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

spank_inferno

fergus1001 wrote: »

nukes, war breaks out with america ? we get nuked

a cornered bear is a very dangerous thing indeed

MAD means that would not likely happen.

Not that a conventional war would be any more likely anyway.

In the million-to-1 chance of a conventional war, Russia is overwhelmingly outmatched.

fergus1001

spank_inferno wrote: »

MAD means that would not likely happen.

Not that a conventional war would be any more likely anyway.

In the million-to-1 chance of a conventional war, Russia is overwhelmingly outmatched.

russia+china = america ****ing it

why do you think america does nothing about syria and did nothing about georgia

spank_inferno

fergus1001 wrote: »

russia+china = america ****ing it

why do you think america does nothing about syria and did nothing about georgia

Cos it wasn't in their interest to do so.

No point expending blood & treasure on something that is not necessary....

Besides, who said anything about China?
China acts in China's interests.
Often that does not coincide with Russia.

Where does Chinas interest lie in Ukraine?
Chinese state companies own significant agri-land there.
They have little interest in Putin expansionism.
Business is business.

No mutual defence treaty exists between the 2.
They are rivals for Asian dominance.

Frank Lee Midere

Tea drinker wrote: »

Nothing strange about it. Also the opposition are borderline neo Nazi's and have called for expulsion of the muscovite and jews. Banning the Russian language as you mentioned is a very provocative act as well, no wonder Russia is involved and we are lying about why as usual.

This "opposition are nazis" meme seems like propaganda - certainly I have seen the pro-Russian supporters with Euro = Gay.

The Ukrainian opposition are being charged with two distinct and opposite slurs: 1) they are working for the "zionists" and the neo-conservatives.
2) They are anti-semites.

joining the EU is hardly nationalistic, most European nationalist parities want out.

aloyisious

There was likening to The Sudetenland take-over in 1938, for the protection of German-nationals. As far as I can see, Russia look's at national territory from a different angle than most European Countries, it has a Politico-Religious aspect. I can see only one faction that'll gain from the Ukrainian state of affairs, those Muslim separatists trying to break their home-states away from the Russian Federation.

I hope there's some sort of deal to allow the Ukrainian Troops in The Crimea free movement (even if not with their weapons) to the Kiev Govt controlled area. If there's a move against the troops by the Russians, even a minor fire-fight or accidental missile strike (grenade, mortar or tank/artillery shell) resulting in Ukrainian fatalities, then the basket will break. I hope the Russians are keeping a tight rein on their fellow-language speakers, one hothead is all it takes. It's comical how the Western media and the Russian Govt are not calling the ethnic-Russians in Ukraine nationalists for wanting to maintain their links to Mother-Russia. It's the Ukrainians in the Ukraine that are given the label.

Frank Lee Midere

Wow apparently Stalin deported the entire Tartar population of Russia to Sibera after WWii as he blamed them for co-operation with the Nazis. They didn't get back until 1990, the Russian majority there are recent colonialists.

Which makes me wonder about the anti-colonialist credentials of the left, where is the outrage.

ThisRegard

bobcoffee wrote: »

seems russia today is reporting something interesting.
bascially.. that Ukraine when this new gov formed passed a law that all laws are to be in Ukraine only.
thus removing a lot of people from the political process.
very interesting indeed and would take that as pinch of salt.

be strange thing for our media to leave out.

I thought I heard this morning that although this was proposed, it was voted down?

Manach

On China, my understanding from a recent web article I've read, is that they have conducted recently joint military exercises with Russia signed protocols pledging co-operation. I'd read also that they are not pursuing any international court claims to various contested China sea islands under UNCLOS and instead are insisting on overship buacked by their blue sea fleet. So should, God forbid, it does become a shooting war with NATO then even the threat of expansion would tie up the US Pacific command.

fergus1001

Manach wrote: »

On China, my understanding from a recent web article I've read, is that they have conducted recently joint military exercises with Russia signed protocols pledging co-operation. I'd read also that they are not pursuing any international court claims to various contested China sea islands under UNCLOS and instead are insisting on overship buacked by their blue sea fleet. So should, God forbid, it does become a shooting war with NATO then even the threat of expansion would tie up the US Pacific command.

china would use the shooting war as an opportunity to take those islands that Japan occupies

chinnas millitary is as strong as americas
russias millitary has been heavily invested in over the last 10 years ( 50+ BILLION A YEAR) they have a strong millitary and this is why america quivers in its boots they are weak after an economic downturn

exactly what happened at the start of WW2

Eggy Baby!

These perceptions are dangerous because they do not stem from propaganda, but from a difference in existential vantage point. Russia is fighting for its survival, against a catastrophic decline in population and the likelihood of a Muslim majority by mid-century.

Not really prescient here, considering Russia's population decline has been largely reversed for the last couple of years. Say all you want about Putin, but Russia's demographics have improved rapidly in every meaningful index since 2000. The thing about the Muslims becoming a majority is conspiratorial bullcrap too, considering Muslims in Russia just don't have a large enough population base. Even then, many Muslims are actually ethnic Russians, not just Chechens, Tatars, or Dagestanis. Even then, Muslims compose only about 7% of Russia's population. There are more Atheists in Russia than Muslims.

Says I To Bridey

fergus1001 wrote: »

china would use the shooting war as an opportunity to take those islands that Japan occupies

chinnas millitary is as strong as americas
russias millitary has been heavily invested in over the last 10 years ( 50+ BILLION A YEAR) they have a strong millitary and this is why america quivers in its boots they are weak after an economic downturn

exactly what happened at the start of WW2

Chinas military isn't anywhere near the US. And for your 50 billion a year, the US spends 600 billion a year. China would struggle against Japan alone, nevermind the US.

Its a pity this EU military that the anti-Lisbon side was scaremongering about isn't real, an EU military with a bit of backbone would put Putin in his place fairly quick

Conas

fergus1001 wrote: »

china would use the shooting war as an opportunity to take those islands that Japan occupies

chinnas millitary is as strong as americas
russias millitary has been heavily invested in over the last 10 years ( 50+ BILLION A YEAR) they have a strong millitary and this is why america quivers in its boots they are weak after an economic downturn

exactly what happened at the start of WW2

There is a hell of a lot of hysteria in this post, and other recent ones on this thread. But I still think it wouldn't be in the best interest for certain people to set flames to Europe over Crimea, like come on lets be realistic here. The missile defence system has a really pissed the Russians, and Putin off big time. I'm sure they feel very threatened by it, and I suspect they think USA is behind wants happened in Ukraine. Then again we on boards.ie don't have access to classified information so it's very much, we can only call it how we see it. But Putin is no fool, far from it. There is good reason why he's doing, what he's doing.

Iwasfrozen

fergus1001 wrote: »

russia+china = america ****ing it

why do you think america does nothing about syria and did nothing about georgia

Russia and China combined are no match for NATO in a conventional war. May I remind you that neither Russia nor China have blue water navies? Every blue water navy in the world is aligned to NATO.

Russia is a fallen super power with delusions of grandeur. They have failed to reposition themselves as a great power as the UK has been forced to do.

China has numbers but their economy suffers from the fact they have approx a billion people living in African levels of poverty. OT but Japan and the US pacific fleet would blow them out of the water if they tried to siege the Senkakus.

spank_inferno

fergus1001 wrote: »

china would use the shooting war as an opportunity to take those islands that Japan occupies

chinnas millitary is as strong as americas
russias millitary has been heavily invested in over the last 10 years ( 50+ BILLION A YEAR) they have a strong millitary and this is why america quivers in its boots they are weak after an economic downturn

exactly what happened at the start of WW2

The hyperbole.

China's military is not in the same ballpark as Americas.

Russia is still outspent by the France & Uk alone..... Without even counting the rest of the EU.

Russia has some good units, but the vast majority are ill trained & ill equipped.

Their navy is almost completely obsolete.

Russia's military spending is about 1/7th of the US.

Modernisation to NATO standard would take many years.

jmayo

born2bwild wrote: »

How? Answer your own question - the Russian ruling class doesn't really give a sh!te about social or economic equality.

They're not alone - the only difference between Fine Gael/Fianna Fail and Putin is charisma, gas and an enormous military.

Fecking hell I have heard some stuff levelled at Enda, but being compared to Putin is a new one on me.
Perhaps he will establish a few Oligarchs in Mayo and we can conquer the rest of ye.
BTW we do have the gas (just get rid of the protestors and it will flow), we probably have oil off the coast and if we just dug up Croagh Patrick we have gold.

born2bwild wrote: »

Yes, but Russia is also a fascist state.

Culturally, the only voices that are heard are those that promote white-euro centric Russian identity - you know that licensed thug Zhirinovsky? His is the default, salt of the earth . xenophobic point of view of most ordinary Russians - or so you would belive if your only source of information was via the state-sanctioned media like RTR, NTV, Rossiya 24 and so on.

The situation in Ukraine is crazy because the alternative - out and out fascism - is worse than either the existing Ukrainian political system or what Russia could offer.

What's on the menu in Ukraine now? Neo nazism, Putin's Mussolini in drag act, or Fine Gaelski aka the Fatherland party/Udar?

Help!

Ahh I remember the days when we spoke about Russians or other eastern Europeans and it was commie under the bed.
Nowadays it seems they are all fascists under the bed.


Has p.ie shut down or something because the amount of "western conspiracies/America is at fault for everything/lets see the yanks get beaten" garbage floating around here is at a new level.

BTW saw interesting documentary few nights ago about how the world sleep walked into WW1 exactly 100 years ago.
It is unbelievable how sometimes country's posturing causes it to stumble into war before they have realised the consequences.

As for the idea and image of mother Russia and it's charismatic leader coming to the rescue of some poor upon ethnic Russians in the Ukraine, don't make me laugh.
Putin is playing a game akin to what hitler did.
He is gambling that no one will anti up and call his bluff.
And he is probably going to win with his hand.
If putin gets away with anexing Crimea and Northern/Eastern Ukraine, what is to stop him taking out Belarus, seen as they would be more linked to Russia.
And then there is the Georgia question.

Godge

jmayo wrote: »

Fecking hell I have heard some stuff levelled at Enda, but being compared to Putin is a new one on me.
Perhaps he will establish a few Oligarchs in Mayo and we can conquer the rest of ye.
BTW we do have the gas (just get rid of the protestors and it will flow), we probably have oil off the coast and if we just dug up Croagh Patrick we have gold.



Ahh I remember the days when we spoke about Russians or other eastern Europeans and it was commie under the bed.
Nowadays it seems they are all fascists under the bed.


Has p.ie shut down or something because the amount of "western conspiracies/America is at fault for everything/lets see the yanks get beaten" garbage floating around here is at a new level.

BTW saw interesting documentary few nights ago about how the world sleep walked into WW1 exactly 100 years ago.
It is unbelievable how sometimes country's posturing causes it to stumble into war before they have realised the consequences.

As for the idea and image of mother Russia and it's charismatic leader coming to the rescue of some poor upon ethnic Russians in the Ukraine, don't make me laugh.
Putin is playing a game akin to what hitler did.
He is gambling that no one will anti up and call his bluff.
And he is probably going to win with his hand.
If putin gets away with anexing Crimea and Northern/Eastern Ukraine, what is to stop him taking out Belarus, seen as they would be more linked to Russia.
And then there is the Georgia question.

There is a difference between now and 100 years ago.

Trade interdependence is such is that if your population has access to consumer goods and good food, it won't stand for a war that denies it access to consumer goods and good food. The paradox is that you won't have a strong military unless you have an economy strong enough to fund it, one which includes a population with access to consumer goods and good food.

A conventional war might still work in sub-Saharan Africa or North Korea but not very many other places. The one place you would worry about is Iran as they might just sustain a war.

Son Of A Vidic

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Russia and China combined are no match for NATO in a conventional war.

Let's not forget that some members of NATO can't hack it in Afghanistan and hadn't the stomach for the fight in Iraq?

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Russia is a fallen super power with delusions of grandeur.

So it's quite like America then.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

They have failed to reposition themselves as a great power as the UK has been forced to do.

The UK hasn’t been a great power since the reign of Victoria. They've been on a downward spiral ever since. Pointless to compare the Russian or Chinese military to the tiny/neutered UK military.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

China has numbers but their economy suffers from the fact they have approx a billion people living in African levels of poverty.

This being the same China that owns $1.37 Trillion dollars of US government debt and who could cripple the US economy accordingly. The West continues to whore itself for lucrative Chinese business and for a good reason. By 2028 China is projected to have the biggest economy on the planet.

http://www.ibtimes.com/china-wont-become-worlds-largest-economy-until-2028-cebr-1521236

15% of the US or 46 million people live below the poverty line and are classified as having difficulty putting food on the table. Now take government food stamps and Welfare support out of the equation and the numbers get worse.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/01/06/50-years-later-a-war-over-the-poverty-rate

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

OT but Japan and the US pacific fleet would blow them out of the water if they tried to siege the Senkakus.

Nobody would be blowing anybody out of the water. It’s all very “My dad would beat your dad in a fight silliness.” Who has the largest, shiniest ships is irrelevant. Russia has the nuclear capability to obliterate our planet. The United States has the same the nuclear capability. NATO and the US don’t want to take on Russia and China, no more than Russia and China want to take on NATO and the US. Any conventional war would most likely escalate into a full blown nuclear war, so there would be no winner and there could be no winner.

Says I To Bridey

Godge wrote: »

There is a difference between now and 100 years ago.

Trade interdependence is such is that if your population has access to consumer goods and good food, it won't stand for a war that denies it access to consumer goods and good food. The paradox is that you won't have a strong military unless you have an economy strong enough to fund it, one which includes a population with access to consumer goods and good food.

A conventional war might still work in sub-Saharan Africa or North Korea but not very many other places. The one place you would worry about is Iran as they might just sustain a war.

Trade interdependence was what they were saying would stop a world war 100 years ago. There was a good article someone put up a while ago with the author talking about how this would prevent a war, looked like it could have been written yesterday but was infact from sometime in the early 1900s. The real thing that will stop a WW3 is MAD

sopretty

I'm sorry to sound stupid again, but what is this MAD that y'all refer to?

MajesticDonkey

sopretty wrote: »

I'm sorry to sound stupid again, but what is this MAD that y'all refer to?

Mutual Assured Destruction: http://people.howstuffworks.com/mutual-assured-destruction1.htm

... As a result, the nuclear strategy doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) emerged in the mid-1960s. This doctrine was based upon the size of the countries' respective nuclear arsenals and their unwillingness to destroy civilization. MAD was unique at the time. Never before had two warring nations held the potential to erase humanity with the entry of a few computer codes and the turn of matching keys. Ironically, it was this powerful potential that guaranteed the world's safety: Nuclear capability was a deterrent against nuclear war.

Because the U.S. and the USSR both had enough nuclear missiles to clear each other from the map, neither side could strike first. A first strike guaranteed a retaliatory counterstrike from the other side. So launching an attack would be tantamount to suicide -- the first striking nation could be certain that its people would be annihilated, too.

aloyisious

sopretty wrote: »

I'm sorry to sound stupid again, but what is this MAD that y'all refer to?

Look up the film "Dr Strangelove - or how to love the bomb"

mike65

This will be decided by who's got the deepest pockets not biggest military.

Russia has one thing and one thing only that the rest of the world needs - gas and Spring is about to be sprung. The markets are down the rouble is down the interest rates are up, gold is being sold by Moscow. A short term victory for Putin will become a long term defeat if he isn't careful.

jmayo

Godge wrote: »

There is a difference between now and 100 years ago.

Trade interdependence is such is that if your population has access to consumer goods and good food, it won't stand for a war that denies it access to consumer goods and good food. The paradox is that you won't have a strong military unless you have an economy strong enough to fund it, one which includes a population with access to consumer goods and good food.

A conventional war might still work in sub-Saharan Africa or North Korea but not very many other places. The one place you would worry about is Iran as they might just sustain a war.

Granted the world has changed hugely in those 100 years.
People in developed countries are more educated, have access to more uncontrolled media (a lot more thanks to internet), have quicker access to news and do indeed have a better quality of life thanks to the access they have to all the goods sourced from around the world.

But how often has mankind shown that we fail to learn from our mistakes and how we are still capable of great stupidity and great butchery.

Was WWI not the war to end all wars.
After WWII did we now say never again would we allow mass genocide.
Pity no one told the Rawandans, Cambodians, Bosniacs, etc.

MAD does offer some cause for thought and no one, bar a complete lunatic, would risk all out war that could lead to annihilation.
Normally a proxy war could be played out, but that is impossible given the location of Ukraine.

Elmer Blooker

When Germany was reunified there was a promise made that NATO would "not spread one centimeter east" I presume the only reason that the former Soviet republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were "invited" to join NATO was to antagonize Russia. Surely these little republics with very large Russian populations should have remained neutral and non aligned in the interests of world peace? I can't really blame Mr Putin for protecting Russia's interests in the Black Sea region from the expansion of NATO.
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20090402/120879153.html (5 yr old article)

Says I To Bridey

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

When Germany was reunified there was a promise made that NATO would "not spread one centimeter east" I presume the only reason that the former Soviet republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were "invited" to join NATO was to antagonize Russia. Surely these little republics with very large Russian populations should have remained neutral and non aligned in the interests of world peace? I can't really blame Mr Putin for protecting Russia's interests in the Black Sea region from the expansion of NATO.
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20090402/120879153.html (5 yr old article)

Or maybe these countries wanted to join NATO to ensure their own safety and prevent a situation like whats happening to the Ukraine now happening to themselves

monty_python

looks like 3am could be a very interesting time in this conflict

http://news.sky.com/story/1220272/ukraine-russia-delivers-assault-storm-deadline

Conas

monty_python wrote: »

looks like 3am could be a very interesting time in this conflict

http://news.sky.com/story/1220272/ukraine-russia-delivers-assault-storm-deadline

Go on the Putin. :cool:

Obama tweets. Putin leads.

Reekwind

Godge wrote: »

Trade interdependence is such is that if your population has access to consumer goods and good food, it won't stand for a war that denies it access to consumer goods and good food. The paradox is that you won't have a strong military unless you have an economy strong enough to fund it, one which includes a population with access to consumer goods and good food.

The world of 1914 was economically more integrated than any point since (up to the 2000s, maybe). That didn't stop tens of millions of Europeans dying over the following three decades.

But let's be clear - in this case EU/US sanctions would be targeted at the Russian elites and not a broader economic blockade. Russia isn't Cuba or Iraq.

bobcoffee

jmayo wrote: »

Fecking hell I have heard some stuff levelled at Enda, but being compared to Putin is a new one on me.
Perhaps he will establish a few Oligarchs in Mayo and we can conquer the rest of ye.
BTW we do have the gas (just get rid of the protestors and it will flow), we probably have oil off the coast and if we just dug up Croagh Patrick we have gold.
And then there is the Georgia question.

Well I'm sure there are some benefits to watching the RTE news I can tell you however your information on "gas" in Ireland is very well misinformed.
Most protesting is done not on the basis of stopping anyone from taking it but more about them doing it right.
Pumping unrefined (none smelling gas) through the worst bog in mayo comes to mind.
Also once the gas "flows", then it flows out of Ireland.
We get little from it as we have one of the worst.. WORST deals in the WORLD.

"Has p.ie shut down or something because the amount of "western conspiracies/America is at fault for everything/lets see the yanks get beaten" garbage floating around here is at a new level."

wow, you mean that ALL the stuff America and it very delightful Allies, from bombing to torturing INNOCENT villages and peasants back to hell can produce negative feedback, AMAZING...
Have you ever heard about the times when Britain would just kidnap random people, torture them, kick them out of helicopters while pretending to be very high in the air.. that kind of stuff.
Any chance you remember how much recruitment the IRA got from these "moments".
And how close it brought a WAR in Europe.
Not remind you of what the Americans and Allies have been doing for the last 10+ years.
Someone made a valid point on facebook.. yes I know but point is valid.
If it was nato doing the invading they would just carpet bombed it.
Russian army still needs to attack.
Also our delightful news seems to not be reporting everything.
Especially the part about crimera asking Russians for help.
Yes the people democratically elected ASKED for help.
Which I'm very sure Russia was already prepared to do.
EU and Americans have been doing nothing but playing games, even before Russia done a thing.
who is worse the Psycho or the ones who poke him?

Conas

Reekwind wrote: »

The world of 1914 was economically more integrated than any point since (up to the 2000s, maybe). That didn't stop tens of millions of Europeans dying over the following three decades.

But let's be clear - in this case EU/US sanctions would be targeted at the Russian elites and not a broader economic blockade. Russia isn't Cuba or Iraq.

Well if the rumours are true that €5 billion of America's money went into Ukraine, then Obama has forces inside the goverment that he has no control over. Which goes to show how shockingly weak he really is. Listen to what Victoria Nuland said a while go with her 'F*ck the EU' comments. Obama has to find out who got that money, and what for. No point huffing and puffing at Russia. You reap what you sow.