Ukraine Thread

[Sarmatian]

It is apparently much more benign if someone is shown enmity for a half of century rather than just for the last few weeks.

http://www.unian.info/politics/45212...rade-zone.html
Will we hear anything against it from Russia?

1) That was in 2011
2) The fact that you didn't hear anything against it from Russia kinda proves that this whole thing isn't about free trade but political and military issues.

[Gilrandir]

But they were RECENTLY still stationed in both countries, you didn't say that they had to be recently shipped there.

You can as well give a list of countries where nukes are still stationed - it serves no explanation of RECENT escalation by Russia.

In fact it sounds like the US and other NATO countries RECENTLY forced Germany to keep the nukes.

I don't think Germany's position as a current leader of both the EU and NATO (in Europe) makes it susceptible for any outside pressure. Germany is an independent enough player to make decisions itself and force others to adopt unpopular decisions too.

It is apparently much more benign if someone is shown enmity for a half of century rather than just for the last few weeks.

So the task of all the world is to please Russia and see to it that it doesn't feel threatened, hurt and offended? What if others are not just offended and threatened but invaded by Russia?

1) That was in 2011
2) The fact that you didn't hear anything against it from Russia kinda proves that this whole thing isn't about free trade but political and military issues.

My bad. Coudn't find any uptodate English-language information on it, now I have a more recent one:
http://en.molbuk.ua/ukraine/88432-po...-torgivli.html
Evidently the free trade zone introduction was at a standstill, but now Ukraine and Turkey want to step it up. Still waiting for Russia to put in its spoke.

[Husar]

You can as well give a list of countries where nukes are still stationed - it serves no explanation of RECENT escalation by Russia.

So you missed the part where the nukes were only recently modernized to make them more lethal.

I don't think Germany's position as a current leader of both the EU and NATO (in Europe) makes it susceptible for any outside pressure. Germany is an independent enough player to make decisions itself and force others to adopt unpopular decisions too.

And you missed the part where it clearly states that the german government bowed to NATO pressure.

[Gilrandir]

So you missed the part where the nukes were only recently modernized to make them more lethal.

So they had been not nukes nor lethal? One can feel threatened enough to know just of any kinds of nuclear missiles pointed at you. But that acute feeling of danger must have been blunted since 1960. It can serve no incentive to start fussing around just at the moment. Besides, you were the one to claim that 10 years is enough for any acute feelings to dissipate.

And you missed the part where it clearly states that the german government bowed to NATO pressure.

I maintain that the German government is powerful enough to act on its own. Perhaps the said pressure was just an excuse to justify the deployment or (more plausibly) it chimed with what the Germans themselves wished or planned to do, so Germany and NATO met each other half way.

[Husar]

So they had been not nukes nor lethal? One can feel threatened enough to know just of any kinds of nuclear missiles pointed at you. But that acute feeling of danger must have been blunted since 1960. It can serve no incentive to start fussing around just at the moment. Besides, you were the one to claim that 10 years is enough for any acute feelings to dissipate.

I don't remember that but even if I did, they were only recently modified. Whether you understand how a modification can make them more lethal is irrelevant.

I maintain that the German government is powerful enough to act on its own. Perhaps the said pressure was just an excuse to justify the deployment or (more plausibly) it chimed with what the Germans themselves wished or planned to do, so Germany and NATO met each other half way.

I'm glad that you always have a better opinion than the experts on every subject. Surely some random guy from Ukraine must know this better than a reporter who deals with these political topics every day.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What Gilandir was talking about:

"We in Russia always thought that Russians and Ukrainians are one people. And I believe so today," Putin told a rally on Red Square marking the first anniversary of Crimea's "unification" with Russia.

People asked why the CIA et al failed to foresee this and I think the answer is actually as simple as it is sad - we have ceased to see war as a tool of statecraft. In the West when we go to war now it is essentially prompted by a humanitarian argument - Afghanistan and Iraq are the exceptions as they are essentially American Wars of Vengeance, but otherwise war has become something of a humanitarian exercise in Europe. Recall that in 1982 the British were unprepared for Argentina to invade the Falklands, they believed the Argentinians would continue to negotiate until both sides were satisfied or the questions became moot.

I think the same was believed in Europe - the politicians believed Putin would continue to negotiate and not deploy Spetnatz in Crimea, and then they didn't think he would escalate.

It's worth pointing out, by the way, that this assumption was at the political level, so it may be moot as to whether or not analysts in the basement saw this coming or not.

[CrossLOPER]

People asked why the CIA et al failed to foresee this and I think the answer is actually as simple as it is sad - we have ceased to see war as a tool of statecraft.

So the expansion of NATO was not an extension of the containment policy used against the USSR, and was totally peaceful in its intentions?

Right, thanks for clearing that up.

Also, clearly a sliver of land is worth nuclear war.