Russia gets Crimea

[postmortemIA]

Maiden protestors were attacked, shot and killed by the police and army.
Donetsk rebels attack, shoot and kill the police and army.

Can you spot the difference?

You missed the reports that maidan rebels were armed after breaking into weapons storages through the country?

There are no innocents here. Just two armed opposing forces with opposing goals.

 

[cabri]

The election is over and the war that Kiev was too chicken-shit to fight, is on:
http://news.yahoo.com/battle-donetsk-airport-ukraine-leader-says-no-talks-063713602.html

If there has been one thing I learned from this thread it is that you cannot do anything to any ethnic Russian because they will always retaliate with nuclear bombs.

Prepare for nuclear holocaust.



In all seriousness, though, it's a shitty situation they've been thrust into. The goal should be for the two "sides" to figure out how to live together in peace, but sadly one side is fuel by propaganda to make that reality quite difficult to achieve.

Putin's bluff is now being called.
You now have an elected legit government going after rebels that are backed by Russia (even though Russia denies it, just like in the Crimea)

 

[iGas]

You missed the reports that maidan rebels were armed after breaking into weapons storages through the country?

There are no innocents here. Just two armed opposing forces with opposing goals.

They all are replaceable puppets in a proxy war.

 

[TROLLERCAUST]

so maidan protestors != terrorists but donetsk rebels = terrorist

okay continue with programming.

Protestors and rebels.

There's the problem. The protestors wanted to get rid of the government at the time, the rebels want to get rid of Ukraine and join Russia. I think it's fair to label the Chechen fighters in Eastern Ukraine as terrorists for example but I also think that labelling people as terrorists just because it sounds evil and bad is just silly. Kind of like Russian propaganda using the word fascist everywhere and the pro-Russian paid propagandists here in Finland calling the current government in Kiev a 'junta' is totally crazy. It totally ignores and butchers the definition and meaning of the word only to be used for propaganda purposes.

 

[cirrrocco]

Putin's bluff is now being called.
You now have an elected legit government going after rebels that are backed by Russia (even though Russia denies it, just like in the Crimea)

Talk about hypocrisy, we have the US meddling in a elected govt in Syria , sending anti tank weapons and arming some crazy fundamentalist bad guys..and you guys talk shit about Putin who is taking care of his neighborhood. WTF is the US doing in Syria.. you guys and and your pathetic talking points.

http://www.reuters.com/video/2014/0...pport-in-syr?videoId=313112955&videoChannel=1

 

[TROLLERCAUST]

Talk about hypocrisy, we have the US meddling in a elected govt in Syria , sending anti tank weapons and arming some crazy fundamentalist bad guys..and you guys talk shit about Putin who is taking care of his neighborhood. WTF is the US doing in Syria.. you guys and and your pathetic talking points.

http://www.reuters.com/video/2014/0...pport-in-syr?videoId=313112955&videoChannel=1

We've gone a full loop again. The argument comes back to two wrongs make a right. That because the US is doing wrong and meddling in affairs that might not be any of it's affairs that somehow justifies the wrongdoing of Russia in Ukraine. It's an absurd argument.

If you condemn US actions in Syria so should you condemn Russia's actions in Ukraine. If you don't that's the real hypocrisy.

 

[Daverino]

You missed the reports that maidan rebels were armed after breaking into weapons storages through the country?

There are no innocents here. Just two armed opposing forces with opposing goals.

I know that 103 protesters, minimum, died in Kiev during Euromaidan and 13 police officers.

I know that the 'Donetsk Protesters' ambushed and gunned down 16 Ukrainian soldiers who were manning a checkpoint last week.

So yes, there are innocents here. The unarmed protestors in Maidan Nezalezhnosti who were gunned down in the streets by the Berkut were innocent. The heavily armed rebels who used RPGs to kill sleeping Ukrainian soldiers are not. If you can't parse that you're just full of shit.

 

[norseamd]

has putin said anything about poroshenko being elected

 

[cabri]

Talk about hypocrisy, we have the US meddling in a elected govt in Syria , sending anti tank weapons and arming some crazy fundamentalist bad guys..and you guys talk shit about Putin who is taking care of his neighborhood. WTF is the US doing in Syria.. you guys and and your pathetic talking points.

http://www.reuters.com/video/2014/0...pport-in-syr?videoId=313112955&videoChannel=1

The US should not be involved in Syria; however, we are also not denying that we are supporting the rebels.

Assad was wiping out those that opposed him; Kiev was not doing so in the Crimea.

Now if you want to buy into the Russian propaganda system like other here, do so.

Even Russian is not backing Syria fully.

If Russia wants to maintain the pretense in Eastern Ukraine, they are going to lose that proxy quickly.

 

[cubby1223]

Talk about hypocrisy, we have the US meddling in a elected govt in Syria , sending anti tank weapons and arming some crazy fundamentalist bad guys..and you guys talk shit about Putin who is taking care of his neighborhood. WTF is the US doing in Syria.. you guys and and your pathetic talking points.

http://www.reuters.com/video/2014/0...pport-in-syr?videoId=313112955&videoChannel=1

If you want to talk about hypocrisy, let's talk about how Russia "supports" the citizens of Crimea in self determination, but not "support" the citizens of Kiev the right to self determination.

Or if you want to talk Syria, we can talk Syria.

Let's talk about the drought that has destroyed much of the nations farmlands, that has caused the farming families to become homeless, having moved into the cities causing overpopulation, and no ability to find new work to pay their debts from farming, and the Syrian government deciding to treat them as criminals, imprison these former farmers, turning them into fighters against the government.

The beauty of being free to take in various perspectives is the ability to seek out what you personally believe to be the morally correct approach to each situation, because every situation is unique. But what is largely happening on the other side of the world is citizens are being led to believe their actions are for their own personal benefit when in fact the group by far benefiting the most is the Russian ruling party.

Do you really want to go down the path of discussing how much Putin "takes care of" his neighborhood?

 

[WelshBloke]

Do you really want to go down the path of discussing how much Putin "takes care of" his neighborhood?

Russia certainly "took care of" the chechens.

 

[norseamd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12Ogx4Qdyy0#t=12

 

[norseamd]

https://news.vice.com/article/yes-t...-ukraine-and-nobody-knows-who-sent-them-there

 

[Daverino]

Looks like the 'protestors' in Donetsk have managed to down another Ukrainian helicopter with a man-portable SAM.

It's just like the spring where the Maidan were protestors were shooting down helicopters left and right in Kiev while assaulting the police with RPGs.

 

[Genx87]

Looks like the 'protestors' in Donetsk have managed to down another Ukrainian helicopter with a man-portable SAM.

It's just like the spring where the Maidan were protestors were shooting down helicopters left and right in Kiev while assaulting the police with RPGs.

Must have raided the local police department again.

 

[Daverino]

Must have raided the local police department again.

I still don't know why Russia wanted an East v West proxy war but at this point, they're seriously in the hole. Their economy is tanked and it won't get better until the sanctions are removed. Putin has gotten some short term gains in nationalistic popularity, but has alienated his closest neighbor permanently and pushed eastern Europe even further away. I just don't know what he bought with what he's spent.

The Ukrainian revolt this past spring was economically motivated. The Ukrainian economy was in the shitter and people got really tired of it. The more damage that Putin self-inflicts on Russia's economy, the more he risks of that happening in Russia as well. Any further direct involvement in the Ukraine will only strap the economy more (wars aren't cheap) and incur far deeper economic isolation. Abandoning the rebels in Eastern Ukraine puts him on track to resolve the sanctions, but the Ukrainians will eventually put down the rebels with economic help from the West. Putin will lose the pro-Russian people sympathy and affection he has gained by 'standing up' for the Russian population in the Ukraine. He won't be remembered for saving the Russians in the Ukraine but abandoning them.

All the while, Russia falls further behind the rest of the world (East and West) economically and militarily.

I cannot see a scenario where Russia permanently 'wins' anything from their actions.

 

[norseamd]

I still don't know why Russia wanted an East v West proxy war but at this point, they're seriously in the hole. Their economy is tanked and it won't get better until the sanctions are removed. Putin has gotten some short term gains in nationalistic popularity, but has alienated his closest neighbor permanently and pushed eastern Europe even further away. I just don't know what he bought with what he's spent.

more than that

all of central asia is fucking paranoid as shit

 

[Jaskalas]

I cannot see a scenario where Russia permanently 'wins' anything from their actions.

Anything? Crimea.

 

[code65536]

I still don't know why Russia wanted an East v West proxy war but at this point, they're seriously in the hole. Their economy is tanked and it won't get better until the sanctions are removed. Putin has gotten some short term gains in nationalistic popularity, but has alienated his closest neighbor permanently and pushed eastern Europe even further away. I just don't know what he bought with what he's spent.

The Ukrainian revolt this past spring was economically motivated. The Ukrainian economy was in the shitter and people got really tired of it. The more damage that Putin self-inflicts on Russia's economy, the more he risks of that happening in Russia as well. Any further direct involvement in the Ukraine will only strap the economy more (wars aren't cheap) and incur far deeper economic isolation. Abandoning the rebels in Eastern Ukraine puts him on track to resolve the sanctions, but the Ukrainians will eventually put down the rebels with economic help from the West. Putin will lose the pro-Russian people sympathy and affection he has gained by 'standing up' for the Russian population in the Ukraine. He won't be remembered for saving the Russians in the Ukraine but abandoning them.

All the while, Russia falls further behind the rest of the world (East and West) economically and militarily.

I cannot see a scenario where Russia permanently 'wins' anything from their actions.

With Putin in firm control of the media (in a takeover that he was able to orchestrate in part due to the crisis and the "mandate" that he currently has), the Russian people won't be blaming him for their long-term economic woes.

It makes more sense when you think of Putin as a less extreme version of the Kims of North Korea. He's in it for himself, the good of Russia be damned.

 

[Daverino]

Anything? Crimea.

Crimea is, for all intents and purposes, less than nothing. A gain of a few square feet of territory at tremendous cost for the Russian economy. Even without the sanctions, Russia has to pump a ton of money into Crimea just to keep it vaguely stable and livable. That's money they don't have.

Worse still, it will need to do so indefinitely. Crimea gets all of its water, electricity and overland transportation from Ukraine proper. If Russia had managed to carve out a land-bridge to the peninsula, maybe the scenario would be different. But that seems impossible at this point.

 

[norseamd]

Crimea is, for all intents and purposes, less than nothing. A gain of a few square feet of territory at tremendous cost for the Russian economy. Even without the sanctions, Russia has to pump a ton of money into Crimea just to keep it vaguely stable and livable. That's money they don't have. Worse still, it will need to do so indefinitely. Crimea gets all of its water, electricity and overland transportation from Ukraine proper. If Russia had managed to carve out a land-bridge to the peninsula, maybe the scenario would be different. But that seems impossible at this point.

exactly

 

[senseamp]

All pennies comparing to how much Russia would have to spend on building up the Black Sea fleet to counter a NATO fleet based in Sevastopol. Just relocating the existing Black Sea fleet to Novorossiysk would cost more than building a bridge to Crimea from Russia. Water is a problem for Crimean agriculture. But their agricultural product is much less than the discount Russia was giving Ukraine on gas and payments for fleet basing rights.

 

[norseamd]

All pennies comparing to how much Russia would have to spend on building up the Black Sea fleet to counter a NATO fleet based in Sevastopol. Just relocating the existing Black Sea fleet to Novorossiysk would cost more than building a bridge to Crimea from Russia. Water is a problem for Crimean agriculture. But their agricultural product is much less than the discount Russia was giving Ukraine on gas and payments for fleet basing rights.

the russians already built a nicer port in novorossiysk and odessa is still nicer than sevastopol so in reality even ukraine does not need sevastopol

 

[Daverino]

All pennies comparing to how much Russia would have to spend on building up the Black Sea fleet to counter a NATO fleet based in Sevastopol. Just relocating the existing Black Sea fleet to Novorossiysk would cost more than building a bridge to Crimea from Russia. Water is a problem for Crimean agriculture. But their agricultural product is much less than the discount Russia was giving Ukraine on gas and payments for fleet basing rights.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

A NATO naval base in Sevastopol? Why would NATO need that? It has bases in Turkey and controls all access into and out of the Black Sea. NATO could delete the Russian Black Sea fleet on a whim right now. To think that a naval base in Sevastopol is something the NATO wants or needs is frankly absurd. And regardless, the capture of Crimea doesn't even prevent NATO from naval access to the Ukraine. If the Ukraine joined NATO (which is already extremely unlikely in the next 5-10 years) Odessa is right up the road. Considering NATO already controls more ports and harbors in the Black Sea than Russia (Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey are full NATO members, Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia are IPAP) any Ukrainian naval base is already redundant.

 

[senseamp]

That makes no sense whatsoever.

A NATO naval base in Sevastopol? Why would NATO need that? It has bases in Turkey and controls all access into and out of the Black Sea. NATO could delete the Russian Black Sea fleet on a whim right now. To think that a naval base in Sevastopol is something the NATO wants or needs is frankly absurd. And regardless, the capture of Crimea doesn't even prevent NATO from naval access to the Ukraine. If the Ukraine joined NATO (which is already extremely unlikely in the next 5-10 years) Odessa is right up the road. Considering NATO already controls more ports and harbors in the Black Sea than Russia (Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey are full NATO members, Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia are IPAP) any Ukrainian naval base is already redundant.

Crimea makes for a nice missile base to reach all of Black Sea periphery too.