Ukraine Thread

[rory_20_uk]

Could escalate

It could. I'm not sure how. Ukraine can't expect any support from NATO countries since those with the ability have no interest and those without can't annoy Russia since Russia will act. By itself? Russia is already causing a massive amount of issues and could ramp them up.

Russia is proving to be an expert in the "grey" area of warfare - the "not quite hostile enough but still really hostile". Democracies are increasingly difficult to get "riled up" and probably rightly so - why should our soldiers fight and potentially die when not all Ukrainians are doing so? Give the locals training, give them army surplus and if they want to fight for their rights then so be it. But against heavily armed Russian mercenaries, I doubt they do.

[Fragony]

It could. I'm not sure how. Ukraine can't expect any support from NATO countries since those with the ability have no interest and those without can't annoy Russia since Russia will act. By itself? Russia is already causing a massive amount of issues and could ramp them up.

Russia is proving to be an expert in the "grey" area of warfare - the "not quite hostile enough but still really hostile". Democracies are increasingly difficult to get "riled up" and probably rightly so - why should our soldiers fight and potentially die when not all Ukrainians are doing so? Give the locals training, give them army surplus and if they want to fight for their rights then so be it. But against heavily armed Russian mercenaries, I doubt they do.

Can escalate because of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQnXo2HMriQ this was so dumb. Because of these idiots we will be involved if things clashes. Russia never harmed us but because of the EU we will be drawn in anyway. Screw them, Russians are nice people.

[Montmorency]

Can escalate because of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQnXo2HMriQ this was so dumb. Because of these idiots we will be involved if things clashes. Russia never harmed us but because of the EU we will be drawn in anyway. Screw them, Russians are nice people.

I don't know that they're any nicer than Ukrainians. Or any other group, really.

Timely question: were the Brits on "the wrong side" of the First World War?

[rory_20_uk]

I don't know that they're any nicer than Ukrainians. Or any other group, really.

Timely question: were the Brits on "the wrong side" of the First World War?

Probably. But the Brits had not realised they were not all powerful and were merely quite powerful - the time to prevent Prussia gaining power in continental Europe was siding with France in the Franco-Prussian war - siding with the damned Republic against Victoria's own family...? After that was missed the cost to recreate the "balance" was pretty much the Empire - sure, it would have faded but this was the start of the catalyst.

Britain should have stood with their historic allies in Prussia / Germany and defeated their historic enemies the French - illustrated that France still dislikes Britain (and vice versa) even though the two were allies in both world wars and beyond. But it was a fratricidal mess where the lower orders were pulled in like chess pieces.

[Montmorency]

Probably. But the Brits had not realised they were not all powerful and were merely quite powerful - the time to prevent Prussia gaining power in continental Europe was siding with France in the Franco-Prussian war - siding with the damned Republic against Victoria's own family...? After that was missed the cost to recreate the "balance" was pretty much the Empire - sure, it would have faded but this was the start of the catalyst.

Britain should have stood with their historic allies in Prussia / Germany and defeated their historic enemies the French - illustrated that France still dislikes Britain (and vice versa) even though the two were allies in both world wars and beyond. But it was a fratricidal mess where the lower orders were pulled in like chess pieces.

Well, the right answer to my question was 'That's a bad question'.

From a realist perspective, there's Lord Palmerston's famous line. Germanic fratrimony is a creepy and hollow idea for obvious reasons, but it was certainly never a popular one such that it could motivate competing powers to team up against the world or whatever the hypothetical is.

Do the French and British even "dislike" each other today more than the Canadians and Americans do each other?

[Husar]

should, should, should. Germany should have listened to Bismarck and continued his great foreign policy instead of pushing for colonies and "glory". Austria should have booted the Habsburgs centuries earlier. Austria, Denmark and France should not have tried to prevent the unification of Germany. Where from do they get the right to deny other people their own nation? Russia should not have tried to subjugate Serbia and neither should Austria.

And DVDs should not have region codes, that's just perverted.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Anything changed?

Anyone aside from Ukraine willing to bleed to stop/reverse Russian hegemonic efforts to the East of Odessa?

If not, then worrying over this latest incident is a bit silly.

[Gilrandir]

Russia never harmed us

Oh really https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/04/e...ntl/index.html
Short memory?

Screw them, Russians are nice people.

How do you know? You might have met a couple of Russians OUTSIDE RUSSIA and have arrived at that conclusion? Anyway, making such general conclusions about large groups is always at fault.

But even if we admit validity of such conclusions, could you name any nation that isn't/wasn't nice? Weren't Germans nice people in 1938? Have they become nicer since then?

Among other news: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ussia-flare-up

[Fragony]

Been to your country, also been to Russia. People are not the politicians. All countries spy on eachother we do that as well

[Gilrandir]

Been to your country, also been to Russia. People are not the politicians.

So nice people elect bad politicians? Are they still nice after that?

All countries spy on eachother we do that as well

It was not just spying. You said Russia didn't do you anything bad. So is it not so bad when somebody meddles with chemical weapons on your territory?

[Fragony]

We do noot have these weapons

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Been to your country, also been to Russia. People are not the politicians. All countries spy on eachother we do that as well

Those driven to acquire and use power are different personality types from those who just enjoy/live life day to day. Pretty much an ubiquitous aspect of the human condition, Frags. And as Gil' has noted, the Russian people have been tolerating or supporting Putin's efforts. The internal opposition to Putin is scattered, with only those protests/opposition to corruption issues having anything resembling a broad base of support. Wiki

30k people for an anti-war protest? I could probably gin up an anti-war protest of that size just on the campus of UC Berkeley (though admittedly, even among universities they are known for being something of a 'People's Republic').

[Fragony]

Those driven to acquire and use power are different personality types from those who just enjoy/live life day to day. Pretty much an ubiquitous aspect of the human condition, Frags. And as Gil' has noted, the Russian people have been tolerating or supporting Putin's efforts. The internal opposition to Putin is scattered, with only those protests/opposition to corruption issues having anything resembling a broad base of support. Wiki

30k people for an anti-war protest? I could probably gin up an anti-war protest of that size just on the campus of UC Berkeley (though admittedly, even among universities they are known for being something of a 'People's Republic').

Well can't really blame them for supporting Putin, he is a dangerous guy but Russia needs that I guess, the west was never be supposed to creep uo on them but still it does, and China is dangerous for them as well, Russian territories are already in schoolbooks. Russia is powerful but doesn't seem to be interested in conflict, they are ready for it of course, everyone should be

[Montmorency]

Those driven to acquire and use power are different personality types from those who just enjoy/live life day to day. Pretty much an ubiquitous aspect of the human condition, Frags. And as Gil' has noted, the Russian people have been tolerating or supporting Putin's efforts. The internal opposition to Putin is scattered, with only those protests/opposition to corruption issues having anything resembling a broad base of support. Wiki

30k people for an anti-war protest? I could probably gin up an anti-war protest of that size just on the campus of UC Berkeley (though admittedly, even among universities they are known for being something of a 'People's Republic').

It's known as such by conservatives.

I wonder if you could point out an example of a protest on Berkeley campus in the past 50 years that reaches that number. Note that 4 of the 5 largest national protests in American history have taken place in the past few years.

Americans just don't protest like other peoples, very rarely have.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It's known as such by conservatives.

I wonder if you could point out an example of a protest on Berkeley campus in the past 50 years that reaches that number. Note that 4 of the 5 largest national protests in American history have taken place in the past few years.

Americans just don't protest like other peoples, very rarely have.

Oh, I know I am playing with the Berkeley stereotype a bit. And I am in complete agreement with you that most of our culture doesn't do the protest thing the way it occurs around the world. I was just pointing up for Frags that active Russian opposition to Putin's leadership isn't that broad.

[Hooahguy]

The Russian military in the Ukraine area seem to have started conducting a readiness check of some sort. Some on Twitter says this is a move like they did in 2014 before they took Crimea. Others say its just a harmless facility check. Not sure what to make of it but the recent tensions dont help. NATO wont come to the aid of Ukraine. Literally a 0% chance. Now will some NATO allies send aid in case of war? Likely yes. But an all out war? Nah. Not unless someone does something very dumb.

Also Frags, don't forget MH17. I would wager that the families of 193 of your countrymen don't.

[Gilrandir]

We do noot have these weapons

Then they have brought these weapons with them, like they did in Salisbury.

[Gilrandir]

Let us see what Trump will do (or at least say) about this whole story. I remember him blaming Obama for Crimea annexation saying that if he had been president at that time there would have been no annexation. Now he has his chance to do something. But so far he only mumbles he doesn't like what is happening betweem Ukraine and Russia.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Let us see what Trump will do (or at least say) about this whole story. I remember him blaming Obama for Crimea annexation saying that if he had been president at that time there would have been no annexation. Now he has his chance to do something. But so far he only mumbles he doesn't like what is happening betweem Ukraine and Russia.

USA isn't willing to bleed for Ukraine or Crimea. Nothing gonna happen.

[Gilrandir]

USA isn't willing to bleed for Ukraine or Crimea. Nothing gonna happen.

I know that. I just want to see Trump squirming on his words about the milksop Obama and the toughie me.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I know that. I just want to see Trump squirming on his words about the milksop Obama and the toughie me.

That's years ago now. His political memory is much shorter ranged. I think it's some kind of turbulence resulting from the eddies surrounding his immense narcissism.

[rory_20_uk]

I know that. I just want to see Trump squirming on his words about the milksop Obama and the toughie me.

He lacks the insight - you're forgetting that he's has his beliefs and fits reality around that rather than perceiving reality and forming what he thinks: he fired those missiles and that shows how 'ard he is.

[Gilrandir]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1NY0NO

[Crandar]

The opposition has accused Poroshenko of using the martial law to postpone the elections. Martial law wasn't even declared when Crimea was occupied, so it definitely seems suspicious now. What are your thoughts on the upcoming presidential elections?

[Gilrandir]

The opposition has accused Poroshenko of using the martial law to postpone the elections.

First of all, martial law was introduced in 11 out of 24 oblasts (regions) of Ukraine, not in the whole country.
Second of all, it is to last a month till December 26 (reduced from the initial 2 months) and elections are scheduled for the 31 of March, 2019.
Third of all, the elections were officially declared and the corresponding law was passed (as was demanded by the opposition), so there is a slim chance the elections could be postponed. It may happen if Russia does something aggressive and the martial law is prolonged. I don't believe it's gonna happen. For once, it can't be done automatically. It is to be put through the parliament each time.

Martial law wasn't even declared when Crimea was occupied, so it definitely seems suspicious now.

The procedure of declaring martial law includes three steps:
1. The Council of National Security and Defense initiates introduction of martial law.
2. The president issues a decree to that effect.
3. The parliament votes it in turning into a law.

When Crimea was occupied Ukraine didn't have a president, Security council was not functioning (as it is headed by the president), the majority in the parliament belonged to the runaway Yanukovych. In view of that it couldn't have been introduced. Besides the procedural obstacles, back then Ukraine didn't have any effective troops to respond to the introduction of martial law and the top commanders of the army were also Yanukovych's stooges (and former Russian citizens). So in 2014 declaring martial law would be just empty words. Most importantly, back then Russia denied any involvement in Crimea events (and later in Donbas events, and still later in MH17 downing). It is very different from what happened in the Kerch strait where Russian ships openly attacked Ukrainian ones in neutral waters when they were in fact heading back to Odesa from where they came and four missiles were shot at them from planes (well, two from a plane and two from a helicopter). Now Russia can't deny it was done by its regular troops.

Plus Poroshenko produced reports of Russia building up its forces in the sea of Azov, having sent there ships from the Caspian Sea and the north by internal waterways. Plus constant reports (not by Poroshenko) of ships heading to or from Ukrainian Azov sea ports (and not just Ukrainian ships, but from all over the world, including the EU) being detained from 2 to 7 days by the Russian navy which entails huge fines and consequently financial losses of the businesses involved. It started in April this year when the Kerch bridge began functioning and has been aggravating ever since despite the fact that according to the 2003 treaty between Russia and Ukraine Azov was to be internal sea of both countries so all ships bearing their flags were to be let pass freely.

Introduction of martial law may seem an overreaction if we consider only the last Kerch strait piracy case, but in view of all the happenings that began in April the latter accident appears to be the last straw and martial law is (partially) meant to make the world pay attention to the situation around Azov. At least that's how I see it.

What are your thoughts on the upcoming presidential elections?

That's a long talk. In short, people are dissatisfied with the current situation in the country, very often putting all burden of blame on Poroshenko. I'm not his fan and I didn't vote for him in 2014, but I can't but note the injustice of such approach. I realize his shortcomings, but many people fail to see that when a country is at war, the life is unlikely to improve rapidly if at all. And that is what populists (like Lyashko and Tymoshenko) promise in case they are elected and many people seem to believe them. Tymoshenko tops poll results. People don't realize that the keys to peace in Donbas are kept in the Kremlin and Putin is unlikely to revise his stance on the issue preferring to wait for a change of the government in Ukraine after the March presidential elections hoping to get a more amenable president or the parliamentary elections which are to be held in fall next year.

Anyway, the election campaign hasn't officially begun and four months which are left till the elections seem to be quite a long time so a lot might change.

[Gilrandir]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46575548

[Gilrandir]

https://www.voanews.com/a/ukraine-am...e/4776669.html

[Gilrandir]

An update on presidential elections:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47767440

[Montmorency]

Don't know anything about Zelezny, but perhaps more notable is that Trump confirms "Finders Keepers" doctrine for clay:

President Donald J. Trump’s recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights upends a half century of U.S. policy. The strategically important plateau has been widely considered under international law to be occupied territory since its 1967 seizure from Syria. In his proclamation, Trump cited security needs as paramount, though in practice Israeli control has not been challenged for decades. Experts warn the move could weaken international prohibitions on acquiring territory by force.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

On the one hand, this is a problem. On the other hand, the Russian "frozen conflict" doctrine relies on the fiction that territory cannot be annexed by force (when it obviously can).

One thing which Ukraine could theoretically do is recognise the de facto independence of the rebel areas and once this is done they would be free to join NATO.

Ukraine would thereby yield territory in exchange for stability and a permanent check on Russian expansion.

Hardly an ideal situation, but possibly a better long-term option than the status quo.