• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Ukrainian Conflict - Donetsk Boogaloo

Status
Not open for further replies.
pulsemyne said:
Much more Georgia. Nobody is going to go to war over Ukraine. All that is going to happen is, possibly, some sanctions...maybe. That's about it. The odd visa restricted here and there.
Besides if the ukrainian army fights back then it could end up a rather bloody situation for Russia.
The media is doing a lot to hype this up as well largely due to the fact that it gets clicks and ratings. Far worse things happened during the cold war with proxy wars all over the world and talking endless smack about each other.
Western diplomats also know one thing for certain and that is the crimean people welcome the russians. They are not seen there as an invading force of evil. Both sides know that in the big picture the crimea doesn't mean that much, but it is a very good political tool to smack each other with. Russia has banged its drum for a long time about americas invasion of Iraq and NATO's activities in Libya (which pissed it off a lot by the way), and kosovo/yugoslavia. In many ways they were right about the dodgy legitimacy over what was done. However, now the EU and the US get to turn the tables and, even better for them, the russians never even bothered with the UN or international law. Russias credibility has disappeared and their leadership has been shown to be untrustworthy. This will make businesses very unlikely to invest in Russia. It will do huge harm.
For the west of course that is another big bonus. Now they can start fraking like mad for gas and avoiding dealing with russia altogether. This allows them to strengthen their economic position against russia.
It will also lead to an increase in defense spending as nations will want to strengthen themselves against an aggressive russian bear. One thing is for certain, they won't be buying things from russia anymore.
In a years time relations with Russia will begin to stabalise and the invasion of the crimea will be a sore point between them and the west but so was georgia and that was forgotten about.
Click to expand...
Slightly more than half of them do. Slightly less than half of them do not. And I still wonder how the Tatars will react - I would imagine they indeed see the Russians as an "invading force of evil".
 
The same Russia that denied it had boots on the ground in Crimea, and used old pictures of traffic between Poland and Russia as pictures of refugees fleeing the Ukraine?

Yeah, not sure that their word is actually worth much at this point in time
 
For the whole weekend at work it was non stop Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine.

I think I will take a break from this thread,
 
What's the upside for Russia in all this?

I've skimmed the thread but all I've seen are negatives. I really dont think there will be a war; it would be larger than Ukraine vs. Russia in that case.

It seems like this is going to hurt their economy. Why risk that?

Also, I'm not an apologist for US military intervention. Iraq was a mistake; not sure about Afghanistan. But Russia going into Ukraine/Crimea just seems totally different. I understand that Crimeans are pro-Russia but what's the reasoning beside that? At least Afghanistan was a reaction to 9/11. (Iraq was manufactured.) But Russia is exhibiting complete disregard for principles of international law, etc. It's just seems strange, overall.

It's also very weird this is happening right after the olympics. What a charade.
 
pigeon said:
Meanwhile, the Russian Central Bank spent $10 billion of its foreign currency reserves on Russian roubles so far today, as well as jumping up the interest rate 1.5 points, as foreign investors continue to flee Russian markets. This is not a sustainable course for the Russian economy.
Click to expand...
This is what I don't understand. Economically, Russia has not done this well since WW2, just by concentrating on itself. Now they are severely risking their new found growth with this. For what? A stable and powerful economy is so much more important than a naval base and a bigger army.

edit:
1011-RussianGDP.gif


avaya said:
Not a chance. EU isn't FIFA
Click to expand...
If FIFA would be against egomaniacs or power crazed dictators, it would have to dissolve itself.
 
Best military option for Ukranian soldiers would be to go plain clothes and start guerrilla warfare. It has worked against the US in the past.
 
Just hope to good this thing blows over quickly and peacefully. As a Finn, living next door to Russia, these last few days have been getting really damn scary.
 
pulsemyne said:
Here's what likely happened. Some commander on the ground gives the ultimatum to the Ukrainian bases. They tell headquarters who tell the press. Russian high command has no idea about all this and immediately get on the blower to the commander and impolitely tells him to "shut his mouth you are making us look bad". Then high command gets on the blower to the press and tells them it was "A complete lie" etc.
The russians are desperate not to look like the bad guys in all of this and that ultimatum made them look very, very bad.
Of course if something does happen then Russia looks even worse again. The political spin doctors in the Kremlin must have shit their pants when that ultimatum was announced.
Click to expand...
I very much doubt that a navy officer would go rogue like that. This fits in a long history of Russia testing how the West reacts to provocations, and within this conflict in creating disinformation to confuse the Ukrainians while simultaneously making the Crimean Russians ready to rise up.
 
cjp said:
If President Obama does this, however, and Ukraine ends up losing chunks of territory to Russia, it is pretty much the end of a rational case for non-proliferation in many countries around the world. If Ukraine still had its nukes, it would probably still have Crimea.
Click to expand...

Yes. This is exactly the thought I've had. It's very dangerous for the countries that signed the memorandum to no act against Russia.
 
Osiris said:
The same Russia that denied it had boots on the ground in Crimea, and used old pictures of traffic between Poland and Russia as pictures of refugees fleeing the Ukraine?

Yeah, not sure that their word is actually worth much at this point in time
Click to expand...

Let's not forget all those Russian military movements from the end of last month that had absolutely nothing to do with Ukraine and if you so much as suggest that then you are a dangerous warmonger.
 
SD-Ness said:
What's the upside for Russia in all this?

I've skimmed the thread but all I've seen are negatives. I really dont think there will be a war; it would be larger than Ukraine vs. Russia in that case.

It seems like this is going to hurt their economy. Why risk that?

Also, I'm not an apologist for US military intervention. Iraq was a mistake; not sure about Afghanistan. But Russia going into Ukraine/Crimea just seems totally different. I understand that Crimeans are pro-Russia but what's the reasoning beside that? At least Afghanistan was a reaction to 9/11. (Iraq was manufactured.) But Russia is exhibiting complete disregard for principles of international law, etc. It's just seems strange, overall.

It's also very weird this is happening right after the olympics. What a charade.
Click to expand...
For Putin it's about trying the save the remains of the once so grand empire. Ukraine going pro EU would be part of a bigger movement. He also had this idea of this East European economy bloc that Ukraine would've been the center piece of.

But you're right, there really isn't an upside in all of this for Russia. Putin's acting more on emotion than logic which is never good.
 
Rubenov said:
Best military option for Ukranian soldiers would be to go plain clothes and start guerrilla warfare. It has worked against the US in the past.
Click to expand...

Thats what the Chechnians did and Russia basically leveled the entire province. Guerrilla warfare is more dangerous when the other side will get as dirty as you.
 
Rubenov said:
Best military option for Ukranian soldiers would be to go plain clothes and start guerrilla warfare. It has worked against the US in the past.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what Russia wants.

"Look at all these Ukrainian nazis trying to genocide all these Russians like we said guess we were right all along *RUSSIA SMASH*"
 
D4Danger said:
why would the Ukrainian soldiers surrender? Is that what you would expect of your army?
Click to expand...
Regional officials (elected) are voicing their questions regarding who actually are the legitimate rulers of Ukraine. Going as far as saying that the only legitimate rulers of Odessa are the regional elected officials.

Is it really that far fetched that some individuals in the Military could agree and pledge their support to the regional government in Crimea? The problem is not the loyalty of the Military but rather who they should be loyal to.
 
GCX said:
For Putin it's about trying the save the remains of the once so grand empire. Ukraine going pro EU would be part of a bigger movement. He also had this idea of this East European economy bloc that Ukraine would've been the center piece of.

But you're right, there really isn't an upside in all of this for Russia. Putin's acting more on emotion than logic which is never good.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it effectively shuts the door to any idea of any independent nations bordering Russia surviving without joining NATO, pushing others away from simply independent but within spheres of influence to actively courting EU and NATO membership.

There is no upside following success in this venture for Russia, just face saving and imperial-minded nostalgia, the downsides far outweigh upsides, which are effectively nonexistent.

This could be why some are pushing the "Never interrupt your enemy whilst he makes a mistake" as an explanation of the soft response by the West, it may actually be in their favor to let Russia overplay it's hand here in the long run.
 
SD-Ness said:
What's the upside for Russia in all this?
Click to expand...

Warm water port, buffer zone between them and pro EU states, and they won't lose out on military bases and industrial sectors built in Crimea under a deal that was set to expire in 2017.


D4Danger said:
why would the Ukrainian soldiers surrender? Is that what you would expect of your army?
Click to expand...

Large portions of the East don't feel that the coup is a legitimate governing body.
 
Rubenov said:
Best military option for Ukranian soldiers would be to go plain clothes and start guerrilla warfare. It has worked against the US in the past.
Click to expand...

I don't think escalating into violence, tearing the country apart and seeing innocent people suffer and die is the solution here. We need diplomats trying to persuade Russia to calm down and work with the international community in order to come to some sort of compromise. That is the only way. Not war and death and not sabre rattling with sanctions and cold war rhetoric that will serve to do nothing but create long-term division on matters where we need to be united. But then, that is unfortunately always easier said than done.
 
Osiris said:
The problem is that it effectively shuts the door to any idea of any independent nations bordering Russia surviving without joining NATO, pushing others away from simply independent but within spheres of influence to actively courting EU and NATO membership.

There is no upside following success in this venture for Russia, just face saving and imperial-minded nostalgia, the downsides far outweigh upsides, which are effectively nonexistent.

This could be why some are pushing the "Never interrupt your enemy whilst he makes a mistake" as an explanation of the soft response by the West, it may actually be in their favor to let Russia overplay it's hand here in the long run.
Click to expand...
It gives Obama a nasty case of egg-on-face in his negotiations with the Iranians. Russia attacking Ukraine is a classic Stalinist ploy to mess up a particular narrative, in this case the current US admin's denuclearisation drive. It also makes him look clueless in his overtures towards the Russians as partners for peace. It's all very by-the-book KGB fare. Putin willingly paints himself as the Big Bad to make the 'hero' who trusted him look like a numpty.

Also, as was said at least 8 times before, without Ukraine his little pet project is toast.
 
Zuhzuhzombie!! said:
Warm water port, buffer zone between them and pro EU states, and they won't lose out on military bases and industrial sectors built in Crimea under a deal that was set to expire in 2017.
Click to expand...
There isn't really that much industry in Crimea, and it's not like Russia ever owned the industry there so they can't really lose out on it either. And the deal was extended until 2042, so the 2017 date is meaningless right now since if the new government wasn't going to honor the 2042 agreement there's no reason to believe they would honor the 2017 one either.
 
The Economist on the economical implications of the invasion.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2014/03/markets

And a very interesting quote:

...the events are a timely reminder that Norman Angell is still a lost prophet. Back in 1910, the journalist and MP argued in "The Great Illusion" that, thanks to financial and trade links, war between the great powers would be futile. Four years later Europe went to war anyway in a collective act of madness. As Tina Fordham of Citigroup notes,

"markets have a tendency to overestimate the weight of economic self-interest; this case is just the most recent where the perceived transgressing of a geopolitical "red line" trumps other considerations, even risking costs to the economy and trade"
Click to expand...
 
Enkidu said:
There isn't really that much industry in Crimea, and it's not like Russia ever owned the industry there so they can't really lose out on it either. And the deal was extended until 2042, so the 2017 date is meaningless right now since if the new government wasn't going to honor the 2042 agreement there's no reason to believe they would honor the 2017 one either.
Click to expand...

Was it?

I thought it expired 2017 and without Yanukovych it probably wouldn't have been renewed.
 
I have mostly been slightly against joining NATO before but if there was a referendum for Finland joining I would say yes without a doubt after shit like this. Just as a fuck you to Russia.
 
Zuhzuhzombie!! said:
Was it?

I thought it expired 2017 and without Yanukovych it probably wouldn't have been renewed.
Click to expand...
Yanukovich already extended it back in 2010. The new Ukrainian government could of course choose not to honor that agreement, but considering their goal was to stabilize the country's economy, it seems like it would be a bad idea to provoke Russia by breaking international treaties.
 
In an indication of how many shits America is giving about all this, along with the rest of the EU, no one has pulled out of the paralypics games. All America will do is not send a presidential deligation there. Basically no shits given. Not even tiny ones.
 
sechsterangriff said:
If Putin really wants to protect Russian citizens and interests he shouldn't pose any obstruction to deployment of UN blue helmets in the region until the next elections. The UN Security Council should be debating this right now. If Puttin refuses this Russia will formally lose credibility.
Click to expand...

what if he's just a dick tho
 
I should learn not to check out Daily Mail comments whenever a global story happens.

Full of the expected "Let's stay out of it, look after our own" and other unrelated tosh. In fact the highest rated comment is supporting Russia and denigrating the EU.

Horribly predictable.
 
Napalm_Frank said:
I have mostly been slightly against joining NATO before but if there was a referendum for Finland joining I would say yes without a doubt after shit like this. Just as a fuck you to Russia.
Click to expand...

Lets not forget Russia is our third largest trading partner as far as exports are considered. Not only that, major cities in Eastern Finland depend on the trade (Lappeenranta etc).

Joining NATO at this point would not serve our national interests. What we need instead is a more comprehensive defence coalition between different European nation states. EU is the biggest market in the entire world so negotiation power is there economically speaking, what we lack is speedy bureaucracy and determination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

How did you get better at handling conflict?
2
60
2K
kpopSuperstar replied
Rogue Squadron Delayed Due to 'Scheduling Conflicts'
45
2K
ManaByte replied
NYT: 1st Amendment No Longer Bipartisan, Now Weaponized for Civil Conflict
36
3K
iconmaster replied
LTTP: The Dress of Conflicting Colors
8
1K
Gavin Stevens replied
NYT: NK Missile Success Is Linked to Ukrainian Plant
2
56
11K
Dingens replied
Top Bottom