Ukraine Crisis 2014

[minigundiplomat]

Doesn't 4 depend on the outcome of 3?

Or have we already decided the outcome of 3 and will keep asking 3 until we get the answer we desire for 4?

Just saying.....

[Ronald Reagan]

Putin: Ukraine Assault Like Nazis In WW2 (http://news.sky.com/story/1326714/putin-ukraine-assault-like-nazis-in-ww2)

Why the West should let Russia have eastern Ukraine
https://theweek.com/article/index/267245/why-the-west-should-let-russia-have-eastern-ukraine

[Ronald Reagan]

Putin: Failure by Kiev to rescue surrounded troops would be a grave mistake - YouTube (http://youtu.be/tR80PpfF9so)


Putin: Kiev?s shelling in E.Ukraine reminiscent of WW2 Nazi siege of Leningrad - YouTube (http://youtu.be/n3vYUwYKS1s)

[t43562]

I always find that people who talk about "Britain being the poodle of ..." end up yipping and dancing themselves. It's that they see life in such terms. :-)

[TEEEJ]

Lavrov playing the silly propaganda game. The images are from Digital Globe and easily verifiable by those wishing to purchase them.

The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, acknowledged reports about the satellite images on Friday but claimed previous imagery was from video games and the Nato photos "happen to be much the same quality".

Ukraine crisis: Nato images show Russian soldiers, artillery and armoured vehicles in 'military operations' in eastern Ukraine - Europe - World - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-nato-images-show-russian-soldiers-artillery-and-armoured-vehicles-in-military-operations-in-eastern-ukraine-9698471.html)

The previous video game imagery was created by a You Tube user and widely circulated. Lavrov just makes himself look silly by making such claims.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-mh17-supposed-satellite-video-of-missile-launch-fake.4025/

NATO released imagery at following links.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/photos_112112.htm

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_112103.htm

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

it's like watching King Canute.

Might I remind readers that the Great Dane was proving to his sycophant courtiers that he could not stop the tide, whereas modern politicians seem to think it is enough to issue orders to the tide, and it's their courtiers' business to actually stop it. And the courtiers' fault when they can't.

[Onceapilot]

Someone reassure me that the G7 leaders have a gameplan?:\

OAP

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

"The G7 leaders have a gameplan"








http://static.rcgroups.net/forums/attachments/3/3/3/4/2/7/t5697992-177-thumb-ROFLMAO.gif?d=1365891438



They have a gameplan to get re-elected.They haven't a f#cking clue about international politics. If we are very, very lucky, assorted senior officials will put something together and be listened to.

[glad rag]

Some independent Russian journalists were trying to check the graves of some Pskov Division paratroopers recently 'deceased due to training accidents'. They had a welcome committee waiting:

????? ????????? ?? ??????????? ?? ???????? ??? ??????? (http://tvrain.ru/articles/video_napadenija_na_zhurnalistov_na_kladbische_pod_pskovom-374596/)

.

[Easy Street]

The irony of Putin's invocation of WW2 is extreme - Sudetenland and the 'protection of ethnic Germans' is the true parallel.

[rh200]

What really peeves me, is this pretext by us in the west to not even give the Ukrainians the ability to defend themselves.

These guys have basically bent over and taken it up the @rse to show restraint and behave professionally, but to what end.

One wonder how good the Ukrainians would be with some descent systems to take them on. And frankly if it needs some "retired personnel" to help out with "training" then why not. Russia has already opened that door and doesn't look like closing it.

A couple a dozen or so mothballed Apache's, A10's etc would do wonders. The politicians are either sitting around knowing that the situation is a fait accompli on Russias behalf and are just going though the motions, or their behind the eight ball.

But if they have any hope of freeing Ukraine, then they need to drastically do something completely unexpected.

[flash8]

freeing Ukraine

The only thing Ukraine needs "freeing" from is Willy Wonka currently held on a tight leash by Brennan.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

A couple a dozen or so mothballed Apache's, A10's etc would do wonders.

Yes, that would be appropriate wouldn't it?

"What are the Maryland ANG doing in Ukraine with their A-10s?"

"We're on leave"
"We got lost"
etc

[Hempy]

Is the Russian annexation of the Ukraine a threat to our 'national interest' (i.e western powers)?

If someone can explain why Putins excursions are in any way more of a threat to our way of life than say ISIS is at the moment, I'd be honestly interested in hearing the argument.

Other than to the Ukrainians themselves (and I pity them), and other than the fact that 1/4 of a century ago the Sovs were our enemies (the memories remain), what does this action have to do with anyone else?

Please don't give me some moral claptrap about 'freeing the oppressed' or 'righting a wrong'. Coming from anyone belonging to a western 'power', that is pure hypocrisy.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The threat to "our" interests is clear; Putin is not interested in any international agreements/common decency in his desire to achieve his aims.
Do most Western countries , per se, give a flying f#ck about the Ukraine? No - Canada does because we have a lot of ex-Ukrainians, but most don't.
How is the Ukraine relevant then? Western countries may no longer assume that the current 'Intent' factor is relevant in Threat = Capability + Intent. Intent can change in a moment and Putin has clearly no bounds on his 'Intent' from a moral/legal standpoint.

Thus, Western countries should remove the geopolitical bounds on their possible actions. In simple terms, they need Armed Forces which are capable of a response should it be necessary (i.e.stronger than now), and less economic dependence on Russia (e.g. not dependent on Russian gas supplies).

The Ukraine may not be important for most, for now, but what options does the West have when Putin picks on somewhere/thing that is important?

[MarcK]

While it is satisfying to think of military action, the logistics of supporting a few thousand troops from far away vs. half a million troops on the ground in the next country over should give you pause. There are some things it is not practical to do, however much you would like to do it.

[rh200]

Its amazing to the the microcosm of similarity between small societal social issues and the large ones.

In our society we are slowly going down hill, lethargy and a not my problem attitudes or its somebodies else problem combined with I might get hurt excuse is prevalent.

This is why we are slowly but surely getting more and more of the bystanders not intervening in situations. we are slowly becoming more what about me society.

Now on a international scale, yes are there are some serious practicalities involved. But in essence we are at the stage where we are trying to do things differently, even if flawed. We have been down this road before, turn our heads and think its not our problem. In some regards I regard the European situation as a far greater threat than ISIS.

This is so called present civilizations back yard, if we can't act like decent human beings there, then how the F@#$ do we expect the third world to operate.

Putin is nothing but a bully, throw down the gauntlet in a smart way, and give him a way out, and he will back off.

[Hempy]

F3, thank you. A well considered and relevant perspective.

I agree with you in a theoretical sense, but I still have doubts about your beliefs in 'intent''.

Putin is taking what he thinks is his, rightly or wrongly depending upon opinion. Why do you think his intent in the future is to want to take what 'isn't his' (from anyones perspective)? Do you fear he is a megalomaniac?

rh, thanks, but thats emotional clap-trap. Yes the Y Generation is all about 'me', thats the fault of the Baby Boomers and the Gen X's. You reap what you sow. But if you want to step in in the Ukraine because it's the 'morally' right thing to do, why don't you advocate military action against every repressive regime on the planet? Surely if there is 'oppression' it's not by degrees, is it? What level of oppression, to your mind, defines when intervention is warranted? Are the North Koreans oppressed? The Iranians? The Commo Red Chinese?

Honestly, whats the difference??

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I have no beliefs about Putin's intents. I don't know his intents, and neither does anyone except Putin himself. It would seem prudent to prepare for every possibility which might improve the security, prestige or progress of Russia, but since it is Putin's views of those things which matter, "we" should prepare for anything.

Honestly, whats the difference??
Well, all the Ukrainian emigrees I've met are nice people, but all the Sith Efrican emigrees have been @ssholes....but that's just me. Do emigrees bring their prejudices with them, or leave them in their country of birth - they aren't all the same.

[Hempy]

Agree 100%. I would like to think that Military strategists in all of 'our' countries are considering eventualities. But that is a long step from intervening in the current situation.

[exhorder]

@Hempy: In addition to the things F3WMB has already said, Poland and the Baltic states are not very excited about the prospect of the neighboring Ukraine being constantly and deliberately destabilized by Tzar Putin I. With both Poland and the Baltic states being members of NATO, that sort of makes it our problem as well.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Seems Like the Fogh is clearing........

NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen urges Canada to boost defence spending - Politics - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-chief-anders-fogh-rasmussen-urges-canada-to-boost-defence-spending-1.2748701)

[Ronald Reagan]

At the end of the cold war both Washington and Bonn promised Gorbachev that if Soviet forces withdrew from Eastern Europe there was no chance NATO would move eastwards. So NATO should never have moved east.

There should be no question of any western forces east of Germany.

It was lunacy on our part to expand NATO into the former Warsaw Pact nations and into parts of the former Soviet Union itself. Its as if some are gunning for all out war.

[glad rag]

Oh really.:zzz: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-chief-anders-fogh-rasmussen-urges-canada-to-boost-defence-spending-1.2748701

"Alliance 'not considering military options' against Russia but wants to enhance co-operation with Ukraine"

Now thats kind of pretty clear don't you think.

[glad rag]

At the end of the cold war both Washington and Bonn promised Gorbachev that if Soviet forces withdrew from Eastern Europe there was no chance NATO would move eastwards. So NATO should never have moved east.

There should be no question of any western forces east of Germany.

It was lunacy on our part to expand NATO into the former Warsaw Pact nations and into parts of the former Soviet Union itself. Its as if some are gunning for all out war.


Self determination is Enshrined under the UN Charter. Those countries have the right to determine their futures just as we have in ours.

You would much rather we/they were all vassal states to the new emperor, period.

If you like it that much just do everyone a favour and p### off and live there yourself.

:ok:

[rh200]

There should be no question of any western forces east of Germany.

It was lunacy on our part to expand NATO into the former Warsaw Pact nations and into parts of the former Soviet Union itself. Its as if some are gunning for all out war.

Where is the east west line, who decides that ethnicity?

The fact is NATO didn't move east. East moved west. A chance of freedom and evolving socially is a big draw.

rh, thanks, but thats emotional clap-trap.

Not really, failure to allow for, and compensate for it can be fatal in any strategy. As such that is why so much effort is put in to pretexts and perceptions.

No one is saying everything is black and white, least of all me. In this case there has to be a line in the sand drawn, make no mistake about it, this situation is being watched very carefully and how we react to it.

This has the potential to change the direction of major players and set significant events in motion. There is a very big perception that the west is weak, whether that is true or not is irelavent, its the preception.

[Ronald Reagan]

Luckily public opinion in the west will prevent NATO from doing anything and causing problems.


The nations may have had the right to apply to NATO but we could have declined to grant them membership, mainly for reasons of logic to prevent war but also to honour the promise made to Gorbachev. As far as the Russian government are concerned it just goes to show the western governments cannot be trusted.

[Ronald Reagan]

Ukraine crisis: Putin says Russia is 'ready to repel any aggression' and compares Ukrainian Government to Nazis - Europe - World - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-death-toll-tops-2500-as-un-report-finds-civilians-targeted-by-government-and-rebel-forces-9699442.html)


Such a brilliant and gifted leader indeed

[Easy Street]

Another reason why this is the West's business is international law. International law is largely unwritten and based on precedent. If Putin annexes or destabilises enough of his neighbouring territories without any formal censure or international response, then such activity (e.g. Sudetenland-type "defence of ethnic minorities") much more likely in other areas and involving different nations (not just Russia). The UN would then be hamstrung by the usual suspects quoting the Ukraine precedent and blocking any action - giving the rest of the world the excuse to do nothing). The world is not made up of ethnically-based states, it is made of sovereign states. Allowing international law to change to incorporate ethnicity groupings as a basis for statehood would destabilise the foundations of western civilization.

[Ronald Reagan]

Most people here have no wish to get involved in this and I am sure its the same amongst the populations of all western nations.


If the Russian government wants to rebuild a new USSR then let them. It could actually be a good thing and could lead to a more peaceful and balanced world. It could rival Washington ;)
Its hardly worth having a nuclear war that wipes out all life on Earth to prevent it.


All we need to do in the west is rebuild our forces so we are protected but under no circumstances must those forces be put anywhere close to Russia in a provocative manner and not used for typical western warmongering.

[t43562]

FWIW, if you don't fight the Putains of the world then they will rape you and kill your cow. If you see them doing it to someone else, you should look at it as a chance to get them while you still have a potential ally left.

[West Coast]

Straight from Vlad's mouth to your eyes RR. At what level of the ministry do you operate?

[Hangarshuffle]

Putin hasn't landed on earth overnight. We in the west have played a terrible hand against him and Russia over the last of many years. It seems he is building a block against our very pushy EU expansionism/western expansionism that has been going right up to his own countries border.
WTF did these shallow greedy politicians expect, really>? In his reaction I mean?
Need to de-escalate the situation.
If (I'm sorry) the Ukraine loses a bit or even a lot of its hectares to keep it all sweet, well crack on. That's their hard cheese.
Cameron needs to look behind him and keep Britain, the British people safe and alive and not placed into this terrible gamble.

[rh200]

Its hardly worth having a nuclear war that wipes out all life on Earth to prevent it.

That isn't even on the table, Putins actions so far have been very careful. But why not go to the edge, we spent how many years standing up to the Soviets.

All this appeasement stuff was said before WW2, nip it in the bud whilst its still small scale.

[MarcK]

If (I'm sorry) the Ukraine loses a bit or even a lot of its hectares to keep it all sweet, well crack on. That's their hard cheese.
I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.

[Valiantone]

I found it particularly amusing the other week when Cameron said hey guys and gals we need to be spending more on Defence now to the other NATO nations..

Too bad both Him Johnny Maggie and the other chums Tony and Gordo have spent the last 24 tearing the bloody armed forces to shreds:ugh::ugh::ugh:

And do we really think they will open a clean sheet order book:eek:

Thought not:mad:

V1

[Fonsini]

Stand up to him for what exactly? Marching into a Russian speaking enclave and fighting WITH the people trying to rejoin Russia, people who are cheering the columns of Russian armored vehicles as they pass by?

If he was invading Hungary or Poland it would be a different story.

However, and in complete opposition to my Chamberlain like stance, I find it impossible to forget that one of Herr Hitler's first moves was the unopposed annexation of Austria, something that was also cheered on by that nation's general populace. At the same time German forces began paying less concern to national boundaries and it has just been reported that Russian military aircraft now violate Finnish airspace with alarming regularity - something that is understandably alarming to the Finns who want no trouble with the Sovie.....err I mean Russians.

And now we hear that sanctions are bringing the Russian economy to near depression.

The parallels are not exact, but they are uncomfortably close to the events of 1935 - 38.

[Hangarshuffle]

Putin has exposed many shortcomings within the "West". The EU has looked very much a bullying, greedy, aggressively expanding, capitalist apparatus that has pushed right to the Russian border. And now look what happened? Its looking over its shoulder to see who in this gang is now with it.
We, the UK need to look carefully again who we share a platform with. The very thought of actually committing troops and our country, yet again, for these horrible places in the east leaves me cold. Let them all get on with it and for once leave us out.


The US President wont be pushing America into this either if he has any sense at all.
This crisis also has the potential to destroy NATO unity.


*If, God forbid, we did commit our own UK forces into this maelstrom, then what happens to the Scottish element if and combat begins? This war would be not one iota of use to the Scottish nation - the Scottish leader would be quite right to call his countrymen away from the fighting.


Cameron is sleepwalking Britain, this island even, into a disaster.

[Hangarshuffle]

Vladimir Putin demands negotiations over 'statehood' for eastern Ukraine - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/vladimir-putin/11066574/Vladimir-Putin-demands-negotiations-over-statehood-for-eastern-Ukraine.html)




In a nutshell, looking increasingly today that Ukraine ground forces are on the back-foot and being forced back from their eastern borders contended/conflict area.
Putin possibly wants to seize this moment to force they accept the situation, probably redraw the map to reflect what he wants.
The deep cynic in me thinks and even hopes this may be a opportunity for everyone to put away their weaponry and call it a day?
Ukraine has lost, should now swallow its pride and accept the inevitable?
An opportunity to avoid a further escalation, dragging the west in?
Is this the template example of how to get your way in 21st century neighbour-management warfare?


http://rt.com/news/184040-ukraine-putin-peace-plan/
His comments about telling the Ukrainians to think about their heating plans and arrangements for the coming Winter drew an eyebrow.
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/newsdesk/energy/analysis/briefing-can-uk-cut-its-reliance-gas-imports
Looking further into it we import about 40 to 50% of our coal from Russia (one of the reasons for the mini boom at the Tyne Dock these days I guess, so I hope David Cameron realises he can always rely on our UK coal mines to bail him out if he needs them). Oh, irony you little imp.

[SARF]

It doesn't matter who relies on it.. The price goes up for everyone as the Germans et al start hoovering up supplies from elsewhere.
Time to get fracking I feel. And to distance ourselves from the whole thing.

[TBM-Legend]

The fight moves to the sea!

Ukraine Navy Vessel Attacked, Says Kiev Military (http://news.sky.com/story/1327779/ukraine-navy-vessel-attacked-says-kiev-military)

Rescue = sunk I guess...

[Hangarshuffle]

105 million tonnes UK coal left at estimate but mostly under the North Sea.

*30 years ago last week the siege of Easington Colliery began. After months of strike action one miner cracked and asked to go back to work. Under prior arrangement with the Police and the NUM it had been arranged for the returning worker to walk in through the front gate. But at the last minute the police decided to shuffle him in via the back door. This caused a pretty nasty riot, with the result being that the police decided to lock down under force the entire little town for 3 weeks. No one in or out. This actually happened in the UK, but you wont ever read much about it anywhere, and who cares now anyway except the wounded party?
Anyway, the miners lost the strike and the colliery closed in I think about 1993. But the coals still down there, loads of it. Future wiser generations may decide to get at it again, who knows?
Don't know why I posted that on here, just seemed interesting in the current climate. We are prepared to potentially front up to Russia, yet use her Gas, Oil and Coal. Sell her folk our finest houses in London, then place embargos on money transfers. Wonder what Putin thinks?

[Danny42C]

Hangarshuffle,

Your (where did it go?) : "Wonder what Putin thinks ?"

Thinks he's got us by the short & curlies - and he may not be far wrong. Am old enough to remember when we were told that sanctions would curb Mussolini - they didn't, he still went into Abyssinia. Same with every time sanctions have been used.

All sanctions involve a restraint of Trade, and the Trade only exists because it is advantageous to both parties, it follows that both will suffer from the restraint - it is a two-edged sword. And if it is put into effect, there will be governments and individuals who have an immediate interest in getting round those same sanctions.

And if both sides are suffering, who is likely to stick it out the longer ? ("Hard pounding, Gentlemen", said Wellington at Waterloo [?] - "we shall see who can pound the longest"). Think of Stalingrad !

Anyway, my guess is that nothing effective will be done by the West. There is no sign of anybody stepping out to "bell the cat". We are "All Mouth and No Trousers !"

Nobody is going to press the nucelar button - we may both be daft, but we're not stupid.

[smujsmith]

Wise words indeed Danny, and even today Camoron is demanding in the press that NATO members should spend more on defence! just a smattering of hypocrisy there. I rather think that any serious action should be focused in the land that Bliar created, there's the threat, and that's where our limited military capabilities should be sent if anywhere. Ukraine is a dangerous, EU created, mess.

Smudge:ok:

[GeeRam]

Interesting article here about the different nationalities fighting on both sides in Ukraine.

BBC News - Ukraine war pulls in foreign fighters (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28951324)

I can see this getting even more messy.......

[Hangarshuffle]

I'm at a loss at it. I don't particularly like or dislike Russians or Ukrainians and I work with both. I hate this present spat.
Sanctions did very little in Iraq (or Libya) to affect the dictators life-style or the elite, we now know, but made every Iraqi adult of a certain age I ever met look about 10 years older than they were.
Man to man Putin is a far sharper tool than the POTUS or the PMUK combined. He and his Foreign Minister have outplayed them from the start.

[henra]

That isn't even on the table, Putins actions so far have been very careful. But why not go to the edge, we spent how many years standing up to the Soviets.

Bad example.
During cold war everyone was in fact very cautious not to do anything really de-stabilizing and to not get into direct conflict with the other side. Both sides only did it via proxies.

A direct military confrontation (which you seem to suggest in this instance) by one side would have definitely eliminated the Blue Planet once and for all. And therefore was a complete No- Go for both sides. Every measure to poke the other sides was indeed always well balanced and restrained. (Leaving aside some Cowboys in the SAC back in the late fifties/early sixties - they didn´t seem to care too much about our nice Blue Island in the big Nothingness).


All this appeasement stuff was said before WW2, nip it in the bud whilst its still small scale.You seriously think WW2 could have been prevented by raising the war a year earlier?
Could have ended badly if RAF had lost its aircraft over foreign territory when fighting against Luftwaffe over their homeland?
This theory that earlier confrontation would have stopped Hitler still looks stupid to me. But it sounds nice. So simple.

[rh200]

@henra

yea your sort of right about the example, but its hard to get an exact good one.

A direct military confrontation (which you seem to suggest in this instance) by one side

Not at all, what I'm saying is, we need to send the message that we are prepared to go all out. I'm of the opinion he doesn't anymore than we do. Unlike the WW2 the results are too catastrophic.

What I'm also saying is, we can go in to Ukraine legally with Ukraine's permission and engage a relatively weak force, without officially confronting the Russians.

He has left that door open by denying any involvement. No I don't think getting involved in WW2 earlier would have saved us there, there where too many variables involved to see how that would have turned out. Hitler was intent on takng over a significant amount of the world, and that wasn't going to change.

As such the cost benefit ratio of us confronting him wasn't going to change. In this case Putin isn't going to take over Europe, he knows that isn't going to be allowed to happen and the consequences of such would be to great. He has smaller strategic ambitions, as such confronting him on a large scale will alter the calculus of what he's doing. But you need to give him a way out at the same time.

This whole sanctions thing is cr@p, there's to much at stake for that sort of thing to work in this game. Our people know it, and are only going though the motions to make it look like where doing something.

[NutLoose]

Just a shame we cannot say oops we got it wrong here is a token nuclear weapon stock back from our / US stocks. I would think Putin would suddenly be screwed.

[tartare]

And the latest from that sad little man who calls himself President of Russia.
"I can take Kiev in two weeks."
What a complete c0ck.
Freeze every single thing they own, and every single rouble outside the Motherland.
No pussying around.

[ORAC]

Streetwise Professor: Merkel: No Military Solution in Ukraine. Putin: Really? It’s Working for Me! (http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=8720)

.......Back in 2008-2009, I asked whether the situation was more like the 70s (the optimistic view, such as it was) or the 30s (the pessimistic one). I think the answer is now clear. We are in 30s mode, with a craven West cringing before emboldened autocrats in both Europe and Asia.

This provides a demonstration of why history cycles. The politicians who are elected in a time of (relative) peace and prosperity are usually the least fit to keep the peace and stability. They are focused on domestic issues, and take international tranquility for granted. They point to the absence of an imminent threat, and argue that militaries can be slashed. They are masters of projection, assuming that everyone is as pacific as they, and share their desire to focus on economic issues and domestic programs and spending.

But they fail to realize that threats are endogenous. When everyone is a lamb, there is an opportunity for wolves. Predators like Putin can succeed only because stronger nations and groups of nations become soft, let slip their vigilance, drop their guard. They are full of rationales for doing so, but in the end these are just manifestations of their denial of the reality that not all people, politicians, and leaders think the same way and pursue the same ends.

So after a period of conflict, strife-weary countries turn to softer leaders who sing siren songs, who are temperamentally and constitutionally averse to conflict, who despise martial matters (and who are hence ignorant of them), and who are strategic naifs who think that every dispute can be negotiated. Appeasement is their first instinct, and their second, and their third. They believe in win-win, in give-and-take.

This creates a main chance for aggressive opportunists, especially those of a zero sum mindset. Opportunists who interpret every concession made to them as an invitation to demand more. These wolves upset the peaceful (apparent) equilibrium, ushering in a period of conflict and disorder that the lambs are utterly incapable of addressing. Populations are interrupted from their reveries, and turn to more steely leaders, and the cycle begins again.

In the meantime, however, there is much trouble, suffering, and too often, bloodshed. Ukraine is the first to suffer from this phase of the cycle. It is almost certainly not the last.

[Hempy]

Orac,

When you say 30's are you referring to the 'German' or 'Russian' '30's'?

Putin wants the USSR back. He's not knocking on the gates of Paris.

Don't get me wrong, I guess my opposition to any action other than economic sanctions is more pragmatic. What is a practical alternative without a full-scale NATO deployment (questions of capability aside..)? That could get real ugly, and I'm personally not prepared to follow history and risk a tragedy for mankind all over some place I know nothing or care nothing about.

The people I am sorry for, but there is no such thing as 'fair'.

[West Coast]

A little nearsighted Hempy, or I suppose it could be written off as a history lesson forgotten.

Australia has had some dark hours, perhaps not to the point of having its territory occupied in great numbers but dark days none the less. Had far off nations that had little knowledge or care for Australia not acted....

If as your tag says, you're from Oz, then I don't think you need worry as any heavy lifting will be accomplished by others. A strongly worded resolution from your PM should suffice.

[Hempy]

So you are saying that repeating history and not learning from the mistakes of it is being near sighted? I suppose by that argument 2 World Wars needed to happen and we were all the better off as a species for them.

I suppose thats easy to say when you personally wont be called upon..

[rh200]

What is a practical alternative without a full-scale NATO deployment (questions of capability aside..)?
Their is no other practical alternative, and that is what should happen, but not just NATO. We built a coalition of the willing on other things, why not this.

Frankly there is a lot of other smaller countries around the globe that have professional forces that have a vested interest in making sure this doesn't become the norm.

Russia is not involved officially, this can be taken care of cleanly at this stage with some backbone and very little risk.

[West Coast]

I suppose thats easy to say when you personally wont be called upon..

That's about the only thing accurate within your post.

Nope, that's a young man's game. I was called upon when I was a younger lad to serve so I'm not without compassion of the mission from a firsthand perspective.

You can wring your hands only so much. The not my problem approach will fail you eventually.

[ORAC]

FIRST THEY CAME - PASTOR MARTIN NIEMOLLER (http://hmd.org.uk/resources/poetry/first-they-came-pastor-martin-niemoller)

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

[Hempy]

Personally, I couldn't give a flying fcuk
if you wiped the entire half of Europe and most of Asia off the map. All I am saying this that

a. it's probably not wise to start a fight unless/until you know you are going to win. 'Probably/maybe/depending on the Politicians Will etc' doesn't cut it considering the consequences.

b. Unless you go Strategic, the West simply doesn't have the capability without at least a massive work-up time.

Pissing about with nasty words and even some little tactical manoeuvres is a waste of time.

Using my WW2 analogy, if Hitler had 300 ocean going submarines and a strategic bomber force in 1939 instead of the planned 1942, would things have turned out differently for Germany?

He was impatient. And look how that panned out. Now, it could also be argued that a quick 'bloodless' German victory followed by decades of 'cold war' may have been more preferable to how things eventuated.

In summary. Fill your boots. Don't go in half-hearted though, it'll turn to shlt for everyone.

[ORAC]

16.03 Ukraine's prime minister has rejected Putin's proposals for peace in Ukraine, saying they were an attempt to deceive the West on the eve of a Nato summit and to avoid new sanctions against Moscow.

"The real plan of Putin is to destroy Ukraine and to restore the Soviet Union," Arseniy Yatsenyuk said in a statement. "All previous agreements made with Russia - in Geneva, in Normandy, in Berlin and in Minsk - were ignored or brazenly violated by the Russian regime," he said.

EU sanctions to target Russian oil industry and strip Russia of World Cup (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11072462/EU-sanctions-to-target-Russian-oil-industry-and-strip-Russia-of-World-Cup.html)

[rh200]

Strip them of the world cup, oh sh!t that will do it.:ugh:

[TBM-Legend]

Create a 10nm DMZ along the border with Russia like Korea with UN peacekeepers..

[NutLoose]

Bloody long border.

Sounds like the new sanctions if they have the balls to implement them will hit Russia hard

EU sanctions to target Russian oil industry and strip Russia of World Cup - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11072462/EU-sanctions-to-target-Russian-oil-industry-and-strip-Russia-of-World-Cup.html)

[Fonsini]

Strangely, stripping them of the World Cup would probably sting as much as any economic sanction.

However, the Russian economy is already on the verge of a depression and any reduction in foreign revenue from gas or oil sales will quite quickly push it over the brink - notice how they haven't turned off the spigots of their own accord (for their European customers).

Here's the problem, we are already dealing with a man who is committed to restoring the pride of what he sees as a humbled and defeated nation. If we push the entire country into a severe economic depression do you think that will soften them, or harden them into thinking they have nothing left to lose.

International brinksmanship is a difficult and dangerous game, especially when the other guy has an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and hates you for what he sees as a) being the Cold War victor, and b) having an extravagant and cushy lifestyle compared to his own somewhat impoverished citizens.

As that noted international ambassador Elmer Fudd once said - "we need to be vewy, vewy careful".

[NutLoose]

True, it's almost as if they have used the west to modernise their country and infrastructure after the Cold War when they had nothing and any computer technology was smuggled in....
His problem I see is if he stays on the path he is following is that the sanction will get bad to a point similar to the cold war and a populace that has had everything suddenly finding they have nothing. It's ok living and wallowing in poverty and not knowing better, but when you rise above that, it's a awfully hard step to go back to it.
The World Cup is something that will hit bring it home to the populace.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Since he spent $50 billion on Sochi, and God knows how much made its way into the pockets of various FIFA officials, I think he cares very much about the prospect of losing the World Cup. Given where Qatar's oil money is turning up, such as Hamas, and the deaths of so many construction workers, I'd love to see the World take a stand there too.

[Hempy]

Since he spent $50 billion on Sochi, and God knows how much made its way into the pockets of various FIFA officials, I think he cares very much about the prospect of losing the World Cup. Given where Qatar's oil money is turning up, such as Hamas, and the deaths of so many construction workers, I'd love to see the World take a stand there too.

And its why they are going to fail eventually, again. Or go down fighting.

The ex-Communists dont get Capitalism. Look at all the Russian billionaires spending ridiculous amounts of 'their' money around the world on a whim. Take Russian oil money out of the EPL and the competition would lose half of the players. At least Western billionaires tend to invest their money back into actual growth, not pissing it up against a wall.

Do you think the average Russian has a brighter future now than he did had he lived in the USSR?

Russia wont change until after the Communists die out. It might be too late by then to change direction though.

[Ronald Reagan]

We are talking about the country that beat Nazi Germany, that got all the way to Berlin. I hardly think a few western sanctions are going to make the Russian people turn against their own government. Putin can simply point out that this is all the fault of the west, that Washington and its collection of puppets want to destroy Russia, which they do. Its all part of Washington's desire to rule the world. I really hope we see a total collapse of the American Empire in the coming years.

[melmothtw]

I really hope we see a total collapse of the American Empire in the coming
years.


Yes, we know. You've said. Many times.

[Ronald Reagan]

I would imagine the Russians have some forces in Ukraine. But then again them being in Ukraine is no different to the west invading Iraq. The west did not even try and hide what it was doing there. Also Libya, waging an air war so terrorists can take over the country and removing Gaddafi from power, what a disaster that was. They even wanted to do the same in Syria but Russia stopped them (likely the coup in Kiev was punishment for stopping the planned war in Syria) The west have no moral high ground to talk at all. The arrogance is astounding really. At least the Russians are operating in an area that was part of Russia and has Russian people living there who wish to be part of Russia again.

[melmothtw]

I would imagine the Russians have some forces in Ukraine.

Really? Because you flatly denied at the time that 'the little green men' in Crimea were Russian solders.

But then again them being in Ukraine is no different to the west invading Iraq.

Totally different, but it's just easy and lazy of you to tie the two together as Iraq was a largely unpopular and unsuccessful war that few in the West would seek to defend. The fact is, that the war in Iraq was fought under a UN mandate (1441) and was in compliance with international law (unpopular or not).

Edited to add: And I quote: On 8 November 2002, the Security Council passed Resolution 1441 by a unanimous 15–0 vote; Russia, China, France, and Arab states such as Syria voted in favor, giving Resolution 1441 wider support than even the 1990 Gulf War resolution.

The west did not even try and hide what it was doing there.

For the reason given above. Interesting though that you're admitting that the Russians are trying to hide what they're doing in Ukraine. Why would they need to do that Ronald, if their cause is so just and legal?

Also Libya, waging an air war so terrorists can take over the country and removing Gaddafi from power, what a disaster that was.

The no-fly campaign was conducted (again with UN approval) to prevent a massacre of innocent civilians in Benghazi. Can't argue there are problems there now, but don't try and pretend that Putin had noble reasons for opposing the NATO intervention.

They even wanted to do the same in Syria but Russia stopped them

Actually, it was the UK parliament voting against it that ultimately stopped it. The UK wouldn't bomb, and the US didn't want to go it alone for political reasons. And again, don't imagine that Putin had the Syrian people's interests or world peace at heart when he opposed it.


At least the Russians are operating in an area that was part of Russia and has Russian people living there who wish to be part of Russia again.

Sudentenland, blah blah blah.

[Ronald Reagan]

Many in the west regard Iraq as illegal Mel.


As for Libya William Hague said it was about protecting civilians and not about regime change! We all know what happened there. The west removing legitimate leaderships and spreading terrorism as usual.


You have to remember most of the world organisations are simply western fronts to help keep the west in control.


Russia is very much right to bring peace to Ukraine. Maybe they can bring peace to the whole country. It really does not matter if Russian troops are in Ukraine or not. As one can see from Crimea they are welcomed as heroes and liberators from the tyranny and oppression of the Kiev junta. The Russian troops really are heroes fighting against the evil and injustice of the world.

[melmothtw]

Many in the west regard Iraq as illegal Mel

They can regard it as illegal all they like Ronald, but the fact is that it wasn't (unlike yourself, I deal in facts). Just ask Russia, they voted for it in the UN. Also, as you said that Russia's invasion of Ukraine was no different from the west's invasion of Iraq, are you saying that you feel Russia's actions are illegal?

As for Libya William Hague said it was about protecting civilians and not about regime change! We all know what happened there. The west removing legitimate leaderships and spreading terrorism as usual.

Earlier you asked me to reassess who I thought the bad guys are. Well, if I ever find myself thinking that Gadaffi, Assad, Hussein et al are the good guys then I'll truly know that my moral compass needs realigning.

You have to remember most of the world organisations are simply western fronts to help keep the west in control

Organisations such as the Illuminati eh Ronald? You really need to go easy on the conspiracy theories. It's curious though how countries all over the world want to join Western organisations (NATO etc), but aren't always so keen to join or remain part of Russian organisations (Warsaw Pact anyone?)

Russia is very much right to bring peace to Ukraine. Maybe they can bring peace to the whole country. It really does not matter if Russian troops are in Ukraine or not.

Russia's peace in Ukraine is the same peace that Germany brought to Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, France, etc.


The Russian troops really are heroes fighting against the evil and injustice of the world.

Having you say that Russian troops are fighting in Ukraine Ronald is as good as official confirmation for me. Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

As one can see from Crimea they are welcomed as heroes and liberators from the tyranny and oppression of the Kiev junta

It is a democratically elected government in Kiev, not a junta. Interestingly, the difference between a democratically elected government and a junta can often be gauged by the margin of their victories in elections - in democracies it is usually a surprisingly small percentage victory (say about 40 to 50% depending on the number of parties), whereas in juntas it is usually around 90 to 99%. Now, remind me, where did we see an election victory of 97% recently...?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

[Ronald Reagan]

The legitimate leader of Ukraine was Yanukovych, once ousted by the west with their coup the so called authorities became a lot less legitimate. He should have still been the President until next year as his term in office did not end until then. They did not like the fact he would not with the EU so they punished him.

[melmothtw]

Sorry Ronald, but you don't laud a foreign invasion of a sovereign European country and annexation of swathes of its territory (not to mention the downing of a civilan airliner with the deaths of nearly 300 innocent people in the process - you seem to be strangely quiet on that), and then get to preach about 'legitimacy'.

I could say that Yanukovych was ousted by his own people in a popular uprising, who then replaced him with a new president in a democratic election, but I know I'd be wasting my breath, so to speak.

[West Coast]

Russia is very much right to bring peace to Ukraine.

A website the size of pprune, you have to figure that it is subject to disinformation/progaganda by agents working on behalf of foreign governments.

[t43562]

If Putain believed he was operating legally and morally then he would openly declare Russia's role and be proud of it.

[melmothtw]

Yep, the cloak-and-dagger nature of Russia's involvement (remember the little green men?) tells you all you need to know about Putin's understanding of the legitimacy of his actions.

[Ronald Reagan]

Do we mean a bit like when western special forces were rumoured to be in Libya or the recent announcement that a US mission was launched into Syria! Washington at the moment actually talks that it may launch strikes into Syria and yet not seek permission from the legitimate government. No comrades, the west are as always the bad guys.


Hopefully President Putin can liberate other nations in the future also.

[melmothtw]

Do we mean a bit like when western special forces were rumoured to be in Libya or the recent announcement that a US mission was launched into Syria!

No, we don't mean like that at all, as you well know Ronald from 'Cornwall'. Special forces missions are by their very nature 'cloak-and-dagger', but what Russia is up to in Ukraine is not special forces, but more akin to state-sponsored terrorism (see, I can band the 'T' word around too).

No comrades, the west are as always the bad guys.

Now you've just shrugged off all pretense haven't you Ronald. Glad you've finally come out into the open (or out from the cold, if you prefer).

[Ronald Reagan]

'No more Iraq' US intel veterans ask Merkel to prevent Ukraine war, rely on facts - YouTube (http://youtu.be/Qdq24zh_CPo)


War machines on golf course: NATO Summit kicks off in Wales - YouTube (http://youtu.be/uY8D2b7SKws)

[West Coast]

I think Vlad should keep an eye out behind him. A lot of Russian billionaires are going to become millionaires.

[Ronald Reagan]

So Mel, you mean special forces missions into nations without said governments permission? So no permission from Gaddafi or Assad for missions or airstrikes into their nations? Russia on the other hand has had repeated requests to deploy troops made to it from the leaders of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. So the Russian's have been invited. I would say so far they have been very restrained in their actions.
So as we can see Russia has not done a single thing wrong.

[melmothtw]

Permission not needed when UN mandate in place (1441 for Iraq, 1973 for Libya, and none for Syria because no strikes were ever launched).

Requests from puppet leaders/governments for foreign intervention from their sponsors are the oldest trick in the book Ronald from 'Cornwall', as you well know, and do not confer legitimacy.

Anyhow, I feel I'm going round the houses with you (that's a popular saying here in the English-speaking world for 'getting nowhere' - you should look it up in the Kremlin library to further your understanding of western culture so as to appear just a little more bone fide, because no one here is currently buying your act).

TTFN.

[Ronald Reagan]

You mean puppet government as in the European and other western governments obeying their masters in Washington? Never daring to truly oppose them in any substantial way, occasionally offering token disapproval but then backing down from what appears to be fear and terror.


The west had no right what so ever to use special forces in Libya or Syria but if the rumours are true it appears that they did and western governments hid this fact from their own people. With Libya western governments went to a great deal of effort to state there would be no boots on the ground. Again so much for the word of the west! Imagine that, using military forces and not openly admitting to the fact!


The rumours also stated that there was a western run special forces training camp close to Syria to train terrorists who could then go and wage war in Syria, yet some wonder how ISIL became so powerful so fast.

[melmothtw]

Ronald, stop being so disingenuous. You know very well that there is a world of difference between using limited numbers of special forces for specific missions (everyone does it, including Russia) - forces that will be withdrawn from the country as soon as the mission is complete, compared to using your conventional forces to invade, seize, and hold the territory of a sovereign neighbour. Territory that is then either outright annexed or turned into a vassal state.

You know this Ronald.

[melmothtw]

http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag380/garethjennings1/bingo_zps2858d5ec.jpg (http://s1373.photobucket.com/user/garethjennings1/media/bingo_zps2858d5ec.jpg.html)

So far in Troll Bingo today Ronald, you've had:

BRICS
Junta
Novorussia
Iraq WMDs
NATO expansion

Looking forward to seeing what you come up with tomorrow...

[Ronald Reagan]

But Mel the situation in Ukraine justifies Russian intervention as much of this land was part of Russia before and many Russian people live there, these people are in danger from the junta forces.
Besides the Russians have only used a limited number of forces and may withdraw them after the troubles are over. They also seem to be using them for specific missions.



The fake western wars though had no justification what so ever for western military intervention.

[melmothtw]

much of this land was part of Russia before and many Russian people live there.

See Troll Bingo above.

By the same token, I look forward to Putin handing back Kalingrad to Germany and the Kuril Islands to Japan, and respecting Siberian calls for independence

Russia bans Siberia independence march | World news | theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/05/russia-bans-siberia-independence-march-extremism-law)

Besides the Russians have only used a limited number of forces and may withdraw them after the troubles are over.

From Crimea (you know, that part of Ukraine that Russia invaded and annexed)? Of course not - see Troll Bingo for 'Crimea was a special case'.

[NutLoose]

I'm surprised you haven't departed to the Ukraine to join in Ronald, just leave your passport at the departure gate :)

[con-pilot]

I still am curious as to who RR is trying to convince, himself or some others, as he'd not doing a very good job convincing anyone here to his propga, err, point of view.

Keep him on ropes Mel, you are doing a great job of making him keep digging a deeper and deeper hole. :ok:

Reminds of an old line; Ronald Reagan of Pprune, “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” :E

[melmothtw]

I'm surprised you haven't departed to the Ukraine to join in Ronald, just
leave your passport at the departure gate


I don't imagine he needs a passport to get into Ukraine these days, he can just hitch a lift with his comrades as they roll across the border.



Keep him on ropes Mel, you are doing a great job of making him keep digging a deeper and deeper hole. :ok:


As much as I love picking holes in Ronald's 'arguments', I'm afraid that Mrs Melmothtw has arrived home and so I must leave it there for now. Mrs Melmothtw is from Ronald's part of the world as it happens, and I'm not talking about Cornwall.

[Ronald Reagan]

You should check out Graham Phillips on facebook the British reporter currently working in the Lugansk area. He has plenty of photographic evidence to show the terrible shelling of civilian areas by the junta forces. Junta forces which are now in most cases in full retreat and along the way having abandoned huge amounts of military equipment. It appears also the Novorossiya military have captured large numbers of prisoners, many of whom are from the so called volunteer battalions. Well done Russia is all I can say.

[Ronald Reagan]

#StopNATO: Aerial footage of protests in Wales at NATO summit in Wales 2014 - YouTube (http://youtu.be/pvcHrY7YY0U)

[Danny42C]

Will the supply of Lenin's Useful Idiots ever dry up ?

[Ronald Reagan]

How about the never ending supply of Washington's puppets?

[Mil-26Man]

Great comeback Ronald :ugh:

[Lonewolf_50]

How about the never ending supply of Washington's puppets? Please state, by name, which European leaders you believe to be puppets of the American government in Washington DC. Then give examples of each one's puppet-like behavior.

I'd be interested to see how you justify using that epithet for a number of heads of state who don't seem to listen to B Obama on much of anything.

[rh200]

Ronald never addresses the real issues, he here for propaganda purposes.

Things like self determination, and choosing who your friends are!

Redirecting by using terms like "Washington puppets". When every one knows the "European puppets" regularly tell Washington to get stuffed.

The fact that NATO primary purpose is to protect its memeber states against aggression. Just who are these other states that need "freeing" he keeps talking about?

He never addresses the fact that most polling in those areas of Ukraine have consistently stated they want to remain part of the Ukraine.

He never addresses the fact that Russia has much territory that they don't have a claim too.

I believe the Argentinians tried the same trick just before its Junta collapsed, this might be the last gasp of the failed Russian state.

[Ronald Reagan]

Lonewolf_50, virtually all European leaders are puppets of Washington, just look at their actions. Joining in with wars that Washington wants, creating larger sanctions against Russia as that is what Washington wants. They allow US military bases in their own territory. Germany does nothing yet they are spied on by Washington. European nations force the Bolivian Presidents aircraft to land as Washington were worried Snowden may have been on it. They are puppets Lonewolf, they not dare do anything without the permission of Washington. Do not underestimate the power and influence of Washington.


rh200, self determination, does that choice apply to the people of eastern Ukraine or just Kiev and the western parts of the country? Talking about self determination, how about the choice of the British people over EU membership and NATO membership?! Sadly you do not always get to chose your nations destiny.


NATO is not a defensive organisation, just look at its role in Libya. It is a dangerous and provocative organisation.

[melmothtw]

virtually all European leaders are puppets of Washington,

'Washington's puppets' - I'd say that classes as 'American and/or rogue CIA plot' on the Troll Bingo. What do you think Ronald from 'Cornwall'?

Looking forward to crossing off more bingo boxes later this afternoon.


They allow US military bases in their own territory.

To deter Russia, funnily enough.

self determination, does that choice apply to the people of eastern Ukraine or just Kiev and the western parts of the country? Talking about self determination, how about the choice of the British people over EU membership and NATO membership?! Sadly you do not always get to chose your nations destiny.

I grant you, self determination is a tricky one as nearly every country in the world has at least one seperatist minority, but if Putin wants to apply seperatism for the groups you mentioned, will he be as accommodating towards the Siberians, Chechans, and the host of other 'Russian' minorities who want out?

What has the British situation with the EU and NATO got to do with self-determination? Besides the fact we are set to get a vote on the EU, we elect the UK government which makes the decisions (rightly or wrongly) on our behalf. That's called democracy, Ronald from 'Cornwall'.

NATO is not a defensive organisation, just look at its role in Libya. It is a dangerous and provocative organisation

Yes, look at its role in Libya, where it averted a genocide. Let's also look at its role in Kosovo and Bosnia where it did the same, and while Afghanistan may not have worked out as hoped, NATO's intentions were honourable there also.

The fact remains, Ronald from 'Cornwall', that countries are queing up to join NATO. Where is the line to restart the Warsaw Pact?

[rh200]

If I remember correctly Ronald, a great deal of those so called European " puppets" told the US to get stuffed in Iraqi. Sort of puts a dent in your argument.

As for bases, well they exist because they governments in those countries fear Russia and any other country like it. The individual countries don't have the capacity or either the will to build up defense forces to protect against potential belligerent states like Russia.

And why would you, when you can be part of a organization with collective defense, and as such don't need to spend as much.

rh200, self determination, does that choice apply to the people of eastern Ukraine or just Kiev and the western parts of the country?

Certainly does, glad we are in agreement for an intimidate cease fire, UN mandate with third party troops to stabilize the area, allow free press and have a referendum. The referendum will of course have to have people who where on the roll before the current conflict.:ok:

Talking about self determination, how about the choice of the British people over EU membership and NATO membership?! Sadly you do not always get to chose your nations destiny.


Of course they do, if it means that much to them, vote for parties that will pull them out. Its all in the voting and balance of whats important., I know this democrocy thing is not very intuative to you sitting in Moscow.

NATO is not a defensive organisation, just look at its role in Libya. It is a dangerous and provocative organisation.

Don't blame NATO for political decisions, thats all NATO acts from. But that said, least their not sending their soldiers in to die like criminals and in secret.

[Ronald Reagan]

You really amaze me Mel, you act as if Libya was a success. The country is broken, a ruin, totally destroyed by the west. What was a functioning nation state has been turned into a disaster zone that is so unsafe its no possible to travel there.






Russia is a great country and people should be happy to be part of it.


They are strong. The strong make the rules while the weak follow.


rh200, since Iraq things have changed, somehow Washington has regained control of Europe, that is because they are strong, I may disagree with them but they do understand how the game is played.
Maybe just maybe things will change as more and more people can see through the lies of the west.

[t43562]

I think you're one of the weak then, RR.

[porch monkey]

R.R, Dude, lay off the crack pipe a little. It is going to harm you long term......:rolleyes:

[Ronald Reagan]

I am here to help you all understand the situation better. I accept its probably a lost cause.
But I genuinely want to help you all and offer an alternative view point.
Its hard to believe that years after Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya people still believe in the western leadership.

[Courtney Mil]

I am here to help you all understand the situation better.


Thank you. You are clearly the only one who understands it "Cornall," so lucky for everyone else that you're here.


I accept its probably a lost cause.


Very astute. Have you noticed how opinion is divided? You think The Soviet Union is great, everyone else think it isn't. Must be a lesson there if only I could work it out.


But I genuinely want to help you all and offer an alternative view point.


It certainly is "alternative."


Its hard to believe that years after Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya people still believe in the western leadership.


I know you're never really interested in reading other people's opinions if they don't match you own, but if you took the trouble, you'd notice that plenty of people challenge the leadership (something we're allowed to do in the West). But that doesn't make Vlad a beacon of shining diplomacy and democracy, does it?

And from earlier...

You should check out Graham Phillips on facebook the British reporter currently working in the Lugansk area. He has plenty of photographic evidence to show the terrible shelling of civilian areas by the junta forces.

I thought you said western press weren't be trusted?

[ExRAFRadar]

I think RR is on, what our Army brethren call, a WAH!!!!

[Martin the Martian]

I believe in the leadership of open democracy and the opportunity to vote it out of office as practised in the west rather than the addiction to power shown by Mr. Putin and the lengths he will go to so that he can retain it. Tell me, is he president or prime minister this week?

Oh, and I bet the Cornwall you are from is not the same one as I am living in. Russian flags not a common sight in the Duchy.

[melmothtw]

Courtney, you bit!!

Oh, go on then, I'll have a nibble too...

Its hard to believe that years after Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya people still believe in the western leadership

Because the alternative is Russian and/or Chinese leadership and again, Ronald from 'Cornwall', I don't see too many countries queuing up for that option, as palatable as it may seem to you.

[Ronald Reagan]

All we have to see is a collapse of the American Empire and then it will come, either that or a slow gradual decline while the Chinese surpass them.
Then finally we can have peace.

[hoodie]

Wouldn't it be handy if the PPRuNe mods were able to answer a quick Yes/No question?

"Is Ronald Reagan's IP address allocated to the UK?"

[Courtney Mil]

Wouldn't work, Hoodie. I can make my IP address look like I'm in the UK. It's not hard. But I'm not sure we even need to ask!

[hoodie]

You're right of course. No need at all.

[Fonsini]

I really hope we see a total collapse of the American Empire in the coming years.

In my experience, people with this limited mindset are usually conspiracy theorists who spend most of their waking hours on Above Top Secret blaming the US for everything from 9/11 to toe fungus.

Very surprised to find one of them lurking on here though.

As Winston so famously said "a fanatic is someone who can't change their mind, and won't change the subject". :)

[Willard Whyte]

I really hope we see a total collapse of the American Empire in the coming years.

I can't see myself snacking on a beetroot burger between jobs at Paddington Station.

[Courtney Mil]

Willard, I doubt anyone that allows their common sense to overcome their insane, rabid, deluded fanaticism would offer you any fears on that front.

[NutLoose]

Re IP addy, I'll give you a clue

http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/390431-ex-joint-warrior-harriers.html

[Out Of Trim]

Maybe RR is a Soviet "Sleeper" who never got the call to activate! :ugh:

Mike or is it Michal from Norfolk? :E

[henra]

Its hard to believe that years after Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya people still believe in the western leadership.

Even though some of these involvements didn't quite yield the desired stable results and the question may legitimately be raised if it was a good idea to stumble into each of these adventures, the other option (being ruled Putin style) doesn't really look very attractive (at least to most of us Joe Average normal Europeans). And it takes a lot (and I mean really, really a lot) of creativity to consider Putin's contribution to the Ukraine crisis helpful. There are People dying as we type for his vision of a bigger and more important Russia driven surely somewhat out of an inferiority complex after the collapse of the big Empire once called Soviet Union.

You have to have really weird preferences if you really prefer the way of living and being governed in Russia to that of Western Europe or the US, even considering all shortfalls of our Western governments.

[ORAC]

Russians open new front after Estonian official is captured in 'cross-border raid' (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/07/russia-parades-detained-estonian-police-officer)

[Willard Whyte]

Oh, deep joy...

[Stanwell]

"Now, watch carefully... Nothing in this hand, see... ?"
Hmm.

[NutLoose]

He is now targeting Lithuania and those that refused to serve in the Soviet Military after Lithuania declared independence 25 years ago!

BBC News - Lithuania says Russia reopens Soviet conscript cases (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-29111188)


The bloke is barking.

[glad rag]

Estonia/Lithuania now they are a NATO member,yes?

This maniac [not RR] is determined to lead the Russian people to disaster.

[rh200]

Its really hard to see what his endgame actually is. Do we go all out and give him a new cold war? would that be playing into his hands, and give him the excuse to do a total arms build up sort of thing.

Or just ignore and do incremental escalation? Where is the chocolate wheel.
What I do know though, there is a country doing its best to behave and getting screwed over by Russia and we won't give them so much as bullets!

[Lonewolf_50]

I have a good friend who was born in northern Syria. His family came here to Texas when he was young. Before he was an adult, he was able to occasionally visit his relatives in Syria without fear/concern.

As soon as he reached the age of majority, he was in trouble with Syrian authorities ... even though he was a US naturalized citizen long since.

He is/was required to either serve in the Syrian armed forces, or pay scutage. He has, as a result, never gone back to Syria. (EDIT: of course, given the current state of play and the fact that he and his family are Syrian Orthodox Christians, there is another powerful incentive not to go back until the ISIS/ISIL threat reduces.)

I wonder if a similar issue is one of the things behind the Russian moves in the Baltic States, particularly among the "ethnic Russians" "Russian speakers" of those three nation states.

[rh200]

Apparently the Pom's are starting to take the piss out of Putin and issuing instructions how to spot their own military equipment.

Mr Putin: Your battle tanks look like this (http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/british-embassy-to-ukraine-issues-kremlin-with-a-recognition-guide-to-its-own-battle-tanks/story-fnpjxnlk-1227129332108)

On a slightly more positive note, it seems the the administration in the white house might be getting the message.

A senior aide of President Barack Obama today said he believes the US should consider giving Ukraine lethal, defensive military assistance to get Russia to think twice about its destabilising behaviour.

I can think of some nice air assets that would make nice lethal defensive equipment.

[rh200]

NATO criticizes Russia, announces military assistance for Ukraine | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/12/02/nato-ministers-criticize-russia-announce-new-military-assistance-for-ukraine/?intcmp=latestnews)

announce new military assistance for ukraine

When I first read the headline, I thought, "what new uniforms or desert with the MRE's". But it looks like they are finally getting serious.

NATO has announced the creation of so-called trust funds. The ministers said Tuesday trust funds are now operational for logistics, cyberdefense, rehabilitation of wounded soldiers and other uses.

The Russians must be quaking in their boots.:ugh:

[NutLoose]

They have been treating Ukrainian wounded in Germany for months

Auswärtiges Amt - Ukraine - Injured Ukrainians to be treated in Germany (http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Aussenpolitik/Laender/Aktuelle_Artikel/Ukraine/140312_Behandlung-ukr-Verletzter.html)

GERMANY: Wounded Ukrainian soldiers treated in Germany in stable condition, says doctor (http://www.itnsource.com/en/shotlist//RTV/2014/09/03/RTV030914013/)

[ORAC]

Merkel Objection to Arms for Ukraine May Spur Backlash for Obama (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-08/merkel-objection-to-arms-for-ukraine-may-spur-backlash-for-obama)

(Bloomberg) -- Germany’s rejection of supplying weapons to Ukrainian forces fighting pro-Russian rebels may heighten the domestic pressure on a reluctant U.S. President Barack Obama to deliver the arms. Increasing numbers of senior military and State Department officials are joining Republican lawmakers in a push to arm Ukraine -- an option the commander-in-chief personally opposes, according to three people familiar with the dynamics in the Obama administration. They asked not to be named due to sensitivity of the matter.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who made an impassioned case against shipping lethal military support to Ukraine in a speech Saturday at the Munich Security Conference, will discuss the issue with Obama in Washington on Monday. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said he’s confident Obama will make his decision soon after the meeting. Obama’s delay in making his move until after Merkel’s visit reflects not only the gravity of the situation and the dueling arguments, but his emphasis on international alliances, his own deliberative nature and the degree to which he’s concentrated power on foreign policy in the White House.

Obama will authorize weapons deployment if Merkel signals that she will not publicly condemn individual nations from arming Ukraine, the three people said. If she opposes any unilateral supplying of weapons, Obama will explain his decision to follow her lead by citing the importance of keeping a united front against Russian President Vladimir Putin and the risk of triggering a proxy war with him, the people said.

A U.S. official who is also close to the debate declined to predict what Obama will decide after meeting with Merkel. The official, who also requested anonymity, added that Obama’s decision may prove to be one of the most important of his presidency............

Merkel’s Position

Merkel in her Saturday speech said, “The progress that Ukraine needs cannot be achieved by more weapons.” Instead, she evoked the perseverance of the U.S. and European diplomatic efforts in confronting the Soviet Union during four decades of Cold War that ended with collapse of communism. Like then, that approach needs staying power and unity, said Merkel, who grew up in communist East Germany. “The problem is that I cannot envisage any situation in which an improved equipment of the Ukrainian army leads to a situation where President Putin is so impressed that he will lose militarily,” she said, reiterating the importance of a negotiated peace without military intervention. “I have to put it in such a blunt manner.” Facing Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko in the audience, she said: “There’s no way to win this militarily -- that’s the bitter truth. The international community has to think of a different approach.”.........

Senators Disagree

Republican senators attending the conference expressed outrage at Merkel’s position. “She’s undercutting the ability of the Ukrainian people to have the best, last chance to keep their country intact,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told reporters. “So can friends disagree? That’s what all this is about.”

Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the head of the congressional delegation in Munich, called Merkel’s position “unacceptable” and “horribly wrong.” “I know the Ukrainians; I know that they’re being slaughtered by the Russians with Russian weapons,” McCain said in an interview with German newspaper Bild-Zeitung. McCain also told TV channel ZDF that German government seems as if “it has no clue, or it doesn’t care, that people are being slaughtered in Ukraine.”........

Gen. Philip Breedlove, the top U.S. military commander in Europe, Ashton Carter, Obama’s pick to be the next U.S. defense secretary, and a list of former U.S. envoys to Ukraine and NATO are publicly supporting arming Ukraine. “I’m very much inclined in that direction,” Carter said at his confirmation hearing before McCain’s committee last week. Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden are increasingly associating with this group, termed the pessimists by the U.S. official who declined to predict what Obama will decide. The official used the term because of this group’s doubts that the U.S. and European economic and diplomatic efforts can alone deter Putin.......

This camp has concluded that Putin is determined to reverse some of what he considers NATO and European aggression against a Russia weakened by irresolute leaders before he came to power, such as Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin, said the official. The group also thinks Putin believes it’s the U.S. and its allies that are weak now, bled by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, facing economic disunity within the EU and indecision about how to fight Islamic extremism.

The pessimists argue that it’s important to push back hard against Putin in Ukraine and elsewhere to prevent the conflict from escalating out of control, the official said. The debate over arming Ukraine masks a much deeper analytical split about relations with Russia within the administration and NATO, he added.

The camp that the official described as the diplomats, which he said so far includes Obama, Merkel and French President Francois Hollande but few other U.S. officials outside the White House, views Putin as a bully but not a fool who would preside over an economic collapse. They believe he will ultimately respond to mounting economic pressure, perhaps coupled with a greater NATO presence in eastern Europe, the official said.

Putin’s Goal

Some U.S. military and intelligence officials assess that Putin’s current strategic objective is a land link from Russia to Crimea through Mariupol, and that a major offensive against the port city of 500,000 is inevitable. The recent push at Debaltseve, they said Saturday in Washington, appears to be simultaneously a test of the Ukrainian military and NATO’s response, a diversion from the real objective and a move to pre-position Russian-backed forces for a two-pronged assault on Mariupol from the east and north..........

[ORAC]

Putin could attack Baltic states warns former Nato chief (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11393707/Putin-could-attack-Baltic-states-warns-former-Nato-chief.html)

Vladimir Putin has dangerous ambitions beyond Ukraine and aims to test Western resolve in the Baltic states, the former head of Nato has warned.Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former secretary-general of the Atlantic alliance, said the Kremlin’s true goal is to shatter Nato solidarity and reassert Russian dominance over Eastern Europe.

“This is not about Ukraine. Putin wants to restore Russia to its former position as a great power,” he told The Telegraph. “There is a high probability that he will intervene in the Baltics to test Nato’s Article 5,” he said, referring to the solidarity clause that underpins collective security.n“Putin knows that if he crosses the red line and attacks a Nato ally, he will be defeated. Let us be quite clear about that. But he is a specialist in hybrid warfare,” he said.

The fear is that the Kremlin will generate a murky conflict in Estonia or Latvia where there are large Russian minorities, using arms-length action or “little green men” without insignia to disguise any intervention. This may tempt weaker Nato members to play down the incident, either to protect commercial ties with Russia or because of pro-Kremlin sympathies as in Hungary or Greece.......

Article 5 states that a military attack on any one Nato country is an attack on all of them, triggering collective mobilization. It has been invoked just once in the 66-year history of the alliance, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York.
Nobody knows what would happen if one of the Baltic states invoked Article 5 protection but was turned down by the Nato Council. Failure to respond would devastate Nato’s credibility and undermine the principle of deterrence, though allies could still act as a coalition of the willing outside the treaty structure......

[NutLoose]

Downing Street denies Cameron is ?diplomatic irrelevance? in Ukraine talks | Politics | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/06/downing-street-denies-david-cameron-diplomatic-irrelevance-ukraine-talks)

Stung by claims that David Cameron is a diplomatic irrelevance as France and Germany spearhead efforts to end the conflict in Ukraine, Downing Street has insisted Britain is playing an active role in Europe’s response to Russian aggression.

No 10 issued a robust defence after being criticised by an army general and the shadow foreign secretary for not being present at the diplomatic table when Europe is under threat of “total war”.

The French president, François Hollande, and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, are set to meet the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, in Moscow to discuss a peace plan aimed at ending the fighting between Ukrainian government forces and Russian-backed separatist rebels.

The move has sparked fears of a division within the western alliance – with Britain and the United States apparently sidelined by the Franco-German initiative.

[rh200]

As I said on the JB thread, do you want to wait until you have to invoke NATO articles, bring it to a head now, see where every one stands.

I personally don't think giving them arms is the best Idea, its hard to compete with Russia on the door step. Hence putting troops in under some invitation, and a bullsh!t story. Beat Putin at his own game.

[Hangarshuffle]

Other indicators of a looming European war could be expected to be what? Falling stock market? Rising oil and food prices, rising price of raw materials?
Stocks have been booming last few weeks, oil is at relatively low prices.
Also would have expected to see exchanges of diplomatic expulsions, tit for tat responses. But cant find any.
The Russian hybrid warfare creeping approach will probably continue until someone in the west miscalculates. Or Putin miscalculates.
Don't think its a good idea to give Western Ukraine arms at all. Their war is already lost.

[Fitter2]

Don't think its a good idea to give Western Ukraine arms at all. Their war is already lost.

At what point in the Russian expansion into Ukraine does the West say enough is enough? Or after all Ukraine is absorbed back into the Rodinya what do we do when, encouraged by inaction he starts on the Baltic States/Poland or wherever he chooses. This is all horribly reminiscent of 1937 to 39, and that ended well, didn't it.

I agree there are no simple answers, but the simplest (inaction) should not be an option.

[ORAC]

FT: Nato discusses arming Ukraine (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c8194996-aebd-11e4-b371-00144feab7de.html#axzz3R9dMgJLZ)

Nato has begun discussing the possibility of sending arms to Ukraine, according to the alliance’s secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg. Mr Stoltenberg said the issue was being actively discussed by alliance members, alongside a range of other measures to bolster support for Kiev.

His remarks follow those of Nato’s top military commander, General Philip Breedlove, who on Friday said that “conventional means” of support from Nato powers should not be ruled out if economic and diplomatic overtures to Moscow failed. The German chancellor Angela Merkel is opposed to a military solution to the Ukraine crisis although she has warned that peace talks may fail.

Mr Stoltenberg stressed that any move to support Ukraine with weaponry would be a matter for individual Nato allies to decide upon, not the alliance as a whole. “There are discussions taking place,” he said on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference in Germany, Europe’s largest annual gathering of defence and security chiefs and politicians. “Nato does not possess weapons so this is at the end something that has to be decided by nations,” he said. “I will limit myself to say that we have an ongoing discussion on how we can help Ukraine and every nation has the right to protect and defend itself.”

British foreign secretary Philip Hammond said sending lethal military aid to Kiev was an option that would be considered by the UK government if fighting in Ukraine got worse. Mr Hammond stressed that Britain still believed there was no military solution to the conflict in Ukraine but acknowledged discussions about sending lethal military aid to help Kiev had become more pronounced in recent days. The UK was prepared to consider a broad range of future courses of action he said.

“We are at the current time not considering the supply of lethal equipment to the Ukrainians,” Mr Hammond said at Munich. “But obviously that decision — that policy position — is a reflection of the situation on the ground and if the situation on the ground changes of course we could keep that under review. If there were a radical change of circumstances on the ground we would want to keep our options open, we would want to be able to think about using all the levers we have available to influence the situation on the ground,” he added.

Mr Stoltenberg said the alliance would continue to ramp up its military presence in eastern Europe. Nato defence ministers agreed on Thursday to more than double the size of Nato’s reaction force from 13,000 to 30,000 men and deploy 6 command and control centres in Romania, Bulgaria, Poland and the Baltic States.

Moscow’s ambassador to Nato said relations between Russia and the alliance were “close to freezing point.”

The measures were just the beginning, Mr Stoltenberg said. “This is the first element. What we decided on Thursday was the land element and command and control. [Next] we will make decisions on naval, air, special forces, reconnaissance intelligence, surveillance — more elements, more decisions are coming. We are doing what we set out to do.”

[rh200]

As I stated in the other thread, Putin is playing a very careful game and denying he has any forces there. That leaves us an opening.

Take advantage of it, or he just keeps moving to the next stage.

Western peace keeping/enforcement troops at Ukraine's invitation with a no fly zone will act as a circuit breaker.

Putin will then show his hand, then you can deal with it. I would suspect he is prepared to trade off eastern Ukraine for Crimea (legal recognition, he actually already has it:p)if push came to shove. He is already factoring that in by letting contracts to build a bridge to Crimea.

[Ronald Reagan]

Actually I would say the best thing the west could do is nothing.
Why on earth would we want to risk turning a small local conflict over a nation that is next door to Russia into World War 3 and the destruction of us all. Its a shame that both NATO and the EU have allowed themselves to move eastwards since the end of the cold war irrespective of what former eastern bloc governments want. This expansion has not added to our security but has made things far more dangerous. We are now thanks to NATO committed to defending nations that just 25 years ago were totally in the soviet sphere of influence. Talk about a reckless policy. The question has to be asked what is in it for us, the western population at large?! Its not as if the former eastern bloc nations are military strong and could aid us much in the event of a future war, but on the other hand require total protection from us.
Going back to Ukraine, right now Russia is still their biggest trade partner. Its utter lunacy for us to get involved with this in any way, shape or form.

[Sop_Monkey]

Who's going to stop Putin even if he takes the Boltic States? He is nothing but a thug and a bully.

NC weapons have keep the world away from total war for 70 years. Now Putin is using that mindset for his latest adventures.

Do we really want M.A.D?

[Fitter2]

Why on earth would we want to risk turning a small local conflict over a nation that is next door to Russia into World War 3

How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war.
Neville Chamberlain, 27 September 1938

[melmothtw]

Its a shame that both NATO and the EU have allowed themselves to move eastwards since the end of the cold war irrespective of what former eastern bloc governments want.

????

Ronald, it's been said before (but it always seems to go in one ear and out the other with you), but NATO/EU has not 'expanded East'. The ONLY reason that former Eastern Bloc countries are now members of these organisations is because they want to be.

It's a different model of expansion than, say, the Warsaw Pact, but there you go.

Enough of the Kremlin-bot trolling already.

[dazdaz1]

I would consider Putin's trump card being the natural gas supplies to western Europe, reduce the flow initially, then most of Europe will comprehend the dire consequences if the gas was fully turned off. No army no nukes required.

[Fitter2]

That would be shooting himself in the foot - there is a surplus of gas in the world market, short term pain for everyone including Russia, long term economic disaster for Russia. And he (and his oligarch mates) know that.

[Ronald Reagan]

Mel, eastern European nations might wish to be part of the EU and NATO, it does not mean its in our interests for them to be so though! The question has to be asked ''what is in it for us?'' As I already said they are militarily weak, so bring little in terms of capability to the alliance, in fact letting them join seems to have given us considerable defence liability but for not much in return. Having all out war with Russia seems a very bad idea but then again the west tends to underestimate every country its ever gone up against, the problem now though is Russia is not some small weak nation, it has enough nuclear forces to end human civilisation on this planet. Letting some arm chair generals who dream of war run policy is not a good idea, we have to come to a realistic solution and not some pipe dream fantasy that some western governments would like to see. The best and easiest way to achieve this would be turn a blind eye to the events in Ukraine while ensuring we maintain strong and capable military forces to defend our homeland against any possible future threats from anyone, but not to go on continuous pointless foreign adventurism. If the west, especially Washington miscalculate they could drag us all into World War 3 and it could be the end of everything.


Fitter2, the difference between the 1930s and now is that we would be talking about all out nuclear war, the end of everything, so we have to avoid that at all costs.

[NutLoose]

MUNICH — The leaders of Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine aim to hold a summit in Minsk this week as they try to stem fighting in eastern Ukraine, officials in Germany and France said Sunday


from MSN, shows how we are irrelevant today having decimated our armed forces to such a state..


RR see your still spouting your cr+p, you playing your own game of a self feeding frenzy? because no one else will?

[Brewers Droop]

One part of me thinks its a war outside NATO's Borders that is already lost and we should best stay well clear. But the UK, through the 1994 Budapest Memorandums, said it would guarantee the territorial integrity of Ukraine in return for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons.

Though there is some legal wriggle room in what this agreement binds us to do (it is not a collective defence guarantee) it does beggar the question of what we, the UK, actually stand for? Are we a country of our word or are we all mouth music? I think Putin has well and truly decided his view on this. It would have been interesting what would have happened if Ukraine had not given up the nukes under our guarantees?

For that reason, IMHO arm The Ukrainian army to the teeth and put troops in Western Ukraine. Alternatively admit we can no longer honour our P5 responsibilities and are just a small island.

Ironically, the signators of this agreement were The UK, US, Ukraine and ...............Russia!

[Ronald Reagan]

NutLoose, thanks for your kind words. I am just trying to bring some logic, reason and level headed thought to this page.

[melmothtw]

RR, whatever it is you believe you are trying to bring to this page, you could have the decency to engage with other members without lying about who you are or what you're about.

If you're so sure as to your arguments, then why do you feel the need to lie about your identity and location?

[Fitter2]

RR - The same logic and reason that parrots Kremlin claims that Russia is not arming and reinforcing the 'rebels', but the US is arming the Kiev Government.

The Russian citizen may believe it (apart from the widows and mothers who are not allowed to bury their dead sons and husbands). We have a sufficiently free press who would not allow such nonse for our side of the rebuilt Iron Curtain.

To avoid WW III it is necessary to halt Putin's megalomania.

[Ronald Reagan]

Mel, virtually no one on this group uses their real names or give their exact location! Everyone else seems to use a random username and give maybe a rough location or nothing at all.

[Bigbux]

you could have the decency to engage with other members without lying about who you are or what you're about.




http://www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/everything-you-need-to-know-about-russia-today-uk#.naJbRyXmA

I believe "Ronald Regan" is the Russian expression for "Duty Officer".

[Ronald Reagan]

But Fitter, have not the west armed rebels/terrorists before? The US did so in Afghanistan in the 1980s and more recently the west has done so in Libya and Syria, arming actual terrorists. In the case of Libya they even attacked said country removing the leadership from power and creating a totally broken and non functioning state in the process. In the case of Syria its Russia who has managed to stop another western war to remove Assad from power and replace him with terrorists.

[Ronald Reagan]

I have to say that its rather interesting how anyone with a counter opinion is regarded as a ''Russian Agent'' or ''troll''. Maybe some of the pro Washington/NATO comments on here are actually from some secret US government department who are paid to do such things!!! ;)

[LS-4]

For what it's worth, some studies indicate that NATO's presence has helped reduce experienced threat levels and facilitated democratic reform in parts of Eastern Europe.

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie (http://www.jstor.org/stable/27640351)

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie (http://www.jstor.org/stable/40204516)

[Flash2001]

Anyone remember the HEF club?

After an excellent landing etc...

[rh200]

Why on earth would we want to risk turning a small local conflict over a nation that is next door to Russia into World War 3 and the destruction of us all.

And this is the key to trying to keep the West out from helping a country move forward against a aggressive bully. Propaganda and fear, there is no chance in hell of that happening, if there was, there would be badged troops in Ukraine proper. Its a standard child's game, seeing how far he can go before we show some balls.

The biggest embarrassment is the fact that he can supply all the best weapons, troops etc, and we supply MRE's. The funniest thing is the Russians being horrified that we could even contemplate such a thing. Putin must be ROFL.

[Brewers Droop]

I have to say that its rather interesting how anyone with a counter opinion is regarded as a ''Russian Agent'' or ''troll''. Maybe some of the pro Washington/NATO comments on here are actually from some secret US government department who are paid to do such things!!! ;)

Or perhaps Comrade it's because 90% of this forum have spent their careers in the military working alongside the US and within NATO and believe that in the 21st Century, big countries like Russia should not go around grabbing bits of Territory from smaller Sovereign Nation States.....

[Ronald Reagan]

Brewers Droop, yes the west tends to bomb/invade a country, level it, then create some puppet government/regime then leave. Maybe if Moscow had called the Ukraine mission ''Operation Ukrainian Freedom'' and if they had gone in with large numbers of forces like the US in Iraq, then after about a year or so Bush, sorry I mean Putin could land on the Russian carrier in the Black Sea wearing a flight suit, the carrier could be covered in banners saying '' Mission Accomplished'' ;) Then Russian forces could leave safe in the knowledge their puppet government would do their bidding and no annexing of territory would be needed. Maybe the west would be ok with this as they have done the same in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya! (Though actually the puppet governments in Afghanistan and Iraq have asked western forces to remain albeit in reduced numbers, mighty convenient that! (Actually I am sure the west would oppose this to, after all, its only they who can go around the world and engage in general and reckless warmongering!

[Ronald Reagan]

Brewers Droop you also have to remember Crimea was part of Russia until the 1950s and after the coup in Kiev the locals wanted to join Russia again. Much of the eastern population of Ukraine also did not approve of the coup in Kiev and lean towards Moscow. Its only natural if Kiev use force against them Moscow will give some support them. As I pointed out earlier the west has supported rebels (terrorists) in Libya and Syria in recent years, the US did the same in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Right now the US regime dreams of ousting Assad from power and thus supports various terrorists in Syria to try and make this dream (nightmare) a reality.

[Brewers Droop]

RR

Brewers Droop you also have to remember Crimea was part of Russia until the 1950s Sigh - the old "it used to be ours in history arguement". So I am assuming Russia will now give Ukraine back to Turkey? Incidentally, the Crimea was given to what was then the Ukraine SSR in 1954 by who (let me give you a clue R_u_s...you can finish it). I say again, in the 21st Century big neighbours don't go into smaller and weaker neighbours and seize territory by force of arms.

and after the coup in Kiev the locals wanted to join Russia again You conveniantly ignore 'the locals' that didn't. Anyway, the current fighting is in Easter Ukraine NOT Crimea. Just because some of the population want to be part of Russia it gives them no right to try and take it by force of arms (apparently supplied by Russia)

Its only natural if Kiev use force against them Moscow will give some support them. No its not. Period. End of. Russia has absolutely no legal or moral right to unilaterally to go in to a Soveriegn Nation, arm the opposition, and fight a Democratically elected Government (I am talking democratically elected not one that simply took over by a coup or similar) regardless of whether they deny doing so or not. And you seem to be very blinkered on who is using force against who.

As I pointed out earlier the west has supported rebels (terrorists) in Libya and Syria in recent years, the US did the same in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Was that the Afghanistan were Russia went in, shot the leader and replaced him? By the way, isnt Afghanistan now a place were 'the west' (whoever they are) are now supporting a Government elected by fair and free elections across the whole country rather than the might of the Soviet Army?

Aside, there is a big difference in acting against regimes that commit gross violations of human rights against their populations rather than simply acting against a Soveriegn country because you fancy some Territory back...

I risk feeding a troll but my red wine tastes quite pleasant this evening :\

[Ronald Reagan]

Brewers Droop, the people of Crimea were not asked if they wished to be part of Ukraine in 1954, they were however in 2014 asked if they wished to be part of Russia.


You say that larger neighbours cannot go into smaller and weaker neighbours? But is it ok for Washington to invade and attack smaller and weaker nations far away from their own nation?


At the end of the day its easily possible the majority in eastern Ukraine want to be part of Russia again or at least a new independent nation, but for sure some of the people want this. Russia supporting them is NO different to Washington supporting various anti government groups in Libya and Syria! Its arguably less bad than the actions of Washington.


I would agree Moscow has no legal right to do this BUT I would say they have a moral right to support their own people. Its unrealistic to expect them to do nothing as its on their doorstep.


I would suggest if the Soviets had won in Afghanistan there would not have been a 911! Also if the west had not destroyed Libya then its unlikely in a Gaddafi ruled Libya that the terrorists would have been able to assassinate the US Ambassador and without the wests invasion of Iraq and later attempts to remove Assad in Syria there would be no IS! Talk about total foreign policy failure and blowback! Its a bit hard to respect governments and leaders who are behind such disasters.
Compared to all this Russia being involved in their next door neighbouring country in a limited way hardly seems the crime of the century.
Considering the outrageous actions of western governments in recent years for moral reasons and reasons of humility it would be best if they simply kept their mouths shut, sadly that's unlikely as they were most likely behind the coup in Kiev setting those whole chain of events in Ukraine in motion, they should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

[West Coast]

Where the line with you RR? What's the threshold for you or your handlers to say Putin is out of line? Putin's surrogates in Warsaw, Berlin?

[Fitter2]

RR - 'Asking the people' where Russia is involved is a dangerous occupation. Ask the people whose money was stolen and their Russian lawyer who brought the case was imprisoned and beaten to death there.

And making apologies for your comrades actions in Afghanistan - really? It must be boring in the Kremlin tonight, haven't you any escaped dissidents to assassinate?

[Brewers Droop]

RR

Sadly my bottle of best capitalist red wine is finished so I will agree to disagree. This will be my last on the matter.

Why do you keep comparing Ukraine with other countries? You imply that Russia can behave in this way simply because 'the west' has intervened.

More conveniantly you completely disregard the rational for those interventions? In Syria, Assad was commiting gross human rights violations against his people including the use of chemical weapons. In Libya civil unrest was responded to by troops firing in to crowds with live bullets. Both leaders had a long history of the complete disregard of the human rights of their population. I don't see the Democratically elected Ukraine Government doing this??? Instead, I see a small country defending its territory against both an armed opposition supplied and supported by a big neighbour determined to take territory by use of force with complete disregard to international law. And if you don't see that then I would suggest you are either Putin (and I collect my 5 pounds) or are of a political view that simply will not accept that Russia is conducting a form of real politic that is best left in the 19th and early 20th Century.

Incidentally, you may find the idea of responsibility to protect enlightening Responsibility to Protect (http://www.unric.org/en/responsibility-to-protect). I hope you do.

Good Night - BP

[Ronald Reagan]

Maybe it would have been better if the Soviets/Russians still had forces in Germany even in a post reunified Germany. We have to remember why there were Soviet forces in Germany! Would imagine the west were keen for them to be there in the early to mid 1940s! For me the pre 1990 world was fine, much more simple with USA and NATO vs USSR and Warsaw Pact, there was more balance and seemingly more sensible leaders in the west! Since then the west has kind of been out of control with its actions. Maybe the USSR and Warsaw Pact could have countered some of that arrogance.

[Fitter2]

We do remember why there were Russian troops in East Germany, and the state they left it in when they finally realised they were unwanted. It took a lot of Western money to replace what was stolen.

[Brewers Droop]

Comrade RR. but those days don't exist anymore. They were quite simply M.A.D.

And Putin's attempt to recreate this world (or his own perception of it) is extremely dangerous for everyone, is ultimately doomed to failure and ultimately benefits no one.

The rest of the world has moved on........

Now for the final time. Good night

[Ronald Reagan]

Brewers Droop, if the west does something which sets a precedent then other nations can and will do the same!


In Syria we only know what the west has told us, remember we were told about Saddam having WMDs and also how he could attack Britain in 45 minutes! Assad is by far the lessor of two evils when compared to the terrorists against him. In Libya Gaddafi actually warned if he was removed the terrorists would take over and rule the country, he had actually joined us in the war on terror then western governments stabbed him in the back and betrayed him. Now Libya does not even exist as a country. We must keep out of these things.


Kiev forces are shelling civilian population centres in eastern Ukraine. This so called elected government only came about thanks to an illegal coup likely instigated by the west as Yanukovych refused to do their bidding. I now see a western puppet government who mainly come from western Ukraine wishing to force their views on the people of eastern Ukraine, most of whom supported Yanukovych, this is a civil war with Russia supporting one side and the west supporting the other and likely being the instigator of the whole thing. Western governments don't seem to care at all about the civilians of eastern Ukraine. I don't think they care about any civilians. After Maidan some protestors in the east rose up but were quickly put down by Kiev forces hence things escalated. Yanukovych should still be the President of Ukraine.

[Ronald Reagan]

Fitter, World War 2! The Russians should have kept at least some bases in Germany, it would have provided balance to this modern world.

[rh200]

Fitter, World War 2! The Russians should have kept at least some bases in Germany, it would have provided balance to this modern world.

ROFL:ok:

I like Ronald, he's so cool:p

[ORAC]

Is This the End of NATO? (http://20committee.com/2015/02/08/is-this-the-end-of-nato/)

........There are two core reasons for Western collapse of will before Putin’s decidedly modest aggression in Ukraine. The first is that Western and Central Europe have so substantially disarmed since the end of the Cold War. Hardly any European NATO countries spend the “required” two percent of GDP on defense, and no amount of American scolding about it seems to make any difference. As a result, European NATO militaries, with few exceptions, possess a mere shadow of the combat power they had two decades ago. Several of them have abandoned tanks altogether, while even Germany has so cut back its combat power that there are only four battalions each of armor and artillery in the whole Bundeswehr.

Not all the fault for this sorry state of affairs lies in Europe. Here America has played an insidious role too, encouraging spending on niche missions for the Alliance at the expense of traditional defense. Hence the fact that Baltic navies have considerable counter-mine capabilities — this being an unsexy mission that the U.S. Navy hates to do — yet hardly any ability to police their maritime borders against intruding Russians. To make matters worse, since 2001 the Americans have encouraged NATO partners to spend considerable amounts of their limited defense budgets on America’s losing war in Afghanistan.

But the moral collapse of Europe is even worse than the military collapse. All the armaments in the world do no good when the will to use them is absent. Since the Cold War’s end, Western Europeans have convinced themselves of many things that simply are not true. Their optimistic worldview, which really is the highest form of the WEIRD Weltanschauung, abandoned any notion that monsters might still exist, and many Europeans, including most of their leaders, seem unable to accept the new reality that Vladimir Putin has forced upon them. Yet denying that Russia aims to change the European order, and will use force to do so, will not stop Kremlin misdeeds, actually it will only encourage more Russian aggression.

To be blunt, I see little evidence to date that major European leaders are willing to wake up to this new reality. In the event of Russian provocation against NATO, which is highly likely soon, it’s very possible that the Atlantic Alliance will unravel completely. Putin may achieve his strategic victory with hardly a shot fired. In such an event, I have no idea how Obama, or any American president, could send U.S. troops to die to defend a Europe that is so flagrantly unwilling to defend itself.

Two-and-a-half millennia ago, the Chinese sage Sun Tzu counseled that “the best military policy is to attack strategies; the next to attack alliances; the next to attack soldiers,” and Putin is doing exactly this. He has no need to undermine NATO strategy, since none exists in reality, while he continues to hack away at the foundations of the Western Alliance through Special War, particularly espionage and subversion.

It’s significant that, just after Greece elected an openly pro-Russian government, whose defense and foreign ministers are major Putin fans, the rising left wing in Spain announces that, should it come to power, it will take Madrid out of NATO altogether. Cyprus’s announcement on Friday that it will offer its military bases to Russia should be seen in proper strategic context. If this chipping away at the foundations of European security by the Kremlin continues, there may be no big war for Russia to have to win...........

For all the Alliance’s military shortcomings, NATO can deter Putin’s aggression until 2020 at least, with current forces. However, deterring the Kremlin’s Special War, which I have long counseled the West to get serious about, may prove a more serious challenge. The West has the ability to keep a rampaging Russia restrained. Sending defensive weaponry to Ukraine would be a wise start, while so is bolstering NATO forces on the Alliance’s vulnerable frontier, well beyond the modest efforts now, finally, being undertaken. What no defense budget or military strategist can provide, however, is political will. If Europe cannot regain enough self-confidence to resist Putin, it will lose everything, sooner than you think.

[Fitter2]

However, it is worth remembering that the joint Reagan/Thatcher strategy that the military option was unworkable, but an economic strategy to bankrupt the USSR was winnable brought about the demise of the 'Evil Empire' that Putin so resents.

Sanctions have been only a gentle reminder so far. Proper economic warfare will hurt Russia's fragile economy far worse than the West.

[Hangarshuffle]

I think sending western made small arms and small weaponry to Western Ukraine would be a disaster for Europe, including the UK.
They (Western Ukraine) wouldn't know how to use it, have no training capability for it. And another large part of the globe will descend into assort of what, a ungovernable guerrilla zone of warfare?. well we already know who would win there if it escalated, don't we?
Putin and the Russian military would probably be fully right to roll in and restore order on their border/land.


No, he's (Putin)won this one flat hands down already.
Keep us (UK) firmly out of this. Surprised opposition haven't made more about it, the crisis, our current fringe role within NATO.
Been watching Merkel and Obama on TV just now, they have a much better and comfortable body language together, its very obvious as to where POTUS sees where the leading role in resolution lies (which is a good thing, Merkel is very calm capable European leader).
But Putin has won this round, no doubt about it for me.

[Lonewolf_50]

Ronald:
Actually I would say the best thing the west could do is nothing.
Wrong, RR, and not even a nice try. Best thing the West can do is feed arms to the Poles, and let the Poles feed Ukraine. :-) (And the Hungarians, if they feel up to it).
ORAC: I looked up the XX blog. Interesting gent.
I think he's mostly right on "two core reasons for Western collapse of will before Putin’s decidedly modest aggression in Ukraine."
The first is that Western and Central Europe have so substantially disarmed since the end of the Cold War. Hardly any European NATO countries spend the “required” two percent of GDP on defense, and no amount of American scolding about it seems to make any difference. 1. A fifty to sixty year old story that goes back as far as the Eisenhower administration and the beginnings of NATO.
2. Western and Central European nations are again showing that they have no stomach for war. When an adversary know you have no stomach for a fight, he'll bully you. Is this all an elaborate head fake, or is this lack of spine for real? If we play "follow the money" then the chances that it is a head fake look pretty slim.
3. Look at how fast "the West" ran short of ammo in Libya. Hmmm.
But the moral collapse of Europe is even worse than the military collapse. All the armaments in the world do no good when the will to use them is absent. Since the Cold War’s end, Western Europeans have convinced themselves of many things that simply are not true. Their optimistic worldview, which really is the highest form of the WEIRD Weltanschauung, abandoned any notion that monsters might still exist, and many Europeans, including most of their leaders, seem unable to accept the new reality that Vladimir Putin has forced upon them. Yet denying that Russia aims to change the European order, and will use force to do so, will not stop Kremlin misdeeds, actually it will only encourage more Russian
aggression. While this has some merit, I think that the Euro group are weighting their main effort with their economic weapon, as economics will always underwrite capability.

[Hangarshuffle]

'Bit player' Britain risks being stuck on foreign policy sidelines | Politics | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2015/feb/09/bit-player-britain-risks-being-stuck-on-foreign-policy-sidelines)


Doesn't bother me either, if I'm honest. Watching UK forces fail to achieve in Iraq and Afghanistan, then watching the futility of assisting with a regime change in Libya, have finally stopped the UK public backing the politicians in foreign follies (that shouldn't concern us any more), at least until the next generation forgets.


On a final thought, I sometimes wonder if one or two of Putin's hoods has put a frightener on some of our nearest and dearest political figures.They who are normally shouting for a military engagement from the roof tops. Election soon - I bet the Russians have thick juicy dossiers on some of our political people.

[Danny42C]

ORAC,

Your "But the moral collapse of Europe is even worse than the military collapse. All the armaments in the world do no good when the will to use them is absent" is so bitterly true. It was at the root of the French collapse in 1940 (and might well have been the at the root of ours had not Churchill stepped in in the nick of time).

It is not the size of the dog in the fight that matters, but the size of the fight in the dog.

D.

[LS-4]

Some things might look a bit bleak at the moment, but NATO has persisted through periods of uncertainty before. Confident assertions about NATO's impending demise have more or less been circulated for around 25 years, e.g. in connection with the Soviet collapse, the Balkans, Afghanistan and so on. Beware, I might suffer from a case of youthful overconfidence, though.

[Bigbux]

I now see a western puppet government who mainly come from western Ukraine wishing to force their views on the people of eastern Ukraine

Funny how the Government you don't want is always a "Western Puppet Government".

The thing about Western Puppet Governments is that you can vote them out, you know, with real elections that allow the people to vote how they wish. You can even get international help to monitor and ensure that the results are genuine, unlike the sham that your boss put in place.

Anyway, its all a sideshow isn't it. This is about restoring the Soviet Union in a new world order where you have new and more powerful friends. To be perfectly honest, I doubt many people on this forum will lose much sleep if the UK Defence Budget gets a boost as a result. In fact, if the recent Bear visits make the case for some decent Maritime Patrol capability, many of us will actually be quite grateful.

[rh200]

We won the cold war for a variety of reasons, military might, technological superiority, and economic might. Like every thing else in life, its a function of several variables, not just one. Those advocating one without the other are either blind, or just looking for excuses for what ever reason.

The world has many paths it can go down, and there are many players in the back ground with varying interests for it to go either way.

The reality is Putin needs to be stopped, you either nip it in the butt, whilst it is a small problem, or you let it get to the stage where it will be more expensive.

The fact is, if Putin wants another cold war, or wants to isolate Russia, or what ever, he is going to do it regardless, we just need to know where he stands and how far he is prepared to go.

He is playing a game on several fronts, at the heart of it is divide and conquer.

Sanctions are cr@p for most significant things, he controls the media and frankly just uses the boogie man scenario against us.

[rh200]

Looks like the next stage, air superiority by the rebels.

This 'Brand New' Air Force Might Be Built From Stolen Museum Exhibits (http://www.vocativ.com/world/ukraine-world/ukraine-luhansk-air-force/?utm_campaign=International&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=outbrain)

I'm gathering Russian pilots and Russian unmarked aircraft will now be in the skys. With the excuse from Putin, "no they are captured and old museum aircraft with volunteer Russian pilots on holiday.:E

[NutLoose]

Personally I think Putin dipped his toes in the water to see how the west would react initially in Georgia, and seeing the lack lustre response, he realised the west would do nothing to prevent any future conflicts, and it is proving the case.

I am ashamed to be British over the state of play in the Ukraine... For whatever reason, right or wrong, we and the U.S. gave the Ukraine assurances that if they disarmed their nuclear capability we would protect them... Words come easy from the mouths of sleazy politicians, it's just a shame they have used the armed forces as a "balancing the books" scapegoat to the detriment of a credible force.
It's ok MP's spouting the usual rhetoric in saying XYZ has the capability of ten of its predecessor, but you cannot have one ship, one fighter, one tank in ten different places, and remember the oppositions capability has also increased tenfold, however they haven't used that bullsh*t to reduce the fleet size.


.

[Stanwell]

Nutty,
I think you just summed it up nicely.:D

p.s. On a different note, one of these days, I'm going to come up with a caption even you can't beat.
Don't hold yer breath, though.

[Ian Corrigible]

As posted in last year's MH17 thread (http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/543741-news-2.html#post8569526), Putin won't feel any need to modify his behaviour as long as he feels this document still reflects the West's priorities:

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/73344000/jpg/_73344509_document.jpg (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26426969)

I/C

[Bigbux]

How about this as another possible insight into Putin's behaviour and where we all might be heading.

Unhedged Commentary: Putin Will Never Back Down | Institutional Investor's Alpha (http://www.institutionalinvestorsalpha.com/Article/3426269/News-And-Analysis/Unhedged-Commentary-Putin-Will-Never-Back-Down.html?)

[Hangarshuffle]

Just been watching BBC World, reporter was in some minging looking bombed small town in the Ukraine, wrecked by shelling and heavy machine gun. People (old) were living in their shelters under their cold, damaged apartment blocks. Cold, little food. Even their pet dogs looked unhappy. On the ground above young lads in uniforms roamed around, smoked cigarettes, waiting for the next gun battle.
Looked horrible. No idea whose side any of these were on. But it will be the same on either side of the line.
Hope someone can somehow work out an intelligent and peaceful solution soon. Surely not beyond the wit of man, in the 21st century, to somehow try and end some of these many ceaseless wars and conflicts?

[rh200]

Hope someone can somehow work out an intelligent and peaceful solution soon.

Hope a wonderful thing, lots of people have hope, lots of people are butterly disapointed.

Surely not beyond the wit of man, in the 21st century, to somehow try and end some of these many ceaseless wars and conflicts?

To be short yes it is.

Look at history and a fundamental understanding of what we are as a species demonstrates even though its possible, its unlikely. There needs to be a winner and a loser, or the appearance of such. Anything less just puts a phase shift into the conflict.

People come up with all sorts of nice ways to peacefully end conflicts, problem is other people have different views:p

[Royalistflyer]

Personally I think Putin is the best leader the world has seen in a long time. I have many contacts - academic journalistic and service in Russia, one or two of them close to him.

Putin will win in Ukraine, he may even eventually take Kiev. Kiev is, incidentally historically Russian - it was the first capital of Russia - ever heard of Kievan Rus?

I am pretty sure that what he wants is eastern Ukraine. The western part holds no interest for him.

Trying to make out that Putin is like Hitler is just silly and should be beneath real commentators here.

Trying to re-live the Cold War is equally silly. This is NOT the Soviet Union revisited, it is entirely different, unfortunately the Americans are unable to see this. Putin wants a powerful, defendable, self-reliant Russia, and he means to achieve that. I think you will find that after he regains eastern Ukraine, Belorus will opt to rejoin fully the Russian Federation, which will give them unfettered access to the Baltic.

After that you will find that Putin turns his asttention to his moslem neighbours and the far east. Once Eastern Ukraine is secured, his western border is secure, that's what he wants.

Putin will out-think any current UK or USA politician, believe me.

[West Coast]

Ronald, is that you?

[Bigbux]

Royallistflyer

wow. How many times did you guys register? Ever thought of giving the Naafi Bar on Arrse a go? I'd love to see it.

After that you will find that Putin turns his asttention to his moslem neighbours and the far east. Once Eastern Ukraine is secured, his western border is secure, that's what he wants.


An interesting thought and one that I'm sure you feel would put all our minds to rest, thus allowing Putin to quietly go on doing his thing. But, are you advocating that it is right and proper to invade the borders of another country, simply to secure your own? Surely that's the thing you'v been accusing NATO of doing. By the way, I'd love to live in NATO, what's the scenery like and which airlines fly there?

[NutLoose]

It seems we are supplying erm,,, taxis? ;)


Brit troop carriers sent to Ukraine « Express & Star (http://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2015/02/14/brit-troop-carriers-sent-to-ukraine/)

[rh200]

I'm guessing its better than MRE's and uniforms, I do hope you got Merkel and Obama's permission first, or did you cut out the middle man and just asked Putin:p

[ORAC]

I'm guessing its better than MRE's and uniforms Not if you believe the ex-army officer on the radio this morning. They got rid of them because they were useless, the "armour" won't stop a Kalashnikov bullet, let alone heavy machine gun fire or shell splinters.

The Ukrainians are getting screwed from all sides.....

[m0nkfish]

This whole sorry saga has the insidious malodour of appeasement. We haven't seen the paper waving and 'peace in out time' sound bites but that doesn't mean we aren't adopting the same flawed policy that set the conditions for WW2....

Not saying this is the start of WW3 by any stretch, but I am genuinely quite worried about the state of the world right now and the perilous state of not just our armed forces but those of most of our allies!

The significant difference between now and 1938 is that Chamberlain used appeasement to successfully delay the onset of war and provide much needed time to rearm and prepare his nation for war. I wonder what the outcome of the next SDSR will be...?

[mmitch]

A10s moving back to Europe.....
Air Force sending 'tankbuster' jets back to Europe - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/12/world/a-10-jets-to-europe/index.html?iid=ob_article_organicsidebar_expansion&iref=obnetwork)
mmitch.

[Rotate too late]

Speaking from experience, those Saxons are utter death traps. Poor visibility, an engine mounted on one side so giving a tendency to drift over under braking, and no real armour capability, if this is a signal of our intent, and considering the implications of this conflict, I too am genuinely worried.:(

[NutLoose]

That'll be the A-10 that everyman and his dog have tried to withdraw from service in the US as no longer relevant in the modern world.....

Just goes to prove they cannot do with out them, no matter what some of the politicians and higher military echelons think.

[rh200]

They got rid of them because they were useless, the "armour" won't stop a Kalashnikov bullet, let alone heavy machine gun fire or shell splinters.

Yea they are a private sale predating the current conflict. As for stopping fire, some news reports are saying that Ivan have bought in some of the latest to try out and the Ukrainian tanks armour can't hold up.

The Ukrainians are getting screwed from all sides.....

Its called being spit roasted.

This whole sorry saga has the insidious malodour of appeasement.

Not saying this is the start of WW3 by any stretch, but I am genuinely quite worried about the state of the world right now and the perilous state of not just our armed forces but those of most of our allies!


As I've stated before, we are heading into a dark path

Despite peace talks, Ukraine teeters on the brink of a bigger war (http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/despite-peace-talks-ukraine-teeters-on-the-brink-of-a-bigger-war/story-fnh81p7g-1227218334209)

As expected all the major players are moving into position.

Just goes to prove they cannot do with out them, no matter what some of the politians and higher military echelon think.

Regardless of what people think of the F-35 and the politics of it, the A10 is available now and a few of the European natives are getting skittish.

[Hangarshuffle]

General Sir Richard Dannatt condemns armoured vehicle transfer to Ukraine - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11412838/Sir-Richard-Dannatt-condemns-armoured-vehicle-transfer-to-Ukraine.html)


Conservatives have had his pants down here IMHO. He repeatedly spoke out against a Labour Govt. over their mishandling of the Iraq War, and Afghan debacle. But as soon as he was demobbed,jumped into the sack with Cameron et al to help get them elected. Now expresses surprise at the news that the present Govt. has effectively turned a blind eye to an inferior weapon supply.
At least he is speaking out against it, I will give him that. But he was used.
Cameron, as UK PM is absolutely desperate for this crisis to go away, because he knows he should be helping to lead with the European response against it. But he cant do anything, because (a) we are small and now surprisingly undefended-we no longer have credible defence forces and (b) the Government know the public do not want to antagonise Russia, or be any part of the potential fight on behalf of the Ukraine, because they now recognise point (a) themselves, and only want to be left in peace. My 2 bob opinion spent.

[Heathrow Harry]

"he knows he should be helping to lead with the European response against it"

Why?

it's actually quite nice to see some other Europeans leading the charge this time with us holding their coats rather than the usual charge from Downing Street

[DC10RealMan]

Didn't Ukraine hand back to Russia its original nuclear weapons on the promise that Putin wouldn't be naughty and try to invade them?

I suspect that they are now regretting it.

[NutLoose]

On the understanding the UK and US would defend them against any hostile threat.

[rh200]

it's actually quite nice to see some other Europeans leading the charge this time with us holding their coats rather than the usual charge from Downing Street Leading the charge, what f%$^ing charge. Charge of the donkey brigade. Seems like a typical European response that is leading to the point where we will end up taking the lead at a terrible cost.

BBC News - Ukraine crisis: Fighting rages ahead of ceasefire (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31470645)Meanwhile, the US ambassador to Ukraine tweeted (https://twitter.com/GeoffPyatt/status/566427629390413825) recent satellite images that he said showed Russian artillery near Debaltseve.Geoffrey Pyatt also said on Twitter (https://twitter.com/GeoffPyatt/status/56649063323874508) that Russian units along the border were preparing a large shipment of supplies to separatist fighters.He said that the rebels were now better armed than some Nato countries.No wonder Putin was smiling when walking out of the ceasefire meetings, he was thinking, "this must be what the Adolf felt like after dealing with Chamberlain".

[NutLoose]

I wonder if they were brought to the table because of the shelling and it was one reason they were pushing for the artillery to be pulled back.

I wonder what they hit at Donetsk, ignore the silly title

https://youtube.com/watch?v=khiEWTs7nwM

[Hangarshuffle]

Ken Clarke: Sending troops to Ukraine will not 'solve anything' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11434209/Ken-Clarke-Sending-troops-to-Ukraine-will-not-solve-anything.html)


PPrune amazes me with its apathy at times.... its as though everybody has gone to sleep... or are simply too world-weary to care. I can understand that but please somebody speak up.
Ok. I'll drag it up again.
The above link is a story about the UK now sending military advisors and trainers to help one side of the Ukrainian...you know what its about.
Ex minister called K Clarke thinks this will not really solve anything.


Our ministers are out of their depths.
We have not the military capability to front up to Russia, right on their own border. We will never have that capability.
This will make us take a side. We could now be seen to be directly supporting the fighting against the Western Ukraine separatists/the Russians (by proxy).
This is not our war to fight.
The PM is beyond his mandate to take these risks. The democratic process must take place in such a serious situation. Have I missed the debate in Parliament? Was there a vote?
This can quickly and readily escalate very badly for everybody.
We are sleepwalking into a conflict of which we should avoid.
Dialogue has to be maintained by and with all sides.


What am I missing? Are they mad, or am I mad?

[Lonewolf_50]

Hangar, one can argue that the UK already took a side (as did the US) a couple of decades ago by underwriting the deal wherein Ukraine gave up the nukes as part of the split from Russia/CIS/USSR.

[Fitter2]

Hangar - a small history exam..

Who said: However much we may sympathise with a small nation confronted by a big and powerful neighbour, we cannot in all circumstances undertake to involve the whole British Empire in war simply on her account. If we have to fight, it must be on larger issues than that. I am myself a man of peace to the depths of my soul; armed conflict between nations is a nightmare to me... War is a fearful thing, and we must be very clear before we embark on it, that it is really the great issues that are at stake.

What was the result?

[racedo]

Hangar, one can argue that the UK already took a side (as did the US) a couple of decades ago by underwriting the deal wherein Ukraine gave up the nukes as part of the split from Russia/CIS/USSR.

Remind me again who has been targetting civilians in this ?

As for the agreement, US Govt has said previously it didn't apply when they disliked parts of it.................... funny that been saying that since 1860's in the US.

[Lonewolf_50]

racedo:
Your "who has been targeting civilians" questions seems a non sequitur regarding who did or didn't sign up to guarantee a deal.

Likewise, just what are you referring to from the 1860's? Was the US involved with the Ukraine in the 1860's? I don't recall that, to be honest. I am not sure what the point of the allusion is.

[racedo]

racedo:
Your "who has been targeting civilians" questions seems a non sequitur regarding who did or didn't sign up to guarantee a deal.

Likewise, just what are you referring to from the 1860's? Was the US involved with the Ukraine in the 1860's? I don't recall that, to be honest. I am not sure what the point of the allusion is.

US Govt happy breaking treaties with its own people from 1860's onwards.

Explainer: The Budapest Memorandum And Its Relevance To Crimea (http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-explainer-budapest-memorandum/25280502.html)

As for Budapest Treaty......... its not, its a political document and that view is from the US.

Victoria Nuland spending $5 Billion on Ukraine...................... what was that about again ?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Boris Nemtsov, Russian opposition leader, shot dead in Moscow: reports - World - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/boris-nemtsov-russian-opposition-leader-shot-dead-in-moscow-reports-1.2976585)

Sure to be nothing to do with that nice Mr Putin, of course. Remarkable how many of his opponents end up accidentally dead.

[rh200]

The Ukraine's screwed, the only question is how screwed are we prepared to allow it to get? We have the ability to severly limit the damage, the question is will we, I think not. Russia is breaking Ukraine financially, whilst this goes on we keep pouring in aid money, but frankly its like p!ssing into the wind.

As for Russia, its already gone, there is a dictator in charge and the sooner the west realizes that the better, then we can work out the new world order and how to deal with it.

[Toadstool]

Militarily, we are not going to get involved. Our last two conflicts were done under the umbrella of Air Supremacy and against insurgents armed with the most basic weapons.

A war in Ukraine against an enemy equipped with tanks, artillery, a credible Air Force and backed up with the threat of nuclear weapons. I think not.

As much as we may bluster and send advisors, the possible number of UK casualties if we involve ourselves in a conflict such as this would be sky high.

Putin and the west have been staring at each other and we blinked first. He knows that the Budapest memorandum is worthless. What will be interesting will be to see how far he takes it. If, as some analysts predict, he starts to look towards the Baltic then the possibility of him testing how strong the NATO alliance is would be very interesting. IMHO he has a free pass with Ukraine. The Baltic may possibly be a step too far.

China must be watching this with glee on the sidelines while they slowly and inexorably strengthen and build their economy and armed forces. Thank god the UK is not involved militarily in the Far East.

[henra]

What will be interesting will be to see how far he takes it. If, as some analysts predict, he starts to look towards the Baltic then the possibility of him testing how strong the NATO alliance is would be very interesting.

I doubt it.
He's not an idiot.
He's playing to the public opinion in Russia but he won't do it at all costs.


IMHO he has a free pass with Ukraine. The Baltic may possibly be a step too far.
Yup on both.
The latter would probably turn ugly for Russia even without NATO firing a gun.
The West hasn't pulled the economic/financial 'nuclear bomb' on Russia yet. At the moment they are just tickling.
Making all Russian Banks toxic, a full economic Embargo including Oil and Gas and freezing all assets of Russian citizens abroad would throw the Country into an economic catastrophy pretty quickly. However this should be spared for the worst case since no one knows what/who would follow Putin after the resulting total collapse. Looking at some of the candidates makes you shiver...
On top of that NATO couldn't leave any Military challenge to the Baltics unanswered. And NATO knows that. And Putin as well.

So, for the Eastern Ukraine including a land bridge to Crimea plus potentially Mariupol it doesn't look to well. On the other hand they were anyway not very Anti Russian (to avoid saying they were majority Pro Russian).
To force Ukraine (which is internally torn between both sides) into a final decision whether they wanted to join EU or Eurasian Alliance was a stupidity beyond belief and Barroso should be pulled to Court and ideally jailed for this.

[Kitbag]

On top of that NATO couldn't leave any Military challenge to the Baltics unanswered. And NATO knows that. And Putin as well.And herein lies the problem I think; NATO has continually and deliberately underfunded itself for the past 25 years, relying on the US to take up the slack. I wouldn't blame the Americans if they said 'you know what fellas, this is your problem...'

A famous American (Was it Carnegie or Roosevelt) said 'speak softly and carry a big stick', today the only stick available is a cheap knock off copy of a Harry Potter wand.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Teddy Roosevelt, not Carnegie.
Teddy advocated long term intelligence-led anticipation of likely flare-ups so the stick wouldn't need to be used; another deep failure by the EU, as Henra said.

[melmothtw]

...another deep failure by the EU

For all its failures, the EU's primary success (and perhaps the only one that matters) is that for nearly 70 years it has preserved the peace in Europe. It's telling that the only continental conflicts in this time have involved non-member countries.

Yes, I know that the presence of the US had a massive part to play in this peace, but without the EU; the French, the Germans, the Spanish, the Italians, and dare I say it the British would have found a way to start a war or two between us.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I think you'll find that was NATO that did that.

[NutLoose]

The drip feeding of sanctions gets you nowhere, people get used to them as they materialise over a long period and they learn to live with them and work around them, it needed to be a full blown slam dunk to coin the American phrase. The problem with that is the west were not willing to suffer the drop in living standards and fall back into recession they could have brought on. It takes a strong willed and firm leader to enforce them, something we all in the west lack with the spineless sycophants we have in power today.

[air pig]

For all its failures, the EU's primary success (and perhaps the only one that matters) is that for nearly 70 years it has preserved the peace in Europe. It's telling that the only continental conflicts in this time have involved non-member countries.

Yes, I know that the presence of the US had a massive part to play in this peace, but without the EU; the French, the Germans, the Spanish, the Italians, and dare I say it the British would have found a way to start a war or two between us.


Sir, you speak ballcocks. The EU's primary failure is itself, its second rate failed politicians who run it and hopefully will fall apart before too long.

[NutLoose]

Agreed........

[Danny42C]

"For all its failures, the EU's primary success (and perhaps the only one that matters) is that for nearly 70 years it has preserved the peace in Europe. It's telling that the only continental conflicts in this time have involved non-member countries".

"Yes, I know that the presence of the US had a massive part to play in this peace, but without the EU; the French, the Germans, the Spanish, the Italians, and dare I say it the British would have found a way to start a war or two between us. "

Not so. NATO is responsible for that; NATO means American power and we forget that at our peril.

D.

[LS-4]

Agree on NATO as a vital player.

The drip feeding of sanctions gets you nowhere, people get used to them as they materialise over a long period and they learn to live with them and work around them, it needed to be a full blown slam dunk to coin the American phrase. The problem with that is the west were not willing to suffer the drop in living standards and fall back into recession they could have brought on. It takes a strong willed and firm leader to enforce them, something we all in the west lack with the spineless sycophants we have in power today.

Costs and benefits in a complex world.

Perhaps the sanctions will have somewhat of a creeping effect combined with domestic issues in Russia and so on? The Russian economy isn't doing too well at the moment. One question is whether Putin might attempt to deflect public attention from domestic to foreign issues to an even higher degree.

[henra]

For all its failures, the EU's primary success (and perhaps the only one that matters) is that for nearly 70 years it has preserved the peace in Europe. It's telling that the only continental conflicts in this time have involved non-member countries.

and
I think you'll find that was NATO that did that.
I think it is probably a bit of both.
Still it was pure folly to put pressure on Ukraine to decide.
Moreover economically the Ukraine was/still is heavily dependent on Russia. They were in many industrial areas the 'subconttracted low wages manufacturing site' for Russia. I doubt there is any viable plan in the drawer how to make Ukraine survive economically without the Russian market. If this breaks away completely you have got a massive problem. And the Ukraine has 45 Million inhabitants. This is 4 times bigger than Greece. So you better got a plan....
Seeing the level of competence on the EU administration level I would be deeply concerned for the Ukrainian people should they blindly follow the EU.

[Bigbux]

I doubt it.
He's not an idiot.
He's playing to the public opinion in Russia but he won't do it at all costs.


Point 1 - Agreed. But that's not to say he isn't unbalanced and won't paint himself into a corner or too. There are plenty of pressures on him at home, and quite frankly - if as state controller of the media and chief punishment monitor for all things "anti-Russian" (read Putin) you can't get an 80% approval rating then you are not much of a dictator are you? And it takes effort to control a state the size of Russia if you are herding it in a direction some of it doesn't want to go.

Point 2 - He will do it at all costs - eventually, unless his own people stop him. To men like Putin there is no difference in killing 1 person, 100 people or many millions. History has shown us what his ilk will do and history has shown us what appeasement and disarmament in the face of it achieves.

As for trying it on in the Baltics - why not? There are pro-Russian elements there and with a little creative thinking, there are anti Western groups dotted all over Europe and, indeed the UK. I don't think we will see massed squadrons of Russian tanks headed our way soon (too easy to destroy with something big), but that's not the way anymore, is it?.

[NutLoose]

Interesting development


Russians to fight UK's North Sea gasfields decision (http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/russians-to-fight-uks-north-sea-gasfields-decision/ar-BBi8gCd?ocid=iehp)

[Bigbux]

It would be interesting to see Russia's interest in the developing South Atlantic oil production.

[ORAC]

Putin takes control of Georgia’s South Ossetia (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4385966.ece)

Russia was again accused of violating a neighbour’s sovereignty last night after President Putin signed a treaty incorporating the breakaway Georgian republic of South Ossetia, a year after annexing Crimea from Ukraine.

Georgia, the European Union, the United States and Nato denounced the move, which merges the tiny statelet’s military with Russia’s and hands control of its economy to Moscow. Jens Stoltenberg, Nato’s secretary general, said that the treaty “violates Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial *integrity and blatantly contradicts the principles of international law”.

South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another disputed region, broke away from Georgia in the early 1990s after the Soviet Union fell apart. Russia gained effective control over both regions in a brief war in 2008. Abkhazia signed its own integration treaty with Moscow last year but yesterday’s document goes further. Thomas De Waal, an expert on the Caucasus region, wrote recently that “South Ossetia is being swallowed up”.

The move came shortly before Mr Putin addressed a crowd estimated at more than 100,000 below the Kremlin walls at a concert to celebrate the “return” of Crimea and amid an intensifying row between Moscow, Russian-backed separatists and Kiev that threatens the fragile ceasefire in east Ukraine.

Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky, leaders of the self-declared People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, said in a joint statement that Kiev had “trampled” on the peace process and sought to destroy their territory “by violence and economic siege”. They said they would defeat Ukrainian forces again if Kiev wanted to fight, and have broken off co-operation until a new law approved by the Ukrainian parliament on Tuesday is repealed.

That legislation grants special status and devolves substantial power to rebel-held parts of the east, but also includes provisions that separatist leaders and Russia say were introduced without consultation after the Minsk agreements were signed last month, including a demand for local elections to be held first under Ukrainian law. Petro Poroshenko, the president of Ukraine, said the new law would “restore Ukraine’s sovereignty on these territories”. Ukrainian MPs also passed a bill declaring the rebel-held areas “temporarily occupied territories”.

Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said that the new laws “grossly violate” the Minsk agreement and told his German counterpart, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, that the bill “could undermine the peace process and lead to a new wave of serious destabilisation”......

[Bigbux]

I would like to think that the world is waking up to the Putin Pflusterkrieg. This is why we should not pull our punches when considering sanctions.

On the horizon, besides the Baltic states - we also have the thorny question of the Arctic and who owns all the hydrocarbon resource there. If planting your flag on the sea bed isn't a declaration of ownership then I don't know what is.

And where else is there oil and an eager ally to stir up a quick conflict....? hmmm, 2 small islands, East and West....name escapes me.

Luckily we have Jean-Claude Juncker to protect us all. (he's a Sith Lord in disguise so no worries there).

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Georgia and the surrounding areas are a political basket-case anyway. I had the pleasure of teaching a student from Georgia for a few years (around Rose Revolution time). She was a fierce patriot, but even she was incensed at the aggressive idiocy of her leaders who pretty much pushed the South Ossetians into the arms of Russia. I'm not blaming Putin for this one.

[Lonewolf_50]

South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another disputed region, broke away from Georgia in
the early 1990s after the Soviet Union fell apart.
Maybe, just maybe, the people who live there prefer to align with Russians rather than Georgians. I'd like to call on the carpet the cnuts who denounced this, our own American pols included, and ask them when they forgot what hypocrisy meant. Look at all of the efforts to support local sentiments in Bosnia and Kosovo: "we want to be out from under rule of X."

Maybe this is the same deal, and as Fox 3 says, the leadership in Georgia have not covered themselves in glory. My son in law has a very good friend living in Georgia now, teaching English. His experiences support what Fox3 says: basket case. Or has he says it with a pretty strong Texan accent:
"Them people are nuts from the get go."

[melmothtw]

Maybe, just maybe, the people who live there prefer to align with Russians rather than Georgians.

Just as the Germans who lived in the Sudetenland preferred to align with Hitler's Germany. If they truly want to go down that road, then there are mechanisms under international law for them to do so that don't include Putin's cynical land-grab.


Look at all of the efforts to support local sentiments in Bosnia and Kosovo

Not sure what you mean by this Lonewolf, as in Bosnia certainly all sides were 'local' (there was a reason they were called Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Croats, and Bosnian Muslims/Bosniaks).

I know there's a counter-narrative (usually propagated by RT and others) by which the West imposed its will on the Balkans for its own imperial reasons, but the fact was that we only got involved (and reluctantly at that) to try and prevent a genocide on our own doorstep.

"Them people are nuts from the get go."

I'm sure many would describe Texans in such a way, but few would see that as an excuse for Mexico to invade.

[rh200]

Its the old problem of ideology again and how extreme we want to be. Frankly for relatively free countries I would just freeze the borders and go this is what you have. Might even extend that to all countries.

Why? well how far do you go, counties, towns? The world needs to move on, breaking away for purely nationalistic reasons is bullsh!t and should be given utter condemnation. More importantly it encourages outside interference.

One can understand if one particular grouping is getting a shafting, but preferably I would prefer to see that dealt with.

[ORAC]

E. Europe Eyes Conscription Amid Russia Threat (http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/03/21/russian-military-policy-pushes-eastern-europe-to-reinstate-conscription/25074779/)


WARSAW — Eastern European countries are increasingly moving to restore conscription as a result of their rising concern over Russia's military activities in the region.

Most recently, Lithuania unveiled plans to reinstate conscription this year in response to Moscow's intervention in Ukraine. The Lithuanian Parliament passed a bill March 19, following a legislative proposal put forward by the country's government, by a majority of 112 out of 141 ministers. The measure will be effective for at least five years, the Lithuanian Defense Ministry said in a statement...........

Lithuania scrapped conscription in 2008. Neighboring Estonia has maintained it, while the government of Latvia has been considering a draft to increase its military numbers. Meanwhile, local analysts say that since 2008, Lithuanian politicians have been increasingly worried by Russia's military policy in Eastern Europe.....

Also in the Czech Republic, the Defense Ministry announced plans to reinstate conscription, and is drafting a bill with this aim. Should the draft law enter into force, conscription will become obligatory for men and women above the age of 18........ Should the draft bill secure the backing of the Czech Parliament, the first call for conscripts would take place in 2017. In addition to this, the ministry is also aiming to introduce voluntary military training in peacetime........

In Poland, where conscription was scrapped by the government in 2009, the government has not announced a return to conscription, although the conflict in Ukraine has spurred increased focus on national defense capabilities by local decision-makers. However, the latest opinion polls indicate that popular support for conscription is rising quickly.......... This month, 80 percent of those polled said they were in favor of re-introducing conscription in Poland, which represented an 8 percent increase compared with November, according to data from local opinion research institute IBRiS Homo Homini............

With the upcoming parliamentary election in Poland scheduled for fall, and representatives of the country's leading opposition party, Law and Justice, announcing they will restore conscription in case of their victory, the new government could opt for following the public opinion, joining the ranks of Lithuania and the Czech Republic, according to various media reports.

[Lonewolf_50]

Just as the Germans who lived in the Sudetenland preferred to align with Hitler's Germany.
You seem to miss the point that the local people did NOT much care for Georgians, no matter how please you are personally with a given set of lines on a map.

[melmothtw]

And the local Sudetenlanders (or what ever the adjective happens to be) did NOT much care for the Czechoslovaks either, so what is your point?

[Woff1965]

Removed - comment no longer applies

[ORAC]

Hard to know where to post this with all the threads on different threats to Ukraine, Denmark, Sweden etc, so chose here - but this threat is to the Baltic States - all NATO members......

Russia threatens to use 'nuclear force' over Crimea and the Baltic states (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-threatens-to-use-nuclear-force-over-crimea-and-the-baltic-states-10150565.html)

Russia has threatened to use “nuclear force” to defend its annexation of Crimea and warned that the “same conditions” that prompted it to take military action in Ukraine exist in the three Baltic states, all members of Nato. According to notes made by an American at a meeting between Russian generals and US officials – and seen by The Times newspaper - Moscow threatened a “spectrum of responses from nuclear to non-military” if Nato moved more forces into Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

The Russians told the meeting, which took place in Germany last month, that an attempt to return Crimea to Ukraine would be met “forcefully including through the use of nuclear force”. And they said if Nato sent arms to Ukraine this would be seen as “further encroachment by Nato to the Russian border” and “the Russian people would demand a forceful response”.

They added that “the same conditions that existed in Ukraine and caused Russia to take action there” existed in the three Baltic states, which like Ukraine have significant numbers of people who regard themselves as ethnically Russian.

Russia was considering taking steps in the Baltics, according to the notes, but this would most likely be “destabilising actions that would be even harder to trace back to Russia than those of eastern Ukraine”.

The notes suggest Moscow would avoid “injections of troops and heavy weapons in favour of other tools”. “Russia would hope slowly to entice those Russian populations towards Russia without giving Nato a pretext to deploy troops,” the document adds.

If Nato then responded, that would make it “a potential co-aggressor against Russian-speaking minorities in Baltic states”, a situation described as “potentially more dangerous than that in Ukraine to the United States”.

[sir]

Here we get to see where some of our 'little friends' work...

Salutin' Putin: inside a Russian troll house | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-inside-russian-troll-house)

[rh200]

Whilst you have a spineless maggot in the White house (passion fingers) you are going to get this. Basically Putin has a finite amount of time to get what he wants.

There is only one way to deal with him, and thats man up and call the bluff. But make sure you have a little candy spare to give, so he can save a bit of face. Another words don't completely back him into a corner.

Basically from all the corners of the world, every one is taking advantage of the power vacuum. Surpised nobody's metioned the Chinese and the south China sea.

[Lonewolf_50]

Here we get to see where some of our 'little friends' work...

Salutin' Putin: inside a Russian troll house | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-inside-russian-troll-house)This is a form of information warfare that simply harnesses new tech to an old theme, of broadcasting a particular world view using mass media. This has been part and parcel of the Soviet / Russian System since about the time of Lenin. No surprise that a veteran cold warrior would apply such a tool to achieve his ends.

Reminds one of the old Goebbels line about "if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth."

Only if it is unchallenged.

[ORAC]

A related issue perhaps.....

Russia Launches Next Deadly Phase of Hybrid War on Ukraine (http://www.newsweek.com/2015/04/10/russia-launches-next-deadly-phase-hybrid-war-ukraine-318218.html)

.......Ukraine’s state security service, the SBU, says Russia has entered into a new phase of its campaign to destabilise Ukraine, with the 22 February attack in Kharkiv just one of a series of bombings orchestrated by Russian spy services, the FSB and the GRU. “It starts with the FSB’s security centres 16 and 18, operating out of Skolkovo, Russia,” says Vitaliy Naida, head of the SBU department responsible for intercepting online traffic. “These centres are in charge of information warfare. They send out propaganda, false information via social media. Re-captioned images from Syria, war crimes from Serbia – they’re used to radicalise and then recruit Ukrainians.”

He takes a suspected three-man terror cell from Dnipropretovsk who are currently on trial as an example and walks Newsweek through the evidence, including photographs and video of weapons with Russian serial numbers and intercepted communications. Passed instructions and weapons via dead-drops, the cell never met their handlers.

“They were recruited by the FSB. Instructions were initially given in private messages via internet and in some cases Vkontakte [a Russian social network],” Naida says. “When they were detained and arrested, in their houses we found explosives, grenades, means of communications and printed messages – where to set explosives, where they should be placed to create panic.” Naida’s unit monitors roughly 600 “anti-Ukrainian” social network groups with hundreds of thousands of members. So far it has intercepted communications between 29 prolific group administrators and individuals using accounts linked to the Russian security services.

A cursory internet search reveals separatist groups are no longer just Ukraine’s problem. This year Armenia, the Baltic countries, Moldova and Poland have suddenly acquired new “People’s Republic” pages on social media, some overtly pro-Russian, others simply stoking ethnic tensions between majority and minority populations in the same city or country – be they Russians and Latvians, or Poles and Lithuanians.........

[Woff1965]

Now they are trying to stir up trouble in the Czech republic

Russian bid for Czech hearts and minds - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32070184)

[ORAC]

I think we're in more trouble than I thought if they've advanced far enough that this is the eastern border....... :{:{

First Air National Guard Theater Security Package Deploys to Europe (https://www.defencetalk.com/first-air-national-guard-theater-security-package-deploys-to-europe-63679/)

The U.S. Air Force deployed 12 F-15 Eagle fighter aircraft and approximately 200 Airmen as the first Air National Guard theater security package in Europe to support Operation Atlantic Resolve this week.........

While in Europe, the unit will conduct training alongside NATO allies with the goal of strengthening interoperability and enhancing regional security. The unit will later forward deploy to locations in Eastern European NATO nations including Leeuwarden, Netherlands.........

[ORAC]

Bankruptcy Looms For Moldova (http://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2015/07/10/bankruptcy-looms-for-tiny-moldova/)

.......The massive expansion of bank lending was funded with heavy borrowing from – among other things – Russian companies. The banks failed when this funding was abruptly withdrawn. Concurrently, there was also a retail bank run triggered by politicians. The timing of the funding withdrawal and bank run does not appear to me to be coincidental, coming as it did less than a week before the parliamentary election. The pro-EU government lost the election: the largest party, with 21.5% of the vote, was the Socialist Party, which is opposed to EU membership and favors Moldova joining Russia’s “Eurasian Union”. An unstable pro-EU coalition government was eventually formed. But it did not last long. The new Prime Minister, Chiril Gaburici, resigned in June after the authenticity of his college diplomas was challenged. Moldova is currently without a government.

It is disingenuous of Jatras to imply that private sector investors “rescued” these banks from a corrupt public sector and were then shafted by politicians. In Moldova, as in Bulgaria, there is no clear distinction between public and private sectors. The country is run by powerful business interests – we in the West like to call them “oligarchs” – who dominate government either directly, by being elected, or indirectly through patronage. They go into politics in order to further their business interests: they gain control of institutions such as central banks and the judiciary in order to protect their business interests: and they take over media channels in order to promote their businesses and discredit their rivals. Ilan Shor is one of them: he was elected mayor of the city of Orhei in June despite being under house arrest. There are no innocent parties in this fraud.

But even more importantly, Moldova is a house divided. A significant part of Moldova’s population is Russian-speaking and/or pro-Russia: an estimated 75% of its banking sector is Russian-owned, as are many of its businesses. Support for EU membership has declined significantly in the last year, partly due to heavy promotion of the Eurasian Union by Russian sympathisers, and is now at best marginal. The enclave of Transnistria openly faces East: Russia has military bases there and in March held military exercises along its border with Ukraine, escalating tensions. Ukraine has now denied Russia access to its Transnistrian military bases. But while the EU is distracted with the Greek crisis, Russia has been distributing Russian passports to Transnistrians.

So although I think Kroll’s report is flawed, I believe it is correct to highlight the involvement of Russians, not only the companies that funded the banks but their shareholders too. What Kroll missed was the geopolitical dimension. Bringing down pro-EU governments fits all too well with Russia’s ambitions in the region. In which case the EU’s denial of budgetary support to Moldova is political suicide. Without that support, Moldova will collapse. And a failed state sandwiched between the unstable Ukraine and fragile Balkans – and featuring a pro-Kremlin enclave described by the FT as a “flashpoint – is the last thing the EU needs. It should think again.

[ORAC]

And this is the probable next leader of the official UK opposition party...... :ugh::ugh:

Corbyn and the Ukraine (http://paulocanning.********.co.uk/2015/08/corbyn-and-ukraine-its-not-pretty.html)

[ORAC]

Is A Slow Putsch Against Putin Under Way?
(http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2015/08/20/is-a-slow-putsch-against-putin-under-way/)

A quarter century after the fall of the USSR, Kremlinologists sense a putsch in the air, (http://windowoneurasia2.********.com/2015/08/24-years-on-russia-has-not-moved-beyond.html) despite Vladimir Putin’s overwhelming approval ratings. The tea leaves say that the Kremlin elite, dubbed by some as Politburo 2.0 (http://minchenko.ru/netcat_files/File/Big%20Government%20and%20the%20Politburo%202_0.pdf), is currently deciding whether Putin should go before he makes a bad situation worse. The founder of the respected daily Kommersant predicts (http://gordonua.com/publications/Osnovatel-Kommersanta-YAkovlev-rossiyanam-Uezzhayte-i-glavnoe-uvozite-detey-94613.html) that a dramatic change is about to take place and advises Russians who have the means to leave the country for a month or so and take their children with them.........

[Party Animal]

ORAC,


I'm interested in your last 2 posts however, the Corbyn and putsch links both failed and the last link was entirely in Russian. Are you able to re-transmit ones that either work or are readable?

[ORAC]

First link is to Paul Canning, but has ******** in it. Follow the link to his full article in the extract in this piece (http://hurryupharry.org/2015/08/03/corbyn-and-ukraine-its-not-pretty/).

The second link is to Forbes magazine in English. Only the link inside it to Kommersant is to Russian Language article - and if you look at the right hand side of their title bar you will see an "English" button which takes you to their translated version........

[glad rag]

Keep at it ORAC, there are many who wish to hide the truth...;)

[ORAC]

A Ukrainian mongrel - Welcome to Surzhyk, the lingua franca of a people who now shun Russian. (http://www.politico.eu/article/ukrainian-mongrel-surzhyk-language-russian/)