A commercial contract can be torn up in less time than it takes me to type this post, and I type pretty fast. In geopolitical terms China “controls” nothing in Ukraine.
It is already pretty well assured China is not super thrilled with Russia’s actions.
You’re right. At first I wanted to say that China ‘owned’ the land, but since it’s a lease I don’t think that would be entirely correct. So I went for ‘control’ instead which clearly wasn’t the right word 
Anyway, it will be interesting to see if this affects the dynamics in the area. Will Russia stay away from this region to avoid angering China? Will China issue a public warning?
That’s kind of bizarre. That section of Moldova has been separated, though unrecognized, since 1991 and has had (as stated in that article) 1000 Russian troops stationed there ever since. There would be no need whatsoever for Russia to “run into” it, it would basically just take the Russian parliament passing a “they’re part of us” bill.
Jens Stoltenberg is going to be the new general secretary of NATO, wonder if thatll affect anything?
There were Russian troops stationed in Crimea also. That did not prevent Russia from “running into” Crimea with more troops - or, if one will excuse the expression, “local Crimean self-defence forces” who happend to have obtained Russian uniforms and equipment at the local army surplus store.
Russia’s economy is based upon the sale of raw materials. Inhibiting the flow of those materials (particularly to the West) hits Russia in the pocketbook. And one thing that the Russian public seems to be forgetting is that occupying Crimea and any other part of Ukraine is going to be an expensive venture.
Seriously, a civil war in Ukraine would be disastrous for Russia. Either through the military expenditures it would take to subdue the country, posting a sizable occupation force in the country or handling the numerous Russian and Ukrainian refugees which will flood into Russia in the aftermath.
Blow the pipelines Ukraine!
It’s generally not good to have a civil war going on in a country you share a border with.
It is very different situation. That region of Moldova really had a separation civil war and the Russian troops went in after. And it’s fundamentally already separated, just not recognized internationally. And all this happened 20 frigging years ago. To worry that Russian troops are now going to “run in” and help them re-separate is to worry about something that is already done.
From the above linked article:
So this is what NATO command is actually worried about, buried halfway down. The Russians don’t really need to get troops there at all.
You should give Carnalk some slack there RedF. He’s right. And for now there is no practical way to overcome the preponderance of anti-Putin news coverage and unbalanced strategic analysis on the events in Ukraine over the past six months. Punishing Putin is all the rage. Settling out the facts will take quite some time. Recognizing the truth that Crimeans were the driving force in committing the act of succession will over come the story that we are seeing a power crazed Putin drive to re-establish a modern version of Soviet era dominance over Europe and perhaps the world.
This thread actually started fairly close to progressing on fact and reality-based track or at least somewhat balanced based less on hysteria and more on the facts and the history of the region.
On 03-03-2014 at 04:41 PM RickJay wrote:
To which Carnalk responded on 03-03-2014 at 05:31 PM:
That was actually a big deal for Carnalk to say that from where I sit in the USA. I watched all the Sunday morning pundit shows and there was absolutely no balanced coverage on the subject of Ukraine. The company line is all you can hear on the news media here in the States. Not a single mention to the troubles in Kiev that led the Crimeans to say enough is enough and asked for the Russian military to have their backs.
We will have to wait for Putin to “NOT invade” any where else during the next six months and then the truth that Carnalk saw will get more air time and acceptance.
That is how the propaganda works in the U.S. Nothing has changed since 2008… Putin’s incursion into Georgia was about the power mad Putin. It is hardly ever if ever mentioned on any public airwaves or print that Russia was justified to wipe out all the NATO arms that the West was building up in Georgia at that time. They were justified because Georgia started killing Russian Federation Peacekeepers similar to the ones in Moldova.
Well. I must say it’s to your credit, NFBW, that you remembered what I was saying earlier despite my continued disagreement with your Russian occupation justification.
Blow up the pipelines?
Russians are united stronger than ever behind Putin’s stand against the US and EU. They have survived much worse than what nutjobs like this have thrown at them:
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
Russians are united stronger than ever behind Putin’s stand against the US and EU. They have survived much worse than what nutjobs like this have thrown at them:
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Arise, Russian People! It’s practically the battle of the ice all over again! I mean, the poor Russians having to endure the vicious and unprovoked sanctions against them but the evil Americans and their EU lackeys…or is it the evil EU, and their American lackeys? I can never keep it straight. But here were the poor Russians, minding their own business, when along came the US and EU to impose sanctions on them for no reason at all! :eek:
To paraphrase: Arise, Russian people, On a glorious battle, to the death battle…or, at least to the vicious and unprovoked sanctions against our stalwart Russian people (well, some of them)! Arise free people…for the honest land we swiped from the Ukrainians fair and square!
So were they justified in defending themselves against Georgia’s attacks, or justified in “wiping out all the NATO arms”? Which is it?
I don’t see it as a Russian occupation of Crimea. I see it as Russian use of the ‘threat of force’ to back a Crimean ‘popular uprising’ that came in defiance of the Ukraine constitution to separate Crimea from Ukraine. The Russian military presence is what forced the Ukrainian Air Force, Navy and Army on Crimean soil to back down and basically surrender with barely a half dozen shots being fired from either side. It must be admitted that there was as period of time *(during the moment in time when **Crimean **pro-Russian leaders declared independence from Ukraine) *where the Ukraine military was not under the command of a constitutionally elected Commander in Chief.
Right or wrong, a declaration of independence was issued with a request for Russian backing. The moment I regard as historic and critical was the moment the Ukraine government lost control of enforcing the law amidst the civilian population of Crimea. That moment is symbolized in reports that the Ukraine police guarding the Crimea legislature buildings just kind of melted away… and there were no Russian tanks or heavy Russian military presence when that happened. It will be interesting also to find out how many Ukraine police and military personnel stationed in Crimea went to the ‘popular uprising’ to secede.
There are so many unique factors in play in this ‘annexation’ story that I don’t see a reason to limit ourselves to a depiction that this was a typical military occupation of an unwilling or recently defeated population or following a change of regime in Crimea. The violence induced change of regime took place in Kiev.
Much of the arms, tanks and heavy artillery that were being used to needlessly kill Russian Federation peacekeepers and civilians in South Ossetia were what was destroyed by the Russian military. I take the EU Commission $15 million, year long investigation that concluded Russia was justified to stop the attack. That is also pure common international law. Its called the inherent right of self-defense. The EU report concluded that Russia went too far in destroying the extent of military infrastructure that they ended up destroying. That’s a judgment call but I don’t see any fault with the Russians sending a message to the murderous Sakaashvilli and all his western and NATO backers that he and they best never ever again send tanks and GRAD rocket launchers to kill Russian Federation soldiers that were legally in positions signed by treaty with Georgia. So Russia went a bit too far in punitive strikes? I don’t think so and the key point remains that Russia was justified, according to the EU Commission’s findings, to take the military action it did to STOP the killing of its solders and civilians that were under those troops protection by treaty.
Do you ever get at least a little bit embarassed by your frequent links to a state-owned propaganda network and trying to pass those stories off as “news”?
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/liz-wahl-quit-russia-today-putins-pawn-104888.html
I posted a mere statement of fact and expressed an opinion about the "RIGHT SECTOR big mouth in Ukraine. . No need to hyperventilate and resort to all that hyperbole.
**The FACT: **Russians are united stronger than ever behind Putin’s stand against the US and EU.
**My opinion: **They have survived much worse than what nutjobs like this have thrown at them.
If you can argue the fact is not true or knock down my opinion - please try. Otherwise can we do without the drama?
Of course the Russians are rallying behind Putin. Should we also post that the sky is blue?
What’s more interesting is that those crying “nationalism = bad” about Ukraine are silent when it comes to Russia.
Are you saying that Yarosh didn’t say what he said and it is nothing but Russian government propaganda that is reporting that he did?
Do you expect the major Western News Services to report on such inflammatory talk by right wing whackos in Ukraine?
Anyway, Forbes had this to say about it:
Read More: For Russia Stocks, A Calm Before The Storm?
Their source was “Ukrainian Media” … Perhaps AP Reuters etc don’t translate Ukrainian? Who knows?