The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
From [Ukraine] with Love 2: The Crimea is not Enough!
JusticeforPluto
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So, there have been a bunch of problems in Ukraine, seen here:
The problems began when people began protesting against the government's decision to pass over EU treaties in favor of closer ties with Russia. Things quickly got out of hand, people got shot, and the president, Viktor Yanukovych,fled the country to Russia.
A new was government created, and elections promised. Things seemed to be looking up.
Then a bunch of mysterious, totally not Russian soldiers began showing up in Crimea, shown here:
Soon, the local government, backed by "local pro-Russian militia", announced that they would have a referendum on whether to gain more autonomy from Ukraine or join Russia. Join Russia won, surprising no one.
The EU and the US passed a bunch of sanctions against Russia, but many EU nations are still dependent on Russian natural gas. Hence, there was not a lot they could do to Russia unless they wanted to hurt themselves just as bad.
All seemed pretty quite for a while, until a bunch of Pro-Russian demonstrators stormed the local government building in Donetsk and proclaimed a peoples republic.
Then, armed men began taking over police stations in Eastern Ukraine. The Ukrainian government responded with force in order to regain control over these buildings.
And than brings us up to the present.
Some quick Q&A:
Q: Why is this happening?
A: IMO, it is due to the fact that Ukraine existed, literally and metaphorically, between the EU and Russia. Russia is very worried at what they perceive NATO encirclement of their homeland. When the pro-Russian government fell and a pro-EU government took its place, it seemed like one of Russia's last two European allies (the other being Belarus) would fall to the West.
Q: Why did Russia take the Crimea?
A: For one, it has a very large Russian population (60%). More importantly, it is home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet (see what I did there). The Ukrainian government allowed the Russian government to station the fleet there in exchange for a discount on gas. It was a Faustian bargain neither side was to happy about, and Russia took advantage of the chaos in Ukraine to seize the vital port for good.
Q: Why is the Russian Fleet stationed in Ukraine to begin with? And why are there so many Russians in Crimea.
A: The Russian population is not just limited to Crimea. There is also a sizable population in the east of Ukraine as well.
But, to answer the question, it is that Ukraine until very recently was part of Russia. Kiev (Ukraine's capital) was once the heartland of Russian culture. Then the mongols invaded, and the area know today as Ukraine fell under the control of the Crimean Tatars and the Ottoman Turks. Russia eventually conquered the area and began to settle it. Now, Ukrainians and Russians are both East Slavic cultures, along with Belarusians. Until very recently, there was considered to be no difference between the three groups (hence why Kiev was the heartland of Russian culture). The first instance of and independent Ukrainian state was in 1918 after the First World War. The state did not last long, and it was annexed by the Soviet Russians and became part of the USSR. Now, Russia has a long history of stationing their Black Sea Fleet in Crimea. In fact, until the 1950's Crimea was considered part of Russia. It was given to Ukraine to please some Ukrainian nationalists, because who in 1950 would of predicted the fall of the Soviet Union?
Wow that got worried. long story short, Ukraine and Russia have a very long and interwoven history. Ukraine, depending on who you ask, was either a Russian colony where Russian supressed the Ukrainian national idenity, or was a part of a glorious "All Russian (East Slavic) Nation.
Q: Whats all this about fascists and anti-Semites?
A: Both Ukraine and Russia have their fair share of Neo-Nazi parties. However, the real issue behind this is the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA). This group collaborated with Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Their goal was to create and independent Ukrainian state. They are a very controversial group to say the least. There is evidence that they helped with the Holocaust, and in one case slaughtered Poles themselves (areas of Ukraine were annexed by the Polish state after the collapse of the Ukrainian State following the invasion of the Soviets. The Poles then suppressed the Ukrainian national identity just as the Russians had). However, many claim that the cooperation with the Nazis was only a means to an end, and the UPA eventually fought the Germans as well during the Second World War. To some, the UPA fought for freedom against the Nazis and Soviets, to others they are a bunch of Nazi collaborators.
Many in Russia are proud of the the actions of the Soviet Armed Forces in defeating the Nazi's. They view the Red Army as the liberators of Eastern Europe. Many in Ukraine are proud of the UPA's actions in fighting both the Soviets and the Nazi's, and many of Ukraine's nationalists parties celebrate the UPA. These two narratives do not mix. Ukraine's nationalist parties got a large amount of seats in Ukraine's Parliament following Yanukovych's flight to Russia.
Now, I hate fascist anti-Semites as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is a fascist anti-Semite). But Russia's narrative of this kind of people taking over Ukraine's government ignores their own problems with such groups and ignores the complex and brackish history of groups like the UPA.
Last Note: Feel free to PM me for anything you feel needs to be added/changed!
The problems began when people began protesting against the government's decision to pass over EU treaties in favor of closer ties with Russia. Things quickly got out of hand, people got shot, and the president, Viktor Yanukovych,fled the country to Russia.
A new was government created, and elections promised. Things seemed to be looking up.
Then a bunch of mysterious, totally not Russian soldiers began showing up in Crimea, shown here:
Soon, the local government, backed by "local pro-Russian militia", announced that they would have a referendum on whether to gain more autonomy from Ukraine or join Russia. Join Russia won, surprising no one.
The EU and the US passed a bunch of sanctions against Russia, but many EU nations are still dependent on Russian natural gas. Hence, there was not a lot they could do to Russia unless they wanted to hurt themselves just as bad.
All seemed pretty quite for a while, until a bunch of Pro-Russian demonstrators stormed the local government building in Donetsk and proclaimed a peoples republic.
Then, armed men began taking over police stations in Eastern Ukraine. The Ukrainian government responded with force in order to regain control over these buildings.
And than brings us up to the present.
Some quick Q&A:
Q: Why is this happening?
A: IMO, it is due to the fact that Ukraine existed, literally and metaphorically, between the EU and Russia. Russia is very worried at what they perceive NATO encirclement of their homeland. When the pro-Russian government fell and a pro-EU government took its place, it seemed like one of Russia's last two European allies (the other being Belarus) would fall to the West.
Q: Why did Russia take the Crimea?
A: For one, it has a very large Russian population (60%). More importantly, it is home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet (see what I did there). The Ukrainian government allowed the Russian government to station the fleet there in exchange for a discount on gas. It was a Faustian bargain neither side was to happy about, and Russia took advantage of the chaos in Ukraine to seize the vital port for good.
Q: Why is the Russian Fleet stationed in Ukraine to begin with? And why are there so many Russians in Crimea.
A: The Russian population is not just limited to Crimea. There is also a sizable population in the east of Ukraine as well.
But, to answer the question, it is that Ukraine until very recently was part of Russia. Kiev (Ukraine's capital) was once the heartland of Russian culture. Then the mongols invaded, and the area know today as Ukraine fell under the control of the Crimean Tatars and the Ottoman Turks. Russia eventually conquered the area and began to settle it. Now, Ukrainians and Russians are both East Slavic cultures, along with Belarusians. Until very recently, there was considered to be no difference between the three groups (hence why Kiev was the heartland of Russian culture). The first instance of and independent Ukrainian state was in 1918 after the First World War. The state did not last long, and it was annexed by the Soviet Russians and became part of the USSR. Now, Russia has a long history of stationing their Black Sea Fleet in Crimea. In fact, until the 1950's Crimea was considered part of Russia. It was given to Ukraine to please some Ukrainian nationalists, because who in 1950 would of predicted the fall of the Soviet Union?
Wow that got worried. long story short, Ukraine and Russia have a very long and interwoven history. Ukraine, depending on who you ask, was either a Russian colony where Russian supressed the Ukrainian national idenity, or was a part of a glorious "All Russian (East Slavic) Nation.
Q: Whats all this about fascists and anti-Semites?
A: Both Ukraine and Russia have their fair share of Neo-Nazi parties. However, the real issue behind this is the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA). This group collaborated with Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Their goal was to create and independent Ukrainian state. They are a very controversial group to say the least. There is evidence that they helped with the Holocaust, and in one case slaughtered Poles themselves (areas of Ukraine were annexed by the Polish state after the collapse of the Ukrainian State following the invasion of the Soviets. The Poles then suppressed the Ukrainian national identity just as the Russians had). However, many claim that the cooperation with the Nazis was only a means to an end, and the UPA eventually fought the Germans as well during the Second World War. To some, the UPA fought for freedom against the Nazis and Soviets, to others they are a bunch of Nazi collaborators.
Many in Russia are proud of the the actions of the Soviet Armed Forces in defeating the Nazi's. They view the Red Army as the liberators of Eastern Europe. Many in Ukraine are proud of the UPA's actions in fighting both the Soviets and the Nazi's, and many of Ukraine's nationalists parties celebrate the UPA. These two narratives do not mix. Ukraine's nationalist parties got a large amount of seats in Ukraine's Parliament following Yanukovych's flight to Russia.
Now, I hate fascist anti-Semites as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is a fascist anti-Semite). But Russia's narrative of this kind of people taking over Ukraine's government ignores their own problems with such groups and ignores the complex and brackish history of groups like the UPA.
Last Note: Feel free to PM me for anything you feel needs to be added/changed!
+12
Posts
It's not just Russia who want to avoid that.
EU peacekeepers would be one thing, but there is no way in hell I'd want US forces deployed in Europe. Nothing personal, guys, but I don't want US and Russian forces having a dick measuring contest on my continent.
Mainly because Ukraine is now doing something about it. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if Russian soldiers identifying themselves as "pro-Russian militia" open fire on Ukrainian troops, and are found out, that isn't just violating Ukraine's sovereignty, it's a false flag operation, which I believe makes it a war crime.
...though I didn't know someone on the ground actually admitted to the ruse in Crimea. That info does make me believe it's more likely a half-hearted attempt to say "we tried peace" before beginning with Crimea Part 2.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27011605
I was really wondering how long it was going to take before something like this happened.
The depressing part is I doubt the EU will do anything even now with evidence that Russia has effectively invaded another sovereign state.
Maybe they'll commit to unilateral sanctions?
I don't see Putin as not planning for this possibility.
But doing so would make me an even bigger douchebag than I am.
boy that's alot of soldiers that went rogue at once
also a hell of a coincidence that all their shooty stuff happened on basically the same day.
Maybe, but depending on if the seized orders are identifiable as to who issued them (a possibility), that tactic can only carry him so far.
On top of that, if they all went AWOL and invaded a foreign nation, arrest them for desertion and war crimes you cocksucker.
Yes give Putin his 'deserted' men back so he can ensure a just trial and sentence for these 'foolish yet honorable' men.
That would just make Russia look weak and pathetic. "Hey guys, we can't maintain control over lots of our troops!"
I'm saying that if Putin were even attempting to look honest that's what he'd do. He clearly doesn't care.
Also, trial? In Russia? For desertion and war crimes? If they actually had gone AWOL and tried to conquer a foreign country without the Kremlin's leave, I think a summary execution would be the best thing they could hope for.
So yeah. I honestly think even most Russians who love Putin don't actually believe this shit anymore, they just feel really superior getting one over on Russia's "enemies".
The phrase "... complete with instructions, arms and explosives" suggests they've actually got proof that's not the case.
As I see it, with Russia being pressured to that extent though, some sort of UN presence in Ukraine seems all the more likely by the day. Seeing as Russia's pushing it so hard, I'd expect them to advocate a full blown peacekeeping intervention (of course backed primarily by Russian troops, who else), but I think an observation mission is more likely. What's really going to happen though, after these UN talks, is sort of anyones guess. In my opinion, we're also rapidly approaching a situation similar to the US Supreme Court ruling on the trail of tears - the court found the forceful removal of native Americans unlawful, just how an international court would probably find Russian military presence in Eastern Ukraine unlawful, but Jackson taunted the Supreme Court to enforce its ruling, much like how I'd imagine a defiant Russia might challenge anyone else to enforce an international ruling against Russia. And then we're back, more or less, where we started. The EU needs Russian gas, Ukraine needs the same gas, and that single trump card, combined with a measure of Russian diplomatic kicking and screaming, will probably undermine sanction efforts in reprise. So then there's the real question;
What would it actually cost Russia, if those operatives are verified and Russia is found to have acted unlawfully?
And furthermore:
Would the cost be significant enough that Russia is forced to withdraw its operatives and indirect support of Eastern Ukrainian separatists?
My bets are on "Probably not much" and "No, I'd expect them to, at the very least, fund and arm indigenous Ukrainian separatists even if the situation nominally de-escalates".
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
What it will cost Russia is yet more international political power. They are rapidly moving towards ending up as a very large pariah.
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
There's alot they can do. Sanctions can get a hell of alot worse. That can't force Russia to do anything, of course, but you can economically cripple them. It's all a matter of if Europe especially has the desire to deal with the consequences for them of doing that.
But militarily, you are correct and that's pretty much what's being shown here. The likely consequences are more people looking to either get nukes or not give them up, general military buildup and more people running to NATO for protection.
While that is a small possibility, it honestly strikes me as being easier to just go out and capture some of these "people's militia" geese and root around their stuff/interrogate 'em.
China opts for the economic rather than military sword. Mostly because of the US carrier groups gently floating in the summer seas.
Not really. They are their largest trading partner afaik but that doesn't mean the Russian economy can afford to abandon most of it's other partners. Shit, they've already lost like a years worth of GDP because of what's already happened.
I also think the Chinese depend on the US more the Russia for their economic growth.
Nah. We're totally gonna bribe them.
They could have high-def footage of Putin giving the orders directly and it wouldn't change a thing. Russia will maintain their obviously bullshit story, and neither the US nor any European country will go beyond economic sanctions, which are already happening to the largest extent that they're going to happen.
I mean.
Are we not behind putting down violent, ethnic uprisings sponsored by foreign governments to undermine your government? There are some layers here, and you can't really paint in broad strokes on something like that, but I tend to think that Ukraine has a right, and a duty, to defend itself and stop the guys with guns who keep seizing towns and shooting cops.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27016021
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
"Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!"
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26988891
I got a little excited when I saw your ship.
This is what I suggested previously. I still think this has a chance of happening.