The coffins sat in the loading bay of a local ice cream factory, filled with the battered bodies of fighters. They had gone to Ukraine to support the Donetsk People’s Republic, and now they were bound for the border, heading home to Russia.
The men, who were described as volunteers, died earlier this week during a bloody battle for the Donetsk airport. Their corpses had since been stored in an industrial freezer. On Thursday afternoon they were packed in black plastic bags, placed in caskets lined with white fabric and stacked unceremoniously in the back of a truck.
There was no fanfare, no procession, no heroes’ send-off. Instead, a shell-shocked work crew looked on while a man hand-painted the side of the truck with red crosses and “Cargo 200” — the Russian label for wartime casualties.
How the men — at least 30 Russian citizens, according to the Donetsk People’s Republic — ended up at the front lines of Ukraine’s brewing civil war remains a mystery. Neither their names nor their origins were revealed to the journalists who accompanied the cargo through rebel-held territory, a Ukrainian military checkpoint and up to the very edge of Ukraine. Тhe fighters’ presence here and Russia’s silence on their ominous return point to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s precarious position as the conflict on his doorstep descends deeper into violence.
I especially like the euphemism of “visiting warriors” that is used further down in the article.
Of course we know if we have no bias who started the violence. One side was stationary and blocking access to the Parliament and one side was advancing toward the stationary positions of the other.
The actions go in this order:
(1) protesters advancing
(2) police blocked
(3) protesters continue advancing
(4) police fired in attempt to repel
(5) protesters fought back
The order of actions define exactly which side started the violence. It clearly was the side that was advancing toward the police line with firearms and IED’s in hand.
‘Police blocked their path’.
Twenty thousand in an armed and deadly mob advancing toward many times fewer police sworn to protect the Parliament are not peaceful protesters. They were a threat to the lives of the police and the property being protected. The side that advanced started the violence. There is nothing peaceful about them.
You and your fellow believers in - being right by forum majority rule - are shown to be wrong again.
I don’t know what XT thinks my narrative is on the anti-Maidan revolt in the east of Ukraine. I doubt XT knows what it is either since he has not cited my words on it and refuted it.
That’s AP reporting quiet in the east with Donetsk Republic leaders wearing civilian clothes. And the Chechen invasion had disappeared with their ‘vintage’ anti-aircraft gun.
It is interesting to see the AP report contradicting itself in the same report.
This is the first paragraph:
They use the word ‘replaced’ here but explain further down they did not replace - they ‘dissappeared’ later in the day and were seen wearing civilian clothing.
You’ve been the Cheerleader-in-Chief of the breakup of Ukraine in this thread, so XT is simply wondering what you think of the fact that Russians are playing an active role in the rebellion. That is, actual Russians-- not just “Russian Speaking Ukrainians”.
You hand-waved away Russian involvement in the snatching of Crimea from Ukraine, so it’s possible your A-OK with Russian involvement in the rebellion in Eastern Ukraine. Are you?
Don’t care much what XT ‘wonders’ about. I have focused on establishing a basis in facts that much of the time completely overwhelm the pro-Maidan western EU and US storyline and commentary on the events in Kiev that precipitated the separation of Crinea from Ukraine.
And since you can’t seem to refute the facts, such as the source provided by TomnDebb that factually explains what happened on February 18 when the protesters advanced against the police lines guarding the Parliament, you are forced to call my presentation of the facts as cheetleading the break up of Ukraine.
I could care less if Ukraine breaks apart or not. There is nothing to cheerlead about that. I am impressed for the way that Crimea was reunited to the Russian Federation with barely a smidgeon of violence. That is just a fact and you can’t insult me for bring impressed by it.
That’s not true. I have argued the point that after the mob violence in Kiev led to Yanukovuch being forced to flee for his life, that separatists in Crimea quickly declared the desire to separate from Ukraine and they asked for Russian support and they got it. I hand waved away nothing.
The Donetsk revolt is quite different. If you want to wonder about my views on that read up on my posts that address it without snippeteering looking for trivial statements to argue about.
Essential as of now I think Putin has stated what needs to be done for that region for a long time now. Putin’s demands do not match up exactly with what the rebels have been seeking.
All I know is that Putin has pulled all but a couple thousand troops from the border according to western sources now and a couple of posts up I reference that talks about resolution seem to getting somewhere. Lets hope so. That is my position.
That’s exactly what handwaving is. Oh, it doesn’t matter if it’s illegal and violates international law-- it accomplishes what you wanted to be accomplished.
Putin can “say” all he wants. Most of us are not fooled by what he says. We’re looking at what he does.
Cleverly ignoring the fact that Yanukovuch only had to “flee for his life” after he ordered troops to fire on unarmed demonstrators on more than one occasion.
Europe has a long tradition of mass protests that (outside the Russian sphere) are routinely met with fire hoses, not AK-47s. The “mob violence” only turned lethal under Yanukovuch’s direction (following specific directions from Russian leaders).
Exactly. And he’s handwaved this away consistently every time it’s been brought up. Then he dances, shuffles and tries to shift the discussion back onto his own narrative, claiming he’s not been handwaving things away. As I’ve noted in the past, it’s like he doesn’t really grasp the fact that people can scroll up and see for themselves exactly what’s been written in the past. Instead, he will try and cut and past (in his odd little way) to spin things so that, in his mind at least, the discussion as well as the narrative followed along the lines it did in his own mind.
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
I don’t know what XT thinks my narrative is on the anti-Maidan revolt in the east of Ukraine. I doubt XT knows what it is either since he has not cited my words on it and refuted it.
[/QUOTE]
It’s exactly the same narrative you had on the Crimea. The irony of you saying this on the same page where you pretty much explicitly stated your thoughts and once again handwaved on the fact that the protesters resorted to violence because your buddy and his minions attempted to stifle protest using draconian means (and then, you know, shot a bunch of them) is pretty much off the scale. It’s like you don’t understand that we can all see what you write without you having to go back and spin what you meant, and we can all FUCKING SCROLL BACK UP AND SEE WHAT YOU AND THE REST OF US SAID IN THE FUCKING PAST. I realize that you still don’t get this, but as I’ve said in the past, it really, really is true…we can.
No, you are focused on spinning the story and attempting to make your internal narrative reality. You have consistently handwaved on the facts and the why of your buddies flight from power to Russia, you’ve consistently handwaved on Russia’s obvious involvement in orchestrating things from behind the scenes and obviously (to everyone but you) to their direct benefit, and you’ve done so in a way that does NOT focus ‘on establishing a basis in facts’ in any way, shape or form. And, the sad thing is, you don’t see that no one (who is still participating in this thread and still members of this board) is buying your lame ass attempts at spin.
Cite an protest beside the February 18th incident in Kiev when 20,000 protesters armed with firearms and IEDs ‘advanced’ toward police lines that were guarding the Parliament Building with the intent of taking it over and changing the Constitution.
Cite a 20,000 mob advance against police where 9 police were killed by demonstrators during the advance beside what your source described happening on February 18 in Kiev.
I understand that many pro-Maidan posters here accept an armed mob of twenty thousand set upon over-running government police with an intent of taking control of the Parliament as acceptable in Ukraine. And now you sit somewhere passing judgement on police who lost ten of their fellow officers that day for not using water canons against 20,000 protesters coming at them. Some came with firearms and Molotov cocktails.
When is the last time a mass protest escalated to an attempt by twenty thousand to over-run police lines intent on taking over a nation’s legislative body?
Is it your fact that Russia ‘orchestrated’ the mass decision on February 18 by 20,000 of the Maidan protesters to advance toward police lines in an attempt to take over the Parliament and change the Constitution?
Firearms and IEDs? You say “cite,” I say “Cite?”
I would like to see a non-Pravda report of police dying prior to the use of live ammunition by the police.
(Why would a mob carry IEDs, to begin with? Were they planning to explode at some point?)
Why do you conflate one statement to mean something entirely different? Answer, because this is how you spin the discussion. See, I’ve addressed your ridiculous point about February 18th previously. It has nothing to do with Russian orchestration, and everything to do with events prior by the former Ukrainian government (Read: your buddy Yanukovich and his faction in Parliament) using draconian measures to stifle protest and killing protesters. Was Russia involved? Only peripherally at this point, since obviously the orchestration they were involved in was bribing that former government to do a 180 on it’s stated position and instead put itself squarely in Russia’s sphere of influence (gee, one wonders what Russia gets out of this, amiright? :p). Anything more than that would be pure speculation (i.e. did Russia assist or even weigh in on whether your buddy and his thugs should open fire on the protesters? No one knows).
What we DO know is that Russia orchestrated things in the Crimea after your pal was forced to flee…which, of course, was my point. You, however, like a bulldog, want to conflate multiple points in this discussion into a narrative that you can spin to build basically strawmen arguments that make no sense when looked at from a narrow view point, but that, again, people can actually scroll up to see what the fuck was under discussion at different times in this ridiculous 70+ page thread. Something you still don’t seem to grasp folks can do.
Getting back to your question here, since we’ve now put to rest (well, to everyone but you I’m sure) the conflation of February 18th and Russian involvement, however:
See, this is you spinning again, and attempting to shift things to your own biased view point. First of all, the protesters weren’t trying to ‘take over the Parliament’ nor were they trying to ‘change the Constitution’. Neither of those things actually happened in the real world. What ACTUALLY happened was that opposition was rising in parliament since the crack down started, and opposition groups within parliament itself began to coalesce around curtailing those crack downs and limiting your buddies powers (and forcing him to form a new government and agree to new elections)…and, eventually, to tossing his ass out with a warrant for his arrest. I’ve shown you timelines of all of this at least 3 times now, but what the hell…maybe 4th time is a charm:
You see the point here? Of COURSE you don’t, but hopefully others following along will.
Photos confirm what TomnDebb’s source stated as fact. It is a very weak argument that police fired upon “unarmed protesters.” These rioters came with intent to kill police on February 18 and they succeeded nine or ten times.
There are also reports that police were using water canons that day and that the protester had broken through police lines at the Parliament which escalated the violence on that day.
The caption reads, “Violence erupted in the Ukrainian capital after anti-government protesters broke through a police cordon in front of parliament.”
Water canons don’t work after killer rioters break through police lines do they?
The caption reads: “Protester marched toward the parliament to demand constitutional reforms that would curb the powers of President Viktor Yanukovych.”
Good indication how mobocracy worked in Ukraine. This mob a few days later won the day.
Then they cried when Crimeans announced they wanted out of this type of rule by riot and Molotov cocktail.
Post 3501. I quoted this from the link you provided:
[41] “Police fired guns, with both rubber bullets and, later, live ammunition (including automatic weapons and sniper rifles), while also using tear gas and flash grenades in an attempt to repel thousands of demonstrators, who fought back with crude weapons, firearms, and improvised explosives.”
Is your own source not good enough for you.
Here another photo. Perhaps your source was referring to this improvised explosives:
