Ukraine-in-a-thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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.

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.

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.

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 ?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

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

Brutish and stupid, like they have always been.

Quote:

---

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

---

Citation needed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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/

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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...

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

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.

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

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.

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/image...gs/vietnam.gif LOVE being ski instructor

---

There's a ski resort in Vietnam?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaka_Khan

There's a ski resort in Vietnam?

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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...

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.

“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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

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.

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

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.

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

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'.
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.

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:

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Bah.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

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/ang...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?

Quote:

---

'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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

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.

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

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).

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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/worl...aine-live.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

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/worl...aine-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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

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:

Quote:

---

You get to do all that as a free man.

---

Umm...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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.

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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:

---

Nokia still exist...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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:

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

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

---

Rule number two: Not too far east.

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