Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…121122124126127…134

Comments

  • Options
    #3692
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,683 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    He's back at home. http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/vladimir-putin-being-treated-for-back-problems-at-home-reports-31068485.html. There are other reports in the Indo on the documentary and the Crimean nuclear alert.


  • Options
    #3693
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    gandalf wrote: »
    So what are you actually saying here, bend over and take it? The last time Europe did this there was a very heavy price exerted.

    If what is being reported is accurate then we do have a rogue nation on European borders that does have to be stood up to. The only threat Russia has over Europe after the Natural Gas lever is diminished (and they are actively looking to mitigate it) is Nuclear Weapons. Does this mean that every little crisis is going to be greeted with the Russias rolling out the big missiles.

    The reaction to this latest revelation should be very clear and it is not moving more military forces into the location it is crippling the Russian economy and making the regime of Vladimir Putin and his criminal cronies untenable.

    Anytime you respond to blatant aggression by capitulation only results in more aggression because it worked the first time.

    Believe it or not I want the same thing you and the other 95% people on this thread Im arguing/debating with. Im pro western and pro European but I do question the wisdom and strategic thinking behind attempting to bring both Ukraine and Georgia into a European sphere of influence. and just to preempt the Ukrainians want freedom or democracy or something like that yes I can understand this but the world doesnt work like that. the big boys have interests and they also have red lines. rightly or wrongly I dont make the "rules" they are what they are you need to play the game. knowing full well how the Russians would react to Ukraine having closer ties or integrating into European institutions then why go down that road at all why push it. why have anything to do with them. as people have pointed out and stated people more qualified than you or I to do so this current situation was predictable. Ukraine is a red line for Russia and clearly that line has been drawn. they are not going to back down. though this idea that Putin and Russia are going to attack and invade a Nato member to me is ludicrous and nonsense. but if this keeps getting pushed and the Germans/French fail to find a diplomatic way out of it or if the Americans arm Ukraine or even crazier Nato troops are sent into Ukraine then all bets are off. as soon as night turns to day the Russians will react to that theres no doubt about it.

    People are comparing what is happening today to what happened during world war 2 but you cant do that as that analogy doesnt work in the nuclear age. sanction Russia fine. try and cripple them fine. but if you try and outright destroy Russia, we all get dead.


  • Options
    #3694
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    WakeUp wrote: »
    Believe it or not I want the same thing you and the other 95% people on this thread Im arguing/debating with. Im pro western and pro European but I do question the wisdom and strategic thinking behind attempting to bring both Ukraine and Georgia into a European sphere of influence.

    No what I am saying is that the Ukraine should be allowed make their own decisions, something that is obvious that Russia doesn't want to happen.

    Why do I feel this way, well if Russia is allowed to dismember states next to it then it will move onto ones that are "more important" to Europe like the Baltic states for example which they are already interfering with.

    Russia needs to learn if it thinks this is the golden age of the USSR and they can meddle with their satellite states still there are very real consequences.
    and just to preempt the Ukrainians want freedom or democracy or something like that yes I can understand this but the world doesnt work like that. the big boys have interests and they also have red lines. rightly or wrongly I dont make the "rules" they are what they are you need to play the game. knowing full well how the Russians would react to Ukraine having closer ties or integrating into European institutions then why go down that road at all why push it. why have anything to do with them. as people have pointed out and stated people more qualified than you or I to do so this current situation was predictable. Ukraine is a red line for Russia and clearly that line has been drawn. they are not going to back down.

    I do believe any country has a right to determine their own destiny without interference from their much larger aggressive neighbour.

    I do believe that Europe does have to protect it's interests and having a aggressive Russia throwing shapes and threatening us with its nuclear weapon is a very clear red flag that they have to be dealt with (via sanctions and severe financial restrictions directly and arming the Ukrainians indirectly).
    though this idea that Putin and Russia are going to attack and invade a Nato member to me is ludicrous and nonsense. but if this keeps getting pushed and the Germans/French fail to find a diplomatic way out of it or if the Americans arm Ukraine or even crazier Nato troops are sent into Ukraine then all bets are off. as soon as night turns to day the Russians will react to that there's no doubt about it.

    Nato troops will never be sent into the Ukraine. However if we allow the Russians to keep their dismembered Ukrainian territories then you will embolden a very dangerous regime into believing they can carry out the same blueprint to another sovereign entity.
    People are comparing what is happening today to what happened during world war 2 but you cant do that as that analogy doesnt work in the nuclear age. sanction Russia fine. try and cripple them fine. but if you try and outright destroy Russia, we all get dead.

    I agree with you to an extent that Putin in Russia today is far more dangerous than Hitler was in 1938/9.

    I certainly don't remember every saying that we should destroy Russia. The only way to deal with the regime there is to make life so miserable for the majority of Russians that they realise the only way forward is for internal regime change. Given the neutering of all media in Russia the regime also realise this.

    If there isn't a stand against Russian aggression towards the Ukraine do you honestly believe that the regime in Russia won't then attempt to use the same tactics again?


  • Options
    #3695
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    gandalf wrote: »
    No what I am saying is that the Ukraine should be allowed make their own decisions, something that is obvious that Russia doesn't want to happen.

    Why do I feel this way, well if Russia is allowed to dismember states next to it then it will move onto ones that are "more important" to Europe like the Baltic states for example which they are already interfering with.

    Russia needs to learn if it thinks this is the golden age of the USSR and they can meddle with their satellite states still there are very real consequences.

    Russia isnt the Soviet union there is no comparison to be made there. the Germans and French for a number of years have actively been against Ukrainian membership of Nato and behind closed doors for reasons that are obvious I would imagine against EU membership. who is driving this. Gandalf listening to what you are saying dismembering Nato countries? if that ever happened the continent will be laid waste. its war. the Ukrainians rightly or wrongly made a mistake declaring their intentions to want to join the EU and Nato. and they have been lead down the garden path. the Russians and the Americans/British seem prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian for their own geopolitical self interests.
    I do believe any country has a right to determine their own destiny without interference from their much larger aggressive neighbour.

    I do believe that Europe does have to protect it's interests and having a aggressive Russia throwing shapes and threatening us with its nuclear weapon is a very clear red flag that they have to be dealt with (via sanctions and severe financial restrictions directly and arming the Ukrainians indirectly).

    I believe that too. but the world doesnt work like that in many cases unfortunately. arming the Ukrainians will only lead to more death misery and chaos. weapons win battles but they dont win wars. deception, spies, espionage, intelligence , spotting a foe posing as a friend, being one step ahead, discipline, planning, these are the things that win wars. the Ukrainians are lacking sorely in all those departments. they are badly compromised. out of a population of 40 million people they have struggled to put a force together of any worthy note. Croatia out of a population of maybe 4 million managed to get an army of 200,000 together when they had too. the Ukrainians are struggling to even get that together. Ukrainian generals/leaders are corrupt, incompetent and in a number of cases cowards. deserting their men on the battlefield when the bullets started flying. giving the Ukrainians weapons is just going to make a bad situation a million times worse and many many more people will needlessly lose their lives.
    Nato troops will never be sent into the Ukraine. However if we allow the Russians to keep their dismembered Ukrainian territories then you will embolden a very dangerous regime into believing they can carry out the same blueprint to another sovereign entity.

    Nato troops are already in Ukraine. the Americans have sent them 75 million dollars worth of humvees and drones.
    I agree with you to an extent that Putin in Russia today is far more dangerous than Hitler was in 1938/9.

    I certainly don't remember every saying that we should destroy Russia. The only way to deal with the regime there is to make life so miserable for the majority of Russians that they realise the only way forward is for internal regime change. Given the neutering of all media in Russia the regime also realise this.

    If there isn't a stand against Russian aggression towards the Ukraine do you honestly believe that the regime in Russia won't then attempt to use the same tactics again?

    Putin is not carrying out a genocide comparing him to Hitler doesnt work. and considering it was the Russians who lost some 20 million people to the nazis the comparison bizzare and unfair to say the least. going after a Russia trying to cripple them and make life for their people horrible and intolerable could be construed by them as an attempt to destroy them. this has been a strange week. UK nuclear secrets perhaps even plans rerouted through Ukraine wouldnt be a stretch to imagine the Russians lifted them and if so what did they find. this coinciding with Putin going awol. rumors abound, its all very odd. now Ive been reading unconfirmed social media reports that the Russians are evacuating their embassy in London which we will find out if true or not probably tomorrow. I dont believe Russia will employ similar tactics against any other country. personally I dont believe that.


  • Options
    #3696
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    WakeUp wrote: »
    Russia isnt the Soviet union there is no comparison to be made there.

    There is no secret that Putin wants to restore the USSR borders and that looking at this from a distance is exactly what is occurring here.
    the Germans and French for a number of years have actively been against Ukrainian membership of Nato and behind closed doors for reasons that are obvious I would imagine against EU membership. who is driving this.

    The Ukraine were driving this, what happens with their country under normal circumstances should be there own business. Given Russia poured troops over their borders and sliced off parcels of land then it appears they were right to look at joining an organisation that could help protect them from Russian aggression.
    Gandalf listening to what you are saying dismembering Nato countries? if that ever happened the continent will be laid waste. its war
    .

    It is quite obvious to me that the Russian regime is already unhinged enough to destablise and then directly attack a neighboring "friendly" sovereign state. If they get away with this then of course there is a risk of them thinking they could try this elsewhere. It is a logical conclusion.
    the Ukrainians rightly or wrongly made a mistake declaring their intentions to want to join the EU and Nato. and they have been lead down the garden path. the Russians and the Americans/British seem prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian for their own geopolitical self interests.

    As I said before NATO was and is a white elephant. They are the visable bogeyman. The real fear for Russia is the Ukraine joins the EU and the standard of living then rises in the former satellite above Russia. Then the so-called powers that be in Russia know the people will start asking why they the former head of the Soviet empire are falling behind one of their subservient nations.
    I believe that too. but the world doesnt work like that in many cases unfortunately. arming the Ukrainians will only lead to more death misery and chaos. weapons win battles but they dont win wars.

    Let just add in your opinion it doesn't work. In my opinion giving the Ukrainians sharper teeth and bigger talons will make the Russians think twice.
    deception, spies, espionage, intelligence , spotting a foe posing as a friend, being one step ahead, discipline, planning, these are the things that win wars. the Ukrainians are lacking sorely in all those departments. they are badly compromised. out of a population of 40 million people they have struggled to put a force together of any worthy note. Croatia out of a population of maybe 4 million managed to get an army of 200,000 together when they had too. the Ukrainians are struggling to even get that together. Ukrainian generals/leaders are corrupt, incompetent and in a number of cases cowards. deserting their men on the battlefield when the bullets started flying. giving the Ukrainians weapons is just going to make a bad situation a million times worse and many many more people will needlessly lose their lives.

    Well that is understandable given they have not invested in the armed forces, they didn't anticipate this aggressive action from their nearest neighbour. Tbh you have just made my argument . This is precisely why they need to be armed.
    Nato troops are already in Ukraine. the Americans have sent them 75 million dollars worth of humvees and drones.

    I think you are confusing vehicles with people ;)
    Putin is not carrying out a genocide comparing him to Hitler doesnt work. and considering it was the Russians who lost some 20 million people to the nazis the comparison bizzare and unfair to say the least.

    No with nuclear weapons Putin has the ability to make WW2 look like a walk in the park and he has threatened to use them.

    It is not bizarre at all. The playbook is lifted from history and mirrors the Sudetenland 1938 manual almost exactly. I am now just wondering when we see the Russian "Operation Himmler".

    And as for the 20 Million the Russians have to take some responsibility for that number of casualties themselves. They were one of the initiators of the outbreak of WW2 because of the Molotov Von Ribbentrop pact of 1939 where Poland was divided up between them and the Nazis and the Baltic states were occupied by the Russians.

    If they only had stood up the Nazi's in 1939 then we could have seen a far different outcome to WW2.
    going after a Russia trying to cripple them and make life for their people horrible and intolerable could be construed by them as an attempt to destroy them.

    No it is showing them that interference in other countries affairs by funding mercenaries, supplying them with military equipment (which shot down an international airliner) and then sending in your own troops has real consequences.
    this has been a strange week. UK nuclear secrets perhaps even plans rerouted through Ukraine wouldnt be a stretch to imagine the Russians lifted them and if so what did they find. this coinciding with Putin going awol. rumors abound, its all very odd. now Ive been reading unconfirmed social media reports that the Russians are evacuating their embassy in London which we will find out if true or not probably tomorrow. I dont believe Russia will employ similar tactics against any other country. personally I dont believe that.

    Before this whole crisis blew up I didn't believe Russia would attack the Ukraine yet that has occurred. Unlike you I do believe a unhindered Russia is very capable of doing this to another country and there needs to be a real concerted international pushback against them. They need to pay for their actions and be made a pariah nation until they decide to reenter the fold as a nation that respects international law and borders.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3697
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WakeUp wrote: »
    Putin is not carrying out a genocide comparing him to Hitler doesnt work [...] I dont believe Russia will employ similar tactics against any other country. personally I dont believe that.
    Your viewpoint is not only naive, it's also factually wrong.

    The recent "documentary" - more of a post-hoc justification really - on Russian telly confirmed that Putin ordered the invasion of Ukrainian Crimea. The program also confirms that the pretext used is that "Russians" in Crimea were under "threat" from nationalists in Kiev - although in point of fact, there was no realistic threat of any kind.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31901966

    The program also confirms that Putin was ready to bring up his nuclear weapons to assert his territorial claim.

    Who's behaving like a genocidaire now?


  • Options
    #3698
    Lemming
    Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    robindch wrote: »
    The program also confirms that Putin was ready to bring up his nuclear weapons to assert his territorial claim.

    TBH, the above smacks of bluffing of the highest (and most wrecklessly dangerous) order. Why? You either launch and condemn your country to oblivion, or you back down and do nothing with them. Further, who would Putin launch against? You launch an ICBM; you launch them all. That's the way MAD works. So for everything that comes with such a horrifying nightmare scenario, all in the name of a territorial dispute? I don't think so. Putin craves power. If he launched; he'd destroy everything he covets.

    The only way that the threat could be viewed as being genuine would be if Putin is starting to crack under his own cult of personality and developing a paranoid psychosis. In short, if he's going off the deep-end and is not of sound mind.


    Edit: it should also be pointed out that Putin's comments were intended to play to a domestic audience; not the international community.


  • Options
    #3699
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Lemming wrote: »
    The only way that the threat could be viewed as being genuine would be if Putin is starting to crack under his own cult of personality and developing a paranoid psychosis. In short, if he's going off the deep-end and is not of sound mind.
    That's what many people like me believe has already happened - hence the paralysis of western policy - should the west have defended Ukraine's territorial integrity in Crimea at the risk of a nuclear attack, or should it have abandoned Crimea to Russia and hope that Putin would stop there?

    And now that his army has invaded East Ukraine, the same political calculation - defend and risk attack, or back down and then risk further attack elsewhere?

    It's impossible to call, but given Putin's delusional and unpredictable behaviour, his assumption of total power within Russia and his declaration that anything other than total acquiescence to his every wish amounts to "provocation", it's hard to argue that backing down isn't the wisest policy, in the short term at least.


  • Options
    #3700
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    gandalf wrote: »
    There is no secret that Putin wants to restore the USSR borders and that looking at this from a distance is exactly what is occurring here.

    How many nations were in the soviet union 15 or something you think his intentions are to retake all of them? Really? have you built your bunker yet if you truly believe that youre going to need it. why hasnt his tanks already rolled into Kiev if what you are saying is accurate..or is that is still yet to happen?..
    The Ukraine were driving this, what happens with their country under normal circumstances should be there own business. Given Russia poured troops over their borders and sliced off parcels of land then it appears they were right to look at joining an organisation that could help protect them from Russian aggression.

    Had they have been part of Nato than that wouldnt have happened but unfortunately for them they werent and it did. Nato is not going to save Ukraine from a Russian point of view this is a red line for them. Im not saying thats right Im saying thats how they view it. knowing this is it in the interests of Ukraine to push or declare their intentions to join Nato? Is it going to help them or hinder them...
    It is quite obvious to me that the Russian regime is already unhinged enough to destablise and then directly attack a neighboring "friendly" sovereign state. If they get away with this then of course there is a risk of them thinking they could try this elsewhere. It is a logical conclusion.

    Ok, so logic...which countries?...
    As I said before NATO was and is a white elephant. They are the visable bogeyman. The real fear for Russia is the Ukraine joins the EU and the standard of living then rises in the former satellite above Russia. Then the so-called powers that be in Russia know the people will start asking why they the former head of the Soviet empire are falling behind one of their subservient nations.

    The real fear for Russia is potential Ukrainian Nato membership in the future and their naval base being threatened. Though I would agree EU membership is something they arent down with either.
    Let just add in your opinion it doesn't work. In my opinion giving the Ukrainians sharper teeth and bigger talons will make the Russians think twice.

    It wont make Russia think twice. It will only make the situation a million times worse
    Well that is understandable given they have not invested in the armed forces, they didn't anticipate this aggressive action from their nearest neighbour. Tbh you have just made my argument . This is precisely why they need to be armed.

    How have I possibly made your argument. Money has nothing to do with the things I mentioned with regard to winning a war. you want to give weapons to them. All you are doing is sending people to a certain death. Is that what you really want
    I think you are confusing vehicles with people ;)

    Are the Americans and British not over there training their army? I stand corrected if not.
    No with nuclear weapons Putin has the ability to make WW2 look like a walk in the park and he has threatened to use them.

    It is not bizarre at all. The playbook is lifted from history and mirrors the Sudetenland 1938 manual almost exactly. I am now just wondering when we see the Russian "Operation Himmler".

    And as for the 20 Million the Russians have to take some responsibility for that number of casualties themselves. They were one of the initiators of the outbreak of WW2 because of the Molotov Von Ribbentrop pact of 1939 where Poland was divided up between them and the Nazis and the Baltic states were occupied by the Russians.

    If they only had stood up the Nazi's in 1939 then we could have seen a far different outcome to WW2.

    No it is showing them that interference in other countries affairs by funding mercenaries, supplying them with military equipment (which shot down an international airliner) and then sending in your own troops has real consequences.

    Before this whole crisis blew up I didn't believe Russia would attack the Ukraine yet that has occurred. Unlike you I do believe a unhindered Russia is very capable of doing this to another country and there needs to be a real concerted international pushback against them. They need to pay for their actions and be made a pariah nation until they decide to reenter the fold as a nation that respects international law and borders.


    I agree with this. just as a matter of interest what should we do about Turkey, that Nato member, vis a vis their invasion/annexation of Cyprus?..and what countries do you believe Russia will turn their attention to next?...
    robindch wrote: »
    Your viewpoint is not only naive, it's also factually wrong.

    The recent "documentary" - more of a post-hoc justification really - on Russian telly confirmed that Putin ordered the invasion of Ukrainian Crimea. The program also confirms that the pretext used is that "Russians" in Crimea were under "threat" from nationalists in Kiev - although in point of fact, there was no realistic threat of any kind.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31901966

    The program also confirms that Putin was ready to bring up his nuclear weapons to assert his territorial claim.

    Who's behaving like a genocidaire now?

    naive and factually wrong. really. is Putin putting people in ovens? is he like Hitler and the nazis currently carrying out a genocide...yes or no?..if you want to talk about "facts" and all that.


  • Options
    #3701
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WakeUp wrote: »
    why hasnt his tanks already rolled into Kiev if what you are saying is accurate..or is that is still yet to happen?
    When I was over there a few weeks ago, people believed that this is a realistic possibility. They still do.
    WakeUp wrote: »
    naive and factually wrong. really. is Putin putting people in ovens? is he like Hitler and the nazis currently carrying out a genocide...yes or no? if you want to talk about "facts" and all that.
    I replied to your original point, not this completely different point. Nor did you answer the question I asked.

    Putin of course is not putting people in ovens, at least not to our knowledge. Though his policies have lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of people in, for example, Chechnya; while his policies in East Ukraine have lead to the deaths of thousands. Similarly, Hitler did not start by putting people in ovens. Instead, Hitler started his international adventures by invading and taking over a sizeable portion of an independent country on the false pretext of protecting his own country's "citizens" who lived there. So did Putin.

    I trust the analogy might be a little clearer now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3702
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    WakeUp wrote: »
    How many nations were in the soviet union 15 or something you think his intentions are to retake all of them? Really? have you built your bunker yet if you truly believe that youre going to need it. why hasnt his tanks already rolled into Kiev if what you are saying is accurate..or is that is still yet to happen?..

    Some of the former satellites are still aligned to Russia so they are ok at the moment. I would be very worried if I was in the Baltic states and the Russians have already been acting up in that area already.

    All joking aside if he is activating his nuclear assets for what is a regional dispute then a bunker is going to be no use to us at all.


    Had they have been part of Nato than that wouldnt have happened but unfortunately for them they werent and it did. Nato is not going to save Ukraine from a Russian point of view this is a red line for them. Im not saying thats right Im saying thats how they view it. knowing this is it in the interests of Ukraine to push or declare their intentions to join Nato? Is it going to help them or hinder them...

    So again you are saying let Russia get away with the illegal carving off of territory from another sovereign nation. In reality based on your interactions on this thread that is what you are suggesting.
    Ok, so logic...which countries?...

    Listed above.
    The real fear for Russia is potential Ukrainian Nato membership in the future and their naval base being threatened. Though I would agree EU membership is something they arent down with either.

    No that's bull. The Russian Regime of Vladimir Putin needs NATO, a stronger NATO is great for them. It allows them distract the Proles with the big bad enemy.

    The real wolf in sheeps clothing for the Kremlin is the EU. Why is this, it's because they will allow the Ukrainian people prosper and to raise their standard of living. Russian and the Ukraine share a border and there are a lot of close relations between both populations. How is it going to pan out if the Russians suddenly see their Ukrainian cousins start to prosper more than them especially when they used to be the "master race".
    It wont make Russia think twice. It will only make the situation a million times worse

    In your opinion. Typically a bully will stand down if they realise you are going to punch back if they attack you.
    How have I possibly made your argument. Money has nothing to do with the things I mentioned with regard to winning a war. you want to give weapons to them. All you are doing is sending people to a certain death. Is that what you really want

    No what you pointed out was the Ukrainian military was ill equipped to face up to an aggressive neighbour. Logically giving them equipment to enhance their defense will raise the cost of attack for the aggressor and act as a deterrent. You want to minimise the casualties don't you.
    Are the Americans and British not over there training their army? I stand corrected if not.

    They aren't fighting or engaging directly.
    I agree with this. just as a matter of interest what should we do about Turkey, that Nato member, vis a vis their invasion/annexation of Cyprus?..and what countries do you believe Russia will turn their attention to next?...

    Ah now you are justifying the Russians actions with something that happened in 1974. I am surprised at you, I didn't think you were part of that camp.

    The Russians are already engaging in dirty tricks in the Baltic states.
    naive and factually wrong. really. is Putin putting people in ovens? is he like Hitler and the nazis currently carrying out a genocide...yes or no?..if you want to talk about "facts" and all that.

    How is it factually incorrect. Read up on the Sudetenland, it is an exact mirror of what happened last year.

    The Nazi's genocide only formally started after 1942 when they formulated their plans during the Wannsee conference. Who knows what Putin will do if he is allowed to continue unfettered. We already see that minorities are fair target in the New Russia of Vladimir Putin.

    Those are the facts, if it is hard to stomach I suggest you stop making excuses for the aggressor nation then.


  • Options
    #3703
    BoJack Horseman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    robindch wrote: »
    When I was over there a few weeks ago, people believed that this is a realistic possibility.

    There is the matter of a world cup just 3 years away.

    Critical for vladi's since of legacy & egomania.

    I dare Ukraine & the Baltic's are safe until the trophy has been lifted.


  • Options
    #3704
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    There is the matter of a world cup just 3 years away.

    Critical for vladi's since of legacy & egomania.

    I dare Ukraine & the Baltic's are safe until the trophy has been lifted.

    I am actually very surprised that FIFA have not come under sustained pressure about Russia hosting 2018. Even from the perspective of the treatment of minorities in Russia they should be considering taking it off them. Add their misadventures into the Ukraine into the mix where their actions have directly led to the deaths of thousands of people.

    The only way to threaten FIFA is to exert pressure via their sponsors. It has to be in the offing that a campaign is going to be directed against them. By continuing the buildup to 2018, FIFA are effectively supporting an aggressive rogue nation that persecutes minorities.


  • Options
    #3705
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    robindch wrote: »
    Putin of course is not putting people in ovens, at least not to our knowledge. Though his policies have lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of people in, for example, Chechnya; while his policies in East Ukraine have lead to the deaths of thousands. Similarly, Hitler did not start by putting people in ovens. Instead, Hitler started his international adventures by invading and taking over a sizeable portion of an independent country on the false pretext of protecting his own country's "citizens" who lived there. So did Putin.

    I trust the analogy might be a little clearer now.

    Chechnya is irrelevant. Putin isnt carrying out genocide there was no need to answer your question. If the above analogy is suppose to define or make an argument in favour of Putin carrying out “genocide”. It still doesnt work.
    gandalf wrote: »
    Some of the former satellites are still aligned to Russia so they are ok at the moment. I would be very worried if I was in the Baltic states and the Russians have already been acting up in that area already.

    All joking aside if he is activating his nuclear assets for what is a regional dispute then a bunker is going to be no use to us at all.

    true nobody wins in a nuclear war we all lose. Which is why the idea of Putin attempting something in the Baltic states to me is ludicrous. Its nonsense.
    So again you are saying let Russia get away with the illegal carving off of territory from another sovereign nation. In reality based on your interactions on this thread that is what you are suggesting.

    So again what exactly. Where have I said that? because I have a different opinion or take on whats going on then I must by default agree and support Russian actions. Thats a weak argument. You talk of reality then start being realistic. The lack of realism vis a vis Russia and Ukraine is part of the problem.

    No that's bull. The Russian Regime of Vladimir Putin needs NATO, a stronger NATO is great for them. It allows them distract the Proles with the big bad enemy.

    The real wolf in sheeps clothing for the Kremlin is the EU. Why is this, it's because they will allow the Ukrainian people prosper and to raise their standard of living. Russian and the Ukraine share a border and there are a lot of close relations between both populations. How is it going to pan out if the Russians suddenly see their Ukrainian cousins start to prosper more than them especially when they used to be the "master race".


    I dont deny that the Russians dont want Ukraine in the EU. But to say that Nato membership or that naval base in Crimea isnt part of their fears/motivation. Thats bull
    In your opinion. Typically a bully will stand down if they realise you are going to punch back if they attack you.

    And what happens if that bully is capable of crushing you in a week. There is no military solution for Ukraine. This is where realism comes in.
    No what you pointed out was the Ukrainian military was ill equipped to face up to an aggressive neighbour. Logically giving them equipment to enhance their defense will raise the cost of attack for the aggressor and act as a deterrent. You want to minimise the casualties don't you.

    Logically giving them weapons is going to make the situation a million times worse. You want to minmise casualties dont you? or do you...
    They aren't fighting or engaging directly.

    So they are there then. It was yourself that was confused not me.
    Ah now you are justifying the Russians actions with something that happened in 1974. I am surprised at you, I didn't think you were part of that camp.

    The Russians are already engaging in dirty tricks in the Baltic states.

    There you go again accusing me of “justifying” Russian actions. Just because something happened in 1974 somehow makes it irrelevant. How so? Are you a hypocrite? Do you need to me requote your statement about respecting international law and borders? So your dismissing(justfying?) Turkish actions, a Nato members invasion and annexation of Cyprus on the basis of what.. that it happened in 1974..really?.....
    How is it factually incorrect. Read up on the Sudetenland, it is an exact mirror of what happened last year.

    The Nazi's genocide only formally started after 1942 when they formulated their plans during the Wannsee conference. Who knows what Putin will do if he is allowed to continue unfettered. We already see that minorities are fair target in the New Russia of Vladimir Putin.

    Those are the facts, if it is hard to stomach I suggest you stop making excuses for the aggressor nation then.

    Its factually incorrect because Putin is not actively carrying out a genocide. And if you are stating as fact that he is. Prove it.


  • Options
    #3706
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    WakeUp wrote: »
    Chechnya is irrelevant. Putin isnt carrying out genocide there was no need to answer your question. If the above analogy is suppose to define or make an argument in favour of Putin carrying out “genocide”. It still doesnt work.

    Ah but the Russians did carry out genocide so it is an apt comparison.

    true nobody wins in a nuclear war we all lose. Which is why the idea of Putin attempting something in the Baltic states to me is ludicrous. Its nonsense.

    Not if you believe that the leader of Russia is not a very balanced person. I certainly believe that Putin has a skewed value system, and if that is the case then we could be in for a very rough ride.
    So again what exactly. Where have I said that? because I have a different opinion or take on whats going on then I must by default agree and support Russian actions. Thats a weak argument. You talk of reality then start being realistic. The lack of realism vis a vis Russia and Ukraine is part of the problem.

    But looking at all your responses here over the months it is obvious that you feel the Ukraine is a lost cause and Russia should be allowed to keep it's prize without any real consequences. Seriously is that your position. If it isn't what sanctions do you believe are justified?

    I dont deny that the Russians dont want Ukraine in the EU. But to say that Nato membership or that naval base in Crimea isnt part of their fears/motivation. Thats bull

    My opinion is that it is accurate. Again a strong NATO means the Russians have their strong boogeyman to justify the expenditure on the military at the expense of the general population.
    And what happens if that bully is capable of crushing you in a week. There is no military solution for Ukraine. This is where realism comes in.

    Again I believe that Putin has only been constrained because the general population in Russia believe that they aren't directly involved and that he would risk serious discontent if they started to ask questions about whether they are. A large increase in soldiers funerals would be such a catalyst.
    Logically giving them weapons is going to make the situation a million times worse. You want to minmise casualties dont you? or do you...



    So they are there then. It was yourself that was confused not me.

    No you are either from the Neville Chamberlain camp of politics which is dismally discredited or from something far more sinister.
    There you go again accusing me of “justifying” Russian actions. Just because something happened in 1974 somehow makes it irrelevant. How so? Are you a hypocrite? Do you need to me requote your statement about respecting international law and borders? So your dismissing(justfying?) Turkish actions, a Nato members invasion and annexation of Cyprus on the basis of what.. that it happened in 1974..really?.....

    Ok are people being killed right now in Cyprus? No.

    Are people dying right now in the Ukraine. Yes.

    You figure it out. Again a pathetic attempt to justify Russian aggression. You're the hypocrite because you pretend to disagree with their actions dragging up a conflict that initiated 41 years ago against one that happened last year and is still ongoing.

    What next use Northern Ireland as a justification for the Russians actions. :rolleyes:
    Its factually incorrect because Putin is not actively carrying out a genocide. And if you are stating as fact that he is. Prove it.

    No I have shown clearly the parallels are there you are just choosing to ignore it because you are pretending to criticise the Russians but in reality you are in favour of capitulation to an aggressor nation.

    Again who knows what Putin will do down the line if this aggression is left unchecked. The man has already said he put nuclear weapons under on high alert indicating he was willing to initiate MAD for a sliver of land. Doesn't that indicate he is well capable and willing to carry out genocide, it sure does to me.


  • Options
    #3707
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WakeUp wrote: »
    Chechnya is irrelevant.
    Chechnya is very relevant indeed since you made the silly claim that "Putin is not carrying out a genocide". Many people believe that in Chechnya, he did.
    WakeUp wrote: »
    Putin isnt carrying out genocide there was no need to answer your question.
    I said that Putin claimed he was prepared to bring his nukes to a state of readiness, and presumably then threaten to use them, when he was invading Crimea last year. And then, I asked whether this is the actions of somebody intent on genocide.

    I can see why you avoided the question :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #3708
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Fun report by Al-Jazeera on the Kremlin's Troll Army:

    http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/listeningpost/2015/03/kremlin-troll-army-150316093244109.html


  • Options
    #3709
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Just on Chechnya, on December 11, 1999, the Russian government (while Putin was PM) ordered the general bombardment of Grozny following a direct threat to the city's entire population delivered by leaflet drop:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1999%E2%80%932000)#Siege
    Russian Government wrote:
    Persons who stay in the city will be considered terrorists and bandits and will be destroyed by artillery and aviation. There will be no further negotiation.
    The bombardment continued as Putin become acting President of Russia on 31st December, 1999 and for some time afterwards.


  • Options
    #3710
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    robindch wrote: »
    Chechnya is very relevant indeed since you made the silly claim that "Putin is not carrying out a genocide". Many people believe that in Chechnya, he did.I said that Putin claimed he was prepared to bring his nukes to a state of readiness, and presumably then threaten to use them, when he was invading Crimea last year. And then, I asked whether this is the actions of somebody intent on genocide.

    I can see why you avoided the question :rolleyes:

    how is that silly? is Putin carrying out genocide in Ukraine and Crimea currently..yes or no? where is the evidence if he is. Yeltsins 1st Chechnya war was certainly in many instances a genocide which Putin then took on with the west turning a blind eye for their own reasons. but is genocide currently being carried out by Russia in Ukraine and Crimea? yes or no?
    gandalf wrote: »
    Not if you believe that the leader of Russia is not a very balanced person. I certainly believe that Putin has a skewed value system, and if that is the case then we could be in for a very rough ride.

    The idea the Russia will attack or invade a Nato member and trigger a thermonuclear war is ludicrous. Its nonsense
    gandalf wrote: »
    But looking at all your responses here over the months it is obvious that you feel the Ukraine is a lost cause and Russia should be allowed to keep it's prize without any real consequences. Seriously is that your position. If it isn't what sanctions do you believe are justified?

    Militarily Ukraine well parts of it is a lost cause. You talk of reality start being realistic. Who said anything about Russia being allowed keep its prize. Crimea is gone whether I agree with that or not its gone. And the only way to take it back is to go to war with Russia and forcibly take it back off them. I support the Germans in trying to find a diplomatic solution to what is going on. Doesnt matter if I believe sanctions are justified or not if they are designed to make the Russians change tac it isnt going nor is it working.
    gandalf wrote: »
    My opinion is that it is accurate. Again a strong NATO means the Russians have their strong boogeyman to justify the expenditure on the military at the expense of the general population.

    My opinion is that your opinion isnt completely accurate. Shall we agree to disagree.
    gandalf wrote: »
    Again I believe that Putin has only been constrained because the general population in Russia believe that they aren't directly involved and that he would risk serious discontent if they started to ask questions about whether they are. A large increase in soldiers funerals would be such a catalyst.

    And thats just Ukraine/Crimea. yet you seem to believe Putin is intent on conquering Europe. Then the moon. followed by Pluto.
    gandalf wrote: »
    No you are either from the Neville Chamberlain camp of politics which is dismally discredited or from something far more sinister.

    Eh, we are talking about nuclear powered Russia here. On their own border. Your ad hominem is impressive though Gandalf keep them coming. We live in the nuclear age. The rules are different
    gandalf wrote: »
    Ok are people being killed right now in Cyprus? No.

    Are people dying right now in the Ukraine. Yes.

    You figure it out. Again a pathetic attempt to justify Russian aggression. You're the hypocrite because you pretend to disagree with their actions dragging up a conflict that initiated 41 years ago against one that happened last year and is still ongoing.

    What next use Northern Ireland as a justification for the Russians actions. :rolleyes:

    A pathetic attempt. Im the hypocrite. sure I am. Are you joking me or what. Would you like me to state my case?...
    gandalf wrote: »
    No I have shown clearly the parallels are there you are just choosing to ignore it because you are pretending to criticise the Russians but in reality you are in favour of capitulation to an aggressor nation.

    Again who knows what Putin will do down the line if this aggression is left unchecked. The man has already said he put nuclear weapons under on high alert indicating he was willing to initiate MAD for a sliver of land. Doesn't that indicate he is well capable and willing to carry out genocide, it sure does to me.

    Clearly shown the parallels of what? That Putin is Hitler and Russia is nazi Germany? No you havent. Have another go
    robindch wrote: »
    Fun report by Al-Jazeera on the Kremlin's Troll Army:

    http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/listeningpost/2015/03/kremlin-troll-army-150316093244109.html
    Ukraine is recruiting Internet soldiers:

    Anyone can join the virtual army through the website set up by the ministry. Enlisted "soldiers" then receive emails with tasks such as monitoring social media and taking on trolls by promoting Ukraine's messages in online discussions.

    http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/25/technology/ukraine-russia-internet-army/

    :rolleyes::pac:


  • Options
    #3711
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    So basically to condense what you are saying Wakeup, you believe that Russia should have the conquered parts of the Ukraine with no sanctions or consequences. There I have stated your case for you in a small sentence without all the dramatic hand wringing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3712
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    gandalf wrote: »
    So basically to condense what you are saying Wakeup, you believe that Russia should have the conquered parts of the Ukraine with no sanctions or consequences. There I have stated your case for you in a small sentence without all the dramatic hand wringing.

    no. lets no condense anything. Ive made a number of points why dont you address them. Im particularly interested in your claim that Im a hypocrite...yet you brush of a Turkish invasion/annexation because..1974?...you were saying....


  • Options
    #3713
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,458 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Your consistently stated opinion is that Ukraine is nothing to the EU/NATO, that we should not involve ourselves in the conflict in anyway. That the Ukraine is in Russia's sphere and thus their invasion is understandable in light of Russian fears of a shift towards Europe. That there is nothing that can be done to stop Russian, sanctions won't work and will hurt the EU, that the Ukrainian's are Nazis and undeserving of any sympathy. That the US is agitating for more conflict, as a means to challenge Russia.

    Anything I missed?


  • Options
    #3714
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    WakeUp wrote: »
    no. lets no condense anything. Ive made a number of points why dont you address them. Im particularly interested in your claim that Im a hypocrite...yet you brush of a Turkish invasion/annexation because..1974?...you were saying....

    No you have spent months on here hand wringing and saying you don't think the Russians are right. Lets hear you now then DO YOU BELIEVE THE RUSSIANS SHOULD BE SANCTIONED YES OR NO?

    AND IF YOU ACTUALLY DO THINK THEY SHOULD BE WHAT SANCTIONS DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE LEVIED AGAINST THEM?

    I await your simple responses with baited breath.


  • Options
    #3715
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WakeUp wrote: »
    different opinion = Russian troll or bot or some bullsh1t like that. hmmmm.
    Not a "different opinion", but bluster roughly in line with what Peter Pomerantsev discusses from around six minutes onwards here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ut_vZI4hH0


  • Options
    #3716
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    gandalf wrote: »
    No you have spent months on here hand wringing and saying you don't think the Russians are right. Lets hear you now then DO YOU BELIEVE THE RUSSIANS SHOULD BE SANCTIONED YES OR NO?

    AND IF YOU ACTUALLY DO THINK THEY SHOULD BE WHAT SANCTIONS DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE LEVIED AGAINST THEM?

    I await your simple responses with baited breath.

    are you shouting or wagging your finger at me Gandalf is that why you feel the need to type in caps? why dont you elaborate on the Turkish( Nato member ) annexation of Cyprus whilst claiming that Im the one whos a hypocrite?? Cyprus being an EU member. surely Turkey should be sanctioned /outcast and threatened with military action until the phuck off out of there no? or is that "different". yes Russia should not get away with annexing Crimea unchecked. should they pay a price yes they should. though once you start down the road of sanctions where does it end. and war usually folllows unless a diplomatic solution is found or someone backs down. Now about Turkeys invasion and annexation of Cyprus... you were saying....


  • Options
    #3717
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    robindch wrote: »
    Not a "different opinion", but bluster roughly in line with what Peter Pomerantsev discusses from around six minutes onwards here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ut_vZI4hH0

    why dont you surmise whats in that video...in your own words for me....


  • Options
    #3718
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WakeUp wrote: »
    why dont you surmise whats in that video...in your own words for me....
    I'll "surmise" it in one word and that word is "rubbish". Pomerantsev discusses it at greater length and in quite specific detail.


  • Options
    #3719
    WakeUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    robindch wrote: »
    I'll "surmise" it in one word and that word is "rubbish". Pomerantsev discusses it at greater length and in quite specific detail.

    but but but Pomerantsev said this....so what?


  • Options
    #3720
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WakeUp wrote: »
    but but but Pomerantsev said this....so what?
    Oh I don't know. The guy must be paid to speak or something. Maybe he's a journalist.

    Пиво anybody? I have a paper bag here if anybody wants to lend me some.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3721
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    WakeUp wrote: »
    are you shouting or wagging your finger at me Gandalf is that why you feel the need to type in caps? why dont you elaborate on the Turkish( Nato member ) annexation of Cyprus whilst claiming that Im the one whos a hypocrite?? Cyprus being an EU member. surely Turkey should be sanctioned /outcast and threatened with military action until the phuck off out of there no? or is that "different". yes Russia should not get away with annexing Crimea unchecked. should they pay a price yes they should. though once you start down the road of sanctions where does it end. and war usually folllows unless a diplomatic solution is found or someone backs down. Now about Turkeys invasion and annexation of Cyprus... you were saying....

    This thread is about the Ukraine and the interference in the same by the Russians.

    Now I asked you a very direct set of questions to determine if your hand wringing is actually genuine or if you are just playing along and firing in deflections like this Turkish one. As expected you didn't or couldn't answer.

    From my perspective what has happened here is quite clearly a crude attempt at deflection away from the topic at hand.

    So again judging from your vast archive of responses here you seem to be saying the Russians are wrong.

    If that is the case should they be sanctioned from their wrongdoing yes or no?

    And if you think they should what form should that take?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement