Ukraine General

[aleksadragutin 9]

Maybe smaller numbers, but 100.000 new fighters in 10 days ? From where should they take all the people and organize the weapons in such a short time. This is hot air, just propaganda probably.

There are justified critics against Russia in general and about Putin, also about the current conflict like you write.

However, some of the mentioned historical events seem to be distorted except I miss something here.

The Baltics were invaded by the Sovjetunion in 1940, Karabakh was mainly an ethnical rivalry which started inside the Sovjetunion around 100 years ago, but the military conflict in the early/mid 90ies was a conflict between the two nations Armenia and Azerbajan solely, Chechnya fighters were aswell involved. In one of the both wars with Georgia (the first one), massacres did happen and Russia is to blaim for but the the last war in 2008 was started by Georgia itself with an attack on Ossetia. It seems the country has problems to accept the independance movements and clashes since the beginning of the last century. The Crimea is definately one of the main points for critics in this current conflict.

A lot of these disputes origin were caused by the creation and brakedown of the Sovjetunion, creating boarders and throwing together people regardless of ethnics, culture, languages and so on. Other imperial powers were similar reckless in other areas of the world and the results are visible.

For example Africa.

[Dwarden 1124]

attack on Osetia? you realize South Ossetia was part of Georgia territory ?

by that logic, if Ukraine forces attack rebels ... then Russia will step in ... oh wait... they already did ... unofficially

so they will step in officially next time ;)

[oxmox 73]

attack on Osetia? you realize South Ossetia was part of Georgia territory ?

by that logic, if Ukraine forces attack rebels ... then Russia will step in ... oh wait... they already did ... unofficially

so they will step in officially next time ;)

New Report on Russia-Georgia War

To put it more simply: It was Georgia who started the war.

The EU fact-finding mission on the Russia-Georgia war has published its findings in a much-anticipated report. The authors blame Georgia for the war but also assign partial responsibility to Russia. Both countries have reacted angrily to the findings, with the Russia ambassador to NATO saying the report is only "pseudo-balanced."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/new-report-on-russia-georgia-war-eu-investigators-debunk-saakashvili-s-lies-a-652512.html

EU blames Georgia for starting war with Russia

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/6247620/EU-blames-Georgia-for-starting-war-with-Russia.html

@Dwarden, it seems there were more going on besides the influence of Russia in South Ossetia, but the war in 2008 actually started with an offensive by Georgia.

Edited February 2, 2015 by oxmox

[Dwarden 1124]

I bet those South Ossetia grads shelling Georgia villages were just like on Ukraine ... non-existent ... more likely Georgians shelled themselves ...

hopeless ...

[oxmox 73]

I bet those South Ossetia grads shelling Georgia villages were just like on Ukraine ... non-existent ... more likely Georgians shelled themselves ...

hopeless ...

There were a lot of skirmishes in the months before if you read the chronology on wikipedia..much more was going on.

Edited February 2, 2015 by oxmox

[surpher 1]

(BBC Monitoring) How Russian TV uses psychology over Ukraine

Russian state TV's coverage of the conflict in Ukraine does not simply contain one-sided and often misleading propaganda. It also appears to employ techniques of psychological conditioning designed to excite extreme emotions of aggression and hatred in the viewer. All the indications are that it is having the desired effect.

(Bloomberg View) A Russian Housewife Caught in Putin's War

Is Russia fighting a war against Ukraine? To hear President Vladimir Putin and his ministers, it's not -- it merely sympathizes with the separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine. Yet the case of a Russian housewife with a two-month-old baby, accused of treason and jailed for making a call to the Ukrainian embassy, proves that Russia sees the neighboring country as an enemy and that it has troops there.

Edited February 3, 2015 by surpher

[beastcat 14]

The army wants to adapt these license made Galil ACE rifles by Fort. I'm just posting this because we will probably see a lot of these used as "evidence" that NATO is supplying Ukraine.

Oh and the USA may want to think about possibly contemplating the idea that they might consider it a potentiality to perhaps maybe supply weapons to Ukraine. Or at least thats what I got out of the news.

[Dwarden 1124]

needtest is in typical soviet -60C degree environment too ;) if that works then maybe ;)

[Tonci87 163]

New Report on Russia-Georgia War

To put it more simply: It was Georgia who started the war.

The EU fact-finding mission on the Russia-Georgia war has published its findings in a much-anticipated report. The authors blame Georgia for the war but also assign partial responsibility to Russia. Both countries have reacted angrily to the findings, with the Russia ambassador to NATO saying the report is only "pseudo-balanced."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/new-report-on-russia-georgia-war-eu-investigators-debunk-saakashvili-s-lies-a-652512.html

EU blames Georgia for starting war with Russia

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/6247620/EU-blames-Georgia-for-starting-war-with-Russia.html

@Dwarden, it seems there were more going on besides the influence of Russia in South Ossetia, but the war in 2008 actually started with an offensive by Georgia.

Is it really relevant who started that war? Did Russia start it? Did Georgia start it? Were they provoked to start it?

Much more important is the question why Russia was so well prepared for that war! Immediatelly Special forces units secured logistical keypoints like the tunnel to Russia, A huge ammount of Russian forces was immediatelly combat ready and on the move into Georgia. That all happened too fast. Russia was not surprised by that war! Either they started it, or they knew exactly that it was coming and decided to go with it instead of finding diplomatic solutions.

In any case, that war was a testbed for Putin to see how the international community and his people would react when he invades a country. Maybe we wouldn´t have this mess in Ukraine if Putin had meet more resistance back then.

[aleksadragutin 9]

Is it really relevant who started that war? Did Russia start it? Did Georgia start it? Were they provoked to start it?

Much more important is the question why Russia was so well prepared for that war! Immediatelly Special forces units secured logistical keypoints like the tunnel to Russia, A huge ammount of Russian forces was immediatelly combat ready and on the move into Georgia. That all happened too fast. Russia was not surprised by that war! Either they started it, or they knew exactly that it was coming and decided to go with it instead of finding diplomatic solutions.

In any case, that war was a testbed for Putin to see how the international community and his people would react when he invades a country. Maybe we wouldn´t have this mess in Ukraine if Putin had meet more resistance back then.

They probably knew it was coming, and can you really find a diplomatic solution to a dispute such as this? Would Georgia be willing to budge? Obviously no. Would Russia give in to the pressure of little Georgia? Would anyone? Even the UN can't solve the disputes, they just go about with their resolutions, which are empty letters on a piece of paper.

[Tonci87 163]

They probably knew it was coming, and can you really find a diplomatic solution to a dispute such as this? Would Georgia be willing to budge? Obviously no. Would Russia give in to the pressure of little Georgia? Would anyone? Even the UN can't solve the disputes, they just go about with their resolutions, which are empty letters on a piece of paper.

Well, if Russia went ahead and said something like "listen Georgia, we know you want to start military operation at this and that time, we are prepared with a large force and we will kick your ass back all over to your capital" Then Georgia wouldn´t have started military operations, I´m quite sure of that.

Or If Russia went to the UN and said "Hey listen guys, our intelligence agency has found out that Georgia want to start a war, could you please tell them to stop or we will have to kick their ass?" I´m sure that Georgia wouldn´t have started a war because they wouldn´t have any way to justify it. Russia did none of those things. They either started the war, or they only waited for Georgia to make the first move before striking back hard.

In any case, Russia wanted that war.

Why? As a testbed for their new toys and to see how everybody will react to it.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Yeah, it's amazing to see how many countries want to attack Russia and how many ended with a part of the country being ruled by Russia :rolleyes:

[aleksadragutin 9]

Well, if Russia went ahead and said something like "listen Georgia, we know you want to start military operation at this and that time, we are prepared with a large force and we will kick your ass back all over to your capital" Then Georgia wouldn´t have started military operations, I´m quite sure of that.

Or If Russia went to the UN and said "Hey listen guys, our intelligence agency has found out that Georgia want to start a war, could you please tell them to stop or we will have to kick their ass?" I´m sure that Georgia wouldn´t have started a war because they wouldn´t have any way to justify it. Russia did none of those things. They either started the war, or they only waited for Georgia to make the first move before striking back hard.

In any case, Russia wanted that war.

Why? As a testbed for their new toys and to see how everybody will react to it.

I think it's safe to assume that Georgia was well aware that they will get their ass kicked. And if Russia went to the UN, do you think NATO countries would just let it roll and approve it?

[mistyronin 1181]

Yeah, it's amazing to see how many countries want to attack Russia and how many ended with a part of the country being ruled by Russia :rolleyes:

Yup that remembers me to other times... late 30s...

To put it more simply: It was Georgia who started the war.

That doesn't make any sense. For the same reason Japan should be able to invade the ISIS territory and annex it... :j:

Some people have a tweaked view of what a legal Casus Belli is.

[aleksadragutin 9]

Yup that remembers me to other times... late 30s...

That doesn't make any sense. For the same reason Japan should be able to invade the ISIS territory and annex it... :j:

Some people have a tweaked view of what a legal Casus Belli is.

Japan definitely has the right to attack ISIS, and it would have the right to annex them if the territories were inhabited by Japanese people.

[ProfTournesol 956]

it would have the right to annex them if the territories were inhabited by Japanese people.

Absolutely not. That's very basic international laws, and it does apply even for slavic countries, mind you.

[Tonci87 163]

I think it's safe to assume that Georgia was well aware that they will get their ass kicked. And if Russia went to the UN, do you think NATO countries would just let it roll and approve it?

Well if Georgia was aware that it will get ts ass kicked, then why start a war? There is no logic in that. Russia had the possibility to go to the UN and to make any effort to resolve the brewing conflict without bloodshed. Sad thing is they didn´t.

That only leaves the option that they wanted this war to happen.

[aleksadragutin 9]

Well if Georgia was aware that it will get ts ass kicked, then why start a war? There is no logic in that. Russia had the possibility to go to the UN and to make any effort to resolve the brewing conflict without bloodshed. Sad thing is they didn´t.

That only leaves the option that they wanted this war to happen.

Russia probably wanted the war, but would going to the UN solve anything, except giving Georgia more time. Again, do you think NATO countries would pass that?

---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:27 ----------

Absolutely not. That's very basic international laws, and it does apply even for slavic countries, mind you.

Ok, then tell me what's the international law behind forceful removal of territories here, that US and it's allies imposed? The same countries that are criticizing the invasion of Georgia and the rebellion in Ukraine (while supporting those in Libya, Syria).

[mistyronin 1181]

Japan definitely has the right to attack ISIS, and it would have the right to annex them if the territories were inhabited by Japanese people.

Yeah that was exactly my point, tho I understand that some people think like you.

As ProfTournesol said, it's against the most basic of the International Laws.

Ok, then tell me what's the international law behind forceful removal of territories here, that US and it's allies imposed? The same countries that are criticizing the invasion of Georgia and the rebellion in Ukraine (while supporting those in Libya, Syria).

Kosovo got it's independence due to the international right of self-determination ( recognized by the UN ).

That right doesn't apply to neither the Ukrainian case nor the Russian-Georgia War. As we are talking about Russian invasions and annexations. Not about a ethnic group that wants to be independent ( even if Putin wants to scam us into believe that ).

Edited February 3, 2015 by MistyRonin

[aleksadragutin 9]

Yeah that was exactly my point, tho I understand that some people think like you.

As ProfTournesol said, it's against the most basic of the International Laws.

Kosovo got it's independence due to the international right of self-determination ( recognized by the UN ).

That right doesn't apply to neither the Ukrainian case nor the Russian-Georgia War. As we are talking about Russian invasions and annexations. Not about a ethnic group that wants to be independent ( even if Putin wants to scam us into believe that ).

But there is no solid proof of Russian army invading Ukraine (if there was, we'd be at war). And noone can claim that Russians don't want independence. Plus where was the self-determination right in Syria?

Edited February 3, 2015 by aleksadragutin

[mistyronin 1181]

But there is no solid proof of Russian army invading Ukraine

What? To me these guys look clearly Russian soldiers & sailors (you know because of the flags and so on ), and are inside Ukraine.

Plus where was the self-determination right in Syria?

Which country has annexed parts of Syria? The only "one" is IS and I don't think they care much about International Law.

[aleksadragutin 9]

What? To me these guys look clearly Russian soldiers & sailors (you know because of the flags and so on ), and are inside Ukraine.

Which country has annexed parts of Syria? The only "one" is IS and I don't think they care much about International Law.

In Crimea there was a referendum which I know you'r going to call fake, as might many others, but the "referendums" in other territories such as Kosovo weren't any more legal than this one. Yet one is regarded as legit and the other one not so much. That's the selective implementation of the so called "international law".

IS was armed by the US during the civil war in Syria, before the big offensive. Same with Libya, armed the rebels.

Edited February 3, 2015 by aleksadragutin

[Tonci87 163]

In Crimea there was a referendum which I know you'r going to call fake, as might many others, but the "referendums" in other territories such as Kosovo weren't any more legal than this one. Yet one is regarded as legit and the other one not so much. That's the selective implementation of the so called "international law".

IS was armed by the US during the civil war in Syria, before the big offensive. Same with Libya, armed the rebels.

Well, the Russian guy responsible for that whole affair called the crimean referendum fake, so I guess we can call it fake too? How was the Kosovo referendum not legal?

[aleksadragutin 9]

Well, the Russian guy responsible for that whole affair called the crimean referendum fake, so I guess we can call it fake too? How was the Kosovo referendum not legal?

Because it was conducted after exiling the Serbian population which made up a majority through terrorist actions and intimidation. But that's off topic. Legitimacy of referendums is a very vague thing, and you can't deny that the referendum in Ukraine was ruled illegal for political reasons.

[mistyronin 1181]

In Crimea there was a referendum which I know you'r going to call fake

It's not me who call it a fake, most of the countries of the World, just check the UN vote on the issue.

Besides that unlike the Kosovo referendum, the Crimean Referendum didn't meet any international law standards. The referendum in Kosovo had all the International guarantees.

IS was armed by the US during the civil war in Syria

How could the US arm IS in Syria. If IS sole birth reason was to fight the US in Iraq ( in 2004-2006 ), and later they extended to Syria.

Why would the US Army & Marines be fighting them in Iraq for years and now bombing them both in Iraq and in Syria... :rolleyes:

Same with Libya

In Libya the NATO conducted a legal operation following the UNSC resolution 1973 ( no country voted against it, so yeah Russia allowed that operation ).

That's the difference between legal and illegal.