Ukraine on the brink of civil war. Mod Warning in OP.

Ren2k7

gandalf wrote: »

Here's an interesting site. They are tracking the different vehicles being used in the Ukrainian conflict. Again quite a number are used only by the Russian military.

https://www.bellingcat.com/resources/2015/02/12/ukraine-conflict-vehicle-first-week/

Bellingcats creator Elliot Higgins (who started off by exposing the Assad's use of chemical weapons and barrel bombs in its war against his own people) has come in for a torrent of criticism and abuse from Russian state media, making disparaging comments about him being unemployed and always referring to him as a "so called citizen journalist". And yet it doesn't stop Russia Today from using any old lunatic wingnut with a Skype connection as their primary source.

gandalf

Sand wrote: »

Its a challenge Europe and the West hasn't faced on this scale since Hitler. That isn't a lazy or alarmist comparison: Putin is copying the Hitler playbook. Provoke war whilst loudly demanding peace and denouncing your opponents as warmongers. The polite, reasonable, rational, bureaucratic EU is just as ill-equipped to deal with Putin as the public schoolboys of Chamberlains government were when dealing with a brutal, cynical operator like Hitler. Its clearly very, very, very difficult for the likes of Merkel and the EU to comprehend someone who does not play by the rules or instinctively seek a compromise solution.

The only remaining question is if or when Putin will complete the imitation of Hitler and overreach. For Hitler it was the invasion of Poland after the aggression in Czechoslovakia had expended all remaining credibility for the doveish approach. Putin is nearing that credibility gap where even Merkel finally acknowledges he's not a "partner".

Absolutely agree with you Sand. Putin is actually a worse prospect than Hitler in 1939. At least Hitler didn't have nuclear weapons.

WakeUp

Sand wrote: »

It has to be remembered, from the Kremlin perspective, the constant lies are viewed through the prism of military conflict. The British for example employed vast levels of deceit to mask the true location of Operation Overlord - but even they didn't think to deny that they were actually at war with Germany.

From the Kremlin perspective, lies and denials, no matter how paper thin serve to keep their enemies (which from their paranoid mindset essentially everyone) off balance and misdirected. How does the west react to a military attack by a power that refuses to acknowledge it is attacking the west? And how does the a rational state or group react to a state or group that simply lies about wanting peace, whilst provoking war? Whilst the West splutters about the latest nonsense spouted by the Kremlin and their shills in the RT, the Kremlin is acting. By the time the West disproves the most recent Kremlin lie, the Kremlin is telling another one.

Its a challenge Europe and the West hasn't faced on this scale since Hitler. That isn't a lazy or alarmist comparison: Putin is copying the Hitler playbook. Provoke war whilst loudly demanding peace and denouncing your opponents as warmongers. The polite, reasonable, rational, bureaucratic EU is just as ill-equipped to deal with Putin as the public schoolboys of Chamberlains government were when dealing with a brutal, cynical operator like Hitler. Its clearly very, very, very difficult for the likes of Merkel and the EU to comprehend someone who does not play by the rules or instinctively seek a compromise solution.

The only remaining question is if or when Putin will complete the imitation of Hitler and overreach. For Hitler it was the invasion of Poland after the aggression in Czechoslovakia had expended all remaining credibility for the doveish approach. Putin is nearing that credibility gap where even Merkel finally acknowledges he's not a "partner".

all warfare is based on deception clearly the Russians are involved in this and have been since day 1. why would that surprise anyone there isnt anything surprising about that . What would be overreach in your opinion? rightly or wrongly in Putin and Russian eyes Ukraine and Georgia for that matter are red lines for them. he and Russia will do whatever they have to do to ensure neither ends up in Nato. I posted this a while back but I would be curious as to your opinion on it. this guy Matlock Reagans man in Moscow helped bring the cold war to an "end". is his opinion anyway relevant? or is it not worth even considering. because freedom or something.

When the Berlin Wall came down, when eastern Europe began to try to free itself from the Communist rule, the first President Bush, George Herbert Walker Bush, met with Gorbachev in Malta, and they made a very important statement. One was we were no longer enemies. The second was the Soviet Union would not intervene in eastern Europe to keep Communist rule there. And in response, the United States would not take advantage of that.

Now, this was a—you might say, a gentlemen’s agreement between Gorbachev and President Bush. It was one which was echoed by the other Western leaders—the British prime minister, the German chancellor, the French president. As we negotiated German unity, there the question was: Could a united Germany stay in NATO? At first, Gorbachev said, “No, if they unite, they have to leave NATO.” And we said, “Look, let them unite. Let them stay in NATO. But we will not extend NATO to the territory of East Germany.” Well, it turned out that legally you couldn’t do it that way, so in the final agreement it was that all of Germany would stay in NATO, but that the territory of East Germany would be special, in that there would be no foreign troops—that is, no non-German troops—and no nuclear weapons. Now, later—at that time, the Warsaw Pact was still in place. We weren’t talking about eastern Europe. But the statements made were very general. At one point, Secretary Baker told Gorbachev NATO jurisdiction would not move one inch to the east. Well, he had the GDR in mind, but that’s not what he said specifically.

So, yes, if I had been asked when I was ambassador of the United States in Moscow in 1991, “Is there an understanding that NATO won’t move to the east?” I would have said, “Yes, there is.” However, it was not a legal commitment, and one could say that once the Soviet Union collapsed, any agreement then maybe didn’t hold, except that when you think about it, if there was no reason to expand NATO when the Soviet Union existed, there was even less reason when the Soviet Union collapsed and you were talking about Russia. And the reason many of us—myself, George Kennan, many of us—argued against NATO expansion in the ’90s was precisely to avoid the sort of situation we have today. It was totally predictable. If we start expanding NATO, as we get closer to the Russian border, they are going to consider this a hostile act. And at some point, they will draw a line, and they will do anything within their power to keep it from going any further. That’s what we’re seeing today.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/former-u-s-ambassador-ussr-u-s-nato-provoking-ukrainian-crisis.html

on another note are the Ukrainians employing barrier squads. shooting their own soldiers who are trying to surrender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88ZNcrTVNl8

AbusesToilets

Well that's conclusive

WakeUp

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

I never said russia would attack nato, russia hasn't the guts too.
we all know ukraine isn't part of eu or un or nato, will it be who knows !!!
georgia which i talked about was a country tried to do same there as what's happening ukraine !!! but i guess you missed that point .

The big picture is russia want ukraine because it not part of un or nato and wants to get ukraine before it might be,,Weather you agree or not, i couldn't give a s!!T !!!!!

America will do something for ukraine, this week uk is sending over military to help train Ukrainians and would suspect america will do something also and I hope they do!!!!!
I think the people of ukraine need help to stop this as russia talks bo1ix and proven lairs
it's enough that germany and france talks crap with these so called truce agreements that aren't worth anything .
The russian muppets will continue to take as much as they can because they better equipped by russia and getting military support in many ways from russia.
Unlike you , I hear what going on there, from my partners family relatives in ukraine and eastern europe , I don't relay on news reports only !!!

Putin isn't worried in any way what europe says or even does,that's very clear to see,
One thing is very certain all europe will do is sit on fence so to speak and talk and talk and talk , so ukraine isn't expecting much but has hope about eu only

I answered your questions now I would appreciate if you could do the same in kind please.

do you agree with the Western backed Ukrainian government bombing and murdering their own citizens in separatist held areas? a simple yes or no would suffice.

Russia not wanting Ukraine in Nato or the EU isnt the "big" picture. thats stating the obvious. and personally speaking I dont want them in either Nato or the EU myself. so you want the Americans and British to fight a war for Ukraine. with all due respect if you fell so strongly about it why arent you over there doing something about it. instead of expecting other people to fight and die for Ukraine. and in the process maybe setting the entire continent ablaze.

Fiery mutant wrote: »

Despite what some people think of Israel, if there is one country in the world you don't wanna piss off, it's Israel. They would have no problem defending themselves, no matter the opponent.

Yep the Israelis are brutal in what they do they dont take any sh1t. but usually they are up against tin pot armies and militias what not with the full backing of the Americans. somehow I think though Russia is and would be in a completely different stratosphere to any of that. and if they decide to ship those air defense systems you can be near certain Tel Aviv will be getting a phone call. the Americans the west their allies whatever are taking on one of big boys now on their own border. to say the rules are a lot different would be an understatement. and it appears to be a zero sum game.

WakeUp

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Well that's conclusive

perhaps they are making things up then. telling lies and that. who knows.

BoJack Horseman

You may think invasion of weaker nations is right, most of the world disagrees & one article won't change that

Fiery mutant

WakeUp wrote: »

I answered your questions now I would appreciate if you could do the same in kind please.

do you agree with the Western backed Ukrainian government bombing and murdering their own citizens in separatist held areas? a simple yes or no would suffice.

Russia not wanting Ukraine in Nato or the EU isnt the "big" picture. thats stating the obvious. and personally speaking I dont want them in either Nato or the EU myself. so you want the Americans and British to fight a war for Ukraine. with all due respect if you fell so strongly about it why arent you over there doing something about it. instead of expecting other people to fight and die for Ukraine. and in the process maybe setting the entire continent ablaze.




Yep the Israelis are brutal in what they do they dont take any sh1t. but usually they are up against tin pot armies and militias what not with the full backing of the Americans. somehow I think though Russia is and would be in a completely different stratosphere to any of that. and if they decide to ship those air defense systems you can be near certain Tel Aviv will be getting a phone call. the Americans the west their allies whatever are taking on one of big boys now on their own border. to say the rules are a lot different would be an understatement. and it appears to be a zero sum game.

Oh I have no doubt the Israelis would be very cautious about crossing the Russians, but in saying that, i do believe Israel would do whatever they thought is to protect their people. Granted yes, I don't think if a shipment was made from Russia to Iran that Israel would try take it out, but I don't think it would change Israel mindset if the situation arose where they felt it was necessary to strike Iran. Just operational changes.

Either way, I don't want bring the thread off topic, back to Ukraine.

I do believe that we are getting dangerously close to a pivot point that could change this situation for the worse. I don't think anyone wants that to occur, but Putin has his red lines, there are red lines for the other side too. And the problem is I don't think anyone on this side knows where they are.

gandalf

WakeUp wrote: »

interesting piece in the Bostonglobe....


http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/02/25/putin-reaction-ukraine-about-russian-security/uM3Ipc7lWPgWbpiIWBJSxI/story.html?

It's an opinion piece by a journalist who has consistently criticised US government actions. Any chance you can let us know what is interesting about it.

Sobko

It's intereting in that it admits US policy to surround Russia with weapons.

gandalf

Sobko wrote: »

It's intereting in that it admits US policy to surround Russia with weapons.

It doesn't admit anything. This is an opinion piece by a journalist who in the past has published articles that have criticised the US government. Is there any sentence in that article which is referencing official US policy. No there isn't.

Sobko

I think it's quite obvious the U.S. wants to surround Russia with weapons and missile shields. You don't? They have been negotiating with Poland and the Czech Republic to place "anti missile" systems for the past ten years. Ukraine is the next logical area and they would have Europe covered.

daUbiq

Sobko wrote: »

I think it's quite obvious the U.S. wants to surround Russia with weapons and missile shields. You don't? They have been negotiating with Poland and the Czech Republic to place "anti missile" systems for the past ten years. Ukraine is the next logical area and they would have Europe covered.

It is obvious, but the patriots posting here won't put up with any criticism of Amerika. They're hoping to get green cards...

Morpheus

Better than having the soviets invade another country

BoJack Horseman

Sobko wrote: »

I think it's quite obvious the U.S. wants to surround Russia with weapons and missile shields. You don't? They have been negotiating with Poland and the Czech Republic to place "anti missile" systems for the past ten years. Ukraine is the next logical area and they would have Europe covered.

The Poland/ Czech deals were dropped to appease Putin, which retrospectively was a mistake..
Russia should have no say if a nation chooses to deploy weapons solely intended for purpose

I recall reading that work is ongoing on a land based Aegis system to provide BMD to Bulgaria/Romania.

Sobko

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The Poland/ Czech deals were dropped to appease Putin, which retrospectively was a mistake..
Russia should have no say if a nation chooses to deploy weapons solely intended for purpose

I recall reading that work is ongoing on a land based Aegis system to provide BMD to Bulgaria/Romania.

So you think the U.S. would have no problem with Russia supplying Central American countries with "missile defense" systems?

daUbiq

Sand wrote: »

It has to be remembered, from the Kremlin perspective, the constant lies are viewed through the prism of military conflict. The British for example employed vast levels of deceit to mask the true location of Operation Overlord - but even they didn't think to deny that they were actually at war with Germany.

From the Kremlin perspective, lies and denials, no matter how paper thin serve to keep their enemies (which from their paranoid mindset essentially everyone) off balance and misdirected. How does the west react to a military attack by a power that refuses to acknowledge it is attacking the west? And how does the a rational state or group react to a state or group that simply lies about wanting peace, whilst provoking war? Whilst the West splutters about the latest nonsense spouted by the Kremlin and their shills in the RT, the Kremlin is acting. By the time the West disproves the most recent Kremlin lie, the Kremlin is telling another one.

Its a challenge Europe and the West hasn't faced on this scale since Hitler. That isn't a lazy or alarmist comparison: Putin is copying the Hitler playbook. Provoke war whilst loudly demanding peace and denouncing your opponents as warmongers. The polite, reasonable, rational, bureaucratic EU is just as ill-equipped to deal with Putin as the public schoolboys of Chamberlains government were when dealing with a brutal, cynical operator like Hitler. Its clearly very, very, very difficult for the likes of Merkel and the EU to comprehend someone who does not play by the rules or instinctively seek a compromise solution.

The only remaining question is if or when Putin will complete the imitation of Hitler and overreach. For Hitler it was the invasion of Poland after the aggression in Czechoslovakia had expended all remaining credibility for the doveish approach. Putin is nearing that credibility gap where even Merkel finally acknowledges he's not a "partner".

Now, apply the above to every foreign policy ****up involving the yank warmongers over the last fifty years.. Wow, there's not much difference really, is there? They just have better PR than Putin and plenty of gullible people to believe their bull****.

"From the Washington perspective, lies and denials, no matter how paper thin serve to keep their enemies (which from their paranoid mindset essentially everyone) off balance and misdirected." Imagine Amerika actually lying to us about their intentions... :eek:

"How does Russia react to a military attack by a power that refuses to acknowledge it is attacking Russia? is this describing encirclement of Russia\China by Amerika.

Well, the reaction is not quite what the CIA, sorry Amerika, was hoping for or expecting. Russia is protecting it's interests just like the yank warmongers do.

BoJack Horseman

Sobko wrote: »

So you think the U.S. would have no problem with Russia supplying Central American countries with "missile defense" systems?

Well, seeing as central/south america is the main growth area for russian arms exporsts, that is already the case!

Its just Vlad sitting on his throne in the Kremlin echo chamber that is succumbing to paranoia.

daUbiq

Morpheus wrote: »

Better than having the soviets invade another country

The Russians are no worse than the yanks but you are happy to see them invade and destroy countries as they please?

Sobko

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Well, seeing as central/south america is the main growth area for russian arms exporsts, that is already the case!

Its just Vlad sitting on his throne in the Kremlin echo chamber that is succumbing to paranoia.

I've read no reports on Russia supplying long range ballistic missles or Missle defensive systems to Central and Southern America. Have you a link?


Its like the Americans have forgotten the Cuban Missile Crisis and are doing exactly the same as the USSR in the 60's.

Morpheus

The Russians invaded and annexed Crimea.
The russians facilitated a similiar feat in luhansk and donetsk
The russians hands are dripping in ukrainian blood.
Putin is f**king up Russia on the Russian people. He and his PM and the corruption in govt there have made a mockery of Russias fledgling democracy. I think Russia is a great country with great people but it is lead , for the most part, by oligarchs and seriously corrupt politicians with incredibly strange world views.

BoJack Horseman

daUbiq wrote: »

The Russians are no worse than the yanks but you are happy to see them invade and destroy countries as they please?

No, of course not.

You are making the stupid assumption that opposing Russian invasions automatically supports american ones.

Sobko

Morpheus wrote: »

The Russians invaded and annexed Crimea.
The russians facilitated a similiar feat in luhansk and donetsk
The russians hands are dripping in ukrainian blood.
Putin is f**king up Russia on the Russian people. He and his PM and the corruption in govt there have made a mockery of Russias fledgling democracy. I think Russia is a great country with great people but it is lead , for the most part, by oligarchs and seriously corrupt politicians with incredibly strange world views.

Unfortunately it's never had a chance at democracy. And probably will never have it.

daUbiq

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

No, of course not.

You are making the stupid assumption that opposing Russian invasions automatically supports american ones.

Maybe you don't but most of the posters here do.. Besides, they are the main players in this conflict even if they say otherwise.

Anyway, a worthy list of american exploits linked below just to put their current stance into perspective:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_authoritarian_regimes_supported_by_the_United_States

If Putin wasn't Russian they'd be supporting him.

Gatling

daUbiq wrote: »

Maybe you don't but most of the posters here do.. Besides, they are the main players in this conflict even if they say otherwise.

Anyway, a worthy list of american exploits linked below just to put their current stance into perspective:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_authoritarian_regimes_supported_by_the_United_States

If Putin wasn't Russian they'd be supporting him.

Still doesn't give justification for Putin's invasion of Ukraine .

America did this and America did that

sounds like a 5 year old in a playground argument

BoJack Horseman

Sobko wrote: »

I've read no reports on Russia supplying long range ballistic missles or Missle defensive systems to Central and Southern America. Have you a link?

Off the top of my head, BUK & S300 systems to Venezuela, Panstir-S1 systems to Brazil (and possibly Mexico)

There are others cuba/Nicaragua etc, but don't have the time to dig.

Sobko

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Off the top of my head, BUK & S300 systems to Venezuela, Panstir-S1 systems to Brazil (and possibly Mexico)

There are others cuba/Nicaragua etc, but don't have the time to dig.

That's interesting it looks like many of the former Soviet block countries also have them already including Ukraine.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_%28missile%29

Gatling

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Off the top of my head, BUK & S300 systems to Venezuela, Panstir-S1 systems to Brazil (and possibly Mexico)

There are others cuba/Nicaragua etc, but don't have the time to dig.

Don't forget about fighter bombers heading to Argentina

Sobko

Gatling wrote: »

Don't forget about fighter bombers heading to Argentina

They are all at it.

BoJack Horseman

Gatling wrote: »

Don't forget about fighter bombers heading to Argentina

Indeed.

Russia is the worlds leading arms exporter.
Its a good source of skilled jobs & hard currency.

Stating "america wouldn't allow" is & always was bullsh*t.