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

Ukrainian Conflict - Donetsk Boogaloo

Status
Not open for further replies.

Won't stop oil and gas prices from skyrocketing or stocks falling. During the US oil embargo and crisis, they had enough to meet all their demands from within the US itself. And yet gas was rationed, prices went sky-high etc.

Who would win in a fight between Obama and putin?

Considering Putin is an ex-KGB colonel and a black belt in judo, and Obama is a career politician and nerd from Harvard, what do you think?
 
People really need to read this and then stop pretending any of this is a sudden result of particular circumstances: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

Written in 1997
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is sanitary cordon, which would be inadmissible.[1]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Dugin
Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin (Russian: Алекса́ндр Ге́льевич Ду́гин, born 7 January 1962) is a Russian political scientist, traditionalist, and one of the most popular ideologists of the creation of a Eurasian empire that would be against the "North Atlantic interests". He is known for his proximity to fascism,[1][2][3][4] and had close ties to the Kremlin and Russian military.[5] He was the leading organizer of National Bolshevik Party, National Bolshevik Front, and Eurasia Party. His political activities are directed toward restoration of the Russian Empire through partitioning of the former Soviet republics, such as Georgia and Ukraine, and unification with Russian-speaking territories, especially Eastern Ukraine and Crimea.[6][7] He is known for the book Foundations of Geopolitics.

It's also clear why Putin wants to be close to the orthodox church.
 
"cuz" they are deploying troops in a foreign nation.
I think its much more gray than you are giving it credit for. The Russians might not have a legitimate occupying force but what is it that provoked this, is it solely the will of Putin or are there real Russian interests that are threatened? Russia is going to be part of a future Ukraine and they should not be billed as the definitive bad guys. I just hope it all deescalates and terms can be found to satisfy all parties; yeah, that is wishful thinking.
 
Considering Putin is an ex-KGB colonel and a black belt in judo, and Obama is a career politician and nerd from Harvard, what do you think?

On the other hand, Putin's 5'5" and 61 years old. Didn't he mess his back up not long ago doing one of his mid life crisis stunts?
 
I think its much more gray than you are giving it credit for. The Russians might not have a legitimate occupying force but what is it that provoked this, is it solely the will of Putin or are there real Russian interests that are threatened? Russia is going to be part of a future Ukraine and they should not be billed as the definitive bad guys. I just hope it all deescalates and terms can be found to satisfy all parties; yeah, that is wishful thinking.

Obviously there are interests in between, why else would they do such a thing? that doesn't make it right or even legal. Occupying a foreign land is 'wrong' in all levels you want to put it. There's no way around it
 
What assumptions do you think that I've been making? That the official Rada website is trustworthy? Yep, you got me there.

Sviatoslav said:
vast majority of Party of Regions people aren't even there to vote for this stuff. Communist party too. Again I'm not an expert on this stuff but it looks strange to me

I'm just telling you that it's not true for most of the laws that were passed and you acknowledge that you are not the expert. That's it...
 
CHEEZMO™;103055936 said:
On the other hand, Putin's 5'5" and 61 years old. Didn't he mess his back up not long ago doing one of his mid life crisis stunts?

Obama could totally dunk on Putin.
 
Maybe not something as stated as an anti-Russia stance, but I do think that much of the Western media - perhaps without realizing it - regurgitates a lot of deep state security/neo-con arguments and interpretations. We saw this with Iraq, we saw this with Libya (and Syria), and now we see this again with Eastern Europe and Russia.

What neocon regurgitations are you seeing with this crisis? Let's say Joe Sixpack clicks on the top link on MSN right now to see what's going on. It's a Reuters wire story on nbcnews.com. http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/ousted-ukrainian-president-asked-russian-troops-envoy-says-n43506

Ousted Ukrainian President Asked For Russian Troops, Envoy Says

UNITED NATIONS — Ukraine's ousted leader Viktor Yanukovych has sent a letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin requesting that he use Russia's military to restore law and order in Ukraine, Moscow's U.N. envoy told a stormy meeting of the Security Council on Monday.

"Under the influence of Western countries, there are open acts of terror and violence," Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin read from the letter in an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council.

"People are being persecuted for language and political reasons," he read. "So in this regard I would call on the president of Russia, Mr. Putin, asking him to use the armed forces of the Russian Federation to establish legitimacy, peace, law and order, stability and defending the people of Ukraine."

Churkin held up a copy of the letter for council members to see during a heated council session in which Western envoys and the Russian ambassador hurled allegations at each other for two and a half hours. He said the letter was dated March 1.

After the Russian ambassador spoke, U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power dismissed Russian claims that Russian-speaking Ukrainians were under threat in the eastern regions of the former Soviet republic.

"There is no evidence that ethnic Russians are in danger," she told the 15-nation council, which is holding its third emergency session on Ukraine in four days, this time at the request of Russia.

Power said there was "no legal basis" for Russia to justify its military deployments in Ukraine through an invitation from the regional prime minister of the Crimea, adding only Ukraine's parliament could do that.

Churkin rejected Power's denials and said she appeared to have gotten all her information about Ukraine "from U.S. TV". He repeated Moscow's view that Yanukovych is Ukraine's legitimate leader, not interim President Oleksandr Turchynov.

Rejecting Russian allegation of acts of terrorism, British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant said: "It is clear that these claims have simply been fabricated to justify Russian military action."

Looks even-handed to me, and even gives the Russian point of view top billing.
 
That's one of the ways to hit Russia. Most of their economy is based upon selling their oil and gas to Europe. If Europe would dedicate itself to getting off Russia fuel. The Russian Economy would implode

Oil problem can be easily solved (Alaska for example), but gas is not as simple...
 
Obviously there are interests in between, why else would they do such a thing? that doesn't make it right or even legal. Occupying a foreign land is 'wrong' in all levels you want to put it. There's no way around it

Leading up to this situation Russia had proposed a deal that was shot down by Brussels and Washington. Hindsight being the bitch that it is, it seems that this (along with other activities) might have been enough of a perceived threat (that was miscalculated when predicting the Russian response) to have lead to where we are. The thing is that they were already there so in line with the steps other World powers have taken, the spin is that they are taking pre-emptive measures. I agree it is heavy-handed to mobilize those forces but let's not forget this is Russia's backyard. If a nonviolent solution is to come, its not going to come from placing all the blame on Russia for this. I'm not arguing for Russia's actions in Ukraine, I'm trying to probe a little deeper into why this happened. Georgia and Ukraine were redlines for the West that Russia put down in the Nineties. They don't want NATO on their backdoor, that is understandable and to move toward that could be considered a hostile act, in the eyes of the Russians. It is much more delicate than these guys are right and these guys are wrong. I'd like to think this provides an opportunity to work closer together, as an international community, but it does seem very unlikely to have that effect.
 
Really it all started with Fox News, which also just so happens to get the highest ratings out of all the major network channels.

Fox News is a cable channel that attracts 1 million viewers in prime time in a nation of over 300 million. The three network nightly newscasts attract about 25 million combined.
 
I'm 100% sure nothing will happen, don't worry.

image.php
 
Another crazy news. HUGELY speculative, but one news agency was able to confirm that the facebook account was not hacked, but no confirmations of this news yet. Apparently Yanukovich has died. It would be INSANE if this was true.

https://www.facebook.com/mike.lebed?fref=ts

http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3314397-yanukovych-skonchalsia-ot-serdechnoho-prystupa-smy

Doubt it's true.

Although "Yanukovich assassinated by Ukrainian extremists" would be a great pretext I suppose.
 
Doubt it's true.

Although "Yanukovich assassinated by Ukrainian extremists" would be a great pretext I suppose.

It was being reported earlier that a Former Ally to Putin was stating that it was planned for Russian Special forces to attack Russians in Crimea and other targets to fan the flames.

Reports have been taken down and cant find it now
 
Has Yanukovich outlived his usefulness to Putin? Maybe.

I wonder if the West will have the balls to accuse Putin of assassinating him. If this is true Putin would probably add this to his list of reasons Russian troops need to be in Ukraine. The west has called him out on his other excuses.
 
Has Yanukovich outlived his usefulness to Putin? Maybe.

I wonder if the West will have the balls to accuse Putin of assassinating him. If this is true Putin would probably add this to his list of reasons Russian troops need to be in Ukraine. The west has called him out on his other excuses.

It's very hard to spin this... It's would be VEEEERY suspicious. Died the SAME day his note was presented in from of UN?!
 
Well, his "escape" was action movie worthy. Why stop now!

Also to be honest, if I was watching a movie and the bad boss guy would live in Yanukovich's house I would be rolling my eyes thinking "Yeah, very subtle and realistic, good job Hollywood"
 
So some people are arguing that Russia is cool because Yanukovich asked for troops, but I'm guessing that the president of Ukraine doesn't have the power to unilaterally invite foreign troops into the country, and that would be something that the rada would actually need to ratify. Anyone know for sure?
 
Is there a good site with up to date news? Guardian has gone to bed.

So some people are arguing that Russia is cool because Yanukovich asked for troops, but I'm guessing that the president of Ukraine doesn't have the power to unilaterally invite foreign troops into the country, and that would be something that the rada would actually need to ratify. Anyone know for sure?

He will not do this, why make such a stupid move?
 
Sounds like trolling to me, Yanokovich hasn't quite outlived his usefulness yet I imagine, besides, Polonium takes a little longer to take effect.

Unless he refused the Green Tea entirely of course, he really ought to check his vehicles brake lines for the foreseeable future though, just in case. :P
 
So some people are arguing that Russia is cool because Yanukovich asked for troops, but I'm guessing that the president of Ukraine doesn't have the power to unilaterally invite foreign troops into the country, and that would be something that the rada would actually need to ratify. Anyone know for sure?

I don't think anyone does, but by all intents and purposed Yanukovych was deposed in an armed rebellion. It gets iffy now because his parliament impeached him, but you have Pro-Russia and pro-Yanukovych supporters say it was illegitimate or through the threat of force.

I believe it's been done before, but I'm on mobile and can't find resources. It's really a perfect storm of things going wrong for the Ukrainians. High level defections, being so close to a hegemonic former power, the entire South and East with a pro-Russian slant etc. Government in disarray etc. And the elected president is in the invading country signing and saying please send troops to restore order.
 
They don't want NATO on their backdoor, that is understandable and to move toward that could be considered a hostile act, in the eyes of the Russians. It is much more delicate than these guys are right and these guys are wrong. I'd like to think this provides an opportunity to work closer together, as an international community, but it does seem very unlikely to have that effect.

What is understandable about a reactionary autocrat objecting to democratic countries voluntarily joining a defensive alliance as expressed by their popular will? What is the argument for that being right? How will that make us work closer together?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom