# Official Ukraine/Georgian Thread



## CQB (Feb 20, 2014)

After some time doing it the protesters look well organised. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...photographer-David-Rose-in-Kiev.html?image=25


----------



## Brill (Feb 20, 2014)

Let Freedom Ring!


----------



## DA SWO (Feb 20, 2014)

CQB said:


> After some time doing it the protesters look well organised.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...photographer-David-Rose-in-Kiev.html?image=25


Kind of reminded me of the Solidarity Movement.

This won't play out well, no matter which way it goes.


----------



## Robal2pl (Feb 21, 2014)

Or rather American Civil War. Solidarity was trade union turned into de facto political party and it was only "opposition vs goverment" scenario. 
Ukraine is divided into two parts, western is considered  pro-European, eastern is pro-Russian. 

And what is really sad is that any ideological or social interests at political parties level are not even secondary, in eastern european politics they are on 4th or 5th place after...money, money, money. And all other buisness and personal benefits of being in goverment. Something like Africa or something


----------



## CQB (Feb 22, 2014)

Hopefully that will change with fresh election bring called & an "all is forgiven clause" for those involved so no charges for anyone. They're a long way off to a feel the love hour but it's a start. 
I was looking at other vids of all this & the opposition were organised. They even had a drone to get an overview. In the linked pix one guy in on the phone, others with makeshift riot shields, they captured over 60 cops as well.


----------



## DA SWO (Feb 22, 2014)

CQB said:


> Hopefully that will change with fresh election bring called & an "all is forgiven clause" for those involved so no charges for anyone. They're a long way off to a feel the love hour but it's a start.
> I was looking at other vids of all this & the opposition were organised. They even had a drone to get an overview. In the linked pix one guy in on the phone, others with makeshift riot shields, they captured over 60 cops as well.


I'd bet the truce only allows the Government to I.D./locate opposition leaders, then it's game on again.


----------



## CQB (Feb 23, 2014)

Whatever occurs from now on in, it won't be easy forming a new govt.
The crux was whether to join the EU, as I understand it. During the protests, Russia gives the Ukraine a poultice of money plus (correct me here) some debt forgiveness. 

Edit: It looks like that money is on hold until they figure out who is in charge


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 24, 2014)

Protesters would have been shot here in the states.


----------



## Brill (Feb 24, 2014)

^^^
They we're just trying to register for Obamacare at their local exchange.


----------



## pardus (Feb 24, 2014)

Goddam this shit is intense!


----------



## ZmanTX (Feb 25, 2014)

pardus said:


> Goddam this shit is intense!



Son of a bitch! That is some intense fighting.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 25, 2014)

Pellet rifles, sling shots and one dude with a pistol pointing it at himself and everyone else. Nice!

Those riot police are getting their asses kicked, literally.

I'm a little shocked that there has not been some tanks and BMPs opening up these crowds. As stated before its funny to me that we the USA make statements that other countries should show restraint during violent riots like this, knowing damn well that American police would open up on crowds doing shit like this. Of course our rioters would not be shooting back with pellet guns and sling shots though.

Crazy shit, the world is going nuts, got me wondering when we will see riots like this here at home.


----------



## CQB (Feb 25, 2014)

The govt side did shoot back, search YouTube for it. There's footage with no sound from the protesters side and another one with commentary clearly showing what the govt was doing. I add I'm bipartisan in this and I was going to post it but it's a bit too much and definitely NSW.


----------



## pardus (Feb 25, 2014)

*NSFW!*

I dread to think of this happening in any of our homes...


----------



## CQB (Feb 26, 2014)

Man, that's tough viewing, some seem to have captured riot shields which IMO wouldn't give too much protection.


----------



## DA SWO (Feb 26, 2014)

pardus said:


> Goddam this shit is intense!


They guy with the pistol is a little humerous, probably hit short of his intended targets.



JAB said:


> Pellet rifles, sling shots and one dude with a pistol pointing it at himself and everyone else. Nice!
> 
> Those riot police are getting their asses kicked, literally.
> 
> ...



There is an earlier video where a BMP gets ambushed with Molotav Cocktails, no one got out IIRC.

Pistols, shotguns and wooden sticks defeating a well armed/equiped Police/Military Force.  Folks in the White House shitting bricks when the consider what kind of weaponry the average American has.  This is a great argument for limiting gun laws.


----------



## Blizzard (Feb 27, 2014)

Let's see how he and the President respond to this:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20140227/DAC7P0LG0.html

I mean he threw out this out (sounding vaguely familiar):
http://news.yahoo.com/us-warns-russia-against-ukraine-intervention-213853114--politics.html
"Any kind of military intervention that would violate the sovereign territorial integrity of Ukraine would be a huge, a grave mistake. And the territorial integrity of Ukraine needs to be respected."

Or what Mr. Secretary?

He reportedly went on to add this as well:
"We continue to object to Russia's occupation, militarization and borderization of Georgian territory, and we call on Russia to fulfil its obligations under the 2008 cease-fire agreement, including the withdrawal of forces and free access for humanitarian assistance"

But of course we do.

The Ukraine situation may not seem like a big deal to most here, but it's a big deal to the Russians. Not the least of which is the strategic importance of the warm water port in Sevastopol to the Russian Navy; it's not exactly a shrug your shoulders and say "oh well" kind of an thing to them.

As for our strategy here, I'm not sure...but rest assured, SECSTATE is on it.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 27, 2014)

What do you mean, or what? A country doesn't have to use force every single time you know. Often times it's best to just condemn with statements.


----------



## Chopstick (Feb 27, 2014)

Sternly worded warnings have worked out so well with that Syrian thing. 

http://www.voanews.com/content/assad-missing-syria-chemical-weapons-deadline/1844681.html



> U.S. officials have said they do not yet view Syria's chemical weapons delay as a formal violation of the agreement. Russian officials said they expect the Assad government to complete the handover of those weapons by the end of March.


----------



## Blizzard (Feb 27, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> What do you mean, or what? A country doesn't have to use force every single time you know. Often times it's best to just condemn with statements.


Agree 100%!

The problem is that statements are thrown down that imply consequences.  What is the administrations strategy to deal with situation?  Same as Syria?  How will it be addressed?  I'm not implying or advocating force (hell, I'm not necessarily even advocating our involvement in the issue...but here we are nonetheless).   So, I'm critiquing their approach (or lack thereof); they seem well out of their league.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 27, 2014)

There doesn't appear to be a warning in that Ukraine statement. Apples/oranges.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 27, 2014)

Blizzard said:


> Agree 100%!   The problem is throwing down statements that imply consequences.  What is the strategy to deal with situation?  Same as Syria?  How will it be addressed.  I'm not implying or advocating force.   I'm critiquing the approach (or lack thereof).   As much as I hate to say it, he seems well out of his league.



OK, for a start I want to let it be known that I agree he's terrible. Considering it's Russia any consequences will come out of the UN, driven by the US and vetoed by Russia, ha! 

One part of me wants to see the Russians have a brief war again...! I'm just curious to see what happens but maybe I'm a guy that likes to watch the world burn?


----------



## Chopstick (Feb 28, 2014)

If you had relatives in Ukraine would you like to watch it burn?


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 28, 2014)

Settle pettle, it was only a figure of speech.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Feb 28, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> If you had relatives in Ukraine would you like to watch it burn?



If that's what it takes for them to figure things out? Yes.  Sometimes things go beyond where verbal discourse can handle and apparently according to the people there, it went beyond that point.


----------



## AWP (Feb 28, 2014)

Yawn....

I'll be an asshole. I don't care about the Ukraine. Not one bit. What are we going to do? Speeches? Sanctions? We might as well ban water from the ocean or denounce the color of the sky. Georgia, Chechnya...and we did what?

Why are we getting worked up over this?


----------



## Blizzard (Feb 28, 2014)

^ I tend to agree.  As I mentioned earlier, I'm not sure why we're weighing in on this.  Nonetheless, we are.


----------



## pardus (Feb 28, 2014)

SOWT said:


> There is an earlier video where a BMP gets ambushed with Molotav Cocktails, no one got out IIRC..



I saw that one and thought the same thing but I subsequently saw another video that _looks like_ the same BMP, still moving, flames greatly reduced and in friendly lines.


----------



## asewland (Feb 28, 2014)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/28/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSBREA1Q1E820140228

It looks like Russia's getting involved in this mess.


----------



## AWP (Feb 28, 2014)

One thing that is kind of...funny about the Ukraine deal is:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/01/219680.htm


> Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin further informed Ukrainian President Kravchuk that the United States and Russia were prepared to provide security assurances to Ukraine once Ukraine acceded to the NPT and the START I Treaty entered into force.


http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-f...rid-nukes-trilateral-statement-20-years-pifer


> The Trilateral Statement confirmed that Ukraine would eliminate all of the strategic nuclear weapons on its territory and accede to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapons state “in the shortest possible time.” In return for this, the statement provided that Kyiv receive:
> 
> •Security assurances. The United States, Russia and Britain would provide security assurances to Ukraine, such as to respect its independence and to refrain from economic coercion. Those assurances were formally conveyed in the Budapest Memorandum of Security Assurances signed in December 1994. (Curiously, Kyiv has never invoked the memorandum, not even during its dispute with Moscow over Tuzla Island in 2003 or when the Russian government applied trade sanctions in 2013 to dissuade Ukraine from signing an association agreement with the European Union.)


 
In the end we're not going to war with Russia over Ukraine, but I find it funny that this deal exists and no one's really talking about it.


----------



## pardus (Feb 28, 2014)

asewland said:


> http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/28/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSBREA1Q1E820140228
> 
> It looks like Russia's getting involved in this mess.



Surprise, surprise.

I love that the Russian Foreign ministry has a facebook page.

Oh the irony of this... 





> The United States has told Russia to show in the next few days that it is sincere about a promise not to intervene in Ukraine, saying using force would be a grave mistake.



Unconfirmed sources* have reported that Putin sent a text message to President Obama in response to the above quote, the message read 
"Syria... BIOTCH! lol". The White House declined to comment.










* this maybe a figment of a certain* member's delusional imagination. 







*may of may not* be me.




*it is.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 28, 2014)

Ukraine is important because of the gas lines that go over it. Well, important to Europe anyway. Remember NATO?


----------



## Brill (Feb 28, 2014)

pardus said:


> Goddam this shit is intense!



So I guess they really wanted to sign the EU trade deal?


----------



## pardus (Feb 28, 2014)

lindy said:


> So I guess they really wanted to sign the EU trade deal?



Right!? lol


----------



## DA SWO (Feb 28, 2014)

The EU can stopp buying Russian oil in protest, but they won't.
Spineless fags.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 28, 2014)

SOWT said:


> The EU can stopp buying Russian oil in protest, but they won't.
> Spineless fags.



Gas is the big one IIRC.


----------



## Salt USMC (Feb 28, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> One thing that is kind of...funny about the Ukraine deal is:
> http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/01/219680.htm
> http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-f...rid-nukes-trilateral-statement-20-years-pifer
> In the end we're not going to war with Russia over Ukraine, but I find it funny that this deal exists and no one's really talking about it.



You learn something new every day.


----------



## pardus (Feb 28, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> One thing that is kind of...funny about the Ukraine deal is:
> 
> http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/01/219680.htm
> 
> ...



That treaty is pretty much how WWII got started... Funny indeed.


----------



## Muppet (Feb 28, 2014)

I'll post the link when I find it of the Red Cross medic that was shot in the neck and "tweeted" while being evac'd. Um, if I was shot in the neck, would I be tweeting to friends? IDK...

F.M.


----------



## goon175 (Feb 28, 2014)

Sounds like there are Russkie boots on the ground in Kiev...

It seriously scares the shit out of me that Kerry is our Secretary of State right now....


FYI: I changed the title of this thread to avoid multiple threads on the subject as this moves more into the limelight of the news...


----------



## Chopstick (Feb 28, 2014)

The twitter feed #Ukraine is an interesting read at the moment.
https://twitter.com/search?q=#Ukraine&src=tren


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 28, 2014)

goon175 said:


> Sounds like there are Russkie boots on the ground in Kiev...



What's interesting is the lack of a Ukrainian response to the airports/fields so far. The people who have taken them haven't been entirely ID'd yet either, they're either militia or RF, it seems hard to tell and there's mixed messages. This is turning out very interesting.


----------



## goon175 (Feb 28, 2014)




----------



## goon175 (Feb 28, 2014)




----------



## pardus (Feb 28, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> What's interesting is the lack of a Ukrainian response to the airports/fields so far. The people who have taken them haven't been entirely ID'd yet either, they're either militia or RF, it seems hard to tell and there's mixed messages. This is turning out very interesting.



You're really surprised by this? Everyone knows it's the Russkies which is exactly why the Ukrainians haven't made a move.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 28, 2014)

pardus said:


> You're really surprised by this? Everyone knows it's the Russkies which is exactly why the Ukrainians haven't made a move.



Yes but there's been _nothing_ that I've read about, not even an encirclement.


----------



## pardus (Mar 1, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> Yes but there's been _nothing_ that I've read about, not even an encirclement.



An encirclement of what? 
Crimea is Russian in everything but name. I don't understand (not that Ive looked into it) why Khrushchev handed it to Ukraine in '54, maybe some 'sorry about Stalin' crap.

This is just like they did in Afghanistan way back in '79


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 1, 2014)

OK silly thing to say re encirclement. Let me try and formulate some thoughts and I'll come back.


----------



## CQB (Mar 1, 2014)

Some more information.

http://m.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26387353

The tin foil hats are on too in certain quarters. Rumblings it was a US backed coup, though I'm wondering how anyone can be bothered with a bankrupt country.
http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2014/02/28/ukraine-was-a-playbook-cia-coup-detat/


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

@goon175 , you really need to stop posting all that provocative propaganda clearly taken from war movies and not from real events.  All the MSM news media sites have headlined that Obama has told Putin "to back off Ukraine" and "there will be costs" to Russian incursions that violate Ukrainian territorial integrity.

If those videos were real, the US would act.

I'm confident that these events were caused by an intel failure or as a result of a Pussy Riot (in collaboration with Katy Perry) video.

In all seriousness, at least Biden or Hillary aren't calling the shots.  Hopefully Obama is taking notes from Putin and learning how a world leader acts.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ybody-is-shocked-by-weakness-obama-statement/


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> Ukraine is important because of the gas lines that go over it. Well, important to Europe anyway. Remember NATO?



It's just a buffer to keep Russian influence as Far East as possible. Still just a pawn on the world stage...with very hot chicks.

If a single MSG gets assigned to Kiev and leaves two years later still single, he's gay...no, I mean REALLY gay.

https://www.google.com/search?q=hot...mK4n40wHuz4GgAg&ved=0CDIQ7Ak&biw=1024&bih=672


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

A non-news affiliated associate without an agenda and with excellent P&A:

https://picasaweb.google.com/reeses...hkey=Gv1sRgCMuDo_rk4cawPw#5985827258278137010


----------



## AWP (Mar 1, 2014)

pardus said:


> Crimea is Russian in everything but name. I don't understand (not that Ive looked into it) why Khrushchev handed it to Ukraine in '54, maybe some 'sorry about Stalin' crap.


 
A pretty decent history:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/...ft-to-ukraine-becomes-a-political-flash-point

http://english.pravda.ru/history/19-02-2009/107129-ussr_crimea_ukraine-0/

Khruschev had strong ties to the Ukraine and that factored heavily into his decision. Both articles are relatively short.


----------



## pardus (Mar 1, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> A pretty decent history:
> http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/...ft-to-ukraine-becomes-a-political-flash-point
> 
> http://english.pravda.ru/history/19-02-2009/107129-ussr_crimea_ukraine-0/
> ...



Thanks for that, yeah makes sense.

This quote is the most important from those two articles to me...



> The Supreme Council of Russia ruled in 1992 that the Crimean region had been delivered to Ukraine illegitimately.
> 
> Now the region is called the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.



I wouldn't mind betting that when this is all said and done, that Crimea will be Russian again.


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 1, 2014)

We have no money, have to gut our own military ect ect but suddenly we have a cool Billion laying around for Ukraine? 

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/u-s-plans-1-billion-loan-ukraine-kerry-says-n39546



> The United States plans to make available $1 billion in loan guarantees to Ukraine and is considering other direct financial assistance, Secretary of State John Kerry said on Wednesday.


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

This is a serious situation...so let's go to a Democrat fundraiser and have drink!

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/28/obama-declares-happy-hour-democrats-after-dire-war/


----------



## Dame (Mar 1, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> We have no money, have to gut our own military ect ect but suddenly we have a cool Billion laying around for Ukraine?
> 
> http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/u-s-plans-1-billion-loan-ukraine-kerry-says-n39546


Awe, c'mon. What's another billion dollars? The President already pledged $7 billion to Africa after giving Karzai billions.

ETA: Or was it trillions once you include Pakistan?


----------



## AWP (Mar 1, 2014)

I merged Ukrainian related posts from another thread. We'll press with this thread for our Ukraine discussion.


----------



## AWP (Mar 1, 2014)

Dame said:


> Awe, c'mon. What's another billion dollars? The President already pledged $7 billion to Africa after giving Karzai billions.
> 
> ETA: Or was it trillions once you include Pakistan?


 
A timely correction.


----------



## Totentanz (Mar 1, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> We have no money, have to gut our own military ect ect but suddenly we have a cool Billion laying around for Ukraine?
> 
> http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/u-s-plans-1-billion-loan-ukraine-kerry-says-n39546



Take it out of the Paki "aid" fund...


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 1, 2014)

Totentanz said:


> Take it out of the Paki "aid" fund...


Fuck Pakistan!


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 1, 2014)

Oh cool...
http://www.latimes.com/world/worldn...orized-20140301,0,3015804.story#axzz2ujs0Lr1s



> Russian lawmakers unanimously approved a request by President Vladimir Putin to send armed forces to Ukraine to protect ethnic Russians there and secure the Black Sea fleet and other military installations in Ukraine’s Crimea region.
> In a 90-0 vote during an extraordinary session of the Federation Council, the upper house deputies argued that last week’s disruption of “constitutional order,” the deadly confrontation in Kiev that led then-President Viktor Yanukovich to flee to Russia, exposes Ukraine’s minority Russian-speaking community to unspecified dangers.
> 
> The Federation Council also recommended that the Kremlin recall the Russian ambassador to the United States to underscore objections to remarks made by President Obama on Friday.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 1, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> Oh cool...
> http://www.latimes.com/world/worldn...orized-20140301,0,3015804.story#axzz2ujs0Lr1s


Recall our guy, and call them out on the Nuke Treaty violations.

Uninvite them from the G-8 (?) summit, but that won't happen because POTUS doesn't care, Sec State thinks more Polar Bears will die from GW, and the media doesn't give a fuck when the WH has a democrat resident.


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 1, 2014)

The next natural extension is how China views these events and the U.S. response or lack there of.  Do such actions embolden them when it comes to disputed territories in the South China Sea, Taiwan, etc.?


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

Canada and Norway are surely watching with interest as these events undoubtedly foreshadow the impending Great Land Grab of the Arctic.


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 1, 2014)

Blizzard said:


> The next natural extension is how China views these events and the U.S. response or lack there of.  Do such actions embolden them when it comes to disputed territories in the South China Sea, Taiwan, etc.?



I don't think so. Any unilateral sanctions put on China by the US will hit very hard, unlike any on Russia.


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

Just heard on CNN that the National Security Team met at the White House yet POTUS was NOT/NOT at the meeting.

I guess we know the answer to "Whacha gonna do PL?"


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 1, 2014)

Please tell me CNN did not go there....:wall:


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 1, 2014)

lindy said:


> Just heard on CNN that the National Security Team met at the White House yet POTUS was NOT/NOT at the meeting.
> 
> I guess we know the answer to "Whacha gonna do PL?"


Weekly Standard is reporting same. 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...urity-team-meeting-russia-ukraine_783659.html



> A White House official emailed some reporters to say that President Obama's team met today to discuss the ongoing situation on Ukraine. It appears President Obama did not attend.
> 
> "The President's national security team met today to receive an update on the situation in Ukraine and discuss potential policy options. We will provide further updates later this afternoon," reads the full statement.



Im not sure if this tweet is factual or satire.  



> Zeke Miller *✔*  @*ZekeJMiller*
> Follow
> Obama did not attend the meeting, but WH official says he has been briefed by Susan Rice and his national security team.


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

http://lobotero.com/2013/09/16/putin-twerking/


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 1, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> I don't think so. Any unilateral sanctions put on China by the US will hit very hard, unlike any on Russia.


There is some truth in that but it's more complex than that as well.  What would the impact of such sanctions be to the U.S. economy?  How would it impact the price of goods, U.S. businesses, etc.?  There could be some symbolic sanctions but would the U.S. economy and American consumers really withstand a larger, impactful sanction?  Our economies have many ties.  And while China may not necessarily be changing it's strategy toward U.S. Treasury holdings, they are reducing them.  A sign of changes?  Who knows.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 1, 2014)

lindy said:


> Canada and Norway are surely watching with interest as these events undoubtedly foreshadow the impending Great Land Grab of the Arctic.


 
Especially since Russia recently created a new command for the Arctic.  In essence doing what our gov't promised but couldn't achieve.  But there's a reason our troops have been spending a lot of time around the circle the last few years. 

http://rt.com/politics/russian-arctic-military-command-397/


----------



## Brill (Mar 1, 2014)

His vision of the situation with the correspondent of "Day" shared Andrei Klimenko, chairman Tauride Institute of Regional Development:

- The situation is very complicated. I do not know whether there is any force that could cause the Russian authorities to change their mind and abandon these mutually fatal events from the war, which threatens to turn into a third world war. *My prediction - troops overnight, or even on this very night, will be introduced in Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk, Mykolaiv region.* In Crimea, they already have, but all attention is fixated only to the Crimea. As is known, a column of Russian troops had already left the Crimea and moves along the track towards Kharkov Melitopol and Zaporozhye. 

*Nicholas SEEDS, "Day", Simferopol

http://www.day.kiev.ua/ru/news/0103...-nochyu-budut-vvedeny-v-harkovskuyu-doneckuyu*


----------



## CQB (Mar 2, 2014)

The continuing story...

http://m.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/03/putin-goes-to-war-in-crimea.html


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 2, 2014)

An article from 1993 about why Ukraine shouldn't give up its nuclear deterrent.

The author of the article is John Mearshimer, those of you who study international relations might recognize the name.

http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/A0020.pdf


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 2, 2014)

http://chicksontheright.com/posts/item/25489-remember-smuggy-mcmockerson

I do like this video.


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 2, 2014)

I may be going against the "norm" here, but the complexity of Crimea's history is hardly black and white here. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-take-a-look-back-at-its-complicated-history/

Crimea currently is somewhat a "shared" territory between Ukraine and Russia after the Treaty of Friendship that gave Russia the chance to keep it's Black Sea fleet in the area. I was not one to freak out when I heard Russian troops were "invading" Crimea...if they had a Navy there, isn't it fair to assume they had a military presence there already? The additional troops they send there probably are going to Sevastopol to protect it's precious fleet, which historically is the most valued thing to Russians as they are very much seafaring people. 

Also, there is damn near almost a 50/50 split between those who think of themselves as ethnic Ukrainian speakers as opposed to Russian speakers. Most of those that favor Russia are from the East and South, where Crimea is, while the North and West favor EU/Western civilization. I think it appears there is complete support for reform and a Western-minded government because Kiev, where Yanukovych was ousted, is situated in the area of Ukraine that is not as friendly to Russia. Yanukovych was elected under the watch of U.N monitors in 2010 and then they saw the election as "free and fair". Is this new government still considered democratically "free and fair" with the ousting of one leader for favor of someone that caters to the people in the Region of Kiev? 

There's just so much complexity to the history of this region for simplistic headlines like "Russia invades Ukraine!" and "Ukraine ousts Yanukovych in favor of the West!" to hold any water. I am not a supporter of Russia or how it does business, but let us at least understand why things are the way they are now. I just turn off the TV when the news starts talking about this conflict. Reading a book about Crimea, Ukraine, and Russia benefits me more and lets me maintain my sanity...

V/R,
PM


----------



## CQB (Mar 2, 2014)

Things move pretty quickly. The Navy chief has switched sides. 

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11212593


----------



## Brill (Mar 2, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> Post



So, based on your logic, the Russians would be legitimately entitled, allowed, whatever, to take back Alaska?  International treaties, law, and territorial sovereignty be damned when there's complicated history involved!!!


----------



## Brill (Mar 2, 2014)

Remember this little gem?  I think the Russians mistranslated "flexibility" to pizda.

“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,” Mr. Obama could be heard saying to Mr. Medvedev, according a reporter from ABC News, who was traveling with the president.

“Yeah, I understand,” the departing Russian president said. “I understand your message about space. Space for you ... .”

Mr. Obama then elaborated in a portion of the exchange picked up by the cameras: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

*“I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” Mr. Medvedev said, referring to Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, who just won an election to succeed Mr. Medvedev. *

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/u...one-telling-medvedev-of-flexibility.html?_r=0


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 2, 2014)

lindy said:


> So, based on your logic, the Russians would be legitimately entitled, allowed, whatever, to take back Alaska?  International treaties, law, and territorial sovereignty be damned when there's complicated history involved!!!



Haha no, the Russians wouldn't be entitled to take back Alaska. We don't share that territory with them. We own it. Crimea's very much a marginal space mutually shared between the two nations.

I'm as confused as pardus about why it was handed over to Ukraine in '54 in the first place. It has to be the single-most valuable territory Russia could own. Those Russians don't think very clearly when they take a swig of that Vodka.


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 2, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> Those Russians don't think very clearly when they take a swig of that Vodka.



Or Absinthe and Ouzo?

http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/03/will-never-mix-absinthe-ouzo-says-ousted-ukraine-president/#!x3Uaz



> “What do you mean, I had a hundred people killed in Independence Square? You know what happens when I drink absinthe!” exclaimed Yanukovych. “No, I don’t know where I am. I think somewhere in Russia.”


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 2, 2014)

I think it's just an improved version of the old Soviet 5 and 10 year plans...the 60-year plan to have reason to cause problems in 2014.


----------



## Worldweaver (Mar 2, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> Crimea's very much a marginal space mutually shared between the two nations.



I thought that Crimea was sovereign territory of the Ukraine as dictated by the terms of 1994(?), demographics be damned.

You know this isn't Vietnam?  There are rules.


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 2, 2014)

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a341002.pdf

Pg. 51: resulting Friendship and BSF treaties.
Pg. 20-23: territorial disputes of the BSF and Sevastopol in the 1990s.

Here is an interesting thesis from the Naval Postgraduate School from 1997 that relates to today's conflict. It's a bit long of a read, but very enlightening to understanding how this conflict came to fruition in 2014. When I read the terms of the Friendship and Black Sea Fleet Agreement from the 199(2)-(7), I find it easy to see why this region is so tenuous in terms of sovereignty. Whether the treaty explicitly states Crimea as sovereign Ukrainian territory or not, that gets thrown right out the window when they walked away from the bargaining table saying that Russia can maintain military bases and a naval fleet ON the peninsula. "Soft politics" from the 1990s are coming back to bite us. Russia knew what the possible implications would be in the future after these treaties were signed.


----------



## Worldweaver (Mar 2, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a341002.pdf
> Whether the treaty explicitly states Crimea as sovereign Ukrainian territory or not, that gets thrown right out the window when they walked away from the bargaining table saying that Russia can maintain military bases and a naval fleet ON the peninsula. "Soft politics" from the 1990s are coming back to bite us.



WOOOHOO, I called dibs on Germany.  The rest of you can split the numerous other countries we now own due to this brilliantly written thesis.  

Mark it zero dude.


----------



## pardus (Mar 2, 2014)

Worldweaver said:


> WOOOHOO, I called dibs on Germany.  The rest of you can split the numerous other countries we now own due to this brilliantly written thesis.
> 
> Mark it zero dude.



Ironically that means Great Britain now belongs to the USA. We would save a shitload of money on foreign aid now though.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 2, 2014)

Wooo!  This means Canada finally gets a seat at the big boy table.   We'll take the Netherlands and Italy.


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 2, 2014)

Worldweaver said:


> WOOOHOO, I called dibs on Germany.  The rest of you can split the numerous other countries we now own due to this brilliantly written thesis.
> 
> Mark it zero dude.



That's a pretty good point. So we are pretty much violating territorial integrity in Germany, or numerous other countries we have military bases in? Makes Russian incursion in the Crimean peninsula seem a lot less like an "invasion" violating Ukraine's sovereignty.


----------



## Worldweaver (Mar 2, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> That's a pretty good point. So we are pretty much violating territorial integrity in Germany, or numerous other countries we have military bases in? Makes Russian incursion in the Crimean peninsula seem a lot less like an "invasion" violating Ukraine's sovereignty.



Sounds like the jump you're trying to make.  I'll go ahead and disagree.


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 2, 2014)

Worldweaver said:


> Sounds like the jump you're trying to make.  I'll go ahead and disagree.



It really wasn't the jump I intended to make. Putin flat out stating he is preparing for invasion sort of crushes that idea. My argument over history, geopolitical lines, or treaties/agreements doesn't take away the fact Russia indeed has the intention of violating Ukraine's sovereignty to some degree, whether that's holding territory in Crimea or expanding outside of that region. I just like seeing the whole picture to issues like this.


----------



## pardus (Mar 3, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> That's a pretty good point. So we are pretty much violating territorial integrity in Germany, or numerous other countries we have military bases in?



Of course not. Countries make agreements. 



Poetic_Mind said:


> Makes Russian incursion in the Crimean peninsula seem a lot less like an "invasion" violating Ukraine's sovereignty.



You seem to be confusing/mixing up Russia having a Military base by agreement with the Ukraine with Russia "supposedly" occupying Ukrainian territory i.e. the airports etc... in Crimea.


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 3, 2014)

Yeah, I think I did pardus. I never read anything about Russia occupying anything outside of Sevastopol, or any key locations where they already had shit to protect. If there is something I missed that explicitly states that though, I do apologize. So far it all seems "supposed".


----------



## pardus (Mar 3, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> Yeah, I think I did pardus. I never read anything about Russia occupying anything outside of Sevastopol, or any key locations where they already had shit to protect. If there is something I missed that explicitly states that though, I do apologize. So far it all seems "supposed".



A lot of life is "supposed", one needs to learn to read between the lines. Look at Russia's history, Czech in '68, Afghan in '79 etc...
Is it _possible_ Russia has nothing official to do with the airport seizures? Yes of course.
However, Occam's Razor...


----------



## goon175 (Mar 3, 2014)

BREAKING: France surrenders to Russia!

http://hitthewoodline.com/satura/2014/3/3/france-surrenders-to-russia


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 3, 2014)

The Washinton Post's Editorial Board from yesterday.  OUCH.
*President Obama’s foreign policy is based on fantasy*

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...854436-a238-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html



> FOR FIVE YEARS, President Obama has led a foreign policy based more on how he thinks the world should operate than on reality. It was a world in which “the tide of war is receding” and the United States could, without much risk, radically reduce the size of its armed forces. Other leaders, in this vision, would behave rationally and in the interest of their people and the world. Invasions, brute force, great-power games and shifting alliances — these were things of the past. Secretary of State John F. Kerry displayed this mindset on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday when he said, of Russia’s invasion of neighboring Ukraine, “It’s a 19th century act in the 21st century.”





> Unfortunately, Russian President Vladimir Putin has not received the memo on 21st-century behavior. Neither has China’s president, Xi Jinping, who is engaging in gunboat diplomacy against Japan and the weaker nations of Southeast Asia. Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is waging a very 20th-century war against his own people, sending helicopters to drop exploding barrels full of screws, nails and other shrapnel onto apartment buildings where families cower in basements. These men will not be deterred by the disapproval of their peers, the weight of world opinion or even disinvestment by Silicon Valley companies. They are concerned primarily with maintaining their holds on power.


----------



## Brill (Mar 3, 2014)

This is getting interesting now that The WAPO is turning on Obama's foreign policies apparently based on his experiences of playing Risk as a kid.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 3, 2014)

lindy said:


> This is getting interesting now that The WAPO is turning on Obama's foreign policies apparently based on his experiences of playing Risk as a kid.



I don't know why you think that the WaPost is such a liberal paper. Compared to trash like Fox News and Washington Times I guess, but compared to most large news outlets they have a very unbiased newsroom.


----------



## Dame (Mar 3, 2014)

goon175 said:


> BREAKING: France surrenders to Russia!
> 
> http://hitthewoodline.com/satura/2014/3/3/france-surrenders-to-russia




Coffee spew. Thanks so much.


----------



## Brill (Mar 3, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't know why you think that the WaPost is such a liberal paper. Compared to trash like Fox News and Washington Times I guess, but compared to most large news outlets they have a very unbiased newsroom.



Perception is reality I suppose and I would agree that they are trying to move to the center with columnists like Will, Krauthammer, etc unlike MSNBC and Wash Times (extreme on each side) but I would not call the Post unbiased.  Quite revealing that you stated the anonym of "liberal" is "trash".

I would disagree with the findings of radio and TV but overall, I think they captured the essence here.

http://library.lakelandcc.edu/PDFs/research/bias.pdf


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 3, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't know why you think that the WaPost is such a liberal paper. Compared to trash like Fox News and Washington Times I guess, but compared to most large news outlets they have a very unbiased newsroom.



I don't know bro, the Post endorsed President Obama... twice... and when a newspaper's own ombudsman says things like this, that's a pretty good indicator of a liberal tilt:



> ...some of the conservatives' complaints about a liberal tilt are valid. Journalism naturally draws liberals; we like to change the world. *I'll bet that most Post journalists voted for Obama. I did. There are centrists at The Post as well. But the conservatives I know here feel so outnumbered that they don't even want to be quoted by name in a memo*.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 3, 2014)

There is plenty of liberal trash as well, as to the bold, I never said trash was an "anonym" of anything, partially because I don't know what an anonym is, and partially because I was not equating liberal with the trash that WT and Fox News regularly distribute.  If I was equating liberal and conservative news outlets I would have compared Fox to MSNBC and Washington Times to...... I don't know New York Times I guess. 


lindy said:


> Perception is reality I suppose and I would agree that they are trying to move to the center with columnists like Will, Krauthammer, etc unlike MSNBC and Wash Times (extreme on each side) but I would not call the Post unbiased.  *Quite revealing that you stated the anonym of "liberal" is "trash".*
> 
> I would disagree with the findings of radio and TV but overall, I think they captured the essence here.
> 
> http://library.lakelandcc.edu/PDFs/research/bias.pdf


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 3, 2014)

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/03/russia-tightens-grip-on-crimea-as-west-scrambles-to-respond/
Just saw this on Fox.



> Ukraine says Russian forces controlling the disputed peninsula of Crimea are demanding that the crew of two Ukrainian warships must surrender – or face capture.
> 
> Ukrainian Defense Ministry spokesman Maksim Prauta said four Russian navy ships were blocking Ukraine's anti-submarine warship Ternopil and the command ship Slavutych in Sevastopol's harbor.
> 
> ...


----------



## Brill (Mar 3, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> There is plenty of liberal trash as well, as to the bold, I never said trash was an "anonym" of anything, partially because I don't know what an anonym is, and partially because I was not equating liberal with the trash that WT and Fox News regularly distribute.  If I was equating liberal and conservative news outlets I would have compared Fox to MSNBC and Washington Times to...... I don't know New York Times I guess.



Anonym is old English form of antonym popularized by the Earl of Fat Finger and Duke of IPad.


----------



## CQB (Mar 3, 2014)

Try Krauthammers' view linked from Chops editorial post, it's hardly liberal with more than a grain of truth. 

http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinion...ca1b26-9fe0-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 3, 2014)

POTUS is taking a beating on social media.  I cant help myself.  This is a favorite of what Ive seen today.


----------



## Brill (Mar 3, 2014)

For a completely different perspective:

(Or a classic example of PSYOPS)

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/04-03-2014/126998-kerry_kiev-0/


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 3, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> That's a pretty good point. So we are pretty much violating territorial integrity in Germany, or numerous other countries we have military bases in? Makes Russian incursion in the Crimean peninsula seem a lot less like an "invasion" violating Ukraine's sovereignty.


There are treaties governing those bases, we would leave if asked.
That is not violating their sovernty, or territorial integrity.


Chopstick said:


> POTUS is taking a beating on social media.  I cant help myself.  This is a favorite of what Ive seen today.
> 
> View attachment 10528


That one is actually humerous.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 3, 2014)

Vice on the scene.


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 3, 2014)

As has been stated earlier, how Russians view the actions and how they're being portrayed by the media there is very different (Russians view the protestor's actions as terrorist acts) from how the West views the actions.   And while Russia's military is without question superior force, moving in and occupying Crimea without a shot is a much different situation than attempting to use force or move further on Ukraine.  Doing so could become a much costlier endeavor than perhaps Putin realizes.  The people of Ukraine aren't likely to just turn a cheek....just look at those protest videos.

Also, something we need to come to grips with is the idea that if we truly support democratic processes, we have to understand that sometimes shitbags will be elected to power, such as an Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.   But if they are legitimately elected, shouldn't we honor the process, even if we don't like the results?


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 3, 2014)

You know this is all George Bush's fault. 
http://www.examiner.com/article/msnbc-s-rachel-maddow-blames-george-bush-for-ukraine



> On Monday, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow told Andrea Mitchell that Bush administration policies in the Middle East are to blame for practically everything, including the current crisis in Ukraine, Newsmax reported.
> 
> “The decisions of our generation on national security are determined more than anything by what the George W. Bush administration did with that 9-year war in Iraq and, alongside it, a 13-year war in Afghanistan that’s still going on," Maddow said. "And the American people are against those wars."
> 
> “Those are the determinative constraints for our thinking about everything,” she added, “from Crimea, to Syria, to what the overall size of the U.S. military is.”


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 3, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> You know this is all George Bush's fault.
> http://www.examiner.com/article/msnbc-s-rachel-maddow-blames-george-bush-for-ukraine


So she was against Iraq, but for a war in Syria?


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 3, 2014)

SOWT said:


> So she was against Iraq, but for a war in Syria?


Hey now, she has a documentary to shill.  Just you shut up with that logic stuff there Mr. Spock!


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 3, 2014)

Blizzard said:


> As has been stated earlier, how Russians view the actions and how they're being portrayed by the media there is very different (Russians view the protestor's actions as terrorist acts) from how the West views the actions.   And while Russia's military is without question superior force, moving in and occupying Crimea without a shot is a much different situation than attempting to use force or move further on Ukraine.  Doing so could become a much costlier endeavor than perhaps Putin realizes.  The people of Ukraine aren't likely to just turn a cheek....just look at those protest videos.
> 
> Also, something we need to come to grips with is the idea that if we truly support democratic processes, we have to understand that sometimes shitbags will be elected to power, such as an Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.   But if they are legitimately elected, shouldn't we honor the process, even if we don't like the results?



We should, but we obviously won't. Yanukovych was fairly elected, but he doesn't fit our interests enough for us to care about democracy there. It's always been a "Russia First" policy. Our policy there is shaped by Russia--mainly its actions and threat of expanding influence and power.


----------



## AWP (Mar 3, 2014)

Rachel Maddow is a fucking clown. I'd rather receive a foreign policy lecture from a class of third graders.


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 3, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> Rachel Maddow is a fucking clown. I'd rather receive a foreign policy lecture from a class of third graders.


Stay tuned for Kerry in Kiev tomorrow......


----------



## AWP (Mar 4, 2014)

If Russia wants the Ukraine it will take the Ukraine and no one is going to do anything about it. The problem isn't stopping them, the problem is rolling over.

Europe can't afford to do much.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/04/news/economy/europe-russia-ukraine/index.html






BUT we have to do something, we have to try, or we really show the world how impotent we are.

http://cnnworldlive.cnn.com/Event/Crisis_in_Ukraine_2?hpt=hp_t1


> CNN correspondent Matthew Chance, currently in Kiev, has a great point of view on the statements made today by Russian and U.S. leaders, particularly the warnings that Russia would be isolated if it does not de-escalate the tension.
> "How do you isolate diplomatically a country which has a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council? How do you isolate a country economically which is the biggest energy supplier in the world and supplies Ukraine, for instance, with 80% of its energy  and Western Europe with a good 40% of its natural gas?" he asked.
> He said there were no signs that Russia was loosening its hold on Crimea.
> "There is a lot of rhetoric calling on Russia to do certain things. What I'm seeing ... is no real sense in which the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin, is going to be prepared - at this stage at least - to give an inch. He's got all the cards. Nobody is going to challenge him militarily. Not the Ukrainians, definitely not NATO and the United States."


----------



## reed11b (Mar 4, 2014)

My experience with the Ukrainian military is a decade old, but unless they have gained a great deal of testicular fortitude from the time they stayed buttoned up in their BTRs in the multi-national zone of Iraq, I don't think things will go well for them if they choose to fight.
Reed


----------



## Brill (Mar 4, 2014)

If you elect someone who has no real experience there "will be costs" and "consequences".

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...4815004579416931451436234.html?mod=hp_opinion


----------



## Centermass (Mar 4, 2014)

This whole thing is a game of Chess.

Putin has it mastered while our President is still learning the pieces.

I've said it several times here and I'll say it again - Once KGB, always KGB. His wardrobe may change, but his stripes underneath, never will.


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 4, 2014)




----------



## Chopstick (Mar 4, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> Rachel Maddow is a fucking clown. I'd rather receive a foreign policy lecture from a class of third graders.





Chopstick said:


> Stay tuned for Kerry in Kiev tomorrow......


Here you go @Freefalling.  About 35 seconds in.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 4, 2014)

Did the intel community see this coming?

I was in Kuwait when he annexed parts of georgia (we assisted the Georgian Goverment by expediting their troops return from OIF).

Seems like a pretty similar situation.  If I was a former Soviet sates I'd just let my Russian Speaking provinces return to Russia and avoid all the dangers an accidental war could bring.

Again, the issue (like Hitler in Pre-WW II Germany), what happens when he runs out of Russian Speaking Provinces  to annex?


----------



## AWP (Mar 4, 2014)

SOWT said:


> Again, the issue (like Hitler in Pre-WW II Germany), what happens when he runs out of Russian Speaking Provinces  to annex?


 
Depends on his end-state. He can only go so far. Putin doesn't strike me as being blind to reality. I think he knows he can push buttons in the Ukraine or Georgia, but I don't see him trying to have a Warsaw Pact Class of 56 reunion or anything.  Is this just about power, resources, strategic positioning, all of the above?

All the more reason to check him, even a little. Events ripple and our actions here, Syria, Libya, etc. will ripple out to the next foreign policy crisis and the next and the next. Nations and leaders learn from other nations and leaders.

I did see that SECSTATE is in Kiev. Not a bad move, invading a country while our Sec. of State is in town? Even Putin's not that crazy.


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 4, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> Depends on his end-state. He can only go so far. Putin doesn't strike me as being blind to reality. I think he knows he can push buttons in the Ukraine or Georgia, but I don't see him trying to have a Warsaw Pact Class of 56 reunion or anything.  Is this just about power, resources, strategic positioning, all of the above?
> 
> All the more reason to check him, even a little. Events ripple and our actions here, Syria, Libya, etc. will ripple out to the next foreign policy crisis and the next and the next. Nations and leaders learn from other nations and leaders.
> 
> I did see that SECSTATE is in Kiev. Not a bad move, invading a country while our Sec. of State is in town? Even Putin's not that crazy.



Putin already got what he wanted, he stuck his thumb in America's eye and we did nothing of consequence.

Putin doesn't want Ukraine, if he did he would have taken over the country before Kerry could have gotten there.  Putin already took the part of the country he wanted, which is Crimea.  If Kerry ends up going to Crimea... that's a different story.  But I don't think he will.

Putin accomplished what he wanted and I don't think he stands to gain a lot by further provocation.  He just intimidated the hell out of all of Eastern Europe and in so doing made Russia look strong and America look weak.  Mission accomplished.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 4, 2014)

Marauder06 said:


> Putin already got what he wanted, he stuck his thumb in America's eye and we did nothing of consequence.
> 
> Putin doesn't want Ukraine, if he did he would have taken over the country before Kerry could have gotten there.  Putin already took the part of the country he wanted, which is Crimea.  If Kerry ends up going to Crimea... that's a different story.  But I don't think he will.
> 
> Putin accomplished what he wanted and I don't think he stands to gain a lot by further provocation.  He just intimidated the hell out of all of Eastern Europe and in so doing made Russia look strong and America look weak.  Mission accomplished.


Which is why the G-8 becomming the G-7 would act as a stick in Putins eye.  But the Europeans are too afraid he'll cut off the gas.


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 4, 2014)

SOWT said:


> Which is why the G-8 becomming the G-7 would act as a stick in Putins eye.  But the Europeans are too afraid he'll cut off the gas.


Agreed.  What exactly will be Russia's consequence for this little indiscretion, assuming Putin goes no further?  Nothing, kind of like Georgia...everyone just moves along?  Is that acceptable?


----------



## CQB (Mar 5, 2014)

Instant Ukraine toolkit 

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffee...bluffing-your-way-through-the-ukraine-crisis/


----------



## goon175 (Mar 5, 2014)

Ya know, I wish someone would put sanctions on our country. Then we could go back to good ol' U.S. manufacturing and employment. It would also stimulate a lot of innovation I bet.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 5, 2014)

goon175 said:


> Ya know, I wish someone would put sanctions on our country. Then we could go back to good ol' U.S. manufacturing and employment. It would also stimulate a lot of innovation I bet.



Any sanctions that could be brought to bear against us will come in debt/currency and would have a totally different effect. Keeping it short, it would not only crush us, but a majority of the planet. And of course would further boost Russia and China...


----------



## Salt USMC (Mar 5, 2014)

Russian markets are showing the world that we don't even need sanctions in order to bitchslap Russia's economy
http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/03/investing/russia-markets-ruble/


----------



## Poetic_Mind (Mar 5, 2014)

SOWT said:


> Did the intel community see this coming?
> 
> I was in Kuwait when he annexed parts of georgia (we assisted the Georgian Goverment by expediting their troops return from OIF).
> 
> ...



Sad to say Ukraine will lose a lot more of its territory if Russia were to take the areas with a Russian-speaking majority. The entire eastern side of Ukraine could be annexed. Scary stuff.

The real end state to me still boils down to influence. It makes little sense for Russia to keep taking territories. It only wants to influence these countries economically, politically, and militarily. Crimea is more of an exception rather than a norm because it has so much intrinsic value to them containing the ports that house its black sea fleet.

And even with Georgia, I remember that conflict having to do with control over those pipelines that run through Russia. Once again, Russia wanted to only make a point who would control all of that precious oil that Eastern Europe still relies on. Economic infrastructure built upon the foundation that was the Cold War.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 5, 2014)

goon175 said:


> Ya know, I wish someone would put sanctions on our country. Then we could go back to good ol' U.S. manufacturing and employment. It would also stimulate a lot of innovation I bet.



No one has the ability to enforce a sanction on us .


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 5, 2014)

The EU could. It would be incredibly dumb of them but they could do it in theory.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 5, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> Sad to say Ukraine will lose a lot more of its territory if Russia were to take the areas with a Russian-speaking majority. The entire eastern side of Ukraine could be annexed. Scary stuff.
> 
> *The real end state to me still boils down to influence. It makes little sense for Russia to keep taking territories. It only wants to influence these countries economically, politically, and militarily. Crimea is more of an exception rather than a norm because it has so much intrinsic value to them containing the ports that house its black sea fleet.*
> 
> And even with Georgia, I remember that conflict having to do with control over those pipelines that run through Russia. Once again, Russia wanted to only make a point who would control all of that precious oil that Eastern Europe still relies on. Economic infrastructure built upon the foundation that was the Cold War.



It may not make sense to you, but to Putin (and other Russian's) it makes perfect sense.

We can't expect the Russians to look at this through our eyes.


----------



## Brill (Mar 5, 2014)

Poetic_Mind said:


> Sad to say Ukraine will lose a lot more of its territory if Russia were to take the areas with a Russian-speaking majority. The entire eastern side of Ukraine could be annexed. Scary stuff.
> 
> The real end state to me still boils down to influence. It makes little sense for Russia to keep taking territories. It only wants to influence these countries economically, politically, and militarily. Crimea is more of an exception rather than a norm because it has so much intrinsic value to them containing the ports that house its black sea fleet.
> 
> And even with Georgia, I remember that conflict having to do with control over those pipelines that run through Russia. Once again, Russia wanted to only make a point who would control all of that precious oil that Eastern Europe still relies on. Economic infrastructure built upon the foundation that was the Cold War.



The BTC doesn't go anywhere near South Ossetia in Georgia.  The Russia-Georgia war was about NATO expansion into Russia's backyard.

Interesting ideas from a former National Security Advisor:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary...ormally-recognize-Ukraine-prepare-NATO-troops


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 5, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> The EU could. It would be incredibly dumb of them but they could do it in theory.



They have the ability to project force ?


----------



## Brill (Mar 5, 2014)

http://nn.by/photos/z_2014_03/atkritka.jpg

"Speak Russian quietly or Putin will hear you

And send troops to your country for your salvation."


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 5, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> No one has the ability to enforce a sanction on us .



I'm pretty sure we could, shut down the border, block traffic into the Great Lakes and turn off pipelines.  

Now that would never happen but it's possible.


----------



## Brill (Mar 5, 2014)

RackMaster said:


> I'm pretty sure we could, shut down the border, block traffic into the Great Lakes and turn off pipelines.
> 
> Now that would never happen but it's possible.



We'd escalate and PNG Bieber.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 5, 2014)

RackMaster said:


> I'm pretty sure we could, shut down the border, block traffic into the Great Lakes and turn off pipelines.
> 
> Now that would never happen but it's possible.


True, but that would force more traffic into coastal ports.
Plus you'd have to stop exporting whaet via US waterways, and only use the St lawrence, are you guys a net exporter of food?

Remember, sanctions are always a two way street, limit imports and we would be forced to stop exporting food, and fuel (yes we EXPORT OIL).

That's why sanctions against Russia would fail, Russia would stop exporting Natural Gas, and the Arabs (and others) would hike the rates on what they sell to Europe.

That said, I wonder what kind of transit fees Russia and the EU pay the Ukraine?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 5, 2014)

China is about the only country that could really fuck us with import/export sanctions. And no they would not need a massive cooperation to do so. They also could dump our debts and send us in a downward spiral, or they could refuse to trade in the USD and basically collapse it. Of course all of those actions would immediately affect China as bad as us, but in the long term, China could recover, meanwhile we would be fooooooooocked for a long time. 

Another thing to think about is we don't produce a lot of food, we mainly produce fuel based grains and we import a shit ton of food from Latin America, and right now China has been working trade agreements in Latin America. 

I think the logic that we can't be effectively sanctioned is being a bit short sighted. Its very possible, it will just fuck everyone along the way.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 5, 2014)

lindy said:


> We'd escalate and PNG Bieber.



He's your's now, remember the Olympics;  we stay true to our word and a bet is a bet.


----------



## Totentanz (Mar 5, 2014)

JAB said:


> China is about the only country that could really fuck us with import/export sanctions.



As RM pointed out, if Canada (hypothetically) decided to stop playing nice with the oil, that would fuck up a significant part of US oil imports.  Could we work around it?  Absolutely, but life would become uncomfortable very quickly, especially given the volatility of oil prices and their tendency to fluctuate based on speculation and fear.


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 5, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> They have the ability to project force ?



Projecting or using military force isn't the only way to enforce a sanction, as you well know.


----------



## goon175 (Mar 5, 2014)

So I want to preface this with the fact that my suggestion about sanctions against us was more in jest than anything else...

 I do think there obviously would be some serious impacts on us initially, BUT our iconic American ingenuity would take over. I think it would be a net gain in efficiency as well as our economy. Companies would have to go back to hiring americans, our country would have to start using the renewable energy technology that we have in this country already instead of relying so heavily on oil trade, and farmers would have to step up to the plate for providing food. I think we would fuck other countries that don't have our technology, ingenuity, and massive resources a lot more than we would fuck ourselves.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 5, 2014)

JAB said:


> China is about the only country that could really fuck us with import/export sanctions. And no they would not need a massive cooperation to do so. They also could dump our debts and send us in a downward spiral, or they could refuse to trade in the USD and basically collapse it. Of course all of those actions would immediately affect China as bad as us, but in the long term, China could recover, meanwhile we would be fooooooooocked for a long time.
> 
> Another thing to think about is we don't produce a lot of food, we mainly produce fuel based grains and we import a shit ton of food from Latin America, and right now China has been working trade agreements in Latin America.
> 
> I think the logic that we can't be effectively sanctioned is being a bit short sighted. Its very possible, it will just fuck everyone along the way.


We exported 114.03B in ag products during 2012.
That's a lot of stuff that can become bio fuel, or big macs.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

Kissingers view on things. 

http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinion...11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html?tid=HP_lede


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Kissingers view on things.
> 
> http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinion...11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html?tid=HP_lede


I tend to ignore Kissenger.

His time is past.

Plus he sucks.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 6, 2014)

From the AF web page:

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDispl...c-135-to-augment-nato-mission-in-baltics.aspx


WASHINGTON (AFNS) --
Following Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's announcement today during Senate testimony that the United States is augmenting its participation in NATO's air policing mission in the Baltics and will increase joint training through its aviation detachment in Poland, a defense official provided additional information.

In a statement provided on background, the official said the United States currently provides four F-15s to fill NATO's January-through-April air policing rotation in the Baltics.

For the past 10 years, the official said, allies have provided on-call aircraft on a rotational basis to help in identifying and responding to violations of Baltic airspace. In addition to the United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Belgium, Poland, Romania, Turkey and Czech Republic all contributed rotations over time since the mission's inception, the official added.

This week, the United States will send six additional F-15s and one KC-135 to augment the mission, the official said. These aircraft -- currently based at Lakenheath in the United Kingdom -- will be deployed to Siauliai Air Base in Lithuania.

This action comes at the request of the United States' Baltic allies and "further demonstrates our commitment to NATO security," the official said.

Poland hosts 10 U.S Air Force personnel to support rotations of U.S. F-16s and C-130s for joint training with the Polish air force, the official said. The aviation detachment, or AVDET, is a practical way to strengthen interoperability with a key NATO ally, the official added, and represents the first continuous presence of a U.S. military unit on Polish soil.

The AVDET has supported four training rotations for U.S. aircraft since late 2012. During his trip to Poland earlier this year, the official noted, Hagel visited with U.S. and Polish airmen from the AVDET alongside Polish Defense Minister Tomasz Siemoniak.

The detachment's presence in Poland also makes it possible to host multiple allied Air Force elements and serve as a regional hub for air training and multinational exercises, the official said, and the Defense Department is consulting with Polish allies on increasing activities associated with the detachment.

_These are the low key actions that can be taken.  Reassures NATO Partners that we won't run as soon as the Soviets, err, Putin rattles his sabre.  _


----------



## Phil M (Mar 6, 2014)

According to the BBC... "Vladimir Putin has obtained parliamentary approval for troop deployments not just in Crimea, but Ukraine as a whole. Moscow, which regards the new authorities in Kiev as fascists, could send troops to "protect" ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

That would enrage nationalists in western Ukraine, who hold positions in the new government. There could also be international repercussions. Western powers have strongly condemned the Crimea takeover. Nato is unlikely to react militarily, but is beefing up air force cover in the Baltic republics, warning of increased Russian military activity in the enclave of Kaliningrad.

The US and EU are considering sanctions, but President Putin may believe that they will not last - as was the case during the Georgian war".

My issue is that the fact that Ultra-Nationalists have gained power and is not headlined in the papers as a major problem with the new Ukraine Government.  Also France, Greece and the Netherlands have all got strong Nationalist politicians gaining power.

This to me is a massive worry and horrifically similar to 1930s Europe.


----------



## Brill (Mar 6, 2014)

SOWT said:


> _Post  _



Would this be the first President to send KC-135s and C-130s in order to demonstrate resolve and commitment?


----------



## Robal2pl (Mar 6, 2014)

Current news here  say about 12 F-16s in Poland, 300 Airmen will arrive in Monday. 

http://wyborcza.pl/1,75478,15580214,Amerykanskie_samoloty_w_Polsce.html (Polish only)

DoD news relase says about supporting NATO Air Policing (it's US shift now) 

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=121785

But as close as it os to Poland i feel quite calm. It was thing waiting to happen. When USSR was over, all republics became "nation" states, in many cases it was hardly regardless of any ethnical groups. That was the case of 2008 war in Ossetia - in fact there are to Ossetias, one after 1991 was Russian province, second  was part of Georgia...that triggered long lasting conflict. Abkhazia,  Transnistria etc - still the same old story.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 6, 2014)

lindy said:


> Would this be the first President to send KC-135s and C-130s in order to demonstrate resolve and commitment?


No, I remember a KC-10/RC-135 deployment as a show of resolve (though it did get much bigger).


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

I hope we don't get involved.none of our business.


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> I hope we don't get involved.none of our business.



I kind of agree but we do have agreements with the Ukraine over this exact thing.  I doubt we'll do anything regardless, then again I also doubted we'd be stupid enough to want to intervene in Syria too...


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

pardus said:


> I kind of agree but we do have agreements with the Ukraine over this exact thing.  I doubt we'll do anything regardless, then again I also doubted we'd be stupid enough to want to intervene in Syria too...


We didn't get involved in Syria because other better options presented themselves. I for one am done getting involved in regional squabbles or other countries civil wars. We have no obligation to come running every time someone gets their feelings hurt or their peepee's slapped.  I don't give a shit if Russia takes over the whole Ukraine, not at all. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Not for me, not one bit.  I also don't buy that this somehow reflects on our status as a superpower. It is a territorial dispute that we should have no part of. 


I'm no expert, and don't claim to be, but to me this whole mess seems overblown.


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> We didn't get involved in Syria because other better options presented themselves. I for one am done getting involved in regional squabbles or other countries civil wars. We have no obligation to come running every time someone gets their feelings hurt or their peepee's slapped.  I don't give a shit if Russia takes over the whole Ukraine, not at all. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Not for me, not one bit.  I also don't buy that this somehow reflects on our status as a superpower. It is a territorial dispute that we should have no part of.
> 
> 
> I'm no expert, and don't claim to be, but to me this whole mess seems overblown.



Thanks to a foreign power, we acted like idiots in Syria.

I do agree with you about Ukraine, but like I said, we have given our word that we would help them if this scenario happen to/in the Ukraine.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

pardus said:


> Thanks to a foreign power, we acted like idiots in Syria.
> 
> I do agree with you about Ukraine, but like I said, we have given our word that we would help them if this scenario happen to/in the Ukraine.



Wasn't the agreement with the previous government?


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 6, 2014)

That doesn't matter.


----------



## AWP (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> We didn't get involved in Syria because other better options presented themselves. I for one am done getting involved in regional squabbles or other countries civil wars. We have no obligation to come running every time someone gets their feelings hurt or their peepee's slapped.  I don't give a shit if Russia takes over the whole Ukraine, not at all. Is the juice worth the squeeze? Not for me, not one bit.  I also don't buy that this somehow reflects on our status as a superpower. It is a territorial dispute that we should have no part of.
> 
> 
> I'm no expert, and don't claim to be, but to me this whole mess seems overblown.


 
I agree with you and I don't, but I largely agree with you. The problem is one of history (and yes, I'm going to violate Godwin's Law).

History has shown us how empires start out conquering smaller nations by diplomacy or force. Eventually you have a behemoth everyone must confront and the behemoth is probably not benign. Nations ebb and flow, but vast enterprises start off as a regional conflict, and then another, and then another...

The Nazi's reminded us that it happens in our modern, civilized world while curiously we ignore how a superpower came into being because this isn't the first time Mother Russia "adopted" the local children. The US didn't exactly come into this world with the land we have now, we took a lot of it from others in bites and gobbles.

Since the fall of the the Soviet Union we've seen nations fragment, but not a lot of land grabbing. Now Putin's back and trying to revive the Bear. Soon a bunch of regional conflicts will become a global problem unless we're fortunate to have Putin pay for a ferry ride across the river Styx like Alexander or some of the Mongol khans.

The real danger is escalation, but at the same time we can't sit back and give the guy a thumbs up. As I've posted earlier we also don't have many options, but we should exercise those available to us. Otherwise we become isolationist and that harms everyone.


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Wasn't the agreement with the previous government?



Come on, you know as well as I that is a non starter as a position. Every agreement ever signed is null and void when a new administration takes over, in every country in the world? Imagine the catastrophe that would be.


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 6, 2014)

I was reminded about this gem today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/o...from-russia-on-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

We all know he's full of shit but I'd like to see him called out on this just to hear his response if Syria was substituted with Ukraine:


			
				Putin said:
			
		

> From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> I agree with you and I don't, but I largely agree with you. The problem is one of history (and yes, I'm going to violate Godwin's Law).
> 
> History has shown us how empires start out conquering smaller nations by diplomacy or force. Eventually you have a behemoth everyone must confront and the behemoth is probably not benign. Nations ebb and flow, but vast enterprises start off as a regional conflict, and then another, and then another...
> 
> ...



Fighting a war on another continent in another superpowers back yard is foolish. Anyone who would call for such a thing is a moron.


pardus said:


> Come on, you know as well as I that is a non starter as a position. Every agreement ever signed is null and void when a new administration takes over, in every country in the world? Imagine the catastrophe that would be.



Yeah I get that. But the legit democratically elected govt was overthrown. We normally don't support such things.


----------



## comrade-z (Mar 6, 2014)

And that leader left (with encouragement, sure), and the democratically elected parliament voted to replace him. Hell, even a number of Yanukovych's supporters voted for it. I am not by any means intimately familiar with Ukraine's specific laws on this matter, but as far as I can tell, it seems like they removed him in a democratic fashion/through democratic means.


----------



## Brill (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> But the legit democratically elected govt was overthrown. We normally don't support such things.



Dust of that history book!

_When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation._
_
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

*That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. *Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
_


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

lindy said:


> Dust of that history book!
> 
> _When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
> ...



Ok there bud, good one, now how about all the shady as fuck despot dictators we have supported/kept in power all these years. Put your Freedom boner away for a minute.


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Fighting a war on another continent in another superpowers back yard is foolish. Anyone who would call for such a thing is a moron.



Maybe, yet we did it in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and to a slightly lessor extent Iraq and Afghanistan. I think a more important issue here is that we are weak as a nation and as a military at the moment.



TLDR20 said:


> Yeah I get that. But the legit democratically elected govt was overthrown. We normally don't support such things.



Good point, but in this case we do support it.
Interestingly I heard the new Ukrainian leader won just 4% of the vote in the last election, I wonder how long he lasts.


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Ok there bud, good one, now how about all the shady as fuck despot dictators we have supported/kept in power all these years. Put your Freedom boner away for a minute.



Yeah there have been some very dodgy alliances, I understand why in the big picture (anti commie etc...), but damn, some of them were awful and led to even worse things and new enemies down the road.


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 6, 2014)

I trust an ex Soviet republic election like I trust a Russian election- like an untrustworthy toad.


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 6, 2014)

"Someone needs to tell Putin that 'March' is a month, not an order." -Facebook FTW


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

SpitfireV said:


> I trust an ex Soviet republic election like I trust a Russian election- like an untrustworthy toad.



But the UN said it was OK so it MUST be!


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2014)

Marauder06 said:


> "Someone needs to tell Putin that 'March' is a month, not an order." -Facebook FTW



Holy fuck that is brilliant!


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 6, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Fighting a war on another continent in another superpowers back yard is foolish. Anyone who would call for such a thing is a moron.
> 
> 
> Yeah I get that. But the legit democratically elected govt was overthrown. We normally don't support such things.


Philippines 1986-87ish.


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 6, 2014)

pardus said:


> Holy fuck that is brilliant!



Yeah, and since I don't think any of you are Facebook friends with the guy who actually came up with it, I'm totally taking credit.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 6, 2014)

Marauder06 said:


> Yeah, and since I don't think any of you are Facebook friends with the guy who actually came up with it, I'm totally taking credit.


My wife showed me that yesterday.


----------



## Brill (Mar 7, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Put your Freedom boner away for a minute.



I'm going to use this at work!  The phrase that is!!!!


----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 8, 2014)

Interesting times...


Ukrainian plane came under fire flying at 3000 ft near border with Crimea

Russian warships blockaded Black Sea, where Ukrainian navy is docked

There are now estimated to be 30,000 Russian troops in Ukraine
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/07/us-ukraine-crisis-troops-idUSBREA260PW20140307

Didn't know the pipelines there were so extensive.....


----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 8, 2014)

SOWT said:


> Did the intel community see this coming?
> 
> I was in Kuwait when he annexed parts of georgia (we assisted the Georgian Goverment by expediting their troops return from OIF).
> 
> ...



heh...funny note on that.  Our CID unit was tasked with investigating crimes the Georgian troops were accused of on civilians, theft, assault, rape...etc, 10th Mountain had made complaints.  They left the country just as we started up.


----------



## Brill (Mar 9, 2014)

Footage of Russians from Ukie ISR:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26503456


----------



## pardus (Mar 12, 2014)

http://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/ukraine-crisis-british-sentry-aircraft-deployed-eastern-europe/



> NATO said Monday that it will begin reconnaissance flights to keep watch on Ukraine, the latest military move to reassure Eastern Europe.
> The British Ministry of Defence (MoD) has said that a British E-3D Sentry AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) aircraft will fly from RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire to monitor the crisis in Ukraine. The aircraft will carry out its mission while staying within Polish and Romanian airspace, the MoD said. They will begin flying over Poland and Romania “to monitor the crisis in Ukraine” NATO said in a statement.


----------



## Etype (Mar 12, 2014)

I hate to put a dark cloud over the globalist party, but I don't think 99% of America should care one bit about Ukraine.  I can bet my bottom dollar that a lot of the folks I work with and the good majority of people on hunting/fishing/military forums will sound their outrage at whatever some hot chick on The Five was up in arms about yesterday.  That's why I'm more or less done with Fox News, but their "Fair and Balanced" groupthink is a whole other topic (don't worry, I'm not going liberal).

All this tells me is that we beed to gain a bit of energy independence and settle some of our debt to lessen our ties to economy.

America has turned into the bossy girl in the 8th grade classroom who is too concerned about everyone else's business.  I'm not saying we go to full scale isolationism, but on a sliding scale between globalist and isolationist- we are way too far left.


----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 16, 2014)

*"Crimea voters overwhelmingly approve referendum to secede from Ukraine"....*expected, but interesting now....how does this proceed from here?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/16/polls-open-in-crimea-referendum-amid-high-tensions/


----------



## Brill (Mar 17, 2014)

Looks like his pen is full of ink!  Take THAT you Commie bastards!!!  

http://media.washtimes.com/media/misc/2014/03/17/2014ukraine2eorel.pdf


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 17, 2014)

Kraut783 said:


> *"Crimea voters overwhelmingly approve referendum to secede from Ukraine"....*expected, but interesting now....how does this proceed from here?
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/16/polls-open-in-crimea-referendum-amid-high-tensions/


Let them go, they are probably better off being part of Russia anyway.


----------



## Queeg (Mar 18, 2014)

Ukraine officer killed in attack on Crimea base.  Apparently due to this, ROEs for Ukrainian forces now allow them to return fire in self-defence.

That was a good call for Putin to deploy troops without insignia.  This way when it's time to go loud he can just keep claiming these were the actions of Crimean rogue "self-defence" units.  It'll get ugly once the Ukrainian mil decides to put up a fight.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26637296


----------



## Brill (Mar 18, 2014)

Seen Vice news?

https://news.vice.com/video/russian...ne-dispatch-fourteen?trk_source=homepage-lede


----------



## Etype (Mar 19, 2014)

So I was doing some reading on Crimea's political history...

- In 93, it seems as though Crimea was an autonomous area when the Budapest Memorandum was signed (the thing where Ukraine gave up its nukes in exchange for US and Russian protection).

- In 94, Ukraine ordered the dissolution of Crimea's autonomous gov't because it was mad that it was more pro-Russian than Ukrainian.

Interesting.

So what is the legitimacy of the agreement as it applies to crimea if Crimea was an autonomous zone at the time? 

The whole autonomous notion is bogus in my opinion anyway.  As I see it, it's what a state does when it realizes it controls an area that it can't control and/or doesn't want to be under said states control.  It's basically a way to non-violently pasify an area without actually giving it independence.


----------



## JBS (Mar 19, 2014)

PaulD said:


> Ukraine officer killed in attack on Crimea base.  Apparently due to this, ROEs for Ukrainian forces now allow them to return fire in self-defence.
> 
> That was a good call for Putin to deploy troops without insignia.  This way when it's time to go loud he can just keep claiming these were the actions of Crimean rogue "self-defence" units.  It'll get ugly once the Ukrainian mil decides to put up a fight.
> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26637296


Lack of insignia inside Crimea + massing of troops = all options (including withdrawal) literally still on the table, at least as of a few days ago.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 19, 2014)

Russian Fighters to Counter NATO Deployments
Russia is considering deploying additional fighter jets to Belarus to counter Air Force F-15s and F-16s sent to reassure NATO allies in Poland and Lithuania, reported state-run RIA Novosti. *Russian President Vladimir Putin said he opposes NATO's presence "on our historic territories,"* apparently referencing NATO's Eastern European member states, in a separate state-run media report released March 18. Russia already deployed six Su-27 fighters to a base just over the Polish and Lithuanian border where US fighters are currently stationed in response to Russian military incursions in Ukraine, a separate press report stated. "There is in fact an escalation of the situation near our borders . . . We will respond to it appropriately," said Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, explaining his request for more fighters. As many as 15 additional Russian fighters could be dispatched under the two countries' mutual defense agreement, RIA Novsti noted. Ukraine's independent government in Kiev said it will not seek NATO membership, in a bid to calm tensions following Russia's annexation of the country's Crimea region on Tuesday, reported the Washington Post. NATO once again called on Russia to de-escalate and cease military hostilities against Ukraine in a statement earlier this week.

Like I asked earlier, what happens when he runs out of Ethnic Russian's to re-acquire?

Do we let him annex Poland and half of Germany?

Eventually we stop him from annexing, or end up in a shooting war.


----------



## JBS (Mar 19, 2014)

Another great success in the world.


----------



## Brill (Mar 19, 2014)

JBS said:


> Another great success in the world.



Also means "reload".


----------



## Queeg (Mar 19, 2014)

So Putin gained Crimea  but lost his puppet regime in Ukraine and thus a buffer state.  It just seems to me he has no choice but make a grab for Ukraine lest the interim gov't gives NATO the go ahead and establish points of presence there.  Is that an oversimplification?


----------



## Etype (Mar 19, 2014)

PaulD said:


> So Putin gained Crimea  but lost his puppet regime in Ukraine...


I think he saw that he was losing Ukraine anyway, so mitigated his loses by grabbing up Crimea, which favored Russia anyway.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 20, 2014)

If Putin pushes any further into Ukraine I am almost positive NATO will bomb the shit out of his ground forces and probably crush whatever aircraft in Ukrainian/NATO airspace. 

I am pretty confident that Putin is going stop where he is for now and use Syria and Iran as leverage points to get whatever sanction removed. He probably won't cut off his oil/gas export but I can see him doing the "we will only take gold" bit, maybe even jacking his prices up until we start shipping our oil/gas to the EU, at which point he drop the prices where we can't compete and fuck the whole market up.

Keeping this short, Putin is done with Ukraine for now, but he is just getting started with games for the ME and EU.


----------



## Queeg (Mar 20, 2014)

Reuters says that Moscow is now expressing concern for the ethnic Russians in Estonia.  Now where's my popcorn...


----------



## Brill (Mar 20, 2014)

Delete


----------



## Brill (Mar 20, 2014)

JAB said:


> If Putin pushes any further into Ukraine I am almost positive NATO will bomb the shit out of his ground forces and probably crush whatever aircraft in Ukrainian/NATO airspace.
> 
> I am pretty confident that Putin is going stop where he is for now and use Syria and Iran as leverage points to get whatever sanction removed. He probably won't cut off his oil/gas export but I can see him doing the "we will only take gold" bit, maybe even jacking his prices up until we start shipping our oil/gas to the EU, at which point he drop the prices where we can't compete and fuck the whole market up.
> 
> Keeping this short, Putin is done with Ukraine for now, but he is just getting started with games for the ME and EU.



I say Kharkov and Donetsk fall within the coming days and then it's onto Kiev!


----------



## Etype (Mar 20, 2014)

NATO is terrified of Putin.


----------



## pardus (Mar 20, 2014)

Etype said:


> I think he saw that he was losing Ukraine anyway, so mitigated his loses by grabbing up Crimea, which favored Russia anyway.



I'm not so sure. I think he is going to consolidate Crimea and then look at other options. My feeling is that he wants at least eastern Ukraine. 
The Baltic states have always been a thorn in the foot of the Russkies so I wouldn't be surprised if they're on the wish list as well, but they would be a much bigger play and one that would be much harder for the west to let happen without action.


----------



## JBS (Mar 21, 2014)

Etype said:


> I hate to put a dark cloud over the globalist party, but I don't think 99% of America should care one bit about Ukraine.  I can bet my bottom dollar that a lot of the folks I work with and the good majority of people on hunting/fishing/military forums will sound their outrage at whatever some hot chick on The Five was up in arms about yesterday.  That's why I'm more or less done with Fox News, but their "Fair and Balanced" groupthink is a whole other topic (don't worry, I'm not going liberal).
> 
> All this tells me is that we beed to gain a bit of energy independence and settle some of our debt to lessen our ties to economy.
> 
> America has turned into the bossy girl in the 8th grade classroom who is too concerned about everyone else's business.  I'm not saying we go to full scale isolationism, but on a sliding scale between globalist and isolationist- we are way too far left.


Will you feel that way if he grabs the rest of Ukraine?  Estonia?  Latvia? Lithuania?   Let's go all in with this line of thought and say we do nothing. What message does this send to China regarding Taiwan?   I know that you are not advocating isolationism, but I've wrestled with this issue myself and for very similar reasons to those you've mentioned.

I am very much a Libertarian in the sense that America needs to worry about our own damn business, but there are a few things here that legitimately merit our concern.  Is there anything Obama can do about it?  Probably not.  He's a weak leader with failed policies and dangerously naive ideas (reset relationship w/ Russia? LOL!!).  But making a huge issue out of Ukraine is in my own opinion the wisest thing we can do.  Staying flat or "neutral" on the matter is at the very least a betrayal to obligations we have to support our friends in that region.     We need our allies there to be strong, not be systematically destablized and gobbled up.   At worst, it will give a green light to Russian leadership to continue on this path.  Also, if Putin succeeds in these (relatively) modest ambitions, consider the surge of support he will get from his inner circle.  The voices of moderation around him will be weakened and the hawks will strengthen.  In other words, there's a very good chance we'll see a recurrence of this kind of aggressive behavior in the future if we remain totally silent.


----------



## JBS (Mar 21, 2014)

America was tested.  There can be no doubt about it.  The lack of insignia was a means of backpeddling if the US had reacted in a strong way.  There's an inherent element of deniability when forces are used with sterile uniforms.   If this is how they were dispatched, then it was for a reason: deniability and backpedaling.  Putin was willing to go in, but not at all costs.   Since there was response from us with "bite", the plan went forward.   Our lack of response was calculated to be  highly likely.


----------



## Etype (Mar 21, 2014)

@JBS , didn't think about him grabbing other countries- I didn't plan that many moves ahead.  I guess I'm still hung up on the fact that Crimea _probably _actually wanted to be part of Russia, and has historically tried to break free from Ukraine- two points that have received ZERO attention from the media, we can't even count on Beck or FOX to say that.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the lack of insignia thing meaning anything.  Russia has the ability to conduct low viz  operations just like we do.


----------



## JBS (Mar 21, 2014)

Etype said:


> @JBS , didn't think about him grabbing other countries- I didn't plan that many moves ahead.  I guess I'm still hung up on the fact that Crimea _probably _actually wanted to be part of Russia, and has historically tried to break free from Ukraine- two points that have received ZERO attention from the media, we can't even count on Beck or FOX to say that.
> 
> I wouldn't put too much stock in the lack of insignia thing meaning anything.  Russia has the ability to conduct low viz  operations just like we do.


I don't disagree with your assessment of the Crimean populace and their collective disposition towards joining Russia.   But my view of Putin gaining political momentum and capital is based on the recent conflict with - and domination of- Georgia.   His military activity in former Soviet-bloc nations didn't just start with Ukraine.

I've also heard very recent rumors that Estonia is now struggling with uprisings to be annexed by Russia.

And regarding low vis operations, I'm with you.  It's just the POINT of conducting one like this means he was non-commital up until it was clear that the US wasn't willing to move.   You don't go low vis if you don't have any requirement for reservation of deniability.   The planners here obviously wanted to reserve that right/option in case the SHTF, then distancing themselves from the event would have been possible.


----------



## Etype (Mar 22, 2014)

@JBS - Operating without insignia is just sound thinking.  With the mass media blasting everything, being able to track troop movements by unit is something that's now able to be done with open sources.

One of the original purposes of ACUs having velcro was for conventional units to able to remove name tapes and unit insignia during operations.  The only thing required of a US service member during offensive operations is a flag or US Army name tape- one of either of those two things constitutes a uniform.  I believe that's how every unit should operate.  The enemy doesn't need to know if it's The 101st, 82nd, 3rd ID, whatever.


----------



## JBS (Mar 22, 2014)

Etype said:


> @JBS - Operating without insignia is just sound thinking.  With the mass media blasting everything, being able to track troop movements by unit is something that's now able to be done with open sources.
> 
> One of the original purposes of ACUs having velcro was for conventional units to able to remove name tapes and unit insignia during operations.  The only thing required of a US service member during offensive operations is a flag or US Army name tape- one of either of those two things constitutes a uniform.  I believe that's how every unit should operate.  The enemy doesn't need to know if it's The 101st, 82nd, 3rd ID, whatever.



Right on, but look at Russian movement in Abkhazia and South Ossettia; it was possible then to get some ID on the units involved- at least nationality and some basic details.   These were mostly overt operations- at least what's OSINT or published about troop movement.    Units traveled and moved on foot and mobile with rank and insignia and even unit ID patches plainly visible in the case of Georgia.  I don't want to sound like I'm blowing it out of proportion.  My main point is there is a distinction between how Putin treated Crimea and how he treated Georgia.   Crimea was almost like putting his foot out on the ice to see if it would hold, or if cracks would develop.   Lack of American response (and probably EU indifference as well) showed him the ice would hold.


----------



## AWP (Mar 22, 2014)

Not to be a dick, but how can one look at a Marines' uniform and ID his/ her regiment?


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 22, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> Not to be a dick, but how can one look at a Marines' uniform and tell his/ her regiment?



Tattoos.


----------



## JBS (Mar 22, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> Not to be a dick, but how can one look at a Marines' uniform and ID his/ her regiment?



I don't think standard USMC uniforms are comparable to how the Crimean forces were dressed.  The Russians were 'uniform', i.e. mostly wearing the same attire and carrying standardized gear (thus thinly adhering to some modicum of Geneva Article 4), but there was a distinct effort made to disguise who they were on an individual troop level, (balaclavas) and to remain relatively low vis with uniforms (no rank, no insignia, etc.).   Additionally when questioned by media, they would never reply with who they were with, just that they were from Russia.  They wouldn't even reply on individual levels with where in Russia they were from.   They were professional in their replies, and would answer "it's not important; we are Russian and that's what is important".


----------



## AWP (Mar 24, 2014)

Finally! Noted scholar and international relations "black belt" Hamid Karzai weighs in:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/24/karzai-snubs-west-backs-russian-annexation-crimea/


> Afghan President Hamid Karzai, already at odds with the U.S. over a vital security pact, snubbed western leaders once again by joining the likes of Syria and Venezuela in backing Russia's annexation of Crimea.
> Karzai's office released a statement over the weekend saying Afghanistan "respects the free will of the people of Crimea to decide about their own future."
> The statement said "we respect the decision the people of Crimea took through a recent referendum that considers Crimea as part of the Russian Federation."


 
I want to believe that the last piece of ordnance dropped in OEF connects with Hammy's forehead.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 24, 2014)

Wonder what he'll think when Pakistan "annexes" half of that shithole.


----------



## AWP (Mar 24, 2014)

RackMaster said:


> Wonder what he'll think when Pakistan "annexes" half of that shithole.


 
What's funny is for years that waas PK's answer to an Indian invasion. Run to AF, hide in a "sovreign" country, and reroup (with Afghan levies) to retake their country.

The Afghans are only as free as the Pakistanis allow.


----------



## Mac_NZ (Mar 24, 2014)

Honest question,

Are some people in the States fizzing at the flaps to get it on with Russia over this just because they served/grew up during the cold war and have lived on a steady diet of Sylvester Stallone laying waste to the evil commies?


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Mac_NZ said:


> Honest question,
> 
> Are some people in the States fizzing at the flaps to get it on with Russia over this just because they served/grew up during the cold war and have lived on a steady diet of Sylvester Stallone laying waste to the evil commies?


That's it.  Rambo is my inspiration.

That, and Putin - KGB Colonel- successively invading and annexing sovereign nations who happen to be allies, one after the other; that has  a tiny bit to do with it.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 24, 2014)

Mac_NZ said:


> Honest question,
> 
> Are some people in the States fizzing at the flaps to get it on with Russia over this just because they served/grew up during the cold war and have lived on a steady diet of Sylvester Stallone laying waste to the evil commies?



From what I can tell, the people up in arms who state we should go to war (which are very few in my a/o) are all cold war era. Most people from my generation are praying like hell the hippies runing our country  don't get us into WW3 over fucking Ukraine of all places...


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 24, 2014)

JBS said:


> That's it.  Rambo is my inspiration.
> 
> That, and Putin - KGB Colonel- successively invading and annexing sovereign nations who happen to be allies, one after the other; that has  a tiny bit to do with it.



Tell us what you want to happen.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Tell us what you want to happen.


Us meaning the Staff?  Or us meaning you and @Mac_NZ ?   Not sure I understood your statement.

If anybody is reliving the Cold War, I'd say it's probably Vladimir Putin.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Mac_NZ said:


> Honest question,
> 
> Are some people in the States fizzing at the flaps to get it on with Russia over this just because they served/grew up during the cold war and have lived on a steady diet of Sylvester Stallone laying waste to the evil commies?


Just to be clear, there's a lot of room between inaction (which is what America's position has been in every instance that has mattered under Obama) and all out war.

For anyone who wants to say that threat of economic sanctions should deter Putin, I think it's pretty evident he could not possibly care less.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 24, 2014)

I want to see the round the world holding hands love fest that was promised.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Maybe if President Obama had bowed the last time he met Putin.


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 24, 2014)

JBS said:


> That's it.  Rambo is my inspiration.
> 
> That, and Putin - KGB Colonel- successively invading and annexing sovereign nations who happen to be allies, one after the other; that has  a tiny bit to do with it.



This is a bit of a dick thing to say but the US lecturing other countries on invading sovereign nations isn't exactly without irony.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

I thought it was an appropriate response for insinuating that my posts are motivated by Hollywood heroes.   And it wasn't intended to be a "dick" comment but just a mild jab towards a post that was percieved as a mild jab.

And this is a can of worms I'm not prepared to open but Iraq and Afghanistan are hardly comparable to Putin's annexation of a sovereign nation.

Iraq we don't own and Afghanistan is a clusterfuck in the end here but mostly because of the astoundingly massive failure in Washington cement the series of victories it was handed with a regional strategy.   I don't know if you could successfully argue that America "owns" Afghanistan.   My point is limited incursion followed by withdrawal andsupport of an indigenous government capable of self determination isn't the same thing as Crimea and S. Ossettia.


----------



## Etype (Mar 24, 2014)

JBS said:


> And this is a can of worms I'm not prepared to open but Iraq and Afghanistan are hardly comparable to Putin's annexation of a sovereign nation.


Iraq WAS a sovereign nation.  I think most folks are long past defending that one...


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Etype said:


> Iraq WAS a sovereign nation.  I thought this board was long past defending that one...


I mean we did not annex Iraq.  Iraq was not a war of conquest and empire and expansionism.  We do not today own Iraq.  We did not make it a part of America or assimilate it.

Putin has unilaterally done that with Crimea; he invaded and re-drew the map and said, "this is mine".


----------



## SpitfireV (Mar 24, 2014)

I meant my post being a dick one. I'll reply further when I'm home and off the phone.


----------



## AWP (Mar 24, 2014)

Re: The Cold War. It was slightly before my time in uniform having grown up under the Reagan Era, but I'm one who does indeed miss the Cold War. It was ugly at times, but it kept a lot of the world's current problems in check. The problem is the genie is out of the bottle, so Cold War Part 2 would actually be worse for us. We'd have our current threats along with a semblance of where we were in the 80s?  We can't do that, we can't cover all of those bases without compromising others; global whack-a-mole as we chased fires.

So yeah, I wish the Cold War never went away, but now it would do more harm than good. If anything, the Russians would benefit from a new Cold War. I think they could be more flexible in their actions and strategy and that gives them an edge in that particular scenario.

Old Cold War = good
New Cold War = bad

I do think there are Americans who don't see that distinction. Some people (this is a generalized statement) can't change, accept change, or even grasp change. They live forever at some point in their lives, refusing to acknowledge that the world has passed them by.


----------



## Etype (Mar 24, 2014)

JBS said:


> I mean we did not annex Iraq.  Iraq was not a war of conquest and empire and expansionism.  We do not today own Iraq.  We did not make it a part of America or assimilate it.
> 
> Putin has unilaterally done that with Crimea; he invaded and re-drew the map and said, "this is mine".


So what's the problem?

Say some stupid president gave Maine to Canada.  50 years later the people of Maine are pissed and want back into the US.  We march in and reclaim it, uncontested.  Then what?  Do you cry out in outrage?


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

If we use that analogy, we must also consider that before the march on Maine, there have been several other marches and "assimilations" prior to Maine.

A pattern is starting to emerge.

Estonia and Latvia might be next.  And that matters to us in the same general way that any democratic nation friendly to the United States matters whether it falls.  And just since it's running in this thread as a secondary topic, another quaint thing about the Cold War is that invasions of free democratic nations were universally viewed as unacceptable and we (most of us) simply understood that.  

I should point out that I'm not in favor of war in this scenario.  But I'm definitely in favor of moving assets and much, much harsher language- with teeth.


----------



## Mac_NZ (Mar 24, 2014)

JBS said:


> That's it.  Rambo is my inspiration.
> 
> That, and Putin - KGB Colonel- successively invading and annexing sovereign nations who happen to be allies, one after the other; that has  a tiny bit to do with it.



Just to be clear it wasn't directed at you so don't read it and feel insulted.  It's more a case of total befuddlement reading the comments on news sites.

Russia was never going to tolerate a pro US govt in power in the same country that their black sea fleet is located.  I don't think any sane nation could expect them to. 

Yes they possibly rigged a referendum and took Crimea back into the fold, yes that probably pisses of the Ukrainians but it's the Ukraine's problem.  If the West decides to push the point on this to far it's going to end badly.  Russia isn't going to compromise it's security.

How many ops has the west conducted in the last 20 years and probably would again tomorrow to restore a pro western govt or support a referendum that instates a pro western govt.  I've been on two of them.


----------



## Etype (Mar 24, 2014)

I used to get in fights a lot as a kid and young soldier.  I didn't ever really see myself as the aggressor, just an outspoken dude who never took shit.

I realized that had to stop once I started having kids...

Here's how I look at things now- when I call a guy out for being rude to a waitress, or cutting in line at Wal Mart? Am I prepared to get into a fight over it?

The US is in a transition phase where it wants to have an opinion about everything, but isn't necessarily ready to fight.  We need to stop having so many opinions.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Mac_NZ said:


> Just to be clear it wasn't directed at you so don't read it and feel insulted.  It's more a case of total befuddlement reading the comments on news sites.
> 
> Russia was never going to tolerate a pro US govt in power in the same country that their black sea fleet is located.  I don't think any sane nation could expect them to.
> 
> ...


I understood that, and I'm not pro-war.  My reply was with a no-homo wink.



> Yes they possibly rigged a referendum and took Crimea back into the fold, yes that probably pisses of the Ukrainians but it's the Ukraine's problem.


Again, don't disagree, but what happens with Estonia?  There are activists there pushing for annexation.


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 24, 2014)

JBS said:


> Us meaning the Staff?  Or us meaning you and @Mac_NZ ?   Not sure I understood your statement.



.I want to know what you want to see done in response to the Russians. What do you think America should be doing. Going to war? More sanctions? What would be effective?


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

For one thing, it starts with our leadership.  

Fundamental changes need to be made.  We don't bow, and we don't seek the approval from inferiors with which we have tension.   Russia- for all the talk of how great they are- would be picked apart by us in short order in an all out war.   I'm prepared to fully argue that point in another thread if anyone is interested in that discussion at some point.  Obama's strategy has been to kiss the ass of every dick on planet earth and it comes from trying to implement human psychology strategies as international relations policy.  If an individual in a room doesn't like conflict, he laughs at the bully's jokes across the room and tries to play it cool.   That might work as an individual, as the bully perceives no threat.  But in international relations, it's weakness.   We're not supposed to act like the intellectual weakling seeking to be "friends" with militant gangsters and thugs.   Putin didn't grow up playing Chess and smoking blunts at Columbia and Harvard.    The fucker grew up in the ranks of the KGB where they slammed each other in the face with boards and practiced garotting Americans in cobblestone alleyways.

So, the first thing I'd do is get a new Secretary of State, and his name would be General Cockswinger.  Whoever it is, he'd have to have (a.) General in front of his name and (b.) a reputation of fucking up Russian-trained fighters back when he was a Captain.   Failing that, a civilian with a few gray hairs and equivalent experience in a covert capacity.    His goal would be to remind Putin that we will not tolerate him rolling up our friends.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

But instead we put John Kerry in there.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 24, 2014)

I'm not interested in going to war over the Ukraine.

Estonia, Latvia,Lithuania, Poland; different story.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

SOWT said:


> I'm not interested in going to war over the Ukraine.
> 
> Estonia, Latvia,Lithuania, Poland; different story.


Exactly. 

Young Marines who go to Security Forces school are taught that when protecting a genuine exclusion area (a 100% no go area for intruders), they're to issue a strong single verbal command for the intruder to halt.   The second time, you command "halt" again, and rack a round with your shotgun.   That unmistakeable sound of metal on metal ratcheting a round into the chamber projects to the intruder that you are going to proceed with your duty.   If the intruder does not comply, then barring specific rules of engagement which vary from post to post, the third halt command is given along with shouldering the weapon and preparing to engage.   Of course it varies depending on the sensitivity of the site but the general procedure is some variation of the above.

America needs to do the international relations equivalent of racking a round.  Instead, we're doing the frustrated mall-parent equivalent of counting to ten.


----------



## Etype (Mar 24, 2014)

Hahahaha

Marines are in the embassy to shred documents and lock safe rooms.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Etype said:


> Hahahaha
> 
> Marines are in the embassy to shred documents and lock safe rooms.


An embassy isn't the kind of facility I'm talking about.


----------



## Mac_NZ (Mar 24, 2014)

If Estonia goes it goes, I don't see it going down like the Ukraine, Russia can already project power into the Baltic and while they aren't likely to so know to a chunk of land I don't think they are going to warm up the band for Estonia.

I wouldn't discount the Russians so easliy either.  Their tech is still pretty good and I'd rate the general populaces will to fight.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Russian forces have always had a reputation for being tenacious fighters, and previous conflicts have historically shown their willingness to accept/tolerate staggering casualties while still maintaining the will to fight.    But they suffer from the same challenges any military faces, including exorbitant maintenance and logistics costs for their most important assets.   We deal with it, every nation deals with it.    This is a different era, though, and the technology gap between Russia and the US is far wider now than it was even 20 years ago.  In a large scale conflict where  they attempt to decimate our military and we vice-versa, there'd be little they could do, as we still can achieve air superiority over them.  Their Navy would be ended in a week and a half.   Collectively on the ground we'd still own the night against them.

Where it gets murky, though, is at what point tactical (nuclear) warheads get implemented- which they eventually would.    At that point, everybody loses.

That's why I argue we don't wait for Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania to fall before we make a scene.   We make it an issue now, so we're not having this discussion again after the fall of other former Soviet republics.


----------



## JBS (Mar 24, 2014)

Give Putin a few more years, some of his agenda is to rebuild Russia's fleet. Commonly published US analysis of Russian strategic intent has been and largely still is that they are focused on a non-agressive 21'st century Navy.  As late as 2012, papers like* this one* were being published.  


But meanwhile Putin has committed $200 billion to rebuilding their Navy:

http://rt.com/news/russia-navy-nuclear-submarine-fleet-450/

As of present they have 26 _operational_ nuclear subs, but by 2020 are slated to have a total of 47.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 25, 2014)

I have the feeling Putin has made peace with his maker and is willing to "push the button".  I'm sure every nation with the capability would then nuke the fuck out of whomever they hate.


----------



## JBS (Mar 25, 2014)

RackMaster said:


> I have the feeling Putin has made peace with his maker and is willing to "push the button".  I'm sure every nation with the capability would then nuke the fuck out of whomever they hate.


Angela Merkel said that in her most recent phone conversation, Putin seemed out of his right mind, a little nutty.   And there have been other, similar accounts.


----------



## pardus (Mar 25, 2014)

JBS said:


> Angela Merkel said that in her most recent phone conversation, Putin seemed out of his right mind, a little nutty.   And there have been other, similar accounts.



Genuinely nutty or "watch me act like a crazy man because no one fucks with a crazy man."? Putin is KGB, he's Russian, which means he's a chess player. He hasn't made a misstep yet, which (at this point in time) to my mind means he knows what he's doing.

Time will tell though.


----------



## JBS (Mar 26, 2014)

pardus said:


> Genuinely nutty or "watch me act like a crazy man because no one fucks with a crazy man."? Putin is KGB, he's Russian, which means he's a chess player. He hasn't made a misstep yet, which (at this point in time) to my mind means he knows what he's doing.
> 
> Time will tell though.


She said he was talking like a crazy man.  And this is coming from a woman who had regular convo's with him.



> US reports said Merkel phoned Barack Obama on Sunday evening after speaking to the Russian president to press him to back down from his invasion of Ukraine and occupation of the Crimean peninsula.
> 
> "She was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. 'In another world,' she said," the New York Times reported.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/ukraine-vladimir-putin-angela-merkel-russian

And here:



> If you weren't sure of the veracity of that little reportorial nugget, all doubt should've vanished after Putin's press conference today.
> 
> Slouching in a fancy chair in front of a dozen reporters, Putin squirmed and rambled. And rambled and rambled. He was a rainbow of emotion: Serious! angry! bemused! flustered! confused! So confused.


http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116852/merkel-was-right-putins-lost-his-mind-press-conference


----------



## pardus (Mar 26, 2014)

JBS said:


> She said he was talking like a crazy man.  And this is coming from a woman who had regular convo's with him.
> 
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/ukraine-vladimir-putin-angela-merkel-russian
> ...



Interesting about Merkel's comments.

I just spent 20min or so watching the interview that the newrepublic was talking about. I didn't know anything about the newrepublic but after reading that piece on the interview I watched (in part) Id advise anyone to find another news source because that was complete bollocks, just a political rag piece and not factual. 
Putin was normal.


----------



## AWP (Mar 26, 2014)

The average Russky, son, don't take a dump without a plan.


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 26, 2014)

And in other news...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ll-obamas-disapproval-rating-hits-a-new-high/



> The AP-GfK poll shows 59 percent of Americans now disapprove of Obama -- a point higher than the previous high set in December.
> 
> Obama's approval rating stands at 41 percent. That's the second-lowest figure the poll has ever found.
> 
> Part of Obama's problems appear to be related to foreign policy: The poll shows Americans disapprove of his handling of the situation in Ukraine 57-40 and disapprove of how he handles relationships with other countries 58-40.


----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 26, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> The average Russky, son, don't take a dump without a plan.



Nice Hunt for Red October reference.


----------



## JBS (Mar 27, 2014)

26MAR2014 US Intel: Greater Russian Invasion Likely in Ukraine

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2014/...likelihood-russia-will-enter-eastern-ukraine/


----------



## pardus (Mar 27, 2014)

JBS said:


> 26MAR2014 US Intel: Greater Russian Invasion Likely in Ukraine
> 
> http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2014/...likelihood-russia-will-enter-eastern-ukraine/



I'm not surprised in the slightest.

Operation Citadel II commence!


----------



## Dame (Mar 27, 2014)




----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 28, 2014)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...3-8020-b2d790b3c9e1_story.html?wpmk=MK0000205

An op-ed saying what we should actually do, not just bitching about what hasn't been done.


----------



## Etype (Mar 28, 2014)

I'm going to go against the grain, yet again, and agree generally with Alan Grayson's comments on the matter.  He  spoke out in favor of Russia annexing Crimea, citing that it was the citizens' choice and also reference Ukraine removing Crimea's autonomous gov't as soon as the decided they were unhappy with them.


----------



## JBS (Mar 28, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...3-8020-b2d790b3c9e1_story.html?wpmk=MK0000205
> 
> An op-ed saying what we should actually do, not just bitching about what hasn't been done.



So basically his answer to what should we do - what "we should actually do", as you put it- is "Europe".

The whole premise of that article is "how to not get into a Cold War again".   The writers then go on to eloquently put forth the idea that we should do nothing, and let Europe handle it.


----------



## Etype (Mar 28, 2014)

JBS said:


> The writers then go on to eloquently put forth the idea that we should do nothing, and let Europe handle it.


Good idea!


----------



## TLDR20 (Mar 28, 2014)

JBS said:


> S
> 
> The whole premise of that article is "how to not get into a Cold War again".   The writers then go on to eloquently put forth the idea that we should do nothing, and let Europe handle it.



Shouldn't that be the goal?


----------



## pardus (Mar 28, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Shouldn't that be the goal?



If we want the USA to look like they have no intention of honoring their agreements/treaties...


----------



## JBS (Mar 28, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> Shouldn't that be the goal?


I think it's a false premise.

We are in zero danger of falling into a new cold war.


----------



## Etype (Mar 28, 2014)

pardus said:


> If we want the USA to look like they have no intention of honoring their agreements/treaties...


This is a good point.  We've been so eager to jump at the opportunity to sign treaties and agreements in the past- and look at how ridiculous the terms are that we agree to. 

In the case of Ukraine, we want a former Soviet country to surrender its nukes to its former oppressor in exchange for our protection.  This is racketeering without a payout.  We created a necessity for protection, then we fulfilled it- terrible.


----------



## JBS (Mar 28, 2014)

Do you know when we will find ourselves in a new cold war?

When we do nothing over the next decade as Putin re-assimilates all the break-away republics and we do nothing.


----------



## JBS (Mar 28, 2014)

Etype said:


> This is a good point.  We've been so eager to jump at the opportunity to sign treaties and agreements in the past- and look at how ridiculous the terms are that we agree to.
> 
> In the case of Ukraine, we want a former Soviet country to surrender its nukes to its former oppressor in exchange for our protection.  This is racketeering without a payout.  We created a necessity for protection, then we fulfilled it- terrible.


Russia was also a signatory.

And don't you want to encourage nations to give up loose nukes/nuclear ambitions?  Why should they?  So they can be rewarded for that like Gaddafi and Ukraine?


EDITED TO ADD: When a nation relies upon its alliances with the United States for protection and NOT nuclear weapons, we should unconditionally reward that, and demonstrate to the rest of the world that they can trust the global community and not nuclear weapons for security.  It's a huge step backwards.    Why would Kim Jong Un give up nukes when he saw that Gaddafi got a bayonet in the rectum for his efforts?  The Ukraine is just another in a long line of US inconsistencies to step up when we need to.


----------



## Etype (Mar 28, 2014)

JBS said:


> Russia was also a signatory.
> 
> And don't you want to encourage nations to give up loose nukes/nuclear ambitions?


Russia did sign it, but as I previously stated- Crimea was an autonomous region when the treaty was signed, and was them reasimilated by Ukraine when the  Ukrainian gov't became unhappy with the direction it was going.

I don't necessarily want to encourage nations to give up nukes or nuclear ambitions.  That's way to vague of a statement/policy for to subscribe to.


----------



## JBS (Mar 28, 2014)

Etype said:


> Russia did sign it, but as I previously stated- Crimea was an autonomous region when the treaty was signed, and was them reasimilated by Ukraine when the  Ukrainian gov't became unhappy with the direction it was going.
> 
> I don't necessarily want to encourage nations to give up nukes or nuclear ambitions.  That's way to vague of a statement/policy for to subscribe to.



I understand your position, I just probably don't agree.  Denuclearization of the world is a good- albeit probably unattainable- goal.   It's not even a goal, just a wish, really, and probably not realistic.  Still, in principle, less nukes is a good thing.

Regardless, I don't think it matters.  Putin is probably going to continue.  Check out this excellent article in BBC:



> The world was stunned when Russia invaded Crimea, but should it have been? Author and journalist Oliver Bullough says President Vladimir Putin never kept secret his intention to restore Russian power...


http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26769481


----------



## pardus (Mar 28, 2014)

JBS said:


> Regardless, I don't think it matters.  Putin is probably going to continue.  Check out this excellent article in BBC:
> http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26769481



That was a very interesting article!


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 28, 2014)

I will just leave this right here.  :wall:


----------



## pardus (Mar 28, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> I will just leave this right here.  :wall:



WTF is that?


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 29, 2014)

That is our State Department Spokeswoman, Jen Psaki's answer to Russia massing troops to invade Ukraine.  That will show 'em!


----------



## Queeg (Mar 29, 2014)

Pfft, hashtags....Putin has no use for electronic means of communications.  He's old school KGB so he's pretty much a SME on how to crack that shit.


----------



## pardus (Mar 29, 2014)

Chopstick said:


> That is our State Department Spokeswoman, Jen Psaki's answer to Russia massing troops to invade Ukraine.  That will show 'em!



Wow... Maybe the State Dept will make a  Kony Putin video and everything will be OK!


----------



## Etype (Mar 29, 2014)

@US_GOV'T, #UKRAINESNOTWORTHWWIII, #ENEERGYINDEPENENCE


----------



## CQB (Apr 20, 2014)

Update: there's been a bit of a skirmish at Sloviansk with about five KIA, the fact are a bit sketchy ATM. 
Here's a bit more analysis:
http://www.economist.com/news/leade...-highbut-it-will-only-get-higher-if-west-does


----------



## Chopstick (Apr 23, 2014)

US Troops arrived in Poland today.  
https://news.yahoo.com/first-troops-land-poland-us-beefs-baltic-presence-155008415.html



> "Poland has been there for the United States," US ambassador to Poland Stephen Mull said at the ceremony in accented Polish.
> 
> "And today, as the transatlantic community confronts Russia's unacceptable aggression against Poland's neighbour Ukraine, a sovereign and independent state, we have a solemn obligation in the framework of NATO to reassure Poland of our security guarantee."


----------



## Chopstick (May 2, 2014)

http://theaviationist.com/2014/05/02/hinds-shot-down-donetsk/

Things are heating up ......



> According to the Ukrainian authorities, two Mil Mi-24 Hind helicopters were shot down by “unknown persons by means of man-portable air defense system (PZRK)” overnight into May 2.
> 
> As a result two servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed forces died and several were injured.
> 
> Furthermore, one Mi-8 Hip helicopter of Army Aviation, Ukrainian Armed Forces, was damaged by small arms fire.


----------



## RackMaster (May 2, 2014)

That is not good at all.


----------



## CQB (May 2, 2014)

Some more...

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA400LI20140502?irpc=932

A report from Le Monde with film regarding a fire in Odessa with 31 dead. There's a bit on the helo as well but it's not clear.
http://mobile.lemonde.fr/europe/art...ents-affrontements-a-odessa_4410927_3214.html


----------



## JBS (May 2, 2014)

We should have been involved.   World Wars start like this.  Our involvement would have caused Putin to back off.


----------



## Marine0311 (May 2, 2014)

JBS said:


> We should have been involved.   World Wars start like this.  Our involvement would have caused Putin to back off.



We have been involved enough since 9.11


----------



## Brill (May 2, 2014)

JBS said:


> We should have been involved.   World Wars start like this.  Our involvement would have caused Putin to back off.



Putin does not fear Obama.


----------



## CQB (May 2, 2014)

JBS said:


> We should have been involved.   World Wars start like this.  Our involvement would have caused Putin to back off.



If any of the Baltic States become involved, as they're members of NATO, things may change.


----------



## CQB (May 2, 2014)

Yes, there's not much good will there towards the Ukraine if you consider the separatist events 1945-47 and even more animosity concerning Russia.


----------



## RackMaster (May 2, 2014)

Marine0311 said:


> We have been involved enough since 9.11



I agree but this is totally different, this is a potential world ender if this go massively to shit.


----------



## CQB (May 2, 2014)

RackMaster said:


> I agree but this is totally different, this is a potential world ender if this go massively to shit.


Oh indeed!


----------



## Phoenix15 (Jun 20, 2014)

Long time reader and have only posted a few times here. (intro complete)

I've been following this crisis pretty closely through the available news outlets and I always enjoy the opinions/insights of this community. 
With the continuation of this crisis would you guys consider this a proxy war between Western and Russian powers? Porshenko and Putin seem to have pretty open channels of dialogue but it appears they consistently say one thing and do another. Porshenko's peace plan has been laughed at by the rebels and its apparent volunteer fighters and arms flow freely across the border. 

How do you guys see this playing out? Another Russian annexation? A successful de-escalation and unification of Ukraine? Just looking for any and all opinions. Thanks!


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 25, 2014)

Assuming at some point Putin invades the Ukraine.

Does he annex the eastern third and stop?

Conquer the whole country?

Assuming he takes the entire country over, then what? Poland? would NATO roll over?


----------



## Marine0311 (Jul 25, 2014)

I don't see him going beyond this. Right now the international pressure is too great. Too many other factors such as the UN, NATO and U.S allies with eyes on him.


----------



## RackMaster (Jul 25, 2014)

I think he's going to want to remove all ties to the separatists in Ukraine.  He's either got to back off completely or go full tilt crazy invasion of Europe.


----------



## CDG (Jul 25, 2014)

Marine0311 said:


> I don't see him going beyond this. Right now the international pressure is too great. Too many other factors such as the UN, NATO and U.S allies with eyes on him.



How much pressure is really on him though?  Strong words and UN sanctions? Yawn.  We can't afford to get into a war with Russia, and the country would raise hell if we put troops on the ground en masse. The UN isn't going to do anything, and what European country can afford to go to war without us?


----------



## Marine0311 (Jul 25, 2014)

CDG said:


> How much pressure is really on him though?  Strong words and UN sanctions? Yawn.  We can't afford to get into a war with Russia, and the country would raise hell if we put troops on the ground en masse. The UN isn't going to do anything, and what European country can afford to go to war without us?



Good points. I really haven't thought it beyond that.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 25, 2014)

Marine0311 said:


> I don't see him going beyond this. Right now the international pressure is too great. Too many other factors such as the UN, NATO and U.S allies with eyes on him.


Cross-border artillery strikes?

That said, watching made me wish we had a ground launched HARM system.


----------



## Marine0311 (Jul 25, 2014)

SOWT said:


> Cross-border artillery strikes?
> 
> That said, watching made me wish we had a ground launched HARM system.



Possibly or air power?


----------



## AWP (Jul 25, 2014)

Consolidate his hold on the Ukraine and then move to Central Asia. So much the better for him if he can tie an "uprising" to Islamic extremists. Failing that, Belarus and Moldava are not NATO members. There's too much heat on Europe right now, but with the Ukrainian "bulge" between those nations he has some room to fabricate "rebels" crossing the border and aiding Ukr. nationalists.


----------



## Scotth (Jul 26, 2014)

CDG said:


> How much pressure is really on him though?  Strong words and UN sanctions? Yawn.  We can't afford to get into a war with Russia, and the country would raise hell if we put troops on the ground en masse. The UN isn't going to do anything, and what European country can afford to go to war without us?



Prior to the downing of the commercial airliner I would have agreed with you.  Europe wasn't willing to risk 30% of their natural gas imports and would let Russia do what ever.  That is why sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine were limited.

Who was going to get into shooting war with someone your dependent upon?

With all the worlds attention now focused on Russia and such a high cost, in European life in the jet downing, the dynamics have certainly changed from what they were 4 months ago.

Does Obama capitalize on this opportunity, to soon to render a verdict, but they are trying at least and hopefully Europe will jump on board.

In the short term Russia is just trying to preserve what they have already gained.  What happens long term will be determined on how the next 6 months play out.


----------



## AWP (Jul 26, 2014)

Scotth said:


> Does Obama capitalize on this opportunity, to soon to render a verdict, but they are trying at least and hopefully Europe will jump on board.


 
I agree, but my (honestly) non-partisan view is that he won't. He'll wait to see what Europe wants, Europe will look to the US for some leadership and guidance. We have our own issues here and despite the stakes will leave it to Europe to "take point" unless this thing escalates. The pot boils, but it doesn't boil over. Barring another major incident this falls off our radar by Christmas. Russia's not leaving the Ukraine so unless this blows up Putin's already won and our response was, is, and will remain token.

To paraphrase from Full Metal Jacket, "We gotta' keep our heads until this sanction craze blows over." - V. Putin


----------



## Scotth (Jul 26, 2014)

Freefalling said:


> I agree, but my (honestly) non-partisan view is that he won't. He'll wait to see what Europe wants, Europe will look to the US for some leadership and guidance. We have our own issues here and despite the stakes will leave it to Europe to "take point" unless this thing escalates. The pot boils, but it doesn't boil over. Barring another major incident this falls off our radar by Christmas. Russia's not leaving the Ukraine so unless this blows up Putin's already won and our response was, is, and will remain token.
> 
> To paraphrase from Full Metal Jacket, "We gotta' keep our heads until this sanction craze blows over." - V. Putin




Obviously I hope your wrong.  Do I bet against you.  Hell no.


----------



## x SF med (Jul 26, 2014)

The Russian 'pacification' of Afghanistan lasted 9 years...  and guess who was in country for a good portion of that as part of the Intel machine?

Ukraine is closer.


----------



## Gunz (Jul 26, 2014)

Putin's a rock star. The Russian ladies love him. They think he's James Bond. He probably thinks Obama, Kerry and the EU are gay-loving whining bitches. So while the West is weak, he'll take the opportunity to clean up his backyard. He may wistfully hunger for the glory days of the USSR but I believe his goals are less ambitious than many people think. He may make a few more minor moves but not Poland. He'd be crazy to do that. A move that bold would galvanize the West. As simpering as Western leadership often appears, it has a nuclear arsenal.


----------



## CDG (Jul 26, 2014)

Scotth said:


> Prior to the downing of the commercial airliner I would have agreed with you.  Europe wasn't willing to risk 30% of their natural gas imports and would let Russia do what ever.  That is why sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine were limited.
> 
> Who was going to get into shooting war with someone your dependent upon?
> 
> ...



IMHO, I don't think the downing of the commercial aircraft changed things in any substantial way.  It's great news fodder for all the talking heads to get all fired up over, and everybody knows it's fucked up.  But again, who's going to *DO* something about it?  I don't see Europe making any kind of military move unless we're out in front of them.  I doubt President Obama is going to go that route, and maybe that's the smart move.  A war with Russia would bankrupt us.


----------



## Scotth (Jul 28, 2014)

CDG said:


> IMHO, I don't think the downing of the commercial aircraft changed things in any substantial way.  It's great news fodder for all the talking heads to get all fired up over, and everybody knows it's fucked up.  But again, who's going to *DO* something about it?  I don't see Europe making any kind of military move unless we're out in front of them.  I doubt President Obama is going to go that route, and maybe that's the smart move.  A war with Russia would bankrupt us.



We certainly aren't going to get into a shooting war with Russia, regardless of who is in the White House, but economic sanctions could put a serious hurt on Russia.  IF and let me say it again IF Europe gets on board it could make a difference.

Look at Iran.  Obama brought China and Russia on board for sanctions and in 2007 Iran was exporting 2.75 million barrels of oil day.  Today they are at 1.1 million.  Tell me that isn't hurting Iran's economy.

Russia is still just as fragile economically as they were when the Berlin wall came.  It's a big country with lots of people and lots of borders to defend.  They need a lot of money to make it all work.


----------



## CDG (Jul 29, 2014)

Scotth said:


> We certainly aren't going to get into a shooting war with Russia, regardless of who is in the White House, but economic sanctions could put a serious hurt on Russia.  IF and let me say it again IF Europe gets on board it could make a difference.
> 
> Look at Iran.  Obama brought China and Russia on board for sanctions and in 2007 Iran was exporting 2.75 million barrels of oil day.  Today they are at 1.1 million.  Tell me that isn't hurting Iran's economy.
> 
> Russia is still just as fragile economically as they were when the Berlin wall came.  It's a big country with lots of people and lots of borders to defend.  They need a lot of money to make it all work.


 
Russia can play that game as well. They're the world's largest titanium exporter.  They are a big market for several European companies whose employees would find themselves unemployed if Russia retaliates and pulls the plug on those products.  The EU average for dependence on Russian gas is 25%.  So it goes both ways.  Europe as a whole is fragile economically, and so are we right now.  It's a very delicate game with potentially disastrous consequences for a misstep.


----------



## Scotth (Jul 29, 2014)

CDG said:


> Russia can play that game as well. They're the world's largest titanium exporter.  They are a big market for several European companies whose employees would find themselves unemployed if Russia retaliates and pulls the plug on those products.  The EU average for dependence on Russian gas is 25%.  So it goes both ways.  Europe as a whole is fragile economically, and so are we right now.  It's a very delicate game with potentially disastrous consequences for a misstep.



/agreed.  The silver lining is Russia can't hurt Europe without hurting themselves as well.


----------



## talonlm (Jul 29, 2014)

And through all of this, no one has mentioned Crimea.  Putin's a slick little bastard, isn't he?

There is little or nothing the US can do--we don't have the political will to do much of anything right now.  The EU is too weak to defend themselves, much less the Ukrainians.  Putin is ambitious and aggressive but not reckless;  he will simply lie low for a year or so.  Already, the news is crowding out Ukrainian coverage with the Israel-Hamas conflict.  Something else will crop up after that.  Like the Georgian incursion, Ukraine's loss of a few provinces will disappear off the MSM and off everyone's concerns will be re-focused on what the must-have toys are for Christmas before you know it.


----------



## BloodStripe (Jul 31, 2014)

As I understand NATO, specifically in regards to this Ukraine incident, is that if a country is not a member of NATO (as Ukraine is not), NATO countries are not under any real pressure to help that country out. What does NATO gain by helping Ukraine? The strength of NATO is only as strong as the weakest country in NATO. The NATO Articles clearly state that if any NATO country comes under pressure or attack that the other NATO countries must help defend it (See Article 5 http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm). If NATO were to at present accept Ukraine, it would thrust NATO in a direct confrontation with Russia. This clearly in my opinion would be the start of WW3 as Russia would be forced to then act with force against any number of the post-Soviet states (specifically Georgia and Moldova). That is not to say we should not have them as allies, but allies do not always see eye to eye or help each other out in the time of need.


----------



## Rapid (Aug 5, 2014)

SOWT said:


> Assuming he takes the entire country over, then what? Poland? would NATO roll over?



I honestly doubt it'd ever go that far... but if it did, NATO wouldn't roll over -- we're at least planning for it. Funnily enough I'm over there right now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...combat-Russian-threat-says-David-Cameron.html


> The alliance should also look to move more military hardware into the region and consider how to strengthen the reaction times of its response force, Mr Cameron said.
> 
> Nato’s headquarters in Szczecin, Poland — which was established only in 1999 — is likely to be expanded to cope with the new threat from the east.




http://inserbia.info/today/2014/07/...-szczecin-base-in-response-to-russian-threat/


> General Philip Breedlove, NATO’s top commander in Europe, has proposed that the Polish city of Szczecin expand its existing base to help the military alliance respond faster to any threat posed by Russia, EurActiv.com reports.
> 
> According to the Atlantic Council, Britain and other NATO allies backing the general’s plans to place supplies — weapons, ammunition and ration packs — at a new headquarters in eastern Europe, to enable a sudden influx of thousands of NATO troops to be ready for action in the event of a crisis.
> 
> “The Russians have decided that they are willing to use force to achieve their aims […] and that breaks with 25 years of building a security structure in Europe built around certain fundamentals,” a NATO official is quoted as saying.


----------



## BloodStripe (Aug 28, 2014)

http://usnato.tumblr.com/post/96003086125/new-satellite-imagery-exposes-russian-combat-troops


----------



## Blizzard (Aug 29, 2014)

lindy said:


> Putin does not fear Obama.


Sadly, no one does.  Meanwhile, Putin is becoming bolder, more belligerent:
https://news.yahoo.com/putin-says-russia-ready-respond-aggression-123956691.html


----------



## BloodStripe (Oct 27, 2014)

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/18/donetsk-airport-rebels-fight-on/17447829/


----------



## xbQUHIm] (Nov 2, 2014)

I don't think it'll turn into much of a proxy war just because the U.S. knows we don't get much for helping Ukraine but it could obviously lead to a lot of problems for us. Sure it's the right thing to do but we know the Russians are more invested to take (parts of) Ukraine than we are to help. It seemed the only way to end it was through negotiations but Geneva II fell through (if there was even hope to begin with). Russia seems determined nearly at all costs to annex Donetsk and Luhansk and they make no effort to hide that, they actually make subtle (or not so subtle) references to it pretty often. That would be terrible for Ukraine because that's the industrial heartland while the western part is more service-sector/government administration oriented. In general, Russia has been beefing up its military, just as Putin promised all along. They're actually issuing matching uniforms, they're in the process of implementing voluntary military service vice conscription, and sweet Jesus they're even trying to improve the quality of chow! The Kremlin just released its Arctic policy not too long ago and they're planning on opening up previously abandoned Soviet bases there and re-establishing a constant military presence. Hell, they even tried to re-open an old Soviet SIGINT base in Cuba (but because of budgeting issues the idea has been shelved). Their new class of submarine I think has started to be deployed and they've been testing SLBMs and ICBMs over this past week with live-fire exercises in Kamchatka. One curious thing that's going on right now is a lot of mothers are starting to ask questions about their service-member children dying. It's obvious they're being killed in Ukraine but the Russian government is covering it up and now dead Russian soldiers are being buried in unmarked graves in Russia. The mothers that are putting political pressure on the government have actually been labeled "foreign agents" believe it or not. Surprisingly this story got some airtime on Russian state controlled news. 

[All sources: DoS PAO, Foreign Policy Magazine, The Economist Magazine, Russian Foreign Ministry PAO, Kremlin PAO, NTV News, ROSSIYA News, RIA Novosti, RT]






_"Those who are searching for the truth about the fallen soldiers face violence and intimidation. What is the Russian Government hiding?" - State Department image on the US Embassy Kiev's Facebook_





_"Soldiers' mothers of St. Petersburg were declared 'foreign agents'. Is that how people who want to know the truth are treated?" 
 - State Department image on the US Embassy Kiev's Facebook_


----------



## Brill (Nov 3, 2014)

xbQUHIm] said:


> I don't think it'll turn into much of a proxy war just because the U.S. knows we don't get much for helping Ukraine but it could obviously lead to a lot of problems for us.



Which is WHY we should use surrogate forces as a tool to forge our foreign policy, which should be "anything and everything to piss off Putin".  Jan 2017 perhaps?


----------



## xbQUHIm] (Nov 3, 2014)

Which is pretty much what we're doing right now. We're helping Ukraine by sending uniforms, rations, tents, body armor, and NVGs on the record - who knows about off the record. As far as pissing off Russia, it seems like we don't have to try that much to do so. The sanctions are biting them in the ass and they're pretending like they're not feeling the repercussions but in reality they're artificially inflating the Ruble by depleting the state treasury. They're super butt-hurt from being kicked out of the G8 and are pretty much like "F%&k it, we'll make our own economic union, and China'll be there, and Brasil, and South Africa!" We just have to wait for them to spend all their money and the military and go broke again in Cold War II.


----------



## BloodStripe (Nov 4, 2014)

http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/06/tu-95-bear-on-ebay/



> Noteworthy, 11 strategic bombers and 600 air-launched missiles were exchanged by Ukraine to Russia in payment for the gas debt in February 2000.


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 19, 2014)

Observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe said they watched a cargo vehicle cross the border on Nov. 4 near Donetsk as it headed back to Russia. The vehicle was among the troop movements and military vehicle crossings OSCE chronicled in a weekly report.

The vehicle had the marking Груз 200, or Gruz 200—Russian for “Cargo 200,” which is a well-known Russian military designation for the bodies of soldiers killed in action.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-war-in-ukraine-is-killing-lots-of-russians-cdf321c369


----------



## pardus (Nov 19, 2014)

It will all come out in the open eventually. That said, it's not like anyone knows this isn't Russia vs Ukraine, so it'll make no difference anyway unless someone stands up to Russia, and really what will that achieve?

Bottom line, sucks to be the Ukraine.


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 19, 2014)

pardus said:


> It will all come out in the open eventually. That said, it's not like anyone knows this isn't Russia vs Ukraine, so it'll make no difference anyway unless someone stands up to Russia, and really what will that achieve?
> 
> Bottom line, sucks to be the Ukraine.


I am surprised, but not surprised that Putin is allowing the Army to take these losses, eventually it comes out and his popularity will drop.  He'll go all in when that happens.


----------



## AWP (Dec 22, 2014)

No, not THAT Georgia, the one in Europe. I freaking LOVE that their unit flag/ patch has a cross in it. Yes, I'm a non-believer, but to see that in an Islamic country causes even my athiest heart to smile. I know a few of you would like this, so I thought I'd share.






http://www.dvidshub.net/image/16402...ers-security-baf-georgian-51st-light-infantry


----------



## Gunz (Dec 30, 2014)

Cross, Star of David, pulled pork barbeque, anything that ruins their digestion works for me.


----------



## Kraut783 (Jan 19, 2015)

*Ukraine conflict: Battles rage in Donetsk and Luhansk

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30878406
*
I'm ashamed to say that I have not been keeping up with this.....


----------



## pardus (Jan 19, 2015)

I was following this on VICE news, but it seems they've stopped covering it. :-/


----------



## pardus (Jan 19, 2015)

From one month ago.


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 19, 2015)

from War is Boring:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/wh...e-donetsk-airport-siege-stalingrad-cef7c4b6a2


----------



## RackMaster (Jan 20, 2015)

Let's get this party started!

Ukrainian Army Ad (subtitled in english):


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jan 21, 2015)

RackMaster said:


> Let's get this party started!
> 
> Ukrainian Army Ad (subtitled in english):



Pretty good ad, if you ask me. It would never fly in CONUS.


----------



## Dienekes (Jan 23, 2015)

*US Trainers To Deploy To Ukraine*
WASHINGTON — American soldiers will deploy to Ukraine this spring to begin training four companies of the Ukrainian National Guard, the head of US Army Europe Lt. Gen Ben Hodges said during his first visit to Kiev on Wednesday.

The number of troops heading to the Yavoriv Training Area near the city of L'viv — which is about 40 miles from the Polish border — is still being determined, however.

The American training effort comes as part of a US State Department initiative "to assist Ukraine in strengthening its law enforcement capabilities, conduct internal defense, and maintain rule of law" Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Vanessa Hillman told Defense News.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2015/01/21/ukraine-us-army-russia/22119315/

Been half-ass following this, but after finding this yesterday, I may have to rethink that.


----------



## Queeg (Jan 23, 2015)

RackMaster said:


> Let's get this party started!
> 
> Ukrainian Army Ad (subtitled in english):


I feel like I've been cheated.


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 23, 2015)

jroberts1187 said:


> *US Trainers To Deploy To Ukraine*
> WASHINGTON — American soldiers will deploy to Ukraine this spring to begin training four companies of the Ukrainian National Guard, the head of US Army Europe Lt. Gen Ben Hodges said during his first visit to Kiev on Wednesday.
> 
> The number of troops heading to the Yavoriv Training Area near the city of L'viv — which is about 40 miles from the Polish border — is still being determined, however.
> ...


How would this impact you?


----------



## Dienekes (Jan 25, 2015)

It is important to me to keep up with the foreign policy our country is implementing along with where our soldiers are being deployed. I wasn't really following this because I didn't think that we would actually send soldiers over there until I read this link.

Also, I can take a few guesses as to which units may be sent, and seeing that I am likely aspiring to join one of those units, I believe that it could only be beneficial to follow and learn whatever I can about the situation whether it is the situation on the ground (however unlikely I may see that) or the political decisions made by the leadership tasking those units.

I'm also reading Pete Blaber's book on leadership, so I really want to use the conflict in Ukraine as a sort of "what would I do situation" for some mental development and preparation.


----------



## Dienekes (Feb 4, 2015)

I really hope I didn't derail the thread because there is an interesting order of events playing out that might attribute to instability in the Caucasus and Ukraine


----------



## Gunz (Feb 4, 2015)

RackMaster said:


> Let's get this party started!
> 
> Ukrainian Army Ad (subtitled in english):


 

I am so on that! I want the blue beret and the girls in go-go boots!


----------



## pardus (Feb 9, 2015)

I found some updates from Vice News on the conflict.


----------



## TLDR20 (Feb 9, 2015)

pardus said:


> I found some updates from Vice News on the conflict.
> 
> ]



Vice puts out good shit.


----------



## pardus (Feb 15, 2015)

Personally I don't see this ceasefire, or any subsequent ceasefires, holding until Russia secures a land corridor to Crimea.


----------



## CQB (Feb 17, 2015)

At 2:28 "People don't believe Russian news channels." I don't think even the Russian population believes the Russian media either. The disinformation is such that even if they reported an event accurately no-one would believe it. 

More from Buzzfeed: Photos with graphic content. 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/avdeev/horrific-images-capture-the-sheer-brutality-of-ukraine-war#.dsRBWY2VG


----------



## Rapid (Feb 21, 2015)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31561769

_"Russian government supporters are to rally in the capital Moscow and other parts of the country to mark the first anniversary of what they view as the "coup" in neighbouring Ukraine.

Russia's state media are promoting the event under the slogan "We won't forget! We won't forgive!"_

It's amazing anyone still tries to defend them in the face of their actions and, as seen here, their behaviours.


----------



## pardus (Feb 21, 2015)




----------



## pardus (Mar 11, 2015)




----------



## Florida173 (Mar 11, 2015)

Vice also puts out some complete garbage and are bit left leaning in situations.. but their Ukraine stuff is great.


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 11, 2015)

pardus said:


> Vice videos...


Interesting.  Whether through selective access, selective editing, simple fact, or some other reason, the DNR in those videos appear to be more competent than the Ukrainian forces, unfortunately.


----------



## pardus (Mar 11, 2015)

Blizzard said:


> Interesting.  Whether through selective access, selective editing, simple fact, or some other reason, the DNR in those videos appear to be more competent than the Ukrainian forces, unfortunately.



DNR = Russia. By proxy or actually. What do you expect?


----------



## reed11b (Mar 12, 2015)

Having worked with the Ukrainians in Iraq, I am not surprised at all.
Reed


----------



## Blizzard (Mar 12, 2015)

pardus said:


> DNR = Russia. By proxy or actually. What do you expect?


Touche.  On the surface it doesn't seem to bode well for Mariupol.  Still, the differences in the way they are presented are striking; ie the clown firing a shot into the ground vs restoring services, holding socials, etc.  At least from Vice's reporting, one is doing a significantly better job in the PR arena.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 12, 2015)

pardus said:


> DNR = Russia. By proxy or actually. What do you expect?


 
Actual, according to USAREUR Gen Hodges, to the tune of 12,000 Russian troops:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303


----------



## pardus (Mar 13, 2015)

Ocoka One said:


> Actual, according to USAREUR Gen Hodges, to the tune of 12,000 Russian troops:
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303



Interesting.


----------



## pardus (Mar 15, 2015)




----------



## pardus (Apr 24, 2015)

This one just goes to show the ignorance of some of the Russian people and how brainwashed they are. "It's America's fault" 
Also I was shaking my head at the stupidity of these people, "we want to be separate from the Ukraine, but we want them to supply food to us and give us money to buy it". 
I did have to laugh at the vodka shelf in the supermarket.


----------



## pardus (Apr 24, 2015)

I thought the slant of this was a bit fucked up. Equipment gets destroyed and lost. That's war. Has the Ukraine shown their ass a few times? Sure. 
The gift of a few Humvees is a good idea IMO, it's gear we can afford to loose, it's a message to Russia, Ukraine and the world, and it's needed and available right now.

I haven't looked into it yet, but I'm curious about what Military equipment the Ukraine sells so much of now.


----------



## Brill (Apr 24, 2015)

pardus said:


> I haven't looked into it yet, but I'm curious about what Military equipment the Ukraine sells so much of now.



(Movers are here so I'm pretty bored.)

They're doing quite well.

http://ukrinmash.com/en/production
and their parent company
http://www.ukrspecexport.com/index/index/lang/eng

Good resource that tracks arms trafficking: http://www.sipri.org/databases

Wait...when did Simon start reporting from the separatists' side? Figured after his detention, their relationship would be over.


----------



## pardus (Apr 24, 2015)

lindy said:


> They're doing quite well.
> 
> http://ukrinmash.com/en/production
> and their parent company
> ...


Cool. Good for them.

Did he ever stop reporting on their side? I know VICE has been on both side throughout the conflict, I just don't recall whether Simon specifically stopped after his abduction.


----------



## CQB (May 3, 2015)

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/finland-prepares-reservists-for-crisis-situation-2015-5

Finland’s military has sent letters to the country’s entire 900,000 strong reservist force outlining what each individual should do in the event of a “crisis situation,” Newsweek reports citing local Finnish media.

The potential mobilization of 900,000 people in Finland would be a massive undertaking. With a population of only 5.2 million citizens, conscription would extend to one sixth of the country’s entire population and would include citizens between the ages of 20 and 60.


----------



## Marauder06 (May 3, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> Consolidate his hold on the Ukraine and then move to Central Asia. So much the better for him if he can tie an "uprising" to Islamic extremists. Failing that, Belarus and Moldava are not NATO members. There's too much heat on Europe right now, but with the Ukrainian "bulge" between those nations he has some room to fabricate "rebels" crossing the border and aiding Ukr. nationalists.


Agree.  He's going to start bumping up against NATO, or countries NATO actually gives a shit about, soon.  He'll need to look elsewhere.  Terrorism is always a good boogyman.


----------



## Viper1 (May 3, 2015)

CQB said:


> http://www.businessinsider.com.au/finland-prepares-reservists-for-crisis-situation-2015-5
> 
> Finland’s military has sent letters to the country’s entire 900,000 strong reservist force outlining what each individual should do in the event of a “crisis situation,” Newsweek reports citing local Finnish media.
> 
> The potential mobilization of 900,000 people in Finland would be a massive undertaking. With a population of only 5.2 million citizens, conscription would extend to one sixth of the country’s entire population and would include citizens between the ages of 20 and 60.



Doesn't Putin know what happened the last time Russia (then known as the Soviet Union) went to war against Finland? :wall::-/

Finland made peace with Stalin but it was about as pyrrhic a victory as one can achieve. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/winter_war_1939.htm
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/514007/Russo-Finnish-War


----------



## pardus (May 26, 2015)




----------



## poison (Jun 1, 2015)

So Russia bans any talk of dead service members. You're a reporter? Shh. Your son was killed and you talk.? Gulag. 

Fucking Russia.


----------



## CQB (Aug 1, 2015)

Hybrid warfare scenario and Article 5 response.

Heinrich Brauss, NATO’s assistant secretary-general for defence policy, stresses the need for speedy decision-making: “One week”, he says, “could be too long in the event of a hybrid attack. We are now significantly accelerating our procedures.” He refuses to define what might trigger Article 5. “Some ambiguity is necessary,” he says. But an adversary “must know that NATO is capable and willing to act”.

Article of faith


----------



## Etype (Aug 2, 2015)

I'm sure Putin is terrified.


----------



## x SF med (Aug 3, 2015)

Etype said:


> I'm sure Putin is terrified.






I'm Not so sure...  he's defeated the wolf from Peter and the Wolf, the Golden Stag, captured and ridden The Minotaur, carries the world like a rucksack, and defeated Cerebrus  and the Horses of Hippolita... and don't forget brokered oil deals for pipelines  - all while wearing a toga  He's Epic...  literally, he's usurped all of the Epics...


----------



## Etype (Aug 3, 2015)

x SF med said:


> ...brokered oil deals for pipelines...


That's what i call a president!


----------



## pardus (Sep 27, 2015)

The War Maybe Over.


----------



## emccabe (Oct 18, 2015)

quick question recently I have not been following whats been going on in ukraine so  is the lasting ceasefire a  direct result of the russian military changing its focus to syria


----------



## Gunz (Oct 21, 2015)

emccabe said:


> quick question recently _*I have not been following whats been going on in ukraine*_ so  is the lasting ceasefire a  direct result of the russian military changing its focus to syria


 
You're gonna go far around here. :wall:


----------



## 104TN (Oct 21, 2015)

x SF med said:


> He's Epic...  literally, he's usurped all of the Epics...



Putin for POTUS?


----------



## x SF med (Oct 21, 2015)

rick said:


> Putin for POTUS?



Nah, he's not liberal enough for most of the general public of this country.


----------



## emccabe (Oct 21, 2015)

I mean I have a degree of understanding but don't really look for constant updates like I had earlier since it seems like the peace is actually holding this time


----------



## Gunz (Oct 21, 2015)

emccabe said:


> I mean I have a degree of understanding but don't really look for constant updates like I had earlier since it seems like the peace is actually holding this time



You're lucky I've raised 3 boys or I'd tell you what I tell them: Look it up, I'm too busy drinking beer to do your homework for you. But, since you're not my kid and since you're new here, I'll give you a kickstart.

Russian Aid To Syrian Regime Designed To Shift Focus From Ukraine

Forget Russia in Syria


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 13, 2018)

Multiple similar threads merged per user request. 

@Gordus


----------



## Gunz (Nov 30, 2018)

I think Russia is going to move on Ukraine.

This whole business in the Kerch Strait seems like a set-up to me. Russia has nothing to fear from the Ukrainian Navy, so why the provocation if not to ratchet up the perils of another clash or incident giving Russia pretext to invade its former satellite state?

Putin's got the Crimea sewed up, he's got a bridge spanning the Strait. Ukrainian vessels passing underneath pose little threat to him. If he just wanted the Crimea, he's got it. Seems to me he's getting ready to roll. And if he does, does anybody think NATO is willing to go to war with him over it? 

How the world's shallowest sea became the latest flashpoint between Russia and Ukraine


----------



## Phoenix15 (Nov 30, 2018)

Ocoka - any speculation on the size of the Russian move on Ukraine? 
Smaller hybrid force attack on Mariupol/slow expansion of the eastern occupation?
Or a full scale overtly Russian annexation of eastern ukraine/fight for all of Ukraine?
Somewhere in between? Neither?

(introduction post taken care of years ago, long time lurker but rare poster)


----------



## Gordus (Nov 30, 2018)

Putin has no reason to roll into Ukraine proper. The purpose of instigating a sessession in Donbass was to distract from and seal the Crimea takeover, while eliminating any prospect of potential NATO membership by creating a territorial conflict. His greatest opportunity to take the rest of the country was right there, in 2014 when it was drown in chaos and there was little to no physical threat in the way and also nearby. The UA may still not be any major threat to the Russian military and I doubt NATO would intervene directly and waste it's NRF and whatever air assetts it can scramble in Europe, but it's barely the same situation as back then when nobody expected it and wasn't ready. He is also risking to bleed out his military in a large scale conventional war and subsequent resistance if the Ukrainians refuse to give up their country. It may not be the same as fighting an insurgency in the North Caucasus as people there can be extremely vicious but if they were forced to, well Ukraine is a much bigger fish to deal with.


----------



## Teufel (Nov 30, 2018)

I agree. I would only add that this may stem from internal Russian domestic issues as well. His popularity is dipping and he may be wagging the dog.


----------

