Ukraine Thread

[Gilrandir]

We as in our governments, intelligence services and populations. So do you think Ukraine would be better off if the West finally sent military there and started to carpet bomb the separatist forces? Do you expect Putin to retreat in that scenario or launch an all-out offensive on Ukraine after which Ukraine would be even better off? You keep criticizing what we don, maybe tell us what we should do and what you expect to happen if we do that. Constructive criticism is much better than just whining about the attempts of others to help.

1. It may be an eye-opener, but all you people are doing here is sheer criticizing - nations, governments, individuals, minorities, confessions, values, trends ... The whole forum is about it. So I just conform to the pattern.
2. Own up to it: the "we" aren't helping (or attempting to help) Ukraine. The we are concerned with how to keep what they have had before 2014 (reputation-wise, money-wise, business-wise, security-wise). This approach was once epitomized in a phrase by Pannonian: "I was better off when I didn't know anything about Ukraine and I would be happier if the good old times returned". If we look at the Ukraine situation from this vantage point everything the we do is sensible. The problem is that in the past such attitude often led to adverse consequences.
3. As to what may be done to stop Putin: total economic and finacial embargo/blockade. Weapon supplies (if any are done) should not be heralded by worldwide trumpet calls. And peacekeepers at the frontlines. Of course, I don't know (and no one does - except, perhaps, Brenus the Seer) if it will bring the desired result or what will the Huilo do if such measures are introduced, but the we have tried other things and they didn't work, so maybe it is time to try something else, no?

And you never told us your recipe. So spill it out.

With the first option they may still have reserves to keep fighting until you and others demand an end to the ceasefire and with the second option there might be "intense fighting" on the front that would make you and others demand an end to the ceasefire, no?

And who provides the reserves? If Russia decided on stopping rebels their reserves would run short within weeks. And I've heard reports of dissatisfaction among the separatists, as their wages are not always regularly paid, which shows the absence of significant reserves.
As for the second option, the intense fighting that would ensue will be far behind the front lines (as are the non-intense fightings among the separatists that we witness from time to time), so it will in no way be considered a violation of ceasefire between UKRAINE and SEPARATISTS.

No - unless the Ukrainian Church applies to the Ecumenical Patriarch to be released from the Moscow Patriarchate they are answerable to Moscow. So they agree or they get Excommunicated, which trickles all the way down to YOU being excommunicated with Constantinople. Messy. It'll get even messier when Constantinople convenes an Ecumenical Council over the issue.

Ukaine has several christian churches, those with the largest congregations being Ukrainian Orthodox church (Moscow patriarchy), Ukrainian Orthodox church (Kyiv patriarchy), Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox church and Greek Catholic church. The only "canonical" church (recognized by Constantinople) is the first and the dioceses in the Crimea belonged to it. But it has (officially) a complete autonomy within Russian Orthodox church, including its property and right to choose a metropolitan (and the latest elections happened in August 2014). Its status can be loosely compared to the status of Scotland within the UK. Can Scotland give some of the state property or land to England without prior discussions, voting and other procedures? I don't think so. That is why alienating property/dioceses of UOC was as much of a treason as the imagined alienation in Scotland would be.

Why is it so hard to see that there are people here who would like to further escalate the conflict?

However numerous such people in the West may be (or you recognize them as such) the only person responsible for further escalating the conflict is Putin. Other "hawks" are only on-lookers doomed to react (mostly inadequately) to Putin's moves.

“Ukraine happened.”Oops, you forgot few steps, as US missiles in Poland, NATO attack on Serbia, building of US bases all around Russia (Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, Georgia, Turkey, Baltic States, Japan, South Korea, Bulgaria, Romania, etc.): Indeed, it did. Miscalculation, ignorance, arrogance, violence, Coup d’Etat followed by attacks,

Remind us, how many lives were lost during the malicious base-planting process? And compare against what was and is going on in Ukraine.

“Russia is the biggest country on the planet and makes most other countries look like dwarves. The only way to not have bases anywhere near Russia is to have them in Africa, South America or Australia.” So many? So recent? And why do you need bases around it, if not for the capacity to attack in all flanks?

Now remind us, how many Nato's flank attacks against Russia happened and compare it against Russia's attacks in Transdniestria, Abkhasia, South Ossetia, Chechnya and now Ukraine. How come that Russia has been delighting in creating a belt of unrecognized quasi-states around its borders, while Nato did it once with Kosovo (and you never tire to bring it up as an ultimate example)? The existing pattern and current Russian government's attitude suggest that the Empire's reconquista is likely to proceed.