn't matter. Even if it wasn't a Ukrainian plane it must have been bringing in spies. Anyway, it shouldn't have been flying about - there is a war going on".
http://kiev.vgorode.ua/news/230150-sbu-perekhvatyla-razghovor-terrorystov-sbyvshykh-samolet
“Can we now say that Russia is a state that supports terrorism?” You never stop to claim it, so you will carry on louder.
Russia qualified similar actions in Chechnya as terrorism. I just want Russia to be consistent. Do you think that bringing down passenger planes is not terrorism?
P.S. Heard another intecepted communication of the terrorists (evidently made before the plane was brought down) where they thank a Russian for the Buk and say that their life will be easier after the delivery. They also complain that their abilities to use Grad are limited since they lack direction layers (if I translate it correctly) and operators, but they are glad that other Grads shoot from Russia across the border.
Papewaio
07-18-2014, 12:55
Can we say France is a state that sponsors terrorism?
Gilrandir
07-18-2014, 13:42
Can we say France is a state that sponsors terrorism?
You mean through Mistrals?
Can we say France is a state that sponsors terrorism?
Yes
“Again, NATO did not start the war in Kosovo.” NATO started the war with Serbia. Serbia didn’t attack NATO, as much as I know, before NATO offensive.
There was already a war with Serbia. NATO indirectly joined in on the side against Serbia.
“And again, NATO did not create an independent Kosovo” Yes it did, as the Countries composing NATO imposed a Peace Treaty, then decided not to respect it in creating an Independent Kosovo, tailoring a Constitution signed freely by the side favoured by NATO.
NATO did not push for independence. As far as I can see, they insisted that Kosovo should return to a state of autonomy it had just a few years earlier.
“There was no insurgency in Crimea, it was an invasion without insignia.” I am sure I read something about storming official building and Local Parliament voting for the return of Crimea in Russia…
Ah yes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26643141
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26609667
http://gawker.com/ukraine-warns-of-separatism-as-pro-russia-protests-erup-1530432058
Mainly unarmed locals aka protesters, armed people mainly Russian military personnel. No insurgency.
The first people to appear were highly organised with military trucks and heavy equipment. Not ragtag locals.
“That's potential evidence pointing in a certain direction.” In what aspect? Only by nationality?
Nationality + that he [Strelkov] was there from (more or less?) the start + no condemnation from Russia + his most recent career in FSB + his involvement in Crimea + his almost immediate top rank in authority.
About Racak, this was stage by William Walker, head of the CIA at that time in the region (funny enough, I rented the house he lived in in Croatia later). None of the forensic evidences shown any traces of massacre, but bodies were carried and disposed as needed for media/propaganda machine to allow NTO intervention.
http://tenc.net/articles/Johnstone/Recak.html
Articles that raise questions, assembled by a person with fringe views, apparently (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/james-bloodworth/sections-of-the-left-shou_b_1520929.html); particularly when it comes to the events in Bosnia:
One of the works released by a prominant "progressive" writer in the years following the genocide that attempted to play down Serb atrocities was Diana Johnstone's Fools' Crusade. In the years since it was published, the work has been thoroughly discredited by many. British historian and expert on the Bosnian war Marko Attila Hoare described the book as "little more than a polemic in defence of the Serb-nationalist record during the wars of the 1990s - and an ill-informed one at that."
Ukrainian forces are mopping up in Lugansk. This is great news indeed. Go Ukraine!
:ukraine:
Gilrandir
07-19-2014, 06:27
A video where the Buk is leaving Ukraine. They say that Strelkov himself came from Donetsk to Snizhne to speed it away.
http://fakty.ictv.ua/ru/index/read-news/id/1521545
One can spot that out of four missiles that are supposed to be there only two are in evidence. Those who were ear-witnesses of the launch heard two explosions.
Curiously, Strelkov said that the Boeing had taken off filled with the people already dead to discredit separatists.
Another intercepted communication of terrorists.
http://hvylya.org/news/exclusive/peregovoryi-terroristov-o-dostavke-buka-iz-rossii-audio.html
In it they admit that the Buk was delivered ACROSS THE BORDER WITH THE CREW to operate it.
Finally,one more video.
http://podrobnosti.ua/podrobnosti/2014/07/18/985393.html
Residents of Donetsk plead Gubarev and his hitmen to leave the city. They say that before whole Donetsk supported them and now they hate them. Gubarev says they have nowhere to escape and the woman sarcastically admits that to be a good reason for separatists to let the whole population of the city die together with them.
So the Ukrainian government is still hard at work producing propaganda.
Gilrandir
07-19-2014, 13:01
So the Ukrainian government is still hard at work producing propaganda.
Yeah, right. The Boeing was shot down by the Ukrainian nazis, all the weapons separatists buy at the supermarkets and Donetsk residents are ready to die for Gubarev.
And in this one Putin calls Goebbels "a talented man who always got what he wanted".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ky_PR3VO7k
Again Ukrainain propaganda machine? It is powerful indeed to make Putin admit he admires Goebbels to the face of a bunch of Jewish representatives. Brenus was especially averse to anyone who did it. Now will we hear him calling Putin a nazi?
Even the press here, while generally supporting Ukraine and the pro-EU movement, keeps mentioning how the entire conflict is full of propaganda by both sides. Right now they are discussing on the radio how all sides are quick to conclude things and throw the blame around.
I still think the separatists probably shot the plane down but a lot of what you post reeks of demonization to justify killing them all or something.
Two years or so ago we had articles about how Putin is a huge fan of Stalin and the great patriotic war and wants to reestablish the USSR, now we hear how he is actually a Hitler imposter who glorifies the Nazis. Either the man has a split personality or people are making **** up about him.
Sarmatian
07-19-2014, 17:22
Yeah, right. The Boeing was shot down by the Ukrainian nazis, all the weapons separatists buy at the supermarkets and Donetsk residents are ready to die for Gubarev.
And in this one Putin calls Goebbels "a talented man who always got what he wanted".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ky_PR3VO7k
Again Ukrainain propaganda machine? It is powerful indeed to make Putin admit he admires Goebbels to the face of a bunch of Jewish representatives. Brenus was especially averse to anyone who did it. Now will we hear him calling Putin a nazi?
Can you please stop the propaganda? Do you really think you're gonna convince anyone with it?
Nice thread, but I prefer the Pit's one. Much funnier, in a bit nefarious way:
and now we gat some pakistani tinfoil hats
I dont need to put up sources for tinfoil hats! And certainly not for those who are also Putin appologists!
Figure yourself back to Ivanland!
Oh and you are somehow the judge over such matters?
All you do is come here and post idiotic phrases in which you question everything that in anyway brings this act of terrorism in conection with the Russians.
Either to deliberaly annoy people, or because you are an RT drone!
It isnt. But it turns into one when it is constantly repeated under each and every single post that leans into a certain direction.
If you doubt my credibility then that is your problem! And i actualy confirmed in one post that I was wrong about something. I also often ask if the reports are true.
My main source for news is Der Spiegel.
You dont post any reports or sources or anything releated to the subject whatsoever.
All you do is constantly post "source" under each and every single post that denounces Russian actions.
Whilest ignoring the disgusting remarks by your fellow tinfoil hat comrades.
Isnt there some Alex Jones forum for you people somewhere?
What oppionion!? You didnt post any oppinion! All you do is constantly post "show me a source" under every single post condeming Russian actions.
http://geofftop.com/images/jones.gif
Case closed.
Nope. In the tiny mind of these kinds of people "sources" are ramblings by fat people in tinfoil hats living in their mums basements posted on youtube.
Except for this one:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?643207-Ukraine-and-Crimea-development-thread&p=13966856&viewfull=1#post13966856
And this one:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?643207-Ukraine-and-Crimea-development-thread&p=13966906&viewfull=1#post13966906
Hypocrit!
No you dont!:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?643207-Ukraine-and-Crimea-development-thread&p=13966914&viewfull=1#post13966914
I didnt even say that! If you have to lie in order to make some excuse for an "argument" you are the one who shouldnt be posting!
The value of your comments would be best served in the newsroom of Russia Yesterday
"When it requires one"?!
The dumbest thing ever posted here.
Hypocrit and liar.
Everything.
Oh! So when you speculate it is alright?! Hypocrit.
Calling someone a liar or hypocrit isnt an insult it is an accusation. You lying hypocrit!
Name calling? I accused you of being a liar and hypocrit!
The only thing I did towards you that I might shouldnt have done was calling you "Ivan".
Have you ever seen a plane fly in the sky?!
So now you call everything you disagree with a "claim" and everything you agree with a "speculation"? And a few hours ago you called everything you disagreed with a "speculation" and everything you agreed with a "claim".
Are you to daft to see how you contradict yourself within a few pages of a thread?!
Well you apparently change it`s definition every few hours.
About sources.
Yes. You are a conspiracy theorist.
Are you now deliberatly making double posts?!
I replied to your post Ivan.
And making a double post might make my reply go away in the potatoe fields of the collapsed soviet union.
But not here.
So if you want to ignore my reply, you must find better ways than simply making a redicilous double post.
Someone who makes arguments agains "Neo Colonian Nazis" is not worthy of getting any more or less good counterarguments.
Those people are only worth of being ridiculed.
No. The difference lies in organisation, process and monitors.
A better one than yours, which is your ass.
A better one than yours, which is your ass.
Says the guy who yelles "false flaaaaag" from beneath his tinfoil hat.
dafuq?
Seriously.......... did you jerk off whilest writing about how "great" your own comments are?
What!?
And you replay by ignoring the most important points: process, organisation and monitoring.
Do you honestly think that making things up will give you the slightest bit of credibility as you promote ethnic nationalism?
Oh no. Everything points to Ivan. And Ivan even initialy admitted shooting down a ukrainian plane which then turned out to be civilian.
And right now they are doing their best to obstruct the investigation.
You are the one who is making elaborate excuses for a bunch of criminals.
And then we have this:
This forum is great and in many regards suppiror to most forums covering pc games. The forum rules ensure a certain civility amongst the members and within the discussion that is really hard to encounter anywhere else on the net. And that kind of civility I believe is really worth keeping up on a forum covering a topic like a gaming series.
But I feel that the rules stand in the way and are somewhat to tought when it comes to things like debating politics or any other social issue.
I would like to ask if you can recomend a forum which is mainly centerd arround debating social issues that is not tied to such strickt rules and censoring swearwords.
And I hope the moderators dont take offense in this. This forum is awsome, but I dont see much reason to engage here besides for debating the TW series, praising mods, presenting my mods and learning to improve my modding skills.
Yeah, the quality of a political discussion increases proportional to the amount of swearwords used.
That is also why everything Alex Jones says is true.
Gilrandir
07-20-2014, 06:49
Two years or so ago we had articles about how Putin is a huge fan of Stalin and the great patriotic war and wants to reestablish the USSR, now we hear how he is actually a Hitler imposter who glorifies the Nazis. Either the man has a split personality or people are making **** up about him.
There is one more possible explanation to it: Putin is changing. He has gone through the Stalin epitome, now his Hitler epitome is giving way to the next - the bin Laden one.
And as for Putin's Goebbels phrase - it was deleted from the interview before it appeared on Russian TV. Why is that? TV time is limited and expensive even for the owners of the said TV?
Can you please stop the propaganda?
What I share here appears in Western sources and press a couple of days later. Some people call it information, others propaganda. The latter is the easiest way - to deny everything en masse since one considers it propaganda.
Do you really think you're gonna convince anyone with it?
As I have argued, people believe what they initially like to believe. My wife has relatives in Odesa region who are strongly Russian-oriented (though being ethnic Ukrainians in God knows what generation). They believe everything Russian TV says, including the story of a woman who saw Ukrainian National Guard crucify a three-year-old boy in the central square of Slovyansk the day they entered the city.
You are sure that all the blame should be put on Ukrainian nazis, seeing no nazis elsewhere, and promote negotiations with (now we are entitled to give them a well-earned name) terrorists. You are sure that every branch of power in Ukraine is illegal as it was installed by mobs threatening MPs. Then France has been illegally ruled since 1789, Russia since 1917, the USA since 1783 and so on.
So what I share here is not meant to convince anyone since it simply can't. People here have already their attitude shaped, don't you see it?
There is one more possible explanation to it: Putin is changing. He has gone through the Stalin epitome, now his Hitler epitome is giving way to the next - the bin Laden one.
Yeah, I heard he's already looking for comfy caves on the market. :dizzy2:
“seeing no nazis elsewhere” Nazism is a very specific political stance. The only ones openly linked with Nazism are on your side of the story.
“They believe everything Russian TV says”. You believe all (and propage) what the Ukrainian TV says, so what is the difference?
“now we are entitled to give them a well-earned name) terrorists”: As terrorist going on, terrorists are people doing murder(s) or mass destruction, or terror attacks on purpose in order to achieve a political aim. Now, can you tell me what was the political gain from the Rebels/separatists were expecting from that? I am sure your TV will explain it… You were the one explaining here that your army just killed civilians by mistake and create more than 40,000 refugees, but you deny others to do the same.
To shoot down an commercial airplane (Iranian) by mistake happened before by the USA; So USA is a terrorist state?
“Then France has been illegally ruled since 1789” well, according to the monarchists, yes…
“NATO indirectly joined in on the side against Serbia.” Indirectly? Bombing a country to imposed your conditions is to join indirectly?
“NATO did not push for independence.” Read newspapers and chronology please…
“Articles that raise questions, assembled by a person with fringe views” So the fact the person raise questions disqualifies the others right?
“Marko Attila Hoare” is obsess by Serbian guilt at all cost, as much as I know from what he wrote. Contrary of what you do, I don't dismiss what he wrote but I try to confront with other sources.
He is engage in a Crusade, not in actually studying facts. His point of view on Gavrilo PRINCIP’s assassination gives you some clue:” At one level, the assassination formed one act in the long history of Serbian attempts to expand westward into Bosnia-Hercegovina, and of the desire of some Bosnians to unite with Serbia.”
“so the both dates are right.”:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: How? How can you even write this to all to see when it obviously wrong? So tell me to what event is the first one is linked?
“The one bearing resposibility is the one who is to blame, no?” Not really, but you are in full propaganda mood so, carry on. Not that I blamed you, you are in your role…
“Russia qualified similar actions in Chechnya as terrorism.” Chechnyan rebels attacked schools and theaters by mistake?
“Does France have such plans regarding Scotland” Absolute :flowers:. Does France have strategic interests in Scotland? But France intervene each time in Africa when her strategic interest are at stake, or in danger to be (Chad being the last one). Of course, to fight terrorism (Muslim one this time).
Gilrandir
07-20-2014, 13:06
“seeing no nazis elsewhere” Nazism is a very specific political stance. The only ones openly linked with Nazism are on your side of the story.
You again forget Le pen's posse, Austria, Hungary and others seeing nazism where you like to.
“They believe everything Russian TV says”. You believe all (and propage) what the Ukrainian TV says, so what is the difference?
How do you know what Ukrainian TV says to brand it as lies and propaganda? Ukrainian TV is full of critisicm on how ATO is held, on corruption among military management (especially the logistic part of it), on low professional skills of some generals as well as of stories how refugees and those who stay in the war zone suffer. Moreover, unlike Russia, only one Ukrainian TV channel is owned by the state, others - by oligarchs. So one has a gamut of TV attitudes here ranging from strongly critical (TV channel "Ukraina" owned by Akhmetov) to government-predisposed. But in any case criticism is a frequent guest at any of them. So watching Ukrainian TV one can form one's own judgement being influenced from several directions.
But besides TV there is internet that I scan in case I have time or something of moment happens.
“now we are entitled to give them a well-earned name) terrorists”: As terrorist going on, terrorists are people doing murder(s) or mass destruction, or terror attacks on purpose in order to achieve a political aim. Now, can you tell me what was the political gain from the Rebels/separatists were expecting from that? I am sure your TV will explain it… You were the one explaining here that your army just killed civilians by mistake and create more than 40,000 refugees, but you deny others to do the same.
I agree that it was a mistake. Moreover, I think Putin and his pet separatists aka terrorists are appalled of what they did themselves and much distressed about it.
But this was not the first act of terror on their part - they blew up canals, railways and bridges sometimes quite far from the fighting zone. Was it also by mistake? When one encourages terrorists and supplies them with weapons more and more deadly it is bound to lead to such mistakes sooner or later.
But even if it is a mistake - if one kills someome by mistake it is still a murder (or in the law language manslaughter) since a person's life is taken away against his will.
To shoot down an commercial airplane (Iranian) by mistake happened before by the USA; So USA is a terrorist state?
The USA admitted it - Russia wriggles like an eel trying to hide all evidence (taking the Buk away from Ukraine, through terrorists impeding the investigation in a number of ways and holding Ukraine responsible for it).
This Iranian plane avokes some ruminations: Husar claimed that professionals operating such missile complexes can't mistake a passenger plane for a military one. So he concluded that the Boeing was downed by laymen. A strange question arises: were Americans who shot down the Iranian plane laymen or can professionals make mistakes like that?
“so the both dates are right.”:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: How? How can you even write this to all to see when it obviously wrong? So tell me to what event is the first one is linked?
I told you several times. OK, once more: I DON'T KNOW. But I didn't make the medals. Those who did KNOW IT PERFECTLY WELL. I can only speculate that it is the date when the operation started on paper by getting everything ready for invasion.
“The one bearing resposibility is the one who is to blame, no?” Not really, but you are in full propaganda mood so, carry on. Not that I blamed you, you are in your role…
Then Russia bears responsibility for the aircrush in which Polish leaders died and the USA for the Twin Towers - in both cases the planes fell respectively on Russian and American territory.
As for the propaganda mood: propaganda is defined as information and ideas that may be false or exaggerated, which are used to gain support for someone or something. Do tell me where I offered false or exaggerated information.
Sarmatian
07-20-2014, 17:30
There is one more possible explanation to it: Putin is changing. He has gone through the Stalin epitome, now his Hitler epitome is giving way to the next - the bin Laden one.
:laugh4:
Next is Montezuma, when he sacrifices 50,000 slaves to heathen Gods (perhaps to fuel his own immortality? Could be, could be...)...
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Just when I think your posts can't get funnier, you prove me wrong.
“NATO indirectly joined in on the side against Serbia.” Indirectly? Bombing a country to imposed your conditions is to join indirectly?
Directly: declare war on your allies' enemy
Indirectly: declare war on a common foe
“NATO did not push for independence.” Read newspapers and chronology please…
And when I do that, all I can find is that they pushed for autonomy.
“Articles that raise questions, assembled by a person with fringe views” So the fact the person raise questions disqualifies the others right?
“Marko Attila Hoare” is obsess by Serbian guilt at all cost, as much as I know from what he wrote. Contrary of what you do, I don't dismiss what he wrote but I try to confront with other sources.
He is engage in a Crusade, not in actually studying facts. His point of view on Gavrilo PRINCIP’s assassination gives you some clue:” At one level, the assassination formed one act in the long history of Serbian attempts to expand westward into Bosnia-Hercegovina, and of the desire of some Bosnians to unite with Serbia.”
You seemed certain of your case. The evidence that you have presented thus far does not justify this confidence.
“The evidence that you have presented thus far does not justify this confidence” Evidence about what? You came-up with his name under the label “British historian and expert on the Bosnian war Marko Attila Hoare ”. Not me. In just saying “the assassination (1914) formed one act in the long history of Serbian attempts to expand westward into Bosnia-Hercegovina” when Serbia became independent in 1878 after roughly 500 years of Ottoman Occupation, he proves largely his competence, knowledge and understanding of the region!!!
“You again forget”: Nope, but you forget (or ignore) that Le Pen’s family deny being Nazi (even if my opinion at least the father is) when yours proudly claim and are proud of it.
“How do you know what Ukrainian TV says to brand it as lies and propaganda?” Just reading what you wrote, sorry. Perhaps you are not reporting all…
“Moreover, unlike Russia” Yeah it was said, but I did vaguely remember than 60 % of Russia channels are in fact private, and it was something that putting taxes on them was seen as a threat to Freedom of Information (read right to make money without contributing to the economy). “According to the National Association of TV and Radio Broadcasters, there are 2,168 TV and radio companies in Russia. Of these, 161 have a combined (TV and radio) licence, 799 are TV companies and 888 are radio stations. There are about 1,511 cable operators.”
Find it: From Radio Free Europe (not really Putin’s lovers): “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”
“I agree that it was a mistake” At least.
“if one kills someone by mistake it is still a murder (or in the law language manslaughter)” Nope, in law language as you said Murder is Murder and Manslaughter is manslaughter, not the same things, sorry. In NATO term, it is call a “collateral damage” and changing the vocabulary for the Separatists doesn’t change the reality.
“Then Russia bears responsibility for the aircrush in which Polish leaders died and the USA for the Twin Towers” Yeah, sure, carry on with silly comparisons…
“Indirectly: declare war on a common foe” What common foe? Which NATO country did Serbia attacked? Please?
“And when I do that, all I can find is that they pushed for autonomy.” Read again:"It was drafted by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)" “The most controversial provision was the status envisioned for Kosovo, by which Kosovo would remain a de jure province of Serbia, but would become a de facto third republic.”
The best Part: “ Kosovars would take part in Serbian elections by electing representatives (MPs) to the Serbian parliament, which would have no jurisdiction over Kosovo. Kosovars would have guaranteed seats in the Serbian Government and the Serbian Supreme Court, which would deal exclusively with the territory of Serbia without Kosovo. Kosovo would also have an independent judicial system including its own autonomous Constitutional Court, but it would also have guaranteed representatives in the Yugoslavian judiciary, which would have no jurisdiction over Kosovo. Furthermore, NATO would have free and unrestricted military access to the country.”
www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Rambouillet_Agreement.html
Gilrandir
07-21-2014, 07:02
“You again forget”: Nope, but you forget (or ignore) that Le Pen’s family deny being Nazi (even if my opinion at least the father is) when yours proudly claim and are proud of it.
You made me search back but I found what I wanted (it is # 2326, quite a way back):
Svoboda claims that they are nationalists and deny being Nazis.
Of course they would. It's like how racists deny being racist - "I'm not a racist, I just think that black people have smaller brains, are dirty and full of bacterias. They should stick to picking cotton, and if they absolutely must be free, they shouldn't have a vote or the same salary for the same job as white people."
Svoboda denies being nazi, but they're openly promoting nazi principle.
Go ahead and argue with Sarmatian.
The same for Right Sector:
http://styknews.info/novyny/polityka/2014/03/04/pravyi-sektor-zaperechuie-prykhylnist-natsystskym-ideiam
in which the head of the Kyiv headquarters denies adherence to nazist ideas and claims that 7 of his relatives were killed by nazis in Babyn Yar and as a proof pointing to one of the leaders of Right Sector Boryslav Bereza who is Jewish.
““Moreover, unlike Russia” Yeah it was said, but I did vaguely remember than 60 % of Russia channels are in fact private, and it was something that putting taxes on them was seen as a threat to Freedom of Information (read right to make money without contributing to the economy). “According to the National Association of TV and Radio Broadcasters, there are 2,168 TV and radio companies in Russia. Of these, 161 have a combined (TV and radio) licence, 799 are TV companies and 888 are radio stations. There are about 1,511 cable operators.”
Being private TV station in Russia doesn't mean being free from a total governmental control. If you disobey, your fate is forfeit. The examples with NTV, TV 6 Moskva and others prove it.
Another intercepted conversation of terrorists:
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/2601134-boeviki_pryatali_chernye_yashchiki_s_boeing_777_sbu.htm
in which they show they are bent on keeping the Boeing black boxes from OSCE as "people in Moscow" want them.
And about 38 bodies were brought from the site of the crash to hospital and then back to the site.
Ukrainian authorities suspect attempts to extract from them whatever evidence that may point to the kind of weapon used to down the plane.
Some people will again call it propaganda (although they don't do that if, say, Viking publishes the Gukovo Grad firing video).
Gilrandir
07-21-2014, 07:07
:laugh4:
Next is Montezuma, when he sacrifices 50,000 slaves to heathen Gods (perhaps to fuel his own immortality? Could be, could be...)...
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Just when I think your posts can't get funnier, you prove me wrong.
You and Brenus (the latter mentioning Rokossovsky) were snapping your fingers at "JUST THREE" tanks that were spotted in Donbas and now there are plenty of them.
Go ahead and laugh watching Putin pushing his game farther and farther. The fun your are in because of him is growing apace.
Same thing happens everywhere. After the French revolution the euro-monarchists sent armies trying to bring back monarchy to France, recently the US supplied the Syrian rebels with weapons. It's what countries do to you when they do not like you.
Gilrandir
07-21-2014, 10:36
Same thing happens everywhere. After the French revolution the euro-monarchists sent armies trying to bring back monarchy to France, recently the US supplied the Syrian rebels with weapons. It's what countries do to you when they do not like you.
I agree. But this is what Putin denies and many people here feel inclined to believe him. More and more reports come, in which Ukrainian forces stationed along the border say that they are shelled both by separatists and across the border from Russia, and the Russian souvenirs make up 70% of all the shelling they get.
“Go ahead and argue with Sarmatian” Sarmartian has his opinion/analyse, I have mine. However, he is right. Intelligent Nazi deny to be Nazi, yours are stupid. So what is your point?
“in which the head of the Kyiv headquarters denies adherence to nazist ideas and claims that 7 of his relatives were killed by nazis in Babyn Yar and as a proof pointing to one of the leaders of Right Sector Boryslav Bereza who is Jewish.” I gave you a link you didn’t dare (wisely) to contest. Go back to it with your Nazi in full Nazi uniform during one of their parades.
“people in Moscow” Yeah, eared this one… Carry on; give as all the Kiev’s Propaganda… It is in 2 sentences: “high people are interested” and in order to be sure to be understood (by stupid foreigners), the guy added “in Moscow”or something like this.
"Being private TV station in Russia doesn't mean being free from a total governmental control." Truth in all countries, as it is the State that gives licences for broadcasting Russia is no exception...
“The evidence that you have presented thus far does not justify this confidence” Evidence about what? You came-up with his name under the label “British historian and expert on the Bosnian war Marko Attila Hoare ”. Not me. In just saying “the assassination (1914) formed one act in the long history of Serbian attempts to expand westward into Bosnia-Hercegovina” when Serbia became independent in 1878 after roughly 500 years of Ottoman Occupation, he proves largely his competence, knowledge and understanding of the region!!!
Evidence that "[the Račak massacre] was stage[d] by William Walker, head of the CIA at that time in the region." If you don't like Hoare, then try Ed Vulliamy (http://iwpr.net/report-news/comment-we-must-fight-memory-bosnias-camps), a journalist during the war in Bosnia:
One could be forgiven for thinking that once the Bosnian Serb co-president Biljana Plavsic had pleaded guilty to the entire hurricane of violence unleashed on her authority, the revisionists would go to ground. After all, who would know best: they or the woman (and her peers and subordinates) on whose orders the pogrom was carried out?
But no. In Sweden, here they come again, through the pages of a magazine called Ordfront, or Word Front. Last year, it carried an interview with the author Diane Johnstone, about her book Fool's Crusade, which expresses doubts over the number of victims of the Srebrenica massacre; the authencity of the Racak massacre in Kosovo; the use of systematic rape in the war in Bosnia; and the true figure of Bosnian war dead (the official estimate is more than 200,000 - Johnstone claims 50,000). And just as before, members of the chattering classes, unbelievably, have hailed this poison as “outstanding work”, in a letter signed by, among others, Noam Chomsky, Arundhati Roy, Tariq Ali, John Pilger, et.al.
There appears to significant amounts of controversy surrounding Diana Johnstone; the quote involving Hoare was just a random example. You can find more links on the topic in her Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_Johnstone).
“Indirectly: declare war on a common foe” What common foe? Which NATO country did Serbia attacked? Please?
Kosovan militants and NATO saw a common enemy in the government of Serbia. The militants saw the Serbian government as an enemy because they wanted independence. NATO saw it as an enemy, according to itself at least, because it viewed it as responsible for ethnic killings and repression in Kosovo.
“And when I do that, all I can find is that they pushed for autonomy.” Read again:"It was drafted by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)" “The most controversial provision was the status envisioned for Kosovo, by which Kosovo would remain a de jure province of Serbia, but would become a de facto third republic.”
The best Part: “ Kosovars would take part in Serbian elections by electing representatives (MPs) to the Serbian parliament, which would have no jurisdiction over Kosovo. Kosovars would have guaranteed seats in the Serbian Government and the Serbian Supreme Court, which would deal exclusively with the territory of Serbia without Kosovo. Kosovo would also have an independent judicial system including its own autonomous Constitutional Court, but it would also have guaranteed representatives in the Yugoslavian judiciary, which would have no jurisdiction over Kosovo. Furthermore, NATO would have free and unrestricted military access to the country.”
www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Rambouillet_Agreement.html
That page is a mirror of a Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement).
Are these (http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/ramb.htm) the accords? I'd like to see exact quotes.
The remains of Yugoslavia was a federation, and your quotes goes a long way towards expressing a desire to put Kosovo on an equal footing with Serbia and Montenegro within that federation. How exactly this status compares with with the autonomy Kosovo used to have before Milošević canceled it in 1989 I am not sure, but it's certainly not full independence. That would require Kosovo to have its own foreign policy.
GenosseGeneral
07-22-2014, 12:40
"Being private TV station in Russia doesn't mean being free from a total governmental control." Truth in all countries, as it is the State that gives licences for broadcasting Russia is no exception...
Well, thats exactly how the Kremlin exerts influence. The Moscow fire prevention administration or the tax authorities play a role possibly equally important to that of the FSB when it comes to suppressing unwanted voices.
Look at the story of the TV channel 'Dozhd', the prime example: it lost its access to the cable TV network this January.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dozhd
Russia is definitely not a free state and not a democracy, but it's not totalitarian either. I think it fits well in the category of 'competetive authoritarism': A political system, where democratical institutions are in place and elections and their outcomes do matter, but in which political competition is not fair, since the government makes use of illegal means to some degree (such as using state-owned media for one-sided information, charging political opponents for 'corruption' or 'possession of narcotics' etc.)
Putin could charge Navalny with corruption, but he cannot simply let him disappear.
Gilrandir
07-22-2014, 15:54
Intelligent Nazi deny to be Nazi, yours are stupid. So what is your point?
I gave the link in which Right sector denies being nazi. You said the French nazis do the same. Yet you believe your compatriots and disbelieve others.
Go back to it with your Nazi in full Nazi uniform during one of their parades.
I qualify any uniform as the nazi one only if it is the exact replica of the one worn by Nazis in Germany in 1933-1945. Otherwise it is just the (intentional or unintentional) similarity. For example, this is the uniform of Hitlerjugend.
13716
13719
Does it remind you of the scouts' one?
This is what pioneers in the USSR looked like:
13717
13718
So are these nazi organizations?
MP Levchenko is kicked out of the Ukrainian parliament by force, apparently after opposing military action in the east. Via Oliver Caroll (https://twitter.com/olliecarroll/status/491515706811641856).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRUeG63l_q8#t=55
What a mess.
Meanwhile, it seems that several smaller towns and cities (like Severodonetsk) have recently come under Ukrainian control. Looks like the momentum continues.
Sarmatian
07-22-2014, 19:26
Evidence that "[the Račak massacre] was stage[d] by William Walker, head of the CIA at that time in the region." If you don't like Hoare, then try Ed Vulliamy (http://iwpr.net/report-news/comment-we-must-fight-memory-bosnias-camps), a journalist during the war in Bosnia:
First of all, what Biljana Plavsic has to do with Kosovo? Secondly, Biljana Plavsic made a deal. After pleading guilty, she was sent to a Swedish prison that is more of a spa than a prison for a few years.
Thirdly, Racak was almost certainly staged. Of the three autopsy teams, two reported that there was no evidence to support a massacre story while a third apparently said there may have been. The report was never made public. About 10 years after, the head of that third team admitted there was little evidence to support a massacre story and that the general narrative was based on what William Walker said before any investigation. She also mentioned she was under heavy pressure to use strong language to condemn the Serbian government at the time.
Berliner Zeitung in 2001 apparently managed to get a hold of that third report and there was nothing in it to support a massacre story, according to them.
It was most probably a fierce battle between government forces and KLA, in which KLA later moved the bodies to one place and called Walker who figured out there was the pretext they were waiting for.
T
HopAlongBunny
07-22-2014, 19:49
This whole thing reminds me of various campaigns for freedom in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala; with all the attendant clarity of reporting and information.
Major Powers playing in what they consider their yard do a lot of nasty stuff.
“There appears to significant amounts of controversy surrounding Diana Johnstone;” I know her reputation. But the matter is here she quoted various French Journalists, and just because she is who she is, you dismissed the journalists she quote.
By the way, systematic rape campaign charges were abandoned in The Hague. I quote:” The legal question was whether the acts of these soldiers were crimes against humanity or simply individual acts of depravity. In order to prove that the soldiers' acts were crimes against humanity, the prosecution in the Foca rape case argued three things:
The use of rape in attacks on civilians was widespread and systematic,
To support the allegation that rape was “widespread and systematic” the prosecution worked to show that the tactic was repeated and continuous (systematic) and that what had happened in Foca was a representative sample of Serbian methods of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia (widespread),
Rape was not simply an individual action but involved a chain of command. This did not mean that a commanding officer had ordered his men to rape, but that rape was occurring with his knowledge and he did not intervene to stop it.”
I cowardly refused to meet raped women in Tuzla during the war. Rapes did happen but do you remember the claim at that time: 80,000 women systematically rape and forced to keep the babies.
“Kosovan militants and NATO saw a common enemy in the government of Serbia. The militants saw the Serbian government as an enemy because they wanted independence. NATO saw it as an enemy, according to itself at least, because it viewed it as responsible for ethnic killings and repression in Kosovo.” Well, I do understand the Kosovar and admired them of how they succeed to gain their independence in using others countries’ soldiers, well, so they thought.
Now, you are telling me that a power decided that a country is an enemy and that is enough to bomb it. So what do you reproach to Putin's policy, exactly?
“The remains of Yugoslavia was a federation, and your quotes goes a long way towards expressing a desire to put Kosovo on an equal footing with Serbia and Montenegro within that federation. How exactly this status compares with the autonomy Kosovo used to have before Milošević cancelled it in 1989 I am not sure, but it's certainly not full independence. That would require Kosovo to have its own foreign policy.” Nope. Yugoslavia was made of 5 countries (Slovenia, Croatia, B&H, Macedonia, Montenegro and 2 autonomous counties (Kososvo & Vojvodina –where Sarmartian lives). You are right in the fact that NATO in order to forbid the Serbs to sign the agreement, just wanted to go back to the previous status (this plus the free access for NATO troops of all the Yugoslav territory which at the time included Montenegro). So the Kosovar had power to do want ever they wanted in Serbia, but Serbia couldn’t do anything in Kososvo…
And by the way, these are not the agreement, as the dictat was not signed by Serbia.
“Kosovo, Federal, and Republic authorities shall not interfere with the exercise of these additional rights.” So, The Federation won’t be able to interfere, so Kosovo is de Jure Independent (so would be Vojvoidine and perhaps in future Sandzak, finishing off Yugoslavia and making Serbs minorities everywhere, except in a Serbia of a stamp size).
“All authorities in Kosovo shall fully respect human rights, democracy, and the equality of citizens and national communities.” Note, not Yugoslavia, Kosovo is seen as out of it.
Chapter 4a, Article I-- "The economy of Kosovo, shall function in accordance with free market principles (End of Yugoslav Sovereignty de facto)
Chapter 5, Article V-- `The Chief of the Implementation Mission (CIM) shall be the final authority in theatre regarding interpretation of the civilian aspects of this Agreement, and the Parties agree to abide by his determinations as binding on all Parties and persons.
Chapter 7, Article XV-- "The KFOR [NATO] commander is the final authority in theatre regarding interpretation of this Chapter and his determinations are binding on all Parties and persons.
APPENDIX B
Important: Note that the text speaks of FRY, when previously it was Kosovo & FRY.
Section 6 B: NATO personnel, under all circumstances and at all times, shall be immune from the Parties, jurisdiction in respect of any civil, administrative, criminal or disciplinary offenses which may be committed by them in the FRY (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)."
Section 7: "NATO personnel shall be immune from any form of arrest, investigation, or detention by the authorities in the FRY."
Section 8: "NATO personnel shall enjoy, together with their vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and equipment, free and unrestricted passage and unimpeded access throughout the FRY including associated airspace and territorial waters
Section 11: "NATO is granted the use of airports, roads, rails, and ports without payment of fees, duties, dues, tolls, or charges occasioned by mere use."
Section 15: "The Parties (Yugoslav government) shall, upon simple request, grant all telecommunications services, including broadcast services, and the right to use all of the electromagnetic spectrum for this purpose, free of cost." (didn't want to pay for a service, doesn't it go again "free market economy" they wanted to impose?
Section 22: "NATO may, in the conduct of the Operation, have need to make improvements or modifications to certain infrastructure in the FRY, such as roads, bridges, tunnels, buildings, and utility systems.
I am sure that now you will tell that is a balance, perfect and acceptable “peace” treaty.
“a journalist during the war in Bosnia” And this make him a specialist of what? I was in Bosnia during and after the war and I don’t pretend to be an expert on it. I couldn’t see on the other side of the hill, and no journalist could either. But I worked with/for the three sides’ refugees and IDP’s.
Gilrandir
07-23-2014, 13:38
MP Levchenko is kicked out of the Ukrainian parliament by force, apparently after opposing military action in the east.
He was not so much opposing the continuation of ATO as blaming the Ukrainian military in killing civilians in Donbas.
There is a piece of news that corroborates my opinion that a leakage of information led to shooting down the Ukrainian plane above Lugansk 40 days ago: a dispatcher of Dnipropetrovsk airport was arrested and charged with treason. So Brenus's picture of separatists sitting in the bush at night and waiting for a stray plane to fly by seems less and less likely.
Meanwhile, it seems that several smaller towns and cities (like Severodonetsk) have recently come under Ukrainian control. Looks like the momentum continues.
If you are interested in the progress, here is an updated ATO map.
13723
First of all, what Biljana Plavsic has to do with Kosovo?
She has to do with Diana Johnstone.
Thirdly, Racak was almost certainly staged. Of the three autopsy teams, two reported that there was no evidence to support a massacre story while a third apparently said there may have been. The report was never made public. About 10 years after, the head of that third team admitted there was little evidence to support a massacre story and that the general narrative was based on what William Walker said before any investigation. She also mentioned she was under heavy pressure to use strong language to condemn the Serbian government at the time.
Berliner Zeitung in 2001 apparently managed to get a hold of that third report and there was nothing in it to support a massacre story, according to them.
It was most probably a fierce battle between government forces and KLA, in which KLA later moved the bodies to one place and called Walker who figured out there was the pretext they were waiting for.
10 years later? Let's see what was stated in 1999 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/298131.stm):
A final report by forensic experts into the killing of 40 Kosovo Albanians in the village of Racak has failed to rule on whether they were massacred by Serb police.
But the report does conclude the victims were unarmed civilians.
Kosovo Section Dr Helena Ranta, the forensic expert who led a team carrying out post mortems on the bodies, called the Racak deaths a "crime against humanity".
[...]
Dr Ranta said there were no signs that the victims were anything other than unarmed civilians and that they were most likely shot where they were found.
In 2008 (http://www.hs.fi/english/article/1135240292632), Ranta said that she pressured into using strong language, but that she refused to do this:
According to Ranta, in the winter of 1999 William Walker, the head of the OSCE Kosovo monitoring mission, broke a pencil in two and threw the pieces at her when she was not willing to use sufficiently strong language about the Serbs.
So, as far as I can see, Ranta is still of the opinion that those killed in Račak were civilians.
But the matter is here she quoted various French Journalists, and just because she is who she is, you dismissed the journalists she quote.
I pointed out two twings:
the journalists were asking questions, not providing conclusions
the articles were assembled by a person with very particular views (fringe ones at that), meaning that they are most likely chosen because they are the best ones that argue her views rather than the most insightful ones on the topic. No attempt to refute the best arguments of the other side in that piece, nor 'conclusive' evidence for her own side.
Now, you are telling me that a power decided that a country is an enemy and that is enough to bomb it.
Nope.
So what do you reproach to Putin's policy, exactly?
Doing a land grab.
Yugoslavia was made of 5 countries (Slovenia, Croatia, B&H, Macedonia, Montenegro and 2 autonomous counties (Kososvo & Vojvodina –where Sarmartian lives).
At the time of the Kosovo War, Yugoslavia = Serbia + Montenegro.
You are right in the fact that NATO in order to forbid the Serbs to sign the agreement, just wanted to go back to the previous status
What do you mean by that? "Forbid the serbs"?
“Kosovo, Federal, and Republic authorities shall not interfere with the exercise of these additional rights.” So, The Federation won’t be able to interfere, so Kosovo is de Jure Independent (so would be Vojvoidine and perhaps in future Sandzak, finishing off Yugoslavia and making Serbs minorities everywhere, except in a Serbia of a stamp size).
“All authorities in Kosovo shall fully respect human rights, democracy, and the equality of citizens and national communities.” Note, not Yugoslavia, Kosovo is seen as out of it.
Chapter 4a, Article I-- "The economy of Kosovo, shall function in accordance with free market principles (End of Yugoslav Sovereignty de facto)
Chapter 5, Article V-- `The Chief of the Implementation Mission (CIM) shall be the final authority in theatre regarding interpretation of the civilian aspects of this Agreement, and the Parties agree to abide by his determinations as binding on all Parties and persons.
Chapter 7, Article XV-- "The KFOR [NATO] commander is the final authority in theatre regarding interpretation of this Chapter and his determinations are binding on all Parties and persons.
APPENDIX B
Important: Note that the text speaks of FRY, when previously it was Kosovo & FRY.
Section 6 B: NATO personnel, under all circumstances and at all times, shall be immune from the Parties, jurisdiction in respect of any civil, administrative, criminal or disciplinary offenses which may be committed by them in the FRY (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)."
Section 7: "NATO personnel shall be immune from any form of arrest, investigation, or detention by the authorities in the FRY."
Section 8: "NATO personnel shall enjoy, together with their vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and equipment, free and unrestricted passage and unimpeded access throughout the FRY including associated airspace and territorial waters
Section 11: "NATO is granted the use of airports, roads, rails, and ports without payment of fees, duties, dues, tolls, or charges occasioned by mere use."
Section 15: "The Parties (Yugoslav government) shall, upon simple request, grant all telecommunications services, including broadcast services, and the right to use all of the electromagnetic spectrum for this purpose, free of cost." (didn't want to pay for a service, doesn't it go again "free market economy" they wanted to impose?
Section 22: "NATO may, in the conduct of the Operation, have need to make improvements or modifications to certain infrastructure in the FRY, such as roads, bridges, tunnels, buildings, and utility systems.
This part really sums it up for me (from here (http://mws.polis.cam.ac.uk/research/cps/documents_kosovo_inter_01.html)):
3. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has competence in Kosovo over the following areas, except as specified elsewhere in this Agreement: (a) territorial integrity, (b) maintaining a common market within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which power shall be exercised in a manner that does not discriminate against Kosovo, (c) monetary policy, (d) defense, (e) foreign policy, (f) customs services, (g) federal taxation, (h) federal elections, and (i) other areas specified in this Agreement.
No independence.
I am sure that now you will tell that is a balance, perfect and acceptable “peace” treaty.
If NATO demanded to have permanent military access to FRY territory, then of course not. But that was not the demand.
“a journalist during the war in Bosnia” And this make him a specialist of what? I was in Bosnia during and after the war and I don’t pretend to be an expert on it. I couldn’t see on the other side of the hill, and no journalist could either. But I worked with/for the three sides’ refugees and IDP’s.
That's his background.
If you are interested in the progress, here is an updated ATO map.
13723
Map updates seem to be posted regularly by this account: https://twitter.com/NSDC_ua
Sarmatian
07-23-2014, 14:28
10 years later? Let's see what was stated in 1999 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/298131.stm):
In 2008 (http://www.hs.fi/english/article/1135240292632), Ranta said that she pressured into using strong language, but that she refused to do this:
So, as far as I can see, Ranta is still of the opinion that those killed in Račak were civilians.
So, how was it not a massacre if they were unarmed civilians? Can you explain that oxymoron?
To further elaborate, the 17th March report was not really a report but a personal opinion of Helena Ranta. The first part stressed that it was not the position of the team, but only her personal opinion.
At first she said that there "there was no evidence that the victims had been anything other than unarmed civilians and that they had probably been killed where they were later found by the international monitors".
Later her explanation was "...medicolegal investigations [such as scientific analysis of bodies] cannot give a conclusive answer to the question whether there was [in fact] a battle [between the police and insurgents]...", but she leaned towards the victims being non-combatants in part because (there was no ammunition in the pockets ".
There's a big difference between the two statements, so she was obviously lying about not giving in to the pressure. The first states with absolute certainty that it was a massacre, the second that there's no evidence to support either position.
The wording itself of the first statement is also very interesting - it doesn't say there was evidence that they were civilians. It says there was no evidence that they weren't, which is a very curious phrasing.
So, summing up:
1st team said there was evidence of a massacre
2nd team likewise
3rd team also, apart from the head of the team who later moderated her statement, and confirmed there was no evidence.
Add that crime scene was in fact in control of KLA for a long time before anyone arrived and you don't really need Einstein IQ to see something was fishy.
There is a logo that reads CIA on those pictures.
Meanwhile the CIA seems to plan the deployment of recon pigeons: https://twitter.com/CIA
So, how was it not a massacre if they were unarmed civilians? Can you explain that oxymoron?
A final report by forensic experts into the killing of 40 Kosovo Albanians in the village of Racak has failed to rule on whether they were massacred by Serb police.
I.e., wouldn't comment on who did it.
Gilrandir
07-23-2014, 17:44
Meanwhile the CIA seems to plan the deployment of recon pigeons: https://twitter.com/CIA
Let the monuments beware - the pigeons will poop on them and film the process.:laugh4:
Later her explanation was "...medicolegal investigations [such as scientific analysis of bodies] cannot give a conclusive answer to the question whether there was [in fact] a battle ..."
I found (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/18/4)this quote in this context:
But Dr Ranta [B]threw out Serb claims that the dead were combatants and that their bodies had been tampered with, making Recak a 'set-up'.
but she leaned towards the victims being non-combatants in part because (there was no ammunition in the pockets ".
What's the source for this quotation?
Sarmatian
07-23-2014, 18:36
I found (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/18/4)this quote in this context:
And in that article there's a quote from her report that says: 'Medico-legal investigations cannot give a conclusive answer to the question whether there was a battle or whether the victims died under some other circumstances.'
What's source for this quotation?
This (http://web.archive.org/web/19991116063236/http://www.usia.gov/regional/eur/balkans/kosovo/texts/racak.htm). A report on the report, because the report was never released to the public in its entirety (Berliner Zeitung's claim aside), which makes one wonder why.
There are other issues. Of the 45 bodies, only a few very elderly and only one was a woman, which doesn't correspond to the natural male/female or young/elderly ratio.
The initial report of OSCE mentions 45 bodies. Only 40 bodies were delivered for pathological examination. KLA was in control of the crime scene. Access to scene was denied to Serbian forensic team. Not a single report offered conclusive evidence of a massacre. Position of the head of the Finnish team differed from the rest of her team. The full report was never released, even now, 15 years from the incident.
If you need more to see something's not right there, I'm not sure what I can do.
EDIT: Oh, and the English translation of the Berliner Zeitung article.
Bo Ada, Roland Heine and Claudius Technau
BERLIN, March 23. A small village played a crucial role just as the course was set for the Kosovo war: Racak. In this hamlet, inhabited by Albanians, Serb security forces allegedly executed unarmed civilians in cold blood on January 15, 1999. That was the claim of US president Bill Clinton, among many other Nato politicians. Was the public opinion in Nato countries fed with half-truths and unproven claims throughout the spring of 1999 to secure consent with a military intervention in the Kosovo conflict? The "Berliner Zeitung" was able to get access to secret documents which raise doubt about the widely spread version of events:
What happened in January 1999? Let's look at the war crimes tribunal for Yugoslavia in The Hague: "On or about 15 January 1999, in the early morning hours, the village of Racak (Stimlje/Shtime municipality) was attacked by forces of the FRY and Serbia. After shelling by the VJ units, the Serb police entered the village later in the morning and began conducting house-to-house searches. Villagers, who attempted to flee from the Serb police, were shot throughout the village. A group of approximately 25 men attempted to hide in a building, but were discovered by the Serb police. They were beaten and then were removed to a nearby hill, where the policemen shot and killed them. Altogether, the forces of the FRY and Serbia killed approximately 45 Kosovo Albanians in and around Racak. The Hague indictment calls it "murder of Kosovo-Albanian civilians."
This representation agrees with statements made by American William Walker, who led the OSCE in Kosovo at the time. He visits the village the day following the tragedy. His verdict was passed immediately: He claimed to have seen the corpses of more than 20 mostly elderly men, who "obviously were executed were they lay." According to Walker, the others were found later. A "special report" [English term used by B.Z.] by the OSCE mission prepared under Walker's auspices a day later summarizes: One has found proof of "arbitrary arrests, killings and mutilations of unarmed civilians." The report details a list with 23 adult males in a ravine above Racak, "many shot at point blank", furthermore four adult males who apparently were shot while escaping, as well as 18 corpses in the village proper. The latter include a woman and a young boy.
The pictures of the bodies trigger worldwide shock and dismay. US foreign minister Madeleine Albright calls it a "galvanizing incident". Three days later she demand the bombardment of Yugoslavia as "punishment". In a letter sent to Yugoslav president Milosevic on January 20, the German foreign minister Joschka Fischer writes that any excuses from Belgrade "in no way can justify the execution of 45 unarmed people, amongst them women and children, by the security forces." Later on, Fischer says: "Racak became the turning point for me."
Denial from Belgrade
The Yugoslav government vehemently dispute the condemnation. Belgrade talks of a police action against UCK terrorists. [According to Belgrade,] The bodies were collected by the UCK on the night of January 15 and presented as civilian victims.
On January 22, a forensic team from Finland begins with the autopsy of the corpses that have been brought to the capital of Kosovo. A week later, it has concluded its inquiry. The public waits for the conclusion. But for the time being, the team led by Dr. Helena Ranta takes its time to evaluate the findings.
Meanwhile, the Kosovo conflict becomes grows more intense by the day. In Rambouillet near Paris, the Western powers, Russia, Serbs and Kosovo-Albanians still negotiate a peaceful solution to the dispute. The Rambouillet talks have entered a decisive phase when the team leader Ranta hosts a confusing press conference in Pristina. Instead of issuing the inquiry results, she shares "comments" that reflect her "personal opinion." On this 17th of March 1999, nobody knows that political forces have urged Mrs. Ranta to go public. To this day, her reserach is neither finished, nor has it led to any clear conclusions.
In complicated sentences, prone to misunderstandings, Mrs. Ranta tries to extricate herself from the affair. She declines to speak of a "massacre"; instead, she calls the tragedy a "crime against humanity". She states that no ammunition and no uniforms were found on the bodies, but that some of them were clothed in several thick sweaters. She elaborates on the fact that no gunpowder traces were found, but doesn't clearly state where one has looked for them. She criticizes that the OSCE has neither secured the corpses or any evidence and points to the long time that has passed between the deaths and the forensic inquiry. Both would make a non-ambigious statement difficult.
Nevertheless, most observers took Helena Rantas' statements as a confirmation that an execution had taken place. Important politicians allow no more leeway for doubt. US president Clinton says that "innocent men, women and children" have been driven from their homes, forced to "kneel in the dirt and were moved down." Anonymous Western government representatives tell the "International Herald Tribune" that the most horrendous details from the Finnish report have not yet been made public. A week later, the war begins, and the reports remain secret.
Inquiries with Mrs. Ranta
The Berliner Zeitung has now been able to access copies of the autopsy documents. Of all these reports, none contain any evidence of an execution scenario. The Finnish forensic experts and their Yugoslav and Belorussian colleagues found traces that point to a gunshot fired "relatively close" on only one of the victims. In the other cases, the findings were negative.
Neither is the alleged absence of gunpowder residue [on the victims'] hands documented. As a consequence, there is no evidence that the victims were civilians. We asked Mrs. Ranta about the reason for this. After a brief consideration, she solved the puzzle: The Finnish team never looked for such traces. Rather, the tests mentioned at the press conference on March 17, 1999, were carried out to look for traces of executions or point blank shootings. These were the tests that proved negative. "It was somewhat easy to misunderstand that at the press conference," Mrs. Ranta admits today.
That is a fact. But this "misunderstanding" is crucial to the Racak case. Were the dead actually unarmed, peaceful villagers? Or were at least some of them Albanian UCK fighters? Was it an execution or a battle? In all official statements by the OSCE, the Hague tribunal, and the EU the second possibility is not mentioned.
Against better knowledge. As early as the morning of January 16 1999, the UCK issues the first communique stating that eight of its fighters had been killed in combat in Racak. The names of these dead do not appear on the Hague tribunal's list. Another strange thing: Also on January 16, the UCK mentions 22 execution victims in Racak by name. But only eleven of them are recorded on the tribunal's victim list. Only the figure 22 approximately correlates with the number of dead found on the hill behind Racak. How many dead were there really?
"The truth is," says French journalist Renaud Girard, "that Racak was a fortified village with a lot of [gunfighter] trenches." There isn't a single word to be found about that in OSCE's "special report." [English term used by B.Z.] On January 16 1999, Girard had hurried to the scene of the tragedy, and he saw OSCE chief of mission in action. "In terms of massacres, Walker is a professional," says Girard. "Any professional knows what to do. He blocks off access to the crime scene to secure the evidence. Walker did no such thing. He trampled around there himself and let the journalists fiddle around with the corpses, collect souvenirs and wipe out evidence. Initially, Girard filed a massacre story like all his colleagues with his paper "Le Figaro." But then he started pondering. "I felt that something was wrong."
Doubts among Journalists
A colleague with "Le Monde" contributed to his doubts. Christophe Chatelet had been in Racak the day before - the day of the alleged massacre. Together with OSCE representatives, he entered the village in the late afternoon, when the Serbs had left. The foreigners found four wounded and were told about one dead. Chatelet returned to Pristina at dusk. He told a colleague that nothing particular had happened at Racak. The day after, when Walker went to racak with a large press entourage, Chatelet declined and stayed at the hotel. Chatelet cannot explain why the OSCE only recorded one dead on the afternoon of January 15, while the OSCE the morning after suddenly found at least 13, possibly as many as 18, corpses in the streets and farmhouses: "I can't solve that mystery."
Certainly, the 45 dead are the Serbs' victims. But if there was a mass execution: why did the Serb units withdraw without any attempt to cover up the incident and make as many corpses as possible disappear? The UCK is in the best position to bring light to the case. Recently, its commander in chief Hashim Thaci said to the BBC: "We had a key unit in the region. It was a fierce battle. We regrettably had many victims. But so did the Serbs.
“But that was not the demand.” Did you read the Appendix? Yes, of course, but you don’t acknowledge what goes against your opinion…
“No independence.” Full independence as FRY won’t have any control on law enforcement, and the 2 bolt points are dealt by NATO: “The KFOR [NATO] commander is the final authority in theatre regarding interpretation of this Chapter and his determinations are binding on all Parties and persons”= No independence from NATO.
“At the time of the Kosovo War, Yugoslavia = Serbia + Montenegro.” And NATO wanted to reinstall a Constitution made by a Dictator when Yugoslavia was made of 5 full countries. Did you notice that the West LOVED old communist dictators drawing of borders?
“a dispatcher of Dnipropetrovsk airport was arrested and charged with treason.” And convicted apparently… I like the judiciary process in Ukraine… A little bit little the social media intelligence, I suppose, or the shelling of towns against the Ukrainian Power will, etc…
“Doing a land grab.” Yeah, but I wonder why, as you fully agree when NATO is doing it. Sorry, you have the right to support NATO aggressive wars and expansion. I find it a little bit hypocritical to cry on some victims and to ignore others; but again, you are entitled to do so.
“What do you mean by that? "Forbid the serbs"?” In making the agreement impossible to agree with, from the Serbian point of view.
Gilrandir
07-24-2014, 10:45
“a dispatcher of Dnipropetrovsk airport was arrested and charged with treason.” And convicted apparently…
Not yet. The investigation is under way.
I like the judiciary process in Ukraine… A little bit little the social media intelligence, I suppose, or the shelling of towns against the Ukrainian Power will, etc…
You don't swerve from your usual line: "apparently", "suppose" show that you don't know for certain, yet you condemn what you don't know. We witness your usual unfathomable logics: on the one hand you want Ukrainian authorities to investigate sometning (for example, sniper shooting on Maidan) and come up with palpable results, on the other hand you mistrust and think biased whatever results there may be.
As for Russia direct military involvement into fighting in Donbas:
http://gordonua.com/news/separatism/Rossiyskiy-soldat-v-socseti-Vsyu-noch-dolbili-po-Ukraine-33074.html
A Russain soldier called Vadim Grigoriev from Samara regularly posted in his VKontakte account updates on his deatchment's doings. He claims that it is deployed near the Ukrainian border. The post of July 23 said that they had been shelling Ukraine all night through. Later he deleted all the photos and even his account in the social media.
“Later he deleted all the photos and even his account in the social media.” Sure he did, just giving time for the Ukrainian Intelligence Service and news to see them…. Tsk tsk tsk, what a continuous bad luck for the Ukrainian Intelligence Service and news agencies…
“on the other hand you mistrust and think biased whatever results there may be.” Well, due to the results they’ve got…
And in that article there's a quote from her report that says: 'Medico-legal investigations cannot give a conclusive answer to the question whether there was a battle or whether the victims died under some other circumstances.'
This (http://web.archive.org/web/19991116063236/http://www.usia.gov/regional/eur/balkans/kosovo/texts/racak.htm). A report on the report, because the report was never released to the public in its entirety (Berliner Zeitung's claim aside), which makes one wonder why.
There are other issues. Of the 45 bodies, only a few very elderly and only one was a woman, which doesn't correspond to the natural male/female or young/elderly ratio.
The initial report of OSCE mentions 45 bodies. Only 40 bodies were delivered for pathological examination. KLA was in control of the crime scene. Access to scene was denied to Serbian forensic team. Not a single report offered conclusive evidence of a massacre. Position of the head of the Finnish team differed from the rest of her team. The full report was never released, even now, 15 years from the incident.
If you need more to see something's not right there, I'm not sure what I can do.
EDIT: Oh, and the English translation of the Berliner Zeitung article.
Bo Ada, Roland Heine and Claudius Technau
BERLIN, March 23. A small village played a crucial role just as the course was set for the Kosovo war: Racak. In this hamlet, inhabited by Albanians, Serb security forces allegedly executed unarmed civilians in cold blood on January 15, 1999. That was the claim of US president Bill Clinton, among many other Nato politicians. Was the public opinion in Nato countries fed with half-truths and unproven claims throughout the spring of 1999 to secure consent with a military intervention in the Kosovo conflict? The "Berliner Zeitung" was able to get access to secret documents which raise doubt about the widely spread version of events:
What happened in January 1999? Let's look at the war crimes tribunal for Yugoslavia in The Hague: "On or about 15 January 1999, in the early morning hours, the village of Racak (Stimlje/Shtime municipality) was attacked by forces of the FRY and Serbia. After shelling by the VJ units, the Serb police entered the village later in the morning and began conducting house-to-house searches. Villagers, who attempted to flee from the Serb police, were shot throughout the village. A group of approximately 25 men attempted to hide in a building, but were discovered by the Serb police. They were beaten and then were removed to a nearby hill, where the policemen shot and killed them. Altogether, the forces of the FRY and Serbia killed approximately 45 Kosovo Albanians in and around Racak. The Hague indictment calls it "murder of Kosovo-Albanian civilians."
This representation agrees with statements made by American William Walker, who led the OSCE in Kosovo at the time. He visits the village the day following the tragedy. His verdict was passed immediately: He claimed to have seen the corpses of more than 20 mostly elderly men, who "obviously were executed were they lay." According to Walker, the others were found later. A "special report" [English term used by B.Z.] by the OSCE mission prepared under Walker's auspices a day later summarizes: One has found proof of "arbitrary arrests, killings and mutilations of unarmed civilians." The report details a list with 23 adult males in a ravine above Racak, "many shot at point blank", furthermore four adult males who apparently were shot while escaping, as well as 18 corpses in the village proper. The latter include a woman and a young boy.
The pictures of the bodies trigger worldwide shock and dismay. US foreign minister Madeleine Albright calls it a "galvanizing incident". Three days later she demand the bombardment of Yugoslavia as "punishment". In a letter sent to Yugoslav president Milosevic on January 20, the German foreign minister Joschka Fischer writes that any excuses from Belgrade "in no way can justify the execution of 45 unarmed people, amongst them women and children, by the security forces." Later on, Fischer says: "Racak became the turning point for me."
Denial from Belgrade
The Yugoslav government vehemently dispute the condemnation. Belgrade talks of a police action against UCK terrorists. [According to Belgrade,] The bodies were collected by the UCK on the night of January 15 and presented as civilian victims.
On January 22, a forensic team from Finland begins with the autopsy of the corpses that have been brought to the capital of Kosovo. A week later, it has concluded its inquiry. The public waits for the conclusion. But for the time being, the team led by Dr. Helena Ranta takes its time to evaluate the findings.
Meanwhile, the Kosovo conflict becomes grows more intense by the day. In Rambouillet near Paris, the Western powers, Russia, Serbs and Kosovo-Albanians still negotiate a peaceful solution to the dispute. The Rambouillet talks have entered a decisive phase when the team leader Ranta hosts a confusing press conference in Pristina. Instead of issuing the inquiry results, she shares "comments" that reflect her "personal opinion." On this 17th of March 1999, nobody knows that political forces have urged Mrs. Ranta to go public. To this day, her reserach is neither finished, nor has it led to any clear conclusions.
In complicated sentences, prone to misunderstandings, Mrs. Ranta tries to extricate herself from the affair. She declines to speak of a "massacre"; instead, she calls the tragedy a "crime against humanity". She states that no ammunition and no uniforms were found on the bodies, but that some of them were clothed in several thick sweaters. She elaborates on the fact that no gunpowder traces were found, but doesn't clearly state where one has looked for them. She criticizes that the OSCE has neither secured the corpses or any evidence and points to the long time that has passed between the deaths and the forensic inquiry. Both would make a non-ambigious statement difficult.
Nevertheless, most observers took Helena Rantas' statements as a confirmation that an execution had taken place. Important politicians allow no more leeway for doubt. US president Clinton says that "innocent men, women and children" have been driven from their homes, forced to "kneel in the dirt and were moved down." Anonymous Western government representatives tell the "International Herald Tribune" that the most horrendous details from the Finnish report have not yet been made public. A week later, the war begins, and the reports remain secret.
Inquiries with Mrs. Ranta
The Berliner Zeitung has now been able to access copies of the autopsy documents. Of all these reports, none contain any evidence of an execution scenario. The Finnish forensic experts and their Yugoslav and Belorussian colleagues found traces that point to a gunshot fired "relatively close" on only one of the victims. In the other cases, the findings were negative.
Neither is the alleged absence of gunpowder residue [on the victims'] hands documented. As a consequence, there is no evidence that the victims were civilians. We asked Mrs. Ranta about the reason for this. After a brief consideration, she solved the puzzle: The Finnish team never looked for such traces. Rather, the tests mentioned at the press conference on March 17, 1999, were carried out to look for traces of executions or point blank shootings. These were the tests that proved negative. "It was somewhat easy to misunderstand that at the press conference," Mrs. Ranta admits today.
That is a fact. But this "misunderstanding" is crucial to the Racak case. Were the dead actually unarmed, peaceful villagers? Or were at least some of them Albanian UCK fighters? Was it an execution or a battle? In all official statements by the OSCE, the Hague tribunal, and the EU the second possibility is not mentioned.
Against better knowledge. As early as the morning of January 16 1999, the UCK issues the first communique stating that eight of its fighters had been killed in combat in Racak. The names of these dead do not appear on the Hague tribunal's list. Another strange thing: Also on January 16, the UCK mentions 22 execution victims in Racak by name. But only eleven of them are recorded on the tribunal's victim list. Only the figure 22 approximately correlates with the number of dead found on the hill behind Racak. How many dead were there really?
"The truth is," says French journalist Renaud Girard, "that Racak was a fortified village with a lot of [gunfighter] trenches." There isn't a single word to be found about that in OSCE's "special report." [English term used by B.Z.] On January 16 1999, Girard had hurried to the scene of the tragedy, and he saw OSCE chief of mission in action. "In terms of massacres, Walker is a professional," says Girard. "Any professional knows what to do. He blocks off access to the crime scene to secure the evidence. Walker did no such thing. He trampled around there himself and let the journalists fiddle around with the corpses, collect souvenirs and wipe out evidence. Initially, Girard filed a massacre story like all his colleagues with his paper "Le Figaro." But then he started pondering. "I felt that something was wrong."
Doubts among Journalists
A colleague with "Le Monde" contributed to his doubts. Christophe Chatelet had been in Racak the day before - the day of the alleged massacre. Together with OSCE representatives, he entered the village in the late afternoon, when the Serbs had left. The foreigners found four wounded and were told about one dead. Chatelet returned to Pristina at dusk. He told a colleague that nothing particular had happened at Racak. The day after, when Walker went to racak with a large press entourage, Chatelet declined and stayed at the hotel. Chatelet cannot explain why the OSCE only recorded one dead on the afternoon of January 15, while the OSCE the morning after suddenly found at least 13, possibly as many as 18, corpses in the streets and farmhouses: "I can't solve that mystery."
Certainly, the 45 dead are the Serbs' victims. But if there was a mass execution: why did the Serb units withdraw without any attempt to cover up the incident and make as many corpses as possible disappear? The UCK is in the best position to bring light to the case. Recently, its commander in chief Hashim Thaci said to the BBC: "We had a key unit in the region. It was a fierce battle. We regrettably had many victims. But so did the Serbs.
So, no conclusive evidence points in either direction.
“But that was not the demand.” Did you read the Appendix? Yes, of course, but you don’t acknowledge what goes against your opinion…
It's hard for me to tell from this vantage point to say what would be necessary and unnecessary demands for military access for the NATO troops in the area. It is clear, though, that having military access to all of FRY means that federal units can't do a hit-and-run in Kosovo and then retreat back to rest of FRY territory without NATO units immediately being able to chase them or search for them.
“No independence.” Full independence as FRY won’t have any control on law enforcement, and the 2 bolt points are dealt by NATO: “The KFOR [NATO] commander is the final authority in theatre regarding interpretation of this Chapter and his determinations are binding on all Parties and persons”= No independence from NATO.
So when KFOR withdraws, Kosovo is back with the FRY federation.
“At the time of the Kosovo War, Yugoslavia = Serbia + Montenegro.” And NATO wanted to reinstall a Constitution made by a Dictator when Yugoslavia was made of 5 full countries. Did you notice that the West LOVED old communist dictators drawing of borders?
Point being?
“Doing a land grab.” Yeah, but I wonder why, as you fully agree when NATO is doing it. Sorry, you have the right to support NATO aggressive wars and expansion. I find it a little bit hypocritical to cry on some victims and to ignore others; but again, you are entitled to do so.
If you want to do a land grab, it's not adequate to install a friendly regime - democratically or not. Once own troops are gone and friendly regimes are a distant memory, so is the land. The Russian army will never leave Crimea as long as Russia consider it as its own territory. It's as permanent as a land grab gets.
In making the agreement impossible to agree with, from the Serbian point of view.
What should the Kosovars agree to, in your opinion?
“What should the Kosovars agree to, in your opinion?” :laugh4: No choice. They were defeated by the Yugoslav Army, so NATO was the only way to turn the situation, as what followed proved it. It was a good old blackmail from NATO: Sign here, here and here, or negotiate with the Serbs who were not in mood to do so…
“If you want to do a land grab, it's not adequate to install a friendly regime” No, you also install a strong military fort named Bondsteel
http:www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/images/camp-bondsteel_2000.jpg
“Point being?” Why do you hate freedom?
“It is clear, though, that having military access to all of FRY means that federal units can't do a hit-and-run in Kosovo and then retreat back to rest of FRY territory without NATO units immediately being able to chase them or search for them.” :laugh4: when did NATO ever followed international rules, first, second, it would be a right of pursuit (reason why, now, the US claim that the shells on Ukraine are coming from the Russia side). That the WORST answer ever given to justify an occupation.:laugh4:
“So, no conclusive evidence points in either direction.” So the verdict is not guilty as the Prosecution was not able to provide evidences. That is the law in UK and in most of the world. If you can’t find the body, you can’t say it was a murder, in fact, you can’t even say that a murder happened. You can pretend as the West did, that it is because the murderers were so good that they hind the bodies, but unfortunately Walkers said he saw the bodies;
“So when KFOR withdraws, Kosovo is back with the FRY federation.” Yeah, but US Army still there, so long independence, which somehow is good, as the Albanians would finish of the last Serbs, Gypsies and other Askenalees who didn’t flee during the wave(s) of Ethnic cleansing launched by the NATO’s allies.
And as you well know, Kosovo is now independent. So your justification of the land grabbing by NATO is a little bit out of date as reality is hard to dismiss. So, after an baseless and illegal war, NATO carved a territory from a country that was not a threat of the Alliance (defensive one), imposed its conditions to the vanquish, covered-up an ethnic cleansing, organised a “referendum”, free of course, and give the lands to the war lords she favoured. Ah, I was near to forget, and dictated the Constitution, recognising minority right to the minorities that were expelled without one movement (or even a whisper) to stop the crime.
Gilrandir
07-25-2014, 06:13
“Later he deleted all the photos and even his account in the social media.” Sure he did, just giving time for the Ukrainian Intelligence Service and news to see them…. Tsk tsk tsk, what a continuous bad luck for the Ukrainian Intelligence Service and news agencies…
Why is it bad luck? Social media users spotted it and posted it further so that everyone interested (or, in your case, skeptical) could see it and make conclusions. The same happened with the Gukovo video. Yet both are evidence that the Russian army overtly hepls separatists.
"Yet both are evidence that the Russian army overtly hepls separatists." Except of course they are no evidence at all, as they can be fabricated by the Ukrainian Intelligence.
And by the way, I have no doubt that Russia helps the separatists as it was from the start my hypothesis of Putin's policy. I am just annoyed by the pure propaganda coming from the Ukrainian Government and the systematic dehumanisation of their opponents... I just wait for the moment when, on social media, the Ukrainian Intelligence will have proof that Separatists eat babies, but of course, all pictures have been withdraw and the account doesn't exist any more, how convenient...
Gilrandir
07-25-2014, 12:28
"Yet both are evidence that the Russian army overtly hepls separatists." Except of course they are no evidence at all, as they can be fabricated by the Ukrainian Intelligence. And by the way, I have no doubt that Russia helps the separatists as it was from the start my hypothesis of Putin's policy.
This help looks more and more like open shelling the Ukrainian army positions. The information on it has been trickling in for a couple of weeks from the Ukrainian border guards and now it was involunarily corroborated by Russians themselves in the evidence I offered.
Another turncoat, this time a conscript of the Russian armed forces, admitted that Russia has been sending military specialists, weapons and military equipment to Ukraine:
http://rus.newsru.ua/ukraine/24jul2014/sbu_balabanov.html
I am just annoyed by the pure propaganda coming from the Ukrainian Government and the systematic dehumanisation of their opponents... I just wait for the moment when, on social media, the Ukrainian Intelligence will have proof that Separatists eat babies, but of course, all pictures have been withdraw and the account doesn't exist any more, how convenient...
Let me quote yourself: they demonize themselves. It has been done by torturing the prisoners, shooting civilians in passing-by cars, blowing up infrastructure objects, setting fire to the ice hockey arena, burglarizing banks and supermarkets, and, finally, bringing down a passenger plane (albeit by mistake). These are the very actions that estranged from the separatists the locals who had been looking favorably upon them.
“What should the Kosovars agree to, in your opinion?” :laugh4: No choice. They were defeated by the Yugoslav Army, so NATO was the only way to turn the situation, as what followed proved it. It was a good old blackmail from NATO: Sign here, here and here, or negotiate with the Serbs who were not in mood to do so…
I mean, should the Kosovars be happy with being an ethnic minority when they could be an ethnic majority? Should they be happy without autonomous rule?
“If you want to do a land grab, it's not adequate to install a friendly regime” No, you also install a strong military fort named Bondsteel
http:www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/images/camp-bondsteel_2000.jpg
And for how long do you recon it'll stay there as a US base? More than 50 years? How much control over the territory do you think such a base will provide compared to a real annexation?
“It is clear, though, that having military access to all of FRY means that federal units can't do a hit-and-run in Kosovo and then retreat back to rest of FRY territory without NATO units immediately being able to chase them or search for them.” :laugh4: when did NATO ever followed international rules, first, second, it would be a right of pursuit (reason why, now, the US claim that the shells on Ukraine are coming from the Russia side). That the WORST answer ever given to justify an occupation.:laugh4:
They could claim a right to pursue, but then FRY could claim that no such event took place and that NATO are invading their territory. Can't invade a territory you have military access to.
“So, no conclusive evidence points in either direction.” So the verdict is not guilty as the Prosecution was not able to provide evidences. That is the law in UK and in most of the world. If you can’t find the body, you can’t say it was a murder, in fact, you can’t even say that a murder happened. You can pretend as the West did, that it is because the murderers were so good that they hind the bodies, but unfortunately Walkers said he saw the bodies;
There were more events than just this one. Is your opinion that all alleged (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/campaigns/kosovo98/timeline.shtml) atrocities carried out against [Albanian] Kosovars did not happen or lack credible evidence?
“So when KFOR withdraws, Kosovo is back with the FRY federation.” Yeah, but US Army still there, so long independence, which somehow good, as the Albanians would finish of the last Serbs, Gypsies and other Askenalees who didn’t flee during the wave(s) of Ethnic cleansing launched by the NATO’s allies.
And as you well know, Kosovo is now independent. So your justification of the land grabbing by NATO is a little bit out of date as reality is hard to dismiss. So, after an baseless and illegal war, NATO carved a territory from a country that was not a threat of the Alliance (defensive one), imposed its conditions to the vanquish, covered-up an ethnic cleansing, organised a “referendum”, free of course, and give the lands to the war lords she favoured. Ah, I was near to forget, and dictated the Constitution, recognising minority right to the minorities that were expelled without one movement (or even a whisper) to stop the crime.
Could they effectively have stopped it? Some say (http://books.google.no/books?id=L-VQXwGDrcoC&pg=PA133&lpg=PA133&dq=%22ethnic+cleansing+of+serbs+in+kosovo%22&source=bl&ots=gyolJYLILr&sig=A53HXeLuUuXXUoLHfMAzUUQobQA&hl=no&sa=X&ei=GUfSU-ThDKf_ygO2uIKgAQ&ved=0CF0Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=%22ethnic%20cleansing%20of%20serbs%20in%20kosovo%22&f=false) that they couldn't:
KFOR cannot stop the ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Kosovo, nor can it prevent the KLA surrogates from attacking Serbs in southeastern Kosovo. The Kosovars are now the domestic power in Kosovo; the UNMIK does not have enoguh personnel to govern or to police the province.
What's the evidence for your stance?
“I mean, should the Kosovars be happy with being an ethnic minority when they could be an ethnic majority? Should they be happy without autonomous rule?” Kosovar or KLA? The KLA wanted independence, Albanian Territories of Macedonia, and part of Albanian populated region still in Serbia. Some wanted to join Albania, but Albanian Government was not really keen on this as it would have changed its own power balance (Gheg & Tosk, roughly). So were they happy, not really? Did had they a choice: Not.
“And for how long do you recon it'll stay there as a US base? More than 50 years? How much control over the territory do you think such a base will provide compared to a real annexation?” Don’t know. How long now for Guantanamo base in Cuba? And it is not like in Cuba, Kosovar leaders need USA badly for protection, or a real political resolution with Serbia and human reconciliation with the Serbs.
“Can't invade a territory you have military access to.” True, you can’t invade a territory you invaded before and occupy, you logic is implacable…
“Is your opinion that all alleged atrocities carried out against [Albanian] Kosovars did not happen or lack credible evidence?” Ah, the good old tactics, one can always rely on them. So, I cast doubt on one event so I became a killers’ friend.
I do not have a shred of doubt than atrocities happened; I have been witness of the result(s) of some. I spoke with victims of atrocities; I gave them food, medicaments and shelter during the war, rebuilt houses, implemented social programmes with psychiatrist and psychologist, social workers and lawyers to help them. I followed their sorrow, and pain, and their tears. Do you have ever smell a refugee? Did you have ever seen a looted house, with all the stupid but how much precious pictures as “you and your partner on the beach” spread on the floor… Don’t give me *****. I know what it is. I saw graves opened or recovered, I saw kids with military boots 10 times too big for them, I saw destruction and killing fields. Did you see a man drinking himself to death because a sniper missed him and just destroyed his face? Did you refused to have sex with a 15 years old girl who lost every possible compass when a sniper shot her at the age of 13? Don’t even try to tell me that I agree with killers and assassins, butchers and torturers.
When some rejoice of troops "mopping-up", I know, saw, and smelt what it is. It is the smell of burned houses, misery and blood, columns of refugees, rapes and slaughters.
You are supporting annexation and invasion, not me, so deal with the consequences of your choice.
“Could they effectively have stopped it? Some say that they couldn't:” BS. With a proper plan, it could have been easily prevented, just a gradual withdrawal would have been enough.
“What's the evidence for your stance?” Of what stance? That NATO let the Albanians doing it: The result speaks by itself no? How many Serbs, Ashkenali, Croats and others before, how many after? Find by yourself, be curious.
As to stop the ethnic cleansing, they would have just had to tell them off… They didn’t, not a word.
“I mean, should the Kosovars be happy with being an ethnic minority when they could be an ethnic majority? Should they be happy without autonomous rule?” Kosovar or KLA? The KLA wanted independence, Albanian Territories of Macedonia, and part of Albanian populated region still in Serbia. Some wanted to join Albania, but Albanian Government was not really keen on this as it would have changed its own power balance (Gheg & Tosk, roughly). So were they happy, not really? Did had they a choice: Not.
Kosovars. There are always choices, but only a few has the power to make them.
You are supporting [...] invasion, not me, so deal with the consequences of your choice.
I have neither said that I do nor that I do not. A battlefield defeat of the KLA does not mean that the movement would become dead or that no new movements would spring up and restart the war. It's easy to blame NATO and say that its choice of going to war has led to needless deaths, but the alternative could easily have led to many more deaths and a region that would still be unstable.
“What's the evidence for your stance?” Of what stance? That NATO let the Albanians doing it: The result speaks by itself no? How many Serbs, Ashkenali, Croats and others before, how many after? Find by yourself, be curious.
As to stop the ethnic cleansing, they would have just had to tell them off… They didn’t, not a word.
Numbers alone do not tell much. Can't tell the reason why each individual left: Forceful eviction? Because of specific threats or events personally witnessed? Because of general fear and hearsay?
Gilrandir
07-26-2014, 14:09
Not only Ukraine claims that Russia attacks its territory:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/654128f0-1356-11e4-8244-00144feabdc0.html#axzz38ZylDKe9
They don't if I do not pay to read it.
Fisherking
07-26-2014, 18:20
The unfortunate fact is that Ukrainian defense ministry reports and US government reports are not as believable as the reports of individual Ukrainian solders reports or international media reports, if there were war correspondents in the area.
If access to the front is strictly controlled it is more prone to propaganda than actual news reporting.
The BBC version of the story just say “paraphrased” that US intelligence sources say the Russians are firing from across the border but because of security they won’t say how they know that.
And some experts say the Ukrainian army is using Grad fire from its own positions:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/07/deadly-hail-eastern-ukraine-2014726111616255695.html
In these circumstances it can be challenging to establish who was responsible for a particular attack that killed civilians, particularly since both sides deny responsibility. But, in four attacks against populated areas that Human Rights Watch investigated in Donetsk, the evidence strongly indicates that Ukrainian government forces were responsible.
All the hits were in areas controlled by insurgent forces, but close to the front lines. And by examining the impact craters we were able to establish the rockets' flight direction, which indicated they had been launched from government-controlled areas. These four attacks killed at least 16 civilians and injured many more.
[...]
Because they are imprecise and cannot be relied upon to accurately target legitimate military objectives, the use of Grads in populated areas is a violation of the laws of war, and repeated attacks like those we documented could amount to war crimes. Commanders on both sides should recognise that they might one day be held legally accountable for their actions.
So much for the nice government forces fighting the good fight. They're not the first or the only modern army trying to get insurgents out of cities so where the separatists are hiding is hardly an excuse.
“Can't tell the reason why each individual left: Forceful eviction? Because of specific threats or events personally witnessed? Because of general fear and hearsay?” A bit of all of this, but when it was the Kosovars doing this, that was called a Ethnic-Cleansing.
“There are always choices, but only a few has the power to make them.” Yeah, there is the bad choice and the bad choice in this case.
“A battlefield defeat of the KLA does not mean that the movement would become dead or that no new movements would spring up and restart the war.” Could be, no one knows. What we know is the creation of an artificial state which satisfy really no one (I mean the local populations) but serves well the Western Interests. The real fact is the Nationalists won. The real things is the Karadzic, Mladic, Izetbegovic, Tudjman, Milosevic and others Thaci won. We divided Yugoslavia between “ethnicities”, but because we had to keep good conscience, we keep some little bit of everything everywhere.
Gilrandir
07-27-2014, 07:03
So much for the nice government forces fighting the good fight. They're not the first or the only modern army trying to get insurgents out of cities so where the separatists are hiding is hardly an excuse.
A fight is always a fight so it can't be good by default. And episodes like this will happen. But there is a great difference between collateral damage that may take place while the enemy's positions are attacked and casualties caused by deliberate shelling residential quarters in the cities they hold where they know no enemies are hiding, as the separatists do.
I wonder would such discussions be held during WWII when a country was evicting an enemy from its territory. Did anyone think then of collateral damage? Or, without a need to go that far back, - the current ATO by Israel. They are going all the way to put and end to those they brand as terrorists.
A fight is always a fight so it can't be good by default. And episodes like this will happen. But there is a great difference between collateral damage that may take place while the enemy's positions are attacked and casualties caused by deliberate shelling residential quarters in the cities they hold where they know no enemies are hiding, as the separatists do.
I wonder would such discussions be held during WWII when a country was evicting an enemy from its territory. Did anyone think then of collateral damage? Or, without a need to go that far back, - the current ATO by Israel. They are going all the way to put and end to those they brand as terrorists.
So throwing a nuclear weapon at a city where the enemy hides would be okay as the civilians are just unfortunate collateral damage then?
WW2 was full of war crimes on all sides, that's really a good one to bring up. :laugh4:
And yeah, noone really criticized Israel for killing hundreds of civilians, my fault. :rolleyes:
Gilrandir
07-27-2014, 11:01
So throwing a nuclear weapon at a city where the enemy hides would be okay as the civilians are just unfortunate collateral damage then?
When we see it done we will discuss it. Until then it is one of might have beens. If I made the same surmise about Putin I would be laughed at and branded propaganda-monger and demonizer of Russia.
WW2 was full of war crimes on all sides, that's really a good one to bring up. :laugh4:
And that is why it should have been better to let nazis own 3/4 of Europe and not conquer back the lost territories to prevent further casualties.
And yeah, noone really criticized Israel for killing hundreds of civilians, my fault. :rolleyes:
And yet, Israel sees it essential to pursue its activity so that later its citizens could have peace and reasonable security.
When we see it done we will discuss it. Until then it is one of might have beens. If I made the same surmise about Putin I would be laughed at and branded propaganda-monger and demonizer of Russia.
I'm pretty sure there were some soldiers in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And that is why it should have been better to let nazis own 3/4 of Europe and not conquer back the lost territories to prevent further casualties.
:strawman1:
But yes, because...
And yet, Israel sees it essential to pursue its activity so that later its citizens could have peace and reasonable security.
...the Nazis were also convinced that if they just conquer enough enemies and people they disagree with, the future citizens could live in peace and reasonable security. It's definitely a solution that works, for one side.
Gilrandir
07-28-2014, 06:19
...the Nazis were also convinced that if they just conquer enough enemies and people they disagree with, the future citizens could live in peace and reasonable security. It's definitely a solution that works, for one side.
Oh, those jewish nazis!
Seamus Fermanagh
07-28-2014, 14:49
I'm pretty sure there were some soldiers in Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
Both were cities on a short list of targets precisely because they had been largely undamaged by previous bombardment and that the sweeping impact of the weapons would be more readily apparent to any and all.
Both included a number of military installations and both had industrial targets -- considered legitimate targets by the standards of the day.
It was, of course, well known that residential areas were mixed in with these military targets, and it was expected that the bomb would cause huge collateral casualties in the process of taking out these targets.
Sadly, this did not cause us many qualms at the time, and vengeance for Pearl Harbor still drove a lot of US popular opinion. Some authorities of that era even thought that civilians SHOULD be targeted specifically, and not just as an incidental target. It was truly believed that terror would break the will of the opponent.
Gilrandir
07-30-2014, 07:48
I would like to ask the opinion of those who are well-versed in peculiarities of American media. What do you make of Alex Jones? To what extent is the information he presents unbiased and trustworthy?
I would like to ask the opinion of those who are well-versed in peculiarities of American media. What do you make of Alex Jones? To what extent is the information he presents unbiased and trustworthy?
100%, Alex Jones is the most trustworthy source you can find on this planet. :laugh4:
Seriously, it shouldn't be hard to figure out he is a crazy conspiracy guy.
You can check this post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?147359-The-red-Kipper-flies-at-midnight%21%2A&p=2053593197&viewfull=1#post2053593197), although I spelled his name wrong, it's about him.
Fisherking
07-30-2014, 09:40
100%, Alex Jones is the most trustworthy source you can find on this planet. :laugh4:
Seriously, it shouldn't be hard to figure out he is a crazy conspiracy guy.
You can check this post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?147359-The-red-Kipper-flies-at-midnight%21%2A&p=2053593197&viewfull=1#post2053593197), although I spelled his name wrong, it's about him.
A less bias reading is that Jones often infers conspiracies that have no foundation in provable fact.
The basic new item may be factual and the only source reporting it. His information and videos are often picked up by other news organizations. It is mainly when he ties the event to the New World Order or some other wide unprovable conspiracy that one needs to be skeptical.
So it is more like “Caution! Handle with care”. If we discount all information coming from crazy people we would still be in the dark ages.
:bow:
Do you also extend that level of scrutiny to people like Putin?
Of course some of the things he says are true. For example that his name is Alex Jones, or where you can find his website, or....
It might even be true that certain organizations threatened him because he got something right for once, the problem is that he seems a lot like the kid that cried wolf a little too often. And his reaction to such accussations is to cry wolf even more often and to call everyone a wolf who does not believe him. He is simply destroying his own credibility with all the crazy stuff so it becomes hard to figure out which of the things he says may be true and which are not.
When he says vaccines cause cancer because of an NWO conspiracy, do you really think only the NWO part is wrong?
Fisherking
07-30-2014, 13:37
Do you also extend that level of scrutiny to people like Putin?
Of course some of the things he says are true. For example that his name is Alex Jones, or where you can find his website, or....
It might even be true that certain organizations threatened him because he got something right for once, the problem is that he seems a lot like the kid that cried wolf a little too often. And his reaction to such accussations is to cry wolf even more often and to call everyone a wolf who does not believe him. He is simply destroying his own credibility with all the crazy stuff so it becomes hard to figure out which of the things he says may be true and which are not.
When he says vaccines cause cancer because of an NWO conspiracy, do you really think only the NWO part is wrong?
Of course all politicians have to be carefully scrutinized. They have motive to present things in a particular light.
When tracing back stories to their origins I have often found the source to be Jones or his crew. Sometimes cited, sometimes not. But his stories have been covered by almost all major media outlets at one time or another.
He does often have incredible takes on his information at times or the information its self could be tainted. That is true.
All claims need to be proven. Taking any one source of information is a danger. Conspiracy or not.
Even scientific reports from a single study should not be taken without examination. Hundreds of them and sometimes even thousands are retracted or discredited yearly.
N.W.O. is what politicians are always calling for. Some see it as conspiracy just to name it. It is mainly the in group of any proposed future political axis, sometimes involving world government. Most recently Russia is seen to be excluded from that proposed in group.
Is that conspiracy? I would say it depends on your point of view and what they hope to accomplish.
There are lots of proven conspiracies. The most recent to fit the term I would propose as the NSA and Five Eyes programs to spy on the civilian populations of a wide number of countries. It does not mean that they are tied to any wider unnamed international cartel, however.
Media and governments use the results from social science experiments to convince their viewers or citizens to take the same opinion of a story as they do. This does not mean there is an international conspiracy to control the minds of everyone.
If an argument has one true statement but the second premise is false it dose not invalidate the true part. It just takes effort to separate the two. But it does mean that an argument has to be examined on the basis of facts and not just the assumption that it must all be a lie.
Employ logic, critical thinking, and be aware of what is intended merely to persuade rather than providing reasoned data.
Err, yes, but Alex Jones is still crazy.
Fisherking
07-30-2014, 15:12
LOL! Compared to whom?
Jones has an over active imagination. But he is not crazy.
The human mind is an excellent pattern recognition device. It recognizes patterns everywhere, even where there really is no pattern except what is imagined.
This guy was crazy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Parsons_%28rocket_engineer%29
Jack Parsons, rocket scientist and engineer: The story of rocket scientist Jack Parsons is so monumentally insane that it’s tempting to think it’s all the product of a deranged Hollywood scriptwriter’s imagination. However, the truth of the California Institute of Technology researcher’s personal life is well documented. In 1939 Parsons converted to Thelema, a philosophy-cum-religion developed by the famous occultist Aleister Crowley. Parsons together with his housemates were spotted on a number of occasions dancing practically nude around a fire in the garden, in an apparent pagan ritual. At other times, he joined up with Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard to attempt to raise the mother of the Antichrist; to do this, Parsons masturbated while Hubbard wrote notes. The pair also believed that they could summon spirits, so Hubbard intoned while Parsons and his mistress made love. And when Hubbard later absconded with Parsons’ girlfriend, the scientist reported that he was trying to hex his foe. Parsons was eventually killed in an explosion that some have suggested was down to a magical experiment.
Yes, my mind recognizes a crazy pattern when I hear Alex Jones rambling about the NWO and "they" and the evil government. Ok, he's right about the US government being evil, but everything he makes up around that is just crazy. Do you believe that there are FEMA camps or that his behavior on the BBC was not crazy?
I would like to ask the opinion of those who are well-versed in peculiarities of American media. What do you make of Alex Jones? To what extent is the information he presents unbiased and trustworthy?
He is as trustworthy as a drunkard in the pub with a vendetta against invisible green men from mars.
He may actively hear about news stories or events from other people in the said pub, the news and the television, but it always boils down to the fact the evil green men are taking over the world and turn us in their slaves.
HoreTore
07-30-2014, 18:58
LOL! Compared to whom?
Jones has an over active imagination. But he is not crazy.
Say that again...? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9_gUDQe4uE)
"666 is the double of 33, and 33 is pi".
Alex Jones is the gold standard of the whacko-scale.
Fisherking
07-30-2014, 20:26
The number 666 is likely to effect a lot of people and organizations in strange ways.
It may be superstition rather than reason but they react to it none the less. It is part of a set of physiological biases.
Even the US Navy in small part was susceptible to it. USS Hawkbill SSN 666 nicknamed the Devil Boat. Service on the ship was voluntary. If service members objected to being posted there they were accommodated with other assignments.
Jones, at least in his public persona, can not be charged with being highly rational but that might be deliberate, considering much of his audience.
It does not justify dismissing anything by him or his crew out of hand, though taking all of it at face value is a mistake. It often makes its way into mainstream media, not that that should be a glowing recommendation, either.
John Nash, mathematician, received the Nobel Prize in Economics for game theory. He is also a paranoid schizophrenic. Abe Lincoln was likely mad and Pythagoras was rally batty! Cult following and all.
Just about everything requires some degree of filtering.
.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
07-30-2014, 20:45
And that is why it should have been better to let nazis own 3/4 of Europe and not conquer back the lost territories to prevent further casualties.
I sincerely hope this is a joke.
We know what happens when we don't resist tyrannical regimes - we get the USSR and its satellite Empire.
As regards collateral damage - we should make efforts to minimise it, and to that end neither side should be using rockets in urban areas, those things are not accurate. Counter-battery fire needs to be conducted by conventional artillery, or failing that precision air attack - as in ONE missile, not a cluster bomb - looking at you USAF.
Pannonian
07-30-2014, 21:10
The number 666 is likely to effect a lot of people and organizations in strange ways.
It may be superstition rather than reason but they react to it none the less. It is part of a set of physiological biases.
Even the US Navy in small part was susceptible to it. USS Hawkbill SSN 666 nicknamed the Devil Boat. Service on the ship was voluntary. If service members objected to being posted there they were accommodated with other assignments.
Jones, at least in his public persona, can not be charged with being highly rational but that might be deliberate, considering much of his audience.
It does not justify dismissing anything by him or his crew out of hand, though taking all of it at face value is a mistake. It often makes its way into mainstream media, not that that should be a glowing recommendation, either.
John Nash, mathematician, received the Nobel Prize in Economics for game theory. He is also a paranoid schizophrenic. Abe Lincoln was likely mad and Pythagoras was rally batty! Cult following and all.
Just about everything requires some degree of filtering.
.
Philosophy and obscure branches of sciences may leave leeway for bizarre readings. Basic maths is basic, and I'd expect everyone with a brain to master it, barring maybe some illnesses. If they can't, then I assume they're either lacking a brain, or they're peddling a line to exploit people who don't have a brain. Which do you think Alex Jones is? Is he an idiot who can't cope with numbers? Or is he a highly intelligent marketeer who peddles conspiracy theories to idiots who'll swallow anything that sounds in the echo chamber?
HoreTore
07-30-2014, 23:16
Any theory which can be traced back to Alex Jones can safely be dismissed as loony.
Fisherking
07-31-2014, 07:44
Well, sure!
Individual news stories are not grand conspiracies. Wild horse roundups and police brutality don’t involve alien Nazi Buildaburg plots.
His reporting staff usually give just the essential facts of a matter. It is what he does with it afterward that is the problem.
The other Alex Jones is easier to look at.
http://static.entertainmentwise.com/photos/Image/AlexJones.jpg
HoreTore
07-31-2014, 11:07
"Essential facts" and "Alex Jones' staff" in the same sentence.
I just died.
Gilrandir
07-31-2014, 13:14
He is as trustworthy as a drunkard in the pub with a vendetta against invisible green men from mars.
I could put up with the vendetta if its aim was LITTLE green men sent by Marscow.
The number 666 is likely to effect a lot of people and organizations in strange ways.
The Russian spelling of Партия Единая Pоссия (Party United Russia) has three words six letters in each thus Putin's party has 666 as its name.
Any theory which can be traced back to Alex Jones can safely be dismissed as loony.
What would you say to this one?
http://www.infowars.com/whistleblower-u-s-satellite-images-show-ukrainian-troops-shooting-down-mh17/
HoreTore
07-31-2014, 13:16
What would you say to this one?
http://www.infowars.com/whistleblower-u-s-satellite-images-show-ukrainian-troops-shooting-down-mh17/
I will say that because it's from infowars.com, it has no value.
The Russian spelling of Партия Единая Pоссия (Party United Russia) has three words six letters in each thus Putin's party has 666 as its name.
Do you believe this to be of importance?
The Russian spelling of Партия Единая Pоссия (Party United Russia) has three words six letters in each thus Putin's party has 666 as its name.
I once read that Putin would find Osama and become beloved by all, proof that he is the anti-christ.
He didn't catch Osama and I don't quite see how he is beloved around the world, so much for that theory.
What would you say to this one?
http://www.infowars.com/whistleblower-u-s-satellite-images-show-ukrainian-troops-shooting-down-mh17/
It collides with the one where a Ukrainian pilot admitted that he shot down the plane using the cannon of his SU-25.
Then again that one collided with itself given that the plane was at 10km height and the SU-25 has a service ceiling of 7km...
Alex Jones ia also not a fan of Obama/the government, so it's not surprising that he uses every excuse to claim that the government is lying, as would most of his followers (like the guy who wrote that).
Maybe the journalist who is quoted is somewhat reliable and maybe the US government is actually spreading false information as propaganda (surprise, surprise...) but the last part about the tape refers to ITARTASS, a russian agency that would be just as full of propaganda most likely and it makes me wonder how those experts got a hold of the original tape to look for timestamps etc.
Gilrandir
07-31-2014, 14:33
Do you believe this to be of importance?
Just to keep up the topic of 666's omnipresence.
Gilrandir
07-31-2014, 14:37
It collides with the one where a Ukrainian pilot admitted that he shot down the plane using the cannon of his SU-25.
Then again that one collided with itself given that the plane was at 10km height and the SU-25 has a service ceiling of 7km...
Alex Jones ia also not a fan of Obama/the government, so it's not surprising that he uses every excuse to claim that the government is lying, as would most of his followers (like the guy who wrote that).
Maybe the journalist who is quoted is somewhat reliable and maybe the US government is actually spreading false information as propaganda (surprise, surprise...) but the last part about the tape refers to ITARTASS, a russian agency that would be just as full of propaganda most likely and it makes me wonder how those experts got a hold of the original tape to look for timestamps etc.
It also mentions Yarema saying that the plane was hit not from our Buk, but the stress is omitted. Yarema wanted to emphasize that though Buk it was, it wasn't a Ukrainian one.
HoreTore
07-31-2014, 14:38
Chillax guys, the plane didn't even exist. (http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1732)
Sarmatian
07-31-2014, 16:15
It collides with the one where a Ukrainian pilot admitted that he shot down the plane using the cannon of his SU-25.
Then again that one collided with itself given that the plane was at 10km height and the SU-25 has a service ceiling of 7km...
Soviet planes had very long bullets. Anything is possible.
Alex Jones is still crazy, though.
Fisherking
07-31-2014, 17:20
I will say that because it's from infowars.com, it has no value.
Well, then you would be wrong.
https://www.google.com/#q=Whistleblower:+U.S.+Satellite+Images+Show+Ukrainian+Troops+Shooting+Down+MH17&start=0
Because Jones picked it up like everyone else. He clearly links to what may be the original source. At least the by line of the author of the story.
The story is more an criticism of MSM than anything else. Of taking the word of a single source without proof (US government). Not asking for images or documents, etc.
It does not make a positive claim that it was shot down by the Ukrainian government. It just casts serious doubt.
I would put it down to cognitive bias: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect
edit:I admit I am biased against Jones too.
If he is the only source for a claim or story I usually won’t go there. He has too many other problems to cite as a source of information unless it is confirmed elsewhere. I usually only run into him when tracing things back to their origins.
His rants do make you uneasy about his mental state.
HoreTore
07-31-2014, 18:13
Nutjobs and cranks rarely make positive claims; obscurity is their calling card. They're just asking questions (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions).
I did not state that the information within it was wrong, I said it was of no value. If someone credible has reported on it, link to that. An Alex Jones link is still completely worthless.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-01-2014, 00:58
Nutjobs and cranks rarely make positive claims; obscurity is their calling card. They're just asking questions (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions).
I did not state that the information within it was wrong, I said it was of no value. If someone credible has reported on it, link to that. An Alex Jones link is still completely worthless.
Isn't it possible that Mr. Jones may be correct on one or two issues, even if only on a "blind squirrel" basis?
HoreTore
08-01-2014, 01:49
Isn't it possible that Mr. Jones may be correct on one or two issues, even if only on a "blind squirrel" basis?
A stopped clock does indeed tell the time correctly twice a day, but I would rather prefer a working one.
GenosseGeneral
08-02-2014, 14:53
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian army is making quite some progress:
MAP (http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3400735-karta-boevykh-deistvyi-na-donbasse-za-2-avhusta)
Note how they managed to cut off Donetsk from Luhansk, thus dividing the separatists. The Ukrainian leadership seems to hope indeed for a complete military victory.
However, I have my doubts whether they can be successful at it. Their losses continue to be high, mostly due to the highly effective artillery/Grad fire their positions take. 2 brigades seem to be more or less cut off from their supply lines while they are under sustained, systematic fire. Territories taken back from the separatists are systematically mined. At the same time, protests against the latest draft become stronger and Ukraine is essentially bankrupt.
On top of that, with every day of fighting it becomes more likely that Luhansk and Donetsk turn into full-scale humanitarian catastrophes, the city council of Luhansk today announced that they essentially ran out of fuel for ambulances. The water supply for the whole Donbass is in danger as well, since canals and pumpstations have been damaged in the fights, yet noone is able to repair them in the middle of a war zone (in fact, several workers have lost their lives trying to do so).
So the army has separated the separatists... :eyebrows:
HopAlongBunny
08-02-2014, 22:08
Speculation it might have been an "Oops" moment by a Ukrainian aircraft:
http://www.gasandoil.com/oilaround/2014/07/revelations-of-german-pilot-analysis-of-the-201cshooting-down201d-of-malaysian-mh17.-201caircraft-was-not-hit-by-a-missile201d
Does that guy even know how BUK missiles may work (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/22/world/europe/jet-wreckage-bears-signs-of-impact-by-supersonic-missile-analysis-shows.html?_r=0)?
Rather than striking an aircraft directly, missiles in this class fly a course that is designed to intercept the targeted aircraft and explode beneath it, creating a cloud of shrapnel.
At the end of the missiles’ flight, they act “more like a shotgun than a rifle,” Mr. Foster said, adding: “one is attempting to put as many consistently sized, low-drag fragments into the airframe as possible.”
Speculation it might have been an "Oops" moment by a Ukrainian aircraft:
http://www.gasandoil.com/oilaround/2014/07/revelations-of-german-pilot-analysis-of-the-201cshooting-down201d-of-malaysian-mh17.-201caircraft-was-not-hit-by-a-missile201d
I already mentioned that the aircraft was at 10km and the SU-25 has a service ceiling of 7km.
Can anyone please explain how a SU-25 can fire its gun at a plane 3km above its maximum flight altitude and how any plane can shoot at a civilian airliner with its gun by accident? this was a big passenger plane and guns are used well within visual range, if that is what happened then whoever did it shot down the plane on purpose. You simply cannot mistake an airliner for an enemy airplane unless you are so drunk that it's a wonder you actually managed to take off.
HopAlongBunny
08-03-2014, 01:49
Yes I realize the article is not a clear, definitive case. Its merely a possibility.
Apparently you did not read the article to where it is explained why a passenger craft was targeted, and shot down on purpose.
Since you can't be bothered to read and I can't be bothered to quote it, g'day.
Yes I realize the article is not a clear, definitive case. Its merely a possibility.
Apparently you did not read the article to where it is explained why a passenger craft was targeted, and shot down on purpose.
Since you can't be bothered to read and I can't be bothered to quote it, g'day.
Yes, the plane would still be missing 3km of altitude to reach the airliner. It cannot fly to 7km, point its gun straight upwards and hit an airliner 3km higher with its gun. The SU-25 is a ground attack aircraft that is neither made to fly that high nor to attack aircraft in the first place. So what was it doing at 10km altitude and how did it even get up there in the first place? This story would be far more believable had it been a MiG-29 or a SU-27 which have a service ceiling of 18km and 19km respectively, compared to the 7km of the SU-25. Again, MH-17 was flying at an altitude of 10km.
I even found a link for you, this guy doesn't even consider the guns but only talks about the short range missiles the SU-25 can carry for self defense, even with those it would be a stretch: http://aviationweek.com/blog/how-su-25-can-shoot-down-faster-higher-flying-aircraft
And more: http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/could-old-warplane-really-shoot-down-mh17
Gilrandir
08-03-2014, 13:39
Their losses continue to be high, mostly due to the highly effective artillery/Grad fire their positions take. 2 brigades seem to be more or less cut off from their supply lines while they are under sustained, systematic fire.
The hardest fire to counter is the one produced by the Russian army (from Russia and from Ukraine):
http://news.bigmir.net/ukraine/834866-Rossijskij-soldat-pohvastalsja-foto-Buka-v-Instagram--nahodjas--v-Ukraine
In this one a Russian soldier reports "working on Buk" (whatever that may mean - it can well be translated as "working with Buk" or "from Buk"). He uploaded those photos into Instagram which has a geolocator. The latter identified his position as the villages Krasnaya Talovka and Krasny Derkul which are both UKRAINIAN VILLAGES 15 KM from the nearest Russian settlement.
However, the more frequent cases are those when the Ukrainian army positions are attacked with Grad across the border from Russia.
Territories taken back from the separatists are systematically mined.
Though it happens as you say, I wouldn't put it that way. Rather it is that minefields and mines on the roads and across the countryside (as well as within the cities) are detected ever and anon by Ukrainian mine pickers. So (to my mind) a more correct statement could be: Territories taken back from the separatists have been systematically mined.
At the same time, protests against the latest draft become stronger
Strange as it may seem, quite a number of adequately trained troops (comprised of volunteers mostly with a military experience) eager to depart to the East are still waiting for the assignment while it will take the newly drafted some time to be prepared for it.
The hardest fire to counter is the one produced by the Russian army (from Russia and from Ukraine):
http://news.bigmir.net/ukraine/834866-Rossijskij-soldat-pohvastalsja-foto-Buka-v-Instagram--nahodjas--v-Ukraine
In this one a Russian soldier reports "working on Buk" (whatever that may mean - it can well be translated as "working with Buk" or "from Buk"). He uploaded those photos into Instagram which has a geolocator. The latter identified his position as the villages Krasnaya Talovka and Krasny Derkul which are both UKRAINIAN VILLAGES 15 KM from the nearest Russian settlement.
How accurate is that anyway? If he posted them from inside the Buk, his GPS/GLONASS may well be 20km off.
Gilrandir
08-03-2014, 14:26
How accurate is that anyway? If he posted them from inside the Buk, his GPS/GLONASS may well be 20km off.
Regretfully, being a high tech imbecile :laugh4:(as a colleague of mine put it - talking about herself, but I may as well qualify to this description), I have no idea how it works. Perhaps there could be found explanations that work either way. But this is not the first time (and evidently not the last time, although I heard that Russian authorities ordered their military to put an end to their social media presence) similar bad calls from Russian conscripts and civilians have been detected. The tendency is in evidence (corroborated by what the Ukrainian military claim and what American intelligence has discovered) so I have no doubt that Russia takes an active part in fighting supporting the separatists with fire across the border.
Regretfully, being a high tech imbecile :laugh4:(as a colleague of mine put it - talking about herself, but I may as well qualify to this description), I have no idea how it works. Perhaps there could be found explanations that work either way. But this is not the first time (and evidently not the last time, although I heard that Russian authorities ordered their military to put an end to their social media presence) similar bad calls from Russian conscripts and civilians have been detected. The tendency is in evidence (corroborated by what the Ukrainian military claim and what American intelligence has discovered) so I have no doubt that Russia takes an active part in fighting supporting the separatists with fire across the border.
It does seem to be the case that Russians are in Ukraine, but if a GPS gets a bad signal inside a building or I suppose also inside a relatively well armored vehicle, it can be quite some ways off and think you are in the neighboring city or so.
So I wouldn't take some metadata from inside a Buk as 100% accurate. Of course that also doesn't mean that he is not in Ukraine, but I wouldn't call that a hard fact.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-04-2014, 14:45
It does seem to be the case that Russians are in Ukraine, but if a GPS gets a bad signal inside a building or I suppose also inside a relatively well armored vehicle, it can be quite some ways off and think you are in the neighboring city or so.
So I wouldn't take some metadata from inside a Buk as 100% accurate. Of course that also doesn't mean that he is not in Ukraine, but I wouldn't call that a hard fact.
Alternatively, he could be even deeper in Ukraine.
Gilrandir
08-04-2014, 15:15
... if a GPS gets a bad signal inside a building or I suppose also inside a relatively well armored vehicle ...
As far as I know (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system) Buk consists of 4 components, so "working with Buk" may actually mean being in the fresh air running errands from one component to another. So as like as not there may have been no impediment to GPS signals.
Alternatively, he could be even deeper in Ukraine.
Yes, like somewhere around Kiev.
As far as I know (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system) Buk consists of 4 components, so "working with Buk" may actually mean being in the fresh air running errands from one component to another. So as like as not there may have been no impediment to GPS signals.
Yes, now let's speculate about why Ukraine shot down MH-17 as there was a picture of a drunken Ukrainian army Buk crew somewhere on the internets.
Gilrandir
08-05-2014, 06:08
Yes, now let's speculate about why Ukraine shot down MH-17 as there was a picture of a drunken Ukrainian army Buk crew somewhere on the internets.
Unlike this picture, Russian shelling Ukrainian army both from within and from without the border has multiple corroborative proofs which you yourself seem to consider valid:
It does seem to be the case that Russians are in Ukraine
News at the BBC this morning: Ukrainian Army crossed Russian Border. Any confirmation on social Network?
Unlike this picture, Russian shelling Ukrainian army both from within and from without the border has multiple corroborative proofs which you yourself seem to consider valid:
Russians does not necessarily mean the Russian army. And if I consider something valid or proven, I don't say "seem".
At the moment I just assume that everybody is lying about Ukraine, that's about the only certainty there is.
Gilrandir
08-05-2014, 14:31
Russians does not necessarily mean the Russian army.
The information in the social media that exposes the said shelling was posted by Russian military servicemen (mostly privates) which means Russian regular army. But I think that the shelling is also done by the separatists who constantly sneak across the border and back to collect weapons left and/or delivered for them by the Russian military.
News at the BBC this morning: Ukrainian Army crossed Russian Border. Any confirmation on social Network?
You didn't mention which way the Ukrainian army crossed the border.
Being no resident of any social networks I have no idea what they say (and indeed, would you trust it?), but I can offer two pieces of latest information connected with the border-crossing:
1. Yesterday from 300 to 400 Ukrainian soldiers crossed into Russia by way of a crossing point. They said that after 4 hours under fire they were left without any heavy weaponry and equipment, so a part of them broke through to join with the back up force which was coming to relieve them, and the others (to save their lives) crossed into Russia.
2. Today most of the said Ukirainians crossed the border back into Ukraine and joined with the rest of ATO forces.
Sarmatian
08-05-2014, 16:40
What I like is that Russia allowed 438 men, who were pinned down, unable to move, under heavy artillery fire, to cross the border. Then they were given food, shelter, water for shower and allowed back across the border (for those who wanted to, obviously) to rejoin Ukrainian army or national guard, while new sanctions are being discussed because Russia supports federalists strongly.
Gilrandir
08-06-2014, 14:31
What I like is that Russia allowed 438 men, who were pinned down, unable to move, under heavy artillery fire, to cross the border. Then they were given food, shelter, water for shower and allowed back across the border (for those who wanted to, obviously) to rejoin Ukrainian army or national guard, while new sanctions are being discussed because Russia supports federalists strongly.
That makes Putin a shoo-in for the next Nobel Peace prize. His army lives up to its nickname "polite men" earned while annexing the Crimea.
You forget that all this was done in the presence of OSCE mission members.
"You forget that all this was done in the presence of OSCE mission members." Your peaceful army is shelling towns in presence of OSCE. So much for the OSCE effect, at least on Ukrainian side...
And the fact that OSCE is there doesn't obliged Russia to return Ukrainian Soldiers. If fact, Russia could easily put them in jail for illegal crossing a border, as I suppose Ukrainian Soldiers have no passport and no visa...:laugh4:
Gilrandir
08-07-2014, 13:08
Your peaceful army is shelling towns in presence of OSCE. So much for the OSCE effect, at least on Ukrainian side...
OSCE mission are not present where the fighting is going on so it can have no effect on the Ukrainian army allegedly shelling towns. Instead, AFAIK, OSCE mission are present at Ukraine-Russia border crossing points and have reported on the Ukrainian military crossing the border.
And the fact that OSCE is there doesn't obliged Russia to return Ukrainian Soldiers. If fact, Russia could easily put them in jail for illegal crossing a border, as I suppose Ukrainian Soldiers have no passport and no visa...:laugh4:
1. Ukrainians need neither foreign passport nor visa to come to Russia. They must show their internal (Ukrainian) passport to do that. So much for your perspicacious and sinister :laugh4:.
2. Today the news came that at least 5 Ukrainian officers and 18 soldiers have been detained by FSB and charged with shelling the Russian territory. So they ARE in jail. (Sarmatian would probably remark: "At least they've had their shower".) So much for kind and obliging Russian authorities.
The only comfort I got from your post is that you capitalized Ukrainian Soldiers.
“So much for your perspicacious and sinister” In uniforms and weaponry? I doubt it, but perhaps Russia is not that bothered by armed Ukrainian soldiers crossing its borders.
“So much for kind and obliging Russian authorities.” Remember, Russians are evil drinkers.
“Ukrainian army allegedly shelling towns.” I was expecting the denial. Sources: red Cross, about the shelling.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/29/donetsk-ukraine-fighting_n_5629677.html
Do note I am careful not to put link with RT or/and Russian Media
You don’t have to read the article; it will spoil your moral high ground.
However, the "liberation" of East-Ukraine is more difficult and bloodiest than the annexation of Crimea apparently... Oops...
Kralizec
08-07-2014, 21:46
So, it looks like the clock is running out for the separatists.
Does anybody care to guess wether Russia will intervene directly for 'humanitarian reasons' or whatever? Honestly I don't know what to expect.
So, it looks like the clock is running out for the separatists.
Does anybody care to guess wether Russia will intervene directly for 'humanitarian reasons' or whatever? Honestly I don't know what to expect.
Yes, on its own this insurgency is doomed. As for Putin's intervention, I doubt he'll go for it because of several reasons:
1. Incorporating land is expensive. He already had to raid the federal pension budget to pay for Crimea, and the people are not amused. Incorporating land devastated by war is even more expensive.
2. Eastern Ukraine on its own means nothing to him: he wants all of Ukraine. If Russian tanks roll in, he'll be pushing until they reach the Polish border. That means casualties, lots and lots of casualties on both sides. Once Russian troops start arriving home in boxes, Putin's popularity will take a nosedive.
3. If he moves in, I'm pretty sure that NATO will provide Ukraine with some serious support (aka weapons + volunteers).
4. Lots of people in his inner circle are already losing money and do not want any further escalation. He ultimately calls the shots, but he can't risk alienating his base.
Kralizec
08-08-2014, 00:43
"Putin has joined Western leaders and imposed sanctions against us as well" (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28689363)
:laugh4:
"Putin has joined Western leaders and imposed sanctions against us as well" (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28689363)
:laugh4:
That second picture immediately reminded me of these:
http://kimjongillookingatthings.tumblr.com
http://kimjongunlookingatthings.tumblr.com
edit: here we go:
http://putin-looking-at-things.tumblr.com
“he wants all of Ukraine” Explain how do you reach this conclusion, please. You probably have some reasoning in this, as there are actually evidences or hints he was not. If he was, he would have done it when the troops were at the borders.
But annexing Ukraine has a cost, as EU will acknowledge (probably already knows, should I say) and will have to pay the bill of a complete bankrupted country. Why Putin would be happy to pay it? Apart silly reason like Putin being new Hitler, can you give at least 2 or 3 reasons, basis, on what you draw this interesting idea?
“volunteers”: You having a laugh. Volunteers? To fight for a country banning political parties and shelling civilians? Against Russia? Last time we did, it finish very badly…
In fact, extreme-right/nazi might be tempted to take revenge on the 3rd Reich defeat, but I doubt it will be in massive number.
Papewaio
08-08-2014, 08:32
"Putin has joined Western leaders and imposed sanctions against us as well" (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28689363)
:laugh4:
Here in Australia there is speculation that food prices will go down as we export slightly less to Russia.
Sarmatian
08-08-2014, 09:14
Great news. Serbia already has an increased export to Russia compared to last year. With this we can probably reach additional 0.3bn by the end of the year, and between 0.5 and 1bn in the next.
It's reminiscent of the good old days of the Cold War - NATO on one side, Russia on the other and us in the middle making a big, fat pile of cash out of both. :D
Warning: Some graphic material in there! - Husar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN_Mbe9u-vE
Sarmatian
08-08-2014, 10:10
It's no wonder Kiev is winning - they have ninjas.
Papewaio
08-08-2014, 23:04
Great news. Serbia already has an increased export to Russia compared to last year. With this we can probably reach additional 0.3bn by the end of the year, and between 0.5 and 1bn in the next.
It's reminiscent of the good old days of the Cold War - NATO on one side, Russia on the other and us in the middle making a big, fat pile of cash out of both. :D
Which side of the Iron Curtain was Serbia on again?
I'm sure you guys are happy that modern Russia has shown no tendancy to annex successful former nations of the USSR.
First they came for...
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-08-2014, 23:50
Which side of the Iron Curtain was Serbia on again?
I'm sure you guys are happy that modern Russia has shown no tendancy to annex successful former nations of the USSR.
First they came for...
Actually, Serbia sat in the middle and refused to take sides - but only because Stalin and Tito had a falling out.
HoreTore
08-09-2014, 01:18
Which side of the Iron Curtain was Serbia on again?
Yugoslavia was a founder of the non-aligned movement, and traded with both blocks.
Actually, Serbia sat in the middle and refused to take sides - but only because Stalin and Tito had a falling out.
That's an oversimplification. First of all, Yugoslavia liberated themselves from the nazis. All the Eastern Bloc countries were liberated by the USSR. As such, the USSR had little leverage over them. Further, Tito and Stalin didn't really have a "falling out" - they had genuine ideological differences.
Gilrandir
08-09-2014, 06:17
Yes, on its own this insurgency is doomed.
This "insurgency" since its inception has never been on its own. Think of it: separatists are involved in active fighting for about three months and they don't run out of ammo, weapons, men. Russian "assistance" to them is on such a scale that some Ukrainian Natioanl guard units claim that they are almost completely provided for by Russia - after they captured the separatists storehouses in Slovyansk and other liberated cities.
Once Russian troops start arriving home in boxes, Putin's popularity will take a nosedive.
They already have. After the Ukrainian army captured the Donetsk airport I read information of some 15-18 (don't remember the exact number) soldiers of one Russian detachment (IIRC some airborne troops division, but I wouldn't wager on that) who were brought to Russia to be buried. A simultaneous natural death incidence? So boxes ARE coming to Russia - the problem is that Russian mass media don't touch upon that topic. Even if that homecoming becomes numerous it will take quite a longish time for the Russian society at large to learn it and yet longer to realize that Putin is to blame in it. Knowing of the power of Russian TV I would say that the latter is hardly to happen.
In uniforms and weaponry? I doubt it, but perhaps Russia is not that bothered by armed Ukrainian soldiers crossing its borders.
In uniforms - yes, but with weaponry - no. But it is hard to be bothered even if they had one - Russian troops are amassed along the border in such quantity, that a couple of hundred of battered soldiers would hardly scare them.
“Ukrainian army allegedly shelling towns.” I was expecting the denial. Sources: red Cross, about the shelling.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/29/donetsk-ukraine-fighting_n_5629677.html
Do note I am careful not to put link with RT or/and Russian Media
You don’t have to read the article; it will spoil your moral high ground.
My moral high ground weathered it. Surprisingly, I found in it less than I had expected. Red cross mentioned the shelling but it didn't attribute it to a particular side. Recriminations of residential areas shelling have been there for quite a while so it is no news (still less moral-shaking news) for me. The only independent source mentioned was Human Rights watch, but that received only a passing note in the article. But seeing the separatists behavior in general, I'm inclined to believe the Ukrainian autorities more in this shelling issue. Yet I think that while trying to pin down separatists' Grads the Ukrainian army may have sporadically hit residential areas where the valiant separatists place their heavy weaponry almost always. At least it is not done on purpose (unlike what separatists do).
However, the "liberation" of East-Ukraine is more difficult and bloodiest than the annexation of Crimea apparently... Oops...
If our territory is taken away bit by bit there should be a time when we start putting up some resisitance, no? Resisting Putin spells blood.
In fact, extreme-right/nazi might be tempted to take revenge on the 3rd Reich defeat, but I doubt it will be in massive number.
Here we go again. You relate every piece of news to nazis (mosly Ukrainian ones). Yet those who you term Ukrainan nazis have been so far guilty of BULLYING MPs, WEARING what you identify as nazi uniforms, MARCHING through cities, SALUTING at conventions, NAMING organizations after nazi leaders, BLAMING jews in all sins and the like.
What conventional russist non-nazi "insurgents" have been doing is KIDNAPIING people (including international observers), TORTURING the dissident on a large scale, CONFISCATING the property of those who they claim they defend, SETTING FIRE to non-military objects (the ice hockey arena), LOOTING shops and banks, BRINGING DOWN a passenger plane.
Now compare the capitalized gerunds from the two lists and tell me which are more terrible. Actions speak louder than words.
And speaking about the words: you swooped hard at some organization named after Goebbels, but the same person praised by Putin did not stir you to any righteous anger. How come?
First of all, Yugoslavia liberated themselves from the nazis.
But it happened because Hiltler was busy elsewhere fighting a total war and couldn't find resources to man his fronts everywhere.
Gilrandir
08-09-2014, 06:30
Yes, on its own this insurgency is doomed. As for Putin's intervention, I doubt he'll go for it because of several reasons:
1. Incorporating land is expensive. He already had to raid the federal pension budget to pay for Crimea, and the people are not amused. Incorporating land devastated by war is even more expensive.
2. Eastern Ukraine on its own means nothing to him: he wants all of Ukraine. If Russian tanks roll in, he'll be pushing until they reach the Polish border. That means casualties, lots and lots of casualties on both sides. Once Russian troops start arriving home in boxes, Putin's popularity will take a nosedive.
3. If he moves in, I'm pretty sure that NATO will provide Ukraine with some serious support (aka weapons + volunteers).
4. Lots of people in his inner circle are already losing money and do not want any further escalation. He ultimately calls the shots, but he can't risk alienating his base.
Forgot to mention. SBU made public a report in which they claim that Russian invasion was to have started on July 18 and the signal for it was to have been shooting down a RUSSIAN passenger plane which was flying from Moscow to Cyprus on July 17. It was to have fallen on the territory controlled by the Ukrainian army and to have been a pretext for further Russian military interferecnce.
Why it didn't happen: in Donetsk region there are 5 towns called more or less Pervomaysk (Pervomayskoye, Pershotravneve). The two of significance are those to the west of Donetsk and to the south-east of it. The Buk was to have been transported to the former one, but the non-local separatists unaware of such name-sake problems brought it to the latter one. The ensuing events are well known to all.
SBU says that it is only a surmise, but a very likely one.
First of all, Yugoslavia liberated themselves from the nazis.
That's not entirely correct. Tito and his partisans belonged to the most successful resistance group, having liberated large parts of their homeland, but they were incapable of getting rid of the Germans completely.
City likes Belgrade were captured thanks to the Red Army's intervention, while the participation of the partisan groups was solely for propagandistic intentions.
Stalin had estimated that the people of Yugoslavia would accept a communist regime much more willingly, if its forces had actively participated in the liberation of their country.
A state-owned Russian TV channel broadcasts live from a biker show in Crimea, in which black-clad men with torches clearly form a swastika. The TV channel even tweets (https://twitter.com/vesti_news/status/497839019393572864) about it without mentioning the swastika. What gives?
https://i.imgur.com/eeTJxwK.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCjbsnoSi-U
Sarmatian
08-09-2014, 10:05
Stuff the swastika. Prior to that they formed a pentagram. Unholy devils. After that, they formed a wedge and after that a cantabrian circle.
It means they're representing a Nazi Anti-Christ and that they will charge into their enemies and pepper them with arrows afterwards. We're doomed.
That's not entirely correct. Tito and his partisans belonged to the most successful resistance group, having liberated large parts of their homeland, but they were incapable of getting rid of the Germans completely.
City likes Belgrade were captured thanks to the Red Army's intervention, while the participation of the partisan groups was solely for propagandistic intentions.
Stalin had estimated that the people of Yugoslavia would accept a communist regime much more willingly, if its forces had actively participated in the liberation of their country.
That's mostly true. Even though partisans controlled large swathes of land, mostly in Serbia and Bosnia, it was predominantly sparsely populated hills and forests. Germans controlled most urban centers and without the Red Army and the western Allies it would have been impossible for partisans to defeat them.
When it's said Yugoslavia liberated itself, it's mostly meant effort. Partisans didn't just limit themselves to sabotage, intelligence gathering and rescuing pilots, they were actually taking the fight to the Germans and were very effective, given the difference in heavy weapons and training.
Gilrandir
08-09-2014, 14:03
Perhaps it is a totally unrelated post. Yesterday I visited Mezhihirya - the fabled residence of Yanukovych. I had been to some royal palaces in the vicinity of St. Petersburg and I must say the the estate of Yanukovych is on par with them. Sometimes it seems that Catherine II and Peter I fall utterly short of what Yanukovych built for himself. Well, you can form an opinion yourselves (sorry, if the photos are too numerous).
13920 13921 13922 13923 13924 13925 13926 13927 13928 13929 13930 13931 13932 13933 13934 13935 13936 13937 13938 13939 13940
The last picture was taken on Maidan and it features a barricade most of which are being torn down today.
Gilrandir
08-09-2014, 14:09
A state-owned Russian TV channel broadcasts live from a biker show in Crimea, in which black-clad men with torches clearly form a swastika. The TV channel even tweetsabout it without mentioning the swastika. What gives?
For Russian TV (as well as for Brenus and Sarmatian) Ukraine is the last and sole sanctuary of Nazis. If they are squashed here it will be a safe new world to live in.
This seems to be the full context. Tacky stuff. Sounds like a speech by Hitler at 7:50 and onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPnb97ybtiU
Guys. Guys. Don't worry. The skirmish AI sucks so their horse archers will die to our spearmen.
Kadagar_AV
08-11-2014, 16:40
A state-owned Russian TV channel broadcasts live from a biker show in Crimea, in which black-clad men with torches clearly form a swastika. The TV channel even tweets (https://twitter.com/vesti_news/status/497839019393572864) about it without mentioning the swastika. What gives?
What gives? A picture and show without context is what you gave.
The context was what I was asking for.
And actually, the full show is available in the link in the tweet (since the tweet mentioned live video, I thought the link had expired without actually checking it).
Here's (http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/russian-motorbike-gang-tells-the-conflict-in-ukraine) some more context in English (don't miss the gifs).
Here's (http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/russian-motorbike-gang-tells-the-conflict-in-ukraine) some more context in English (don't miss the gifs).
This is awesome. Done in the best traditions of the USSR ca 1980s.
Gilrandir
08-12-2014, 14:51
This is awesome. Done in the best traditions of the USSR ca 1980s.
When I was in Sevastopol last summer it seemed to me that I WAS in the USSR of the 1980s. Lenin's monuments aplenty, streets and squares named after the heroes of that time, intense mistrust growing into enmity at the mention of anything connected with foreigners (especially if those are the foreigners from NATO countries), local TV reminding regularly and proudly about the heroic past of the city (though both battles of which they are so proud - 1853-55 and 1941 were lost by the valiant defenders of the city).
Meanwhile SBU made public another conversation of the separatists from which it transpires that they pay a special attention to protecting from any intrusion to say nothing of burglary two houses owned by Yanukovych in Donetsk.
http://ostannipodii.com/ru/a/201408/terroristy_v_donecke_ohranyayut_dom_yanukovicha-110003972/
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-12-2014, 23:04
Forgot to mention. SBU made public a report in which they claim that Russian invasion was to have started on July 18 and the signal for it was to have been shooting down a RUSSIAN passenger plane which was flying from Moscow to Cyprus on July 17. It was to have fallen on the territory controlled by the Ukrainian army and to have been a pretext for further Russian military interferecnce.
Why it didn't happen: in Donetsk region there are 5 towns called more or less Pervomaysk (Pervomayskoye, Pershotravneve). The two of significance are those to the west of Donetsk and to the south-east of it. The Buk was to have been transported to the former one, but the non-local separatists unaware of such name-sake problems brought it to the latter one. The ensuing events are well known to all.
SBU says that it is only a surmise, but a very likely one.
I think you've become a bit too Russian paranoid - I understand why, but it's clouding your judgement.
Given the number of Western Sats focused on the area it's unlikely Russia could have successfully staged all that without being caught. It's also unlikely that Putin would have been willing to gamble that. He's very much the man for the calculated risk, not the wild gambit. Added to this, Ukrainian forces know that, realistically, Russia won't start dropping bombs on them before it's ground troops are already engaged. I wouldn't be surprised if the Ukrainians Buks are actually shut down just to prevent this sort of thing, or at least under strict ROE.
No, the most likely scenario is still an accident.
Gilrandir
08-13-2014, 13:45
I think you've become a bit too Russian paranoid - I understand why, but it's clouding your judgement.
Did I say that the scenario forwarded by SBU is the one I agree with? Even SBU said that it was one of the possible reconstructions of what had happened. As for me, I don't very much believe it, yet, as Brenus says, we can't disregard any plausible explanation. I just wanted to air this version and see what others think of it.
Given the number of Western Sats focused on the area it's unlikely Russia could have successfully staged all that without being caught. It's also unlikely that Putin would have been willing to gamble that.
Yet with all the Western Sats there is no official corroboration of who had shot down the plane. Russia under whose auspices the separatists act is still not officiallly caught and continues supplying weapons, ammo and manpower across the border and shelling the Ukrainian territory. In spite of its being a proven fact, Putin goes on doing this gambling. Realizing this I wouldn't altogether turn down the SBU version - if Russia hasn't been caught so far after the accident (as most believe it to be), it wouldn't have been caught if it weren't an accident but a pre-planned act.
Gilrandir
08-13-2014, 14:17
This seems to be the full context. Tacky stuff. Sounds like a speech by Hitler at 7:50 and onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPnb97ybtiU
Finally found time to check this out (though intermittently) and can give you a short outline of the show.
The anchorman says (the gist): The peaceful Soviet country lived in bliss when it was rent apart in 1991. Crimea appeared torn away from its mother Russia. In 2014 "the nazi sour dough spilled over its kneading trough in Kiev and started overflowing across the land". Ukrainain nazis shell Kramatorsk, use Grads against Slovyansk, their tanks crash Donetsk. The inhabitants of those areas look pleadingly at Russia entreating it for help and Russia will respond. Nazism would be stopped.
The show itself is to illustrate what is going on in Ukraine. So Hitler's speech is quite Ok there thus equalling current Ukrainian authorities with him. You can also see meek Berkuts attacked by vicious nazi street fighters and APCs bearing Ukrainian flags being attacked (and indeed captured) by valiant soldiers who surmount them with DPR flags.
The most curious fact in it all is the anchorman, Alexander "the Surgeon" Zaldostanov:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/10670244/Meet-the-Night-Wolves-Putins-Hells-Angels.html
Gilrandir
08-14-2014, 16:30
What are the opinions of the Russian "humanitarian aid" convoy? What is Russia up to?
If its purpose were really sending food and the trucks didn't contain anything else, why didn't it agree for the cargo to be inspected by Red Cross, reloaded to other trucks and sped on farther from Kharkiv region down south?
If Russia wanted to supply the separatists with ammo, weapons or manpower, why did it need the trouble of forming a huge train of white trucks and proclaiming its mission when the separatists are supplied on a daily basis through the border points the latter control without so much pomp?
Gilrandir
08-15-2014, 06:06
In his speech in Yalta yesterday Putin again admitted that those green men in Crimea were Russian troops.
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=42751&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=7&cHash=67f6647e164a0b57def07460a3824a22#.U-2TiIF_vgs
Verbatim (according to TV channel Dozhd twitter coverage): "There was no annexation of Crimea. Yes, we used our armed forces, but only with the purpose of holding a referendum".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNacG0VKksU&feature=youtu.be
That's kind of random (Russian TV channel in Paris).
Gilrandir
08-15-2014, 15:08
That guy who passed in the background is sure a Ukrainian nazi.
Don Corleone
08-15-2014, 19:54
What are the opinions of the Russian "humanitarian aid" convoy? What is Russia up to?
This is going to be the beginning of something very, very bad. (http://news.yahoo.com/ukrainian-border-officials-inspecting-russian-convoy-kiev-085145166.html)
Full disclosure, I am cynical and paranoid when I'm not making efforts to practice a spiritual way of life. Even though I believe I'm in relatively fit spiritual condition at the moment, I am pretty sure that this was exactly what that convoy was there for in the first place... bait. Now for the overwhelmingly disproportionate response....
This is going to be the beginning of something very, very bad. (http://news.yahoo.com/ukrainian-border-officials-inspecting-russian-convoy-kiev-085145166.html)
Full disclosure, I am cynical and paranoid when I'm not making efforts to practice a spiritual way of life. Even though I believe I'm in relatively fit spiritual condition at the moment, I am pretty sure that this was exactly what that convoy was there for in the first place... bait. Now for the overwhelmingly disproportionate response....
I think the convoy they destroyed was not the humanitarian aid thing. Reporters and Ukraine said there was a different convoy of armored vehicles crossing the border somewhere else and that's the one the Ukrainians shelled. Or are you saying the Russians actually sent a convoy of soldiers and armored vehicles into Ukraine as bait? AFAIK responding to an armed incursion/invasion is quite legitimate.
Don Corleone
08-15-2014, 21:50
No, I didn't realize that there were two convoys: one of humanitarian aid and an armored column.
Either way, I think this has the strong potential of escalating quickly. I hope that I'm wrong.
The Russians just say there never was a convoy and Ukraine is shooting at ghosts now:
http://news.yahoo.com/12-russian-armored-vehicles-join-aid-convoy-073246864.html
Gilrandir
08-16-2014, 14:37
No, I didn't realize that there were two convoys: one of humanitarian aid and an armored column.
Either way, I think this has the strong potential of escalating quickly. I hope that I'm wrong.
In fact, the convoy that was partially destroyed on the Ukrainian territory was accompanying the "humanitarian" one. The latter started being inspected on the Russian territory by Ukrainain customs officers and border guards but they discovered that it has no documents as to the cargo in each truck, only a general wholesale description, so the inspection was suspended. By the way, the trucks were without lisense plates (they were put on only when the truck train reached the place where it is now) and appeared to be only half-full. Russians explained it by the fact that most of the trucks were brand-new and hadn't had their test drives, so in case any broke down they could distribute the cargo to the other vehicles.
While all this was happenning the first convoy went on to cross into Ukraine through the territory controlled by the separatists. Then it was partly destroyed.
SBU made public another intercepted call, to my mind the most revealing I've heard so far. http://lb.ua/news/2014/08/15/276231_sbu_obnarodovalo_peregovori_boevika.html
In it a Russian military man (nicknamed Trifon) who is currently on DPR territory is communicating to a FSB agent who is in Russia. The former admits that their defeat is imminent and wants to escape "home". He says that he doesn't wish to perish with the fanatic Strelkov (who, as he claims, under the influence of Orthodox-rooted ideology is ready to die in battle). He is strongly critical of both DPR and LNR who are engaged mostly in dividing territories (mostly Donetsk) into spheres of influence with subsequent money hoovering from locals and hijacking cars over the border with their subsequent selling. Trifon sees no sense in staying longer as he and the likes of him are needed "back in Crimea to start dealing with Tatars".
The most important parts of the conversation (as I see it):
1) Trifon says that all "theirs" (probably non-locals) are to be withdrawn, retrained in Rostov region for subversive activities and returned to Ukraine as the to-do is likely to last next 5-10 years. They leave behind a network of agents and hideaways with weapons which are to be utilized when they return.
2) Trifon is very much disappointed by the locals' attitude. He deems himself a deliverer, but locals show disapproval and even enmity to them. He exemplifies this attitude by an episode which happened yesterday. He (in his uniform) was walking down the street and a woman who passed him by blurted out : "God damn you".
One more curious thing. People here spoke of similarity of the weapons used on Maidan with medieval ones. Now one more medieval-related thing to have happened:
a Ukrainian army detachment conducted a raid through separatist-held territories destroying checkpoints, wreaking havoc and stirring panic among them. The raid was more than 400 km long and they joined again the ATO forces. A modern chevauchee?
Every time you mention Strelkov I need to remind myself I'm not playing Stalker. :laugh4:
But now I'm confused about what kind of convoy ukraine partially destroyed? Those white trucks they stopped at the border?
Gilrandir
08-17-2014, 18:00
But now I'm confused about what kind of convoy ukraine partially destroyed? Those white trucks they stopped at the border?
The white trucks are still there and only 16 of them have been so far agreed to be let through. But they haven't crossed into Ukraine yet.
The vehicles that were reported to be partially destroyed were APCs and tanks of usual khaki color. Before it happened one of the newly-appointed (or elected, don't know which) leaders of DPR claimed that 70 military vehicles (including 30 tanks) and 1200 men who had had a 4 months training in Rostov region came to DPR as reinforcement.
I leave you to guess on how much truth is in this statement.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian military report that their adversaries now are very professional. They believe them to belong to a regular army, judging from the way they behave in a battle (they never drop weapons), build escarpments and communicate to each other using military jargon.
Those trucks must be let through! Lugansk needs air (http://beta.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28799627)!!!
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-18-2014, 23:58
Hmmm, reports on the Beeb seemed to indicate someone shelled refugees - not armour or aid - people fleeing the Ukrainian advance.
Gilrandir
08-19-2014, 15:08
Hmmm, reports on the Beeb seemed to indicate someone shelled refugees - not armour or aid - people fleeing the Ukrainian advance.
I'm not sure they were fleeing Ukrainian advance as Ukrainian army provided them with vehicles to escape from two villages south of Luhansk which had been captured by the army and were (and still are) under constant attacks of the separatists as capturing the villages spelled cutting off the Luhask garrison of LPR.
Since the Ukrainian army provided the vehicles it can't have shelled them. On the other hand, the separatists are known to shell residential areas, sometimes deliberately, sometimes by mistake. In the following interception a separatist woman who directed the Grad fire confesses that they missed the target hitting the village of Stepne instead in which there were no Ukrainian armed forces, only locals. She sounds shocked. Her interlocutor advises her to dismiss it from her head by drinking 150 grams of alcohol (as he usually did). As for the victims, he says that they would spread information that it had been done by Ukrainians and it wasn't the first time the separatists did likewise.
http://lb.ua/news/2014/08/18/276539_sbu_perehvatila_peregovori.html
And the Ukrainian Air Force shot down MH-17 while a separatist valiantly used a trampoline in an attempt to reach the airplane and save the civilians.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mg2Ny2yL-Y
And my sources are all 100% guaranteed propaganda-free just like yours of course.
Gilrandir
08-20-2014, 05:56
And the Ukrainian Air Force shot down MH-17 while a separatist valiantly used a trampoline in an attempt to reach the airplane and save the civilians.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mg2Ny2yL-Y
And my sources are all 100% guaranteed propaganda-free just like yours of course.
I expected this. Well, you are free to disbelieve the links I post. If you think that intercepted calls (not only this one, but others as well) are fake, have it your own way.
I expected this. Well, you are free to disbelieve the links I post. If you think that intercepted calls (not only this one, but others as well) are fake, have it your own way.
I keep reading that Ukraine is a huge propaganda war where both sides lie a lot, every one of your posts reeks of propaganda, your links are mostly from Ukrainian news sources on the western side and my point is not that everything is a lie but I also do not believe that everything you post is the full truth.
Previous wars indicate that both sides usually commit atrocities and civil wars are especially bad, when I read your posts the Ukrainian army are angels who gift people food, cars and everything else they might need after not even having the resources to attack the separatists in the beginning while the separatists are the scumbag terrorist murderers who commit all these unspeakable crimes on purpose while they grow their devil horns. IMO it would be naive not to think that there is w hole lot of pro-government propaganda involved, the Wochenschau I linked works pretty much the same way, praises "our own guys" and demonizes the enemy. Unlike others I'm not claiming that this automatically makes Poroshenko Hitler though, it's just a small parallel that makes the content of your posts and links reek of propaganda.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-20-2014, 14:04
No media story posts the full truth...at a minimum, they always miss something.
Add to the purposeful efforts at "spin doctoring" and the potential for distortion is magnified.
Gilrandir
08-20-2014, 14:32
Previous wars indicate that both sides usually commit atrocities and civil wars are especially bad, when I read your posts the Ukrainian army are angels who gift people food, cars and everything else they might need after not even having the resources to attack the separatists in the beginning while the separatists are the scumbag terrorist murderers who commit all these unspeakable crimes on purpose while they grow their devil horns.
Believe me, not all I hear and see I dare to post here. But I think that nonwithstanding what I link or write you may have read about the separatists' "unspeakable crimes" elsewhere.You may also compare reports on what Slovyask, for instance, was like when they held it and what it is now. The same with other cities. So be my guest and make conclusions yourself basing your judgement on the information from the sources you trust. I just want you to be aware of the information that is late in reaching people in the west or never reaches them through language barrier.
What's the word from Lugansk? Are the ATO forces any closer to establishing full control there?
No media story posts the full truth...at a minimum, they always miss something.
Add to the purposeful efforts at "spin doctoring" and the potential for distortion is magnified.
Yes, and the Ukrainian media directly involved in this even moreso, which was the point I was trying to make.
Gilrandir
08-21-2014, 05:58
What's the word from Lugansk? Are the ATO forces any closer to establishing full control there?
AFAIK, the city is partly under control of the Ukrainian army, but their progress is impeded by the arrival of a reinforcement which came from Russia and has a number of vehicles, mostly tanks and APCs. A similar situation is in Ilovaysk - a town south-east of Donetsk controlling the only route left by which reinforcements from Russia can reach DPR. Contradictory reports come from there some saying that the whole town is held by the ATO forces against the terrorist offensive, others that the town is only partly controlled by the Ukrainian military, but all indicate that here reinforcements come from Horlivka and Donetsk.
For those interested, this map (http://liveuamap.com/) seems to be the most accurate map of the situation in the area. It's continuously updated.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-21-2014, 17:46
I keep reading that Ukraine is a huge propaganda war where both sides lie a lot, every one of your posts reeks of propaganda, your links are mostly from Ukrainian news sources on the western side and my point is not that everything is a lie but I also do not believe that everything you post is the full truth.
Previous wars indicate that both sides usually commit atrocities and civil wars are especially bad, when I read your posts the Ukrainian army are angels who gift people food, cars and everything else they might need after not even having the resources to attack the separatists in the beginning while the separatists are the scumbag terrorist murderers who commit all these unspeakable crimes on purpose while they grow their devil horns. IMO it would be naive not to think that there is w hole lot of pro-government propaganda involved, the Wochenschau I linked works pretty much the same way, praises "our own guys" and demonizes the enemy. Unlike others I'm not claiming that this automatically makes Poroshenko Hitler though, it's just a small parallel that makes the content of your posts and links reek of propaganda.
Yeah, but he's a Ukrainian and Russia is clearly supporting the rebels - otherwise their resistence would have collapsed weeks ago.
So maybe we should give him a half-decade before we ask him not to be biased.
On balance I would say that as the forces of "New Russia" are either Russian Cossacks or irregular militia, they're more likely to commit attorcitieis or screw up and bomb civilians.
That's not to say that Ukrainian volunteers and regular forces are lily white, but the people in Kiev want to return normalcy to the East in the medium term, and want to appear Western-facing. Those two concerns mean they're unlikely to support a policy of reprisals. Conversely, Russian-backed forces will want to appear strong and will, as their position erodes, become ever more concerned with suppressing "treason".
Basically, Ukraine is winning this, they can afford not to be jerks and have multiple reasons to want to be seen as the "good guys" tens years from now.
Gilrandir
08-22-2014, 10:48
On balance I would say that as the forces of "New Russia" are either Russian Cossacks or irregular militia, they're more likely to commit attorcitieis or screw up and bomb civilians.
Lately more and more reports have been coming in indicating that Russian regular army detachments are involved in fighting including the Pskov airborne division known for its participation in the Georgian war of 2008.
http://fakty.ua/186753-pod-luganskom-protiv-sil-ato-voyuyut-rossijskie-desantniki-iz-pskovskoj-divizii-vdv-foto
Gilrandir
08-22-2014, 15:01
For those interested, this map (http://liveuamap.com/) seems to be the most accurate map of the situation in the area. It's continuously updated.
I wouldn't call this map accurate since the Ukrainian army is holding some towns (namely Miusinsk), border checkpoints and an important height in the south Donetsk region - Saur Mohyla which commands the surrounding area within the radius of several dozen km. And the ATO forces are reported to be storming some towns (namely Snizhne, Krasny Luch and some others) in the south Donetsk and Luhansk regions. So one may say that there is a strip there controlled by the Ukrainians as it is shown in the map: http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3409161-karta-ato-po-sostoianyui-na-22-avhusta
You storm places you don't control. There are videos indicating that Miusinsk is in separatist hands (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8jmsPyOvT8). Recently, the monument on Savur Mohyla collapsed (http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-185-russian-airborne-forces-reportedly-captured-in-ukraine/#3894), indicating that it could be under attack.
I think the map is quite fine on the points you mention (not sure which border points you mean). I have been watching it for a while, and it is often ahead of official information.
Gilrandir
08-22-2014, 17:06
You storm places you don't control.
But it means you have forces in the vicinity to do that. If the territory around is enemy-held you can't worm deep inside and start storming a point well within it.
There are videos indicating that Miusinsk is in separatist hands (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8jmsPyOvT8).
How old is the video? Miusunsk was reported to have been captured by the army several days (maybe a week) ago.
Recently, the monument on Savur Mohyla collapsed (http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-185-russian-airborne-forces-reportedly-captured-in-ukraine/#3894), indicating that it could be under attack.
Its being under attack means that it is still held by the army. It has been constantly attacked ever since it was captured close on three weeks ago. As far as I get the whole hill is damaged pretty much, but its strategic importance makes the ATO forces still cling to it tooth and nail.
I think the map is quite fine on the points you mention (not sure which border points you mean).
Border points are those along the southern border of Donetsk and Luhansk regions where Ukrainian border guards are reported to hold out and be under constant shelling from both the separatists and across the border from Russia.
But it means you have forces in the vicinity to do that. If the territory around is enemy-held you can't worm deep inside and start storming a point well within it.
Snizhne and Krasny Luch are right at the front lines according to Liveuamap.
How old is the video? Miusunsk was reported to have been captured by the army several days (maybe a week) ago.
That was indeed reported by Liveuamap, but the place seems to have been retaken by the separatists not too long after.
Its being under attack means that it is still held by the army. It has been constantly attacked ever since it was captured close on three weeks ago. As far as I get the whole hill is damaged pretty much, but its strategic importance makes the ATO forces still cling to it tooth and nail.
According to Liveuamap, it is under Ukrainian control. However, that doesn't seem (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3kPVbd4VAM) to have prevented Gubarev & co from capturing Marynivka close by.
Border points are those along the southern border of Donetsk and Luhansk regions where Ukrainian border guards are reported to hold out and be under constant shelling from both the separatists and across the border from Russia.
In the far east in Luhansk, all Ukrainian soldiers retreated AFAIK. Some of them to Russia (the recent Russian PR thingy), while some broke through their encirclement and went to Donetsk oblast (I think). Even on the official map (http://mediarnbo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/22-08.jpg) is most of this area greyed out with its own colour.
For those interested, this map (http://liveuamap.com/) seems to be the most accurate map of the situation in the area. It's continuously updated.
Thanks for the map. The frontlines on it make a lot of sense.
Gilrandir
08-23-2014, 13:34
Snizhne and Krasny Luch are right at the front lines according to Liveuamap.
.... which means that the ATO forces are facing the separatists who are holding those cities. Behind the army there is the land that is held by the Ukrainians.
Even on the official map (http://mediarnbo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/22-08.jpg) is most of this area greyed out with its own colour.
It is not greyed out. The striped zones on the official map indicate areas which have been recaptured from the separatists. Those stripes are superimposed on the yellow color (for the Ukraine-held areas) which creates that color, which is definitely different from the separatists' beige.
As for border guards escaping, it is true about those far east into Luhansk region. Those outposts situated close to and in Donetsk region are still held by the Ukrainian border guards.
Gilrandir
08-23-2014, 13:38
According to Liveuamap, it is under Ukrainian control. However, that doesn't seem (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3kPVbd4VAM) to have prevented Gubarev & co from capturing Marynivka close by.
The video is dated 13.08.2014, so since that time it could have changed hands.
.... which means that the ATO forces are facing the separatists who are holding those cities. Behind the army there is the land that is held by the Ukrainians.
Which there is according to the map (the official map is even more conservative when it comes to the area around Krasnyi Luch).
It is not greyed out. The striped zones on the official map indicate areas which have been recaptured from the separatists. Those stripes are superimposed on the yellow color (for the Ukraine-held areas) which creates that color, which is definitely different from the separatists' beige.
Zoom in. There are two different types of beige stripes in the area. Compare Sverdlovsk to Marivka.
As for border guards escaping, it is true about those far east into Luhansk region. Those outposts situated close to and in Donetsk region are still held by the Ukrainian border guards.
And what evidence do you have for that? Something better than the map, I hope. I haven't seen a single report from that area since those about Ukrainian troops withdrawing.
The video is dated 13.08.2014, so since that time it could have changed hands.
Judging by the blue arrow on the recent official map I just linked to, that does not seem to be the case.
Gilrandir
08-23-2014, 15:37
And what evidence do you have for that? Something better than the map, I hope. I haven't seen a single report from that area since those about Ukrainian troops withdrawing.
Those reports I heard (about Russian shelling from across the border) are connected with Donetsk region, so I must be wrong about the Luhansk region border posts.
Gilrandir
08-24-2014, 06:31
Which there is according to the map (the official map is even more conservative when it comes to the area around Krasnyi Luch).
Zoom in. There are two different types of beige stripes in the area. Compare Sverdlovsk to Marivka.
I wonder how do you read all those names on the map in Russian. Are you good at Cyrillic?
I wonder how do you read all those names on the map in Russian. Are you good at Cyrillic?
The names are given in English as well for me.
Might be automatic given it seems to be based on Google maps.
I wonder how do you read all those names on the map in Russian. Are you good at Cyrillic?
I can read Cyrillic fluently and understand some basic Russian (learning new languages is a hobby of mine). But as Husar said, transliterations are also available automatically through Google Maps, and English situation maps (http://www.rnbo.gov.ua/files/2014/23-08_eng.jpg) also exist.
I also took a basic Russian course last semester, there are more people who can read Cyrillic than one might think! ~D
This is for the Russian readers/speakers. A Belarus newspaper shows a lovely compilation of Russian propaganda...
Classic Goebbels (http://nn.by/?c=ar&i=133533&lang=ru).
GenosseGeneral
08-25-2014, 22:15
Another one for the Russian speakers in here:
http://tvrain.ru/articles/pojavilis_fotografii_mogil_pskovskih_desantnikov-374543/
The independent Russian TV channel claims that there were two secretive funerals of soldiers of the 76th airborne division today, which is stationend in Pskov. IIRC, one of the various Ukranian armed formations recently published pictures showing the military ID of a Russian paratrooper, whom they claim to have killed in battle. I do not remember, though, whether it was the same unit, but I guess there is only one airborne division based in Pskov.
This is not necessarily sound and solid proof. After all, service in the Russian armed forces is dangerous even in peacetime and this is probably even more the case in elite units, such as the VDV (airborne units). The Ukrainians can also have obtained that ID in an other way than killing its bearer. Yet we can also take this as a hint, that the numerous Russian volunteers do at this point not only come from nationalist Cossack unions or shady paramilitary Chechen formations such as Vostok, but that they are also recruited among actual military personnel.
The stuff that is happening around Novoazovsk, a town near the Russian border, is pretty exceptional. There should not be any insurgents anywhere near the town, yet they have been shelling (https://twitter.com/shelomovskiy/status/504253642929864705) the western outskirts of it (according to later reports (https://twitter.com/Henry_Langston/status/504314079767703552): even overrun it).
With the confirmation that Ukrainian forces have captured regular Russian troops inside Ukraine, one wonders whether what is seen now is a last-ditch effort and a sign of desperation or a part of a steady escalation from the Russian side.
After I posted that, reports from Reuters about green men (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/26/us-ukraine-crisis-fighters-idUSKBN0GQ1X520140826) in the eastern village of Kolosky (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kolosky,+Donetsk+Oblast,+Ukraine/@47.8045901,38.3374924,10z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x40e0dfce37a1674b:0xa476c037cacfb65e) came in:
Unidentified, heavily-armed strangers with Russian accents have appeared in an eastern Ukrainian village, arousing residents' suspicions despite Moscow's denials that its troops have deliberately infiltrated the frontier.
Two witnesses told Reuters on Tuesday that the dozens of men, who arrived at the weekend and set up a road block, were not local and had military ration packs marked with Russian writing.
Another witness, Alexei, who was in Kolosky on Monday, said that the armed men, when asked who they were, told residents only that they had come "to protect them".
That was an answer given by Russian military officers after they first seized state buildings in Crimea.
"It looks like direct invasion," said Alexei.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-26-2014, 21:12
What is new here?
HoreTore
08-26-2014, 21:23
This is for the Russian readers/speakers. A Belarus newspaper shows a lovely compilation of Russian propaganda...
Classic Goebbels (http://nn.by/?c=ar&i=133533&lang=ru).
Wat?
Is on the Ukrainian side in this conflict?
What is new here?
Until now, there have been no reliable reports about potential regular Russian troops ('little green men') operating inside Ukraine.
It's also a first that there is solid evidence for insurgents creating new fronts far away (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/26/us-ukraine-crisis-novoazovsk-exclusive-idUSKBN0GQ19U20140826?utm_source=twitter) from their frontline positions, presumably by attacking from Russia (in fact, it might be the first time I've seen that kind of claim, reliable or not - all the previous claims about attacks from Russia happened near existing rebel frontlines).
All in all, a significant escalation as it means that a lot of the previous plausible deniability disappears with this apparent shift in strategy.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-27-2014, 03:42
Until now, there have been no reliable reports about potential regular Russian troops ('little green men') operating inside Ukraine.
It's also a first that there is solid evidence for insurgents creating new fronts far away (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/26/us-ukraine-crisis-novoazovsk-exclusive-idUSKBN0GQ19U20140826?utm_source=twitter) from their frontline positions, presumably by attacking from Russia (in fact, it might be the first time I've seen that kind of claim, reliable or not - all the previous claims about attacks from Russia happened near existing rebel frontlines).
All in all, a significant escalation as it means that a lot of the previous plausible deniability disappears with this apparent shift in strategy.
Either the Russians are getting sloppy, or they're trying to prop the Rebels up directly. The first seems unlikely and the latter pointless given the grip the Ukrainian army has on the conflict now. The only way to turn it around is a full-scale invasion from Russia.
If Putin calculates he can make such an incursion with no real pretext and no diplomatic cover - well - I would say that the West would have to move to a hostile footing, if not directly confront Putin.
Gilrandir
08-27-2014, 06:21
This post could also be entitled "I told you so".
I also took a basic Russian course last semester, there are more people who can read Cyrillic than one might think! ~D
One doesn't need to know Cyrillic to read this one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/world/europe/russia-ukraine.html?_r=0
Is it only me or the New York Times is also being sensationalist and full of propaganda trying to demonize the separatists?
The stuff that is happening around Novoazovsk, a town near the Russian border, is pretty exceptional. There should not be any insurgents anywhere near the town, yet they have been shelling (https://twitter.com/shelomovskiy/status/504253642929864705) the western outskirts of it (according to later reports (https://twitter.com/Henry_Langston/status/504314079767703552): even overrun it).
The shelling of numerous Ukrainain border posts even far from the actual fighting zone from within Russia has been going on for a month at least. Now you see confirmations coming from elsewhere not just from me. The latest news bearing on it: the Ukrainain military claim that for the first time aviation was used against the border guards in Krasna Talivka. Two Russian helicopters Mi-24 fired missiles killing four of them.
http://kp.ua/politics/467453-rossyiskye-vertolety-obstrelialy-ukraynskykh-pohranychnykov-est-ubytye
With the confirmation that Ukrainian forces have captured regular Russian troops inside Ukraine, one wonders whether what is seen now is a last-ditch effort and a sign of desperation or a part of a steady escalation from the Russian side.
I would opt for the latter. It is evidently done to strengthen Putin's position at negotiations in Minsk.
Until now, there have been no reliable reports about potential regular Russian troops ('little green men') operating inside Ukraine.
All in all, a significant escalation as it means that a lot of the previous plausible deniability disappears with this apparent shift in strategy.
Does anyone still believe Russia's subterfuges like the claims that Russian paratrooper division on vehicles "was lost while patrolling the border" so much that found itself 20 km from this very border on the Ukrainian territory? The captured soldiers themselves claim that they were having an exercise, not patrolling the border.
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/3056207-poyavilos_video_doprosov_plennykh_rossiyskikh_desantnikov.htm
Anyway, border guards, not paratroopers are supposed to patrol the border, aren't they?
Either the Russians are getting sloppy, or they're trying to prop the Rebels up directly. The first seems unlikely and the latter pointless given the grip the Ukrainian army has on the conflict now. The only way to turn it around is a full-scale invasion from Russia.
The latest reports from the war zone are far from optimistic (for Ukranians, I mean). Ukrainian army seems to have stopped the offensive and is only defending the positions it is holding. A significant group of Ukrainians was surrounded near Ilovaysk. The new fighting spot in the south (Novoazovsk) is drawing away attention and needs strengthening. Mariupol was panick-stricken yesterday when the rumours of Russian tanks moving to it were spread.
I would say that Russian reinforcements of professional millitary saved separatists for the moment and start saying a weighty word in the war which now seems far from being won by Ukraine.
Kagemusha
08-27-2014, 08:21
Putin wants to secure good holdings for the negotiations. It would seem indeed true that there seems to be fresh Russian airborne units in Eastern Ukraine.
One doesn't need to know Cyrillic to read this one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/world/europe/russia-ukraine.html?_r=0
Is it only me or the New York Times is also being sensationalist and full of propaganda trying to demonize the separatists?
It's the New York Times, of course it is full of propaganda.
Even the Republicans in the US think it is a horribly biased liberal pinko rag that has an agenda.
There are even US institutions spreading propaganda from inside Ukraine, to think NATO or the US have no bias against Russia is quite funny.
GenosseGeneral
08-27-2014, 11:23
Here is a good overview over events hinting at Russian paras being involved in the Ukrainian conflict (unfortunately it is in Russian, though):
http://tvrain.ru/articles/chto_sluchilos_s_desantnikami_vse_materialy_dozhdja-374606/
And the fighting in Novoazovsk is indeed 'special', as the fighters there appeared far away from the actual separatist positions and opened a new front - in other words, it is very obvious, that they simply drove across the border.
I would say, the Russian try to keep a foot in the door. Kyiv was hoping to beat the separatist in the field and then start negotiations/reconcilement as a political process inside Ukraine. Moscow is trying to prevent this, as it wants to be at the table of negotiations in order to shape the future of Ukraine according to its interests.
Wat?
Is on the Ukrainian side in this conflict?
Que? Not sure what you mean there, but the if you look through the list of photos in that article you'll see that Russian media plucks photos of various atrocities from across the globe (Bosnia, Syria, Chechnya, etc.) and tries to pass those off as the deeds of the Ukrainian military in the current conflict.
Gilrandir
08-27-2014, 13:24
It's the New York Times, of course it is full of propaganda.
Even the Republicans in the US think it is a horribly biased liberal pinko rag that has an agenda.
There are even US institutions spreading propaganda from inside Ukraine, to think NATO or the US have no bias against Russia is quite funny.
So the picture is fake and the information is incorrect?
Here is a good overview over events hinting at Russian paras being involved in the Ukrainian conflict (unfortunately it is in Russian, though):
http://tvrain.ru/articles/chto_sluchilos_s_desantnikami_vse_materialy_dozhdja-374606/
And the fighting in Novoazovsk is indeed 'special', as the fighters there appeared far away from the actual separatist positions and opened a new front - in other words, it is very obvious, that they simply drove across the border.
Ukrainian RNBO reports of the separatiats capturing Starobeshevo and Russian military detachments spotted in Amvrosiyevka and setting up their headquarters in the village of Pobeda. It seems the southern front is opened.
A captured Serbian mercenary claims that they have been cheated as to the character of mission and payment.
http://podrobnosti.ua/podrobnosti/2014/08/23/990234.html
He didn't seem to expect to encounter "a real war" and didn't receive the promised money.
Gilrandir
08-27-2014, 13:25
Que? Not sure what you mean there, but the if you look through the list of photos in that article you'll see that Russian media plucks photos of various atrocities from across the globe (Bosnia, Syria, Chechnya, etc.) and tries to pass those off as the deeds of the Ukrainian military in the current conflict.
Probably Hore Tore is surprised that a Belorussian newspaper sides with Ukraine in the conflict. Yet I may be wrong.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-27-2014, 13:59
It's the New York Times, of course it is full of propaganda.
Even the Republicans in the US think it is a horribly biased liberal pinko rag that has an agenda.
There are even US institutions spreading propaganda from inside Ukraine, to think NATO or the US have no bias against Russia is quite funny.
So Russian troops aren't in Ukraine right now?
Come on Husar - the Ukrainian government may not be a college of saints, but the evidence on the ground is damning now. Russia started this conflict when they first annexed Crimea and then prevaricated over explicitely rejecting the rebels in the east. Now we fine paratroopers (not infantry) wandering around Ukraine and a new front has opened up.
I suppose you continue to maintain that the new armour isn't coming from Russia too?
Gilrandir
08-27-2014, 14:34
Now we fine paratroopers (not infantry) wandering around Ukraine and a new front has opened up.
Russian paratroopers are extremely well at losing themselves in any steppes (both of Eastern Ukraine now and of Crimea in March).
I suppose you continue to maintain that the new armour isn't coming from Russia too?
You wouldn't believe what a variety of weapons one can buy at Ukrainain supermarkets.
So the picture is fake and the information is incorrect?
I don't even think they write in true latin characters and arabic numbers.
Gilrandir
08-28-2014, 09:55
I don't even think they write in true latin characters and arabic numbers.
Behind all verbal frolicking and there-is-not-enough-proof/it-is-not-officially-admitted/it-is-just-propaganda statements I see evading giving direct answers to such questions:
Did the separatists bring down the Malaysian plane? (yes/no)
Does Russia supply the separatists with weapons and ammo? (yes/no)
Are there Russian regular army troops in Ukraine? (yes/no)
Do the separatists maltreat (to put it mildly) dissidents and prisoners? (yes/no)
Can Russia stop the havoc any time it wishes? (yes/no)
I believe you as well as other people deep inside have opted for this or that answer to such questions.
Behind all verbal frolicking and there-is-not-enough-proof/it-is-not-officially-admitted/it-is-just-propaganda statements I see evading giving direct answers to such questions:
Did the separatists bring down the Malaysian plane? (yes/no)
Does Russia supply the separatists with weapons and ammo? (yes/no)
Are there Russian regular army troops in Ukraine? (yes/no)
Do the separatists maltreat (to put it mildly) dissidents and prisoners? (yes/no)
Can Russia stop the havoc any time it wishes? (yes/no)
I believe you as well as other people deep inside have opted for this or that answer to such questions.
Or the other answer. Which is "How the **** would I know?"
But I gave a very public answer on my thoughts about at least one of those questions.
I have no big problems to just think thatboth sides are lying a lot and the truth is probably somewhere in between/much worse.
The only thing that I find astounding is that the rebels were able to hold out this long and if the Russian army is actively supporting them in huge numbers I would have expected several tons of proof by now, such as production numbers of tanks that were never owned by Ukraine or something like that. Especially given that the Ukrainian army is apparently winning and gaining ground most of the time, so they should have access to all those battlefields, the wrecks and the bodies. I can't do much with greasy pictures from 1980s cameras and words written by people who have a stake in promoting a certain story.
Do you also just read Hamas press reports because Israeli ones are biased and think you get an accurate picture of the situation?
Or do you just read Israeli press reports because Hamas are biased and think you get an accurate picture of the situation?
I find the two conflicts similar because I find it hard to believe either side in both of them. That doesn't mean I hate anyone or want anyone to die, it just means that I wait and see what happens, maybe one day there will be more clarity or maybe not.
After all we also found out that Hitler was an almost-vegetarian and that makes vegetarians just like him, it just takes time and research to find out the truth about some issues.
For all I know the answer to most of your questions may be yes, but it could also be no, and I could add ones such as:
Does the Ukrainian army use neo-nazi death squads as seen in a video? (y/n)
Does the Ukrainian army shoot at ambulances as seen in a video? (y/n)
Quite frankly, desperate people do desperate things and I would have preferred a different solution than civil war in the first place.
Crazed Rabbit
08-28-2014, 13:52
CNN is saying Russian soldiers are invading directly;
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/28/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/index.html
I'll guess we'll see if Europe has any stomach to support democracy (via hard sanctions on Russia) if it means harming trade.
CR
a completely inoffensive name
08-28-2014, 14:33
CR's article from CNN worries me. I really don't want a possible full on war with Russia.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-28-2014, 15:26
CR's article from CNN worries me. I really don't want a possible full on war with Russia.
We should have deployed against Russia earlier this year - if not in 2008 when Putin invaded Georgia.
Appeasement. Doesn't. Work.
GenosseGeneral
08-28-2014, 15:58
The only thing that I find astounding is that the rebels were able to hold out this long and if the Russian army is actively supporting them in huge numbers I would have expected several tons of proof by now, such as production numbers of tanks that were never owned by Ukraine or something like that. Especially given that the Ukrainian army is apparently winning and gaining ground most of the time, so they should have access to all those battlefields, the wrecks and the bodies. I can't do much with greasy pictures from 1980s cameras and words written by people who have a stake in promoting a certain story.
Well, that is precisely what has changed over the last days. While Ukrainian forces were quite successfully after the fall of Slovyansk and made a lot of progress (encircling Donetsk, most notably), since sunday tides have turned: After the premier of te DPR announced a counterattack with Mariupol as its goal, something nobody took serious at that moment, Ukrainian forces came under serious pressure. A notable number of fighters (several Special Battaillons) are encirclednin Ilovaisk. At the same time, the attack against Novoazovsk started. Where did all those fresh forces come from? To me it is clear: They came from Russian military bases. And not only as 'volunteers', but as units of the Russian military.
rory_20_uk
08-28-2014, 16:06
Even giving Ukraine NATO's army surplus- or selling it at a steep discount - would have helped them a lot.
Russian meddling should be met with more Eastern countries getting closer to NATO - so they learn not to do it again. Russia wants to get into a hot war with the West less than we do as right on their other border they have their bestest mates China who has no interest whatsoever in annexing any territory...
But Germany needs to keep warm, and France is building two Helicopter carriers...
~:smoking:
Gilrandir
08-28-2014, 18:18
Or the other answer. Which is "How the **** would I know?"
I said not of knowing things but of an attitude one has before (or even without) having full knowledge (if such a thing exists) of an issue. It determines a lot what kind of proof one would try to search for and which of the proof one would/wouldn't believe no matter how reliable/unreliable the sources are. If one adopts an attitude "no one is right/wrong in the matter" then no further developments (no matter how much proof is offered) will sway it either way.
The only thing that I find astounding is that the rebels were able to hold out this long and if the Russian army is actively supporting them in huge numbers I would have expected several tons of proof by now, such as production numbers of tanks that were never owned by Ukraine or something like that. Especially given that the Ukrainian army is apparently winning and gaining ground most of the time, so they should have access to all those battlefields, the wrecks and the bodies. I can't do much with greasy pictures from 1980s cameras and words written by people who have a stake in promoting a certain story.
As for rebels holding out long - the answer is simple: a couple of months ago Ukraine had no army to speak of. It is astounding for me that it has appeared in such a short time. But as further developments tend to show it is still no match for the Russian one in terms of management, supply, weapons and so on. Unfortunately, there is no time to get even or at least to progress significantly to stop the Russians.
As for the proofs, they are there with log books and painted over tank numbers and weapons' packing documents and other things. Perhaps they have not filtered to the western sources but the attitude like "I wouldn't believe that there are mercenaries until a see a person receiving money according to a pay roll entitled MERCENARIES" would prevent you from believing any.
Do you also just read Hamas press reports because Israeli ones are biased and think you get an accurate picture of the situation?
Or do you just read Israeli press reports because Hamas are biased and think you get an accurate picture of the situation?
Even if we put together pro-Hamas and pro-Israeli propaganda it is unlikely to rival the Russian one.
Quite frankly, desperate people do desperate things and I would have preferred a different solution than civil war in the first place.
If in spring one (not me, though) could still believe that it looked like a civil conflict in which locals expressed their desire to separate from the central government in Kyiv, now the separatists don't even pretend they act on behalf of the angry locals - they capture cities and towns in which DPR was not proclaimed or was not supported by the majority of population. To me it is clear that from the inception Russia has been the chief meddler and instigator in the conflict. And to me it is strange how others don't see it.
Gilrandir
08-28-2014, 18:29
CR's article from CNN worries me. I really don't want a possible full on war with Russia.
Don't worry, you will have none. So far the sanctions the West introduced against Russia amounted to:
Wave 1: Now what do you think you are doing?
Wave 2: Will you please stop, will ya?
Wave 3: And now you made us very angry.
Let me guess what wave four would be: no Russian delegation at NATO convention in Wales in September. But Putin as usual has plan B: he will paint Lavrov white from head to foot and send him to Wales as a "humanitarian minister".
Hooahguy
08-28-2014, 18:41
Canada is rather cheeky Id say. (http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-28961152?ocid=socialflow_facebook)
Pannonian
08-28-2014, 19:26
We should have deployed against Russia earlier this year - if not in 2008 when Putin invaded Georgia.
Appeasement. Doesn't. Work.
We couldn't spare any troops for deployment in Ukraine, having committed them earlier in Syria to overthrow Assad.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-29-2014, 02:07
Maybe we can get the Kurds to do it.....
Pannonian
08-29-2014, 03:26
Maybe we can get the Kurds to do it.....
The Ukrainians are already doing this effectively. Perhaps too effectively, and that is why Russia is taking a more direct role. Remember Brenus's theory that Russia wants to keep the fighting going, not so much to control Ukraine, but to deny it to NATO. If Ukraine threatens to bring the fighting to an end through complete victory, that theory would require greater effort to keep things going.
Appeasement. Doesn't. Work.
That's pretty obvious.
Nobody has considered the possibility of the appeasement working, in any point of history.
Rhyfelwyr
08-29-2014, 09:26
We should have deployed against Russia earlier this year - if not in 2008 when Putin invaded Georgia.
Appeasement. Doesn't. Work.
The problem with that line of thinking is that Russia's aggression isn't the only thing going on here. It is also about the right of the Donestk Republic to self-determination, the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government and its replacement with one that is unrepresentative and even openly hostile to the east of the country, the role of the West in fostering the Maidan Revolution, etc.
rory_20_uk
08-29-2014, 09:34
Almost every uprising has a point of view that could support "their" side.
In the UK, we get led by those who break their election promises, were voted for by less than 50% of the populace etc. Police commisioners were elected by a tiny minority of people.
Scotland / Wales / Northern Ireland / Scotland have probably said exactly the same thing about the government at Westminster (as has the North of England who generally also didn't vote for the incumbents).
The only thing we are missing is the violent overthrow of the government - but then the populace has found out what happens to legal protests against government decisions.
And we are one of the more stable countries in the world!
~:smoking:
Our government stopped nuclear power plants because a significant portion of the people demanded it.
People in eastern Ukraine started out by demonstrating against the new course of the government after the Maidan coup because they were worried that Ukraine would cut all ties with Russia, which would seriously hurt their industry. The new government didn't do much to address that until some people declared their cities or provinces independent. Maybe the problem is that the two sides are so radically different and do not care a whole lot what the other side thinks. And now one side felt cheated because the president they elected was thrown out violently and encouraged because of what Russia did in Crimea while the new government did nothing but say they were overreacting and dismiss their concerns.
If we elected a new chancellor who would promise to ban all trade and travel with Turkey and Poland we'd also get quite some uproar most likely. Especially if Erdogan would then declare that his army was ready to help all Turks in Germany. And I could absolutely see Turks coming here to help their "brothers" fight even without orders from their army.
Just like we would annex Mallorca if Spain banned it for German tourists or switched to an anti-german government.
It is also about the right of the Donestk Republic to self-determination
You might as well respect the right of self-determination for bank robbers within the bank they are robbing. Roaming around a place with guns does not mean that you own it.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-29-2014, 13:56
You might as well respect the right of self-determination for bank robbers within the bank they are robbing. Roaming around a place with guns does not mean that you own it.
Mao would disagree.
rory_20_uk
08-29-2014, 14:21
The winners always are the ones writing the history books that get read the most - men with guns was how the West was won, right? And what a noble and heroic undertaking that was.
Those with guns only pay attention to the threat that others will have bigger guns and are serious about using them.
Wouldn't it be a shame if a convoy of military APCs / tanks which aren't apparently there were hit from the air by a plane / planes which also wern't there? Or even drones can cause misery from a large distance.
~:smoking:
Gilrandir
08-29-2014, 16:43
The problem with that line of thinking is that Russia's aggression isn't the only thing going on here. It is also about the right of the Donestk Republic to self-determination, the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government and its replacement with one that is unrepresentative and even openly hostile to the east of the country, the role of the West in fostering the Maidan Revolution, etc.
1. I'm getting tired of reiterating this one: the full title is SELF-DETERMINATION OF NATIONS. If we admit the existence of Donetsk (or Luhansk) nation, we must admit the existence of Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhya, Odesa and other "nations" within Ukraine which is obviously ridiculous.
2. The previous government was as much unrepresentative including representatives of only one oblast - Donetsk. Yet no one had seemed disturbed about it for four years. Meanwhile the current minister of the interior represents the east - he is from Kharkiv.
3. I would dearly like to see proofs of current Ukrainian government hinting or saying openly something which can be evaluated as "hostile" to any part of the country (including the East).
The new government didn't do much to address that until some people declared their cities or provinces independent.
And now one side felt cheated because the president they elected was thrown out violently and encouraged because of what Russia did in Crimea while the new government did nothing but say they were overreacting and dismiss their concerns.
1. So you admit that Yanukovych was elected not by all Ukrainians but only by the East?
2. Somehow the government managed to persuade other Russian-speaking regions that they were overreacting and they accepted it and stopped overreacting. Which of their concerns were justified? Which regions are now better off - those that saw the sensibility of the government's reasoning with them or those that didn't? I'm sure Donetsk and Luhansk regions would follow suit but for the activity of local oligarchs and Russia.
If we elected a new chancellor who would promise to ban all trade and travel with Turkey and Poland we'd also get quite some uproar most likely. Especially if Erdogan would then declare that his army was ready to help all Turks in Germany. And I could absolutely see Turks coming here to help their "brothers" fight even without orders from their army.
Just like we would annex Mallorca if Spain banned it for German tourists or switched to an anti-german government.
I would like to hear facts of the anti-Russian rhetorics of the new Ukrainian government, of its promising to stop all trade and travel with Russia, still more of banning Russian tourists from anywhere in Ukraine including Crimea. I mean facts dating back as early as February and March, before Russia started being aggressively involved.
You accused me of propaganda-mongering, but now we are on the same footing, I guess.
Seamus Fermanagh
08-29-2014, 22:50
Banning Russians from traveling to Crimea might be...impractical.
Being honest, having the separatists disarmed, the Russians kicked away, then holding a referendum for the area, akin to the Scotland one and its debates, would be the right way to go about it.
Russia is clearly screwing around with the political process and destabilizing the country.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-29-2014, 23:28
The problem with that line of thinking is that Russia's aggression isn't the only thing going on here. It is also about the right of the Donestk Republic to self-determination, the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government and its replacement with one that is unrepresentative and even openly hostile to the east of the country, the role of the West in fostering the Maidan Revolution, etc.
For one thing, Maidan was not a "revolution" it was a political crisis which the gvernment completely failed to handle - and had Yanakovich not fled the country he'd probably still be president (although on his way out). Had he just left the protesters there and ignored them, he could have kept his job.
But lets go back even further to the anti-EU deal that started this. That's the thing that started it, really, Russia wanted Ukraine to NOT sign a deal with the EU - the EU would not (then) have tried to seperate Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine faces East and West - the EU saw the country as a bridge to Russia, not a piece to be carved off.
Then recall that within days of the Ukrainian president having fled the capital Russia had invaded Ukraine, and even after failing to provoke the Ukrainian armed forces they annexed the region.
By the time the fighting broke out in Eastern Ukraine Russia had already invaded and annexed territory. From the beginning the rebels displayed Russian flags and symbols, then they held cod Referendums and declared themselvees independent and asked to join Russia (a request not yet specifically rejected irrc).
If Ukraine now seems somewhat heavy handed in response, and I don't agree with using Grad Rockets in Urban areas, then you have to remember that they've faced invasion, annexation and foreign backed insurrection within about six months.
Got back through the news reports and you can SEE the escalation at each point - you can also see that the trigger for the uprising was the annexation of Crimea, not anything Ukraine did.
Our government stopped nuclear power plants because a significant portion of the people demanded it.
People in eastern Ukraine started out by demonstrating against the new course of the government after the Maidan coup because they were worried that Ukraine would cut all ties with Russia, which would seriously hurt their industry. The new government didn't do much to address that until some people declared their cities or provinces independent. Maybe the problem is that the two sides are so radically different and do not care a whole lot what the other side thinks. And now one side felt cheated because the president they elected was thrown out violently and encouraged because of what Russia did in Crimea while the new government did nothing but say they were overreacting and dismiss their concerns.
They went from street demonstrations to armed insurrection while the rest of the country was PLANNING AN ELECTION.
Or have you forgotten that?
It's also worth nothing that, whilst there were demonstrations elsewhere, only these two regions on the Russian border entered open revolt and demanded independence so they could join Russia (the stated aim of the rebels from the beginning.
1. I'm getting tired of reiterating this one: the full title is SELF-DETERMINATION OF NATIONS. If we admit the existence of Donetsk (or Luhansk) nation, we must admit the existence of Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhya, Odesa and other "nations" within Ukraine which is obviously ridiculous.
2. The previous government was as much unrepresentative including representatives of only one oblast - Donetsk. Yet no one had seemed disturbed about it for four years. Meanwhile the current minister of the interior represents the east - he is from Kharkiv.
I would make the point that, without the armed insurrection, the West would be pushing Kiev to grant the regions more say over their own affairs - we do it here, and Scotland (which is probably akin to a Ukranina Oblast) is being allowed a referendum on independence in a couple of weeks.
We don't restrict self determination only to "nations" because that allows larger groups (like the Russians) to declare smaller groups (like Ukrainians) the same as Russians by fiat and then deny them the right to self determination.
So, if Ukraine was at peace, then I would say Donetsk Oblast has the right to a referendum of independence - but Ukraine is not at peace, it has been invaded by Russia,
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.