Page 60 of 392 FirstFirst ... 103550515253545556575859606162636465666768697085110160 ... LastLast
Results 1,181 to 1,200 of 7825

Thread: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

  1. #1181

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    meanwhile Crimea, that is, the only important part of this story, is already annexed to the Russian Federation,
    So were the Baltic States, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, Georgia, Moldova or Belarus.

    But then the Soviet Union collapsed. Just like the Russian Federation will do.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    so now, if you want to get it back, you need to declare war to the Russian Federation but nobody wants a nuclear war in Europe, at least Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Britain will NEVER start a war against Russia, and here the story ends.
    Who said anything about a nuclear war?

    The West has 2 tried and tested options, which worked nicely during Cold War 1:

    1) To ruin Russia through sanctions (that is happening now, and won't stop until Crimea is returned);

    2) To fight one or several proxy wars, like in Afghanistan.

    The Ukrainians are "Fascists thirsty for Russian blood" so as long as the West would supply them with weapons they'll gladly send all those fine young Russians back home in wooden boxes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    To be serious we should discuss if, after this small crisis:
    - Ukraine will be halved with one part to the West and the other one to the Russians.
    - Ukraine will become a Russian protectorate.
    - Ukraine will be set as independent demilitarized and denuclearized area between Union européenne and Russia.
    Actually what we should be discussing is:

    1) In how many pieces would Russia break next;

    2) How many of those states would join the EU and how many would become Chinese protectorates.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MareNostrum

  2. #1182
    Kindjal83's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
    Posts
    295

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    ...Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Britain will NEVER start a war against Russia, and here the story ends.
    Some people also said that France and England would never, EVER declare war at Germany because of Poland...

  3. #1183

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    No, we shouldn't, if you ask my money to fight their small war against Putin.
    None is asking.

    Still, three of your four options are unlawful for another sovereign country to enforce onto another sovereign country but mainly dependant on how the Ukrainian electorate (East and West) works themselves through the crisis. I mean, you ignore stuff like a consitutional reorganization to a more federal system, that even a majority of East Ukrainians do not really want to be Russians unless you put an AK to their head (the lack of popular support is a main reason why the Russian separatists do not look anywhere close to Maidan activists) or how and why you would encourage a demilitarization of a country that thus far has solely suffered from outside aggression (Ukraine is not Iraq that had attacked other countries prior).

    Your options really leave out Ukraine as an independant negotiator and are rather simplistic and unsuited to the situation.
    "Sebaceans once had a god called Djancaz-Bru. Six worlds prayed to her. They built her temples, conquered planets. And yet one day she rose up and destroyed all six worlds. And when the last warrior was dying, he said, 'We gave you everything, why did you destroy us?' And she looked down upon him and she whispered, 'Because I can.' "
    Mangalore Design

  4. #1184

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Ukraine becomes economically and politically integrated in the EU - the Ukrainian people win.

    Russia becomes economically and politically integrated in the EU - the Russian people win.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  5. #1185

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Condottiere 40K View Post
    Ukraine becomes economically and politically integrated in the EU - the Ukrainian people win.

    Russia becomes economically and politically integrated in the EU - the Russian people win.
    That's funny, because it didn't work for Greece or Italy or Spain or Portugal or a few others. The woke up one day and discovered that in reality they'd been reduced to colonial dumping grounds for German products. Ukrainian farmers would soon find themselves tossed off their land and replaced by German corporates. However some people in Ukraine would become rich selling their country to Germany, it's these "some people" that are the cause of all the trouble.
    Proculus: Divine Caesar, PLEASE! What have I done? Why am I here?
    Caligula: Treason!
    Proculus: Treason? I have always been loyal to you!
    Caligula: [laughs insanely] That IS your treason! You're an honest man, Proculus, which means a bad Roman! Therefore, you are a traitor! Logical, hmm? Ha, ha, ha!

  6. #1186
    StarDreamer's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Finland, Espoo
    Posts
    2,378

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by wulfgar610 View Post
    That's funny, because it didn't work for Greece or Italy or Spain or Portugal or a few others. The woke up one day and discovered that in reality they'd been reduced to colonial dumping grounds for German products. Ukrainian farmers would soon find themselves tossed off their land and replaced by German corporates. However some people in Ukraine would become rich selling their country to Germany, it's these "some people" that are the cause of all the trouble.
    Compare Poland's and Ukraine's economy, which has fared better the EU member or the one that was under the RF's boot?
    Last edited by StarDreamer; August 01, 2014 at 09:43 AM.
    "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein
    https://www.politicalcompass.org/ana...2.38&soc=-3.44 <-- "Dangerous far right bigot!" -SJWs

  7. #1187

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Meanwhile some interesting things happen on the Western Ukrainian border with Moldova, in the region of Transnistria.

    At the beginning of the week the Ukrainians have started to dig what seems to be a 300km-long, 3m wide and 3m deep moat.

    Now we have reports of Russian UAVs being shot down after being launched from Transnistria.

    The thing is officially there are only about 2,000 Russian "peacekeepers" in Transnistria and about 5,000 soldiers of the "Transnistrian Army". That is not enough for an invasion of Ukraine from the West. But the presence of the Russian UAVs shows something is brewing there and the Ukrainians don't want to take any chances.

    More to the point: what the Russians could do is to "export" commandos to some Ukrainian cities in the Odessa area. Transnistria used to have some large military depots and it is not clear what the Russians have left behind when they pulled out the Russian 14th army in 2003. Some estimate half of the equipment is still there, which might include tanks, GRAD batteries, Buk systems etc.

    The moat the Ukrainians are digging now would make it hard (but not impossible) for such commandos to bring any heavy weaponry with them. If the Russians have left some MT-55 or MTU-72AVLB vehicle-launched bridges in Transnistria, that 3m wide moat won't be a problem (such a tank-carried bridge can span 18m and support 50t). A MT-55 looks like this:

    However, if they don't have such equipment at hand, sending commandos on foot would be a very costly adventure.

    Dmitry Tymchuk, the Ukrainian defense expert who coordinates sprotiv.info says the Ukrainian officials might want to go beyond building a moat. At some point in the near future they may want eliminate the Transnistrian threat completely by assisting Moldova to recover the province.

    Given that as we speak the inhabitants of Transnistria are queuing in front of the Moldavian police offices to get a Moldavian passport (which allows them access to the EU without a visa), the ATO in Transnistria should be swift.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MareNostrum

  8. #1188
    I WUB PUGS's Avatar OOH KILL 'EM
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nor ☆ Cal
    Posts
    9,149

    Default

    The majority of Russian IFV and APC which carry heavy enough ATGMs to take out tanks are amphibious anyway.

    Just couldn't take the armor, but if you're already blasting through with mechanized forces then its not so much of a big deal to take a bridge or two.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    That hasn't stopped congress from already sending the rebels weapons. We have been sending the rebels millions in aid and arms for a while now. But it hasn't been enough. This package is Obama seriously arming the rebels now.


    You remember this?

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/bo...es-f8C11066085

    Boehner supported strikes on Syria. You think he wouldn't support a bill arming the rebels? Charlie Wilson's War won't happen. The US is almost completely against giving the rebels any kind of MANPADs, and after MH17 it looks like there is no chance for the rebels to get MANPADs.

    This isn't a simple situation anymore. The US isn't just arming the rebels to beat Assad, but to defend themselves against the ISIS too. And if the ISIS get any stronger the US is going to get involved. And before you say Obama would have no support:

    http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/06...le-iraq-burns/

    Bohner already accused Obama of doing nothing in Iraq. So he possibly isn't against strikes.

    Got off topic there, but my point remains. Russia's actions in Ukraine are causing the Us ot respond elsewhere like in Syria.
    You need to read the SAC members comments. ABC had them in the article I read. Scathing doubt about the language of the bill. Only Feinstein seemed to agree with the language. They're so tight about providing those funds because of fear that AQ types will get money that its doubtful anyone will get any.

    And that Boehner .... with Ryan .... with Pelosi was BEFORE it got shot down IN CONGRESS because we very nearly went to war with bad intel.

    Back on topic. In what possible way would even obliterating Syria from the face of the earth damage Russia? So they lose a base that they don't even port a ship at all the time. They lose a minor importer of surplus military equipment. They lose a pariah state in the Middle East that only links them to Iran, a country that Russia has butted heads with a few times in the last 10 years. Russia doesn't have any allies and barely any friends. Syria is nothing but a chip at the UNSC table to play against the US.

    And you're right if they lose that, they lose a chip but advocating a war with Syria of any scale to harm Russia is obscene. Please march your butt down to the recruiter and do your bit if we do though. At least one hawk can put their ass where their mouth is.

    Syria is far too muddled now. That's exactly why Congress is against dumping money on them. SAC said it this month that these funds are 3 years too late. Boehner said the same thing in your article and that was almost a year ago. The situation is far more muddled and worse now. I very much doubt the US Congress will be passing anything more than a spending bill that is so stringent on qualifications for funding that you may as well not bother asking. War. No. Never. Assad will be there for as long as you and I care about it.







    This reminds me so much of the 1980's wargames write-up that Pielstick linked to in the procurement thread. BLUE being obsessed with opening 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th fronts, no matter how small to try and pull RED away from the Rhine and Denmark. It never worked even if it had success. These sanctions and talks of toppling allies are all on the periphery. Trying to cause death by paper cuts. The only way Russia falls is by closing ALL capital markets which won't happen because Shanghai and Hong Kong will stay open to them. OR getting Europeans to switch oil and gas suppliers which is not an option on the table for stupid European reasons.
    Last edited by Aikanár; August 01, 2014 at 02:37 PM. Reason: consecutive postings

  9. #1189
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    17,268

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by I WUB PUGS View Post
    You need to read the SAC members comments. ABC had them in the article I read. Scathing doubt about the language of the bill. Only Feinstein seemed to agree with the language. They're so tight about providing those funds because of fear that AQ types will get money that its doubtful anyone will get any.

    And that Boehner .... with Ryan .... with Pelosi was BEFORE it got shot down IN CONGRESS because we very nearly went to war with bad intel.
    Bad intel? The intel wasn't bad. Russia just flanked us with that deal and Obama was put in a situation where he would looks like an aggressor if he went to war. Its too bad we didn't follow on that intel since the UN investigation just quietly hints at Assad's regime conducting the attacks.

    Quote Originally Posted by I WUB PUGS View Post
    Back on topic. In what possible way would even obliterating Syria from the face of the earth damage Russia? So they lose a base that they don't even port a ship at all the time. They lose a minor importer of surplus military equipment. They lose a pariah state in the Middle East that only links them to Iran, a country that Russia has butted heads with a few times in the last 10 years. Russia doesn't have any allies and barely any friends. Syria is nothing but a chip at the UNSC table to play against the US.

    And you're right if they lose that, they lose a chip but advocating a war with Syria of any scale to harm Russia is obscene. Please march your butt down to the recruiter and do your bit if we do though. At least one hawk can put their ass where their mouth is.
    Who said anything about obliterating? Supporting one side seems good enough. Syria isn't just about Russia anymore i thought i just explained that to you. And i have been advocating a war in Syria long before this Russia fiasco started. I think the fact a dictator is murdering thousands of his people through barrel bombs, indiscriminate artillery, chemical weapons attacks, the starving and demolish of areas known to have supported the rebels, and of course the possibility of AQ winning in Syria should be enough reason to intervene, but not for our country. We got to have some kind of benefit from this.


    Quote Originally Posted by I WUB PUGS View Post
    Syria is far too muddled now. That's exactly why Congress is against dumping money on them. SAC said it this month that these funds are 3 years too late. Boehner said the same thing in your article and that was almost a year ago. The situation is far more muddled and worse now. I very much doubt the US Congress will be passing anything more than a spending bill that is so stringent on qualifications for funding that you may as well not bother asking. War. No. Never. Assad will be there for as long as you and I care about it.
    Muddled? Again Obama has not ruled out strikes in Syria. Again, if the US decides on stirring groups like the ISIS, it will require going through Syrian air space. If we end up bombing ISIS, we will end up bombing the Syrian Army too.

    But i agree with you here. the situation is muddled, but thats because we allowed it to become that way. We can either arm some of the moderate rebels (and yes there is secular moderate rebels in Syria) or we can let the more extreme elements win. And they will. Assad isn't going to win against this insurgency. He has to rely on Hezbollah just to maintain his advances. meanwhile the ISIS, Al-Nusra, and Islamic Front only grow stronger. And they can easily run right across the border into Turkey, Lebanon, or Syria to escape his forces, and strike again. They are like a better armed and better trained Taliban. They will do juts like the Taliban do and this war won't end.

    We are getting kind of off-topic, so i might get a mod to move this posts.
    Best/Worst quotes of TWC

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyriakos View Post
    While you are at it, allow Germany to rearm, it's not like they committed the worst atrocity in modern history, so having a strong army can't lead to anything pitiful.

  10. #1190
    I WUB PUGS's Avatar OOH KILL 'EM
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nor ☆ Cal
    Posts
    9,149

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    I said "even obliterating" as in removing that country as an entity being the most extreme measure. Anything else is obviously less. So even if we obliterate Syria, it does nothing to Russia. Doing less than that is well, just as pointless as obliterating. Syria means nothing to Russia.

    It was bad intel because it wasn't abundantly clear at the time who did it and we about bombed someone over it, but we had a pause and didn't follow through with anything more than Obama "reexplaining" his "red line". The US could've gone to war unilaterally but did not because Congress as a whole was not in favor. Period. That was a year ago, and as you agree it is far more muddled now with ISIS becoming a larger player with the other nuts still in place. Sure we can arm some seculars, but we have no guarantees that our arms won't end up in the wrong hands and if you read the Senators from the SAC, you'd see that there is VERY STRONG pessimism concerning our ability to effectively deploy the $500M. When even SAC is guarded against the wording...........wording that is already stringent on the disbursement of funds, you know that the Senate Floor and the House Floor are going to strip it down to a meaningless bill..........that's if a bill ever makes it back to Obama's desk.

    My point still remains that you said "there was strong Congressional support for actions in Syria" and you cited a bill passing SAC that had strong criticism and a great deal of pessimism from the committee members. The situation has gone sour and we've likely missed our window by about 2 years and Congress knows that.

    And still, going after Syria serves no strategic goal when addressing Russia. It is an old axe to grind that Russia has been prohibiting to lord over us, has zero potential to cause even minor discomfort to Russia.
    Last edited by I WUB PUGS; August 01, 2014 at 12:13 PM.

  11. #1191
    Pavlik the Rus's Avatar Civitate
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Posts
    2,332

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Proofs of falcifications of the satelite's photoes
    http://eng.mil.ru/en/analytics.htm

    Under patronage of respectable MARCVS
    Надо чаще встречаться
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=58644

  12. #1192

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    The latest sanctions seem more like this:

    American, French, Israeli and British government's ILLEGAL aggression against the Syrian people, without any proof for chemical attacks in Douma, and without waiting for OPCW to conduct their investigation..
    Sons of *******, leave that poor, war torn country in peace.
    If you are a citizen of one of these countries, then DO NOT ask any help from me on these forums, since, in protest against this aggression by your governments, I do not provide assistance/help anymore.
    Let Syria be finally in peace.

    A video of false chemical attack in Douma, Syria, which led to Western illegal attacks.

  13. #1193
    I WUB PUGS's Avatar OOH KILL 'EM
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nor ☆ Cal
    Posts
    9,149

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pavlik the Rus View Post
    Proofs of falcifications of the satelite's photoes
    http://eng.mil.ru/en/analytics.htm
    Would be interesting to get a 3rd party opinion. That seems hard though given that most if not all countries with any expertise here have already cast their lot.

  14. #1194

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pavlik the Rus View Post
    Proofs of falcifications of the satelite's photoes
    http://eng.mil.ru/en/analytics.htm
    Russia's takes it time to put out real evidence, in stark comparison with Kiev/Nato who uses twitter, photoshop and a video of a conversation made the day before the crash as evidence.

    "We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest" - James Paul Warburg

  15. #1195
    Holger Danske's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    THE NORTH
    Posts
    14,490

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dromikaites View Post
    But since a NATO nation (the Netherlands) or maybe two (the UK as well) and an American ally (Australia) are sending soldiers to Eastern Ukraine, that Cold War might not remain that cold if Putin invades.
    Wat?

  16. #1196

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by StarDreamer View Post
    Russia is different because it annexed another region, the last time someone tried that it was Irak in the 90's... That didn't end well? Adn a annexation backed by ones militray spreading around the region(without insignia at that) is not a peaceful one, it is backed by force.
    But local population was okay with it, which was confirmed in the referendum, and there was no evidence that Russian troops intervened in the political process.
    West and East Germany reunited by the wish of both countries, never said annexations not backed by ones military is bad.
    But it wasn't annexed by the military, it was annexed after it was voted for in the referendum.
    Yes, but the economy was in ruins because of the SU. And I find the rise of the oligarchs as a bad thing too, but they exist because of Russian culture not western intervention. Then it has slowly regained its economy with the help of western investment. The last 5+ years Russian media has been spreading that everything that goes wrong is the wests fault. The untruthful bile that sometimes is spread in Russian media about Finland, spearheaded by a certain "Johan Bäckman", now the leading "representative" of the DNR in Finland, is just one example.
    Still the west was blind and until the unlawful forceful annexation of Crimea it continued to think Russia intended to work with them and not against them. After that it has slowly been waking up to the real Russia and not the fairytale one that hasn't been true for a long time.
    This has nothing to do with Russian culture. West backed undemocratic oligarch coup in 1990s, and West is the reason why men like Putin are in power today, since it was Yeltsin who brought him there anyways. The reason why Russia isn't a democracy today is because of Western states that backed Yeltsin in 1990s.

  17. #1197
    Holger Danske's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    THE NORTH
    Posts
    14,490

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    The reason why Russia isn't a democracy today is because of Western states that backed Yeltsin in 1990s.
    Did you just admit that Russia isn't a democracy?

    And out of interest, who would you rather have had the West backing during those years? Especially after the failed Soviet coup d'état attempt in 1991.
    Last edited by Holger Danske; August 01, 2014 at 03:22 PM.

  18. #1198

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Holger Danske View Post
    Did you just admit that Russia isn't a democracy?
    It was democratic before Yeltsin's Western-backed coup in 1993.

  19. #1199
    Holger Danske's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    THE NORTH
    Posts
    14,490

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    It was democratic before Yeltsin's Western-backed coup in 1993.
    I never liked Yeltsin, but still you admit that Russia isn't a democracy now?

  20. #1200

    Default Re: Ukraine and Russia Developments. Version 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Holger Danske View Post
    I never liked Yeltsin, but still you admit that Russia isn't a democracy now?
    Of course it isn't, but that doesn't go only for Russia. In Russia it is just more obvious, because Russian (Soviet) propaganda has always been crap.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •