Russia Discussion

Some Ukrainians support a pro-west movement. Some support a pro-Russian movement. The issue isn't who would win. The issue is that the pro-west took the matter into their own hands allegedly with outside support through extra-legal means. The elections since then on either side really prove nothing since the opposition has been excluded, either by circumstance or by self choice.

You're basically discounting half of the country. Eastern Ukraine clearly favours a pro-Russian movement. So what they want only counts if it aligns with the current US administrations desire?

That's the unfortunate reality of the situation on the ground. The elections are legitimate by any international standard, in fact the government went to extraordinary measures to facilitate voting just outside Donbass for residents within Donbass who wanted to vote. The majority of Ukrainians voted and they did so in clear favor of moving in a western direction.

As for the people in eastern Ukraine, they will be the biggest losers here as their views were not heard in the composition of the current parliament, similar to how the Sunnis in Iraq lost their voice in the 2005 parliamentary elections due to their boycott. At the end of the day Ukraine has to move on, and it shouldn't have to do so by allowing an outside country to agitate its way to claiming part of their country.
 
Three members of their party hold positions in the Ukrainian government.

How many has BNP got in ours again?

I think its safe to assume you missed the salient point.

That they have no real voice in government at all? Should Ukraine ban them like Putin does of certain (basically all opposition) political parties?
 
Last edited:
That they have no real voice in government at all? Should Ukraine ban them like Putin does of certain (basically all opposition) political parties?

Its basically a massive red herring designed to distract from the Russian intervention in Ukraine. The fact that Putin has been flogging this narrative to cloak his orgy of state sponsored lies, speaks volumes as to how much credibility it should be extended in a rational discussion.
 
That they have no real voice in government at all? Should Ukraine ban them like Putin does of certain (basically all opposition) political parties?

In Government
No voice at all lol. :lol:



Former government officials
  • Ihor Tenyukh - acting Minister of Defense, resigned on own initiative, resignation accepted by parliament after repeated voting
  • Oleh Makhnitsky - acting General Prosecutor
Red herring :lol:

Yep - this is a Putin Charade....

You should just give up because you rightful dislike of Putin is clouding a more complicated situation to the extent you missing the whole picture.
 
The right wing fascist issue can be easily falsified by the fact that it didn't become a factor in the narrative until Putin decided he wanted to invade Crimea. He desperately needed a strawman to vilify in order to stoke paranoia as a pretext to steal a piece of land that belongs to a foreign country - a simple fact his apologists seem to have difficulty admitting.
 
So far removed from reality. Ask the Jewish council what they think of Svoboda or what the European parliament thought of them in 2012 or ukranian mp Olena Anatoliivna Bondarenko
long before your strawman arguments blaming all on the all seeing eye of Putin. So your 'fact' is is one that is easily falsified.

Crimea wanted to leave Ukraine, we are going around in circles but the fact is self determination won out as it will throughout the whole of the old Ukraine - the west will look west and the east will look east.

A reality that the people involved want.
 
All ginned up by Putin's propaganda. The referendum is not recognized internationally because it was coerced onto the population by the Russian plan to grab Crimea. The vast majority of the UN rejected it spare a handful of despotic regimes who are in bed with Putin's Russia. The best indicator that it was all fabricated by Russian intervention is that none of it existed before the Revolution, at which point Russian operatives began fomenting fake successionism in Crimea and Donbass because Putin realized his corrupt proxy, Yanukovych had been chased out of the country. Putin never respected Ukraine as a country and merely viewed it as a fake nation state that was created out "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century", the collapse of the Soviet Union. A non Russian leaning Ukraine is a serious threat to his long term strategic goal of unifying the former Soviet states, which is precisely why he took action and used fake nonsense like "the fascists are coming" in Ukraine to lie his way to a Sudetenland style land grab. Once the Russian economy completely implodes, all the propaganda he's been spewing to Russian citizens will quickly unravel and he will be held to account.
 
Well I think we have clear understanding of your views on Putin and do not disagree with much - other than he is not the main reason for Direction each part to the country are heading, the people are.

My issues are around Europe's and even worse America's intervention, the illegal power grab by opposition parties with some more than dubious neo nazi members gaining very prominent positions and the rise of fascism, something that is emerging in quite a few European states let alone Ukraine and Russia.

Like meddling in the middle east, the consequences can be disastrous.

When you read incredible stories like Hunter Biden getting on the board of one of Ukraine's biggest Gas companies that you do start to get that sinking feeling.
 
Good summary of how things have gone down since Putin returned to office in 2012

 
Good summary of how things have gone down since Putin returned to office in 2012



This guy is a good example of someone assessing the situation in Ukraine or Russia for that matter from his couch somewhere in the US. What a tool.
 
He's actually a prominent journalist who works for Vox and the Atlantic. There isn't much wrong with what he said in his condensed two minute summary. I'd be far more concerned about some random guy on a couch somewhere in southern Russia who gets brainwashed by state sponsored propaganda on a daily basis.
 
He's actually a prominent journalist who works for Vox and the Atlantic. There isn't much wrong with what he said in his condensed two minute summary. I'd be far more concerned about some random guy on a couch somewhere in southern Russia who gets brainwashed by state sponsored propaganda on a daily basis.

He clearly is not knowledgable enough. He simplifies things. The fact that he thinks that Putin's main motivation is his self-esteem and that he got addicted to popularity after the Crimea annexation is just wrong. He was building this image of himself for years and this events didn't change nor his views, nor his motives. He gets depicted as a brainless dictator, which he is, sadly, not. He manipulated everyone inside the country to believe that all that crisis is because of the USA's actions and not his, and he, actually, got away with it, especially considering that the crisis would've happened with or without those Ukranian shenanigans - he spent unreasonably huge amount of money on Olympics without any prospect of getting them back and a lot more. So he really is not in the corner, like this journalist says, because "he can't afford to built up the crisis" - he can, he did and he will get away with it.

Another thing - you can't call it a competent journalism when he says that rebels shoot down the Malasyan airplane. I, myself, believe that it was rebels who are responsible for this, but there is no official confirmation of any theory yet, so to say what he said in so blatant manner is just pure incompetence. He could've threw "allegedly", or "possibly", but he didn't. He is no better than the Russian press at the moment, that keeps saying that the Ukranians did it and threw a photoshopped "satellite picture" with the plane and a Ukranian fighter (I don't know if this is a correct word for a military plane with missiles on board) on it* - and I'm not trying to justify Russian propaganda and lies, which I hate with all my heart, but to be objective and judge him as well. He is much more likely to be proven right in the end, but the press just can't throw such accusations without proof and official results.

*It's actually the reason for me bumping this thread. They continue to amaze me again and again with the level of blatant lying that they are capable of. When I'm sure that nothing will be worse than yesterday's news, they came up with another, actually worse idea. I'm just so pissed at them right now. They didn't even bother to make those things a little bit realistic, at such low regard they hold their auditory.
 
He clearly is not knowledgable enough. He simplifies things. The fact that he thinks that Putin's main motivation is his self-esteem and that he got addicted to popularity after the Crimea annexation is just wrong. He was building this image of himself for years and this events didn't change nor his views, nor his motives. He gets depicted as a brainless dictator, which he is, sadly, not. He manipulated everyone inside the country to believe that all that crisis is because of the USA's actions and not his, and he, actually, got away with it, especially considering that the crisis would've happened with or without those Ukranian shenanigans - he spent unreasonably huge amount of money on Olympics without any prospect of getting them back and a lot more. So he really is not in the corner, like this journalist says, because "he can't afford to built up the crisis" - he can, he did and he will get away with it.

Another thing - you can't call it a competent journalism when he says that rebels shoot down the Malasyan airplane. I, myself, believe that it was rebels who are responsible for this, but there is no official confirmation of any theory yet, so to say what he said in so blatant manner is just pure incompetence. He could've threw "allegedly", or "possibly", but he didn't. He is no better than the Russian press at the moment, that keeps saying that the Ukranians did it and threw a photoshopped "satellite picture" with the plane and a Ukranian fighter (I don't know if this is a correct word for a military plane with missiles on board) on it* - and I'm not trying to justify Russian propaganda and lies, which I hate with all my heart, but to be objective and judge him as well. He is much more likely to be proven right in the end, but the press just can't throw such accusations without proof and official results.

*It's actually the reason for me bumping this thread. They continue to amaze me again and again with the level of blatant lying that they are capable of. When I'm sure that nothing will be worse than yesterday's news, they came up with another, actually worse idea. I'm just so pissed at them right now. They didn't even bother to make those things a little bit realistic, at such low regard they hold their auditory.

Good post. Domestic Russian propaganda seems to be taking on a jingoistic tone in recent months and so this latest attempt at blaming the down plane on Ukrainian jets isn't particularly surprising.

I doubt we're ever going to have "hard evidence" about the shoot down of the plane, but excepting Russian propaganda, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence about Russian complicity in terms of their movement of surface to air batteries into the area shortly before the shootdown as well the shooting down of several Ukrainian cargo planes during the same period. The Russian objective at the time seemed to focus on controlling the air space over Donbass so that Ukrainian planes couldn't attack rebel positions or resupply Ukrainian troops on the frontline.

Personally, I don't think the Malaysian flight is the central issue any more. Its still about Putin invading Ukraine whilst lying about it to both his internal audience as well as world leaders, as if we're not in the information age where everyone is eventually going to find out what he's actually up to.
 
I watched a report yesterday which went to the recent business event inside Russia to speak to Russian business leaders. The reporter expected to find the state line being parroted but the people who spoke were universally concerned about the line Putin was taking and these are his usual supporters. It also got Putin's official press secretary on camera and asked him for the govt's position which I found quite interesting. It seems that unless Russia is given assurances that Ukraine won't ever be allowed to join NATO then this is the west humiliating Russia and Russia won't ever be humiliated.

I just thought what a complete prick, unless we tie the hands of Ukraine by refusing to allow them to ever join that is a humiliation of Russia but not of Ukraine which should be cornered into only ever dealing with Russia from a weak or overpowered position.
 
I watched a report yesterday which went to the recent business event inside Russia to speak to Russian business leaders. The reporter expected to find the state line being parroted but the people who spoke were universally concerned about the line Putin was taking and these are his usual supporters. It also got Putin's official press secretary on camera and asked him for the govt's position which I found quite interesting. It seems that unless Russia is given assurances that Ukraine won't ever be allowed to join NATO then this is the west humiliating Russia and Russia won't ever be humiliated.

I just thought what a complete prick, unless we tie the hands of Ukraine by refusing to allow them to ever join that is a humiliation of Russia but not of Ukraine which should be cornered into only ever dealing with Russia from a weak or overpowered position.

I saw Peskov talking about that. Putin and his parrots seem to not be able to grasp that independent countries are allowed to make their own choices about their respective futures without mafia style threats from their neighbors.
 
So Putin invades Ukraine, helps himself to three of their provinces and now Ukraine should bargain with him; presumably to avoid him taking the rest of southern Ukraine ? Makes perfect sense. :wenger:

Here are some good points from a couple of Russians who are actually able to speak their minds about Putin; and why the west should continue to squeeze the life out of the Russian economy.

Kasparov likens Putin to Hitler, urges West to act
http://news.yahoo.com/kasparov-likens-putin-hitler-urges-west-act-150329029.html


Continue taking hard line with Putin, former Russian PM tells West
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...line-with-putin-former-russian-pm-tells-west/
 
So Putin invades Ukraine, helps himself to three of their provinces and now Ukraine should bargain with him; presumably to avoid him taking the rest of southern Ukraine ? Makes perfect sense. :wenger:

Here are some good points from a couple of Russians who are actually able to speak their minds about Putin; and why the west should continue to squeeze the life out of the Russian economy.

Kasparov likens Putin to Hitler, urges West to act
http://news.yahoo.com/kasparov-likens-putin-hitler-urges-west-act-150329029.html


Continue taking hard line with Putin, former Russian PM tells West
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...line-with-putin-former-russian-pm-tells-west/

It's called realpolitik.

Nobody is coming to save Ukraine. At a basic level, Ukraine has the right to self determination. That self determination however has some strings attached. Just like Canada and Mexico have strings attached to their self determination. This is the cost of being on the border of a superpower/major power.

Let's not forget that the entire situation is not as crystal clear, white hat and black hat cut and dry as you would make it out to be Raoul. It's a mess, we in the west almost certainly assisted in starting. Honestly it is difficult to even read your posts on this subject. Your bias is so blatantly transparent. You post like the US shits rainbows and everyone else doing the same thing as us for the same reasons as us is bad because it just isn't us.

This is a situation where one global power is asserting itself in its own backyard against the power of a super power and its allies. This is a lose lose situation for the United States, Nato and Europe. We have no good exit strategy here. We can hurt the Russian economy only so long as it doesn't re-align its economy with economic monsters that don't give a damn what the United States wants (See India and China). Then what?

What WE SHOULD be doing is supporting the movement in Eastern Ukraine to establish their autonomous state within Ukraine. We've done it before in the past when it suited us, now it suits us to diffuse the entire situation. Allow the East which distrusts the West, to align itself economically and politically with Russia, which it CLEARLY wants to do.

Russia isn't driving this civil war. There is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine. What Russia is doing, is evening the odds up. The establishment in Kiev, the pro-west side, certainly has western backing. Russia is backing its horse. Let's stop with the silliness that Russia has invaded Ukraine. It hasn't. It almost certainly has some forces on the ground in the East. I'd call it more of a defensive posture more than anything. Designed to prevent the East from losing, rather than spearheading the East to victory. If Russia wanted to militarily conquer Ukraine, it would have months ago. This isn't to say that at some point in the future the situation changes and Russia gets more involved. We've played that game too!

At the end of the day, this is all bullshit. Our propaganda machines are working overtime to paint Putin and Russia in a bad light. Their machines are working overtime to do the same with us. We might be better than them at it. This is at its core about political and economic power at the expense of Russia. We can pretty it up any way you want, that is what this is about. Undermining Russian power, grow stronger at the expense of your rival. It is a policy we've been following since the Berlin wall fell. It's worked pretty well, until now.
 
It's called realpolitik.

Nobody is coming to save Ukraine. At a basic level, Ukraine has the right to self determination. That self determination however has some strings attached. Just like Canada and Mexico have strings attached to their self determination. This is the cost of being on the border of a superpower/major power.

Let's not forget that the entire situation is not as crystal clear, white hat and black hat cut and dry as you would make it out to be Raoul. It's a mess, we in the west almost certainly assisted in starting. Honestly it is difficult to even read your posts on this subject. Your bias is so blatantly transparent. You post like the US shits rainbows and everyone else doing the same thing as us for the same reasons as us is bad because it just isn't us.

This is a situation where one global power is asserting itself in its own backyard against the power of a super power and its allies. This is a lose lose situation for the United States, Nato and Europe. We have no good exit strategy here. We can hurt the Russian economy only so long as it doesn't re-align its economy with economic monsters that don't give a damn what the United States wants (See India and China). Then what?

What WE SHOULD be doing is supporting the movement in Eastern Ukraine to establish their autonomous state within Ukraine. We've done it before in the past when it suited us, now it suits us to diffuse the entire situation. Allow the East which distrusts the West, to align itself economically and politically with Russia, which it CLEARLY wants to do.

Russia isn't driving this civil war. There is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine. What Russia is doing, is evening the odds up. The establishment in Kiev, the pro-west side, certainly has western backing. Russia is backing its horse. Let's stop with the silliness that Russia has invaded Ukraine. It hasn't. It almost certainly has some forces on the ground in the East. I'd call it more of a defensive posture more than anything. Designed to prevent the East from losing, rather than spearheading the East to victory. If Russia wanted to militarily conquer Ukraine, it would have months ago. This isn't to say that at some point in the future the situation changes and Russia gets more involved. We've played that game too!

At the end of the day, this is all bullshit. Our propaganda machines are working overtime to paint Putin and Russia in a bad light. Their machines are working overtime to do the same with us. We might be better than them at it. This is at its core about political and economic power at the expense of Russia. We can pretty it up any way you want, that is what this is about. Undermining Russian power, grow stronger at the expense of your rival. It is a policy we've been following since the Berlin wall fell. It's worked pretty well, until now.

If you believe there is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine that wasn't completely ginned up by Russian agitation/special forces/propaganda/weapons et al, then there's really no point in having a discussion about it. Such a rampant misinterpretation of the facts can't be argued against.
 
It's called realpolitik.

Nobody is coming to save Ukraine. At a basic level, Ukraine has the right to self determination. That self determination however has some strings attached. Just like Canada and Mexico have strings attached to their self determination. This is the cost of being on the border of a superpower/major power.

Let's not forget that the entire situation is not as crystal clear, white hat and black hat cut and dry as you would make it out to be Raoul. It's a mess, we in the west almost certainly assisted in starting. Honestly it is difficult to even read your posts on this subject. Your bias is so blatantly transparent. You post like the US shits rainbows and everyone else doing the same thing as us for the same reasons as us is bad because it just isn't us.

This is a situation where one global power is asserting itself in its own backyard against the power of a super power and its allies. This is a lose lose situation for the United States, Nato and Europe. We have no good exit strategy here. We can hurt the Russian economy only so long as it doesn't re-align its economy with economic monsters that don't give a damn what the United States wants (See India and China). Then what?

What WE SHOULD be doing is supporting the movement in Eastern Ukraine to establish their autonomous state within Ukraine. We've done it before in the past when it suited us, now it suits us to diffuse the entire situation. Allow the East which distrusts the West, to align itself economically and politically with Russia, which it CLEARLY wants to do.

Russia isn't driving this civil war. There is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine. What Russia is doing, is evening the odds up. The establishment in Kiev, the pro-west side, certainly has western backing. Russia is backing its horse. Let's stop with the silliness that Russia has invaded Ukraine. It hasn't. It almost certainly has some forces on the ground in the East. I'd call it more of a defensive posture more than anything. Designed to prevent the East from losing, rather than spearheading the East to victory. If Russia wanted to militarily conquer Ukraine, it would have months ago. This isn't to say that at some point in the future the situation changes and Russia gets more involved. We've played that game too!

At the end of the day, this is all bullshit. Our propaganda machines are working overtime to paint Putin and Russia in a bad light. Their machines are working overtime to do the same with us. We might be better than them at it. This is at its core about political and economic power at the expense of Russia. We can pretty it up any way you want, that is what this is about. Undermining Russian power, grow stronger at the expense of your rival. It is a policy we've been following since the Berlin wall fell. It's worked pretty well, until now.

Spot on. Sensible post that points out the strategies of both sides. It is a shame that we have to meddle at all but such is the stupidity of our nation states.

Resources are being battled for all around the world as the media/governments play the democracy card.

If only time was being spent on solving the worlds problems and the obvious facts that we need to move to a completely different energy beat, we could be a lot closer to renewable, sustainable energy.

Instead we fight over every last fossil.

It's like being in a forest surrounded by tree's - only to be fighting over the fallen twigs because they appear simpler to burn.
 
It's called realpolitik.

Nobody is coming to save Ukraine. At a basic level, Ukraine has the right to self determination. That self determination however has some strings attached. Just like Canada and Mexico have strings attached to their self determination. This is the cost of being on the border of a superpower/major power.

Let's not forget that the entire situation is not as crystal clear, white hat and black hat cut and dry as you would make it out to be Raoul. It's a mess, we in the west almost certainly assisted in starting. Honestly it is difficult to even read your posts on this subject. Your bias is so blatantly transparent. You post like the US shits rainbows and everyone else doing the same thing as us for the same reasons as us is bad because it just isn't us.

This is a situation where one global power is asserting itself in its own backyard against the power of a super power and its allies. This is a lose lose situation for the United States, Nato and Europe. We have no good exit strategy here. We can hurt the Russian economy only so long as it doesn't re-align its economy with economic monsters that don't give a damn what the United States wants (See India and China). Then what?

What WE SHOULD be doing is supporting the movement in Eastern Ukraine to establish their autonomous state within Ukraine. We've done it before in the past when it suited us, now it suits us to diffuse the entire situation. Allow the East which distrusts the West, to align itself economically and politically with Russia, which it CLEARLY wants to do.

Russia isn't driving this civil war. There is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine. What Russia is doing, is evening the odds up. The establishment in Kiev, the pro-west side, certainly has western backing. Russia is backing its horse. Let's stop with the silliness that Russia has invaded Ukraine. It hasn't. It almost certainly has some forces on the ground in the East. I'd call it more of a defensive posture more than anything. Designed to prevent the East from losing, rather than spearheading the East to victory. If Russia wanted to militarily conquer Ukraine, it would have months ago. This isn't to say that at some point in the future the situation changes and Russia gets more involved. We've played that game too!

At the end of the day, this is all bullshit. Our propaganda machines are working overtime to paint Putin and Russia in a bad light. Their machines are working overtime to do the same with us. We might be better than them at it. This is at its core about political and economic power at the expense of Russia. We can pretty it up any way you want, that is what this is about. Undermining Russian power, grow stronger at the expense of your rival. It is a policy we've been following since the Berlin wall fell. It's worked pretty well, until now.

Brilliant post.
 
If you believe there is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine that wasn't completely ginned up by Russian agitation/special forces/propaganda/weapons et al, then there's really no point in having a discussion about it. Such a rampant misinterpretation of the facts can't be argued against.

This is exactly what Nucks mentioned in his post. You're so blinded by your bias, you refuse to see the other side of the argument.

No civil war can start, never mind last for any serious period of time without solid local support. Of course, Russia played a part and still does in what's going on in the Southeast of Ukraine. But the biggest reason why the whole conflict started isn't Russian interference but rather a serious conflict within Ukraine as a country that goes back long before these events took place.

Just as Maidan, which wouldn't have lasted as long as it did without outside support, let alone being able to topple the former regime. No one denies that there was a genuine and widespread hatred towards Yanukovich and his cronies but without the assistance and support from the US and EU the opposition would have lost. Does it mean that what happened in Kiev was against people's wishes and all due to the interference from the West? Of course not, but it wouldn't have been possible otherwise.

The real problem is what to do now. US government has gotten quite good at creating messes all around the world but doesn't seem to know or care how to deal with consequences of their actions. Ukraine is in shambles, economically and socially the country is close to collapse. It'll take $15-20 bn a year to keep it from falling apart. EU clearly doesn't want or need that burden and mostly offers verbal support. The most that US has done so far is sectoral sanctions against Russia which proves once again what the whole thing was about as far as they're concerned. Will the Americans take on an unenviable role of Ukrainine's biggest sponsor for the next few years? Somehow I doubt it.

Which once again leaves the whole mess at Russia's doorstep. Merkel and Co can't afford to support Ukraine and want Russia as usual to foot the bill. Putin, rightly amazed at such impudence tells his old friend Angela in fluent German something like 'you wanted it, you got it, now take care of it yourselves' and plays innocent when it comes to accusations of Russia's support for the separatists.

And the mess continues.
 
Last edited:
It's called realpolitik.

Nobody is coming to save Ukraine. At a basic level, Ukraine has the right to self determination. That self determination however has some strings attached. Just like Canada and Mexico have strings attached to their self determination. This is the cost of being on the border of a superpower/major power.

Let's not forget that the entire situation is not as crystal clear, white hat and black hat cut and dry as you would make it out to be Raoul. It's a mess, we in the west almost certainly assisted in starting. Honestly it is difficult to even read your posts on this subject. Your bias is so blatantly transparent. You post like the US shits rainbows and everyone else doing the same thing as us for the same reasons as us is bad because it just isn't us.

This is a situation where one global power is asserting itself in its own backyard against the power of a super power and its allies. This is a lose lose situation for the United States, Nato and Europe. We have no good exit strategy here. We can hurt the Russian economy only so long as it doesn't re-align its economy with economic monsters that don't give a damn what the United States wants (See India and China). Then what?

What WE SHOULD be doing is supporting the movement in Eastern Ukraine to establish their autonomous state within Ukraine. We've done it before in the past when it suited us, now it suits us to diffuse the entire situation. Allow the East which distrusts the West, to align itself economically and politically with Russia, which it CLEARLY wants to do.

Russia isn't driving this civil war. There is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine. What Russia is doing, is evening the odds up. The establishment in Kiev, the pro-west side, certainly has western backing. Russia is backing its horse. Let's stop with the silliness that Russia has invaded Ukraine. It hasn't. It almost certainly has some forces on the ground in the East. I'd call it more of a defensive posture more than anything. Designed to prevent the East from losing, rather than spearheading the East to victory. If Russia wanted to militarily conquer Ukraine, it would have months ago. This isn't to say that at some point in the future the situation changes and Russia gets more involved. We've played that game too!

At the end of the day, this is all bullshit. Our propaganda machines are working overtime to paint Putin and Russia in a bad light. Their machines are working overtime to do the same with us. We might be better than them at it. This is at its core about political and economic power at the expense of Russia. We can pretty it up any way you want, that is what this is about. Undermining Russian power, grow stronger at the expense of your rival. It is a policy we've been following since the Berlin wall fell. It's worked pretty well, until now.


I think they know that but does that mean we let Russia dick them and carry on like nothing happened? That is your argument right, they live next door to Russia so its all good.

I think you have it the wrong way around, Russia has already lost and loses more each day it goes down the path its taken, economically and politically.

We don't have to accept Russia's end game at all and certainly there is no need to rush to do so. The economic pressure is building in Russia and that works for us. If Russia wants to align with China or India then it is free to do so but that will come with a higher price to Russian influence in the world than losing Ukraine would have done.

Russia has acted in haste, in bad faith and for egotistical reasons in Ukraine and it is going to regret it. They won't admit it but they probably already do.

The only bullshit here is the idea that having both sides of an argument which we get in spades in the west is the same as giving equal weight to both cases which is nonsense. If sending tanks across an internationally agreed border to seize territory for the motherland is a defensive posture in your view then what the fook would an offensive posture be?

I think it would be best if we stopped making excuses for it. I mean if you want to admit that it is a bit scary and you don't want to call Russia on its conduct then fair enough, you can go and hide under the covers and pretend that it makes no difference and aren't all countries really guilty of invading Ukraine a little bit. Or you can grow a pair of bollocks and look the facts in the face and admit that things are not going to be the same any more and we are going to have to stop the wishful thinking about how bad this could get if we let Putin's Russia continue unchecked without acting to stop them.
 
I think they know that but does that mean we let Russia dick them and carry on like nothing happened? That is your argument right, they live next door to Russia so its all good.

I think you have it the wrong way around, Russia has already lost and loses more each day it goes down the path its taken, economically and politically.

We don't have to accept Russia's end game at all and certainly there is no need to rush to do so. The economic pressure is building in Russia and that works for us. If Russia wants to align with China or India then it is free to do so but that will come with a higher price to Russian influence in the world than losing Ukraine would have done.

Russia has acted in haste, in bad faith and for egotistical reasons in Ukraine and it is going to regret it. They won't admit it but they probably already do.

The only bullshit here is the idea that having both sides of an argument which we get in spades in the west is the same as giving equal weight to both cases which is nonsense. If sending tanks across an internationally agreed border to seize territory for the motherland is a defensive posture in your view then what the fook would an offensive posture be?

I think it would be best if we stopped making excuses for it. I mean if you want to admit that it is a bit scary and you don't want to call Russia on its conduct then fair enough, you can go and hide under the covers and pretend that it makes no difference and aren't all countries really guilty of invading Ukraine a little bit. Or you can grow a pair of bollocks and look the facts in the face and admit that things are not going to be the same any more and we are going to have to stop the wishful thinking about how bad this could get if we let Putin's Russia continue unchecked without acting to stop them.

Its quite a complicated issue but at the end of the day the core issue is one of power. Can Russia continue to impose itself and control states in the former Soviet sphere in a post Soviet world or are the former Soviet states now truly independent and able to decide their own futures without being subject to coercive tactics by the Kremlin.

Economically, the west is making a bet that they know they can win and Putin is more or less walking straight into a probable regime change from within scenario. As the sanctions continue to entrench themselves into the lives of everyday Russians, they will gradually begin to question the jingoistic propaganda and ask why their quality of life is suddenly and quickly eroding. At that point, Putin will be finished. He knows it and has already instructed his team to avoid a potential colored revolution.

At the end of the day, Russian involvement in Ukraine is merely a device to buy Putin the good will of Russian citizens in order to consolidate and extend his rule. However that will quickly vanish as the Russian economy gradually drifts deeper into recession, at which point things will get interesting.
 
A top article well worth a read from start to finish. It highlights the economic domino effect sanctions are having and predicts Putin's potential fall within two years.

Russia ‘two years from meltdown’ as economic distress grows

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...138724839?nk=b22412846fdaeef2a200b30ad2f38658

RUSSIA’S mounting economic crisis is likely to pose an existential threat to President Vladimir Putin’s leadership within two years, one of the country’s most respected economists said yesterday.

The economic distress signals are becoming clearer and although western sanctions are not the only cause of Russia’s problems, they make escape from the downturn far more difficult.

Ordinary Russians, who have overwhelmingly supported Mr Putin’s annexation of Crimea in March and his refusal to buckle in the face of sanctions imposed as a result, are feeling a growing impact in their daily lives, and the plummeting price of oil has squeezed government receipts.

Inflation is running at more than 8 per cent, but food inflation is even higher, and there has been panic buying of buckwheat, a Russian staple that is served as a side dish or cooked into soups, pancakes or porridge. Prices have risen by up to 80 per cent in some regions. Rice is more than 25 per cent more expensive than it was last month, and the retail price of pasta is expected to climb by a similar degree.

Sergei Guriev, a former adviser to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and a former board member of Russia’s largest state bank, said: “If nothing changes, if sanctions aren’t removed and the price of oil does not go up, then in two years the Russian government will have a major problem — it will lack cash and it will not be able to borrow it.”

Speaking from Paris, where he fled after state harassment left him fearing for his freedom last year, Dr Guriev said that rising inflation, the depressed oil price, the falling rouble, isolation from Western capital markets and plummeting investor confidence meant that, for the first time, “there is a risk to the existence of the regime”.

In Moscow, such thoughts are aired only in private. The business world does not dare to question the Kremlin’s increasingly unpredictable political and military course, even though it has sucked Russia into an economic confrontation with the West over Ukraine that it looks ill-equipped to win.

At the high end of the social scale, the economic fall is hurting Moscow’s designer-clad elite. The luxury goods market will contract by up to 18 per cent this year, after 5 per cent growth last year, according to the consultancy Bain & Company.

International companies have scaled back and delayed planned acquisitions and expansion. Demand for high-end property in Moscow, normally driven by foreigners, is down by 10 per cent. Occupancy rates in Moscow City, a $US12 billion ($14bn) cluster of skyscrapers that was intended to turn the capital into a global financial hub, are so low that a youth hostel has opened on the 43rd floor of one of the glass towers.

According to Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, sanctions will cost Russia $US40bn this year, but the falling oil price will take out a further $US100bn.

On Thursday the price of Brent crude oil fell below $US73 a barrel to its lowest point in four years as a crucial OPEC meeting in Vienna failed to reduce the supply that Russia hoped for to prop up prices. That is $US27 below the price needed to balance Russia’s 2015-17 budget.

The rouble has lost 40 per cent of its value against the US dollar this year and the slide accelerated in the past month. That will make it far harder for Russian companies to pay the $US614bn in foreign debt that they owe, $US130bn of which is due within the next year. Russia has foreign exchange reserves of more than $US380bn, which Mr Putin has said could be used to substitute for international borrowing, but there is uncertainty over whether more than $US200bn of that can be accessed quickly.

China’s role as an alternative source of international investment has been heavily emphasised by the administration, but Chinese business is proving resistant to Russia’s charms.

Andrey Kostin, the head of VTB, Russia’s second biggest lender, complained on Wednesday that Chinese banks were not lending to sanctioned Russian companies because of pressure from the US.

The Russian central bank predicts that the economy will stagnate next year.

A few favourably placed business people have voiced concerns. Alexei Kudrin, the liberal former finance minister whose advice Mr Putin values, wrote last week that “bringing back earlier opportunities with regard to foreign investment and trust in the rouble will take seven to 10 years of growth of our economy”.

German Gref, the head of Sberbank, Russia’s largest state bank, last month that the country risked repeating the “mind-boggling incompetence of the Soviet leadership” by returning to a government-directed model of economic development.

“You cannot motivate people through the gulag, like in the Soviet Union,” he told a conference.

However, Mr Putin sought to reassure the same audience, saying Russia remained committed to an open economy built on strong foundations. Investment would return, he said. “All I have to do is smile and show the devil is not as frightening as he seems.”
 
The only exit that will undo the sanctions will be for Putin get out of Ukraine, which will then allow his economy to improve. Its quite an easy and straightforward decision to make.
 
Driving Ukrainians Into Putin's Arms.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/opinion/driving-ukrainians-into-putins-arms.html?_r=0

A RECENT United Nations report says that nearly half a million Ukrainians have fled the country since April. The fact that families run from a war zone is heartbreaking but hardly unexpected. The disturbing part lies in the details — of the roughly 454,000 people who had fled Ukraine by the end of October, more than 387,000 went to Russia. Most of those who fled were Russian speakers from the east, but this still raises a sobering question: If this is a conflict between Ukraine and Russia, why did so many Ukrainians choose to cast their lot with the enemy?

Moscow’s denials of involvement in eastern Ukraine are, of course, absurd: It is clear that the separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk are equipped, reinforced and trained by Russians. That said, if Vladimir V. Putin had tried sending unmarked commandos to set up sham republics in western Ukraine, where anti-Russian sentiment runs high, his men would have been returned to the Kremlin in body bags. Yes, Mr. Putin is brewing unrest in the east, but he is brewing with local ingredients. He is connecting with the population using a language they speak and a symbolism they understand.

The unpalatable reality is that a significant portion of eastern Ukrainians — the very people on the ground living and suffering through this conflict — distrust Kiev and the West and at least tacitly support Russia and the separatists. And frankly, that isn’t surprising.

Last month the Ukrainian president, Petro O. Poroshenko, decided to freeze government pensions and cut off funding for schools and hospitals in the eastern provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk. Unfortunately, the separatist thugs fighting there don’t rely on food stamps to buy weapons — they get them from Russia. All that Mr. Poroshenko accomplished was giving Mr. Putin the “proof” to tell the starving pensioners of the region: “See — the West doesn’t care if you die.” This is a sentiment that is growing stronger and stronger, according to reports coming out of the region.

Equally awful is Kiev’s decision to maintain a relationship with the Azov battalion, an ultranationalist paramilitary group of around 400 men that uses Nazi salutes and insignia. To anyone familiar with eastern Ukraine’s bloody history during World War II, allowing the Azov battalion to fight in the region is a bit like sponsoring a Timothy McVeigh Appreciation Night in Oklahoma City. It does nothing but infuriate the local population and provide Mr. Putin with yet another opportunity to shed the mantle of invader and position himself as a protector.

The impact of World War II, or, as most people there call it, The War, on eastern Ukrainian consciousness cannot be understated. My childhood in the northeast city of Kharkov (now called Kharkiv) in the 1980s was surrounded by The War, 40 years after it ended. Every family — Russian, Ukrainian, Roma, Jewish — had ghost relatives who had vanished or perished. One of my earliest memories is of asking my father where the mortar holes pockmarking the outside of our apartment block had come from; one of my father’s earliest memories is of fleeing Kharkov mere hours before the Nazis invaded the city. Eastern Ukrainians today, especially the older generations, respond to swastikas and wolfsangel runes — Nazi symbols now used by Ukrainian ultranationalists — about as well as African-Americans respond to burning crosses.

Mr. Putin and the Russian news media say that western Ukrainians in Mr. Poroshenko’s government are neo-Nazis. The West denies these claims, averring that there are no neo-Nazi elements in the Kiev government. Both are wrong. The Kiev government and the armies fighting in eastern Ukraine contain a small minority of neo-Nazi ultranationalists. To eastern Ukrainians, however, even one is too many.

Washington and the Western media have largely ignored the negative ramifications of Kiev’s actions. The State Department has said nothing about the pension freeze’s effect on the local population of eastern Ukraine; reports of the Azov battalion’s use of Nazi insignia have not been addressed in any meaningful manner. Mr. Putin’s greatest weapon of all may be the West’s refusal to speak directly to the people of eastern Ukraine. When I talk to family friends still living in Kharkiv, they ask me, “Why does the West label us as enemies?”

It seems the West has forgotten the lessons of its own history. At the end of the Cold War in 1989, Communism collapsed, leaving unrest and uncertainty in its wake. In that moment of chaos, the people of Eastern Europe turned their gazes westward. This happened not by accident, but because of decades of public diplomacy — from “Ich bin ein Berliner” to “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” to nightly broadcasts by Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, which constantly reassured those behind the Iron Curtain that the West had not forgotten them. That year my family was one of many that fled eastern Ukraine for Vienna, and later the United States.

In 2014, the people of eastern Ukraine find themselves in an exponentially more horrible and deadly situation. They will turn to whoever provides them with bread and security and respect for their language and culture. They are looking, and more and more it seems they’re turning, eastward.


 
Let's not forget that the entire situation is not as crystal clear, white hat and black hat cut and dry as you would make it out to be Raoul. It's a mess, we in the west almost certainly assisted in starting. Honestly it is difficult to even read your posts on this subject. Your bias is so blatantly transparent. You post like the US shits rainbows and everyone else doing the same thing as us for the same reasons as us is bad because it just isn't us.

This is a situation where one global power is asserting itself in its own backyard against the power of a super power and its allies. This is a lose lose situation for the United States, Nato and Europe. We have no good exit strategy here. We can hurt the Russian economy only so long as it doesn't re-align its economy with economic monsters that don't give a damn what the United States wants (See India and China). Then what?

......

Russia isn't driving this civil war. There is a legitimate civil war going on in Ukraine. What Russia is doing, is evening the odds up. The establishment in Kiev, the pro-west side, certainly has western backing. Russia is backing its horse. Let's stop with the silliness that Russia has invaded Ukraine. It hasn't. It almost certainly has some forces on the ground in the East. I'd call it more of a defensive posture more than anything. Designed to prevent the East from losing, rather than spearheading the East to victory. If Russia wanted to militarily conquer Ukraine, it would have months ago. This isn't to say that at some point in the future the situation changes and Russia gets more involved. We've played that game too!

At the end of the day, this is all bullshit. Our propaganda machines are working overtime to paint Putin and Russia in a bad light. Their machines are working overtime to do the same with us. We might be better than them at it. This is at its core about political and economic power at the expense of Russia. We can pretty it up any way you want, that is what this is about. Undermining Russian power, grow stronger at the expense of your rival. It is a policy we've been following since the Berlin wall fell. It's worked pretty well, until now.

I'm no expert on this issue so I'm curious, did 'the west' ever give it's 'side' the same level of support as Russia has its supporters in the East? Afaik western involvement in the events in Kiev never got as extensive as that of Russia in the east.
 
I'm no expert on this issue so I'm curious, did 'the west' ever give it's 'side' the same level of support as Russia has its supporters in the East? Afaik western involvement in the events in Kiev never got as extensive as that of Russia in the east.

Its more or less a Russian attempt to make it appear as though the internal aspirations of Ukrainians are being controlled by the west as a means to justify their agitations in Crimea and Donbass. The more you look at this, the more analogous it is to a woman who tells her abusive husband she wants a divorce and he responds with abuse, stalking, threats, and violence after telling her she can't leave and that he won't let her go without paying a heavy price.
 
UKrainians who speak Russian flee to Russia to escape war zone, since fleeing to the western part of the Ukraine where the war might soon spread, is it really that shocking? Are they really being driven into Putin's arms or is it just natural that is the direction they would flee in?
 
It's interesting to read the various reports that Russia is funding far right parties in Europe. So much for the "anti-fashisti" line parroted by the Kremlin and their useful idiots in the West. As regards the current crisis, I don't see an easy way out. I see earlier that @Raoul mentions the economic motivation for withdrawal but unfortunately the sanctions effect is only the cherry on the top of 12 years of economic mismanagement in which the fruits of the greatest commodity boom in history were squandered. Since the basis of the regime's support has been based on improving living standards, I can only see a desperate reliance on nationalism as it becomes clear the money has run out and people are facing wages freezes/losses amid rampant inflation.
 
UKrainians who speak Russian flee to Russia to escape war zone, since fleeing to the western part of the Ukraine where the war might soon spread, is it really that shocking? Are they really being driven into Putin's arms or is it just natural that is the direction they would flee in?

Russia is still much richer (despite recent troubles) and most Ukrainians (even beyond the Eastern part) have a family connection with Russia (and vice versa) so it's not surprising at all.
 
UKrainians who speak Russian flee to Russia to escape war zone, since fleeing to the western part of the Ukraine where the war might soon spread, is it really that shocking? Are they really being driven into Putin's arms or is it just natural that is the direction they would flee in?

They're probably just going to a safe area where there's no fighting and humanitarian support, which is across the border.
 
Funny article exposing Putin's high stakes Internet trolling operations.....

Putin's New Weapon In The Ukraine Propaganda War: Internet Trolls

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrod...n-the-ukraine-propaganda-war-internet-trolls/


According to a Buzzfeed account, each troll is expected to post 50 news articles daily and maintain six Facebook and ten Twitter accounts, with 50 tweets per day. At these rates, a small army of one thousand trolls will post 100,000 news articles and tweets per day. The Kremlin does not spare the cash. In a time of austerity, the budget for “participation in the international information space” is scheduled to rise to some $250 million in the next couple of years.
 
It's interesting to read the various reports that Russia is funding far right parties in Europe. So much for the "anti-fashisti" line parroted by the Kremlin and their useful idiots in the West. As regards the current crisis, I don't see an easy way out. I see earlier that @Raoul mentions the economic motivation for withdrawal but unfortunately the sanctions effect is only the cherry on the top of 12 years of economic mismanagement in which the fruits of the greatest commodity boom in history were squandered. Since the basis of the regime's support has been based on improving living standards, I can only see a desperate reliance on nationalism as it becomes clear the money has run out and people are facing wages freezes/losses amid rampant inflation.

I agree that the nationalism will be used as a sort of glue to hold the regime together internally, but that too will begin to chip away when people begin to not able to afford their usual consumer staples because the rouble is only worth a fraction of what it was a year ago. Once those things happen, it could be a tipping point moment for the regime, where larger subsections of the population who were previously either silent or tepidly pro-Putin, will become a significant factor.

Seeing as he has staked his domestic reputation on foreign conquests in Crimea and other places, I don't think he will reverse course on them, which will at some point in the next 18 months lead to his demise.
 
Funny article exposing Putin's high stakes Internet trolling operations.....

Putin's New Weapon In The Ukraine Propaganda War: Internet Trolls

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrod...n-the-ukraine-propaganda-war-internet-trolls/


According to a Buzzfeed account, each troll is expected to post 50 news articles daily and maintain six Facebook and ten Twitter accounts, with 50 tweets per day. At these rates, a small army of one thousand trolls will post 100,000 news articles and tweets per day. The Kremlin does not spare the cash. In a time of austerity, the budget for “participation in the international information space” is scheduled to rise to some $250 million in the next couple of years.

But it does work to some extent. As witnessed by some postings in this thread. It's a lot easier to spread a lie than to disprove it.