Ukraine Thread

[a completely inoffensive name]

In all seriousness, Ukraine has been destabilized and will continue to be destabilized for as long as the rebels have support. Putin has his port and has weakened a potential threat at his border. Nothing left to do other than keep counting the bodies and wonder where Putin wants to expand next. And yes, I believe this whole affair has shown how inept Europe is when it comes to defense. Putin now must be plotting how to save those "ethnic russians" that need saving in Estonia and Latvia.

[Gilrandir]

(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michae...b_4938747.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30414955

All I can add to PVC's post (indeed, it echoes what I have told not once) is that the two links you gave aim (as I see it) to call attention to the fact that THERE WERE nazis on Maidan. Who denies it? The question is how significant was their influence. As the later developments (parliamentary and presidential elections) show, their influence was rendered non-existent. And you claim that Maidan ended in a nazi coup. Strange are those nazis if AFTER A COUP which GAVE THEM ALL THE POWER (as you claim it) they peacefully step down and merge with the background. Meek nazis?
And the phrase "Ukrainian Nazi past" shows how unbiased and impartial is your attitude to Ukraine in general. One might as well claim that France has a Nazi past.

Facts on the ground are not as clear cut as western/ukrainian politicians and media are portraying them, but, at the end of the day, there is no question that what Russia did and still does in Ukraine is wrong.

After that I blame Kiev politicians, which refuse to accept the current situation and make necessary political changes for it to stop. They've gambled, they've lost, they should walk away before they lose even more.

So no blame on the Moscow Politician who refuses to make necessary political changes to stop? It looks that his gamble is not a victory either.

But again I see a failure to realize that whatever sensible concessions Kyiv politicians may offer, it is Putin who ultimately chooses the course of further development of the conflict. Once he has gone that far he can't just stop. In case he does (or, moreover, retracts) his all previous desicions and actions will seem fallacious which he will never suffer to admit. There are no face-saving steps for him but to push on till he gets what he wants.

But even if we imagine that a peace of some kind was made with Putin, who will ever believe that he will stick to the stipulated conditions? Not Ukraine, for sure. And not Russia's neighbors. Thus Putin is himself heading to where he has long been imagining himself in - to the besieged fortress state.

In all seriousness, Ukraine has been destabilized and will continue to be destabilized for as long as the rebels have support. Putin has his port and has weakened a potential threat at his border.

As I have remarked, tactically Russia looks to have won. Strategically, it has lost. It deprived itself of historically (more or less) friendly neighbor and gave it a decisive push EU- and NATO-wards, put on alert other neighbors, whether friendly (Belarus and Kazakhstan) or otherwise (the Baltic states), almost ruined its ties with the West, got its economy on decline... Is it a good exchange for a port and a heavily donated region with no land-bridge to the bulk of Russia? Let everyone answer the question himself.


An opinion of a Russian politilogist on Russia's current international stance:
http://www.the-american-interest.com...-of-blackmail/

[Brenus]

“Well, I never said any of that, at least nine months ago” So, that makes you a Putin lover…

Well that symbol doesn't actually look a lot like the Wolf Cross, does it? Nope, it is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_SS_...sion_Das_Reich

“Turn it around - the French have been electing lots of Nazi's and Fascists over the last few years” And? I will even play my Gilrandir and arguing about figures (2 MP in the National Parliament!), there is actually and in a recent past no openly Nazi in the French Government. And there are no official political parties openly claiming to be Nazi. And even if, that wouldn’t be an excuse.

“Well, you have no excuse for being pro-Russian in this context” This was answered by someone else.

“GAVE THEM ALL THE POWER (as you claim it)” Lies.

“One might as well claim that France has a Nazi past.” And one might be right. The difference between the nations who love Nazi and the none loving Nazi is that nor are the Germans or the French are proud of their Nazi, whereas in Ukraine they are now national heroes.

“Strategically, it has lost.” In keeping a harbour for its fleet, securing under-water pipelines and pushing potential NATO troops a little bit to the west? Few defeats like this and Putin take all Europe…

“to the besieged fortress state” You should follow more closely international politics. Without even mentioning China and India, USA and EU need Putin/Russia badly for Iran, Iraq, Syria and other little problems.
I think that the selling by Russia of AA missile to Iran is a “free” warning. Of course, it won’t really matter as everyone knows that Russian Material is crap as it is design and built by drunken corrupted stupid Russians in obsolete factories.

[Montmorency]

whereas in Ukraine they are now national heroes.

So, like the Cetniks in Serbia?

In keeping a harbour for its fleet, securing under-water pipelines and pushing potential NATO troops a little bit to the west? Few defeats like this and Putin take all Europe…

Black Knight Syndrome

USA and EU need Putin/Russia badly for Iran, Iraq, Syria and other little problems.

I'm very interested to hear the your basis for that interpretation.

[Sarmatian]

So, like the Cetniks in Serbia?

Cetniks are a disgrace (the ww2 and the nineties versions - original, Balkan War version was ok I guess).

The spent little time fighting the nazis and more time fighting the communists and killing civilians. They were small scale mostly. Not nearly UPA level, but still.

[Brenus]

"I'm very interested to hear the your basis for that interpretation." Read your usual newspapers about Iran Nuclear Program, civil war in Syria, Isis and others points where the West need Russia for various reasons.

@ Montmorency : No: Marechal de Villars, after the battle of Malplaquet (French defeat against the English, but left the English incapable to exploit): “If it please God to give your majesty's enemies another such victory, they are ruined” to Louis the XIV.

[Kagemusha]

Let us see in three weeks whether if EU will renew sanctions against Russia. If the case will be such and the sanctions will be renewed. I dont see any reason for Russia to hold back at Ukraine any more.

What is the most disturbing to me is that effectively nobody is benefiting from the current situation, except maybe US for gaining more influence at Europe, while EU is only loosing from the situation, similar to Russia and Ukraine.

[Gilrandir]

“Turn it around - the French have been electing lots of Nazi's and Fascists over the last few years” And? I will even play my Gilrandir and arguing about figures (2 MP in the National Parliament!), there is actually and in a recent past no openly Nazi in the French Government. And there are no official political parties openly claiming to be Nazi. And even if, that wouldn’t be an excuse.

As the latest local elections in France show, Le Pen's party is gaining votes not losing them (as it happened to Svoboda and Right Sector in Ukraine). Who knows, perhaps some elections later we will witness the greatest nightmare of Brenus come true.

“One might as well claim that France has a Nazi past.” And one might be right. The difference between the nations who love Nazi and the none loving Nazi is that nor are the Germans or the French are proud of their Nazi, whereas in Ukraine they are now national heroes.

Charges against UPA and Bandera are not of them being nazis, but of collaborationism and massacres of Poles. While the latter was true, the former (as I have shown) is disputable.

“Strategically, it has lost.” In keeping a harbour for its fleet, securing under-water pipelines and pushing potential NATO troops a little bit to the west? Few defeats like this and Putin take all Europe…

1. Keeping a harbor which can be used only defensively is a tactical gain.
2. What pipelines do you mean? The South Stream was suspended indefinitely, any others are still only nascent projects so far from implementation, that it is precarious to speak of them being "secured".
3. Before the Russian invasion started the NATO troops were on the borders of Russia in the north (so no pushing back happened there) and in Romania to the south. By doing what he has done Putin made it likely for the NATO troops to come closer to Russia in the south (Ukraine is unlikely to be averse to any NATO's overtures as to deployment of its forces), to be reinfoced in the north, moreover, Finland is much disturbed and is contemplating joining NATO. And you call it a strategic victory?

“to the besieged fortress state” You should follow more closely international politics. Without even mentioning China and India, USA and EU need Putin/Russia badly for Iran, Iraq, Syria and other little problems.

Somehow, they have been doing fine without Russia so far. So this "badly need" is only your wishful thinking.
As for Russia, the besieged state mentality has been actively propelled in it recently, so that it may unite the nation and not question Putin's aggressive politics.

The spent little time fighting the nazis and more time fighting the communists and killing civilians. They were small scale mostly. Not nearly UPA level, but still.

It is easy to judge from the age distance of 70 years and with modern awareness. You seem to be concerned about "average everyday people in the street". Let's imagine such a man in western Ukraine between the world wars.
He knows he is Ukrainian, but he sees his land being under Polish power. He wants to change it, but it is not likely to happen. And then, in September 1939 Poland falls apart and the Soviets "liberate" their land ostensibly to join it with "Greater Ukraine". He is glad and even inspired. But within less than 2 years, by massive repressions, executions and deportations the Soviets succeded in estranging the locals. When Nazis come, he feels enheartened and hopes to finally have an independent Ukrainian state. But again he is cheated of all hopes and promises. So he takes a gun and starts fighting everyone - the Poles (remembering his old grievances), the Soviets (remembering the recent grievances), the Nazis (seeing the current grievances). He may make temporary alliances with either of his enemies to fight another one.
Naturally, he is embittered and his heart is hardened in the continuous struggle against anyone who (as he thinks) is out to grab his land.
Having these considerations in mind and trying to put oneself in his place makes me wish to forgive such a man defending his native land against all odds.

[Husar]

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/0...231638732.html

Russia President Vladimir Putin has told an Italian newspaper that his country was "not a threat to the West", and that he was still committed to a Ukraine peace deal despite a fresh flare-up in violence.
"I would like to say - there's no need to be afraid of Russia," Putin told Corriere della Sera in an interview published on Saturday, ruling out a major conflict between Russia and NATO member countries.
"The world has changed so much that people in their right mind cannot imagine such a large-scale military conflict today."

Only a sick person - and even then only in his sleep - can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO.

There you have it, we can all calm down now.

[Sarmatian]

It is easy to judge from the age distance of 70 years and with modern awareness. You seem to be concerned about "average everyday people in the street". Let's imagine such a man in western Ukraine between the world wars.
He knows he is Ukrainian, but he sees his land being under Polish power. He wants to change it, but it is not likely to happen. And then, in September 1939 Poland falls apart and the Soviets "liberate" their land ostensibly to join it with "Greater Ukraine". He is glad and even inspired. But within less than 2 years, by massive repressions, executions and deportations the Soviets succeded in estranging the locals. When Nazis come, he feels enheartened and hopes to finally have an independent Ukrainian state. But again he is cheated of all hopes and promises. So he takes a gun and starts fighting everyone - the Poles (remembering his old grievances), the Soviets (remembering the recent grievances), the Nazis (seeing the current grievances). He may make temporary alliances with either of his enemies to fight another one.
Naturally, he is embittered and his heart is hardened in the continuous struggle against anyone who (as he thinks) is out to grab his land.
Having these considerations in mind and trying to put oneself in his place makes me wish to forgive such a man defending his native land against all odds.

I know that time is relative, but hasn't it been 70 years in Ukraine also?

Anyway, past repressions are not a justification for mass-murdering civilians.

When you have an independent nation state and some groups think that the dominant ethnic group in that country isn't "free" (or free enough), that's when you should start suspecting they have strong nazi/fascist tendencies.
And, in classic nazi/fascist fashion, they aren't thinking of actually building a nation, they want to clean it. And, of course, there's the obligatory harkening back to the glory days when One Leader led a strongly motivated National Force against all enemies.

It's not even original.