Ukraine General

[surpher 1]

Any other sources for that?

Not really, this is where I first saw the story.

(ПреÑтупноÑти.ÐЕТ) Fighters tried to break from Ukraine to the Russian Federation - the Russian frontier guards shot a car

[mistyronin 1181]

Dude really? US allowed him to escpae so that he could live? Is it why they forced a plane with the president of Bolivia to land because they thought Snowden is on that plane?

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/02/world/americas/bolivia-presidential-plane/

He will be executed in the USA that's why he fled.

Well, we are talking about high treason, so yeah it would be pretty easy that if Snowden appears in the US he will be sentenced to death.

If he was Russian and had did the same, he would be already dead and buried.

We all remember different cases:

Russian defector poisoned in London 'on orders of Moscow'

It seems indeed that that whole conflict is about gas in Europe, but I highly doubt that Russia is the sole instigator of that conflict.

I think it's a bit more complicated. But I can of agree that Putin saw the opportunity to stole Crimea as an strategic point, so he did.

And also that he is trying to destabilize Ukraine, to keep it weak ( to keep certain control over it and to prevent it to have relations with anyone else ).

[spooky lynx 73]

And also that he is trying to destabilize Ukraine, to keep it weak ( to keep certain control over it and to prevent it to have relations with anyone else ).

Keeping Ukraine weak results in hundreds of dead civilians and tens of thousand refugees who come to us. We have to spend descent amount of money to help them. Also it results in breaking trade and economic relations between Russian and Ukrainian ventures (which also means loss of money). At the same time Poroshenko is signing association treaty with EU. So what's the point of destabilizing Ukraine if now it only causes harm to us but does not stop UA president and government from providing pro-EU/US policy?

[mistyronin 1181]

Keeping Ukraine weak results in hundreds of dead civilians and tens of thousand refugees who come to us. We have to spend descent amount of money to help them. Also it results in breaking trade and economic relations between Russian and Ukrainian ventures (which also means loss of money). At the same time Poroshenko is signing association treaty with EU. So what's the point of destabilizing Ukraine if now it only causes harm to us but does not stop UA president and government from providing pro-EU/US policy?

Precisely, as Putin see that Russia is unable to control Ukraine, first he stole the main strategic point, Crimea, and then he keeps Ukraine weak as I said. Obviously Ukraine will keep defending its freedom from Russia, with whatever allies they may find.

But if Putin keeps with the destabilization of the country, he may not control Ukraine as a whole anymore, but it may turn into a federal state, where Russia could at less manage to control parts of it ( mainly the ones with more Russian speakers ).

And that is worth for Putin all the refugees, violence, etc. If not why has he been favoring that situation, and still do specially through the Russian media.

[surpher 1]

(BBC) EU signs pacts with Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova

Mr Poroshenko also said he saw the signing as the start of preparations for joining the bloc.

"Ukraine is underlining its sovereign choice in favour of membership of the EU," he said.

(Al Jazeera) Ukraine rebels free four OSCE observers

Four observers from Switzerland, Turkey, Estonia and Denmark, part of the 100-strong mission, were brought by heavily armed rebels to a hotel in central Donetsk, where they were handed over to their colleagues early on Friday. Another four remain in rebel captivity in the neighbouring Luhansk region.

[mistyronin 1181]

[maturin 12]

Keeping Ukraine weak results in hundreds of dead civilians and tens of thousand refugees who come to us. We have to spend descent amount of money to help them. Also it results in breaking trade and economic relations between Russian and Ukrainian ventures (which also means loss of money). At the same time Poroshenko is signing association treaty with EU. So what's the point of destabilizing Ukraine if now it only causes harm to us but does not stop UA president and government from providing pro-EU/US policy?

Because the Donbass rebellion means leverage. It's a powerful bargaining chip that can be used to put pressure on all of Kiev's future decisions, even if it's not a bargaining chip that is entirely under Russian control anymore.

NATO will never consider letting a war-torn country with disputed borders join the alliance, and preventing Ukraine's accession into NATO is Putin's main goal know that Sevastopol is secure.

Putin doesn't want Ukraine to be at war necessarily, just politically unstable and divided internally, so that the pro-Western government is unable to exercise control over all its territory. If there was a friendly government in Kiev, he would of course want Ukraine to be calm and prosperous and inside the Eurasian Union. But a pro-Eastern orientation is the first priority, so he will play a long game in Ukraine, trying to prevent the escalation of the conflict but also denying a resolution that is friendly to Kiev. The Poroshenko government is torn between its desire to resolve the conflict diplomatically and the radical nationalist component of its base. It will be very easy for Poroshenko to lose the support of everyone by trying to walk a line between Donetsk and Lvov. More importantly, the economy is not going to get better soon, even if peace came tomorrow, and it needs support from Russia too, not just the West. Putin knows that if he can get the conflict down to a slow burn while the economy collapses further, the country will become disillusioned with Poroshenko just like they did Yuschenko, and there will be a chance to get a pro-Russian government in power again. In the short term, he knows that most of Ukraine is going to be incensed at Russia for annexing Crimea, but they could still come crawling back.

Putin has already shown that he is ready to accept financial consequences of aggressive Ukraine policy. The cost of running Crimea is much greater than that of the relatively small number of refugees from Donbass, who will not stay long. And as for economic ties, Putin currently has a form of control over the industrial east, with its strategically important military manufacturers. He would rather have a factory under bombardment in his own sphere of influence than trust it to the control of someone else, even if there is only a slight chance the second party denying him access. That's how Putin's strategic mind works, and how the Soviet leadership always saw things. If something is not under direct control, it is considered to be a pawn of the enemy.

Edit:

Further proof that Russia doesn't care about harming trade with Ukraine is in the recent restrictions on imports of Ukrainian chocolate, potatoes and cheese for 'health reasons.' Of course, there are no apolitical bureaucratic decisions in Russia, and just as Georgian wine was deemed unsafe for consumption after the 2008 war, so Ukraine's economy gets slapped with an identical mark of disapproval. Mutual benefit is not a concept in Putin's vocabulary. All his politics are zero-sum.

Edited June 27, 2014 by maturin

[ProfTournesol 956]

Blindly shelling civillians is just outright stupid and will produce the exact opposite effect of what they want. The incompetence of the Ukainian regular Army never ceases to amaze me.

Edited June 27, 2014 by ProfTournesol

[Sgt.Spoetnik 10]

"They have no saints beside money" that pretty much said it. and its prob not the regular army but those kiev militia's and right wing sector thats doing the killing and the shelling for weeks now,but you hear anything about it the western media, Hell no,why,they are friends off the west(so they can pretty much what they will), and dont try to blame Russia or the seperatist,because their not to blame for this only kiev and if you cant see this your blind.

[vilas 477]

blame only Kiev ?

word "only" you should replace by word "as well" , because Russian foreign politics is not saint, to blame is Moscow too , maybe even more due to fact that they allow crossing border - this caused a lot of anger in Ukraine, cause for Ukrainian point of view it was open war declaration from Russian side + voices of some Eastern Ukrainian citizens saying they want join to Russia , it was Russia who anected Crimea causing Ukrainian anger,

saying about Ukrainian violence after some months of pro-Russian violence is not objective ,

of course Right Sector is active, but not "only" but "as well" as separatists behaving like terrorists (who was taking hostages? )

if one side starts with violence, than natural consequence is violent answer,

Edited June 27, 2014 by vilas

[mistyronin 1181]

dont try to blame Russia or the seperatist,because their not to blame for this only kiev and if you cant see this your blind.

Uhm? The ones that started all this mayhem were the violent thugs from the pro-Russian side supported by the Kremlin. They are to blame for the situation.

Specially having in mind that they just chose violence over any other option without even trying the others.

Also, are them who directed the fight to the highly populated areas creating the humanitarian crisis.

Said that. The Ukrainian Army has probed to lack of tactic skills and being inexperienced, but after saw their main commanders no wonder. You have to think that most of their forces, specially the new National Guard are more green than a lettuce.

So basically we have thousands of new recruits without much training that are trying to fight insurgents that were trained by former Berkut, Russian combat experienced soldiers that came from Chechnya and Georgia; and with equipment "bought in surplus shops in the Kremlin".

[maturin 12]

Let's indulge in some counter-factuals.

If none of the radicals in Donbass had seized government buildings and taken up arms, there would be no fighting in the region.

No one would have been harmed; life would have gone on as normal. Poroshenko would have come to power promising to carry out federalization of the country and legal protections of the Russian language. But radicals with Russian support chose to take with a gun what they were going to get with a ballot box. The population of Crimea and the Donbass was going to get just about everything it wanted, if not for the idiotic news coverage of a fascist coup and violence that was practically non-existent.

Once parliamentary elections came around, the right wing element would have lost heavily, down to less influence than Russia's own Dugin-style fascists have. The only reason that Right Sector has the power it does is because of Russia's annexation of Crimea. Ukrainians think that their country is being invaded and dismembered, and will turn to the radicals out of desperate patriotism. Nothing turns people into hardliners like watching the spread of treason.

Indeed, if Russia had not taken Crimea, the Donbass insurgents would have had absolutely no hope of a successful uprising. This war being waged by people mimicking Moscow's actions in the Crimea. Indeed, Crimea could not have been taken except at that moment. A few more weeks would have made it clear that there was no threat, no nazis in the streets.

The 'anti-terrorist operation' is an incompetent clusterfuck involving too much indiscriminate fire and too many irregular groups that should have been kept far away from Russophone populations. But it's ultimately the insurgents who took up the gun and brought this upon their neighbors. None of this needed to happen. There is no cause and no conflict except the one they cooked up.

And we can go farther back. If Putin hadn't kept pressuring Yanukovich to crush the protestors and pass laws turning the country into a police state, the maidan would not have turned into a massacre. But of course, Russia always feels entitled to use force when others use protest signs.

[Tonci87 163]

Let's indulge in some counter-factuals.

If none of the radicals in Donbass had seized government buildings and taken up arms, there would be no fighting in the region.

No one would have been harmed; life would have gone on as normal. Poroshenko would have come to power promising to carry out federalization of the country and legal protections of the Russian language. But radicals with Russian support chose to take with a gun what they were going to get with a ballot box. The population of Crimea and the Donbass was going to get just about everything it wanted, if not for the idiotic news coverage of a fascist coup and violence that was practically non-existent.

Once parliamentary elections came around, the right wing element would have lost heavily, down to less influence than Russia's own Dugin-style fascists have. The only reason that Right Sector has the power it does is because of Russia's annexation of Crimea. Ukrainians think that their country is being invaded and dismembered, and will turn to the radicals out of desperate patriotism. Nothing turns people into hardliners like watching the spread of treason.

Indeed, if Russia had not taken Crimea, the Donbass insurgents would have had absolutely no hope of a successful uprising. This war being waged by people mimicking Moscow's actions in the Crimea. Indeed, Crimea could not have been taken except at that moment. A few more weeks would have made it clear that there was no threat, no nazis in the streets.

The 'anti-terrorist operation' is an incompetent clusterfuck involving too much indiscriminate fire and too many irregular groups that should have been kept far away from Russophone populations. But it's ultimately the insurgents who took up the gun and brought this upon their neighbors. None of this needed to happen. There is no cause and no conflict except the one they cooked up.

And we can go farther back. If Putin hadn't kept pressuring Yanukovich to crush the protestors and pass laws turning the country into a police state, the maidan would not have turned into a massacre. But of course, Russia always feels entitled to use force when others use protest signs.

Basically this^

[mistyronin 1181]

And we can go farther back. If Putin hadn't kept pressuring Yanukovich to crush the protestors and pass laws turning the country into a police state, the maidan would not have turned into a massacre. But of course, Russia always feels entitled to use force when others use protest signs.

Some analysts say that Putin was afraid that the Maidan situation could replicate in Russia, the idea that peaceful pro-Democracy protesters gathering in the Red Square threatening his Czardom was too much, so he forced Yanukovich to crash the demonstrators by any means.

[ballistic09 241]

lol :lol:

but you hear anything about it the western media, Hell no

... he said immediately after quoting a western news source reporting on the matter.

Western media should be state controlled, like RT. Then we'd never have issues like selective reporting, media bias, or the spreading of asinine conspiracy theories about rival countries we disagree with. Just look at the shining examples of freedom of the press, outside of the west...[/sarcasm] :j:

Edited June 28, 2014 by Ballistic09

[surpher 1]

(BBC) Second OSCE team freed in Donetsk

Four European monitors have been released by pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine, officials say.

The Organization for the Security and Co-operation in Europe observers were detained last month. Another OSCE team was released earlier this week.

The move comes amid a shaky ceasefire between government forces and rebels.

[Sgt.Spoetnik 10]

he said immediately after quoting a western news source reporting on the matter.

uhm it whas the old lady in that report that said it,not the reporter, and you should know how the western press is misleading,bias and is payed and controlled by big bussines and banks, btw how is your lovely country doing? any more immigrants crossing the open border?that then get locked up in detention camps, waisting your taks money. how many police killings where there this week? i can keep going all day long. so i wouldn talk to loud if i whas you!

[ballistic09 241]

Again, lol.

uhm it whas the old lady in that report that said it,not the reporter

Indeed, but it was in a Vice news report, a western news source. If they were truly a part of the evil "misleading,bias and is payed and controlled by big bussines and banks" western media you say they are, shouldn't they have cut that tidbit out instead of showing how the people of Slavyansk suffer from the Ukrainian army shelling? A bit contradictory, hmm?

And for the record, I'm not saying western media isn't biased or misleading. My opinion on that is quite the opposite. I don't think I've ever read a western news source, or any news source for that matter, that wasn't somewhat biased or didn't have an ulterior motive, but compared to the propaganda garbage that's spit out by both the Ukrainian and Russian press, it makes the western media look like the honest to god truth.

The last half of your response looks like you got mad, and defaulted simply to insulting me and my country (which is way off topic), but instead of reporting you, I'll just answer your questions as if you were serious because it's simply too much fun.

btw how is your lovely country doing?

Fine, thanks.

any more immigrants crossing the open border?that then get locked up in detention camps, waisting your taks money.

Nah, not up here. In my state, we share a border with Canada, and we're all very friendly up here.

how many police killings where there this week?

None in my state, as far as I know. I live in Minnesota. We're pretty much like the Scandinavia of the U.S. with regards to crime and violence (and heritage).

i can keep going all day long.

Go right ahead. It's not my job to stop you from spreading bigoted, anti-American, xenophobic nonsense.

so i wouldn talk to loud if i whas you!

I'll talk all I want. That's the beauty of free speech and free press.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Ballistic09

[maturin 12]

how many police killings where there this week?

Not sure if you're aware, but Russia has about twice the murders the US has, and with half the population.

[vilas 477]

Nah, not up here. In my state, we share a border with Canada, and we're all very friendly up here.

i think he meant Mexico problem, not Canada,Canda is among richest countries of the world when it comes to usual citizen life ;)

but in Eastern media we hear a lot of Mexican problem and children that are taught in Mexico that if they go to USA, they will get everything from the state and USA has problem cause lots of Mexican kids go there brainwashed by parents "go to USA, you will be very rich" etc. at least this was told in some Russian-speaking media afaik , maybe it was not true information, but we heard it in our media,

but this is oftop to Ua

Edited June 29, 2014 by vilas

[vilas 477]

few news:

Russia accuses Ukraine of using chemical weapons

France meets Russian ship with 400 soldiers to train Russian soldiers use Mistral ship : http://wiadomosci.wp.pl/kat,1356,title,Rosyjscy-marynarze-zapoznaja-sie-z-okretem-typu-Mistral-ktory-kupia-od-Francuzow,wid,16721106,wiadomosc.html

[mistyronin 1181]

( BBC ) Ukraine president ends ceasefire with rebels

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has ended a unilateral ceasefire with separatists in the east, saying: "We will attack, we will free our land."

Mr Poroshenko said the chance for peace was lost because of the "criminal activities" of pro-Russian militants.

The shaky 10-day ceasefire between the Ukrainian authorities and separatist groups had been due to end on Monday evening.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Let's hope it won't turn into a long term civil war.

[surpher 1]

(The Moscow Times) Journalist Says Reporters Set Up After Cameraman Killed in Ukraine

A separatist rebel identified by his nom de guerre Gyurza, or Viper, addressed the gathering, telling reporters that they would travel with a group of Ukrainian women — the mothers of conscript servicemen — to a government military base whose commander had supposedly agreed to surrender to the rebels, Dzhemal wrote.

But no surrender agreement appeared to have been in place, as the bus came under fire outside of the army base.

[Tonci87 163]

(The Moscow Times) Journalist Says Reporters Set Up After Cameraman Killed in Ukraine

That is really bad...