Ukraine-in-a-thread

[Sarmatian]

I did not liken anyone to anyone. I tried to explain the effect Russian TV tries to create in the unwary minds of its watchers. Having access to both Ukrainian and Russian TV I can hear both sides of the story while Russian public can not.


And you think Russians are brainwashed into watching only one TV station which only serves them pre-approved news? They don't have access to other news and other channels? They don't get other Ukrainian or Russian channels in Crimea? International channels? Cable or satellite TV? Internet? Google News doesn't work in Crimea or in Russia?

[Fisherking]

And you think Russians are brainwashed into watching only one TV station which only serves them pre-approved news? They don't have access to other news and other channels? They don't get other Ukrainian or Russian channels in Crimea? International channels? Cable or satellite TV? Internet? Google News doesn't work in Crimea or in Russia?


Group physiology and dominant public opinions. People want to fit in with their neighbors.

It is rather like political opinions here. Some will only look at the left, some only at the right. Few look at both and fewer still try to do it objectively. People naturally like to here what they like to believe.

[Kadagar_AV]

Voice/IP Connection has been cut between Crimea and Ukraine...

Russian tanks and troops reported in the area.

Airport definitely and parliament building maybe taken over (unclear sources?).




It sure starts to LOOK like an invasion...

[Fragony]

Uncomfirmed, http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-28/officers-76th-russian-shock-troops-division-operating-ukraine

[Seamus Fermanagh]

None of the major news services are confirming that the gunmen are Russian soldiers. They do, however, appear to have highly uniform equipment, unlike the folks who stormed into the regional parliament building.

[Gilrandir]

And you think Russians are brainwashed into watching only one TV station which only serves them pre-approved news? They don't have access to other news and other channels? They don't get other Ukrainian or Russian channels in Crimea? International channels? Cable or satellite TV? Internet? Google News doesn't work in Crimea or in Russia?
Majority of people in Russia (as well as in Ukraine) are too poor to afford satellite TV. Broadcast cable channels are chosen and controlled by the authorities. If any channel displeases them they may switch it off without any explanation. Cable TV operators are prone to change the broadcasing roster the way they like again without any explanation or apologies. At least this is the way in Ukraine and I don't think it is any better with the more controlled media space in Russia.
As for Internet, Ukrainian and Russsian rural communities are sparsely provided with it. Even if they are internet users are predominantly young people but Russsia (as well as Ukraine) is an ageing nation, especially in the countryside which able-bodied young people escape in droves. There are entire villages populated by pensioners with no internet aspiration.
The life of most people is hard work from early morning till late in the evening. So if they get any news it is from the traditional 9 p.m. news program. And you understand how carefully prepared it is. And generally speaking, many people in Russia like their president and trust their TV.
As for access to Ukrainian TV in the Crimea, I have told you the sentiment of people over there.They watch and trust Russian TV more.

[Sarmatian]

Majority of people in Russia (as well as in Ukraine) are too poor to afford satellite TV. Broadcast cable channels are chosen and controlled by the authorities. If any channel displeases them they may switch it off without any explanation. Cable TV operators are prone to change the broadcasing roster the way they like again without any explanation or apologies. At least this is the way in Ukraine and I don't think it is any better with the more controlled media space in Russia.
As for Internet, Ukrainian and Russsian rural communities are sparsely provided with it. Even if they are internet users are predominantly young people but Russsia (as well as Ukraine) is an ageing nation, especially in the countryside which able-bodied young people escape in droves. There are entire villages populated by pensioners with no internet aspiration.
The life of most people is hard work from early morning till late in the evening. So if they get any news it is from the traditional 9 p.m. news program. And you understand how carefully prepared it is. And generally speaking, many people in Russia like their president and trust their TV.
As for access to Ukrainian TV in the Crimea, I have told you the sentiment of people over there.They watch and trust Russian TV more.

Lots of bollox, but it doesn't matter. You didn't offer a single good reason why would Russians be worse informed than Ukrainians. "They trust their TV", is not a good reason. Group mentality, what Fisherking mentioned, applies just as equally to Ukrainians and most other nations in the world. That is somewhat understandable as we tend to notice the divisions and difference of opinion within our own nation, while we generally consider other nations as monolithic blocks. You mention how Russian like to have Tsar figure, who tells them what to do. Why, then, would Russians tend to topple so many of their governments, from the middle ages to this day? Number of rebellions and revolutions are certainly high, more than most nations in the world. As for how many people in Russia like and trust their president, a research conducted a month or two ago shows that more than half of Russians wouldn't like to see Putin as their president again.

Also, don't you think that their fear is at least partly justified, considering the amount of neo-nazi and far right groups were involved in the revolution? Svoboda party is a neo-nazi party in disguise. Founded in 1990's under the name of Social-National party of Ukraine, with this as their logo
12363
whose leader doesn't shy away from this kind of gestures
12364
whose leader thinks that Ukraine must be rid of the influence of "Jews from Moscow", whose members found "Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center", whose members call the Holocaust "a period of light in History".

Just a little justified, maybe, when 10-15 thousand of protesters in January were honouring Stepan Bandera, whom Tyahnybok glorifies because he fought ""Russians, Germans, Jewry and other crap"? A little more justified, perhaps, when taking into account Svoboda's party platform which contains a part in which only ethnic Ukrainians are allowed to hold civic jobs? How many important positions in Kiev Svoboda now holds?

That is without mentioning other smaller far right and neo nazi organizations involved.

My opinion, as someone whose been a part of something similar, here in my own country? You're gonna pay for that, just like we paid and are still paying because democratic opposition politicians employed thugs like that in 2000. It's gonna take a lot of time and effort to get rid of that vermin.

So, yes, the Russians in the Crimea brainwashed by Putin are the biggest problem.

[Brenus]

Don't forget the Ukrainian Joan of Arc...

[Fragony]

Can we please agree on that we have absolutily no understanding of what is going on at the moment on just about every level? International politics, game of chess.

Never play chess with Russians, rule #1

[HoreTore]

Lots of bollox, but it doesn't matter. You didn't offer a single good reason why would Russians be worse informed than Ukrainians. "They trust their TV", is not a good reason. Group mentality, what Fisherking mentioned, applies just as equally to Ukrainians and most other nations in the world. That is somewhat understandable as we tend to notice the divisions and difference of opinion within our own nation, while we generally consider other nations as monolithic blocks. You mention how Russian like to have Tsar figure, who tells them what to do. Why, then, would Russians tend to topple so many of their governments, from the middle ages to this day? Number of rebellions and revolutions are certainly high, more than most nations in the world. As for how many people in Russia like and trust their president, a research conducted a month or two ago shows that more than half of Russians wouldn't like to see Putin as their president again.

Also, don't you think that their fear is at least partly justified, considering the amount of neo-nazi and far right groups were involved in the revolution? Svoboda party is a neo-nazi party in disguise. Founded in 1990's under the name of Social-National party of Ukraine, with this as their logo
12363
whose leader doesn't shy away from this kind of gestures
12364
whose leader thinks that Ukraine must be rid of the influence of "Jews from Moscow", whose members found "Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center", whose members call the Holocaust "a period of light in History".

Just a little justified, maybe, when 10-15 thousand of protesters in January were honouring Stepan Bandera, whom Tyahnybok glorifies because he fought ""Russians, Germans, Jewry and other crap"? A little more justified, perhaps, when taking into account Svoboda's party platform which contains a part in which only ethnic Ukrainians are allowed to hold civic jobs? How many important positions in Kiev Svoboda now holds?

That is without mentioning other smaller far right and neo nazi organizations involved.

My opinion, as someone whose been a part of something similar, here in my own country? You're gonna pay for that, just like we paid and are still paying because democratic opposition politicians employed thugs like that in 2000. It's gonna take a lot of time and effort to get rid of that vermin.

So, yes, the Russians in the Crimea brainwashed by Putin are the biggest problem.

How large is the fascist presence in the pro-EU/western/anti-russian/anti-yanu/whateverwecallthemnow faction, Sarmatian?




As for Russian honesty in contested areas, I refer you to Chechnya's election results showing a 99,5% support for Putin.

[Sarmatian]

How large is the fascist presence in the pro-EU/western/anti-russian/anti-yanu/whateverwecallthemnow faction, Sarmatian?

5 ministries in the new government, if I'm not mistaken. It's hard to come by that information. Western press tend to ignore Svoboda and focus on Klitshcko and Yatsenuk. In fact, if someone finds a full list of new ministers and their party affiliation, please share, I'd like to see it.


As for Russian honesty in contested areas, I refer you to Chechnya's election results showing a 99,5% support for Putin.

Russia is brutal just as West is when its interests are at stake, I don't contest that. I just don't subscribe to the Tolkinesque appraisal of the situation.

[Gilrandir]

Lots of bollox, but it doesn't matter. You didn't offer a single good reason why would Russians be worse informed than Ukrainians. "They trust their TV", is not a good reason. Group mentality, what Fisherking mentioned, applies just as equally to Ukrainians and most other nations in the world. That is somewhat understandable as we tend to notice the divisions and difference of opinion within our own nation, while we generally consider other nations as monolithic blocks. You mention how Russian like to have Tsar figure, who tells them what to do. Why, then, would Russians tend to topple so many of their governments, from the middle ages to this day? Number of rebellions and revolutions are certainly high, more than most nations in the world. As for how many people in Russia like and trust their president, a research conducted a month or two ago shows that more than half of Russians wouldn't like to see Putin as their president again.

Also, don't you think that their fear is at least partly justified, considering the amount of neo-nazi and far right groups were involved in the revolution? Svoboda party is a neo-nazi party in disguise. Founded in 1990's under the name of Social-National party of Ukraine, with this as their logo
12363
whose leader doesn't shy away from this kind of gestures
12364
whose leader thinks that Ukraine must be rid of the influence of "Jews from Moscow", whose members found "Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center", whose members call the Holocaust "a period of light in History".

Just a little justified, maybe, when 10-15 thousand of protesters in January were honouring Stepan Bandera, whom Tyahnybok glorifies because he fought ""Russians, Germans, Jewry and other crap"? A little more justified, perhaps, when taking into account Svoboda's party platform which contains a part in which only ethnic Ukrainians are allowed to hold civic jobs? How many important positions in Kiev Svoboda now holds?

That is without mentioning other smaller far right and neo nazi organizations involved.

My opinion, as someone whose been a part of something similar, here in my own country? You're gonna pay for that, just like we paid and are still paying because democratic opposition politicians employed thugs like that in 2000. It's gonna take a lot of time and effort to get rid of that vermin.

So, yes, the Russians in the Crimea brainwashed by Putin are the biggest problem.
I don't like Tyagnybok more than you do. I am aware of the character of the party he heads. But he played his part in toppling Yanukovych who evokes even greater aversion in many minds and hearts. At least Tyagnybok is honest in what he professes. Yanukovych is constantly lying how kind and democratic he is. Do you know that Yanukovych has been in prison twice during Soviet times for street robbery and was charged with rape (acquitted for the lack of evidence)? So calling Tyagnybok a thug we might as well apply that word to Yanukovych.
And I want to introduce to you some necessary ptotagonists of the latest events in Ukraine - titushki (Sg. titushka). It is a generalized last name of one of such guys. He was the first to become personally known to public at large as he assaulted journalists who tried to film a procession of his likes.
Those titushki are young men of 18-25 associated with some martial arts sport clubs and also some with criminal past (of even present). They were hired by the authorities to do the dirty job that the police couldn't in view of its ostensibly legal status. Titushki were usually armed with baseball bats, iron rods and chains and their task was to bully, scare and bash protesters and civil citzens symathizing with them. Very ofen they were brought by buses from other cities, fed, provided with light drugs and guarded by the police. The police just watched them do their job doing nothing to prevent it. Moreover, if such titushki were caught and brought to the police department they were released very soon. I saw a video in which some people took a knife from a titushka and the police officer returned the weapon to him. I heard of similar phenomenon in Latin America in 1970s - death squadrons they were called.
Again, I don't want to justify Tyagnybok and his ardent adherents, but I want you (and others) to see both sides of the story.
As for Bandera, he is one more controversial figure (but very popular in Western Ukraine). Personally he didn't participate in atrocities connected with his name as he spent most of his adulthood in Polish prison and later in a Nazi concentration camp. But he was an ideologist of the movement, so he is thought to be responsible for what was going on.
The main thing he is charged with by his adversaries is being a collaborationist. Plus the movement he founded (UPA - Ukrainian Insurgent Army) was involved in massacres of Poles and "shooting in the back" of Soviet soldiers who liberated Ukraine from fascists. All of them are true.
But again, let us see both sides of the story. In 1939, when the Soviet Union occupied Western Ukraine people welcomed the Soviet troops who were thought to be delivering them from Polish oppression. In less then two years they welcomed the Germans as heartily. The Soviet regime by its obnoxious behavior (to put it mildly) had managed to "estrange" the citizens so much that the Nazis were hailed as deliverers. At this time Bandera was among those hoping for creation of an independent Ukrainian state. So much for collaborationism. But later when he saw that the Germans never meant to grant statehood to Ukraine UPA turned its weapons against them and Bandera was put to the concentration camp where he spent the rest of the war. When the Soviet troops advanced UPA fought both against them and the Germans. A story of a collaborationist? Perhaps.
But others may be charged with collaboration as well. First of all, the Soviet Union. Probably you know of a joint military parade Germans and Soviets held at Brest after partitioning Poland. There is other evidence: when German bombers "unloaded" above Warsaw they were radio directed from Minsk; when Germans attacked Norway their planes were quartered and flew to the mission from Murmansk region. Many Nazi bosses (the head of Gestapo Muller one of them) studied in Soviet police academies. And the notoriuos Molotov-Ribbentrop pact?
Western democracies behaved no better: they agreed to Hitler ocuppying parts of Czechoslovakia (and later all of it), turned a blind eye on Anschluss of Austria and so on and so forth.
The bottomline: at the beginning of WWII EVERYONE was a collaborationist. If we admit it, it would be easier to finally make peace. At least in Ukraine where history is revisited very often, as in other countries (e.g. Spain with its civil war) people learned not to refer to the past to emphasize the differences but to see the common present and goals they are to reach in future.

[HoreTore]

when Germans attacked Norway their planes were quartered and flew to the mission from Murmansk region.

When?

Source?

[Gilrandir]

When?

Source?
I don't remember the name of a documentary I saw, I just know it was a British one. As for when, I guess in 1940 but I'm not sure.

[HoreTore]

I don't remember the name of a documentary I saw, I just know it was a British one. As for when, I guess in 1940 but I'm not sure.

The invasion of Norway consisted of two phases: the initial attack in April and the "last stand" around Narvik. The problem with the claim of German planes stationed in Murmansk, is that for the first part they only bombed the south. When they eventually bombed the north, they had captured* the airbase Værnes outside Trondheim.

Flying planes from Murmansk just doesn't make any sense.

*it was in German hands before any German had even set foot in Norway...

[Gilrandir]

The invasion of Norway consisted of two phases: the initial attack in April and the "last stand" around Narvik. The problem with the claim of German planes stationed in Murmansk, is that for the first part they only bombed the south. When they eventually bombed the north, they had captured* the airbase Værnes outside Trondheim.

Flying planes from Murmansk just doesn't make any sense.

*it was in German hands before any German had even set foot in Norway...
I am as puzzled as you are. Probably, the planes didn't bomb, they had other purpose. But I report it as I heard.

[HoreTore]

I am as puzzled as you are. Probably, the planes didn't bomb, they had other purpose. But I report it as I heard.

Still doesn't make any sense. I would suggest the claim is false.

[Sarmatian]

I don't remember the name of a documentary I saw, I just know it was a British one. As for when, I guess in 1940 but I'm not sure.

Yeah, that's bollox. From Finland, perhaps, but from Soviet Union, no chance.


Too long to quote.

I don't disagree with you about Yanukovich. Hang him by his private parts. Hang Tyahnybok right next to him, give Timoshenko a nice, 30+ years, all expenses paid vacation in a spa and send Klitschko back to Germany with a thank you note.

Then start the real cleaning, placing tycoons in jail and their political lackeys with them.

Legalize the reality that Ukraine is bilingual and make Russian the second official language in the country and guarantee rights of the ethnic Russians.

Declare military neutrality and preferably write it down in the constitution. Offer them 20 years longer lease of naval bases in Crimea. Now Russia has no cause to intervene (and few reasons to).

Refuse to sign a definitive deal, either with Russia or EU. Postpone in until the country is stabilized. Instead go for bilateral agreements, emphasizing importance of both Russia and EU as a trading partner.

In a decade or two, the situation might be vastly different.

Unfortunately, that scenario is highly unlikely. What's probably gonna happen, the harsh reality, is that your politicians are gonna go for EU exclusively, possibly even pushing for NATO membership (unlikely), which is gonna piss of Russia, and you won't get in NATO anyway, simply because Germany and most European NATO members aren't prepared to go to war with Russia over Ukraine, simple as that. You have 50/50 chance to keep Crimea. You're gonna get a few billions from EU, but soon the novelty will have worn off and some other crisis in the world will demand their attention. You won't deal with corruption adequately, which will stifle most foreign investments. Come next winter, or the one after, you will again be praying that someone in Russia doesn't decide you should pay market price for gas instead of subsidized price so you don't freeze.

I really wish you all the best, but with these "changes", I don't believe you'll get anywhere.

[Sarmatian]

Putin has asked permission from the upper house to deploy troops in Ukraine. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26400035.

This is very, very, very bad.

[gaelic cowboy]

well now were in a pickle lads, will we see washington and london honour there treaty obligation to protect Ukraines integrity.


1914 anyone (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances)

[Sarmatian]

It's not officially an invasion, which is good enough fine print for west not to intervene. It's deployment of troops "in connection with the extraordinary situation in Ukraine and the threat to the lives of Russian citizens". Ukrainian army won't resist, according to the acting president.

The rest of the statement actually goes

"In connection with the extraordinary situation in Ukraine, the threat to the lives of citizens of the Russian Federation, our compatriots, and the personnel of the armed forces of the Russian Federation...I submit a proposal on using the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine until the normalization of the socio-political situation in the that country,"

[gaelic cowboy]

Russian parliament approves troop deployment in Ukraine I dunno bout you but it sounds like an invasion to me (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26400035)


There will have to be consequences for Russia and Putin over this or it could potentially cause havoc among EU and Nato eastern members.


Lets remember USA will have to be looking at this with one eye on larger picture vis a vis honouring defense treaties in East Asia.

Cutting Ukraine loose will not play well in Eastern Europe this has potential to cause a massive row in Nato.

[Fisherking]

The United States may have the most powerful executive branch of all times but the guy sitting behind the desk is indecisive.

If he can’t fix it with drones and covert ops, it just ain’t go’na happen. Look forward to a bunch of hot air coming out of Washington.

He may indeed get the US into some war but I don’t think this is it, not yet anyway.

[Sarmatian]

Yeah, that's the exact same link I shared. It's still not approved but I fear it is just a formality

[gaelic cowboy]

The United States may have the most powerful executive branch of all times but the guy sitting behind the desk is indecisive.

If he can’t fix it with drones and covert ops, it just ain’t go’na happen. Look forward to a bunch of hot air coming out of Washington.

He may indeed get the US into some war but I don’t think this is it, not yet anyway.

I think you will find even the most belicose US President would do sweet :daisy: all, the problem is the political fallout later.


Even Reagan or Bush would not do anything millitarily and US didnt do anything in 50s for Eastern Europe.

Blaming Obama for not having the guts to nuke Moscow over this is a bit silly, however this will now defacto move the US Russia relations into a cypto cold war.

[gaelic cowboy]

Yeah, that's the exact same link I shared.

I know but where you it one way I read it the other, I felt the banner headline needed to be prominent

[Crazed Rabbit]

So Obama said there would be costs, and Putin freaking invades Ukraine like it's 1956.

What do we think is Obama's response? Europe's? What would work to deter Russia?

Is Putin going to try to control all of Ukraine or just the Crimea?

CR

[gaelic cowboy]

So Obama said there would be costs, and Putin freaking invades Ukraine like it's 1956.

What do we think is Obama's response? Europe's? What would work to deter Russia?

Is Putin going to try to control all of Ukraine or just the Crimea?

CR

I dont see that the "WEST" has any chips worth cashing really

But the fiction of resets of relations blah blah is totally gone now.



hmm apparently according to BBC 5 O'Clock news just now Putin saying he hasnt decided to act on the approval of troop deployment.

The Armed men who have effectively seized Crimea are not claiming to be "Russian" so Putin has a way to pull back if he wants.

I suppose there hoping the Ukrainians attack these groups to give the military fictions a legal footing.

[Sarmatian]

I suppose there hoping the Ukrainians attack these groups to give the military fictions a legal footing.

Are you kidding or you are really hoping that happens?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Spelling failed him.

[gaelic cowboy]

Are you kidding or you are really hoping that happens?


What are you on about why would I hope for that

As far I can see the men seizing key places in Ukraine are not claimed to be russian yet.

But its a serious provocation and IF elements in the ukrainian millitary or even the public were to clash with them who knows where this leads.


Lets be realistic here Russia sent armed men into Ukraine without identification on there uniforms, why would they do this if not to seriously increase the heat in this situation. The other reading is that they did so in an effort to spin the invasion out long enough to create a pretext for actual invasion due to blah blah crisis situation etc etc.

This is really an attempt to remind the Ukraine to steer clear of the EU and NATO







hmm Im seeing some reports now that they are being claimed as Russian troops by the crimean premier.

That certainly ups the ante in terms of how Ukraine itself responds to this.

[Sarmatian]

"Russian", as in, of Russian nationality, or "Russian", as in, a part of Russian armed forces?

[gaelic cowboy]

"Russian", as in, of Russian nationality, or "Russian", as in, a part of Russian armed forces?


Obviously I'm talking about russian forces, were all well aware these troops are from russia.

[Sarmatian]

Obviously I'm talking about russian forces, were all well aware these troops are from russia.

Link to the news, I can't find it.

[Brenus]

C’mon. Let’s implements a Kosovo’ solution:
1- Pledge to recognise International Borders and territory of the Sovereign Ukraine on Crimea.
2- Put Crimea under UN mandate
3- Organise or cover-up the ethnic cleansing of the now minority in the region
4- Organise a local referendum
5- Hire Ahtisaari as negotiator (or equivalent)
6- Inform UN that negotiations are not going well thanks to the interference of Ukraine.
7- The last workable solution to break the deadlock is to give independence to Crimea. However, Crimea will not be allowed to join Russia.
8- Give Nobel Price to Negotiator.
9- UN troops (UNCPF), made by Russia, are maintaining peace.
10- Tell Ukraine if they want to be part of EU just to shut-up, (or if they want the money to pay the gaz to Russia). And they want gaz in winter, better to be nice to Russia as well.
11- End.

[gaelic cowboy]

Link to the news, I can't find it.

well some of it was from the live broadcast on the bbc that i was watching at 5.



Dozens injured in clashes in Ukraine city of Kharkiv (http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0301/507567-president-obama-warns-russia-over-ukraine/)

[Sarmatian]

Well, according to Kremlin, the decision to deploy troops to Ukraine has not been made yet and those in Crimea are there under the base lease agreement. Putin's just got a blank check to order the move in if he deems it necessary.

This situation needs to de-escalate, and fast.

[gaelic cowboy]

Well, according to Kremlin, the decision to deploy troops to Ukraine has not been made yet and those in Crimea are there under the base lease agreement. Putin's just got a blank check to order the move in if he deems it necessary.

This situation needs to de-escalate, and fast.

Yes because the kremlin wants to be able to claim it hasnt invaded crimea, but lets be realistic this is an invasion by Russia.

[Beskar]

Yes because the kremlin wants to be able to claim it hasnt invaded crimea, but lets be realistic this is an invasion by Russia.

This is pretty much the fact, the real question is "What happens now?"

If Ukraine begs Nato or any of the Eastern-bloc to jump in, it could result in a proxy-war between the 'East and West'.

[Sarmatian]

Yes because the kremlin wants to be able to claim it hasnt invaded crimea, but lets be realistic this is an invasion by Russia.

If that's the standard, invasion has happened days and probably months/years ago) when a Russian soldier stepped over a white line outside his base. It also means there are dozens of invasions every year around the world.

The important thing is that 150,000 Russian soldiers are still on their side of the border and the decision to have them cross the border hasn't been made yet.

I'm hopping this is a chess move by Putin, because if it isn't, there's little anyone can do to stop it.

[gaelic cowboy]

ah come on now Sarmatian there are armed groups all over crimea, they have seizing important buildings the airport and there manning roadblocks. There not some ragtagbunch who pulled on a pair of combat trouser and grabbed a rusty shotgun, there clearly russian troops.

Russia has invaded Crimea but there just keeping stum for now, the kremlin is creating facts on the ground while winking a the international community.

[Sarmatian]

ah come on now Sarmatian there are armed groups all over crimea, they have seizing important buildings the airport and there manning roadblocks. There not some ragtagbunch who pulled on a pair of combat trouser and grabbed a rusty shotgun, there clearly russian troops.

Russia has invaded Crimea but there just keeping stum for now, the kremlin is creating facts on the ground while winking a the international community.

I'm not arguing that these groups are not at least directed from Moscow. I'm pointing out the fact that there's still chance Ukraine comes out of this with its territorial integrity intact.

[gaelic cowboy]

I'm not arguing that these groups are not at least directed from Moscow. I'm pointing out the fact that there's still chance Ukraine comes out of this with its territorial integrity intact.

I wouldnt disagree with this assement because clearly russia want to make sure that the Ukraine does not drift to the EU or Nato camp.

It doesnt matter if it was a real possibility or not clearly the kremlin believed it could happen.

[HopAlongBunny]

Hope you're right.
Russia is likely to have an increased presence in the Ukraine.
If something nasty and violent is averted, Russia is likely to offer military "assistance" just to be helpful ... like someone else who's name escapes me atm.

[HoreTore]

It also means there are dozens of invasions every year around the world.

There actually are several invasions a year. And yes, a soldier in uniform/with military identification crossing the border uninvited is an invasion.

I was stationed in the western part of the north(Bardufoss, outside Tromsø) when I was in the army. We had a shooting exercise in the eastern part of the north, and so had to transport quite a lot of stuff there as the base we were going to was empty. So, we had to drive a truck convoy there. Now, if you look at the map, you will see that the Norwegian border with Sweden and Finland isn't a straight line, it's a bend going into Norway. This means you can't drive straight ahead while staying in Norway, you have to go north and then south to avoid crossing the border. Long story short, the truckers got lost and found themselves in Finland.

That was an invasion.

Luckily, noone saw them, which added some relief to the captains anger. Apparently, he had been involved in a similar incident before, with a truck ending up in Sweden. They were seen that time, and that story ended with the Norwegian foreign minister issuing an official apology to the Swedish foreign minister for the unannounced invasion of Sweden...

[HoreTore]

I'm not arguing that these groups are not at least directed from Moscow. I'm pointing out the fact that there's still chance Ukraine comes out of this with its territorial integrity intact.

Georgia came out with their territory intact as well.

[Sarmatian]

Georgia came out with their territory intact as well.


Georgia fired on and shelled Russian soldiers. Important distinction.

Not giving Russia a pretext is the best thing Kiev can do at the moment. UDAR and Svoboda calling for a nationwide mobilization, is not doing that.

[gaelic cowboy]

Georgia fired on and shelled Russian soldiers. Important distinction.

Not giving Russia a pretext is the best thing Kiev can do at the moment. UDAR and Svoboda calling for a nationwide mobilization, is not doing that.

At this stage it harldy matters Sarmatian.

[HoreTore]

Georgia fired on and shelled Russian soldiers. Important distinction.

Are you of the opinion that Russia did not want that conflict...?

[Sarmatian]

At this stage it harldy matters Sarmatian.

I believe it does, or maybe I just hope it does. It may come out funny, but I'm really rooting for Ukraine in this one.

Let's face, there's no way Ukraine can pull of a nationwide mobilization. What little it can scrap, it wouldn't be able to properly arm them. Then they have to move through entire pro-Russian eastern Ukraine to get to Crimea and Russia. They will be stopped by road blocks and protesters. What are they gonna do? Shoot at other Ukrainians? They can't muster an effective force that will be more than a speed bump. NATO European members aren't ready to go to war with Russia over Ukraine and Americans are to far away to do something effectively.

There's nothing to stop Putin if he decides to move in, so, in my opinion, doing nothing to encourage that is the best strategy. Maybe they can pull through
with just some Russian troops stationed as peacekeepers.


Are you of the opinion that Russia did not want that conflict...?

The staple of Russian foreign policy for the last decade or two has been: NO NEW NATO MEMBERS ON OUR BORDERS. WE'RE READY TO GO TO WAR OVER THIS!

Remove the incentive. That's the only option left to Ukraine now, as I see it.

[gaelic cowboy]

Better off just telling em to take Crimea and :daisy: off back to Moscow.

From a strategic point they wont want to annex the ground as every ethnic Russian "liberated" is one less voting in Ukrainian elections.

Russia needs control of Ukraine which means they need lots of Russians in it voting in elections.

Annexation of the east and crimea means west ukraine is free to join the eu/nato camp, i cant imagine the kremlin wants that.


So we can expect the old herring of "Russian Peacekeepers" for sure.

[Sarmatian]

Better off just telling em to take Crimea and :daisy: off back to Moscow.

From a strategic point they wont want to annex the ground as every ethnic Russian "liberated" is one less voting in Ukrainian elections.

Russia needs control of Ukraine which means they need lots of Russians in it voting in elections.

Annexation of the east and crimea means west ukraine is free to join the eu/nato camp, i cant imagine the kremlin wants that.

That is also my view. Don't forget, quite a lot of Ukrainians vote for pro-Russian candidates. Annexing a part of Ukraine might alienate them, like NATO bombing alienated most (though not all) NATO supporters in Serbia and is a major factor that even now, 15 years after, there isn't a single serious party advocating it.

Putin is smart, calculated and careful, and I don't believe he's not aware of this. That's why I believe he won't move in unless he feels he has absolutely no other choice.

Maybe I'm wrong, though, and the current Russian administration feels that only Crimea and the bases there are important.

[Kadagar_AV]

As you understand, this is a break-away from the Ukraine thread.

To not steer the discussion away from current events I'd like to open up a more theoretical discussion around what "The West" CAN actually do if Putin decides to simply go for grabs.

I believe we all can agree that the worst-case-scenario (at least for Ukraine!) would be for the country to be used as a proxy battleground between the former power blocks. The country is smack bang in the middle of the power blocks, and either block will have a more than easy time sending jets from secure bases.

Both blocks have huge railway and road connections in to the country, meaning they can quickly fill up troops and equipment where needed.

I also believe the navy situation would be chaotic. I'm absolutely no expert here, but from the looks of it it would be hell for either side to control the waters (mainly because both sides easily can run jets over the Black Sea) .

Seriously, COULD we in the west actually do much, short of starting WW3?

1914 anyone?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Assuming we let Russia take Ukraine, or part of it, it's likely that remaining border nations (including a Rump Ukraine) would demand admittance to NATO, and it would be difficult for NATO to argue against that on a basic humanitarian level. At that point Russia starts WWIII if it wants to expand, either with China or the "west"

[Fisherking]

There are a lot of alternatives. Of course this is international diplomacy, so all sides are required to act like 6 year old boy. So there go most of the alternatives.

The wise choice is to send in neutral peace keeping forces. Someone with not interests in the region and ask for the Russians to withdraw.

They very well could paint themselves into a corner and blow things up though. Keep an eye on the propaganda.

[SwordsMaster]

What will happen is what should have happened a long time ago - it will split into East and West Ukraine along language/ethnic lines. There really is no way to govern a country where every national level issue is split 50/50. Ask Belgium. So the Western half can join the EU or something, and the East can join Russia, Georgia, Turkey, or whoever they want.

Neither Europe nor the US will go to war with Russia, and Russia know this. If they didn't over Syria, they won't here. It will take the EU a year to go through all the required committees to send some undertrained troops with proportional, sufficient quotas of minorities, women, and LGBT members proportional to their membership conditions, and amount of money received in the recession, and by then the party will be over. The US is stretched as it is, and Russia is not Afghanistan, so they will sit tight and at most throw some rotten fruit over the fence. Not their fence anyway, so aside from some half baked 'economic sanctions' there won't be much of a response.

The only ones who could sway this in any way are the other former soviet republics who hold some economic power over Russia. If they choose to see the intervention in Ukraine as a potential threat to their own independence. The likes of Kazakhstan, for instance. But they are already making too much money from natural resource exports through Russia and so I doubt they will do much either.

[Fragony]

Not all that much. It's most powerfull weapon,the argument to end all arguments; the godwin, doesn't apply.

[Fisherking]

The thing is that the US military could not fight Russia if they wanted to. Not today, And after the planed cuts, not ever. About then roughly 30% or more will be Special Forces. They are not war fighters. They are for low intensity or support for special missions.

The EU has no organized military and NATO troops would not be welcome.

They will likely not get anything done through the UN.

It could make the US rethink its defense strategy. It could lead to an arms build up, but this time it may be the US that can’t cut it for economic reasons.

I think sanctions against Russia is also a bad idea.

I will just wait to see what bad ideas they all come up with.

[HoreTore]

The wise choice is to send in neutral peace keeping forces.

What on earth would that accomplish?

[Kadagar_AV]

What on earth would that accomplish?

Let me rephrase; What peace would a peace keeping force keep?

Different cultural groups are at it :shrug:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The thing is that the US military could not fight Russia if they wanted to. Not today, And after the planed cuts, not ever. About then roughly 30% or more will be Special Forces. They are not war fighters. They are for low intensity or support for special missions.

The EU has no organized military and NATO troops would not be welcome.

They will likely not get anything done through the UN.

It could make the US rethink its defense strategy. It could lead to an arms build up, but this time it may be the US that can’t cut it for economic reasons.

I think sanctions against Russia is also a bad idea.

I will just wait to see what bad ideas they all come up with.

Russia has a million odd men - of dubious quality - the US has around half that - Europe can probably contribute between 500-250 thousand of variably quality - Britain and France alone can muster 150 thousand men.

NATA can fight Russia - they can't INVADE Russia but I doubt Europe has an appetite for conquest as Germany did, so that's less of an issue.

Of course, previous experience has shown the US to be a poor ally, see - WWI, WWII, Falklands - any democracy in the developing world.

So - the question is - once Germany, France and Britain start moving troops towards Ukraine - will the US back them, or will it cower and inadvertently cause WWIII.

See - here's the thing - Russia WON'T start a shooting war with the US, but it MIGHT start one with Western Europe which the US will join. So have a think about that.

[Montmorency]

1. Russia is in even less of a position to field a European wartime army than the US is.

2. Russia has no incentive to do this as it holds all the cards. If Ukraine were to join NATO tomorrow, it would be playing into them.

[Kadagar_AV]

Russia has a million odd men - of dubious quality - the US has around half that - Europe can probably contribute between 500-250 thousand of variably quality - Britain and France alone can muster 150 thousand men.

NATA can fight Russia - they can't INVADE Russia but I doubt Europe has an appetite for conquest as Germany did, so that's less of an issue.

Of course, previous experience has shown the US to be a poor ally, see - WWI, WWII, Falklands - any democracy in the developing world.

So - the question is - once Germany, France and Britain start moving troops towards Ukraine - will the US back them, or will it cower and inadvertently cause WWIII.

See - here's the thing - Russia WON'T start a shooting war with the US, but it MIGHT start one with Western Europe which the US will join. So have a think about that.

Bolded brilliance.

I am however with SwordsMaster on the ability of EU forces to do anything, anytime soon. I mean, honestly... If we send the troops to war, how would we be able to uphold the gender-equivalence-training-program the army goes through?!

[Major Robert Dump]

Russia has near negative population growth. Let them expand if they want, but I don't think they would be successful even if "the west" doesn't intervene, it would just become a guerilla war which Russia cannot fight

[SwordsMaster]

Russia has near negative population growth. Let them expand if they want, but I don't think they would be successful even if "the west" doesn't intervene, it would just become a guerilla war which Russia cannot fight

They don't have to. Once they prop up their ukrainian puppet they will not fight at all. Europe such as it is is not going to go to war over some post-soviet corrupt 'president' regardless of the current grand-standing.

[Kadagar_AV]

Russia has near negative population growth. Let them expand if they want, but I don't think they would be successful even if "the west" doesn't intervene, it would just become a guerilla war which Russia cannot fight

I disagree.

Russia has shown that they can occupy territories quite successfully.

Also, exactly what WILL do the Ukranians have to fight a serious guerilla war? They were under the Russian umbrella latest in this very generation, so it's not like they are unaware they can live through it, and hopefully seek freedom by other than military means.

Don't get me wrong, of course there will be some resistance if Russia invades. But I doubt it will be more than Russia can handle.

This is not Afghanistan or Vietnam, I sincerely doubt they have the cultural WILL to resist Russia in any type of prolonged conflict.

[PanzerJaeger]

So - the question is - once Germany, France and Britain start moving troops towards Ukraine

You must be joking. The suggestion that these nations would or could use their paper divisions in anger is laughable on its face. Combat effectiveness was sucked out of these respective militaries a long time ago. They should not be viewed as actual combat forces, but instead state welfare. Ascribing any more potential to them than that is dangerous and could result in a Libya-esce "oops, we ran out of missiles" fiasco.

[Arjos]

Why would Putin/Russia invade the countries fueling russian economy by buying its natural gases?
Seems to me they've already won without firing a shot :P

[Gilrandir]

I don't disagree with you about Yanukovich. Hang him by his private parts. Hang Tyahnybok right next to him.

Then start the real cleaning, placing tycoons in jail and their political lackeys with them.

With the violence and tensions we have that is certainly a solution that is very prudent and legal. Both Yanukovych and Tyagnybok have supporters among ordinary people. Tycoons own vast network of entreprises at which millions of people (mainly in Eastern Ukraine) work. Do you want a civil war to acompany Russian invasion?

Declare military neutrality and preferably write it down in the constitution.

It is written in constitution. Now how does it help us at the moment?


Offer them 20 years longer lease of naval bases in Crimea.
They have them according to 2010 agreement until something about 2048. Now how does it help us at the moment? Instead Russia has a foothold to attack from.


Legalize the reality that Ukraine is bilingual and make Russian the second official language in the country and guarantee rights of the ethnic Russians.
Ethnic Russians are not numerous. The vast majority of Russian speakers are ethnic Ukrainians. I won't go into details (if you want me to I can make a special post on linguistic situation, but it is not that simple and maps shown in this thread may be misleading), but officializing Russian as a second language will eventually spell extinction of Ukrainian in many social spheres degrading it to the status of the language of uneducated hicks from the sticks.

[Kadagar_AV]

Why would Putin/Russia invade the countries fueling russian economy by buying its natural gases?
Seems to me they've already won without firing a shot :P

Because the gas can be taxed however they want if they take over, while free countries pay market prices?

EDIT: Thanks for the insight GC, it's a very refreshing perspective on how the War-On-Terrorism have impacted on the armys ability to actually wage war. Swedens army model have mirrored what you describe post 9/11, directing its aim away from international warfare to intranational warfare (abroads).

[HopAlongBunny]

The "West" could do a lot of things.
They will actually do nothing.
Fight a war on Russia's doorstep => not gonna happen
Economic sanctions => unlikely, winter still gets awful cold and Russia has everyone by the gas
Pontificate and let talk radio go bananas => very likely

[Shaka_Khan]

What will happen is what should have happened a long time ago - it will split into East and West Ukraine along language/ethnic lines. There really is no way to govern a country where every national level issue is split 50/50. Ask Belgium. So the Western half can join the EU or something, and the East can join Russia, Georgia, Turkey, or whoever they want.

People shouldn't think about dividing countries without thinking of the consequences. Look what happened with Korea and Vietnam. Although there are different ethnicities in the case with Ukraine, the demographics are mixed geographically. Even in eastern Ukraine where there are large numbers of Russian-speaking people, there are significant numbers of Ukrainian-speakers in that region with the exception of Crimea. Ukraine doesn't want to lose territory and would want to protect Ukrainian citizens in eastern Ukraine.

Also, where would you draw the boundary? Having a third party decide the boundaries have proven to be disastrous in Korea, Vietnam, in African nations and in the Middle East.

Germany is an exception. Germany lost WWII and was in no position to start a civil war expecially when having superpower armies stationed there. After decades of peace, the Germans decided to continue with that peace.

[Sarmatian]

With the violence and tensions we have that is certainly a solution that is very prudent and legal. Both Yanukovych and Tyagnybok have supporters among ordinary people. Tycoons own vast network of entreprises at which millions of people (mainly in Eastern Ukraine) work. Do you want a civil war to acompany Russian invasion?

No, I want Ukraine to actually use its enormous potential and become a well-functioning and rich country. You can't do that with tycoons controlling corrupt politicians. I want Ukraine that has a strong enough economy and can be an important partner to other countries, not beg other countries for money so it doesn't go bankrupt.

There's no need to destroy the companies. It doesn't take a genius to know the way most tycoons acquired most of those companies wasn't exactly legal. Take them legally away from tycoons and sell them. There are many companies in the US, western Europe, Russia, China... that will want to buy them.


It is written in constitution. Now how does it help us at the moment?

I didn't know that. Still, there's danger when some Ukrainian politicians advocate nato membership, secretly or openly.


They have them according to 2010 agreement until something about 2048. Now how does it help us at the moment? Instead Russia has a foothold to attack from.

They don't need a foothold, Ukraine is not in South America. You share a huge border. Foothold or no foothold, if they decide to move, there's nothing Ukraine can do to stop them.


Ethnic Russians are not numerous. The vast majority of Russian speakers are ethnic Ukrainians. I won't go into details (if you want me to I can make a special post on linguistic situation, but it is not that simple and maps shown in this thread may be misleading), but officializing Russian as a second language will eventually spell extinction of Ukrainian in many social spheres degrading it to the status of the language of uneducated hicks from the sticks.

Not if both languages are taught from the first grade of elementary school in all schools in Ukraine.

[Sarmatian]

You must be joking. The suggestion that these nations would or could use their paper divisions in anger is laughable on its face. Combat effectiveness was sucked out of these respective militaries a long time ago. They should not be viewed as actual combat forces, but instead state welfare. Ascribing any more potential to them than that is dangerous and could result in a Libya-esce "oops, we ran out of missiles" fiasco.

Russian army isn't in a much better state, except a small part that is combat ready.

No country in the world is prepared to fight a war of ww2 proportions.

[Brenus]

“It is written in constitution. Now how does it help us at the moment?” Sadly, what is written in Constitution is not what makes the differences. The implementation of it does.
Now, I am against “minorities” (or communities) rights. If you have a “minorities” rights (or a need for them) that is the proof your initial constitution is wrong. No citizens of a Country should be in need of “special measures” to be protected by the law if all citizens are equals in front of the law.
But, in order to make the “minorities” part of a democratic state, first you have to re-assure the “minorities” that they are part of the Country. And when a Nazi bragged about how many Russians, Jews and others he killed, you put him in jail for murder; you don’t offer him a job.
Implementation of universal laws is the key for Citizenship Building, and more your have “special” “minorities” rights, more you are building on sands, especially when the “minority” in your country is a big “majority” on the other side of the border.

NATO will not engage the Russians. They didn’t in Georgia when the Georgian President (once upon a time the Champion of the Free World) started his ethnic Cleansing, thinking he would succeed as the Croatian Tudjman did. And Russia was far weaker than it is now.
NATO armies are now not in shape for a confrontation against a more or less equal enemy. Armed Forces are now stretch so thin that just to launch an offensive needing more than one battalion would take months (can’t be in Afghanistan, fighting the flood and parading at Westminster all the times). And I just imaging German Soldiers sent to the Eastern Front once again, Germany being probably the only Country being able to provide enough foot soldiers for this kind of operation.
Forget about short air campaign, as Russia can retaliate. Even Serbia, completely overpowered, succeeded to attack NATO base in Bosnia, in a sky totally controlled by AWACS.
So what are the options? Strong condemnation of Russia’s move, and err, that is it.

[gaelic cowboy]

Im guessing it would return political relations to extreme suspision this would hurt Russia in the long run.

[Brenus]

“Eh. I say America lets it happen. Let the EU defend its own territorial integrity, preferably with stuff they bought from us.” I would say let USA deal with what they started and pay it with their money. Then we will see how many “revolutions” will start. And US material is not that good any way....

In term of military intervention, the USA certainly doesn’t want to know if the Abrahams are not only good at crushing rusty T55 and militias. In a conflict against Russia, Air Campaign is not an option, as Alaska is not THAT far, and possibly Seattle and other Pacific Towns are in reach, not only to Air Attack, but submarines. So, all former war strategy against enemies unable to retaliate has to be abandoned.
The problem is when you start a war, you can’t decide when and where to stop.
The other problem of course is if USA wants war, it has to be launch from errr, European Territories, which are not that keen on this. The Russian troops are ready, at around 200 km; the US troops are not and are far. Ukraine not being part of NATO, there is no legal obligation to engage the Russian Armies. If fact, there is a lot of good reasons not to.
Thanks to cut and “end of Communism = end of History”, all European Countries dismantled their armies, and kept just “special” forces and specialised Regiments. In France, the new generation of tanks production was just halted as “we don’t need this very costly and ineffective material in the new generation of threats we are now facing”, forgetting that Bin Laden and Terrorism are not a real threat when powerful Armoured Divisions are.
Even don’t want to speak of the cancellation of the 2nd Aircraft Carrier, and the dissolution of Air Squadrons, Infantry Regiments, and destruction of factories producing Assault Rifles and selling of Army Facilities to investors.
In UK, we have an Aircraft carrier; unfortunately we don’t have the planes going on it.
So Europe (even including UK in it) is not ready to fight for a US war: Not militarily, not politically.
Want the SEAL or other “special Forces” will do in front of Armoured Divisions? Die bravely. Can they attack them? No.

“The suggestion that these nations would or could use their paper divisions in anger is laughable on its face. Combat effectiveness was sucked out of these respective militaries a long time ago” Yeap. Not for the second sentence, as the combat effectiveness is quite good, however the design of their mission changed, so they French Army is not able to face this kind of action, as every resources for this kind of war were wrecked by all successive government (starting by abolition of Conscription).

[Kagemusha]

According to Voice of Russia news channel and Andriy Parubiy from Ukrainian security council, Ukraine has today ordered full mobilization of its armed forces. The situation has gone to the extreme. All that needs to happen now is one bad call somewhere locally and the shit will hit the fan. I hope, no i pray that cool heads will prevail and what i am afraid will happen next can be avoided..

[Fisherking]

What on earth would that accomplish?

It moves the sides apart and reduces tension.

A neutral force to protect those Russian and Ukrainian peoples and not be a threat of annexing territory.

It should protect the stated interests of all parties without having them place people in harms way.

[Kagemusha]

If we are talking about the current situation at Ukraine. There is a solution. UN needs to send a huge multinational peacekeeping force there in order to cool the situation and prevent open confrontation between Russian and Ukrainian forces. It is pretty much the only chess move left to avoid Russia doing what it can and quite likely will. Once the situation would cool of all sides need to sit in the table and Russia should quite likely get parts of Ukraine, so the Russian interests in the area are secured, after that Ukraine should apply for NATO membership and thus the lines will be solidly drawn in the area.

We should all remember that Russia does not equate with Mordor, but that Russia has been loosing ground on most of its interest areas for quite long and there is only so much the Russian bear can tolerate, without collapsing from inside out and we really do not want that. Even with all the problems and quirks Russia as it is causes. We really do not want Russia to collapse into dozen diibadaabastans, which would create a hot bed of trouble like not seen in long time.

If we look at this in larger scale. What West can do is to re evaluate the situation and understand the real worst scenarios that can happen and stop living in a dream world effected by security consultants who think armed forces should be built according to "trends". USA should think what is really the role they want to have in Global security and what pros and cons their role will give to them.

Europe needs to pull their head out from their behinds and decide what Europe wants to be and act accordingly when it comes to security. For my country Finland.This Ukrainian crisis have clearly shown that we really need to forget already the past wars and understand that we cant fight our possible wars alone and cant remain without choosing which power block we clearly belong.Thus Finland should apply for NATO asap.

From my personal point of view. If in a hypothetical situation Russia would keep expanding to West and invade my country. As much as i like Russians as people. I have taken the pledge to protect my country from enemies outside and i would hold to it. So then it would be the bayonet, until i am dead or those threatening my land and my loved ones.

[Sarmatian]

And now it takes just one bullet on their way to Crimea and the shit hits the fan.

[Sarmatian]

Even if the division of Ukraine would mean long term stability, you can't really expect Ukrainians to agree to that.

The problem with multinational peacekeeping force is that it will hardly be neutral. Who's gonna be in it? Americans, French, Russians, Brits, Germans? Not neutral by a long shot.

Maybe we could invite Chinese and Indian troops, in a delicious spiff of irony.

[Husar]

Germans are incredibly neutral because half of Germany is heated with Russian gas in the winter.
I knew buying Russian gas would have advantages eventually...

[Kagemusha]

Even if the division of Ukraine would mean long term stability, you can't really expect Ukrainians to agree to that.

The problem with multinational peacekeeping force is that it will hardly be neutral. Who's gonna be in it? Americans, French, Russians, Brits, Germans? Not neutral by a long shot.

Maybe we could invite Chinese and Indian troops, in a delicious spiff of irony.

Im afraid that Ukraine has just to accept the facts. International politics do not compute right or wrong but necessity. About peacekeepers, yes Asians, Africans, mixed with neutral Europeans like for example Finns, Swedish and Austrians and like you mentioned, this would be perfect chance for China to take the Global spotlight in positive way, while India could join in as it has very good relations with Russia.

This still can be avoided. It does not look good, but the chips have not yet fallen.

[Fisherking]

Well, it seems to be looking more like a world war all the time.:shame:

[Husar]

Apparently Russia just wants the Ukrainians to establish the government that was agreed on in the talks around Feb. 21st.
Meanwhile the government apparently consists of different people who seized power through the revolution while the west distracts from the issue with alarmist propaganda about supposedly russian aggression...

There are simply some pro-russian areas as we established earlier and since they're not happy with the new anti-russian government, they took to the streets themselves. I don't see how that is Russia's fault or constitutes an invasion because someone thinks the people on some photograph "look a little too professional". The cold war mentality is still alive in the west...

Whether Russia actually has a right to protect Russian citizens in Ukraine is debatable though given their numbers and why they are there in the first place. It's not too different from the USA planting US Marines in allied countries to act upon "attacks on US soldiers" however.

Oh and this picture is awesome because it looks like they're getting ready to enter "the zone": http://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/bilder/krim164~_v-videowebl.jpg

[gaelic cowboy]

Ah here come on now Russia has troops on the ground seizing Crimea already.

[Kagemusha]

Apparently Russia just wants the Ukrainians to establish the government that was agreed on in the talks around Feb. 21st.
Meanwhile the government apparently consists of different people who seized power through the revolution while the west distracts from the issue with alarmist propaganda about supposedly russian aggression...

There are simply some pro-russian areas as we established earlier and since they're not happy with the new anti-russian government, they took to the streets themselves. I don't see how that is Russia's fault or constitutes an invasion because someone thinks the people on some photograph "look a little too professional". The cold war mentality is still alive in the west...

Whether Russia actually has a right to protect Russian citizens in Ukraine is debatable though given their numbers and why they are there in the first place. It's not too different from the USA planting US Marines in allied countries to act upon "attacks on US soldiers" however.

Oh and this picture is awesome because it looks like they're getting ready to enter "the zone": http://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/bilder/krim164~_v-videowebl.jpg

Hus, if you are referring to the troops operating yesterday at Crimea without insignia. Anyone with eye for such can recognize they were Russian regulars. No paramilitary forces are so well equipped and acting so calmly.

[Kagemusha]

Ukraine has just moments a go closed her airspace.

[HoreTore]

It moves the sides apart and reduces tension.

A neutral force to protect those Russian and Ukrainian peoples and not be a threat of annexing territory.

It should protect the stated interests of all parties without having them place people in harms way.

Peacekeepers do not work that way, sadly.

First of all, peacekeepers have only appeared post-conflict. Sending "peacekeepers" into an on-going one is a recipe for disaster.

[gaelic cowboy]

reports are coming out that local Ukrainian comanders and there troops are refusing to surrendar there arms and bases in Crimea.

This is the most delicate phase now as there apparently big scuffles outside Feodosia marine base.

[Husar]

Hus, if you are referring to the troops operating yesterday at Crimea without insignia. Anyone with eye for such can recognize they were Russian regulars. No paramilitary forces are so well equipped and acting so calmly.

Their uniforms look a lot like those of the Ukrainian military in the picture I linked above. IIRC the local government of the Crimean peninsula was very much against the government takeover and may have asked for Russian help to secede. Since it is the democratically elected government of the Crimeans and Ukraine cannot beat them in a civil war if they get Russian help, the new government of Ukraine will just have to accept the secession.

Also love this comment:

Can't speak for the Russians but personally as an American I would love to leave Old Europe to your own fate. The problem though is your Politics are so screwed up you keep dragging the US back in.
I feel the need to remind you Communism and Socialism are the gifts to the world born in Europe. Capitalism and Democracy improved in the US are our gifts to the World.
:laugh4:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10666893/Ukraine-crisis-live-President-Barack-Obama-warns-of-costs-for-any-violation-of-Ukraine.html

[Kagemusha]

Peacekeepers do not work that way, sadly.

When deployed successfully it is exactly how they work. Get your mind off from Yugoslavia and take a look at Suez, Lebanon or Darfur just to mention few deployments.

[Kagemusha]

Their uniforms look a lot like those of the Ukrainian military in the picture I linked above. IIRC the local government of the Crimean peninsula was very much against the government takeover and may have asked for Russian help to secede. Since it is the democratically elected government of the Crimeans and Ukraine cannot beat them in a civil war if they get Russian help, the new government of Ukraine will just have to accept the secession.

Dont look at their camouflage, but their coms, weapons and carrying systems. Here you have a pic from the guys at Crimea:

12373

Compare to your pic of the Ukrainians from today. These guys have ballistic vests, composite helmets, radios and carrying AK-74 with tactical sights, compared of the AK 47´s of Ukrainians.

[SwordsMaster]

People shouldn't think about dividing countries without thinking of the consequences. Look what happened with Korea and Vietnam. Although there are different ethnicities in the case with Ukraine, the demographics are mixed geographically. Even in eastern Ukraine where there are large numbers of Russian-speaking people, there are significant numbers of Ukrainian-speakers in that region with the exception of Crimea. Ukraine doesn't want to lose territory and would want to protect Ukrainian citizens in eastern Ukraine.
Germany is an exception. Germany lost WWII and was in no position to start a civil war expecially when having superpower armies stationed there. After decades of peace, the Germans decided to continue with that peace.

Also, where would you draw the boundary? Having a third party decide the boundaries have proven to be disastrous in Korea, Vietnam, in African nations and in the Middle East.

True. Boundaries are tricky. However, repopulations are nothing new. The Russians for one are very good at them. The Turks and Greeks did a land exchange after WWI with hundreds of thousands moving from one country to another. There are ways.

In terms of non-violent solutions - Russia could switch off the gas. But Ukraine could switch off the power and water from Crimea, and leave the russian black sea fleet with no electricity. I reckon a 2 hour power outage across the whole of Crimea would calm things down significantly, to be honest. There ain't no revolution without twitter these days.

[Husar]

Dont look at their camouflage, but their coms, weapons and carrying systems. Here you have a pic from the guys at Crimea:

12373

Compare to your pic of the Ukrainians from today. These guys have ballistic vests, composite helmets, radios and carrying AK-74 with tactical sights, compared of the AK 47´s of Ukrainians.

The helmets of the Ukrainians look just the same, the vests are very thin and how you can make out the exact nature of their weapons is a mystery to me. They look like AK family guns and the magazines are a little different but such things often vary even within units.

[Kagemusha]

The helmets of the Ukrainians look just the same, the vests are very thin and how you can make out the exact nature of their weapons is a mystery to me. They look like AK family guns and the magazines are a little different but such things often vary even within units.

I leave it to you to decide if you think i know or not what i am talking about.:bow:

[Husar]

I leave it to you to decide if you think i know or not what i am talking about.:bow:

You have been in the army, I have never seen a gun from inside, that's not even a contest.
Just consider me amazed by your abilities. :bow:

[Catiline]

Other details not with standing both lots are in Russian camo anyway aren't they?

[Sarmatian]

We should sent the photos to McCain to analyze. He's great when it comes to looking people in the eyes and seeing their motives and affiliations.

[Kagemusha]

Other details not with standing both lots are in Russian camo anyway aren't they?

Yes. Both armies have similar camo variants and once the Ukrainian reservist are equipped we will be seeing lot of good ole Soviet looking guys in the pics, with older camo type and quite likely green metal helmets. I bet identification can be very problematic for both sides on several occasions.

[HopAlongBunny]

Peacekeepers could be an option.
It would be nice to see them used as a war prevention tool.
The difficulty is convincing both side more is to be gained from sitting/talking/negotiating than from armed conflict.
While the stakes/benefits might seem clear from an external viewpoint is the Ukraine really going to enter an agreement which effectively cuts it into pieces? Would Russia forgo its trump card of force?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Putin knows that the US and EU are governed by feckless and cowardly administrations. If you were an early 20th century Russian dictator living in the modern age, wouldn't you invade sovereign nations when you could do it with impunity? It's no wonder that China is attempting to define itself as the hegemon in the S China Sea. Once it is able to do so, the US will shrink at every provocation and roll over. The US government has become good only at targeting it's own citizens and has lost it's grip on the world. Let's see how much better off the world becomes for it. Wait, didn't we spend countless years and treasure to target one guy in central Asia? Brilliant foreign policy when sovereign nations are being invaded.

The US should begin encouraging or threatening to encourage secession within Tartaristan, Dagestan, and Chechnya. Remove some organizations from the terror list. I believe that we should push for independence everywhere, especially where it compromises the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation and China.

[Brenus]

"If you were an early 20th century Russian dictator living in the modern age, wouldn't you invade sovereign nations when you could do it with impunity?" Do you mean like in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya? Of course, you will have to change Russian dictator by Modern and Alive Democracies, and add in agreement with UN decisions...:laugh4:

[Montmorency]

Energy is not a Russian trump card.

If Russia ever cuts the oil in a conflict or near-conflict situation, they will lose it as a source of revenue permanently, unless they agree to whatever disadvantageous terms the East-Asian states are willing to offer.

Don't forget that Europe is sitting on a huge bed of natural gas. They will exploit it if forced to.

[Fisherking]

The US should begin encouraging or threatening to encourage secession within Tartaristan, Dagestan, and Chechnya. Remove some organizations from the terror list. I believe that we should push for independence everywhere, especially where it compromises the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation and China.


You know, I thing the West, and the rest of the world, should be looking for solutions that defuse the situation. Preferably while maintaining Ukrainian territorial integrity.

Not getting into further difficulties. Forcing anyone into a corner or launching propaganda campaigns to make them look like beasts is not going to do that.

Russia may be overly aggressive in the actions they took. Taking a cold but firm stance that offers them an out without losing face. Russia was guarding its interests while using an excuse that has worked before.

Heated rhetoric is not going to make them back down and further drawing lines or taking a polarized view is not going to get the reaction you are looking for, that is unless it is more tension leading to larger confrontation.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Peacekeepers do not work that way, sadly.

First of all, peacekeepers have only appeared post-conflict. Sending "peacekeepers" into an on-going one is a recipe for disaster.

They could work that way though - it requires a binding UN resolution, though, and Russia has a veto.

Putin is testing to see how far he can go before NATO reacts, especially America. As the Head of NATO the US should be taking the lad here, but comment has been strongest so far from Kerry, not Obama.

This is unlikely to result in WWIII - it could become a shooting war over Ukraine, but that would likely be a larger version of the Falklands war, essential an arm-wristle between NATO and Russia until one side concedes. Long Term - comment by the American here suggest America will revert to type and leave Europe to burn, until it realises it really SHOULD do something, thus triggering WWIII.

As far as I'm concerned, worst case scenario is WWIII, and whether that happens depends on whether the US is willing to face down Russia or not - if it is not Putin may conclude he can overpower Europe and start shooting.

[Beskar]

Looking at this news article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26405635), things are really hotting up.

Russia is getting threatened to be kicked out of G8.

The UK has joined the US, France and Canada in suspending preparations for the Sochi summit.

Nato is conducting emergency talks, saying Russia's actions threaten "peace and security in Europe".

US President Barack Obama called Russian troop deployments a "violation of Ukrainian sovereignty".

"[President Putin] has just seen his man, in effect, [Viktor] Yanukovych, overthrown by what he sees as a Western instigated revolt. He [Putin] is determined to maintain Russian influence in Ukraine as a whole, and he has now taken Crimea... hostage"

"You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext," Mr Kerry told the CBS program Face the Nation

"He may find himself with asset freezes, on Russian business. American business may pull back, there may be a further tumble of the rouble."

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Unconfirmed reports of Russian soldiers along with militia assaulting the Regional Border Control HQ

That's it.

[Kagemusha]

Unconfirmed reports of Russian soldiers along with militia assaulting the Regional Border Control HQ

That's it.

Source?

[Husar]

"You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext," Mr Kerry told the CBS program Face the Nation

:laugh4:

Yeah, when you say there are WMDs then there....oh wait, never mind.

[Crazed Rabbit]

There are simply some pro-russian areas as we established earlier and since they're not happy with the new anti-russian government, they took to the streets themselves. I don't see how that is Russia's fault or constitutes an invasion because someone thinks the people on some photograph "look a little too professional". The cold war mentality is still alive in the west...

Are you serious?

CR

[HoreTore]

When deployed successfully it is exactly how they work. Get your mind off from Yugoslavia and take a look at Suez, Lebanon or Darfur just to mention few deployments.

....And the UN peacekeepers in Suez, Lebanon and Darfur entered while the crisis was ongoing...?

We tried to send peacekeepers while Darfur was hot. It failed because a peacekeeping mission requires an invitation, which it didn't get until things cooled down.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Source?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26405082

BBC Monitoring - between 1603-1607.

[Pannonian]

Personally, I don't understand why those idiots thought it was a good idea to try to overthrow the elected government. However bad it is and however corrupt, the generally understood rules of the democratic game is that, after an election, you're stuck with whoever your country elected until the next set of elections where you can change your mind. If you abandon those rules, you shouldn't have any complaint about where you end up.

[HoreTore]

They could work that way though - it requires a binding UN resolution, though, and Russia has a veto.

That would be like ISAF without Enduring Freedom. How could that work in Ukraine?

[Kagemusha]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26405082

BBC Monitoring - between 1603-1607.

Thanks for the link. It is still hazy as the news have not been promoted in any other medias. We do not know if the "storming" was an actual use of force or again unidentified troops seizing an key loacation like they have done for days on already.

[Kagemusha]

That would be like ISAF without Enduring Freedom. How could that work in Ukraine?

Are you just playing thick today Horetore? The basic idea how peacekeepers are deployed is so they are deployed between possibly hostile forces, thus helping to neutralize the situation. The worst thing that can happen now is that someone fires a shot and anything to diminish that possibility will help. The operations in Afghanistan have little to nothing to do with normal peacekeeping operations as the coalition is fighting an insisting armed rising of toppled ex government of Afghanistan.

[Pannonian]

They could work that way though - it requires a binding UN resolution, though, and Russia has a veto.

Putin is testing to see how far he can go before NATO reacts, especially America. As the Head of NATO the US should be taking the lad here, but comment has been strongest so far from Kerry, not Obama.

This is unlikely to result in WWIII - it could become a shooting war over Ukraine, but that would likely be a larger version of the Falklands war, essential an arm-wristle between NATO and Russia until one side concedes. Long Term - comment by the American here suggest America will revert to type and leave Europe to burn, until it realises it really SHOULD do something, thus triggering WWIII.

As far as I'm concerned, worst case scenario is WWIII, and whether that happens depends on whether the US is willing to face down Russia or not - if it is not Putin may conclude he can overpower Europe and start shooting.

Or alternatively, the "pro-Europe" side tested things first by unilaterally overthrowing the pro-Russian government, which, however corrupt, was elected. Russia stood by election results when they weren't favourable. When they were favourable, their side should have had the opportunity to cash in, until the next lot of elections when they could be thrown out again by a disgruntled electorate. If we felt fair elections weren't likely to be possible, we should have pushed diplomatically to redress the conditions. The riots weren't the right way to go about it.

[HoreTore]

Are you just playing thick today Horetore? The basic idea how peacekeepers are deployed is so they are deployed between possibly hostile forces, thus helping to neutralize the situation. The worst thing that can happen now is that someone fires a shot and anything to diminish the possibility that someone will helps. The operations in Afghanistan have little to nothing to do with normal peacekeeping operations as the coalition is fighting an insisting armed rising of toppled ex government of Afghanistan.

That mission is called Enduring Freedom. ISAF's mission was simply to protect Karzai's government from being whacked.

Peacekeepers have a good record on lowering tensions in post-conflict areas(with the occasional hiccup in the form of a genocide or two). Deploying such a force in a potentially explosive conflict is something else, and something which has not been done before(if you discount ISAF). What would be its mandate? When would it intervene? Would it require a shot fire, a shell fired or a tank rolling before they intervened? Should it be pre-emptive or only reactive? Should it side with one of the sides if the situation escalates, or should it form an independent faction?

All in all, there are way too many unanswered questions for what a peacekeeping force in the Ukraine could do right now that it would be impossible to avoid becoming the screw-up of the decade.

[Kagemusha]

That mission is called Enduring Freedom. ISAF's mission was simply to protect Karzai's government from being whacked.

Lol! What kind of peace forcing mission would you like to deploy to solve the current crisis in Ukraine? How does that apply to the current crisis?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Or alternatively, the "pro-Europe" side tested things first by unilaterally overthrowing the pro-Russian government, which, however corrupt, was elected. Russia stood by election results when they weren't favourable. When they were favourable, their side should have had the opportunity to cash in, until the next lot of elections when they could be thrown out again by a disgruntled electorate. If we felt fair elections weren't likely to be possible, we should have pushed diplomatically to redress the conditions. The riots weren't the right way to go about it.

I have two words for you "Police Sniper"

The president ordered the deaths of protesters, then fled the Capital.

His "ousting" was a mere formality.

Edit: The Head of the Navy has defected: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26410431

Crap, Crap, Crap.

[HoreTore]

Lol! What kind of peace forcing mission would you like to deploy to solve the current crisis in Ukraine? How does that apply to the current crisis?

I wouldn't want to deploy any kind of peacekeeping force, that's kinda my point. A few gunboats in the black sea might be useful, but that carries the risk that if something happens we are forced to intervene.

[Kagemusha]

I wouldn't want to deploy any kind of peacekeeping force, that's kinda my point. A few gunboats in the black sea might be useful, but that carries the risk that if something happens we are forced to intervene.

You are entitled to your opinion. You just want to stay clear from the crisis and hope for the best. That has little to do with your original statement that peace keeping operations are not for situations like this. But thank you for the clarification.

[Sarmatian]

Newly appointed head of the Ukrainian navy defects to Crimea. His statement:


"I, Berezovsky Denys Valentynovych, pledge allegiance to the residents of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the hero city of Sevastopol. I vow to strictly follow orders from the commander-in-chief of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and hero city of Sevastopol, as well as orders by military commanders appointed by them, demands placed by the military code. I vow to fulfil my military duty properly and bravely defend the life and property of the people of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol."

[Pannonian]

I have two words for you "Police Sniper"

The president ordered the deaths of protesters, then fled the Capital.

His "ousting" was a mere formality.

Edit: The Head of the Navy has defected: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26410431

Crap, Crap, Crap.

Then let them do what they feel is right, and let them handle the consequences as well. Same with the president they overthrew. I suspect what Russia really wants is a stable set of rules to play by, with no unexpected changes, and certainly not against them. Democratic elections with the government remaining in place for the duration of their term would be as good as a Russian puppet government. What is not good is a democratic government with the chance of turning against Russia at any given moment. Unpredictable in a direction that they don't want.

[HoreTore]

You are entitled to your opinion. You just want to stay clear from the crisis and hope for the best.

What absolute nonsense.

[Kagemusha]

It seems Crimea is now more secure for the Russians. Interesting to see what his troops will do.

[Kadagar_AV]

"You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext," Mr Kerry told the CBS program Face the Nation

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

That quote is so evil on a Orwell scale that it might just have made my day...

I don't know what saddens me most... That he think the USAnian population is so stupid they accept quotes like that, or that the USAnian population actually is so stupid that they accept quotes like that.

[Kagemusha]

What absolute nonsense.

Having a bad day HoreTore? You have already shown that you have no idea how actual peacekeeping missions work as your knowledge of them is based solely on Afghanistan which has little to nothing to do with ordinary operations which just dont get such media attention. You are making blanket statements and we should just take it by face value? Ok, lets play the game, please elaborate how deploying peacekeepers would make the situation worse?

[HoreTore]

Having a bad day HoreTore? You have already shown that you have no idea how actual peacekeeping missions work as your knowledge of them is based solely on Afghanistan which has little to nothing to do with ordinary operations which just dont get such media attention. You are making blanket statements and we should just take it by face value? Ok, lets play the game, please elaborate how deploying peacekeepers would make the situation worse?

Based on the number of unfounded assumptions made in this post, I have no desire to respond.

[Kagemusha]

Based on the number of unfounded assumptions made in this post, I have no desire to respond.

:laugh4:

[Kadagar_AV]

Based on the number of unfounded assumptions made in this post, I have no desire to respond.

Oh well, at least you don't come off as a petulant child..

[HoreTore]

:laugh4:

Did the army try to recruit you to any of the 3 peacekeeping missions you mentioned, Kage? Do you personally know anyone who were a part of those missions?

I can answer yes to both of those(Darfur and Suez). Where you got the idea that I know only of Afghanistan is plain nonsense, and such statements do not form a foundation for further discussion.

[Sarmatian]

It seems Crimea is now more secure for the Russians. Interesting to see what his troops will do.

From what little I've been able to understand, most of the officers in the armed forces are pro-Russian.

It's definitely getting more chaotic by the minute.


Personally, I don't understand why those idiots thought it was a good idea to try to overthrow the elected government. However bad it is and however corrupt, the generally understood rules of the democratic game is that, after an election, you're stuck with whoever your country elected until the next set of elections where you can change your mind. If you abandon those rules, you shouldn't have any complaint about where you end up.

I totally support the right of people to overthrow their government in a popular revolution. The problem here, is that the revolution was only semi-popular.

[Kagemusha]

Did the army try to recruit you to any of the 3 peacekeeping missions you mentioned, Kage? Do you personally know anyone who were a part of those missions?

I can answer yes to both of those(Darfur and Suez). Where you got the idea that I know only of Afghanistan is plain nonsense, and such statements do not form a foundation for further discussion.

Yes and yes. I had the possibility to join the Kansainälinen valmiusjoukko, which sends most of Finnish peacekeepers to operations. My brother in law is a peacekeeper and have made couple tours to Lebanon.

I made my assumptions based on your posts. First you claimed that peacekeepers cant be used to prevent an situation from escalating, but only in the aftermath of conflict, which is simply rubbish. Then you posted that any peacekeeping mission would need a peace forcing mission before hand, which is rubbish also. Maybe i cant read between the lines of your posts, or you do not explain your statements very clearly?

[HoreTore]

Yes and yes. I had the possibility to join the Kansainälinen valmiusjoukko, which sends most of Finnish peacekeepers to operations. My brother in law is a peacekeeper and have made couple tours to Lebanon.

I made my assumptions based on your posts. First you claimed that peacekeepers cant be used to prevent an situation from escalating, but only in the aftermath of conflict, which is simply rubbish. Then you posted that any peacekeeping mission would need a peace forcing mission before hand, which is rubbish also. Maybe i cant read between the lines of your posts, or you do not explain your statements very clearly?

Extreme selective reading here, I would say. The first claim is a simple misunderstanding; I said that a peacekeeping mission isn't sent in when it is hot, as it has never been done. Ie. in the middle of an ongoing war. It can of course be used to prevent a situation from escalating, that's the reason they are there.

Where you got the idea that I believe a peacekeeping force needs to follow a mission to enforce the peace I'm not sure. That only rarely happens, and did not happen in any of the three missions you stated.

Further, your claim that since I do not see the benefit of sending a peacekeeping force in I simply wish to "hope for the best" is pure rubbish. There are plenty of alternatives other than "do nothing" and "send in some troops".

[Pannonian]

I totally support the right of people to overthrow their government in a popular revolution. The problem here, is that the revolution was only semi-popular.

If they want the right to overthrow a government through popular revolution, they can accept the responsibility of consequences that goes with it. The basic rule of a democracy is that, post-election, the country is left with the government that was elected, until the time comes for another election. If you decide that rule is unsatisfactory, then negotiations can take place for a substitute set of rules. During this interregnum, your neighbours may decide to have a hand in deciding the new set of rules. But you shouldn't have any complaint, as it was your choice to abandon those rules in the first place.

[Husar]

Are you serious?

CR

As serious as Mister Kerry.


Newly appointed head of the Ukrainian navy defects to Crimea. His statement:

Well yeah, there is also not much of a Ukrainian army on the Crimean peninsula because the government of the Crimean peninsula turned all ukrainian soldiers on the peninsula into crimean soldiers two days ago. Why did they do that? Because they were not happy with the revolution and do not want to support it.
The only one making a big fuss about all of this are Westerners who think a pro-western revolution of ~50% of the population has to be a good thing simply because it's pro-west and against the evil russian empire. That doesn't mean that I liked Yanoukovich, it just means that when 51% of Ukrainians elected him ,what gives the other 49% the right to overthrow him? It's no wonder that the country is full of corruption because that's a corrupt way of thinking.


I totally support the right of people to overthrow their government in a popular revolution. The problem here, is that the revolution was only semi-popular.

Exactly. While I fully support the ideas of the revolutionaries in general, their way of getting there leaves a very bad taste and wasn't the right way to do it.
As Pannonian says, that's what elections are for.

[Kagemusha]

Extreme selective reading here, I would say. The first claim is a simple misunderstanding; I said that a peacekeeping mission isn't sent in when it is hot, as it has never been done. Ie. in the middle of an ongoing war. It can of course be used to prevent a situation from escalating, that's the reason they are there.

Where you got the idea that I believe a peacekeeping force needs to follow a mission to enforce the peace I'm not sure. That only rarely happens, and did not happen in any of the three missions you stated.


This is your original post:


Peacekeepers do not work that way, sadly.

First of all, peacekeepers have only appeared post-conflict. Sending "peacekeepers" into an on-going one is a recipe for disaster.

This is the one you are referring to Afghanistan:


That would be like ISAF without Enduring Freedom. How could that work in Ukraine?

Either we are assessing the situation very differently but from your first one i got the expression that you do not think peacekeepers as viable option. In my opinion using them now could possibly deter the situation from becoming "hot" at any point.

From the second i understood that you thought that in your view a peace forcing mission would be needed before peacekeeping mission, with your reference to Afghanistan. Maybe we are simply misunderstanding each other, but i want to make clear that in my opinion peacekeeping mission now could very well be viable option in order to avoid the conflict turning "hot".

[HoreTore]

This is your original post:

This is the one you are referring to Afghanistan:

Either we are assessing the situation very differently but from your first one i got the expression that you do not think peacekeepers as viable option. In my opinion using them now could possibly deter the situation from becoming "hot" at any point.

From the second i understood that you thought that in your view a peace forcing mission would be needed before peacekeeping mission, with your reference to Afghanistan. Maybe we are simply misunderstanding each other, but i want to make clear that in my opinion peacekeeping mission now could very well be viable option in order to avoid the conflict turning "hot".

IMO, the situation is already hot, or at the very least will be before such a force can be mustered and deployed. The "Rapid" in RDF's is, of course, rather misleading... Moreover, the peacekeeping missions so far have happened with the acceptance of the parties of the conflict(excluding the unofficial ones). How do you propose to get Putin to agree to international troops in the Crimea...? You could go on without Putin's approval, but that leads us to the next point:

"ISAF without Enduring Freedom" doesn't mean ISAF won't work without Enduring Freedom. "Without" simply means exclude Enduring Freedom from the equation altogether, both its goals and its consequences. I don't make a general claim that ISAF needed an Enduring Freedom. Rather, I suggest that pvc's proposal would look like an ISAF operation without the need for an accompanying Enduring Freedom operation, and I question what good that would do in Ukraine.

[Montmorency]

This is one of the strangest threads in a while. The speculation on a potential shooting war between the CIS and NATO is a real laugh, and something I'd expect to hear from a middle-aged Midwesterner, not liberal Europeans. Putin has everything to gain by simply waiting for things to proceed in his favor, rather than starting a pointless conflict in which everyone stands to lose.

If Ukraine outright joins NATO tomorrow, Putin will simply effectuate the secession of Eastern Ukraine; "rump" Ukraine will end as an inconsequential economic cripple and will be of no threat to Russian interests ever again.

The alternative of course being a resolution to the crisis in the form of tolerable new elections followed by a steady slide into the same Russia-dominated oligarchy that we've seen for the past 20 years.

All in all, very predictable. Leave the Cold-War era fantasies out of it.

[Kagemusha]

IMO, the situation is already hot, or at the very least will be before such a force can be mustered and deployed. The "Rapid" in RDF's is, of course, rather misleading... Moreover, the peacekeeping missions so far have happened with the acceptance of the parties of the conflict(excluding the unofficial ones). How do you propose to get Putin to agree to international troops in the Crimea...? You could go on without Putin's approval, but that leads us to the next point:

"ISAF without Enduring Freedom" doesn't mean ISAF won't work without Enduring Freedom. "Without" simply means exclude Enduring Freedom from the equation altogether, both its goals and its consequences. I don't make a general claim that ISAF needed an Enduring Freedom. Rather, I suggest that pvc's proposal would look like an ISAF operation without the need for an accompanying Enduring Freedom operation, and I question what good that would do in Ukraine.

Thank you for the clarifications. About the situation. The situation is "hot" only after the first shot and so far it has not happened. The Russian troops in Crimea have coordinated the takeover there very professionally and i am quite sure that there is actually large reluctance on both sides to open fire against each other. Russians and Ukrainians dont exactly hate each other at all.

About the possible operation. It should have full UN mandate and that means that Russia has to accept it. I am certain that there is no real wish for Russia to engage, if they dont see it as absolutely last option. How they have behaved so far shows it quite clearly. If Russia could be convinced by the UN that they will be offered a real starting point for the negotiations. I think they just might accept the mission, if it consisted of troops that they would see as not backing certain power block. I think someone ought to bring this up in UN and fast rather then individual countries and NATO making aggressive statements towards Russia.

To me the most important thing is to avoid things getting out of hand. It will be hard, but it can be achieved.

[Sarmatian]

If Ukraine outright joins NATO tomorrow, Putin will simply effectuate the secession of Eastern Ukraine; "rump" Ukraine will end as an inconsequential economic cripple and will be of no threat to Russian interests ever again.

The alternative of course being a resolution to the crisis in the form of tolerable new elections followed by a steady slide into the same Russia-dominated oligarchy that we've seen for the past 20 years.


That is all true, but who in Ukraine is ready to end the status quo now in effect by making a deal? That person will commit political suicide, and possibly a real one. The other question is how will the protesters, and especially, the militant arm, react? The proposal for new government was first given to them to approve, before it was taken to the parliament.

The longer the status quo is in effect, the more danger something will go wrong. The only ones in Ukraine that would jump to respond to the call for mobilization will be far-right, anti-Russian organizations and their supporters. It might take only a few bullets by a single company to light up this powder keg.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As serious as Mister Kerry.



Well yeah, there is also not much of a Ukrainian army on the Crimean peninsula because the government of the Crimean peninsula turned all ukrainian soldiers on the peninsula into crimean soldiers two days ago. Why did they do that? Because they were not happy with the revolution and do not want to support it.
The only one making a big fuss about all of this are Westerners who think a pro-western revolution of ~50% of the population has to be a good thing simply because it's pro-west and against the evil russian empire. That doesn't mean that I liked Yanoukovich, it just means that when 51% of Ukrainians elected him ,what gives the other 49% the right to overthrow him? It's no wonder that the country is full of corruption because that's a corrupt way of thinking.



Exactly. While I fully support the ideas of the revolutionaries in general, their way of getting there leaves a very bad taste and wasn't the right way to do it.
As Pannonian says, that's what elections are for.

Except that the majority of the Rada voted to impeach the President and the first people to deploy troops were the Russians.

If, after the May 25th elections the Crimea was to demand greater autonomy, or even secession, then the West would likely support that. However - the fact is that, from what we know, the ex-President ordered the paramilitary Berkut Police to shoot protesters with sniper rifles, then fled, then was impeached, then the Russians invaded.

So the Russian-backed stooge screws up, then the Russians invade.

The opposition has a lot of answer for, mostly for screwing up in-office and letting Yanoukovich back in, but it's still RUSSIA who are the aggressors here.

[Pannonian]

That is all true, but who in Ukraine is ready to end the status quo now in effect by making a deal? That person will commit political suicide. The other question is how will the protesters, and especially, the militant arm, react? The proposal for new government was first given to them to approve, before it was taken to the parliament.

The longer the status quo is in effect, the more danger something will go wrong. The only ones in Ukraine that would jump to respond to the call for mobilization will be far-right, anti-Russian organizations and their supporters. It might take only a few bullets by a single company to light up this powder keg.

If that's the case, why can't we give them a bunch of AK-74s and an agreed on battlefield and call it natural selection?

[Kagemusha]

If that's the case, why can't we give them a bunch of AK-74s and an agreed on battlefield and call it natural selection?

If only the world would work like that.~:)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Rapid admission to NATO with mutual defense treaties for Ukraine is a way to prevent further aggression. Additionally, NATO should begin building a Black Sea response fleet on newly acquired maritime borders.

[Sarmatian]

However - the fact is that, from what we know, the ex-President ordered the paramilitary Berkut Police to shoot protesters with sniper rifles, then fled, then was impeached, then the Russians invaded.

So the Russian-backed stooge screws up, then the Russians invade.


That is a highly simplified and fairly inaccurate version of the events.

[gaelic cowboy]

That is a highly simplified and fairly inaccurate version of the events.

No more simplistic than Putins shenanigans since the begining of this crisis.


This is quite simply his crisis

[Montmorency]

That is all true, but who in Ukraine is ready to end the status quo now in effect by making a deal? That person will commit political suicide, and possibly a real one. The other question is how will the protesters, and especially, the militant arm, react? The proposal for new government was first given to them to approve, before it was taken to the parliament.

The longer the status quo is in effect, the more danger something will go wrong. The only ones in Ukraine that would jump to respond to the call for mobilization will be far-right, anti-Russian organizations and their supporters. It might take only a few bullets by a single company to light up this powder keg.

Well, sure, a government of national unity is unlikely - that makes the alternative, a split Ukraine, in turn more likely.

Are you thinking of a situation in which far-rightists take over Western Ukraine and foment a civil war with the secessionists?

Assuming it does get to that point, I don't think it would still be very much of a West vs. Russia sort of thing, and more of a UN intervention with Russian cooperation - or else the West stays out entirely.

No one in the West has the stomach to prop up bloodthirsty fascists just to annoy Russia - not on this scale.

Even in the worst case, I doubt a belligerent far-right govt in Western Ukraine would be able to justify itself to the population long enough for any real conflict to get underway.

[Sarmatian]

You're right. He could have decided to ignore everything.

But, that would still leave the government in Kiev semi-legitimate with a significant neo-nazi involvement, which would probably try to enforce it's rule in the rest of Ukraine.

[gaelic cowboy]

I would be of the opinion that there was no way in hell Ukraine would have got into Nato or the EU.

Putin acted stupidily and now its not impossible that he has made it more likely himself.

What he should have done was merely stay on the border with his iron fist in his glove, this would have let the new government know what it had to do.

Instead he is acting like some 19th century colonial govennor annexing mboto gorge.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Most of USA's Military Technologies are hidden from the Public.
Russia or USSR could invade USA with P.R.C and maybe N.Korea in 1950 to 1975..... because at that time USA & USSR's Military Technology were somehow equal but USSR Could bring much Damage and Destruction to USA if he would attack alone until 1975s.
but after that time USA's Military's Technology got an strange high speed in advancing and invented much warfare that could easily blow the whole USSR.
now? now USA can destroy the WHOLE WORLD with two or three buttons!! dont make mistake! i dont mean Nuclear! much other Secret Technologies that is much more better and Fearsome than Nuclear War!
i watched a video was for 1988 that Doctor, a friend of D. VON . BRAUN that she acknowledged that there are massive American Military Technology that they want to be hidden many time so they can face with some unknown threats that they completely KNOW about it and then they will uncover that what great masterpieces they have....for now i will only Example the EX-NAZI Warmachine.... THE "UFO" ! said doctor Rosenberg i think (i will try to re find the video and bring you her name or maybe even the video itself!

so USA is Ready for WW3 or maybe Praise it ?!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That is a highly simplified and fairly inaccurate version of the events.

Well - I did gloss over the part where he signed that relatively vague "peace" deal and then the protestors threw rocks at the opposition.

In Crimea, however, the Police were trying to protect both groups of protesters - and the first violent move was the seizure of the Parliament and forced expulsion of the regional Prime Minister (and his replacement with a pro-Russian one).

You would not be entirely wrong to compare that to what happened in Kiez, except that nobody in Kiev had an RPG.


You're right. He could have decided to ignore everything.

But, that would still leave the government in Kiev semi-legitimate with a significant neo-nazi involvement, which would probably try to enforce it's rule in the rest of Ukraine.

They're planning an election in six weeks, Sarmation, it wouldn't "leave" anything. As far as Neo-Nazi's go, Putin is a Neo-Stalinist, so they're two sides of the same coin. In any case, they are the united "opposition against", it's not the pure Facist government Putin has described it as, it's just that the Facists hate Yanakovich as much as the other groups in the Rada - including his own party.

[Pannonian]

They're planning an election in six weeks, Sarmation, it wouldn't "leave" anything. As far as Neo-Nazi's go, Putin is a Neo-Stalinist, so they're two sides of the same coin. In any case, they are the united "opposition against", it's not the pure Facist government Putin has described it as, it's just that the Facists hate Yanakovich as much as the other groups in the Rada - including his own party.

That's the problem when you decide to throw out the basic rule of democracy. You may decide on a new set of rules, but until things settle down, someone with backing may decide they may not want to play by your new rules. And you can't complain, since you've already discarded the previous mutually agreed on rules. Be strong enough to enforce your new set of rules, have the backing to enforce it, or play by the agreed on rules. The Ukrainian protestors rejected the third, are dubious on the first, and are looking for the second, whereas the pro-Russians seem confident on the second.

Also, I note that you pointed out the Ukrainian Parliament voted to impeach the old president, with the argument being that the replacement of that government was backed by democratic legitimacy. If so, would the Crimean regional government, similarly democratically elected, have democratic legitimacy in saying they want nothing to do with the rest of Ukraine? Both political bodies have democratic credits in their own way, and the rules concerning the status of government have already been dismissed, so they're free to define the new rules. The Ukrainian parliament defined it by legitimising the replacement of the previous government, whereas the Crimean region have defined it by declaring their independence from the rest of Ukraine. Is one right and the other wrong?

[Sarmatian]

Well - I did gloss over the part where he signed that relatively vague "peace" deal and then the protestors threw rocks at the opposition.

Which is one of the most significant events in the whole drama. You had a deal which included early elections, reducing presidential powers, forming a government a of national unity and even freeing Timoshenko. The protesters decided it was a much better idea to simply break into and seize government buildings.


In Crimea, however, the Police were trying to protect both groups of protesters - and the first violent move was the seizure of the Parliament and forced expulsion of the regional Prime Minister (and his replacement with a pro-Russian one).

You would not be entirely wrong to compare that to what happened in Kiez, except that nobody in Kiev had an RPG.

I'm more scared of a mob than of guy with an RPG. The mob is governed by herd mentality and is difficult to control. Guys with RPG's are usually professionals and most often follow someone's orders, and you can reason with that someone.


They're planning an election in six weeks, Sarmation, it wouldn't "leave" anything. As far as Neo-Nazi's go, Putin is a Neo-Stalinist, so they're two sides of the same coin. In any case, they are the united "opposition against", it's not the pure Facist government Putin has described it as, it's just that the Facists hate Yanakovich as much as the other groups in the Rada - including his own party.

Is this the case of "you can't fire me, I quit!" talk? They were getting elections which would have been infinitely more fair than when the biggest opposition party (after the revolution) was threatened and bullied into submission.

Well, they got what they wanted. Now a big part of the country doesn't see them as a legitimate government and we're back on square one because, apparently, two can play that game. And the reason is that opposition leaders couldn't control the most militant protesters, bringing us to a point where it will take immense effort to keep the country in once piece, if it is at all possible.

[Strike For The South]

Remember the time Russia invaded Georgia and had to cannabilze their APCs for parts?

Brutish and stupid, like they have always been.

[Strike For The South]

Russia has the most capable conventional Army in the western world right now for a conflict in Ukraine.

Citation needed

[Husar]

In Crimea, however, the Police were trying to protect both groups of protesters - and the first violent move was the seizure of the Parliament and forced expulsion of the regional Prime Minister (and his replacement with a pro-Russian one).

You would not be entirely wrong to compare that to what happened in Kiez, except that nobody in Kiev had an RPG.

The locals seem to like the "invaders", on every scary german news report about the "invaders" there are a lot of comments saying that the locals are cheering for the soldiers, taking photographs with them and giving them food and drinks.
Is that what oppression looks like?

http://rt.com/news/crimea-airport-terminal-capture-095/


The people patrolling the territory of the airport did not mind being filmed. Only a few spoke to the journalists though. AP managed to interview one person, who said he was member of the People's Union of Crimea.

“No to radicalism and fascism in Crimea,” the man who only gave his first name, Vladimir, said. “That’s our slogan. And we don’t want radicals either from other regions of Ukraine or from other countries to come to Crimea.”

The soldiers have just seized the island without any real opposition, without bloodshed and casualties. They just protect the Crimeans from the new fascist government in Kiev and its corrupt leadership that seized power through lots of violence.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The locals seem to like the "invaders", on every scary german news report about the "invaders" there are a lot of comments saying that the locals are cheering for the soldiers, taking photographs with them and giving them food and drinks.
Is that what oppression looks like?

http://rt.com/news/crimea-airport-terminal-capture-095/



The soldiers have just seized the island without any real opposition, without bloodshed and casualties. They just protect the Crimeans from the new fascist government in Kiev and its corrupt leadership that seized power through lots of violence.

Streets kinda empty though, eh?

It's possible a majority of the people support the invaders, but they're still invaders who manufactured strife as a pretext and a significant minority, including the Tartars, won't support them.

[Kadagar_AV]

Remember the time Russia invaded Georgia and had to cannabilze their APCs for parts?

Brutish and stupid, like they have always been.

Remember the time Russia(ish) invaded Germany and had to cannibalize their APCs for parts?

They made it through, like they have always been.

From my military experience, I honestly can't remember a time in the field where we did not have to scavenge to make things work. But hey, as long as you make things work...

[Papewaio]

"Russia has the most capable conventional Army in the western world right now for a conflict in Ukraine.
Citation needed."

Citation needed

I would say that the one who has the military doing exercises in the borders of Ukraine is in a very capable position for a conflict in the Ukraine. They also have access to the main port in Crimea. It will take a lot more logistics for any other conventional army to make it there.

Half the energy for Ukraine comes from Russia. All Russia needs to do is turn off the taps when the pipes go beyond a pro Russian region.

So access, energy supplies and a local populace that is spilt 50:50 in support of the invader. I'm not sure how many trump cards they need. No one else is really in the same position.

[Kadagar_AV]

MY OFFICIAL BET:

Russia will keep stirring the pot, and then send troops in to restore order.

Ukraine will be split after cultural lines.

Crimea with its strategic ports will become Russian.

- Kadagar 3rd March 2014.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ya I was pretty specific in saying Ukraine. We have enough tanks in Germany to make them think twice, but it wouldn't be Desert Storm. Newer Russian tanks are as good or better than an Abrams, and Russia hasn't been gutting its Armored forces for the last decade. The US isn't going to do anything, especially given our Asia Pacific priorities.

Russia's army is also in transition though - in particular they are moving from an Officer heavy army with a broad conscript base to an NCO-heavy one with a semi-professional base. Putin has a limited number of deployable brigades right now, rather like the Nazi's in France, he has breadth but not depth.

By contrast, Europe and the US have armies which are largely deployable, and battle hardened. The major problem is that a lot of the gear is in Afghanistan right now, being shipped home, while the troops have already left. The UK has, theoretically, two deployable Divisions, but it can probably only deploy one right now, it could scrape together and second and third, but only on an actual war-footing.

America's tanks may be a problem, but the Germans, British, and French all have modern gear - just not enough of it.

Even then - what we've seen are Russia's most deployable troops - their army is just as much a paper Tiger as NATO

[Kadagar_AV]

Russia's army is also in transition though - in particular they are moving from an Officer heavy army with a broad conscript base to an NCO-heavy one with a semi-professional base. Putin has a limited number of deployable brigades right now, rather like the Nazi's in France, he has breadth but not depth.

By contrast, Europe and the US have armies which are largely deployable, and battle hardened. The major problem is that a lot of the gear is in Afghanistan right now, being shipped home, while the troops have already left. The UK has, theoretically, two deployable Divisions, but it can probably only deploy one right now, it could scrape together and second and third, but only on an actual war-footing.

America's tanks may be a problem, but the Germans, British, and French all have modern gear - just not enough of it.

Even then - what we've seen are Russia's most deployable troops - their army is just as much a paper Tiger as NATO

As to the bolded part, ever heard of Russia?

Your reasoning however is in tune with several other great military minds, Charles the XII, Napoleon, Hitler... To name a few.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As to the bolded part, ever heard of Russia?

Your reasoning however is in tune with several other great military minds, Charles the XII, Napoleon, Hitler... To name a few.

I was talking offensively

Defensively, you'd need to fight through layers of armour and motor-rifle Brigades.

Offensively, though, there's an upper limit to the number of those formations Putin can employ - not least because he has to leave a large portion of his army facing China.

Charles XII was overconfident, and he wasn't expecting to face the reformed Russian army, Napoleon had already started to lose his marbles to a God complex and Hitler attacked prematurely and got bigged down in the snow.

Rule one to conquer Russia: Obey the seasons. If it wasn't possible, the Tsars couldn't have done it.

[Kadagar_AV]

I was talking offensively

Defensively, you'd need to fight through layers of armour and motor-rifle Brigades.

Offensively, though, there's an upper limit to the number of those formations Putin can employ - not least because he has to leave a large portion of his army facing China.

Charles XII was overconfident, and he wasn't expecting to face the reformed Russian army, Napoleon had already started to lose his marbles to a God complex and Hitler attacked prematurely and got bigged down in the snow.

Rule one to conquer Russia: Obey the seasons. If it wasn't possible, the Tsars couldn't have done it.

Bolded part: Kind of like in the Stalingrad debacle?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Again - invaded in the wrong season - got bogged down in snow.

Even then, they almost pulled it off.

Still - we're not talking about invading Russia, we're talking about facing them down in Ukraine.

[Kadagar_AV]

Again - invaded in the wrong season - got bogged down in snow.

Even then, they almost pulled it off.

Still - we're not talking about invading Russia, we're talking about facing them down in Ukraine.

I totally get your point.

However, right now Russia has some 150.000 men stationed on the border. To compare, USA have spent their economical and military ability to fight some supposed terrorism supposedly threatening them.

The EU forces are more worried by balance of sexual minorities and tax cuts, so they have absolutely NOTHING to send.

Russia in the meantime, has let go of the cold war era thinking, as well as the terrorist era thinking, and now actually have a military force, both equipped and trained, to work in their immediate area.

Should I act surprised when they expand?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

If they want the right to overthrow a government through popular revolution, they can accept the responsibility of consequences that goes with it. The basic rule of a democracy is that, post-election, the country is left with the government that was elected, until the time comes for another election. If you decide that rule is unsatisfactory, then negotiations can take place for a substitute set of rules. During this interregnum, your neighbours may decide to have a hand in deciding the new set of rules. But you shouldn't have any complaint, as it was your choice to abandon those rules in the first place.

Completely agree. Geo Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin et al were quite well aware of the personal price for a failed rebellion. You roll the iron dice, you take your chances.

[lars573]

So wait, now it's Poland to the rescue? They decided to have previously scheduled military exercises on their border with Ukraine.

[Papewaio]

USA may have called it a war on terror. Had dubious intelligence (both sorts) in going into Iraq and the public aren't happy right now because of a generational change in work forces is happening.

But the US economy is no where near broken. Bloated with corporate malfeasance, but not dead, and still has the lions share of economic clout. That economic clout can be seen in Google, Microsoft, Tesla and Apple. All leaders in high tech.

US has off shored a lot of its manufacturing. But certainly not all of it.

Also the standard of living hasn't exactly plummeted while paying for the war on terror. It isn't as if the US is on a war ration economy.

US is still only using a fraction of its firepower and because of poor planning assumed a 6 month turn around and employed contractors for a decade plus pair of quagmires.

So they could both do it more efficiently and with more money.

But if I was going in against Russia, I would look at getting China to apply trade sanctions. As it is China and Russia are more likely to say go away then play to NATOs demands.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Poland sees what appear to be Russian troops sans insignia in Crimea. As one of the very few nations that, arguably, has been invaded and chopped apart MORE than Russia, it is hard to see them just kicking back and waiting for the Spring planting. Since your army needs a bit of practice anyway...

[Shaka_Khan]

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/images/smilies/flags/vietnam.gif LOVE being ski instructor
There's a ski resort in Vietnam?

[Papewaio]

There's a ski resort in Vietnam?

The flags are which nations the ski instructor has worked overtime with.

[Gilrandir]

If they want the right to overthrow a government through popular revolution, they can accept the responsibility of consequences that goes with it. The basic rule of a democracy is that, post-election, the country is left with the government that was elected, until the time comes for another election. If you decide that rule is unsatisfactory, then negotiations can take place for a substitute set of rules.
It is all true until the government starts to employ snipers to shoot at its own citizens. Now I will probably hear from Sarmatian about Nazis throwing Molotov cocktails at those poor Berkuts. That was true as well. But protesters never tormented the captives they had which Berkut did letting one of them stand naked (in winter too) and taking photos with him. I saw videos when doctors tried to reach the wounded, they wore white vests with a red cross on them which they pointed to Berkuts and they got shot through the leg (with gum bullets, oh so very merciful Berkuts). Many of them were shot into the back while they were carrying the wounded away. Journalists infuriated Berkuts especially and were beaten and had their cameras destroyed. As far as I know all international laws forbid the use of snipers in non-military actions. Out of 20 people shot at Institutska Street on the first day of really violent skirmishes 9 WERE SHOT THROUGH THE LEFT EYE. What a hunter that sniper would have made! The tactics used by snipers tells a lot: first they shot a person in the leg and when others tried to carry the wounded away they were knocked about in heaps through the head, heart and carotid artery in the neck. Those snipers shot also at Berkut - many of those were shot through the nape. They say (unconfirmed), it was the older son of Yanukovych who hired mercenaries in Russia and Abkhasia. This son is a dentist, but he has managed to become a billionaire in three years of his father's rule.

[Gilrandir]

Also, I note that you pointed out the Ukrainian Parliament voted to impeach the old president, with the argument being that the replacement of that government was backed by democratic legitimacy.
The argument was that the President escaped, couldn't be located and thus forfeited his duties. Though it is aslo questionable it terms of legitimacy.

[Papewaio]

The problem with multinational peacekeeping force is that it will hardly be neutral. Who's gonna be in it? Americans, French, Russians, Brits, Germans? Not neutral by a long shot.

Maybe we could invite Chinese and Indian troops, in a delicious spiff of irony.

How are Indian troops any different then Canadian, New Zealand or Australian?

I do wonder if people would want to rough up peacekeepers if they were Gurkhas...

[Gilrandir]

The protests in Eastern Ukraine are instigated and indeed headed by Russians. I saw the picture of a bus with russian license plate near the square where a pro-Russian meeting was held (in Donetsk, if I'm not mistaken). The officials talk of sealing the border against Russia as some frontier guards are suspected of letting them in (bribed, of course). The guy who flew the Russian flag from the City hall in Kharkiv is a Russian citizen - a correspondent interviewed him a day later in Moscow.
As for the new Crimean authorities: the head of the Parliament (Konstantinov) is widely known in the Crimea, Kyiv and even Russia for his building frauds. He collected money from people promising to build houses for them and never did (his company is called Console). He borrowed huge sums of money in Russia and now he is trying to foot the bill yielding to Russians all he can hoping that his debts would thus be held remitted. The head of the Crimean government (Aksyonov) is an ex-racketeer of the 1990s and a criminal leader today. What they will succeed in is ruining this year "resort season" as they call it. No one will want to have rest in the Crimea and tourism is in fact the only business (practised 3 months in a year) that gives income to the Crimeans. Two thirds of the Crimean budget is donated from Kyiv as well as 100% fresh water and electricity supply comes from the continent.
The same strategy Russia apllied in Abkhasia in 1992 promising lavish investment and inclusion into Russia - search for pictures of Abkhasian resorts today: pilfered buildings,no tourists to speak of, no inclusion into Russia. The prodigiuos Sochi investment of Putin has to pay back. To do this one should destroy competitors the most powerful of which in the vicinity is (or was ) the Crimea.

[Brenus]

“MY OFFICIAL BET:
Russia will keep stirring the pot, and then send troops in to restore order.
Ukraine will be split after cultural lines.
Crimea with its strategic ports will become Russian.”
Yeap, a replica of US/NATO strategy in Kosovo. Russia might create a Crimean Liberation Army as well…. You don’t change a winning tactic.

By the way, why people always forget that Napoleon took Moscow… His mistake was to believe that would end the war, idea shared by the Germans in 1941.

[Fragony]

It is all true until the government starts to employ snipers to shoot at its own citizens. Now I will probably hear from Sarmatian about Nazis throwing Molotov cocktails at those poor Berkuts. That was true as well. But protesters never tormented the captives they had which Berkut did letting one of them stand naked (in winter too) and taking photos with him. I saw videos when doctors tried to reach the wounded, they wore white vests with a red cross on them which they pointed to Berkuts and they got shot through the leg (with gum bullets, oh so very merciful Berkuts). Many of them were shot into the back while they were carrying the wounded away. Journalists infuriated Berkuts especially and were beaten and had their cameras destroyed. As far as I know all international laws forbid the use of snipers in non-military actions. Out of 20 people shot at Institutska Street on the first day of really violent skirmishes 9 WERE SHOT THROUGH THE LEFT EYE. What a hunter that sniper would have made! The tactics used by snipers tells a lot: first they shot a person in the leg and when others tried to carry the wounded away they were knocked about in heaps through the head, heart and carotid artery in the neck. Those snipers shot also at Berkut - many of those were shot through the nape. They say (unconfirmed), it was the older son of Yanukovych who hired mercenaries in Russia and Abkhasia. This son is a dentist, but he has managed to become a billionaire in three years of his father's rule.

Left eye? As a former Rainbow-Six player I can assure you they are using hacks.

[Sarmatian]

The argument was that the President escaped, couldn't be located and thus forfeited his duties. Though it is aslo questionable it terms of legitimacy.

Then you just oust the president, you don't go to protesters to approve a new government. At the very most, you set up a transitional government which will only deal with technical issues, that is, day-to-day running of the country. Unfortunately, the new semi-legitimate government started passing huge-impacting laws and making efforts to fundamentally change the inner shape of the country and its foreign relations. And now, Ukraine is in a bit of a pickle and the best possible scenario for Ukraine is a more federalized country, with regions given more much more autonomy and addition of other peacekeepers complementing the Russian.

I don't understand why the need for sarcasm with me. I already told you I root for Ukraine in this one and hope you get out of this in one peace and with no loss of territory. I'm just looking at things in a realistic way and can't ignore the huge mistakes made during and after Maidan, or the reality of the situation at the moment. You can't keep playing poker with Putin and re-raising him because he has a stronger hand and more chips.

[Pannonian]

It is all true until the government starts to employ snipers to shoot at its own citizens. Now I will probably hear from Sarmatian about Nazis throwing Molotov cocktails at those poor Berkuts. That was true as well. But protesters never tormented the captives they had which Berkut did letting one of them stand naked (in winter too) and taking photos with him. I saw videos when doctors tried to reach the wounded, they wore white vests with a red cross on them which they pointed to Berkuts and they got shot through the leg (with gum bullets, oh so very merciful Berkuts). Many of them were shot into the back while they were carrying the wounded away. Journalists infuriated Berkuts especially and were beaten and had their cameras destroyed. As far as I know all international laws forbid the use of snipers in non-military actions. Out of 20 people shot at Institutska Street on the first day of really violent skirmishes 9 WERE SHOT THROUGH THE LEFT EYE. What a hunter that sniper would have made! The tactics used by snipers tells a lot: first they shot a person in the leg and when others tried to carry the wounded away they were knocked about in heaps through the head, heart and carotid artery in the neck. Those snipers shot also at Berkut - many of those were shot through the nape. They say (unconfirmed), it was the older son of Yanukovych who hired mercenaries in Russia and Abkhasia. This son is a dentist, but he has managed to become a billionaire in three years of his father's rule.

All very moving and emotional. But not grounds for us to get involved, especially with Russia who can screw us up quite badly if we do. By your own description, the protestors were testing the boundaries from the off, looking to provoke a reaction. Now that they've provoked a reaction, they can deal with the consequences that come with it. If you want a revolution, either deal with the results of that yourself, or make it worthwhile for outsiders to intervene on your behalf. I doubt you can do the latter in comparison with the risks involved, so it has to be the former for you.

Maybe once all this is over, you'll remember the basic rule of democracy. Once you've elected a government, you're stuck with it until the next elections. Don't like it? Make a better case and organise yourself better so you don't lose.

[Fisherking]

How are Indian troops any different then Canadian, New Zealand or Australian?

I do wonder if people would want to rough up peacekeepers if they were Gurkhas...

Because Russia would only see them as more NATO or US pawns.

China, India, and Brazil have the strongest militaries of any countries outside that sphere.

[Sarmatian]

There are first, tentative signs that the crisis might be de-escalating. In a telephone conversation between Merkel and himself, Putin agreed that forming a contact group for Ukraine might be a good idea. That would allow more serious talks between the current Kiev government and Moscow.

Besides that, Valentina Matviyenko, president of the Federation Council, the Russian upper house, spoke on Russian TV yesterday. I haven't been able to find anything in English about that so I'll just offer a recap.

She said that a war between Russia and Ukraine is unthinkable, considering historical and ethnic bonds between the peoples of the two nation. Russia isn't interested in a break-up of Ukraine, although she said that no one can forbid Crimea to hold a referendum on their future. Next she said that it appears that Crimea wants a wider autonomy (it appears Russia doesn't necessarily want a secession, but the language is ambiguous enough that they still may pull a "Kosovo" over there).

In the next part, Matviyenko said that Russia isn't interested in installing Yanukovich back in power and that that is a question for Ukrainian people, but in a fair, transparent and legal elections, which isn't possible in the current state of affairs. She went on that Russia can not talk about sending previously offered monetary aid to Kiev until there's a legitimate government there. She also mentioned the deal between Yanukovich and the opposition in February and how it is a good basis from which to have general elections.

Similar sentiments were heard from Russian deputy Foreign Minister.

What this means in practice, in my opinion, is: Yanukovich stays out but the pre-Maidan government is re-installed, everything this interim government did is null and void, and the new/old government prepares for general elections as soon as possible.

I'd say this is a fair and balanced deal, and Ukraine might even get to keep Crimea, under a very wide autonomy.

[Papewaio]

Well I don't see the irony of Indian troops going in. That one is lost one me.

[Husar]

It is all true until the government starts to employ snipers to shoot at its own citizens. Now I will probably hear from Sarmatian about Nazis throwing Molotov cocktails at those poor Berkuts. That was true as well. But protesters never tormented the captives they had which Berkut did letting one of them stand naked (in winter too) and taking photos with him. I saw videos when doctors tried to reach the wounded, they wore white vests with a red cross on them which they pointed to Berkuts and they got shot through the leg (with gum bullets, oh so very merciful Berkuts). Many of them were shot into the back while they were carrying the wounded away. Journalists infuriated Berkuts especially and were beaten and had their cameras destroyed. As far as I know all international laws forbid the use of snipers in non-military actions. Out of 20 people shot at Institutska Street on the first day of really violent skirmishes 9 WERE SHOT THROUGH THE LEFT EYE. What a hunter that sniper would have made! The tactics used by snipers tells a lot: first they shot a person in the leg and when others tried to carry the wounded away they were knocked about in heaps through the head, heart and carotid artery in the neck. Those snipers shot also at Berkut - many of those were shot through the nape. They say (unconfirmed), it was the older son of Yanukovych who hired mercenaries in Russia and Abkhasia. This son is a dentist, but he has managed to become a billionaire in three years of his father's rule.

I'm pretty sure the Molotovs started flying long before anyone opened fire. You also start by saying the Berkut fired and then you mention that Berkut got shot themselves and that there were mercenaries. It's a bit confusing honestly because why would Yanukovich bring Mercenaries to shoot at both sides to escalate the conflict and make even more sure he'd have to run away?


As for the new Crimean authorities: the head of the Parliament (Konstantinov) is widely known in the Crimea, Kyiv and even Russia for his building frauds. He collected money from people promising to build houses for them and never did (his company is called Console). He borrowed huge sums of money in Russia and now he is trying to foot the bill yielding to Russians all he can hoping that his debts would thus be held remitted. The head of the Crimean government (Aksyonov) is an ex-racketeer of the 1990s and a criminal leader today. What they will succeed in is ruining this year "resort season" as they call it. No one will want to have rest in the Crimea and tourism is in fact the only business (practised 3 months in a year) that gives income to the Crimeans. Two thirds of the Crimean budget is donated from Kyiv as well as 100% fresh water and electricity supply comes from the continent.
The same strategy Russia apllied in Abkhasia in 1992 promising lavish investment and inclusion into Russia - search for pictures of Abkhasian resorts today: pilfered buildings,no tourists to speak of, no inclusion into Russia. The prodigiuos Sochi investment of Putin has to pay back. To do this one should destroy competitors the most powerful of which in the vicinity is (or was ) the Crimea.

Crimea's tourism is their own problem. If they want to secede led by a criminal, let them. In Kiev they wanted to revolt led by violent nationalists and corrupt pro-westerners. And if Russia likes to acquire run-down, desolate regions and ruin them even more while the locals cheer for them, why do we have a problem with that? The West should have learned by now that if people do not ask the West to come and have no oil, it makes no sense. And if people ask the West to come, chances are only about 50:50 that anyone will care, worse if there is no oil to be had.

[Pannonian]

Well I don't see the irony of Indian troops going in. That one is lost one me.

Because China and India themselves have a disputed border in need of peacekeepers?

[Pannonian]

I'm pretty sure the Molotovs started flying long before anyone opened fire. You also start by saying the Berkut fired and then you mention that Berkut got shot themselves and that there were mercenaries. It's a bit confusing honestly because why would Yanukovich bring Mercenaries to shoot at both sides to escalate the conflict and make even more sure he'd have to run away?

There's a video somewhere on youtube of a trebuchet the protestors had built for throwing cocktails. The guy who posted it probably thought it was "cool". I thought the expertise was commendable, its purpose less so, and indicative of a mindset that the "authorities" were there to be baited.

[Sarmatian]

I thought more about the fact the Europeans used to send troops there in the past for various reasons and now we need their troops here to keep the peace.

[Husar]

Do we even want to keep the peace or is it time to let off steam and release the tensions in a nice and shiny proxy war?
If we do nothing now and the tensions stay, the next war will not be a proxy war but a world war. For the sake of preventing the nuclear apocalypse, we should go there now and fight the Russians. I'm just thankful I'm not in the army.

[Fragony]

All very moving and emotional. But not grounds for us to get involved, especially with Russia who can screw us up quite badly if we do. By your own description, the protestors were testing the boundaries from the off, looking to provoke a reaction. Now that they've provoked a reaction, they can deal with the consequences that come with it. If you want a revolution, either deal with the results of that yourself, or make it worthwhile for outsiders to intervene on your behalf. I doubt you can do the latter in comparison with the risks involved, so it has to be the former for you.

Harsh, but I agree. Some political groups in western-Ukraine don't make me very happy anyway.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Russia is now doing the same thing in Donetsk, Eastern Ukraine. Expect more of this in the future. The precedent for impunity has been set. NATO should have built up forces in the Black Sea after the Ossetian conflict, but decided against it. Maybe Europeans will stop the circle jerk and realize that it is time to man-up, now that their borders are imperilled by someone who has 19th century political aims.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The flags are which nations the ski instructor has worked overtime with.

insert: claims to have


We at the .org have yet to be provided with corroboration.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Russia is now doing the same thing in Donetsk, Eastern Ukraine. Expect more of this in the future. The precedent for impunity has been set. NATO should have built up forces in the Black Sea after the Ossetian conflict, but decided against it. Maybe Europeans will stop the circle jerk and realize that it is time to man-up, now that their borders are imperilled by someone who has 19th century political aims.

It's simple really. Just demonstrate that you are willing to kill ten-thousand of your own to stop them. Then they will listen to alternatives. If they are willing to kill 10k of their own and you are not, your options to stop them become limited.

[rajpoot]

Following up on the man behind it all, I was reading up on Putin and I found that Merkel after a conversation with Putin spoke with Obama and told him that she found Putin was 'out of touch with reality' and in 'a world of his own' (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/ukraine-vladimir-putin-angela-merkel-russian).
Interestingly I recall reading that Bush once expressed similar sentiments to Blair about Putin, saying that 'he is not very well informed' and arguing with him is like 'arguing with an eight year old'.
Really don't know what to make of it. Do Western leaders just misunderstand Putin because of extreme difference in perspectives or is Putin actually a victim of ignorance and illusions?

This relatively old article makes for an interesting read about Bush-Putin relation. (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/05/the_seduction_of_george_w_bush_by_vladimir_putin)

[Kagemusha]

Hmmmm..This day has been very confusing indeed. From certain sources we hear that Russia is warming up to negotiations via OSCE, while New York Times claims that Merkel thinks that Putin might be loosing it a bit, while Russian secretary of foreign affairs claims that China is backing Russian policies in Ukraine and last there is news that Russia is launching war maneuvers this time at Kaliningrad, which means the Russian Baltic fleet is flexing its muscles, which seems bit like giving the finger to the NATO statements of yesterday..And this is just part of the news from today...Very confusing indeed..:shrug:

[rvg]

This is really sad. I look at what is going on and can't help but shake my head in disgust. Not because of what Russia is doing, but to whom. This would be comparable to us invading Canada. There are certain things that you just don't do to someone that close to you, not even in big politics.

[Sarmatian]

Western leaders, at least most of them, still have a colonial mindset of "we're entitled to everything and we can do no wrong". When you have Kerry condemning Putin about "invading a sovereign country under a false pretext" with a straight face, you understand just how out of touch with reality some of them really are.

[Pannonian]

This is really sad. I look at what is going on and can't help but shake my head in disgust. Not because of what Russia is doing, but to whom. This would be comparable to us invading Canada. There are certain things that you just don't do to someone that close to you, not even in big politics.

Just to extend the comparison, does this mean Russian forces will shortly be routed and the Kremlin burned? The Russians will eventually make up a song after a consolation victory at St Petersburg, hours after a ceasefire was agreed.

[HoreTore]

Bah.

"Right" and "wrong" are irrelevant terms in the world of power politics.

[rvg]

Western leaders, at least most of them, still have a colonial mindset of "we're entitled to everything and we can do no wrong". When you have Kerry condemning Putin about "invading a sovereign country under a false pretext" with a straight face, you understand just how out of touch with reality some of them really are.

You know, Serbia isn't that far from Ukraine. Who's to say you're not on Putin's hit list?

[Husar]

Yes, and it's not just western leaders, it's also the public and the press, at least partially.

Merkel is also known as the Teflon lady because she always manages to blame others for her mistakes. She appoints all the wrong ministers and it's never her fault, there was even a joke statistic about how long people stay in office on average after she expressed her "full trust" in them: http://saschalobo.com/2013/02/11/angela-merkels-vertrau-o-meter-papst-edition/

She also loves to repeat the same empty phrases such as "We have to find a common solution...".

And do I really have to explain why Bush saying Putin is living in a different world is hilarious?

[Montmorency]

'he is not very well informed' and arguing with him is like 'arguing with an eight year old'.

Well, can anyone here deny having felt this way on the Org at some point?

It's a matter of strongly-contrasting frameworks.

But we're not as different as we think, ultimately...

Anyway, didn't Bush also throw a fit in front of Putin over Caucasian politics at the 2008 Olympics?

[Kagemusha]

Do we even want to keep the peace or is it time to let off steam and release the tensions in a nice and shiny proxy war?
If we do nothing now and the tensions stay, the next war will not be a proxy war but a world war. For the sake of preventing the nuclear apocalypse, we should go there now and fight the Russians. I'm just thankful I'm not in the army.

Rule number 1. We do not want war until the day wars will be fought between politicians themselves.:yes:

[Husar]

Merkel is doing it wrong anyway, if she wants to get through to Putin she should call Gerhard Schröder, he's always been a good friend of Putin. I wonder whether he still works for that russian gas company. Either way I do not believe that Putin has lost it, he probably has a plan and so far it seems to work rather well.

[Kagemusha]

According to BBC, Russian Black Sea Fleet has given Ukrainian forces at Crimea deadline until 03:00 GMT,Tuesday, march 4th to surrender or face all out assault..:shame:

[Sarmatian]

You know, Serbia isn't that far from Ukraine. Who's to say you're not on Putin's hit list?

Actually it is quite far, but that doesn't matter. We're landlocked and surrounded with NATO bases. In your face, Putin! Not to mention that mighty Bulgarian Khans, our century old allies (minus a war here and there, and again here and there, and another one here... and few smaller skirmishes... some insults... footy trashings...) will defend us from the Bear. There still are fierce steppe horseman genes in them and you know what fierce steppe horsemen did to Russia? In winter?


Rule number 1. We do not want war until the day wars will be fought between politicians themselves.:yes:

Oh, man, I hate boxing, but I'd sell my car to see a Putin-Obama match, with Merkel holding up the round number (but NOT in a Bikini).

[Sarmatian]

They were given same kind of ultimatums before. It's intimidation. The important part is that it came from the Black Sea Fleet and hasn't been confirmed by anyone in Moscow who's actually authorized to order something like that.

We should start worrying when Putin says that.

[Kagemusha]

They were given same kind of ultimatums before. It's intimidation. The important part is that it came from the Black Sea Fleet and hasn't been confirmed by anyone in Moscow who's actually authorized to order something like that.

We should start worrying when Putin says that.

Lets just hope it wont be confirmed by Russian political leadership.

EDIT: Russia is now denying that any official ultimatum have been given. Little bit earlier Russia has called for an meeting of UN security council for this night. Sounds like good news. :yes:

[rvg]

Actually it is quite far, but that doesn't matter. We're landlocked and surrounded with NATO bases. In your face, Putin! Not to mention that mighty Bulgarian Khans, our century old allies (minus a war here and there, and again here and there, and another one here... and few smaller skirmishes... some insults... footy trashings...) will defend us from the Bear. There still are fierce steppe horseman genes in them and you know what fierce steppe horsemen did to Russia? In winter?

I suppose Myth has more reasons to worry than you do. But you're next, right after Bulgaria gets subjugated.

[Sarmatian]

I suppose Myth has more reasons to worry than you do. But you're next, right after Bulgaria gets subjugated.

To be attacked you have to have something worth conquering. Nowadays, we can't even get the Germans, the traditional Balkan invaders, interested. We tried, pleading, crying, begging but the Germans were adamant - NEIN! No invasion for you, Balkanische Schweine. Back in the day, they'd do it for a sausage.

So, what is in the rest of the world incorrectly seen as mismanagement of the country and rampant corruption is actually a genius master plan by our politicians. Destroy anything of value and you're safe from invasion.

[rvg]

To be attacked you have to have something worth conquering...

Not a problem. If Russia considers Crimea important enough to conquer, then Serbia is definitely worth it. Heck, they put so much effort into maintaining Black Sea fleet, it's ridiculous.

Oh look, we're the masters of this puddle, the lords of this bottle! The Turks hold the cork to the bottle, but that's okay, in the meantime we can project our might at Romania and Bulgaria.

Waste of money, if you ask me, but good for posturing.

[Kagemusha]

Not a problem. If Russia considers Crimea important enough to conquer, then Serbia is definitely worth it. Heck, they put so much effort into maintaining Black Sea fleet, it's ridiculous.

Oh look, we're the masters of this puddle, the lords of this bottle! The Turks hold the cork to the bottle, but that's okay, in the meantime we can project our might at Romania and Bulgaria.

Waste of money, if you ask me, but good for posturing.

Apparently you are wrong about where Putin is looking for next. According to The Telegraph UK, Putin has been last seen checking out Russian tanks and artillery near Viborg at Karelian Isthmus, near the Finnish- Russian border just moments a go....~;p

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10672417/Ukraine-live.html

[rvg]

Apparently you are wrong about where Putin is looking for next. According to The Telegraph UK, Putin has been last seen checking out Russian tanks and artillery near Viborg at Karelian Isthmus, near the Finnish- Russian border just moments a go....~;p

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10672417/Ukraine-live.html

That just proves my point: Russia will take anything that isn't nailed down. The value of what they're taking in unimportant.

P.S. Join NATO. Now. If you know what's good for you.

[Kagemusha]

That just proves my point: Russia will take anything that isn't nailed down. The value of what they're taking in unimportant.

P.S. Join NATO. Now. If you know what's good for you.

I have shared your opinion concerning NATO as long as i can remember. If only the majority of my countrymen would share that feeling..

[Sarmatian]

Join NATO. Now. If you know what's good for you.

Whole grain, non-saturated fats, sugar-free drinks and lots of excercise. What's that got to do with NATO?

[rvg]

Whole grain, non-saturated fats, sugar-free drinks and lots of excercise. What's that got to do with NATO?

You get to do all that as a free man.

[Kagemusha]

Whole grain, non-saturated fats, sugar-free drinks and lots of excercise. What's that got to do with NATO?

You do realize that diet could have life threatening effects to a Finn, when our normal diet consists of Vodka and beer and basic exercise method is brawling in front of late night food stands. :inquisitive:

[Montmorency]

You get to do all that as a free man.

Umm...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUIuUEH4qTY

[Slyspy]

That just proves my point: Russia will take anything that isn't nailed down. The value of what they're taking in unimportant.

P.S. Join NATO. Now. If you know what's good for you.

It is the taking of it which has value.

[Papewaio]

So Crimea is a cunning ruse so Putins real plan of liberating Nokia from the fiendish clutches of Windoze can go off without a hitch.

:smoking:

[HoreTore]

So Crimea is a cunning ruse so Putins real plan of liberating Nokia from the fiendish clutches of Windoze can go off without a hitch.

:smoking:

Nokia still exist...?

[Papewaio]

Nokia still exist...?

If its good enough for Colonialism it is good enough for Nokia.

Being an out of date anachronism in a modern world they is...

[Pannonian]

So Crimea is a cunning ruse so Putins real plan of liberating Nokia from the fiendish clutches of Windoze can go off without a hitch.

:smoking:

The soundtrack of the film would certainly be interesting. Is it possible to do an epic, military version of the Nokia theme?

[Kadagar_AV]

Not a problem. If Russia considers Crimea important enough to conquer, then Serbia is definitely worth it. Heck, they put so much effort into maintaining Black Sea fleet, it's ridiculous.

Oh look, we're the masters of this puddle, the lords of this bottle! The Turks hold the cork to the bottle, but that's okay, in the meantime we can project our might at Romania and Bulgaria.

Waste of money, if you ask me, but good for posturing.

You think Putin regrets spending money on the Black Sea fleet? An interesting notion.

I for one believe he is more like "We have a fleet here, you don't".

Try getting carrier groups through the bottleneck when you don't control the air.

[gaelic cowboy]

I was talking offensively

Defensively, you'd need to fight through layers of armour and motor-rifle Brigades.

Offensively, though, there's an upper limit to the number of those formations Putin can employ - not least because he has to leave a large portion of his army facing China.

Charles XII was overconfident, and he wasn't expecting to face the reformed Russian army, Napoleon had already started to lose his marbles to a God complex and Hitler attacked prematurely and got bigged down in the snow.

Rule one to conquer Russia: Obey the seasons. If it wasn't possible, the Tsars couldn't have done it.

Rule number one is to conquer russia start from the east.

[Pannonian]

Rule number one is to conquer russia start from the east.

Rule number two: Not too far east.

[HopAlongBunny]

Russia abandoning Sevastopol is as likely as the USA abandoning Hawaii.

[HopAlongBunny]

All sorts of goodies on the East coast; oil and gas which is the life-blood of the Russian economy...

[Montmorency]

Try getting carrier groups through the bottleneck when you don't control the air.

The Strait is rather far from Russian airbases, and I doubt the Turks would appreciate Russian jets flying over Istanbul to bomb the Americans...

[Kadagar_AV]

The Strait is rather far from Russian airbases, and I doubt the Turks would appreciate Russian jets flying over Istanbul to bomb the Americans...

It's within operational range.

And if it comes to that situation, I don't think Russia would care much what Turkey thinks.

It won't, however, come to that as neither EU nor USA will do anything.

[Montmorency]

It's within operational range.

At the edge - from the Crimea. If it's Russia-proper, forget about it - the strike craft won't be able to make it.


And if it comes to that situation, I don't think Russia would care much what Turkey thinks.

They would, if they expect a future after 2014 - international politics is not like your TBS games.

[HopAlongBunny]

A nice synopsis from BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26421703

[Papewaio]

If the US intervened that fleet would be on the bottom of the ocean before anybody knew what was going on. Fortunately for Russia, we probably won't intervene. Targeted stealth asswhoopings are something we've still got the edge on. One B2 flying waaay up there with a payload of smartbombs is all it would take.

Yet you would somehow accidentally hit the Chinese Embassy in the process...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Here's why: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26427848

The ousted President called for Russian troops.

Hmmm.

That's a good fig leaf.

Couldn't find a better version of this:


http://youtu.be/YSvOK9RRGFM (http://youtu.be/YSvOK9RRGFM)

[Xiahou]

At least we've got a competent leader managing things for us...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Eh - Obama is deploying the progressive fallacy "We did that already".

It's a great rhetorical trick - and most Americans fell for it.

Doesn't mean Obama really believed it.

[Shaka_Khan]

The flags are which nations the ski instructor has worked overtime with.
I see.....
Or he went during his vacation away from China or Japan.....

[rvg]

You think Putin regrets spending money on the Black Sea fleet? An interesting notion.
I don't think he regrets it. He has plenty of money to waste, and if he runs out there's always more to steal. I just think it's an unnecessary financial drain that's only good for dick-waiving.


I for one believe he is more like "We have a fleet here, you don't".
Sure, he can have a fleet there, but what for? It's useless as far as projecting power because it can't get out into the Mediterranean. Almost as pointless as having a large naval presence in the Caspian Sea.


Try getting carrier groups through the bottleneck when you don't control the air.
There's no need: a carrier can operate just fine out of the Aegean and provide good air cover.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I believe it's *for* covering troops crossing the sea - because it's quicker to attack he Balkans by Sea AND Air than by land.

So, I reckon we're about 5 minutes from Western Brown Alert.

[rvg]

I believe it's *for* covering troops crossing the sea - because it's quicker to attack he Balkans by Sea AND Air than by land.

That is highly dependent on who is attacking whom.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Well if the Russians ever seriously wanted to invade Bulgaria like you suggested then it would make the logistics more convenient. Meanwhile the fleet is only useful for intimidation and prestige purposes. I don't think the Russians mind that very much.

If nothing else it keeps a lot of potentially angry young men off the streets and generates a loyal voting block. :shrug:

[Gilrandir]

Maybe once all this is over, you'll remember the basic rule of democracy. Once you've elected a government, you're stuck with it until the next elections. Don't like it? Make a better case and organise yourself better so you don't lose.
One statement that can give a different perception of legitimacy of the government: Hitler was legitimatly elected chancellor of Germany. So what do you think of a coup against him in July 1943? I expect you would say that it is good that the coup failed. They may have assassinated a legitimate chancellor whose term hasn't expired. Being legitimately elected does not mean the elected one may do whatever he wants until the next election comes.

[Gilrandir]

Then you just oust the president, you don't go to protesters to approve a new government.


How do you implement ousting? A delegation of egg-heads coming to him and saying: "Now will you please go away, sir, will you?" And the protesters demanded approval of the new government because they were (and are) afraid that 2004 scenario will be played again - a gang of political thieves replacing a gang of political thugs. And Maidan was not (and is not) very happy about all of the new government either. But unfortunately we have other worries now then go discussing the personal composition of the government.

[Gilrandir]

You also start by saying the Berkut fired and then you mention that Berkut got shot themselves and that there were mercenaries. It's a bit confusing honestly because why would Yanukovich bring Mercenaries to shoot at both sides to escalate the conflict and make even more sure he'd have to run away?

He didn't mean to run away. Both-sides shooting was aimed at exactly what you guessed: to escalate the conflict, make both sides furious, justify employment of the army against the protesters and show himself a firm and decisive leader able to cope with the situation. Until the snipers were involved NO ONE spoke of ousting Yanukovych - they just wanted a new government. Does Yanukovych's appeal to Putin for Russian army invading Ukraine mean that he wants de-escalation and peaceful solution? In all three months of Maidan he never went to talk to people there while they were still moderate enough to talk to. His background and worldview prevents him from seeing that people with a different point of view should be considered worth of negotiating. He did negotiate when the situation got out of hand completely, his own followers started to desert him and the West intervened.

[Brenus]

"Hitler was legitimatly elected chancellor of Germany." Nope. Hitler was called by Hindenburg, Hitler was never elected in fact.

[Sarmatian]

Didn't you oust him? After that, you created a new government. Why, if Yanukovich was the problem? But, ok, let's say there weren't enough indications that the old government would hold fair and transparent elections. In that case you set up an interim, technical government which only deals with day to day management of the country until the first moment elections could be held. Why? Because that government is ILLEGITIMATE! It wasn't agreed on by the people or their elected representatives, so that government simply doesn't have the mandate to do anything else.

In reality, the interim government tried to use the window before the new elections to encourage protesters to bring down other elected representatives they didn't like, to weaken and disorganize the largest opposition party and to fundamentally alter both domestic and foreign policy. That is called a putsch.

It certainly isn't the first one in history. After the October Revolution in Russia, there were at least 10 different armies on its territories. Japanese and American army, French and British intervention force, remnants of AH and German army, Polish army... together with many different internal factions. The new Soviet government dealt with them. They made a deal with some and defeated and expelled the others.

This is what Pannonian's been telling you. If you go that route, either make sure you can deal with the consequences or make sure those who can get involved are okay with it.

Since you can't defeat and expel the Russian army, you have to deal with them diplomatically. Going back to earlier government or setting up a new one, true interim government whose only purpose is to manage the country until new elections, declaring everything Maidan government did null and void is a very good starting position and something that Russia might be willing to accept. I don't think you could get a better deal than that and that is the only scenario in which I see you having decent chance of keeping Crimea.

[Brenus]

"If the US intervened that fleet would be on the bottom of the ocean before anybody knew what was going on. Fortunately for Russia, we probably won't intervene. Targeted stealth asswhoopings are something we've still got the edge on. One B2 flying waaay up there with a payload of smartbombs is all it would take." Stop believing your own propaganda. Propaganda is good if you don't start to believe it is true.:yes:
I suggest you should study the Air Forces losses against the small country like Serbia during the NATO (against sovereignty and UN resolutions, by the way) Air Campaign before making this kind of statement. Then, can you explain how you will prevent missiles from Russia to kill your Fleet in San Diego, or wherever the US Fleet is?