Ukraine-in-a-thread

[HoreTore]

Keep shooting dictators, eventually you have to get democrats.

I actually supported the US aim of toppling Saddam. If only they had been clear on that and dropped the WMD nonsense as well as creating a proper plan for the invasion and occupation(or at least a plan!), I would have been a supporter of the invasion....

[Myth]

The USA didn't annex Iraq for many reasons, none of which are because of the morality of the guys in charge.

1 - annexing Iraq would be a stupendous act of international politics suicide. After all, uncle Sam's justification usually involves worn out cliches like "democracy" "liberty" and "freedom", none of which could be plastered over Fox news and CNN if you actually annexed a foreign nation.
2 - trying to keep Iraq annexed would send a steady stream of body bags and flags back to the soccer moms of the middle class. See, while they can be brainwashed into believing the war on terror, when their kids start dying en masse your government will get a new wave of hippies, protesters and other such things.
3 - no point in annexing when you can install a puppet regime enforced by your benevolent "allies" from Israel
4 - no point in annexing when chevron and shell are already leeching iraqi oil and it's sold in USD and not EUR

So let's not pretend the USA has any moral high ground here.

[Sarmatian]

Keep shooting dictators, eventually you have to get democrats.

Is "eventually" definable? How many years, deaths, rapes, suffering... are there in "eventually"?

"Eventually", every democracy will become a dictatorship and every dictatorship will become a democracy without shooting anyone...

For democracy to succeed, certain conditions need to be met. If those conditions aren't met, forcibly implementing democracy means it will revert back to dictatorship, just with more violence in the meantime.


EDIT: And that is all assuming that the actual goal of toppling a dictator is internal change, rather than a change in foreign policy.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Is "eventually" definable? How many years, deaths, rapes, suffering... are there in "eventually"?

"Eventually", every democracy will become a dictatorship and every dictatorship will become a democracy without shooting anyone...

For democracy to succeed, certain conditions need to be met. If those conditions aren't met, forcibly implementing democracy means it will revert back to dictatorship, just with more violence in the meantime.


EDIT: And that is all assuming that the actual goal of toppling a dictator is internal change, rather than a change in foreign policy.

Serbia seems to be doing better now than it was under Milosevic, no? I hear that you have a wealthy young reformer as the deputy PM and running for leadership. He is extremely ugly, but I support many of the policies that he has in mind.

Long story short, the chaos of freedom is preferable to the stasis if totalitarian despotism. For as long as my country has a military, I will support the clandestine undermining of dictators and the insurgency that it causes - followed by, if necessary - military assistance in eliminating the despot and his political classes. I don't believe in doing this for economic reasons (although that seems to be the rationale that our political leaders and power brokers need). I support legitimate freedom movements because people who want to break free from bad laws and awful governments are my brothers in arms. Like Virginia supported Massachusetts in the American Revolution, I support my fellow human beings anywhere that they are fighting to break the chains.

[Sarmatian]

Serbia seems to be doing better now than it was under Milosevic, no? I hear that you have a wealthy young reformer as the deputy PM and running for leadership. He is extremely ugly, but I support many of the policies that he has in mind.

Serbia met, for the most part, the preconditions for democracy, and would have probably made the transition sooner were it not for the surge in nationalism brought by internal crisis and problems that have been swept under the rug. Support for far right parties peaked at almost 20% back then, now it's at much more healthy level of 2-3%. We're not really that much better off now than we were in 1998. It is the general feeling that in October, 2000, we removed one corrupt bastard and installed 19 corrupt bastards instead.

Considering the young reformer, we'll have to wait and see. Anywaym he isn't a deputy anymore. Serbian parliamentary elections were held this Sunday but Crimean referendum overshadowed that. He got unprecedented support, 158 out of 250 seats. I'm not holding my breath, though.

Long story short, the chaos of freedom is preferable to the stasis if totalitarian despotism. For as long as my country has a military, I will support the clandestine undermining of dictators and the insurgency that it causes - followed by, if necessary - military assistance in eliminating the despot and his political classes. I don't believe in doing this for economic reasons (although that seems to be the rationale that our political leaders and power brokers need). I support legitimate freedom movements because people who want to break free from bad laws and awful governments are my brothers in arms. Like Virginia supported Massachusetts in the American Revolution, I support my fellow human beings anywhere that they are fighting to break the chains.

I agree that the chaos of transitioning from a totalitarian regime to freedom is acceptable. I do not agree that chaos from transitioning from one totalitarian regime to another is acceptable.

What was achieved in Iran? Expelling the shah, installing Ayatollah... In Afghanistan - removing communists, installing Talibans... In Egypt and other places?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Serbia met, for the most part, the preconditions for democracy, and would have probably made the transition sooner were it not for the surge in nationalism brought by internal crisis and problems that have been swept under the rug. Support for far right parties peaked at almost 20% back then, now it's at much more healthy level of 2-3%. We're not really that much better off now than we were in 1998. It is the general feeling that in October, 2000, we removed one corrupt bastard and installed 19 corrupt bastards instead.

Considering the young reformer, we'll have to wait and see. Anywaym he isn't a deputy anymore. Serbian parliamentary elections were held this Sunday but Crimean referendum overshadowed that. He got unprecedented support, 158 out of 250 seats. I'm not holding my breath, though.



I agree that the chaos of transitioning from a totalitarian regime to freedom is acceptable. I do not agree that chaos from transitioning from one totalitarian regime to another is acceptable.

What was achieved in Iran? Expelling the shah, installing Ayatollah... In Afghanistan - removing communists, installing Talibans... In Egypt and other places?

Good points. Transitions that take us from the Shah to the Ayatollah are arguably more of a tragedy than the status quo. Arguably, because fear of consequence can throw you off making the changes needed to see best effect. Either way, the best way to protect against a negative outcome is to become involved, because you know that powerful enemy interests wound have no reluctance to involve their own agenda.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The USA didn't annex Iraq for many reasons, none of which are because of the morality of the guys in charge.

1 - annexing Iraq would be a stupendous act of international politics suicide. After all, uncle Sam's justification usually involves worn out cliches like "democracy" "liberty" and "freedom", none of which could be plastered over Fox news and CNN if you actually annexed a foreign nation.
2 - trying to keep Iraq annexed would send a steady stream of body bags and flags back to the soccer moms of the middle class. See, while they can be brainwashed into believing the war on terror, when their kids start dying en masse your government will get a new wave of hippies, protesters and other such things.
3 - no point in annexing when you can install a puppet regime enforced by your benevolent "allies" from Israel
4 - no point in annexing when chevron and shell are already leeching iraqi oil and it's sold in USD and not EUR

So let's not pretend the USA has any moral high ground here.

The US didn't annex Iraq because the US doesn't do that sort of thing - for all its faults, the US is not a country which likes to directly rule others.


Putin on the other hand - well "Glory to Russia" as he said.

Is "eventually" definable? How many years, deaths, rapes, suffering... are there in "eventually"?

Depends on how quickly you reload.

That may sound flippant, but it's true. The problem with Western policy is a lack of consistency - we should ONLY support democrats and we should CONSISTENTLY support democratic revolutions. That does not mean we should attack every dictator, but as soon as he starts waging war against his own people and that generates an uprising we should support it on the understanding that we expect them to form a better government.

We did well in Libya, then lost credibility when we failed to support the Syrian revolution - a policy which looks even more idiotic after Putin's invasion of Crimea.

Had we supported the Syrian rebels a couple of years ago there might be a better situation in that country, rather than a new Somalia.

To return to Kosovo - Serbs were always going to start killing ethnic Albanians, it was just a question of when. At the very least, the interventions got the mess over and done with.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Meh. I support turning all European countries into tiny bits, united under a strong central government in Brussels... So, slice up all the big states and get all of them into the EU.

Balkanization as the tool for effecting OEG. Wowzers.

HT, I have got to hand it to you, you are the most unabashedly "big government" guys I interact with -- but you stick to your principles pretty well.

[Husar]

The US didn't annex Iraq because the US doesn't do that sort of thing - for all its faults, the US is not a country which likes to directly rule others.


Putin on the other hand - well "Glory to Russia" as he said.

Afghanistan is also half a planet away from the US, it would be much harder to incorporate. Crimea has Russian history, Russian culture, Russian almost everything. It's apples and oranges. The US annexed a lot of territories from the British, the Indians and the Mexicans however, because those were nearby and "strategically important" at the time. Afghanistan and Iraq are none of that and having a friendly guy in power and several contracts for economic cooperation etc. is far preferable. Often they can also keep a military base in such friendly countries, which is one of the major issues islamic terrorists used to form around in the first place IIRC.

[HoreTore]

Balkanization as the tool for effecting OEG. Wowzers.

HT, I have got to hand it to you, you are the most unabashedly "big government" guys I interact with -- but you stick to your principles pretty well.

One world government, not one european government.... NWO for the win!

Nationstates belong to the past. They make little sense nowadays in my opinion.

[rvg]

One world government...

The mere thought of a bureaucracy associated with that abomination makes me cringe.

[HoreTore]

The mere thought of a bureaucracy associated with that abomination makes me cringe.

Remember that they will all be Reptoids, so they're super-effective.

[Xiahou]

Afghanistan is also half a planet away from the US, it would be much harder to incorporate. Crimea has Russian history, Russian culture, Russian almost everything. It's apples and oranges. The US annexed a lot of territories from the British, the Indians and the Mexicans however, because those were nearby and "strategically important" at the time. Afghanistan and Iraq are none of that and having a friendly guy in power and several contracts for economic cooperation etc. is far preferable. Often they can also keep a military base in such friendly countries, which is one of the major issues islamic terrorists used to form around in the first place IIRC.

Russia has core on Crimea. That gives them casus belli.

[HoreTore]

Russia has core on Crimea. That gives them casus belli.

Core is lost after 50 years.

Russia gave away its province in the 50's. No casus belli.

[Sarmatian]

Core is lost after 50 years.

Russia gave away its province in the 50's. No casus belli.

Russia plays Magna Mundi Platinum. Cores never expire.

[Sarmatian]

T
To return to Kosovo - Serbs were always going to start killing ethnic Albanians, it was just a question of when. At the very least, the interventions got the mess over and done with.

Bollox. OSCE and UN reports prior to the bombing show that attack by the Serbian forces were concentrated on KLA and areas with strong KLA support. Reports about the actions during the bombing, even the HRW report HoreTore linked, show disproportionate damage in the areas where KLA was active.

They also show that presence of international monitors did have a pacifying effect as KLA couldn't operate as easy as before in Kosovo and naturally, that also stopped the responses of the Serbian police. In the last several months prior to the bombing, Kosovo was most peaceful it has been in several years. That's why there was the need to stage Racak massacre and to keep repeating the word "genocide", to justify a needless intervention.

[Kagemusha]

I have been looking at the footage concerning the Russian takeover of the Ukrainian Navy headquarters and something has definitely changed. People pouring in the base were apparently Crimean militia and the Russian professional troops only secured the gates after the militia stormed in. If such was the case also yesterday at the base, where there were casualties apparently on both sides. It would seem that it just might be that Russia is actually now looking forward towards confrontation. I dont like what i see. Hopefully i am wrong or the footage is not giving a clear picture.

[rvg]

It would seem that it just might be that Russia is actually now looking forward towards confrontation. I dont like what i see. Hopefully i am wrong or the footage is not giving a clear picture.

They have everything to gain and nothing to lose from provoking a confrontation. On the other hand, if they initiate an act of aggression and Ukraine actually decides to actively resist it, I would expect a whole lot of real support starting to pour in from the West. The West is not willing to protect those who aren't willing to protect themselves. However, once we see that the Ukrainians are willing to fight back it'll be a game changer imho.

[Kagemusha]

They have everything to gain and nothing to lose from provoking a confrontation. On the other hand, if they initiate an act of aggression and Ukraine actually decides to actively resist it, I would expect a whole lot of real support starting to pour in from the West. The West is not willing to protect those who aren't willing to protect themselves. However, once we see that the Ukrainians are willing to fight back it'll be a game changer imho.

What i am afraid is that they are trying to frame the Ukrainian troops as aggressors. In the footage basically an unarmed mob of men ripped off the gates of the base and stormed in, while the Russian troops only isolated the base afterwards. One only needs a local Ukrainian commander with itchy finger and we have a "massacre of unarmed civilians" in our hands.

[Husar]

I have been looking at the footage concerning the Russian takeover of the Ukrainian Navy headquarters and something has definitely changed. People pouring in the base were apparently Crimean militia and the Russian professional troops only secured the gates after the militia stormed in. If such was the case also yesterday at the base, where there were casualties apparently on both sides. It would seem that it just might be that Russia is actually now looking forward towards confrontation. I dont like what i see. Hopefully i am wrong or the footage is not giving a clear picture.

If local militia stormed the base that is great news, it's just like Kiev with reversed winners!

And you have to admit it takes more balls to storm a military base than to storm a parliament or ministry.

[Kagemusha]

If local militia stormed the base that is great news, it's just like Kiev with reversed winners!

And you have to admit it takes more balls to storm a military base than to storm a parliament or ministry.

I am myself more fan of a vote when it comes to dealing with mutual affairs.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am myself more fan of a vote when it comes to dealing with mutual affairs.

I would agree. To be fair though, it does take more courage to go at the armed forces of those you deem your opponent then to blow up school buses.

[Kagemusha]

I would agree. To be fair though, it does take more courage to go at the armed forces of those you deem your opponent then to blow up school buses.

Yes but is the actual case about Russians encouraging Crimean nationalist towards action for their own goals? Courage is a fine quality, but it can be used like anything else. Courage combined with possible fanatical nationalism can have a terrible turn out.
Are those militia or protesters as RT network calls them, pawns in Putin´s chess game?

[GenosseGeneral]

Edit: Wow, what a lengthy post. Anyway, there is a manifesto in there you can possibly skip.

Seems like Kyiv likes to kindle. Announcements being made after the last session of Ukraine's national security council:

1. Introduction of a Visa regime with Russia.
Earlier today it became public, that Russia has also made it harder for Ukrainians to enter the country. They need an invitation now, as well as documents proving that they have medical insurance and enough money to sustain themselves. That is basically the same stuff citizens of other countries need to apply for a Visa, but Ukrainians need only the documents so far and don't have to apply for a visa. Even before there had been threats to do so, in case Kyiv signs the association agreement (remember, that treaty this whole mess started with).
This closing of the borders will certainly p*** off people in both countries, as it makes it way more of a hassle to cross borders. A lot of Ukrainians have relatives in Russia (and vise versa). Also, in Kharkov I often saw Russian cars in the streets, a lot of Russians came there for shopping. That seems to be all over now. We will see whom the people will blame for this development, the transitional government in Kyiv or the Kremlin.

2. Ukraine leaves the CIS, the confederation of independent states
Again, something Ukrainian nationalists will cherish whilst it worries Russia-oriented Ukrainians. In my opinion, this transitional government is making far more strategic long term decisions than a transitional government for 3 months should.

3. The armed forces of Ukraine go into full combat readiness.
Well, what to say about this one... I really hope, the nationalists take their glorification of Stepan Bandera and the UPA's fight against the Soviets not so serious, that they try to continue it.

4. Ukraine wants to hold joined military excercises with the UK and US on Ukrainian soil.
Also a dumb provocation, in my eyes. It will just scare the people in Eastern Ukraine who fiercely oppose Ukraine joining the NATO, and it will also support hawks in Moscow. With no effect other than this.

To give you an idea of these people's mindset, a 'manifesto' from a demonstration in Donetsk. I have translated it from Russian into English to illustrate to some friends of mine, how pro-Russian minded people probably think:

"After occupying power by arms, after commiting a disgrace against the rule of law in Ukraine, humiliating the common folk, calling them scum and slaves, they continue to create despotism in Ukraine. Today they occupy our churches,
extinct our orthodox faith. They continue to drag Ukraine into the EU, under humiliating conditions; ignoring the non-aligned status, set in the constitution, they drag Ukraine into the NATO.
And this means - we fill up the ranks of the unemployed and beggars, while those, who burned our people in crematories, who annihilated them in concentration camps, become even richer.
The successors of the fascists have seized power in Ukraine!!! Under the slogan "Ukraine over all - death to [all] enemies" they openly call for the extermination of everything Russian.
In Ukraine occur political arrests, they destroy the memorials of our ancestors, [memorials] to the warrior-liberators of the Great Patriotic War. We will not make peace with fascism, humiliation, arbitrariness and call you up, not to miss the time, when we can still peacefully demand to restore peace and rule of law in Ukraine.
we do not allow [them] to break the country apart, we do not allow the defiling of our grandfathers' commemoration, who defended the country against fascism, we defend our faith, the soil of our Russian motherland.
To prevent the spreading of fascism, to stop the bloodshed, the participants of the demonstration decide to:
Send this message to:
The president of the Russian federation,
Valdimir Vladimirovitch Putin,

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine,

The members of the Donetsk Oblast council,

The members of the Verkhovna Rada [parliament] of Crimea

Accepted at the demonstration on the 16.3.2014. Donetsk, Lenin Square."
http://kor.ill.in.ua/m/610x0/1370791...05736735714895

;tldr: The people on the Majdan were evil fascists, thus our new government consists out of even more evil fascists who want oppress everything Russian and dishonour our ancestors.

After all, the transitional government of Ukraine becomes more and more of a problem in my eyes. Their main objective should be to keep their country together and try to appease people in the East. Those are extremely worried about the fact that a good deal of their new government are members of the nationalist Svoboda party. Yet the government in Kyiv takes those actions, which will probably heat the situation even further up. That is not how to convince people to trust you...

[Sarmatian]

1) It will make things more complicated but Ukrainian government need to respond in some way. Choosing visas is the most benign option.

2) Another decision an interim government shouldn't make. Indefinite suspension of CIS membership as a response would have been more appropriate, until the legitimate government is elected and can act accordingly.

3) and 4) Absolutely disastrous. In no way does it change the reality of the situation and won't scare Russia for a second. It just might make pro-Russians in the eastern Ukraine that more desperate and determined.

[a completely inoffensive name]

So let's not pretend the USA has any moral high ground here.

US and the West has more moral high ground than Putin. That's all that matters.

Your rant about brainwashed soccer moms is hilariously out of touch. Every mother I have met is proud, but awfully scared of their child being in the military.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I give up - I'm gonna apply for Armour, what about you guys?

[Beskar]

I give up - I'm gonna apply for Armour, what about you guys?

I can get into medical, so I will most likely be there. Even if it on the 'front-lines' on conflict.

Prefer to be shot whilst saving lives then get shot whilst being just as bad. Forcing people many innocent conscripted people against each other on different sides of a conflict, there are no winners there, the other person is just like myself. Obviously, if the person was a cold-blooded murderer who likes to shoot medics and wounded people who could not be dissuaded, I would shoot back in self-defense, but that is fundamentally different to me morally. I like to think the 'other side' would leave them be, and I would treat their wounded too, in spirit they may be doing the same to my 'brothers and sisters'.

[rvg]

Checked out my enlistment potential...

[drone]

I give up - I'm gonna apply for Armour, what about you guys?

First law of warfare - Large, slow moving hunks of metal tend to attract small, fast moving hunks of metal.