One Year Later, Crimeans Prefer Russia

[Togo]

I think that people living in the areas which have been shelled by both sides, will have as much difficulty accepting rule by Kiev as they will rule by the rebels. Unless only one side produces casualties?

Makes sense to me. The warmongers have a lot to answer for. But again, my point is that is it the so called rebels who were first attacked by the coup government...

But those are two, quite separate points. You may feel quite strongly that the war is entirely the fault of the government and their army, and not at all the fault of the heavily armed rebels, but that has nothing to do with a man crying in the rubble. He's there because someone shelled his house, and his family home is no more or less destroyed irrespective of who you feel is responsible. Both sides have shelled people, both sides have produced misery and heartbreak. You may feel that one side bears the full responsbility for the existance of the conflict, but those who have had their children killed may well disagree.

 

[Axulus]

Not if his goal is to merely destabilize Ukraine, rather than conquer as much land as possible. .

Do you think that the US wants to get NATO bases in Ukraine? Just to digress for a minute.
That to me seems to be what is going on, and it seems entirely consistent with their stated goals.

Just interested though, do you think that is what they want?

So Ukraine is not a free country to allow or deny the USA in or make agreements with the EU - they actually must do the bidding of Russia and will be ruthlessly attacked when they step out of line, is that what you are saying?

 

[barbos]

Do you think that the US wants to get NATO bases in Ukraine? Just to digress for a minute.
That to me seems to be what is going on, and it seems entirely consistent with their stated goals.

Just interested though, do you think that is what they want?

So Ukraine is not a free country to allow or deny the USA in or make agreements with the EU - they actually must do the bidding of Russia and will be ruthlessly attacked when they step out of line, is that what you are saying?

Was Cuba a free country in October 1962?
We know Turkey was free country in 1961

 

[Togo]

Do you think that the US wants to get NATO bases in Ukraine? Just to digress for a minute.
That to me seems to be what is going on, and it seems entirely consistent with their stated goals.

Just interested though, do you think that is what they want?

No. Bases close to the Russian border are not very useful. They're too easy to attack. You might conceivably find a use for a base in western Ukraine, but a country further to the west would be better. You don't want bases on the front-line, they're just targets.

In any war scenario, either the West in invading, in which case border bases are too small and vunlerable before the push, and irrelevent afterwards, or the East is invading, in which case border bases will be smoking holes within minutes. I can't see what they'd be for.

 

[barbos]

Really? exactly the same, really?

It is the same in the sense that in Georgia, six years later, the breakaway regions are still in state of frozen conflict. Russia's goal was not to conquer entire Georgia, which it could have easily done, but to destabilize it. Same with Ukraine. Only exception is Crimea, that had a Russian naval base and a clear Russian ethnic majority.

You keep implying that Russia somehow started that conflict.

And remind me why can't Georgia let them go?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Russian involvement in Ukraine - I can't believe that there are still denialists:

It's probably true that there are at least Russian volunteers in Ukraine, but one wonders why American politicians have to produce photos from Georgia in 2008 and claim they are from Ukraine recently, if the evidence is so clear that Putin is sending troops.


View attachment 2298

Such errors of attribution are common.

 

[Jayjay]

It is the same in the sense that in Georgia, six years later, the breakaway regions are still in state of frozen conflict. Russia's goal was not to conquer entire Georgia, which it could have easily done, but to destabilize it. Same with Ukraine. Only exception is Crimea, that had a Russian naval base and a clear Russian ethnic majority.

You keep implying that Russia somehow started that conflict.

And remind me why can't Georgia let them go?

Putin's politics are like judo... his opponent makes a misstep, and he takes advantage. Regardless of who started it, the conflict in Georgia is not resolved, and there are tens of thousands of internally displaced refugees who are not allowed to return. I fully expect the same thing to happen in Ukraine.

 

[Axulus]

It is the same in the sense that in Georgia, six years later, the breakaway regions are still in state of frozen conflict. Russia's goal was not to conquer entire Georgia, which it could have easily done, but to destabilize it. Same with Ukraine. Only exception is Crimea, that had a Russian naval base and a clear Russian ethnic majority.

You keep implying that Russia somehow started that conflict.

And remind me why can't Georgia let them go?

Who was it that took control of government buildings in Eastern Ukraine? There is evidence that these individuals were either sent from Russia or were helped by Russia (the men that took over the government buildings and police stations were equipped with specialized Russian weapons and the same uniforms as those worn by the Russian forces that invaded Crimea.)

You also realize that the CIA is not involved in every coup that takes place in the world, correct? That sometimes a polarized society gets very angry at the actions its government is taking, leading to mass protests and that sometimes turn violent and that sometimes lead to the ouster of the political leaders?

 

[tupac chopra]

Makes sense to me. The warmongers have a lot to answer for. But again, my point is that is it the so called rebels who were first attacked by the coup government...

But those are two, quite separate points. You may feel quite strongly that the war is entirely the fault of the government and their army, and not at all the fault of the heavily armed rebels, but that has nothing to do with a man crying in the rubble. He's there because someone shelled his house, and his family home is no more or less destroyed irrespective of who you feel is responsible. Both sides have shelled people, both sides have produced misery and heartbreak. You may feel that one side bears the full responsbility for the existance of the conflict, but those who have had their children killed may well disagree.

The point I was replying to was a complaint that some want Ukraine split up.
My point was that that seems inevitable in view of the fact that peoples children are being killed.

 

[tupac chopra]

I can't see what they'd be for.

The US would like something to stop ballistic missiles I'd say. Never mind that it is cruise missiles that Europe would be vulnerable to. But hey, Europe is getting the worst of their entanglement with the US.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Not if his goal is to merely destabilize Ukraine, rather than conquer as much land as possible. .

Do you think that the US wants to get NATO bases in Ukraine? Just to digress for a minute.
That to me seems to be what is going on, and it seems entirely consistent with their stated goals.

Just interested though, do you think that is what they want?

I had heard something about energy exploration revealing huge untapped oil and natural gas deposits in the waters just off crimea. If that's the case, this might simply be a case of Putin calling "dibs."

 

[barbos]

You keep implying that Russia somehow started that conflict.

And remind me why can't Georgia let them go?

Putin's politics are like judo... his opponent makes a misstep, and he takes advantage. Regardless of who started it, the conflict in Georgia is not resolved, and there are tens of thousands of internally displaced refugees who are not allowed to return. I fully expect the same thing to happen in Ukraine.

So, Georgia attacking (with US help) South Ossetia was just a mistake?
Yes, there are displaced refugees there, as well as in Kosovo. Yet somehow Kosovo is better than Abkhazia (which have never been part of independent Georgia and was merely Stalin's gift to himself).
You all hate Stalin, right? then Georgia has no rights whatsoever to Abkhazia.

 

[barbos]

You keep implying that Russia somehow started that conflict.

And remind me why can't Georgia let them go?

Who was it that took control of government buildings in Eastern Ukraine? There is evidence that these individuals were either sent from Russia or were helped by Russia (the men that took over the government buildings and police stations were equipped with specialized Russian weapons and the same uniforms as those worn by the Russian forces that invaded Crimea.)

Local militia took control of these buildings. And they were not uniformed at all.

 

[barbos]

It's probably true that there are at least Russian volunteers in Ukraine, but one wonders why American politicians have to produce photos from Georgia in 2008 and claim they are from Ukraine recently, if the evidence is so clear that Putin is sending troops.


View attachment 2298

Such errors of attribution are common.

Way too common in western media.

 

[Ford]

Well I see the paid Putin brigade is out in (solo) force tonight.


Apparently rubles are worth more than I thought!

 

[Axulus]

Such errors of attribution are common.

Way too common in western media.

You do realize that Sen Inhofe is a politican and not a member of the media or a journalist? One would think you could distinguish these salient matters, or is there no difference from your perspective since State and Media are one and the same in Russia?

 

[Axulus]

Who was it that took control of government buildings in Eastern Ukraine? There is evidence that these individuals were either sent from Russia or were helped by Russia (the men that took over the government buildings and police stations were equipped with specialized Russian weapons and the same uniforms as those worn by the Russian forces that invaded Crimea.)

Local militia took control of these buildings. And they were not uniformed at all.

And you know this how? They were not aided by Russia in any way? Do you have a direct line to Russia's inner circle and their military intelligence?

Besides, these are acts of rebellion. You blame Ukraine for trying to stamp out a rebellion? You think a country should automatically acquiesce to any rebellion that takes place within its territory?

 

[tupac chopra]

Well I see the paid Putin brigade is out in (solo) force tonight.


Apparently rubles are worth more than I thought!

You Mericans would do well to make friends with Russia rather than an enemy.
Both America and Russia have an interest in dealing with terrorism originating from Islamic countries, as just one example of where they could work together. But instead or making a friend of Russia America is demonising Russia and thus alienating Europe. It is Europe who is paying the price for sanctions against Russia. They will eventually get sick of this and realise that America is a friend that costs them dearly. It is Europe that is within striking range of Russia's cruise missile , not the USA. Europe is at risk. Europe will more than likely awaken to this uneven relationship.

Are you a neo con Ford? I think that whether you realise it or not you for the neo cons and against Europe. Though I'm interested if you have some reason why you aren't a neocon.

In foreign policy, the neoconservatives' main concern is to prevent the development of a new rival. Defense Planning Guidance, a document prepared during 1992 by Under Secretary for Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz, is regarded by Distinguished Professor of the Humanities John McGowan at the University of North Carolina as the "quintessential statement of neoconservative thought". The report says:[66]

"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."​

Have you seen what those idiotic bumbling cretinous neocons have done WRT the alliance that China and Russia recently made?
Don't you care, as an American, to the damage that is being done?

 

[tupac chopra]

Besides, these are acts of rebellion. You blame Ukraine for trying to stamp out a rebellion? You think a country should automatically acquiesce to any rebellion that takes place within its territory?

Wait a minute. The act of rebellion was the coup that your tax dollars brought about.

"Russia calls the events that took place at the beginning of this year a coup d'etat organized by the United States. And it truly was the most blatant coup in history."​

- George Friedman of Stratfor.

This is what George Friedman is saying!! For fucks sake! It seems like the average American lives in lala land where even if someone like George Friedman tells them what happened they put their fingers in their ears and have another Big Mac (on money they borrowed from those they are trying to make an enemy of).

 

[Axulus]

Wait a minute. The act of rebellion was the coup that your tax dollars brought about.

"Russia calls the events that took place at the beginning of this year a coup d'etat organized by the United States. And it truly was the most blatant coup in history."​

- George Friedman of Stratfor.

This is what George Friedman is saying!! For fucks sake! It seems like the average American lives in lala land where even if someone like George Friedman tells them what happened they put their fingers in their ears and have another Big Mac (on money they borrowed from those they are trying to make an enemy of).

Maybe you think there is no legitimate method to remove a leader currently in power because you have only experienced dictatorships like those that exist in Russia and Belarus. Also, unlike what you may be used to, protests are allowed in free countries and do not in and of themselves constitute an act of illegal rebellion or a coup when such protests lead to removal of the leader in accordance with the laws and the constitution of the country in question.

In this particular case, the Ukrainian parliament voted to remove president Yanukovich from power:

After parliament passed the motion to remove the president with a constitutional majority shortly after 5pm – supported by many members of the president’s own party – MPs cheered, then stood and sang the national anthem, hands on hearts. There was applause too on the streets of central Kiev, as protesters gathered in cafés to watch events on television.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8faf...0144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3S5UCZwR7

So the removal of Yanukovich was done in accordance with Ukraine's constitution. You really should understand the basics of the situation before you go spouting off and taking sides.