Support NeoGAF

[commedieu]

'Miss Martin however told the Telegraph: "I am not going to Crimea despite the statement RT has made."'

This is pretty hilarious actually. Slightly scary as well.

Yeah... so it makes the RT threat via Putin, (tinfoil) even more hilarious.

 

[andycapps]

Im with your underlying sentiment that domestically we can quarrel all we want, but internationally we should have a unified front regardless of politics.

And really, the rest of the world pays a lot less attention to what minority senators...etc...says than you think.

I agree with what you say should be the case, but I just know that politicians don't give a shit about the perception of America in the world and that they're doing things to push their own career forward and bring the other side down. It's business as usual. So what I would like to expect from our elected representatives and what we actually get are radically different things.

 

[Kadayi]

You know, maybe I'm remembering wrong, but there used to be a time where we could be divided domestically, but unified internationally. The efforts of most Republicans to undermine Obama's international standing -- no matter the cost -- is absolutely disgusting.

They're going to use his apparent inaction (like he has much choice) to batter the Democrats in the electoral run up as weak and indecisive, with ever more voluminous declarations of how they themselves would of handled events. No doubt involving story lines of military/covert heroism that wouldn't sit amiss on a movie producers reject pile for being far fetched.

 

[cebri.one]

Of course they did, they aren't suicidal. No-one wants another Able Archer.

Yeah, we came really close to nuclear war when norway launched a missile in 1995 without warning the russians.

 

[MGrant]

I heard the bit about Yanukovych being dead at some point last night; I won't believe it until I see it from the AP or Reuters.

I think the US has been pulled into this whole thing against its will. I have no idea what the best course of action is, and there are no doubt a lot of dicks trying to gain an advantage from the situation. What a clusterfuck. Let me see if I understand everything so far:

There was a proposed trade agreement between Ukraine and the EU. A trade deal, not an EU membership, not a NATO agreement, just a monetary exchange. This deal contradicted an earlier proposal from Russia, who had agreed to bail out Ukraine's economy with billions of dollars in exchange for future agreements.

So Viktor Yanukovych, the leader of Ukraine, rejected this deal in favor of the Russian deal. A lot of people in Kiev who support closer ties with the EU were outraged by this, and took to the streets in protest. Yanukovych ordered special forces to use live ammunition against protesters, resulting in deaths on both sides. Then, the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove Yanukovych from power as punishment for ordering the attack against the protesters.

This is where things get fuzzy for me. There is word that the Ukrainian parliament is silencing Yanukovych's party. Yanukovych goes into hiding in Russian custody, claiming that he is still the rightful leader of Ukraine. Russia backs him up, claims his ouster was unconstitutional according to Ukrainian law. Ethnic Russians in Crimea take to the streets in pro-Russian protests. Ethnic Tatars and other pro-Ukrainian groups meet them to counter-protest. Russia says the pro-Ukraine protesters are Nazis, undesignated ethnic Russian troops show up and basically walk into Ukrainian bases to take control. No exchange of gunfire. Putin claims the troops are local Crimean security forces, not Russian troops proper.

So now, Russia is test-launching ICBMs and the West is freaking out. Poland is somehow involved. Do I have most of this correct? How does any of this make sense?

 

[Azih]

Countries pick sides all the times and they don't then try to start an international crisis over it. Its why even China, is saying to cut this shit out.

Not really relevant. China doesn't have a major naval base in the Ukraine and neither does most of China's gas exports run through Ukraine. Just take a look at what China does whenever Japan or Korea or Taiwan make noises. It brings out the damn warships to protect what they see as their security no matter how high tensions go. Similar to the article's examples, how would the U.S react if Canada for example said that they had decided to sell their energy to China instead of the U.S threatening the supply of oil and gas that America depends on. Superpowers always prioritize Protecting Self Over Not provoking International Crises.

 

[pigeon interrupted]

What is it with Russia being unable to issue measured responses over this? I get that this is basically Russia's Iraq and that tensions are high and that Russian nationalism is at something of a fever pitch right now, but essentially reminding the world that they can nuke us all is a bit extreme. This is North Korea levels of diplomatic escalation.

I dont't have any particular views on this either way apart from at the individual level of people. Putin is playing chess with the West and their geopolitical cabals. When CCCP collapsed I think the west agreed to leave the satellite states alone (defenceless?withdefence?illusionof?) you see the quagmire. Anyhow, whatever the reason: we did not.

And there is no understating that Sevastopol represented a strategic location and port to RF. Factor in involvement of various groups and the likelihood Putin would never have completely left Sevastopol or let his grip on Ukraine completely fail.

Pure guess, I would say that he was afraid [EDIT: afraid is probably too overstating his feel ]of becoming victim to some future conflict considering how the US and RF view each others systems of governance, paranoia on each side--intent on each side, maybe paranoia inadvertently manifests. Who can tell?

The politics of subterfuge, division and the truth cannot be handled a born of our inherent inadequacies?/qualities?. So the main consideration will always be, imho: would it stop the flow of money.Infinite from the finite. Closed and open system if you take into consideration population and resource/energy consumption and what is immediately involved. Wavering in-between maybe.


In the circles of power all they see is the interchange potential money=power/power=money in every sense. We see fleeting paperycottony stuff that is too fleeting and utilitarian and status. We miss the power or downplay it: do not know what we have not perceived, no exposure.

I guess that is addictive? Power and lifestyle? I doubt Patriotism is much more than the kid in the back seat poking them in the neck saying "are we there yet." It is a tool a man can use though. I think maybe addictive personality may be universal behavioural phenomena not individual trait. It's such an abstract thing anyway.

Haven't seen any proud Romans wandering about of late.

 

[pulsemyne]

Whats really happening is the press is freaking out. Imagine how bad it would have been with today's press during the cold war. Think about this, nothing has really happened on the ground, no one has died, the russias haven't gone beyond crimea. They have pulled back troops from the border areas. The ukrianians have been cool and calm and haven't fallen for any bait.
As for the ICBM, well that could have been planned for quite a while. The russians fire them now and again as does america.
The russians often use such launches as a means of sabre rattling. They did it all the time during the cold war.

 

[Azih]

People have died, and how isn't Russian troops invading Ukraine a REALLY BAD THING in flashing neon letters.

 

[Partial Gamification]

I heard the bit about Yanukovych being dead at some point last night; I won't believe it until I see it from the AP or Reuters.

I think the US has been pulled into this whole thing against its will. I have no idea what the best course of action is, and there are no doubt a lot of dicks trying to gain an advantage from the situation. What a clusterfuck. Let me see if I understand everything so far:

There was a proposed trade agreement between Ukraine and the EU. A trade deal, not an EU membership, not a NATO agreement, just a monetary exchange. This deal contradicted an earlier proposal from Russia, who had agreed to bail out Ukraine's economy with billions of dollars in exchange for future agreements.

So Viktor Yanukovych, the leader of Ukraine, rejected this deal in favor of the Russian deal. A lot of people in Kiev who support closer ties with the EU were outraged by this, and took to the streets in protest. Yanukovych ordered special forces to use live ammunition against protesters, resulting in deaths on both sides. Then, the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove Yanukovych from power as punishment for ordering the attack against the protesters.

This is where things get fuzzy for me. There is word that the Ukrainian parliament is silencing Yanukovych's party. Yanukovych goes into hiding in Russian custody, claiming that he is still the rightful leader of Ukraine. Russia backs him up, claims his ouster was unconstitutional according to Ukrainian law. Ethnic Russians in Crimea take to the streets in pro-Russian protests. Ethnic Tatars and other pro-Ukrainian groups meet them to counter-protest. Russia says the pro-Ukraine protesters are Nazis, undesignated ethnic Russian troops show up and basically walk into Ukrainian bases to take control. No exchange of gunfire. Putin claims the troops are local Crimean security forces, not Russian troops proper.

So now, Russia is test-launching ICBMs and the West is freaking out. Poland is somehow involved. Do I have most of this correct? How does any of this make sense?

Yeah, it seems right. Poland was proposed as a place to gather forces in the event of a massive invasion westward from Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin talked tough but cooled tensions in the Ukraine crisis in his first comments since its president fled, saying Russia has no intention "to fight the Ukrainian people" but reserved the right to use force.

As the Russian president held court Tuesday in his personal residence, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry met with Kiev's fledgling government and Moscow agreed to sit down with NATO.
source

BERN, 4 March 2014 – Swiss Chairperson-in-Office Didier Burkhalter today discussed the Ukrainian crisis with German Minister of Foreign Affairs Frank-Walter Steinmeier. They emphasized the capacity of the OSCE in helping to overcome the crisis.

“We discussed the creation of a contact group which could support de-escalation”, Burkhalter said. “Time is of the essence now to launch a dialogue format in order to re-build confidence and resolve the crisis by peaceful means”, he continued. Burkhalter added that they also discussed other ideas such as the possibility to monitor the situation in Ukraine, which could help to re-establish trust in the long term by focusing on minorities and human rights.

The Swiss Chair exchanged views regarding different possibilities for the OSCE to help find a way out of the Ukrainian crisis with Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov at the margins of yesterday's opening of the 25th Human Rights Council Session.
source

 

[pulsemyne]

People have died, and how isn't Russian troops invading Ukraine a REALLY BAD THING in flashing neon letters.

I'm not saying it's not a bad thing. It's just that people think crazy nuclear war is around the corner because the press wants to shit them up with it. Selling fear is the press win button.

 

[Tex117]

I agree with what you say should be the case, but I just know that politicians don't give a shit about the perception of America in the world and that they're doing things to push their own career forward and bring the other side down. It's business as usual. So what I would like to expect from our elected representatives and what we actually get are radically different things.

We are in total agreement.

 

[Ty4on]

Yeah, we came really close to nuclear war when norway launched a missile in 1995 without warning the russians.

It wasn't a missile and they (almost felt like writing we, but I was no even two) did warn them:

Lost in the Bureaucracy

The message from the Norwegian Foreign Ministry was routine. On Dec. 21, 1994, it sent out a letter to neighboring countries, including Russia, about the impending launch of the Black Brant XII, a four-stage research rocket, between Jan. 15 and Feb. 10, depending on weather conditions.

But the letter got lost in the Russian bureaucracy and never made it to the radar crews, as had past notifications. Norway had launched 607 scientific rockets since 1962. But the Black Brant XII was bigger than any of those. The rocket was a cooperative effort with the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and was built with surplus U.S. rocket engines.

I don't even think we have any missiles

 

[pulsemyne]

Yep a big story over fuck all

"A US official, speaking anonymously to Reuters, says Washington received prior notification of Russia's missile test plans, which pre-dated Russia's military movements in Crimea.

This comes in line with Moscow's commitments under the nuclear arms treaty between Russia and the USA, the official adds."

You see. The press ladies and gentlemen. Making something out of nothing. Also reports say Russian and ukraine minsters are to hold talks.

 

[pigeon interrupted]

Yep a big story over fuck all

"A US official, speaking anonymously to Reuters, says Washington received prior notification of Russia's missile test plans, which pre-dated Russia's military movements in Crimea.

This comes in line with Moscow's commitments under the nuclear arms treaty between Russia and the USA, the official adds."

You see. The press ladies and gentlemen. Making something out of nothing. Also reports say Russian and ukraine minsters are to hold talks.

You overate the integrity of some journalists and/or maybe their ability to defend themselves

 

[Enkidu]

I do not quite understand why NATO's eastward expansion is supposed to be such a terrible thing that it would warrant Russia invading another country. I mean, I understand why Russia might not like it but it shouldn't in any way excuse their behavior. It's not like it actually changed that much compared to the Cold War either. NATO members such as West Germany were bordering the Iron Curtain, so the eastward expansion if anything is only preserving the old status quo. Whatever you might think of the Soviet Union, it is clear that many of the countries that gained independence after its fall wanted little to do with Russia and were eager to join organizations like NATO to ensure they were protected.

Instead of making comparisons to Canada and Mexico, it would probably be more accurate to compare the situation to a hypothetical independent west-coast. Imagine if the US imploded and states like California gained independence and were very much eager to keep it that way. I could personally not fault them for joining up with some Chinese or Russian military alliance to ensure they were protected from being forcefully reincorporated into the US.

 

[Coketruck]

You know, maybe I'm remembering wrong, but there used to be a time where we could be divided domestically, but unified internationally. The efforts of most Republicans to undermine Obama's international standing -- no matter the cost -- is absolutely disgusting.

Yes, because no Democrat every said anything to undermine Bush's foreign policy...

[Bush refusing high-level talks with Syria] "... is a mistake... the kind of policy that's got us into trouble in the region, and it needs to change." Senator John Kerry, 2006

"I know this war is lost and the surge [of troops into Iraq] is not accomplishing anything." Senator Harry Reid, 2007.

"The president has no constitutional authority ... to take this nation to war ... unless we're attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked. And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him." Senator Joe Biden, 2007.

"That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics." Senator Barack Obama, 2002.

Yes, you're remembering wrong. In fact, I remember a time when criticizing the president's foreign policy decisions was patriotic as all hell... "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" was how the bumper sticker went, I think. Believe it or not, many Democrats oppose Republican president's foreign policies, and many Republicans opposed Democrat president's foreign policy. That's just how it is.

One more quote from then-Senator Obama: "True patriotism... is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security...".

 

[CHEEZMO™]

I believe (although I'm not certain) that NATO admission isn't a prospect if you have unresolved border and territorial disputes. Anyone know about that? Puts this whole mess in an interesting light if so.

 

[mavs]

I do not quite understand why NATO's eastward expansion is supposed to be such a terrible thing that it would warrant Russia invading another country. I mean, I understand why Russia might not like it but it shouldn't in any way excuse their behavior. It's not like it actually changed that much compared to the Cold War either. NATO members such as West Germany were bordering the Iron Curtain, so the eastward expansion if anything is only preserving the old status quo. Whatever you might think of the Soviet Union, it is clear that many of the countries that gained independence after its fall wanted little to do with Russia and were eager to join organizations like NATO to ensure they were protected.

Instead of making comparisons to Canada and Mexico, it would probably be more accurate to compare the situation to a hypothetical independent west-coast. Imagine if the US imploded and states like California gained independence and were very much eager to keep it that way. I could personally not fault them for joining up with some Chinese or Russian military alliance to ensure they were protected from being forcefully reincorporated into the US.

So you can't even understand why the USA would take extreme measures to ensure that doesn't happen?

 

[Azih]

The US went almost all the way around the bend during the Cuban Missile Crisis. That's got to be a somewhat reasonable analogy to what's happening here.

 

[Enkidu]

So you can't even understand why the USA would take extreme measures to ensure that doesn't happen?

Sure, I can understand why the US wouldn't like it, just as I understand why Russia doesn't like how it is right now. But I don't understand why it's a valid excuse. I wouldn't think that the US is any more justified to invade California in that scenario than I think Russia is justified to invade Ukraine.

As an explanation for why Russia is acting the way it is, I find it acceptable. But I don't think it actually justifies any of Russia's actions. It's a bit like saying that the US invaded Iraq for oil. Yes, that might explain why but it's not like it justifies the war.

 

[pigeon interrupted]

Sorry didn't realise it was behind a sign up. Here it is in full: -



The bolded part links to an article at the NYTimes: -

Tnx good article. Long for simple things tho

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

The US went almost all the way around the bend during the Cuban Missile Crisis. That's got to be a somewhat reasonable analogy to what's happening here.

I had no idea that this Russian incursion into Crimea happened in response to stationing American nukes in Ukraine.

Are you suggesting that being pro-EU is the same as this? They're not even joining it yet, or NATO for that matter. But Putin will be driving Ukraine into their arms thanks to this.

 

[Osiris]

I had no idea that this Russian incursion into Crimea happened in response to stationing American nukes in Ukraine.

Are you suggesting that being pro-EU is the same as this? They're not even joining it yet, or NATO for that matter. But Putin will be driving Ukraine into their arms thanks to this.

I think that's pretty much spot on.

It would be interesting to see what the numbers for the following survey would have been before the folly initiated by Russia, I'm sure it would have been much less than the nearly 80% it polled at:

The vast majority of Ukrainians for Ukraine's accession to NATO

79.1% of Ukrainians believe that Ukraine should immediately apply for membership in NATO

These are the results of a survey conducted by news portal TSN.ua.

Less than one day a record 36,000 people responded to the question whether Ukraine should immediately apply for membership in NATO in response to recent events in the Crimea?

Putin's actions are likely I think to prove counterproductive in the long-term, they have just pushed the argument that you are with us or against us, totally undermining any notion of effective independence.

 

[joseph1594]

I feel like Russia wondering why Central and Eastern European nations are so fast to reject them is like the United States wondering why so much of the Middle Eastern populace seems to despise the American government. Propping up satellite states with brutal regimes plus killing countless people is not a way to win hearts and minds. Russia should work on improving its PR image rather than using force.

 

[mavs]

Sure, I can understand why the US wouldn't like it, just as I understand why Russia doesn't like how it is right now. But I don't understand why it's a valid excuse. I wouldn't think that the US is any more justified to invade California in that scenario than I think Russia is justified to invade Ukraine.

As an explanation for why Russia is acting the way it is, I find it acceptable. But I don't think it actually justifies any of Russia's actions. It's a bit like saying that the US invaded Iraq for oil. Yes, that might explain why but it's not like it justifies the war.

Well who are you trying to justify it to? Californians, Russians, or the Russian government? If Putin has a boss it's probably just "opinion in Russia", if he needs to justify invasion to his "boss" his response will be that it's impossible for his country to be secure without a pliant Ukraine next door. Which is probably true.

It would be a lot more true for the US in regards to an independent and incompliant California.

Putin isn't taking advantage of anything here. Russia has avoided disaster twice in the last decade (assuming their grip on Crimea holds.)

I feel like Russia wondering why Central and Eastern European nations are so fast to reject them is like the United States wondering why so much of the Middle Eastern populace seems to despise the American government. Propping up satellite states with brutal regimes plus killing countless people is not a way to win hearts and minds. Russia should work on improving its PR image rather than using force.

I don't think they wonder why a lot of Eastern European countries aren't friendly to them. Invading Ukraine isn't a win for Russia, it's minimizing the potential damage.

 

[Azih]

I had no idea that this Russian incursion into Crimea happened in response to stationing American nukes in Ukraine.

Are you suggesting that being pro-EU is the same as this? They're not even joining it yet, or NATO for that matter. But Putin will be driving Ukraine into their arms thanks to this.

I didn't say it was a perfect analogy (and of course Russia putting nukes in Cuba was in response to the US putting nukes in Turkey and Italy). I just said that powerful nations don't react well to friendly nations on their borders turning unfriendly (the decades long embargo on Cuba by the US for example which is really pointless) or unfriendly nations close to them doing things that antagonize them.

I'm not saying what Russia did was right in any way. But Russia is dependent on Ukrainian gas pipes and their naval base in Crimea that has to be taken into account, no?

And yeah I agree that this is no good for Russia in the medium or long term. They just can't keep this up.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

I feel like Russia wondering why Central and Eastern European nations are so fast to reject them is like the United States wondering why so much of the Middle Eastern populace seems to despise the American government. Propping up satellite states with brutal regimes plus killing countless people is not a way to win hearts and minds. Russia should work on improving its PR image rather than using force.

"The more you tighten your grip, Putin, the more nations will slip through your fingers."

 

[ksan]

I feel like Russia wondering why Central and Eastern European nations are so fast to reject them is like the United States wondering why so much of the Middle Eastern populace seems to despise the American government. Propping up satellite states with brutal regimes plus killing countless people is not a way to win hearts and minds. Russia should work on improving its PR image rather than using force.

You're saying that as if Russia hasn't done that to the Russian speaking population of various countries through their media!

 

[pigeon interrupted]

Because what we needed was some more tension. That'll help I imagine.

They were warned, see earlier. Better than Torvill and Dean. Zzzzzzzzz

 

[cyberheater]

check pm...

Thanks.

 

[cyberheater]

Sorry didn't realise it was behind a sign up. Here it is in full: -



The bolded part links to an article at the NYTimes: -

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/world/europe/russia-to-pay-not-so-simple.html?hp&_r=0

main article is here (for those looking to comment to the author) and sign up: -

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/03/no_contest_ukraine_obama_putin

Delete if necessary mods. It's an interesting article, seems foolish to hide it behind an obnoxious sign up screen.

Thank you.

 

[Enkidu]

Well who are you trying to justify it to? Californians, Russians, or the Russian government? If Putin has a boss it's probably just "opinion in Russia", if he needs to justify invasion to his "boss" his response will be that it's impossible for his country to be secure without a pliant Ukraine next door. Which is probably true.

It would be a lot more true for the US in regards to an independent and incompliant California.

Putin isn't taking advantage of anything here. Russia has avoided disaster twice in the last decade (assuming their grip on Crimea holds.)

Putin can justify it however he wants, that's not really what I'm talking about here. I just feel like I have read comments and articles for a long time that doesn't just use the NATO expansion as an explanation for Russian behavior, but that actually tries to make you feel sympathetic to the Russian position which is what I have a problem with.

 

[lastplayed]

Meanwhile NK launches a couple of missiles and no one notices. Poor Kimmy.

 

[Osiris]

Interesting article from Shaun Walker on the whole "fascism/nazi" thing:

Russian propaganda and Ukrainian rumour fuel anger and hate in Crimea
...
On the ground in Crimea, what is particularly odd is that the most vociferous defenders of Russian bases against supposed fascists appear to hold far-right views themselves.

Outside the Belbek airbase, an aggressive self-defence group said they were there to defend the base against "Kiev fascists", but also railed against Europe, "full of repulsive gays and Muslims".

"What you foreigners don't get is that those people in Maidan, they are fascists," said Alexander, a Simferopol resident drinking at a bar in the city on Monday night. "I mean, I am all for the superiority of the white race, and all that stuff, but I don't like fascists."

That last line, oh my....

 

[dripdripsplash]

image hosting

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

I didn't say it was a perfect analogy (and of course Russia putting nukes in Cuba was in response to the US putting nukes in Turkey and Italy). I just said that powerful nations don't react well to friendly nations on their borders turning unfriendly (the decades long embargo on Cuba by the US for example which is really pointless) or unfriendly nations close to them doing things that antagonize them.

Everybody was crazy in the cold war, but finding things that happened in the past by different people who were running a country at the time to justify something wrong going on now is really silly. You say you don't think what they're doing is right but then I don't get what your point is at all. We already know why they're doing this, and they aren't motives that make Russia look very good at all.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Interesting article from Shaun Walker on the whole "fascism/nazi" thing:



That last line, oh my....

This reminds me of those NazBol freaks calling themselves antifa LOL. I've seen a couple of people on twitter say that these "defence squads" (the actual civilian ones, not the totally-not-Russian-marines ones) are prone to shouting homophobic and anti-semitic abuse at people.

 

[Azih]

Everybody was crazy in the cold war, but finding things that happened in the past by different people who were running a country at the time to justify something wrong going on now is really silly. You say you don't think what they're doing is right but then I don't get what your point is at all. We already know why they're doing this, and they aren't motives that make Russia look very good at all.

I don't think everybody knows why they're doing this in the thread. Pointing out how deeply invested, and it some ways dependent, Russia is in the Ukraine is I think relevant to the discussion in any case. Plus pointing out that other powerful nations behave like this towards smaller nations in what they consider 'their' sphere of influence (China going apeshit regularly on the straits of Taiwan, The Monroe Doctorine, the US embargo on Cuba which is still there whatisthatallabout?)

 

[Funky Papa]

This reminds me of those NazBol freaks calling themselves antifa LOL. I've seen a couple of people on twitter say that these "defence squads" (the actual civilian ones, not the totally-not-Russian-marines ones) are prone to shouting homophobic and anti-semitic abuse at people.

You have some weird Twitter friends, Cheezmo.

 

[Azih]

'Facist' I think means to nationalistic Russians what 'Commie' means to nationalistic Americans.. .as in it means 'That evil tribe that we should hate'

 

[Tzeentch]

Invading Ukraine isn't a win for Russia, it's minimizing the potential damage.

-- Russia only cares about Crimea, or more accurately, the security and access to its warm water port. The rest of the Ukraine can go hang -- they're little more then a captive energy market for Russian companies at the moment. If an agreement can be reached to secure continued access to the port (and the Russians are going to want something pretty ironclad given recent political instability) then you'll probably see the Bear go back over the mountain pretty fast. Do note that Russia has already suffered some rather momentous capital flight since the start of the crisis, and that can't continue for long without Putin and his cronies getting hit right in the pocketbooks.

 

[Kinyou]

Interesting article from Shaun Walker on the whole "fascism/nazi" thing:



That last line, oh my....

 

[CHEEZMO™]

You have some weird Twitter friends, Cheezmo.

It was a retweet

 

[MacNille]

'Facist' I think means to nationalistic Russians what 'Commie' means to nationalistic Americans.. .as in it means 'That evil tribe that we should hate'

Facist mean nothing today. George Orwell said it best:

It would seem that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox hunting, bullfighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.
This was in 1944.

 

[meanspartan]

-- Russia only cares about Crimea, or more accurately, the security and access to its warm water port. The rest of the Ukraine can go hang -- they're little more then a captive energy market for Russian companies at the moment. If an agreement can be reached to secure continued access to the port (and the Russians are going to want something pretty ironclad given recent political instability) then you'll probably see the Bear go back over the mountain pretty fast. Do note that Russia has already suffered some rather momentous capital flight since the start of the crisis, and that can't continue for long without Putin and his cronies getting hit right in the pocketbooks.

Please. While the Crimea is most crucial, we are talking about the majority of a huge former Soviet Satellite who has remained under Russian influence finally bailing on Russia in favor of the West. Could you imagine how Putin is gonna feel if Ukraine eventually joins NATO or something?

This is devastating for him, his attempts to salvage Crimea notwithstanding. And his awkward and rambling press conference today seems to confirm that. He is shaken badly.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

I don't think everybody knows why they're doing this in the thread. Pointing out how deeply invested, and it some ways dependent, Russia is in the Ukraine is I think relevant to the discussion in any case. Plus pointing out that other powerful nations behave like this towards smaller nations in what they consider 'their' sphere of influence (China going apeshit regularly on the straits of Taiwan, The Monroe Doctorine, the US embargo on Cuba which is still there whatisthatallabout?)

Thing is though, Russian interests in Ukraine weren't directly threatened, at least, insofar as they are "dependent" on Ukraine. The pipelines to Europe weren't getting shut down, and they weren't getting kicked out of their naval base. Signing a trade deal with the EU, and possibly joining the EU in the long term isn't some kind of violent revolution where all foreign interests are kicked out. The Russian Federation was not in a cold war with Europe and enjoys good trade relations with it. What was threatened was Putin's control over the country and the possibility of eventually reintegrating it into mother Russia.

 

[Kinan]

Russian news, god damn it. Remember that video from today above brave Ukrainian guys going to their occupied base unarmed with a flags only while being greeted with warning shots from russian speznaz? Guess how Vesti named this event today?

"Ukrainian soldiers and Crimeans traded shots"

My mind would be blown if it wasnt blown by constant russian lies long before. Last ORT news reel is really a masterpiece of propaganda and manage to use only 1 real fact in 10 minutes.

I hope at least some of the russian journalists feel shame when preparing such "news". I really do.

 

[mavs]

-- Russia only cares about Crimea, or more accurately, the security and access to its warm water port. The rest of the Ukraine can go hang -- they're little more then a captive energy market for Russian companies at the moment. If an agreement can be reached to secure continued access to the port (and the Russians are going to want something pretty ironclad given recent political instability) then you'll probably see the Bear go back over the mountain pretty fast. Do note that Russia has already suffered some rather momentous capital flight since the start of the crisis, and that can't continue for long without Putin and his cronies getting hit right in the pocketbooks.

I did only mean the part they had already invaded (Crimea), not the potential invasion of other parts of Ukraine.

Under Yanukovych they already had the port - no invasions needed. They've almost lost it twice now, and short of that potential invasion their other ambitions in Eastern Europe have also been dashed.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Russian news, god damn it. Remember that video from today above brave Ukrainian guys going to their occupied base unarmed with a flags only while being greeted with warning shots from russian speznaz? Guess how Vesti named this event today?

"Ukrainian soldiers and Crimeans traded shots"

My mind would be blown if it wasnt blown by constant russian lies long before. Last ORT news reel is really a masterpiece of propaganda and manage to use only 1 real fact in 10 minutes.

I hope at least some of the russian journalists feel shame when preparing such "news". I really do.

But but western media bias.