Ukraine-in-a-thread

[HopAlongBunny]

All sorts of goodies on the East coast; oil and gas which is the life-blood of the Russian economy...

[Montmorency]

Try getting carrier groups through the bottleneck when you don't control the air.

The Strait is rather far from Russian airbases, and I doubt the Turks would appreciate Russian jets flying over Istanbul to bomb the Americans...

[Kadagar_AV]

The Strait is rather far from Russian airbases, and I doubt the Turks would appreciate Russian jets flying over Istanbul to bomb the Americans...

It's within operational range.

And if it comes to that situation, I don't think Russia would care much what Turkey thinks.

It won't, however, come to that as neither EU nor USA will do anything.

[Montmorency]

It's within operational range.

At the edge - from the Crimea. If it's Russia-proper, forget about it - the strike craft won't be able to make it.

And if it comes to that situation, I don't think Russia would care much what Turkey thinks.

They would, if they expect a future after 2014 - international politics is not like your TBS games.

[HopAlongBunny]

A nice synopsis from BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26421703

[Papewaio]

If the US intervened that fleet would be on the bottom of the ocean before anybody knew what was going on. Fortunately for Russia, we probably won't intervene. Targeted stealth asswhoopings are something we've still got the edge on. One B2 flying waaay up there with a payload of smartbombs is all it would take.

Yet you would somehow accidentally hit the Chinese Embassy in the process...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Here's why: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26427848

The ousted President called for Russian troops.

Hmmm.

That's a good fig leaf.

Couldn't find a better version of this:

[Xiahou]

At least we've got a competent leader managing things for us...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Eh - Obama is deploying the progressive fallacy "We did that already".

It's a great rhetorical trick - and most Americans fell for it.

Doesn't mean Obama really believed it.

[Shaka_Khan]

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

I see.....
Or he went during his vacation away from China or Japan.....

[rvg]

You think Putin regrets spending money on the Black Sea fleet? An interesting notion.

I don't think he regrets it. He has plenty of money to waste, and if he runs out there's always more to steal. I just think it's an unnecessary financial drain that's only good for dick-waiving.

I for one believe he is more like "We have a fleet here, you don't".

Sure, he can have a fleet there, but what for? It's useless as far as projecting power because it can't get out into the Mediterranean. Almost as pointless as having a large naval presence in the Caspian Sea.

Try getting carrier groups through the bottleneck when you don't control the air.

There's no need: a carrier can operate just fine out of the Aegean and provide good air cover.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I believe it's *for* covering troops crossing the sea - because it's quicker to attack he Balkans by Sea AND Air than by land.

So, I reckon we're about 5 minutes from Western Brown Alert.

[rvg]

I believe it's *for* covering troops crossing the sea - because it's quicker to attack he Balkans by Sea AND Air than by land.

That is highly dependent on who is attacking whom.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Well if the Russians ever seriously wanted to invade Bulgaria like you suggested then it would make the logistics more convenient. Meanwhile the fleet is only useful for intimidation and prestige purposes. I don't think the Russians mind that very much.

If nothing else it keeps a lot of potentially angry young men off the streets and generates a loyal voting block.

[Gilrandir]

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.

One statement that can give a different perception of legitimacy of the government: Hitler was legitimatly elected chancellor of Germany. So what do you think of a coup against him in July 1943? I expect you would say that it is good that the coup failed. They may have assassinated a legitimate chancellor whose term hasn't expired. Being legitimately elected does not mean the elected one may do whatever he wants until the next election comes.

[Gilrandir]

Then you just oust the president, you don't go to protesters to approve a new government.

How do you implement ousting? A delegation of egg-heads coming to him and saying: "Now will you please go away, sir, will you?" And the protesters demanded approval of the new government because they were (and are) afraid that 2004 scenario will be played again - a gang of political thieves replacing a gang of political thugs. And Maidan was not (and is not) very happy about all of the new government either. But unfortunately we have other worries now then go discussing the personal composition of the government.

[Gilrandir]

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?

He didn't mean to run away. Both-sides shooting was aimed at exactly what you guessed: to escalate the conflict, make both sides furious, justify employment of the army against the protesters and show himself a firm and decisive leader able to cope with the situation. Until the snipers were involved NO ONE spoke of ousting Yanukovych - they just wanted a new government. Does Yanukovych's appeal to Putin for Russian army invading Ukraine mean that he wants de-escalation and peaceful solution? In all three months of Maidan he never went to talk to people there while they were still moderate enough to talk to. His background and worldview prevents him from seeing that people with a different point of view should be considered worth of negotiating. He did negotiate when the situation got out of hand completely, his own followers started to desert him and the West intervened.

[Brenus]

"Hitler was legitimatly elected chancellor of Germany." Nope. Hitler was called by Hindenburg, Hitler was never elected in fact.

[Sarmatian]

Didn't you oust him? After that, you created a new government. Why, if Yanukovich was the problem? But, ok, let's say there weren't enough indications that the old government would hold fair and transparent elections. In that case you set up an interim, technical government which only deals with day to day management of the country until the first moment elections could be held. Why? Because that government is ILLEGITIMATE! It wasn't agreed on by the people or their elected representatives, so that government simply doesn't have the mandate to do anything else.

In reality, the interim government tried to use the window before the new elections to encourage protesters to bring down other elected representatives they didn't like, to weaken and disorganize the largest opposition party and to fundamentally alter both domestic and foreign policy. That is called a putsch.

It certainly isn't the first one in history. After the October Revolution in Russia, there were at least 10 different armies on its territories. Japanese and American army, French and British intervention force, remnants of AH and German army, Polish army... together with many different internal factions. The new Soviet government dealt with them. They made a deal with some and defeated and expelled the others.

This is what Pannonian's been telling you. If you go that route, either make sure you can deal with the consequences or make sure those who can get involved are okay with it.

Since you can't defeat and expel the Russian army, you have to deal with them diplomatically. Going back to earlier government or setting up a new one, true interim government whose only purpose is to manage the country until new elections, declaring everything Maidan government did null and void is a very good starting position and something that Russia might be willing to accept. I don't think you could get a better deal than that and that is the only scenario in which I see you having decent chance of keeping Crimea.

[Brenus]

"If the US intervened that fleet would be on the bottom of the ocean before anybody knew what was going on. Fortunately for Russia, we probably won't intervene. Targeted stealth asswhoopings are something we've still got the edge on. One B2 flying waaay up there with a payload of smartbombs is all it would take." Stop believing your own propaganda. Propaganda is good if you don't start to believe it is true.
I suggest you should study the Air Forces losses against the small country like Serbia during the NATO (against sovereignty and UN resolutions, by the way) Air Campaign before making this kind of statement. Then, can you explain how you will prevent missiles from Russia to kill your Fleet in San Diego, or wherever the US Fleet is?

[a completely inoffensive name]

What a wonderful example of a serious discussion turning into a big circle jerk over our respective regions. And here I thought would take the notion that an out of touch, power hungry dictator in control of several thousand nukes would make people just a tad bit more restrained.

Can't wait for when my generation realizes the draft never went away, it's just called the selective service.

[a completely inoffensive name]

"Hitler was legitimatly elected chancellor of Germany." Nope. Hitler was called by Hindenburg, Hitler was never elected in fact.

COuld have sworn it was only like a month or two ago, I said this exact same thing to GC in a thread about something...

[Ironside]

"Hitler was legitimatly elected chancellor of Germany." Nope. Hitler was called by Hindenburg, Hitler was never elected in fact.

Hindenburg was elected legally. Hitler got votes legally. Hinderburg did a legal coalition with Hitler, who had the second largest party.
It's similar to when the loser in the US presidential election got the vice-president position. It's the following power expansion/abuse when things starts to really get out of hands.

Technically, The Swedish people never elects our prime minister. We elect the parlament (riksdagen), whose spokesperson picks a prime minister that riksdagen approves of.

[Husar]

At the edge - from the Crimea. If it's Russia-proper, forget about it - the strike craft won't be able to make it.

We are not talking about WW2-era airplanes here, modern jets and especially bombers have quite a bit more range than prop planes had back then.

If the US intervened that fleet would be on the bottom of the ocean before anybody knew what was going on. Fortunately for Russia, we probably won't intervene. Targeted stealth asswhoopings are something we've still got the edge on. One B2 flying waaay up there with a payload of smartbombs is all it would take.

Apart from Pape's hilarious answer, I think you may overestimate the stealth technology a bit. Even stealth missions are carefully planned to avoid air defenses because stealth doesn't equal complete invisibility. And for bombs you have to fly right over your target, makes one wonder why so many nations invented anti ship missiles with hundreds of kilometers of range. Those stealth bombers have also not been up against a proper, modern russian air defense network as far as I'm aware. It's possible that your 737 million $ bomber would just end up as scrap metal on the bottom of the black sea.

And here I thought would take the notion that an out of touch, power hungry dictator in control of several thousand nukes would make people just a tad bit more restrained.

Indeed, when are they going to impeach Obama!?!

[Fisherking]

Thankfully military intervention is off the table at this time.

The West is stronger on paper but they are not ready and the forces are of the wrong composition to fight a conventional war.

If the US were to take charge of the planning and leadership of such an intervention it would only exacerbate the problems.

For all their rhetoric about smart bombs and so on the US Air Force in Kosovo managed to take out a company of APCs and a Company’s worth of tanks. Not much bang for the buck was it?

Have they improved? Who knows, do you really want to find out?

It would seem that we are once again caught preparing for the wrong war.

All of our light infantry, drones, and special forces are not going to beat a Russian mechanized army.

[Myth]

Russia has no reason to invade Serbia. The most prized asset of Serbia are their gorgeous women. However I am sure you are all aware that Russia has a very large stock of those as well (cold war stockpiling I guess). Also, the Serbians had the gigantic balls to stand up to the USA, take the bombing (lol nice smart missile useage guys. You sure did a number on all those empty fields and non essential bridges) AND dance a traditonal balkan dance called horo on top of a feleld F-117 Stealth Jet. Of course that jet went down due to a technical malfunction, God forbid if they admitted that it got shot down by cold war era ground-to-air missiles.

Bulgaria also has a great stockpile of gorgeous women which are also doubled with many beach resorts and cheap Alchohol. Thus, the German and British invasion is an ongoing, annual process. Still, the majority of our tourism comes from Russia. And the Russians are the ones who come with money. Our western overlords send their broke 20 year olds who go to all inclusives and don't spend much outside that.

Also, with all these liberal movements, I suppose Germany is now even more inclined to invade if promised some Balkan sausage. However, we are Orthodox Christians and we don't swing that way, so we will be uniting with Putin to make a new Orthodox Christian block of homophobes.

Of course, Sarmatian knows well our true motives. We are all secretly Tengri horselords and are planning to form the Great Bulgarian Khaganate. Serbia will be the first to be incorporated, because we want their womenfolk (the appetites of horselords are vast) and their pastures. Even after US bombing there are plenty of green fields for our herds!

Now on a serious note:

To get to join NATO (which I don't see as a positive thing) Bulgaria had to dismantle and destroy its armed forces and defensive positions. In 1990 we had a 150,000 army with a reserve that could go up to 400,000. Every eligible male had gone through 1.5 or 2 years of mandatory service.

We had launch sites for the infamous SS-23 missiles, aimed at Turkish dams and nuclear power plants. Of course we had to cut them into scrap on orders from Washington.

If Russia wants to take Bulgaria it will waltz through the Danube and rush on from Ruse through Pleven and they will probably stop when they reach the Balkan (Stara Planina) since the passes are tremendous choke points and no amount of zerg rushing will speed up the process of going through. Of course, in a matter of weeks they'd be marching across Sofia. I personally am more interested in what will happen with all the US airbases sprinkled around our sovereign territory. I do NOT want Bulgaria to be bombed because the bombers (stealth or otherwise) are flying from here.

The Black Sea is important but let's not kid ourselves - Turkey and Russia are not on the best of terms and anyone who dismisses a 90 million country so easily needs to think again.

Also, I still think that the US Navy is still the best naval force in the world by a large, large margin. I am more interested in this question: we're talking tanks and paper armies and such. What about the 8300 nukes that Russia has? And the 7800 that the USA has? And the 300 that France has? And the 250 that the UK has? How far will the tanks go until these weapons are being considered? Cuz that's where it gets really scary for me.

18th, 19th or 20th century dictators cannot exist any more because the nukes exist.

[Gilrandir]

Didn't you oust him? After that, you created a new government. Why, if Yanukovich was the problem? But, ok, let's say there weren't enough indications that the old government would hold fair and transparent elections. In that case you set up an interim, technical government which only deals with day to day management of the country until the first moment elections could be held. Why? Because that government is ILLEGITIMATE! It wasn't agreed on by the people or their elected representatives, so that government simply doesn't have the mandate to do anything else.

OK,let's get technical. When Yanukovych was elected in 2010 his powers were constitunionally limited to offering some ministers (internal affairs, defense,foreign) to be approved by the parliament. The cabinet of ministers was to be formed by the parliament as well as the prime minister was to be the leader of the parliamentary majority coalition. Yanukovych, having the Constitutional Court in hand, made such an arrangement void as it was ostensibly introduced in 2004 with some violations of the adoption procedures. But the Court couldn't just return the Constitution to what had been before 2004, it is not in its power, it could just proclaim some decisions constitutional or non-constitutional (are you still following me?). So a stalemate occured:the new constitution was wrong, but the old one couldn't be returned to either. So what was the way out for Yanukovych? Easy and ingeniuos - he ordered the text of the Constitution on his official website to be "edited" the way he wanted. So he could now appoint the whole cabinet of ministers, the prime-minister, the prosecutor general, all the judges around the country... The people of Ukraine entrusted him with no such powers when he was elected president. Was this editing a legitimate decision? So technically, Yanukovych was a president with illegitimate powers.
As for the government we are having, it IS an interrim one until the new president is elected and the new parliament is elected (supposedly in October). Turchinov claimed he was ready to step down the moment it is expedient. According to the constitution you can't have both presidential and parliamentary election on the same day. They had to choose and since the president couldn't evidently be kept they decided to keep the parliament and re-elect it later.

[Kagemusha]

I think last night and this day has been somewhat better then yesterday and i have to applaud both armed forces for their composure, while the situation remains very troubled indeed. Today we have heard about warning shots, cyber attacks and possible problems with Gas distribution from Russian side with of course the very interesting speech of Mr.Putin.

At the West, it would seem that US is taking very active stance for Ukraine. Very complicated day, but i sincerely hope that both sides will understand that it is the negotiating table, where things should be decided and nowhere else. I feel there is lot of propaganda flying both ways, but my cautious optimism is somewhat returning and i hope the most tense days are over, but who knows..

[Myth]

http://news.msn.com/world/us-prepare...oubled-ukraine

So the country which is billions (they call them trillions) in debt and which basically gave up on Detroit is now giving 1 billion to Ukraine?

[rvg]

So the country which is billions (they call them trillions) in debt and which basically gave up on Detroit is now giving 1 billion to Ukraine?

Jealous?