quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
I think the country will split. ... Plus it would face save for... the EU.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:


The Ukrainian president seems to have been a prize prat, but then, who knows what might replace him?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
I think we're going to see some 'terrorist' activity, which may be sponsored by Russia, the EU or the USA , or the EU and USA working together. It will be a big mess and we will see extensive FUD

I've heard from a number of first generation Ukrainians living in Canada (there are a lot), that the USA, is sending millions to the Ukraine opposition, and is similarly spending money on other former soviet republics. Don't kid yourself, the EU and the USA see Russia as a main competitor in central Asia and the middle east, and yes, it is about oil and gaining control, though these things are always labelled deceivingly as being about democracy, freedom and other nonsense.

The situation is unstable in Ukraine, with the opposition being non-unitary, including some far right neo-Nazi types like the Svoboda party which is alot like BNP of the UK, and the Hungarian Jobbik party.

Svoboda means freedom, but I particularly don't like the party's symbol, have a look a wikipedia for some more info. They also have a paramilitary wing.

Like the usual adventures in countries that have something we want, our governments will certainly support whomever is the enemy of our enemy including these poisonous people. And they will tell us it is about something good and noble, when it is not.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Putin, but I am not fond of the "compromises" and "collateral damage" that are going to ensue as our western governments fund this Ukrainian opposition and Putin works with the other side.

---

quote:

---

originally posted by Grammatica:
I am not at all sure that the US is taking any particular interest in the affairs of Central Europe at the moment, to be honest. I am not sure that the US has in a long time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:

Putin wants to control the former Soviet republics.
He likely recognizes Eastern Europe is off limits.

---

Well, perhaps, and then again, perhaps he'd like the Baltics back, too. They have certainly been under pressure from Russia recently.
 

---

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
The extraordinary thing about Ukraine is that if it were anywhere else in Europe, it would be one of the larger more powerful European states. But being next to Russia has tended to turn it into a Russian satellite instead.
 

---

Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Ukrainians have been putting up with the crap for years and AFAICT it’s got to the point where people have well and truly had enough. I visited the country shortly after the Orange Revolution. That time round Yanukovych had got into office after supposedly trying to poison his opponent and rig the election. The protestors sat in the main square for forty days in temperatures of -40°C, never knowing if they were going to be fired on.* On that occasion it worked and they got the president they voted for (Yuschenko) without taking any bullets. I remember how proud they were. But after all that optimism, the country is still a colossal mess nine years on.

The Ukrainians I spoke to at the time (in Kiev) were in favour of closer ties with Europe. Nonetheless, I was told that at the time that there were around 3000 laws that would require amendment before EU entry would be possible.

The whole thing makes me very sad. It’s a beautiful country where I met a lot of wonderful, generous people.

*Comment from my host: “Think about it: a million Ukrainians are out in the street, it’s -40° and no one’s drunk.”
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
I just don't understand why pretty much the only thing both sides agree about is that winning an argument over which countries they'll have closer political and trading ties with is something worth killing for.

Seriously, what the fuck?
 

---

Posted by pydseybare (# 16184) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I just don't understand why pretty much the only thing both sides agree about is that winning an argument over which countries they'll have closer political and trading ties with is something worth killing for.

Seriously, what the fuck?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pydseybare:
Why is that so hard to understand? They have a huge emotional response to the influence of Russia, why is it so hard to understand this falling over into violence?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Because politics isn't worth killing people over. I mean, I have a strong emotional response to any suggestion of further UK integration with the EU. But I'd never want to kill someone to ensure our independence - it's a matter for discussion and voting, not bullets and bombs.

---

quote:

---

I also don't get why so many people in the news are saying that splitting the country in two would be a "disaster". If it would allow both sides to get what they want then what's the problem? Surely it would be a better solution than a bloody civil war?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I also don't get why so many people in the news are saying that splitting the country in two would be a "disaster". If it would allow both sides to get what they want then what's the problem? Surely it would be a better solution than a bloody civil war?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pydseybare:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Because politics isn't worth killing people over. I mean, I have a strong emotional response to any suggestion of further UK integration with the EU. But I'd never want to kill someone to ensure our independence - it's a matter for discussion and voting, not bullets and bombs.

---

How do you know that? If you lived in Wales and you heard that France was taking an 'unhealthy' (in your view) interest in Kent, can you not see how that might provoke anger?

---

quote:

---

There is a major problem when the inhabitants of any land have overlapping and contrary understandings of who and what belongs to whom. Whichever the political outcome, if the feelings are strong, war might not be avoided by ceding different parts of the country in different directions.

---

None of us "belongs" to anyone else. If Kent, Cornwall, Wales, Scotland or anywhere else wanted to be independent of the UK then I would be happy to let them secede. It's called self-determination.
 

---

Posted by pydseybare (# 16184) on :
 
OK Marvin, I get that these things would not provoke you. Unfortunately many people are not like you.

[ 24. February 2014, 10:33: Message edited by: pydseybare ]
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
This much is obvious. But I still don't understand it. How messed up does someone have to be for them to think their preferred political situation is more important than people's lives?
 

---

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
This much is obvious. But I still don't understand it. How messed up does someone have to be for them to think their preferred political situation is more important than people's lives?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:
The extraordinary thing about Ukraine is that if it were anywhere else in Europe, it would be one of the larger more powerful European states. But being next to Russia has tended to turn it into a Russian satellite instead.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
Just thinking, no prophet, that you might want to get a look at Timothy Snyder's article in the NYRB (referenced in my post above). It does present a different, and to me credible, point of view....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Yes, I know it happens. The part I don't understand is what motivates them to do it in the first place.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Putin invaded Georgia. How much of pretext will he need to invade the Ukraine? .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:
The extraordinary thing about Ukraine is that if it were anywhere else in Europe, it would be one of the larger more powerful European states. But being next to Russia has tended to turn it into a Russian satellite instead.

---

That's an interesting thought that I hadn't considered before. The Ukraine is, obviously, massive, but then again much of the country is just wheat fields (the flag is a clue). Having a look at the list of countries ranked by GDP on Wikipedia*, the Ukrainian economy appears to be slightly larger than Romania's (which I'd say isn't a powerful European state) but much smaller than Poland's. It seems to be a touch smaller than the Czech Republic's.

But perhaps had she not been in Moscow's sphere of influence, post-Communist economic growth would have been higher?


*Which can be found if you look for 'list of countries by GDP' on Wikipedia but which I can't link to at all because there are brackets in the title and SoF doesn't like those.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

Of course Russia wants a state well disposed to it immediately adjoining, particularly since until only a few years ago it was part of the USSR, and before that had been Russian for centuries.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pydseybare:
Another thing I heard, which I thought was interesting, is that the Russians have a lot of emotional investment in keeping Ukraine in-the-loop because for many Russians, Ukraine represents 'pure' Russia. 'Losing' the Crimea seems unthinkable to many Russians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pydseybare:
Another thing I heard, which I thought was interesting, is that the Russians have a lot of emotional investment in keeping Ukraine in-the-loop because for many Russians, Ukraine represents 'pure' Russia. 'Losing' the Crimea seems unthinkable to many Russians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
This much is obvious. But I still don't understand it. How messed up does someone have to be for them to think their preferred political situation is more important than people's lives?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Putin invaded Georgia. How much of pretext will he need to invade the Ukraine? .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LutheranChik:
I find the neo-Nazi elements in this upheaval troubling. Why is it that fascism and anti-Semitism still hold such an attraction for so many people? (That is a lament, not a request for an explanation. I think fascism's appeal is to our lizard brains, and that some people have an inability/unwillingness to override their basest lower-brain impulses to tribalism, xenophobia and groupthink. Beause it's hard and involves rationality.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LutheranChik:
Why is it that fascism and anti-Semitism still hold such an attraction for so many people?

---

Here...

The Road to War: The Origins of World War II - Dr Richard Overy

The Origins of the Second World War - A. J. P. Taylor

Hitler - Ian Kershaw

and probably the best of them all...

The Anatomy of Fascism - Robert O. Paxton

And there are plenty more. People choose fascism when

(a) They are economically threatened
(b) Someone offers an alternative
(c) The "Establishment" political parties don't have an answer.
(d) There is a useful scapegoat

Point (c) is usually the one overlooked, but it is probably the most vital. If the people can see that the established, moderate political parties have an answer that looks like it will work, then the people will usually vote for them and the alternative fascist parties will wither away.

If they don't then the people cast around to find someone who can give them hope.

I note your question was rhetorical, but I hate to leave people with a superiority complex when they can be educated out of it. It's such bad manners don't you think?
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Ukraine. 2/3rds Ukrainian speaking, 1/3rd Russian, half of whom are Ukrainian.

What Russia is more than capable of? Partition of the Crimea as of South Ossetia from Georgia in 2008.
 

---

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
Another useful link:

John McCain (USA senator) meetings with far right Ukrainian politicians. The article makes for interesting reading. One would hope that McCain knew beforehand that he was meeting with far right anti-semites. But maybe his briefings were incomplete?

The Jerusalem Post published concerns about the opposition back last spring after the rejected EU treaty.

[fixed link]

[ 24. February 2014, 19:03: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
 

---

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :
 
Deano: Just trying to fit in.
 

---

Posted by 3M Matt (# 1675) on :
 
Part of Ukraine wants to return to the old soviet days of the Eastern block...and the other part of Ukraine wants to get closer to Europe and become part of the E.U.

The irony in this, is that the E.U. itself is becoming less and less "western", and increasingly reflects a re-incarnation of the old Eastern Bloc.

So they are squabbling over a distinction which will ultimately all amount to pretty much the same thing.
 

---

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 3M Matt:
The irony in this, is that the E.U. itself is becoming less and less "western", and increasingly reflects a re-incarnation of the old Eastern Bloc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Just read that Yanukovych might be hiding Sevastapol and that Russians might try to annex Crimea. Sounds like a good idea to me. Khruschev made Crimea part of Ukraine less than 60 years ago. Ethnic Russians make up 58% of the population. Hold a referendum to allow Crimea decide if it wants to join Russia, remain in Ukraine, or form it's own independent nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
I'd agree -- if it weren't for the fact that a partition of Ukraine would immediately put the rest of the postwar Central European borders in question. I mean those decreed by Stalin and made permanent as one of the provisions of the German reunification treaty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Just read that Yanukovych might be hiding Sevastapol and that Russians might try to annex Crimea. Sounds like a good idea to me. Khruschev made Crimea part of Ukraine less than 60 years ago. Ethnic Russians make up 58% of the population. Hold a referendum to allow Crimea decide if it wants to join Russia, remain in Ukraine, or form it's own independent nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
I'd agree -- if it weren't for the fact that a partition of Ukraine would immediately put the rest of the postwar Central European borders in question. I mean those decreed by Stalin and made permanent as one of the provisions of the German reunification treaty.

---

Well, the partition of Czechoslovakia doesn't seem to have had that effect. And I don't think the Treaty for the Final Settlement with regards to Germany refers to the Crimea, since at the time of Stalin it was presumably an internal Soviet affair.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Prester John:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
I'd agree -- if it weren't for the fact that a partition of Ukraine would immediately put the rest of the postwar Central European borders in question. I mean those decreed by Stalin and made permanent as one of the provisions of the German reunification treaty.

---

Well, the partition of Czechoslovakia doesn't seem to have had that effect. And I don't think the Treaty for the Final Settlement with regards to Germany refers to the Crimea, since at the time of Stalin it was presumably an internal Soviet affair.

---

I'm working off of a hazy memory but didn't it have an effect on the border of the Ukraine? I thought Poland had to give up some territory to the Soviet Union and in exchange it took some territory from Germany.

---

quote:

---

[Originally posted by Ricardus:
Well, the partition of Czechoslovakia doesn't seem to have had that effect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
... Be careful in speaking of partition as if it were easy to manage, if nothing more were involved than just drawing lines on maps. There's a history here, one which is for the most part unknown in England and America, and it's full of volatile, deeply painful feeling. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
All I am saying is: Be careful in speaking of partition as if it were easy to manage, if nothing more were involved than just drawing lines on maps. There's a history here, one which is for the most part unknown in England and America, and it's full of volatile, deeply painful feeling.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by deano:
The current debate over Scotland's membership of the United Kingdom is not really relevenat either I suppose?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

Why the hell the same thing can't be done in the Crimea, or South Ossetia, or Catalonia, or Texas, or anywhere else where the desire for independence is strong is a mystery to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:


For one thing, Czechoslovakia was not an invention of Stalin's, but was created from the wreckage of the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the end of the First World War, by Americans who believed that people who spoke closely similar languages belonged in the same country together.

---

quote:

---

All I am saying is: Be careful in speaking of partition as if it were easy to manage, if nothing more were involved than just drawing lines on maps. There's a history here, one which is for the most part unknown in England and America, and it's full of volatile, deeply painful feeling. The European Union exists in the hope that this bitterness can be managed through inclusion of all the state actors in a supranational entity guaranteeing basic rights and freedom of movement to all its citizens. I still hope it can be done.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by deano:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
All I am saying is: Be careful in speaking of partition as if it were easy to manage, if nothing more were involved than just drawing lines on maps. There's a history here, one which is for the most part unknown in England and America, and it's full of volatile, deeply painful feeling.

---

Yes because Northern Ireland and "The Troubles" were all a bit of a game really.

The current debate over Scotland's membership of the United Kingdom is not really relevenat either I suppose?

I don't know where the lemon tree's grow but they don't teach much British history there do they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Yes, but the point being made is that Britain knows plenty about partition causing unrest, violence, many deaths, bombings, terrorism, and so on. I think the death toll from the Troubles is over 3000, and still rising, with some estimates of 50, 000 maimed and injured. I think this is a considerable trauma to the body politic, and of course, to individuals.

---

Thank you.
 

---

Posted by Grammatica (# 13248) on :
 
So it's a thread about Ireland, then.
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Erm, Northern Ireland is part of the UK.
 

---

Posted by Grammatica (# 13248) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Erm, Northern Ireland is part of the UK.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Erm, Northern Ireland is part of the UK.

---

So, let me know when you want to discuss Ukraine, OK?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

"Be careful in speaking of partition as if it were easy to manage, if nothing more were involved than just drawing lines on maps."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by deano:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Just read that Yanukovych might be hiding Sevastapol and that Russians might try to annex Crimea. Sounds like a good idea to me. Khruschev made Crimea part of Ukraine less than 60 years ago. Ethnic Russians make up 58% of the population. Hold a referendum to allow Crimea decide if it wants to join Russia, remain in Ukraine, or form it's own independent nation.

---

Do you have a reference please? That sounds interesting in a knowledge-of-history-can-be-scary kind of way!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
I don't like Putin, but, I saw his regime be constructive about chemical weapons disposal in Syria. Which leads me to think/hope, that he has more sense than to invade the Ukraine. That he might genuinely think a massive civil war is a bad thing. It is just that in other situations, like the Chinese government, he is always more likely to take a repressive stability over an unstable but possibly more representative future. I think he pours in resources to support the stability, but he won't waste them to try to restore a system that has already gone phut bang. He may have learned this from the Georgia situation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
I don't like Putin, but, I saw his regime be constructive about chemical weapons disposal in Syria. Which leads me to think/hope, that he has more sense than to invade the Ukraine. That he might genuinely think a massive civil war is a bad thing. It is just that in other situations, like the Chinese government, he is always more likely to take a repressive stability over an unstable but possibly more representative future. I think he pours in resources to support the stability, but he won't waste them to try to restore a system that has already gone phut bang. He may have learned this from the Georgia situation.

---

Well that was over optimistic.

Listening to radio 4 this lunchtime, diplomat pointing out that NATO signed up to a document guarenteeing Ukraines territorial borders in 1994. Cue discussion on whether it is legally binding because "it is possible we may end up at war with Russia".

100 years since the outbreak of WW1 - what is Putin thinking - that sounded like fun, lets do it again ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
I don't like Putin, but, I saw his regime be constructive about chemical weapons disposal in Syria. Which leads me to think/hope, that he has more sense than to invade the Ukraine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
So it is not really a Russian invasion, it is a Ukrainian request. And this sort of thing works actually quite well. At least it has in the past.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pydseybare:
As I understand it, Crimea is a semi-autonomous region.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pydseybare:

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
So it is not really a Russian invasion, it is a Ukrainian request. And this sort of thing works actually quite well. At least it has in the past.

---

It sounds to me like a Crimean request - which isn't the same thing as a Ukrainian request. As I understand it, Crimea is a semi-autonomous region.

---

You mean like if Ontario in Canada, Wales in the UK or Texas in the USA asked for help?
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Fine.
 

---

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
Does it change anything that Ukraine's interim president appears to be a Baptist pastor?

[ETA autoplay ad in link, sorry!]

[ 01. March 2014, 16:04: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
 

---

Posted by Mockingale (# 16599) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
Does it change anything that Ukraine's interim president appears to be a Baptist pastor?

[ETA autoplay ad in link, sorry!]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:


Listening to radio 4 this lunchtime, diplomat pointing out that NATO signed up to a document guarenteeing Ukraines territorial borders in 1994. Cue discussion on whether it is legally binding because "it is possible we may end up at war with Russia".

100 years since the outbreak of WW1 - what is Putin thinking - that sounded like fun, lets do it again ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Midge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:


Listening to radio 4 this lunchtime, diplomat pointing out that NATO signed up to a document guarenteeing Ukraines territorial borders in 1994. Cue discussion on whether it is legally binding because "it is possible we may end up at war with Russia".

100 years since the outbreak of WW1 - what is Putin thinking - that sounded like fun, lets do it again ?

---

Oh shit. I was just thinking 'I'm glad Ukraine isn't in NATO' before I read this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Midge:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:


Listening to radio 4 this lunchtime, diplomat pointing out that NATO signed up to a document guarenteeing Ukraines territorial borders in 1994. Cue discussion on whether it is legally binding because "it is possible we may end up at war with Russia".

100 years since the outbreak of WW1 - what is Putin thinking - that sounded like fun, lets do it again ?

---

Oh shit. I was just thinking 'I'm glad Ukraine isn't in NATO' before I read this.

---

• to respect Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and existing borders
• not to use force or threat of force against Ukraine (except in self-defence)
• not to use economic coercion against Ukraine
• to assist Ukraine if it is a victim of aggression or threat of aggression using nuclear weapons
• not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states except in self-defence against joint attack by an ally of a nuclear state
• to consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
The problem is, at what point do the west make a stand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
The problem is, at what point do the west make a stand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
There is no stand for the West to make.

---

Indeed not . This isn't the Red Army driving tanks across the plains of West Germany .

At worst this thing has the potential to be a regional conflict . The hope being that a newly formed Ukrainian government has more sense that to indulge itself in such a scenario .

I don't see Russia any more happy at handing over a major naval base in Crimea than we would be in allowing local nationalists control of Plymouth .
 

---

Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
According to the BBC News website, some have begun to call Putin 'Putler' now... see here.


 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
History suggests Poland.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
In which century? This is all so C19th.

[ 02. March 2014, 19:40: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Crimean War 2?
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
What war? Not a shot has been fired or will be within the Crimea. Kharkiv and other eastern cities are more ... interesting. Does Putin want the Russian 'Sudetenland' of eastern Ukraine? If so, he will have it. This is the game of Risk being played with none on Russia's part. We must pray that the Ukraine doesn't do anything uselessly heroic.

Putin is on a roll. Where else are there Russian communities bordering Rodina?

Hmmm. All very first half C20th too. Danzig. Yeah Poland Beeswax Altar.
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 
This is just more geo-political strategic posturing. Real people will suffer so Putin and Obama and co’ can continue to play a game of human chess with our lives. I very much doubt that if the Republic of Ireland or Mexico for that matter sought a strategic pact with the PRC, Russia or Iran we would be very keen on self-determination here in the west. After all Cuba is not a big favourite with the US gov. There has been serious encroachment on Russians sphere of Influence and strategic allies. Syria still roles on in a tide of blood as we speak God willing this one will stay relatively peaceful. Of Course the BRIC pact shows us Moscow and others are playing similar games in South America. The US own imperial backyard is also being messed with. Its just another move in a game played by people who don't really give a shit about any of us.
 

---

Posted by Alex Cockell (# 7487) on :
 
Russia's got full control in Crimea... reporting on CNN right now.
 

---

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :
 
I have a bad feeling about this.
 

---

Posted by Louise (# 30) on :
 
The reason the Crimea is 58% plus ethnic Russian is because the Russians committed successive bouts of genocide and ethnic cleansing in the Crimea starting about the time of the Crimean war but with the last horrific wave within living memory in WW2.

Crimean tartars

The Crimean tartars went from being over 90% of the inhabitants of the peninsula in the 19th century to 50% then zero - but then began to return after the collapse of the Soviet Union, now comprising 12 percent of the Crimean population.

quote:

---

Tatar historian Alan Fisher has said that between 1917 and 1933, 150,000 Tatars—about 50% of the population at the time—either were killed or forced out of Crimea.

Then in 1944, Stalin accused the entire population of Crimean Tatars of collaborating with the Nazis and deported them to Siberia en masse. Piled body to body in cattle cars--“crematoria on wheels,” half of the Tatar population died on the way. The Tatar population of Crimea fell to zero, all Tatar mosques were destroyed, and Stalin achieved his goal of expanding the Russian population further south.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nicolemr:
I have a bad feeling about this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Our feelings aren't our friends. This isn't Cuba in '62.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Now, parliament voted to remove him from office (who knows if the Ukrainian parliament has that power or if it will even matter) and Yulia Tymoshenko is on her way to Kiev. Yanukovych fled Kiev for Kharkiv and refuses to accept the vote.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Louise:
Just a caution that the historical background is very different there and what look like enticing solutions and quick fixes may not be when all the historical factors are taken into account.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
If the people really entitled to the Crimea are the Krim Tartars deported by Stalin, on that argument neither the 58% Russians there, nor 42% or less Ukrainians nor the Ukrainian government in Kiev have any other claim on it apart from possession. So it looks as though it's the Russians then.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Hague's doing good going to Kiev. Just keep on trading everyone.

---

Come on martin you can easily identify a politician who sincerely wishes to do good by their absolute lack of political success. Hague doesn't fit the bill his risen to high to have been burdened by the weight of integrity.


You surely don't imagine that the west hasn't had in fomenting this. It is payback for upstaging us on Syria at least that was the plan I'm not sure the gamble will pay off.

The Ukraine is on the verge of sovereign debt default. It also owes Russia a fortune in unpaid energy bills. Like Europe needs another bailout to contend with. The UK and US posture and bark as mobs depose a duly elected (scum-bag though he maybe) leader. Yet Putin is not included in the proses of brokering a deal. Even though Russia is economically and ethnically critical to any viable solution for the Ukraine. But nary a seat at the table is forthcoming?


Come on this is political brinkmanship by the west in Russia's back yard pure and simple. They don't give a shit about Ukrainians, its a faint while the proxy war contuse in Syria though if it spilled out into another proxy conflict that would be no skin of their noses.
 

---

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :
 
Hmmm.... Ukraine? How about this...

quote:

---

"a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
Come on martin you can easily identify a politician who sincerely wishes to do good by their absolute lack of political success. Hague doesn't fit the bill his risen to high to have been burdened by the weight of integrity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by deano:
Who should we send then? Nigel Farage?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:

Come on this is political brinkmanship by the west in Russia's back yard pure and simple. They don't give a shit about Ukrainians, its a faint while the proxy war contuse in Syria though if it spilled out into another proxy conflict that would be no skin of their noses.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JFH:
I realize you don't care, really, but we do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
There is NOTHING to kill or die for.

To which:

Chill. What saddens me is how little the church has done and worse, as usual. In Kiev. Two weeks ago a Ukrainian bishop declaring those gunned down as martyrs. And he wasn't including the state police.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
(Nice to see you back, Matt.)

---

Ditto.

Thanks for the books BTW. Binned a few of the Fundy ones though. But the one on preaching by Stott is a gem!
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:

a comment perhaps on how much we've changed in that time and in particular better knowledge of the consequences of war.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Maybe a Russia vs Ukraine war would be more like a 19th century European war than a 20th.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:

quote:

---

Originally posted by JFH:
I realize you don't care, really, but we do.

---

I do care and don't believe the region is being stabilised or helped by US and UK game playing.(Nor by Russian militarism) Have you heard the 'fuck the EU' tape. There is a link up thread. It is pricelessly because I care that I am suspicious of actions I feel do not serve stability in the region. The rest of the EU has been much more restrained than the US and its UK client state. Funny How we stand to lose the least if it goes tits up but are shouting the loudest. I am no fan of Russia it is corrupt and does not serve its peoples interest but only those of its oligarchical elite. I just distrust the intentions of my own government and doubt they sever the interests of either the Ukrainian people or those of their neighbours. I genuinely hope for a peaceful resolution, instead of this exercise in dick measuring between Putin and the US whilst we in the UK hold Obamas tape measure and talk tough.

---

quote:

---

Actually by your very logic they are not because they too where an invading people who ethnically purged enslaved and ran a massive slave trade to the Ottoman empire of whom they were a protectorate. They continued to prosecute wars of enslavement and a massive slave trade up until 18th century. So they are no more legitimate than any one else.

This is a complex and difficult region with deep ethnic tension and scars on all sides.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JFH:
To begin with, thanks for your reconciliatory introductory words.
As for that tape, I can't find it. Could you provide me with a link?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
The US is interested in everything. At least interested in irritating Russia.
Here is a BBC report of a transcript of a phone call between USA Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.
Here's the Stratfor analysis (it's a USA intelligence company).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JFH:
I'm well aware that the US/UK are no saints, but there are massive differences in civilization, fascism, valuing of human lives, valuing of soft power, et c. I think a Russian world order would be far worse than the American one we've got for a couple years still.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JFH:

I do get a bit strongly involved in this because I see the failings of my own government and country put the world at risk, and also because I'm genuinely scared. Russia is a very, very messed up country.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macrina:
Yes they have Martin: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26424738

---

quote:

---

However, Interfax news agency later quoted a fleet spokesman who denied that any ultimatum had been issued.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Going back upthread a ways: Chill: Sounds pretty close to a description of how things worked in the African slave trade for English interests (which included American) to the New World at about the same time.

And the genocides and tribal forced moves sound quite familiar to anyone who has studied North American history, or the outside interference in some of the intertribal conflicts of Central America in the last century.

Very few peoples' histories are particularly clean.

---

Absolutely no argument here which is why you cannot discount the ethnically Russian Ukrainians as not having any legitimate voice in the fate of their region or nation. Which was the point I was responding to and which is a view which I think is faulty. I was making the point that such logic could be applied backwards add infinitum.
Sorry if that was not clear.
Chaz
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 
sorry to double post but actually apologies as I miss read Enoch who came to the same conclusion as me by a different root.

 

---

Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
Ukranian officers telling Russian generals to politely go take a flying leap when they ask the Ukrainians to Give Up Their Posts

The Russians seem surprised the Ukrainians don't love them.

I also note the interpretation of the Olympics and who's order this all was - Putin.

[ 03. March 2014, 19:51: Message edited by: Og: Thread Killer ]
 

---

Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
... Absolutely no argument here which is why you cannot discount the ethnically Russian Ukrainians as not having any legitimate voice in the fate of their region or nation. Which was the point I was responding to and which is a view which I think is faulty. I was making the point that such logic could be applied backwards add infinitum.
Sorry if that was not clear.
Chaz

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
The Russians seem surprised the Ukrainians don't love them.

---

Well to be fair they are there to help


Just like we (I'm a UK citizen)have been helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, lets hope they do not expend as much ammunition safeguarding their human rights as we have in those theatres.
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Originally posted by Chill:
...Except the party that has put themselves in the front in Crimea only got 4% in a local election awhile back.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
hosting/

If you could take some time to check what you've written (or dictated? I personally struggle with making Dragon Naturally Speaking write what I want it to say) it would be great.

/hosting

---

I am very sorry. I am profoundly dyslexic and struggle with word transposition in my spelling checks. When presented with a list of words I can often misidentify the wrong one. I also lost my punctuation on the last post. I am letting my thoughts run ahead of the necessary level of intelligibility. I will take longer to proof read. I spend a lot of time reading here but don't post too much because it is hard work for me. Apologies. Thanks for taking the trouble to weed out my meaning and for being nice about how you told me I was getting hard to follow.

Chaz
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Clearly the thing to do is to let Russia annex Crimea, ink a deal at Malta, and proclaim we have achieved peace in our time.
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
There is a strong sense that the Russians might have overestimated local sentiment in this. Believing their own propaganda.

---

quote:

---

Vladimir Putin said that Russia was acting solely in the interests of the Russian-speaking population of the Crimea to defend the people against unabated ultranationalist threat.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
I suspect Russia finds some comments about not interfering and invading Ukraine a little rich after Iraq and Afghanistan.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
This link from from Pravda tells it as Putin sees it.

quote:

---

Vladimir Putin said that Russia was acting solely in the interests of the Russian-speaking population of the Crimea to defend the people against unabated ultranationalist threat.

---

From what I understand, this has a kernel of truth to it, but how big a kernel?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
From what I understand, this has a kernel of truth to it, but how big a kernel?

---

quote:

---

I suspect Russia finds some comments about not interfering and invading Ukraine a little rich after Iraq and Afghanistan.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
I am letting my thoughts run ahead of the necessary level of intelligibility. I will take longer to proof read. I spend a lot of time reading here but don't post too much because it is hard work for me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
This link from from Pravda tells it as Putin sees it.

quote:

---

Vladimir Putin said that Russia was acting solely in the interests of the Russian-speaking population of the Crimea to defend the people against unabated ultranationalist threat.

---

From what I understand, this has a kernel of truth to it, but how big a kernel?

---

If by "ultranationalist" you mean "Ukraine is an independent, sovereign nation, and we don't want Russia telling us what to do."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Putin has so far handled things very well, but.....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I suppose another alternative is thousands of refugees streaming westwards away from the Russian occupation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
No the far right is defiantly part of the equation in the Ukraine. Not that it is the whole story. There are some very unsavoury elements on both sides of this thing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
You say, 'maybe in his own mind', about Putin. Well, the Russian troops in control in Crimea are not just in his mind, are they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eutychus:
Thank you, and thank you for putting in that effort - in terms of both form and content.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alt Wally:
…but as with the whole situation; the issue isn't really what's being done, but who is doing it and whose agenda it serves.

---

I agree Alt Wally it is all about whose agenda is served.

Don’t get me wrong given the ever increasing gap between the rich and poor there is much to protest against in the Ukraine. There has been economic disaster, outside meddling and a merry-go-round of internal corruption. I would feel like marching to independence square myself. I doubt the coup will garner real change sadly. Just like the diggers and levellers in Cromwell’s time those voices will be silenced.

I notice that Arseniy Yatsenyuk or ‘Yats’ the new prime minster is a former central banker. Whist it also seems that ‘Ukrainian oligarchs’ are being courted and brought in to key positions. It looks like the same old revolving door for the neoliberal elite. (those who espouse the economic philosophy) This does not bode well for real change. It just looks like Neoliberal regime change from my perspective. I think the real change that protesters were hoping for is still far from realization.

Not that Russia offers anything different on that score. Russia is a corporatized state; govern by an oligarchical neoliberalism and its military industrial complex. Just like us really. The main difference being that they have shades of Orwell’s 1984, whilst we live in the shadow of Huxley’s brave new world. So if this all settles down then the best case scenario for Ukrainians seems to be ‘Same shit different day.’ Oh dear.

However I have some caveats. The position of the far right has been strengthened and radicalised. This is truly worrying and dangerous. Although, it must be said, it is a not uncommon response to instability and economic privation. My analyse of the situation assumes that this trend will not lead to the rise of the Ukraine as a significant fascist power in central Europe. On balance, I think this is correct, not least, because Russia would not tolerate it. That said the economic and social conditions are an ideal hot bed for the rise of the right. It is a political cancer that can spread fast.

My second caveat is this:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Sure, Russian troops will squash any Ukrainian armed resistance, but how about the possibility of various armed groups then continuing the resistance?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Putin has so far handled things very well, but.....

---

Maybe in his own mind.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
I think you're right that annexation won't happen. It doesn't have to, and will be easier if it's just control.

I'm not sure what you mean by US support and Snowden. The US appears to have been caught off guard. Unless you are thinking that the US likes Ukraine not to be linking up with the EU.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
No the far right is defiantly part of the equation in the Ukraine. Not that it is the whole story. There are some very unsavoury elements on both sides of this thing.

---

No doubt. But only one side of this thing invaded a sovereign nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Not really much of a coup when the guy just packs up and leaves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
No the far right is defiantly part of the equation in the Ukraine. Not that it is the whole story. There are some very unsavoury elements on both sides of this thing.

---

No doubt. But only one side of this thing invaded a sovereign nation.

---

It depends on what you mean by side MT. Do you count Washington who have backed and helped to ferment this coup as a side?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
mousethief

I don't see how it's a non sequitur. Putin has efficiently moved troops into Crimea, with hardly a shot fired. That to me suggests that his aims have been successfully met, and not just in his own mind, but on the ground.

---

quote:

---

above article
look at it through Moscow’s eyes. Since the Clinton administration in the 1990s, the U.S.-led West has been on a steady march toward post-Soviet Russia, began with the expansion of NATO in the 1990s under Clinton. Bush then further expanded NATO all the way to Russia’s borders. Then came the funding of what are euphemistically called NGOs, but they are political action groups, funded by the West, operating inside Russia. Then came the decision to build missile defense installations along Russia’s borders, allegedly against Iran, a country which has neither nuclear weapons nor any missiles to deliver them with. Then comes American military outpost in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, which led to the war of 2008, and now the West is at the gates of Ukraine. So, that’s the picture as Moscow sees it. And it’s rational. It’s reasonable. It’s hard to deny.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:

I'm not sure what you mean by US support and Snowden. The US appears to have been caught off guard. Unless you are thinking that the US likes Ukraine not to be linking up with the EU.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Evidence?

---

quote:

---

Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play....I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that's right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:

Unless you are thinking that the US likes Ukraine not to be linking up with the EU.

---

quote:

---

Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

If you are playing a long game, you could even argue that this is all bad for Putin, as the Crimea take-over will alienate many other countries, and obviously Ukraine itself, will screw with the Russian economy, and will make Europe look for other energy supplies. How does Putin reply to that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Quetzalcoatl are you that confident that either Putin or Kerry are really sufficiently in control of things happening beyond the direct reach of their own hands to be subtly plotting outcomes like a game of chess, rather than grabbing opportunities and hoping for the best?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Not really much of a coup when the guy just packs up and leaves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Given how weak Obama was looking until late yesterday, I kinda doubt this was a planned thing.

And given what Putin said today, I don't think he's really planned it all through either.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
May I ask a question?

I understand that Putin is trying to 'protect' the Russian speaking people in Ukraine. What exactly does that mean? Are these people all Russian citizens living in Ukraine, a foreign country, and therefore need protection?

I just wonder whether the fact they are merely described as Russian speaking suggests a broader term, a broader identity. If so, that worries me slightly because there must be millions of Russian speaking people across the countries of the former Soviet Union, some of which are now EU countries.

Does Putin have one eye on these people too? After Crimea, Ukraine, after Ukraine, Estonia, other countries?

If Putin is trying to protect people who are basically Russian by nationality, that's one thing; but if he feels he 'owns' anyone who speaks Russian in a former Soviet republic, that might be a worry? Don't you think?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Chill, just as a matter of interest, do you think any of the Bilderberg Group, Opus Dei, the Freemasons or the Elders of Zion have a significant role in this crisis?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
I'm new to this thread so sorry if I'm repeating something already said.

Why is it that France, Germany, Japan, the UK, and the US, etc., no longer consider each other military rivals (albeit they are still economic rivals, even though some of them are in the EU), but Russia still considers itself a military rival of the US and EU?

In International Politics class, we learned that the international political theory called "realism" predicts that nation-states will be heartless and untrustworthy with each other while promoting their interests and jostling for hegemony. Alliances are only a matter of convenience, and enduring alliances only hold together against a common threat. NATO only worked because the European powers had lost most of their colonies, were severely weakened after World War II, and were threatened by Soviet expansionism.

There are other theories, such as liberalism (trade links countries together to make war less desirable, and liberal democracies tend not to fight each other, so there should be global free trade and all countries should be liberal democracies).

Obviously, Putin seems to be acting like a realist would predict. Would Russia act this way regardless of who was in power? Why is it in Russia's interest to be the military adversary of NATO and the EU? Why can't Russia just join NATO and, if it isn't democratic enough, closely align itself with the EU, along with the other former Soviet states? How are Russian interests mutually exclusive with the interests of the US and the EU?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
... You can also look at this the other way round and point out that Russia probably feels threatened by the approach of NATO and the EU, which gets closer and closer to Moscow. Ukraine has become the disputed area, as it is adjacent to Russia, and Putin does not want the EU right next door.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
... You can also look at this the other way round and point out that Russia probably feels threatened by the approach of NATO and the EU, which gets closer and closer to Moscow. Ukraine has become the disputed area, as it is adjacent to Russia, and Putin does not want the EU right next door.

---

Much as the US did by Cuba?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
Why can't Russia just join NATO and, if it isn't democratic enough, closely align itself with the EU, along with the other former Soviet states? How are Russian interests mutually exclusive with the interests of the US and the EU?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
... You can also look at this the other way round and point out that Russia probably feels threatened by the approach of NATO and the EU, which gets closer and closer to Moscow. Ukraine has become the disputed area, as it is adjacent to Russia, and Putin does not want the EU right next door.

---

Much as the US did by Cuba?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alt Wally:
Western ideas and influence have arrived sometimes via the Russians themselves (such as with the 19th intellectual divisions between the Westernizers and the Slavophiles), but often at the tip of a spear or the end of a gun.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:

But I could well believe that on the Russian side there continue to be people who see Ukrainians as a slightly exotic and peculiar variety of Russians, not as a separate nation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
... You can also look at this the other way round and point out that Russia probably feels threatened by the approach of NATO and the EU, which gets closer and closer to Moscow. Ukraine has become the disputed area, as it is adjacent to Russia, and Putin does not want the EU right next door.

---

Much as the US did by Cuba?

---

Of course that was before ICBMs, and having Russian warheads on Cuba put them within striking distance of at least some of the heavily-populated bits of the United States. In other words, it was a huge change of the game, raising the stakes in the cold war and moving the doomsday clock several hours or days closer to Armageddon.

Ukraine joining NATO in 2014? Not so much.

The analogy doesn't hold.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Alt Wally

I think you are wrong about national sacredness not being understood in the West.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Ah, just like Christianity, then.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Given how weak Obama was looking until late yesterday, I kinda doubt this was a planned thing.

And given what Putin said today, I don't think he's really planned it all through either.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Chill, just as a matter of interest, do you think any of the Bilderberg Group, Opus Dei, the Freemasons or the Elders of Zion have a significant role in this crisis?

---

Sorry been busy with work. No, its actually an Alien plot.

I don’t believe in cartoon arch-villains in smoke filled rooms. The Bilderberg group, however,is clearly a forum for the very influential group of people, (cooperate, political and academic) to gather and network and discuss current events in an off the record setting. I imagine there will be strategic movers and shakers in the room. That said I don’t think they roll down the blinds all do the secret dance and do the evil villain laugh or anything.

What I do think is that there are in this world powerful, economic and strategic agendas which have an impact on world events. How could they not? Those events are of course fluid and impacted by a multitude of factors. It seems to me that the U.S. has the least to lose and the most to gain whilst Russia and the EU and of course Ukraine has much to lose. I think these factors have been exploited by US diplomatic influence. I think it is entirely credible that powerful lobbies, organisations and government elements may seek to influence events in their favour and vie for strategic/economic advantage. That some of this might involve secrecy seems to make sense. After all we have an official secrets act, or is that just a misnomer?

I also made reference to revolving door of oligarchical corruption and that the new Ukrainian government looks a doggy as the old one. It seems from this leaked call that there are those on the Maidan who agree with me. It makes interesting listening, there is clearly immense distrust. I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. It speaks volumes about how well trusted this lot are.
http://tinyurl.com/kelsmjx
Confirming the authentisty of call we have this from the press.
http://tinyurl.com/nph3qdh
and
http://tinyurl.com/k4y3ycj

Chaz
 

---

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :
 
Thinking about it, if Crimea did join the Russian Federation, that would leave the rest of Ukraine with a permanent pro-Europe majority, leaving Putin with less influence over Ukraine, not more.
 

---

Posted by IconiumBound (# 754) on :
 
I may have missed, in this long-going thread, the issue which probably lies at the core of the crisis. That is, the control of the fossil fuels, oil and gas, which lie under the Crimean turf. I read other opinions that put this at the front of other European concerns.

If I am right then ISTM that we are back to our tribal origins in seeking new territory for food. Our sub-human progenitors didn't have any problem with using force to get the neighbors veggies.
 

---

Posted by Anyuta (# 14692) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:
Thinking about it, if Crimea did join the Russian Federation, that would leave the rest of Ukraine with a permanent pro-Europe majority, leaving Putin with less influence over Ukraine, not more.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
... I also made reference to revolving door of oligarchical corruption and that the new Ukrainian government looks a doggy as the old one. It seems from this leaked call that there are those on the Maidan who agree with me. It makes interesting listening, there is clearly immense distrust. I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. It speaks volumes about how well trusted this lot are.
http://tinyurl.com/kelsmjx
Confirming the authentisty of call we have this from the press.
http://tinyurl.com/nph3qdh
and
http://tinyurl.com/k4y3ycj
...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IconiumBound:
I may have missed, in this long-going thread, the issue which probably lies at the core of the crisis. That is, the control of the fossil fuels, oil and gas, which lie under the Crimean turf. I read other opinions that put this at the front of other European concerns. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IconiumBound:
I may have missed, in this long-going thread, the issue which probably lies at the core of the crisis. That is, the control of the fossil fuels, oil and gas, which lie under the Crimean turf. I read other opinions that put this at the front of other European concerns.

If I am right then ISTM that we are back to our tribal origins in seeking new territory for food. Our sub-human progenitors didn't have any problem with using force to get the neighbors veggies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:

What is more relevant is that Ukraine (the rest of it) is the principal corridor for the main gas and oil pipelines from the extensive Caspian Sea reserves. About 30% of Europe's gas comes this way for example. Anyone controlling Ukraine gets the stranglehold over this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
True, but they could have thought about it when they gave the penninsula away to another country, or any time in the last two decades really.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave W.:
When the Crimean peninsula was transferred to the Ukraine in 1954, the Ukraine wasn't "another country", it was part of the USSR just as Russia was.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Yes and no: theoretically, the SSRs, of which Ukraine was one, were republics in 'voluntary union' with each other.

Where nest for Putin?Moldova? If he can secure southern (including Odessa) and eastern Ukraine, he will then have a contiguous swathe of territory stretching to Transnistria, and the 'Second Gathering of the Russian Lands' will be complete...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardus:
That explains why they want a fleet in the Black Sea. It doesn't explain why they need it on the Ukrainian Black Sea coast rather than the Russian Black Sea coast, which I think was Doublethink's question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
...none of which explains why they need it now.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
But it's not its only warm-water port now: as others have pointed out, it has Novorossiisk and Sochi; I can understand why the Russians would want to keep Sevastopol (prestige etc) but not why they need to.

[code]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
... I also made reference to revolving door of oligarchical corruption and that the new Ukrainian government looks a doggy as the old one. It seems from this leaked call that there are those on the Maidan who agree with me. It makes interesting listening, there is clearly immense distrust. I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. It speaks volumes about how well trusted this lot are.
http://tinyurl.com/kelsmjx
Confirming the authentisty of call we have this from the press.
http://tinyurl.com/nph3qdh
and
http://tinyurl.com/k4y3ycj
...

---

Chill why is this surprising? And why is the existence of this telephone call supposed to be scandalous?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Not all those in any struggle are good, noble, high-minded etc. Bad people do bad things. .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
And I'm a lot happier that engaged people in the EU are discussing what might be happening realistically, rather than if they are assuming 'our' lot are clean and the 'others' are dirty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
“Remember also, Urmaes Paet and Baroness Ashton are discussing allegations, hearsay, rumours. They aren't committing themselves to believing any version. They may not have wanted to have been overheard, but now they have been, I don't think they have anything to be ashamed of in what they are heard saying. That the allegations have made means neither that they are true, nor untrue. They could be either. They aren't convincing evidence of anything.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
... I don’t think it proves anything regarding the shootings but it indicates the divisions between many of the protestors and their new government. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
But it's not its only warm-water port now: as others have pointed out, it has Novorossiisk and Sochi; I can understand why the Russians would want to keep Sevastopol (prestige etc) but not why they need to.

[code]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
... Unless I am missing something, I suspect that we are in disagreement over my view that our leaders are not much better if at all than the any others involved. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet, the defeat of the Golden Horde, the Crimean War, "Hero City of the Soviet Union"...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Where I think I do disagree is attributing only cynical motives to all political figures. They, like us, are a mixture of conflicting motives, some good and some less so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet, the defeat of the Golden Horde, the Crimean War, "Hero City of the Soviet Union"...

---

The current crisis made me flick through a history of the Crimean war by Orlando Figes. I've now got a glimpse of how much history there is behind this and how emotional it must be for Russians to see unfolding.

---

My office used to be three doors down from Orlando Figes. Unfortunately he left us under something of a cloud

Eric Hobsbawn's office was on the same corridor. He had to die before we'd let him go. No-one that famous gets allowed to retire...

(And that is nothing but a name-drop - I doubt if I passed more than five words in a row with Dr. Figes - certainly never talked to him about history - though I have read one of his books)

[ 12. March 2014, 15:28: Message edited by: ken ]
 

---

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Unfortunately he left us under something of a cloud

---

quote:

---

the third factor in Putin’s thinking – his unashamed presumption that Russia has the right and duty to protect Russians wherever they may be. He once described the collapse of the USSR as the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the last century. He didn’t mean he regretted the end of communism, but he did regret the collapse of a huge multinational state, and the fact that 25 million Russians ended up outside their own country’s borders. His vow to “protect Russians” in Ukraine is the corollary of that. God forbid if he decides Russians in Latvia and Estonia also require “help”.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
...
What happens after he marches into Ukraine? - because we sure as hell can't stop him!

---

It would come down to whether Western Europe prefers Russian cash/investment over ethical and treaty concerns.

The issue for further intrusion west is the Baltic nations and Poland are in NATO. Not supporting them against an incursion would be politically difficult to justify.
 

---

Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on :
 
So a new European war then?
 

---

Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So a new European war then?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
... Ultimately, Putin, though obviously a narcisstic demagogue and a dictator, is a lot more tied to the wishes of owners of money then past dictators like Hitler. Trade matters to the oligarchs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
... Ultimately, Putin, though obviously a narcisstic demagogue and a dictator, is a lot more tied to the wishes of owners of money then past dictators like Hitler. Trade matters to the oligarchs.

---

I very much hope you're right.

Incidentally, can somebody answer this question for me? The other evening Bridget Kendall on the BBC News was looking at old maps showing the various different states over the last 300 years or so that have ruled what is now the Ukraine and the Russian Black Sea coast.

Maps from before the First World War don't seem to show any province of Imperial Russia that looks like an ancestor of the Ukraine, the way that there's a Polish province. Obviously, western Ukraine was in Austro-Hungary. It seems then to have been largely Polish.

Part of the Russian area is a large province called Kherson, but that doesn't include Kiev. Where does the Ukraine come from? Is it an identity which has always existed in a suppressed form? Or is it an identity created out of the turmoil that followed the end of the First World War?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:

As I'd tried to say earlier, borders in that part of the world are very complicated things, and tend to move around quite a bit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:

As I'd tried to say earlier, borders in that part of the world are very complicated things, and tend to move around quite a bit.

---

Agreed and we must add to this picture that the Russians look to Kiev as one of the first cradles and the first great flowering of the Russ civilisation. The close linguistic, ethnic and historic ties to Russia are also part of this picture. I’m not sure many Russians really see the Ukraine as an imperial position to be regained; it is for them the birth place of their civilisation to be defended from western aggression. I am not saying they are right but it’s part of the emotional DNA in this situation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:



Part of the Russian area is a large province called Kherson, but that doesn't include Kiev. Where does the Ukraine come from? Is it an identity which has always existed in a suppressed form? Or is it an identity created out of the turmoil that followed the end of the First World War?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:
The feeling clearly isn't mutual, though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:
To many Ukrainians, the notion that Ukraine is really 'little Russia' or that they are really just a slightly exotic Russian subspecies is highly insulting and inflammatory.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:
My point was otherwise. The kind of emotional nationalism you referenced in your post is an artificial creation of the nineteenth century, and in the twentieth century it led to the greatest disasters in Europe since the Roman Empire collapsed in the West. (I didn't say that; the late Vaclav Havel did.) So it has to be resisted. It can't become the basis of policy. Let alone the basis of -- what is now happening in Ukraine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
Don't imagine I think Russia stands on the side of the angles but nor do I trust the motives of Washington in helping to bring about this Coup.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Evidence?

---

Originally posted by Chill:

quote:

---

Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play....I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that's right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

---

BBC transcript with analyse here http://tinyurl.com/jwh5g9a

Revolutions rarely get off the ground without substantial external help. This is what we know has gone on. Don’t get me wrong I don’t think the U.S. has created this state of affairs. They have just capitalised on existing tensions. Here we have a phone conversation showing clear diplomatic assistance advice and close working relationships to the opposition from the U.S.a foreign power.
...snip...
American frustration with the EU was because they wanted things to move faster. They were annoyed that the EU was not being proactive enough in its support for the opposition. The EU had a much longer term and less confrontational vision for Ukraine. The U.S. wanted to strike whilst the iron was hot. That is the context of the Fuck the EU comment, hence the decision to use the UN as a way of establishing legitimacy.

quote:

---

Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.

---

So I think the U.S. have used tensions in the Ukraine to put Russia on the diplomatic back foot. I think they have been a significant catalyst. The U.S. have been on the back foot diplomatically over the Snowden affair, and over Syria. Russia and America are currently fighting a proxy war in Syria through their allies. (Syria is a whole different thread but it is not irrelevant to current events.) So this is just another round in the global pissing contest.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:


Changing the subject, Grammatica, what does one have to be to be able to claim to be a "white ethnic"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Venice starts its independence referendum today. [...]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wesley J:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Venice starts its independence referendum today. [...]

---

Link?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
... Ultimately, Putin, though obviously a narcisstic demagogue and a dictator, is a lot more tied to the wishes of owners of money then past dictators like Hitler. Trade matters to the oligarchs.

---

I very much hope you're right.

Incidentally, can somebody answer this question for me? The other evening Bridget Kendall on the BBC News was looking at old maps showing the various different states over the last 300 years or so that have ruled what is now the Ukraine and the Russian Black Sea coast.

Maps from before the First World War don't seem to show any province of Imperial Russia that looks like an ancestor of the Ukraine, the way that there's a Polish province. Obviously, western Ukraine was in Austro-Hungary. It seems then to have been largely Polish.

Part of the Russian area is a large province called Kherson, but that doesn't include Kiev. Where does the Ukraine come from? Is it an identity which has always existed in a suppressed form? Or is it an identity created out of the turmoil that followed the end of the First World War?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Ukrainians look to this in particular for at least one important source of their 'national mythology' although, ironically, most latter-day Cossacks are pro-Russian.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Ukrainians look to this in particular for at least one important source of their 'national mythology' although, ironically, most latter-day Cossacks are pro-Russian.

---

Well yes but its rise seems to have been precipitated by an attempt to throw of western domination. It was then followed by eastern betrayal. This historic pattern of a tug of war between the powers of east and west with Ukraine as a tattered rope continues....

Chaz

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Well, however much our politicians may moan, the referendum has delivered a pretty clear result. Even if the count is a bit suspect, the Crimeans seem to have spoken with a clear voice.

There were two women being interviewed on the BBC yesterday, ever keen to maintain this is a Putinesque stitch up, saying that they wanted to stay in the Ukraine but they were boycotting the referendum. Why do people do that? It happens so often and it's really, really stupid.

If you boycott an election, your vote is not counted. Your opinion is ignored. Everyone is entitled to ignore it. Nobody knows what way you would have voted, because you didn't. There's no difference between you and a person who can't be bothered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Well, however much our politicians may moan, the referendum has delivered a pretty clear result. Even if the count is a bit suspect, the Crimeans seem to have spoken with a clear voice.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:

1. The referendum is not allowed under the Ukrainian constitution without the approval of the rest of Ukraine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:

2. Crimea is already occupied by Russian troops, so any referendum would be cast under doubt even if it is fair and transparently conducted.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gwai:
Matt, exactly!

Chill, I'd rather say that what "lost' the vote for the west was that staying as a part of the Ukraine wasn't an option on the ballot. link

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Given that only 58% of the population of Crimea is Russian and not all of them are dreadfully keen on the current incumbent of the Kremlin, I find the "97% of us want to be part of Putin's benevolent empire 'result'" slightly unlikely, to put it very mildly.

The 98% ex-post facto plebiscite in favour of the Anschluss is brought rather heavily to remembrance...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Just because nothing appeared on a map looking vaguely Ukrainian between 1775 and 1918 doesn't mean that there wasn't a Ukrainian or proto-Ukrainian identity, anymore than the fact that Poland disappeared between 1795 and 1918 meant that Polish identity was non-existent during those years.

---

In that period there were Polish political exiles all over Europe trying (and mostly failing) to get other nations interested in restoring Poland's independence, various governments in exile, at least ten rebellions against Russia, Prussia, and Austria, Polish regiments in the French service, Polish regiments in the American service, (including two famous revolutionary generals), Polish regiments fighting for the Union in the American Civil War (refugees from a failed rebellion in Poland) and dozens of all the usual long-haired and enthusiastic nationalist poets, musicians, artists, and writers. Poland never went away.

I don't remember hearing of anything remotely like that for Ukraine.
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 
Targeted sactions against 11-people http://tinyurl.com/11-people

Business as usual then.

[ 18. March 2014, 07:51: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 

---

Posted by Jonah the Whale (# 1244) on :
 
I'm not sure the Serbian constitution allowed for Kosovo to declare itself independent, and yet that was welcomed with open arms by the west. How is that different? Isn't there cartloads of hypocrisy going on on both sides?
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
I don't think many constitutions allow people to secede at will. I seem to recall that there was a big civil war about this very issue sometime in the 1860s.

Whatever the maths, and however suspect the count might be, it's quite clear that there is a substantial majority of the people in the Crimea who do not wish to be part of the Ukraine and would rather be part of Russia. It's a bit difficult to see how one can say to them, 'Whether you like it or not, you've got to be Ukrainians. Your view is irrelevant'.

Nor is the argument about whether it was constitutional all that relevant. If the Crimeans don't identify themselves with the Ukraine, why should we insist they be expected to respect its laws or its constitution? We don't normally require that of dissident groups that we favour. Look at the fuss about the Pussy Rioters. Virtually nothing can be said in their favour apart from the fact that they were protesting against a government which a lot of opinion formers in the West have taken against.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stonespring
Boycotting a vote is a propaganda tactic used by people who know they have no chance of succeeding in an election.

---

quote:

---

President Sarkozy was "convinced" that Ukraine would one day be a member of NATO, but that there was no point in rushing the process and antagonizing Russia, particularly if the Ukrainian public was largely against membership. The Bucharest summit declaration was very clear that NATO has an open door and Ukraine and Georgia have a vocation in NATO (even if Georgia remains very unstable at the moment).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
Targeted sactions against 11-people http://tinyurl.com/11-people

Business as usual then.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave W.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chill:
Targeted sactions against 11-people http://tinyurl.com/11-people

Business as usual then.

---

Which is it? NATO marching eastward like a juggernaut, or the West responding with weakness worthy only of your derision? Make up your mind.

---

Both sanctions are bad for business in this case but strategic advantage and regional destabilisation is not. At least not for French UK and US interests. For the rest of The UE not so good.

Its a false paradox. Its the naked lack of principle that is worthy of derision.

[ 18. March 2014, 07:53: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Chill

Post preview is your friend. Please be more careful in future, I needed to edit three posts to clear up the link you provided, simply because you didn't put a space between and the tinyurl link.

B62, Purg Host
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Just because nothing appeared on a map looking vaguely Ukrainian between 1775 and 1918 doesn't mean that there wasn't a Ukrainian or proto-Ukrainian identity, anymore than the fact that Poland disappeared between 1795 and 1918 meant that Polish identity was non-existent during those years.

---

In that period there were Polish political exiles all over Europe trying (and mostly failing) to get other nations interested in restoring Poland's independence, various governments in exile, at least ten rebellions against Russia, Prussia, and Austria, Polish regiments in the French service, Polish regiments in the American service, (including two famous revolutionary generals), Polish regiments fighting for the Union in the American Civil War (refugees from a failed rebellion in Poland) and dozens of all the usual long-haired and enthusiastic nationalist poets, musicians, artists, and writers. Poland never went away.

I don't remember hearing of anything remotely like that for Ukraine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:

Also, can anyone explain why pro-Russians argue the Ukraine parliamentary vote impeaching Yanukovych and removing him from office was illegitimate? Was there a procedure that needed to be followed that was not? Or is it because they feel that many members of parliament from Yanukovych's party were coerced into voting to remove him by fear of being attacked by the crowds outside?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring: How does the legitimacy of the vote removing Yanukovych compare with the legitimacy of the vote in Crimea's parliament removing its government and installing the new pro-Russian one?

---

quote:

---

V. GENERAL CONCLUSION (para. 122)
The Court recalls its conclusions reached earlier, namely, “that the adoption of the
declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law, Security
Council resolution 1244 (1999) or the Constitutional Framework”. Finally, it concludes that
“consequently the adoption of that declaration did not violate any applicable rule of international
law.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
I think we are heading towards something akin to a pre-1667 map of Eastern Europe. Good news if you like historical maps, not so good if you live near one of the shifting borders.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:


I prefer this map to illustrate what I think might happen.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
The latter doesn't go much beyond the Vistula, unfortunately. I had in mind the border between Poland-Lithuania and Muscovy before the Treaties of Pereyaslav and Andrussovo, with western Ukraine (Lviv-Kiyiv) in the orbit of the west, and eastern Ukraine (Donetsk-Kharkiv) within the Russian orbit. Of course, if Putin also seeks to add Transnistria and then play 'join the oblasts' then southern Ukraine (Odessa-Kherson) would also be added to his Crimean acquisition, all of which of course was either part of or subject to the Ottomans back in the 17th century.

I prefer this map to illustrate what I think might happen.

---

Will the New Teutonic Knights be aligned with Russia or Europe?
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
Don't need new Teutonic Knights. The old ones inadvertently and indirectly founded modern Germany. The last Grand Master of the Order, one Albert von Hohenzollern (note the name), declared himself a Protestant so he could have legitimate children and turned the lands of the order into a Duchy with him as the Duke. Getting his title as a feudal subject of the King of Poland. And thus was the Empire forged.

The borders were much more complicated than can be shown on the scale of those maps, especially around Livonia and Courland. Until those efficient Swedes turned up and tried to simplify it. A patchwork of tiny feudal states owing allegiance to various combinations of rulers - often more than one at the same time. Not at all unusual for a local boss to hold some lands directly from the King of Poland/Lithuania others indirectly, others from Russians or just about anybody.
 

---

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:

Well, I am just thinking out loud. But this is why I'm fairly insistent that this is a Central European problem to be solved by Central Europeans themselves, slowly, carefully, and patiently. It was not created by the United States, nor is the United States likely to be helpful in solving it.

---

If Ukraine is in Central Europe, where is Eastern Europe? I always thought Central Europe (Mitteleuropa) currently referred to Germany, Switzerland, and Austria, with Eastern Europe to the East, although some places like the Czech Republic sometimes get grouped in the center. I have never heard Ukraine called Eastern Europe. The broadest definition I can think of of Central Europe is the former Holy Roman Empire, and modern-day Ukraine is almost entirely (if not entirely - my geography isn't perfect) outside of that.

[ 19. March 2014, 17:39: Message edited by: stonespring ]
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
Central Europe is anywhere you can get to from Budapest by train in an afternoon
 

---

Posted by Grammatica (# 13248) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Central Europe is anywhere you can get to from Budapest by train in an afternoon

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grammatica:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:


I prefer this map to illustrate what I think might happen.

---

A big swathe of borderland in that map, Matt. Enough to make a person very thoughtful. Some familiar problems begin to surface. How to incorporate the borderlands into the Holy Roman Empire [now dba the European Union]? But should the borderlands be incorporated, or should some territory (how much?) be left as a buffer zone?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Belarus?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
Since Belarus has been brought up, I thought this link might provide some comic relief. (Context: this is an anime called Axis Powers Hetaria, where the characters are personifications of countries and the protagonists are the Axis and Allied powers of WWII, although as in this clip they sometimes refer to present-day (or even way-before WWII) events).

youtube link

Don't worry about the "mature content" warning. Ukraine has a large chest, but she keeps her clothes on. This isn't THAT kind of anime. No one's chastity is at risk from watching it (although Russia (also clothed) is pretty handsome...he can annex me anytime).

The clip is from 2010, so it's a bit out of date and seems to be referring to Belarus' rough treatment of dissidents at the time. The portrayal of Ukraine, like all the other portrayals, is stereotyped, sexist, and a little racist, but that's normal for Japan (political correctness? what's that?). I think this is before Yanukovych returned to power and put Timoshenko in prison, so maybe that explains why Ukraine is portrayed as "she" is, though it's still inaccurate even for the time.

Oh, and here's Russia being more Putinesque:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoeCZf9zc1A

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
Polandball...funny but not as sexy Hetalia's Russia...

---

The Ship ships Russia x stonespring ... ? Tee hee.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Looks like Crimea #2 is now kicking off in the eastern oblasti...
 

---

Posted by Chill (# 13643) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Looks like Crimea #2 is now kicking off in the eastern oblasti...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Putin has the capacity IMO to be another Hitler (or at least Hitler-lite) in terms of his foreign policy. If he isn't stopped, it is unclear where he will stop. So far the West has shown all the moral courage of the 1930s' appeasers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Putin has the capacity IMO to be another Hitler (or at least Hitler-lite) in terms of his foreign policy. If he isn't stopped, it is unclear where he will stop. So far the West has shown all the moral courage of the 1930s' appeasers.

---

That's a bit extreme, Matt. While I don't doubt that he (along with many Russians) would like to see the ancestral Russian heartlands that are currently part of Ukraine returned to Russian control, there's no reason to suppose that if "we" don't stop him he'll continue to roll over as many countries as he can.

And what would you suggest we do anyway? Start world war 3?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Putin has the capacity IMO to be another Hitler (or at least Hitler-lite) in terms of his foreign policy. If he isn't stopped, it is unclear where he will stop. So far the West has shown all the moral courage of the 1930s' appeasers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Is that what Jesus would like to see?

---

Absolutely
 

---

Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on :
 
Does POLAND know something we don't?

I think we can safely say that as soon as the first Russian soldier put on his 'let's go Crimea' uniform every nuclear sub sped off to local waters, every missile has been pointed in the direction of Russia and far more movement is happening that the press don't know about. This is all in the 'What to do when Russia wakes up' manual. I do not believe we're not ready.

[ 15. April 2014, 00:54: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Chill, as Stonespring has said, whilst our own governments have been far from geopolitical saints when it comes to international law, your case would be somewhat more watertight if we had, say, annexed Basra Province after invading Iraq. Also, I seem to have missed the memo that says that two international legal wrongs make a right...
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
So, Beeswax Altar, Jesus wants to see NATO BOG in the Ukraine. Wants to see us at Fast Pace, code red? At least?

How He's changed.
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Nah...Jesus didn't change. It's just progressive revelation. God isn't opposed to using humans to crush God's enemies. We now know Putin is God's enemy. Of course, I reserve the right to disregard all scripture which contradicts that view. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Where did the only God we have ever seen demonstrate using humans to crush His enemies?

Where did the only God we have ever heard from His own lips abrogate His unequivocal saying of the opposite? To the disciples itching to call down fire on whole communities? To all of those with enemies?

You're a man of the cloth, you MUST know better than I where this naksh is in the good news?
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Just read the OT. I'm not a Marcionite. Nor do I ignore the passages where Jesus clearly speaks of judgment. Not a far stretch to say Jesus would use humans as instruments of judgment. Surely not foreign to the other authors of the NT. Again, you can surely quote passages that contradict all of that. However, I call progressive revelation and exercise my prerogative to pretend those don't exist.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
What's the OT got to do with Immanuel?
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Like I said I'm not a Marcionite nor do I believe in a Demiurge.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
So Jesus was a warmonger.

And you are a teacher of Israel.
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Exactly

Can we get back to discussing the topic instead of your pet issue?
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Unclear at present whether the Ukrainians are back in control at Kramatorsk.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Yeah, let's squeeze past the room filler.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
Or try to squeeze past the roadblock....
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
I'm concerned Putin is letting the Ukrainians pick their poison. Either they allow ethnic Russians to slowly take over Eastern Ukraine or they resist the takeover giving Russia an excuse to invade to protect the Russian minority. Question is how hard the Ukrainians can make it for Russia to annex and pacify other parts of the Ukraine and how much help NATO gives them.
 

---

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
As I've said, I'm not sure that NATO can do much without risking all out war. I wish it could.
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Like what? What would Jesus do?
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Bomb Moscow
 

---

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
The Ukrainians have been completely outplayed by Putin and ill-advised and ill-served by America and their church and the Church. From the beginning of their insurrection. Throw rocks and Molotovs at Russians and you will get .22 Kalashnikov rounds back when you finally manage to burn any to death.

At least the Ukrainian military haven't killed any 'terrorists' yet and when surrounded by unarmed civilians they surrendered! Even better.

And yeah Beeswax Altar. You're right. He'd nuke them till they glow and then shoot them in the dark.
 

---

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :
 
Ah...blame America for everything.

At least that makes more sense than saying the Ukrainians were listening to the Church.

Not much more
 

---

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Ah...blame America for everything.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Well, maybe I'm just cynical, like, but I don't buy that. They were there trying to incorporate Ukraine into it's sphere of influence (first EU membership and then NATO). But God forbid Russia should try to maintain its sphere of influence, even if it meant being ready to accept a tripartisan deal, something which wasn't good enough for America and the EU, making Ukraine choose between East and West. This all whiffs of double standards and a complete unwillingness to see the whole situation from the Russian point of view. And as I said above, the real irony of this all is that the Zionists in Washington seem all too ready to get into bed with a bunch of Neo-Nazis in Kiev.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Well, maybe I'm just cynical, like, but I don't buy that. They were there trying to incorporate Ukraine into it's sphere of influence (first EU membership and then NATO). But God forbid Russia should try to maintain its sphere of influence, even if it meant being ready to accept a tripartisan deal, something which wasn't good enough for America and the EU, making Ukraine choose between East and West. This all whiffs of double standards and a complete unwillingness to see the whole situation from the Russian point of view. And as I said above, the real irony of this all is that the Zionists in Washington seem all too ready to get into bed with a bunch of Neo-Nazis in Kiev.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
It gets to build bases there. It's much easier to mobilise it war machine from Europe than America.

---

quote:

---

Kharkiv, Lugansk, Donetsk, Odessa were not part of Ukraine in Czarist times, they were transferred in 1920. Why? God knows.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Well, maybe I'm just cynical, like, but I don't buy that. They were there trying to incorporate Ukraine into it's sphere of influence (first EU membership and then NATO). But God forbid Russia should try to maintain its sphere of influence, even if it meant being ready to accept a tripartisan deal, something which wasn't good enough for America and the EU, making Ukraine choose between East and West. This all whiffs of double standards and a complete unwillingness to see the whole situation from the Russian point of view. And as I said above, the real irony of this all is that the Zionists in Washington seem all too ready to get into bed with a bunch of Neo-Nazis in Kiev.

---

Just because the US has a strong alliance with the state of Israel does not mean that it is appropriate to imply to call the US government or a good deal of its membership Zionist. Pro-Israel is perhaps a better term, but I'm not sure that the Israeli government or US conservatives would consider the current US government pro-Israel. I know that sensitivities are different in Europe, but calling people Zionist unless they explicitly call themselves Zionist is associated with antisenitism in the US and is best avoided, since I doubt you are antisemitic. Zionism is not a bad thing but it is much too vague of a term with all kinds of social and religious connotations. It's not a very good descriptor for any foreign policy of the US. Are there politically active conservative Jews and Christians in the Is who call themselves Zionists? Certainly, but it's far from accurate to imply that the Obama administration is Zionist or that it contains a good deal of Zionists.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
I blame Christendom for everything above America which is just its most powerful territory.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:
Isn't putin just trying to wind the clock back a few weeks to a time before the people's protest ousted the pro-Russian Ukrainian government.

---

quote:

---

Jews over 16 in the Ukrainian city of Donetsk are being told to pay a special tax and register their identities with the pro-Russian militants who have taken over the town, according to multiple reports.

<snip>

The orders were distributed on flyers throughout the city, according to the wire service JTA and USA TODAY. Those flyers bear the name and signature of Denis Pushilin, leader of the Russian-sympathetic separatist rebels who wrested control of Donetsk from Ukraine earlier in the month. Pushilin's forces have since patrolled the streets in black ski masks, AK47s slung over their shoulders.

Pushilin confirmed to one source that the flyers belonged to his group, which is calling itself "Donetsk's temporary government," although elsewhere he distanced himself from the flyers' content.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Sound like big shiny facets of Christendom to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
And please stop calling the US government Zionist. I don't think you are Anti-Semitic, but calling someone "Zionist" just because they are a political and military ally of Israel is associated with Anti-Semitism (and as I explained earlier, it isn't accurate or particularly useful as a term).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
And please stop calling the US government Zionist. I don't think you are Anti-Semitic, but calling someone "Zionist" just because they are a political and military ally of Israel is associated with Anti-Semitism (and as I explained earlier, it isn't accurate or particularly useful as a term).

---

I beg to differ. It is Zionism and it is not anti-Semitic. The state of Israel clearly gets special treatment, though quite why it has any more right to exist than any other country, I'll never know. States come and go. So what? It's not our problem. Quite why we should put our (the West's) security at risk for it I don't know. Let the Jews and Arabs sort it out. We shouldn't get involved.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0