Malaysian Airlines 777 down on Ukraine / Russia Border?

[jmorgan]

I just wonder if it is one level of corruption that would be seen to be replaced by another level of corruption and Putin does not want to lose control.

[tenpenceshort]

jmorgan said:

I just wonder if it is one level of corruption that would be seen to be replaced by another level of corruption and Putin does not want to lose control.

I think it's far more simple than that.

As former USSR states see the Western way of life enjoyed by EU members, they naturally want to head in that direction. Hence Ukraine wishing to join the EU. We know there are blurred lines at the borders between Russians and semi-Russians who became assimilated into former USSR countries (see Crimea).

What Putin is afraid of, is Ukraine becoming Westernised (or, more importantly, rich and prosperous by comparison to its current state), and those in his own country beginning to realise there is an attainable and tangible benefit to be had by becoming more Western. He (or whoever succeeds him) and his small band of multi-billionaire cronies would relatively quickly find themselves on the arse-end of yet another revolution.

Stopping this from happening is worth a little agro with the West over some pit-of-filth that used to be USSR.

[TankRizzo]

This thread is great if only for the continued outpourings of lunacy that is XJ Flyer's posts.

[rich85uk]

tenpenceshort said:

I think it's far more simple than that.

As former USSR states see the Western way of life enjoyed by EU members, they naturally want to head in that direction. Hence Ukraine wishing to join the EU. We know there are blurred lines at the borders between Russians and semi-Russians who became assimilated into former USSR countries (see Crimea).and

What Putin is afraid of, is Ukraine becoming Westernised (or, more importantly, rich and prosperous by comparison to its current state), and those in his own country beginning to realise there is an attainable and tangible benefit to be had by becoming more Western. He (or whoever succeeds him) and his small band of multi-billionaire cronies would relatively quickly find themselves on the arse-end of yet another revolution.

Stopping this from happening is worth a little agro with the West over some pit-of-filth that used to be USSR.

Pretty much that

Poland is the ideal country to show the benefits of joining the EU and is now probably a swear word in Moscow, its economy has boomed over the past 10 years.

[EskimoArapaho]

rich85uk said:

Pretty much that

Poland is the ideal country to show the benefits of joining the EU and is now probably a swear word in Moscow, its economy has boomed over the past 10 years.

But their apples are infected with Western decadence, says Putin. Potato is more patriotic. Simples!

(Speaking of which why don't we all boycott Compare the Meerkats. That'll show 'em.)

[XJ Flyer]

Qwert1e said:

XJ Flyer said:

As I said there is a limit as to how far we should push east,thereby putting everyone at more risk of a major war,just to take in those who for whatever reason have 'issues' with Russia,just to make them feel better/stronger.Which in reality translates as slavic countries that for whatever reason want to get payback against Russia dragging us into their private fight.If that was good enough for NATO to maintain our defence during the Cold War then it's good enough now.

I've read that a couple of times but still have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say.

It's not difficult.Assuming NATO hadn't moved into those ex soviet and WP states when Russia moved out and assuming NATO has no designs on Ukraine would Ukraine be in the situation it's in now.As I said if NATO's borders during the Cold War were good enough to guarantee our defence before the move east what's changed.While assuming NATO has no offensive designs against Russia why the need for NATO to move into those areas when Russia pulled out at all.

[XJ Flyer]

2013BRM said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

No one ever said that Russia isn't a potential adversary.

Good. They have a track record filled with horror, which the ex Soviet/WP countries and their populations were subjected to. This again brings us to the second part of my post, the fear and hate which is the biggest reason for these countries to join the EU and NATO.

XJ Flyer said:

It's obvious that the EU and NATO intend to move into Ukraine

It's mainly Ukraine who wants to get closer to the EU and NATO, for fear and simply for being pretty tired of being bullied by Soviet and later Russia. Most ex Soviet/WP countries have gone this route, it's easy enough to understand if you have spent time in any of the countries or with the people of these countries. They can tell you stories you wish you had never heard.

The facts say that Ukraine is/would be just another in a long line of EU/NATO eastward expansion.With the difference that it would cross the line in the sand which Russia isn't prepared to allow.

As I've said we've been here before at Yalta and Potsdam and the Cold War which followed it.In all cases we ( rightly ) decided that it wasn't worth the inevitable war which we couldn't win just to put Russia in it's place.The fact is Russia has since walked away from those historic 'issues' and given those people their lives and countries back.The last thing we should be doing is now supporting them in an attempt to get 'pay back' against Russia by moving NATO into old Soviet turf.Especially when that 'turf' happens to be disputed Russian territory itself in Ukraine.

As for the Cold War western Europe ( rightly ) decided that it's not worth taking ourselves out against Russia for eastern Europe and if/when push comes to shove nothing should have changed in that regard.No matter how much the EU propaganda tries to say otherwise.

While if it's supposedly all about 'payback' that might explain at least some of why Germany went to war against Russia and it's then WW1 slavic allies in WW2.If we've learn't anything from those two wars it should be that we don't want a 3 rd for the same reasons.

Read what I wrote again, it's mainly the ex Soviet/WP countries wanting to look west. They are afraid of the east. Rightfully so.

As I said there is a limit as to how far we should push east,thereby putting everyone at more risk of a major war,just to take in those who for whatever reason have 'issues' with Russia,just to make them feel better/stronger.Which in reality translates as slavic countries that for whatever reason want to get payback against Russia dragging us into their private fight.If that was good enough for NATO to maintain our defence during the Cold War then it's good enough now.

What has the cold war got to do with anything? During it, these countries were a part of Soviet and/or WP, now they are not, and they seek west instead of east.

How much time have you spent in Estonia for example? Have you talked with any Estonians about their "issues" with Soviet/Russia?
To me, it's obvious that you haven't.

Save your breath mate, he hasn't even registered your name and the significance of the history of the region. I mentioned earlier that Ukraine wants to look east and he claimed then it was some kind of expansionist act by NATO, barking

Personally I couldn't care less what Estonians think about anything.The fact remains we 'were' never going to risk the security of western Europe on the basis of getting involved in the squabbles between Eastern Europe and it's Russian neighbours.So what's changed other than a lot of EU expansionist propaganda.The problem in this case actually being the one of the EU and NATO wanting to move even further East by using our money to pay off the ( not surprisingly in that case ) pro EU Ukrainian nationalists to do it.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Sunday 3rd August 15:15

[XJ Flyer]

rich85uk said:

tenpenceshort said:

I think it's far more simple than that.

As former USSR states see the Western way of life enjoyed by EU members, they naturally want to head in that direction. Hence Ukraine wishing to join the EU. We know there are blurred lines at the borders between Russians and semi-Russians who became assimilated into former USSR countries (see Crimea).and

What Putin is afraid of, is Ukraine becoming Westernised (or, more importantly, rich and prosperous by comparison to its current state), and those in his own country beginning to realise there is an attainable and tangible benefit to be had by becoming more Western. He (or whoever succeeds him) and his small band of multi-billionaire cronies would relatively quickly find themselves on the arse-end of yet another revolution.

Stopping this from happening is worth a little agro with the West over some pit-of-filth that used to be USSR.

Pretty much that

Poland is the ideal country to show the benefits of joining the EU and is now probably a swear word in Moscow, its economy has boomed over the past 10 years.

As in the case of Ukraine the reality being the EU uses our money to buy influence and more Eastward NATO expansion towards Russia.Which leaves the obvious question why and how do we benefit from making others richer at our expense and making war with Russia more likely not less.

[toppstuff]

XJ Flyer said:

It's not difficult.Assuming NATO hadn't moved into those ex soviet and WP states when Russia moved out

You did it again. And you keep doing it.

It is not just a matter of the NATO "moving in" as you put it - it is equally a matter of those ex - Soviet states rejecting Russia. This is the key thing - huge countries in eastern Europe REJECTING Russian influence.

Simply blaming the whole thing on EU/US expansion is a stupid over simplification.

[XJ Flyer]

toppstuff said:

tenpenceshort said:

XJ Flyer said:

You're right Putin's mind,like mine,lives in the more stable safer world of the Cold War rather than the NATO expansionist one that we're in now.

Serious question; are you utterly mental?

Given the enormous amount of time he spends on this thread saying the same thing using a lot of words, the answer is probably yes. Or he may be Russian.

He seems to be ignoring the simple fact that there are scores of millions of people in the formerly oppressed eastern bloc who detest Russia. The EU is not so much welcoming them, as they are desperately trying to turn away from the Kremlins influence. It does not really matter if the EU encourages them or not - there are many millions of people who reject Putin. This is his problem, not some EU/US hegemony.

Poles, Hungarians, Czechs etc would do anything to not go back to the old days.

Russia wouldnt have the problem of losing the old USSR if their neighbours didn't despise them.

So other than a load of EU propaganda how do you reach the conclusion that Eastern Europe and us getting involved in it's historic 'issues' with Russia is any more welcome here than it is in Russia.Yes let them 'reject' Russia if they really must but that's no reason to put western Europe at risk over slavic issues.It is not our problem or our fight.At least obviously until now.Which leaves the glaring question what changed in the relationship between NATO and Russia and western defence policy regards same.

[XJ Flyer]

toppstuff said:

XJ Flyer said:

It's not difficult.Assuming NATO hadn't moved into those ex soviet and WP states when Russia moved out

You did it again. And you keep doing it.

It is not just a matter of the NATO "moving in" as you put it - it is equally a matter of those ex - Soviet states rejecting Russia. This is the key thing - huge countries in eastern Europe REJECTING Russian influence.

Simply blaming the whole thing on EU/US expansion is a stupid over simplification.

And you've again conveniently ignored the issue of NATO moving in when Russia pulled out.If that isn't a recipe for WW3 nothing is.Let alone then adding to problem by trying to do the same in Ukraine.The EU and it's supporters are the insane lot in all this no one else.

[vonuber]

XJ Flyer said:

The EU and it's supporters are the insane lot in all this no one else.

Aha. You definitely work for the kremlin!

[Finlandia]

XJ Flyer said:

2013BRM said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

No one ever said that Russia isn't a potential adversary.

Good. They have a track record filled with horror, which the ex Soviet/WP countries and their populations were subjected to. This again brings us to the second part of my post, the fear and hate which is the biggest reason for these countries to join the EU and NATO.

XJ Flyer said:

It's obvious that the EU and NATO intend to move into Ukraine

It's mainly Ukraine who wants to get closer to the EU and NATO, for fear and simply for being pretty tired of being bullied by Soviet and later Russia. Most ex Soviet/WP countries have gone this route, it's easy enough to understand if you have spent time in any of the countries or with the people of these countries. They can tell you stories you wish you had never heard.

The facts say that Ukraine is/would be just another in a long line of EU/NATO eastward expansion.With the difference that it would cross the line in the sand which Russia isn't prepared to allow.

As I've said we've been here before at Yalta and Potsdam and the Cold War which followed it.In all cases we ( rightly ) decided that it wasn't worth the inevitable war which we couldn't win just to put Russia in it's place.The fact is Russia has since walked away from those historic 'issues' and given those people their lives and countries back.The last thing we should be doing is now supporting them in an attempt to get 'pay back' against Russia by moving NATO into old Soviet turf.Especially when that 'turf' happens to be disputed Russian territory itself in Ukraine.

As for the Cold War western Europe ( rightly ) decided that it's not worth taking ourselves out against Russia for eastern Europe and if/when push comes to shove nothing should have changed in that regard.No matter how much the EU propaganda tries to say otherwise.

While if it's supposedly all about 'payback' that might explain at least some of why Germany went to war against Russia and it's then WW1 slavic allies in WW2.If we've learn't anything from those two wars it should be that we don't want a 3 rd for the same reasons.

Read what I wrote again, it's mainly the ex Soviet/WP countries wanting to look west. They are afraid of the east. Rightfully so.

As I said there is a limit as to how far we should push east,thereby putting everyone at more risk of a major war,just to take in those who for whatever reason have 'issues' with Russia,just to make them feel better/stronger.Which in reality translates as slavic countries that for whatever reason want to get payback against Russia dragging us into their private fight.If that was good enough for NATO to maintain our defence during the Cold War then it's good enough now.

What has the cold war got to do with anything? During it, these countries were a part of Soviet and/or WP, now they are not, and they seek west instead of east.

How much time have you spent in Estonia for example? Have you talked with any Estonians about their "issues" with Soviet/Russia?
To me, it's obvious that you haven't.

Save your breath mate, he hasn't even registered your name and the significance of the history of the region. I mentioned earlier that Ukraine wants to look east and he claimed then it was some kind of expansionist act by NATO, barking

Personally I couldn't care less what Estonians think about anything.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Sunday 3rd August 15:15

How does one argue that, you have won the debate, congratulations.

Lucky for us Europeans that US cared a little more about what we thought 70 years ago, but what do you care?

[Mojocvh]

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

2013BRM said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

No one ever said that Russia isn't a potential adversary.

Good. They have a track record filled with horror, which the ex Soviet/WP countries and their populations were subjected to. This again brings us to the second part of my post, the fear and hate which is the biggest reason for these countries to join the EU and NATO.

XJ Flyer said:

It's obvious that the EU and NATO intend to move into Ukraine

It's mainly Ukraine who wants to get closer to the EU and NATO, for fear and simply for being pretty tired of being bullied by Soviet and later Russia. Most ex Soviet/WP countries have gone this route, it's easy enough to understand if you have spent time in any of the countries or with the people of these countries. They can tell you stories you wish you had never heard.

The facts say that Ukraine is/would be just another in a long line of EU/NATO eastward expansion.With the difference that it would cross the line in the sand which Russia isn't prepared to allow.

As I've said we've been here before at Yalta and Potsdam and the Cold War which followed it.In all cases we ( rightly ) decided that it wasn't worth the inevitable war which we couldn't win just to put Russia in it's place.The fact is Russia has since walked away from those historic 'issues' and given those people their lives and countries back.The last thing we should be doing is now supporting them in an attempt to get 'pay back' against Russia by moving NATO into old Soviet turf.Especially when that 'turf' happens to be disputed Russian territory itself in Ukraine.

As for the Cold War western Europe ( rightly ) decided that it's not worth taking ourselves out against Russia for eastern Europe and if/when push comes to shove nothing should have changed in that regard.No matter how much the EU propaganda tries to say otherwise.

While if it's supposedly all about 'payback' that might explain at least some of why Germany went to war against Russia and it's then WW1 slavic allies in WW2.If we've learn't anything from those two wars it should be that we don't want a 3 rd for the same reasons.

Read what I wrote again, it's mainly the ex Soviet/WP countries wanting to look west. They are afraid of the east. Rightfully so.

As I said there is a limit as to how far we should push east,thereby putting everyone at more risk of a major war,just to take in those who for whatever reason have 'issues' with Russia,just to make them feel better/stronger.Which in reality translates as slavic countries that for whatever reason want to get payback against Russia dragging us into their private fight.If that was good enough for NATO to maintain our defence during the Cold War then it's good enough now.

What has the cold war got to do with anything? During it, these countries were a part of Soviet and/or WP, now they are not, and they seek west instead of east.

How much time have you spent in Estonia for example? Have you talked with any Estonians about their "issues" with Soviet/Russia?
To me, it's obvious that you haven't.

Save your breath mate, he hasn't even registered your name and the significance of the history of the region. I mentioned earlier that Ukraine wants to look east and he claimed then it was some kind of expansionist act by NATO, barking

Personally I couldn't care less what Estonians think about anything.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Sunday 3rd August 15:15

How does one argue that, you have won the debate, congratulations.

Lucky for us Europeans that US cared a little more about what we thought 70 years ago, but what do you care?

Just so long as he wins on the 'ternet....

[AreOut]

skyrover said:

Russian Mig-29 aircraft have been intercepted over Ukrainian territory although no shots have been fired.

don't believe everything you hear, in current situation they wouldn't hesitate to shoot and down any russian plane to actually prove it violated their airspace

[mjb1]

It's all about the gas really. Western Europe relies on Russian gas that is delivered via pipelines across Ukraine. That is what they're really fighting over. Without it, we're all in for a cold winter.

The USA have no real interest in Ukraine, as the gas supply doesn't affect them. That's why they aren't being a louder voice in all this.

Anyone for fracking?

[anonymous-user]

mjb1 said:

It's all about the gas really. Western Europe relies on Russian gas that is delivered via pipelines across Ukraine. That is what they're really fighting over. Without it, we're all in for a cold winter.

The USA have no real interest in Ukraine, as the gas supply doesn't affect them. That's why they aren't being a louder voice in all this.

Anyone for fracking?

I mentioned this a long time ago but doesn't fit in with many posters fantasy posts about the cold war and other st.

The main hub of the gas network is in the area being occupied.

[Jimbeaux]

XJ Flyer said:

Qwert1e said:

XJ Flyer said:

As I said there is a limit as to how far we should push east,thereby putting everyone at more risk of a major war,just to take in those who for whatever reason have 'issues' with Russia,just to make them feel better/stronger.Which in reality translates as slavic countries that for whatever reason want to get payback against Russia dragging us into their private fight.If that was good enough for NATO to maintain our defence during the Cold War then it's good enough now.

I've read that a couple of times but still have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say.

It's not difficult.Assuming NATO hadn't moved into those ex soviet and WP states when Russia moved out and assuming NATO has no designs on Ukraine would Ukraine be in the situation it's in now.As I said if NATO's borders during the Cold War were good enough to guarantee our defence before the move east what's changed.While assuming NATO has no offensive designs against Russia why the need for NATO to move into those areas when Russia pulled out at all.

A nation choosing to join an alliance is their business. That does not mean NATO actually set up shop in that country.

Let's all stop and understand the truth of the matter here. Ukraine was the point at which the Russian gas pipeline branched out and went its different destinations. The Ukraine was given discounts on their gas for being the depot of sorts. Some businessmen, mostly German, decided it would be a good idea to have a pipeline for Europe going through there. Germany became the depot of sorts via the Nord Stream pipeline and received the discounts. Ukraine lost their discount status and, with the new price, own around $197,000,000 in back fees to the Russian gas company, which means they owe Vlad and his pals. This is about money, not being afraid of NATO inching into what was once before your territory.

[XJ Flyer]

Finlandia said:

XJ Flyer said:

Personally I couldn't care less what Estonians think about anything.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Sunday 3rd August 15:15

How does one argue that, you have won the debate, congratulations.

Lucky for us Europeans that US cared a little more about what we thought 70 years ago, but what do you care?

To be fair you'd need to include all the inconvenient historical facts as part of my point.Inconvenient facts like these suggest that what we're seeing now is just another example of historic East European loyalties changing with the wind to suit themselves and whoever pays the most.With Britain,like it's current East European 'allies',just making enemies and alliances to suit the prevailing political mood.With at least Poland in WW1 having fought on both sides as part of it's self interest policy.

www.lonelyplanet.com/estonia/history

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poland_during_Wo...

As for the US it only entered WW1 in it's final year and WW2 after being attacked by Japan in 1941 not with us when we entered it in 1939.IE America can only be relied upon from our point of view 'if' it's in America's interests.Which is why our government rightly saw the importance of our own idependent nuclear deterrent.

WW2 having directly resulted from the aftermath of WW1 which was caused by Britain and France siding with Russia in support of it's Slavic allies against Germany.Ironically Russia then forming part of the German Axis alliance in WW2 until 1941 when Germany turned on them.

All I see in the current situation is just more of the same in Russia needing to be left well alone and slavic East European countries siding with whoever pays the most and seen as being the most advantageous wether it be Russia or Germany/EU.

With the UK government as usual being just as potentially catastrophically clueless as it was in 1914 in not staying well out of it all and looking after our selves.Which,just like America,means not getting into other people's fights unless we absolutely need to.In which case you can bet,in a nuclear armed world,if/when push comes to shove America wouldn't put it's homeland at risk to save western Europe let alone Eastern Europe.Just as we shouldn't

[XJ Flyer]

The Spruce goose said:

mjb1 said:

It's all about the gas really. Western Europe relies on Russian gas that is delivered via pipelines across Ukraine. That is what they're really fighting over. Without it, we're all in for a cold winter.

The USA have no real interest in Ukraine, as the gas supply doesn't affect them. That's why they aren't being a louder voice in all this.

Anyone for fracking?

I mentioned this a long time ago but doesn't fit in with many posters fantasy posts about the cold war and other st.

The main hub of the gas network is in the area being occupied.

How does control over Ukraine provide control over 'Russian' gas.IE regardless of who controls the pipeline Russia holds the gas that goes through them.So NATO gets Ukraine how does that make Russian gas supplies any more guaranteed.More like less being that Russia isn't going to provide gas to it's potential enemies.As I said the EU supporters are on another planet.