Malaysian Airlines 777 down on Ukraine / Russia Border?
Discussion
skyrover said:
An estimated 10,000 to 15,000 Russian soldiers have been deployed in Ukraine
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/01/russi...
Makes complete sense with the sudden turnaround in the situation on the ground.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/01/russi...
Some people on this thread for some reason seem to have a really warped view of Putin and Russia. Must be all the topless hunting pictures.
vonuber said:
Makes complete sense with the sudden turnaround in the situation on the ground.
Some people on this thread for some reason seem to have a really warped view of Putin and Russia. Must be all the topless hunting pictures.
It could be that they are members of this go getting and dynamic bunch? Some people on this thread for some reason seem to have a really warped view of Putin and Russia. Must be all the topless hunting pictures.
www.cpgb.org.uk
A former White House Security Analyst pointed out that this is less a military attack on Ukraine as it is an economic one. Ukraine's economy was already poor, by introducing more instability into the country, Putin is discouraging the foreign investment needed; therefore, it will get so bad that Ukraine will be forced to cut a deal favorable to Russia.
Cobnapint said:
Then, if you want a bit more, you bully the incumbent government of that particular sovereign state you are 'dealing' with, until you get a bit more.
How did that interim government come to power? Let's rehash that part. IIRC it was a violet coup, in which there was ample evidence that the United States and possibly other Western governments were contributing financial and material support to groups like Svoboda. There were even US contractors photographed on the ground -- Xe/Academi/Blackwater I believe (or perhaps they have chosen to hide behind a new name now). These tactics mimic what the US govt. has been doing to destabilize countries like Venezuela and others in South America for years. Edited by scherzkeks on Tuesday 2nd September 21:32
Work on the pipeline between Russia and China is well underway. Russia does not want to have to depend soley on Europe as a customer. Good business I suppose; however, that gives Putin the upper hand in that he will be able to afford to cut off Europe instead of just threatening to if they take action he dislikes.
Jimbeaux said:
Work on the pipeline between Russia and China is well underway. Russia does not want to have to depend soley on Europe as a customer. Good business I suppose; however, that gives Putin the upper hand in that he will be able to afford to cut off Europe instead of just threatening to if they take action he dislikes.
True - but the Chinese are just hedging their exposure with the Russian pipeline. The Chinese will get their energy from anywhere and everywhere and diversify across multiple sources.The Chinese and the Russians are like two silverback gorillas however. They ain't never going to be friends.
And it is China who is in charge.
toppstuff said:
Jimbeaux said:
Work on the pipeline between Russia and China is well underway. Russia does not want to have to depend soley on Europe as a customer. Good business I suppose; however, that gives Putin the upper hand in that he will be able to afford to cut off Europe instead of just threatening to if they take action he dislikes.
True - but the Chinese are just hedging their exposure with the Russian pipeline. The Chinese will get their energy from anywhere and everywhere and diversify across multiple sources.The Chinese and the Russians are like two silverback gorillas however. They ain't never going to be friends.
And it is China who is in charge.
Cobnapint said:
XJ Flyer said:
Since when did NATO have any interests in Crimea whatsoever and what changed and why in that case.Unfortunately Russia understandably doesn't see it the same as you do.Whatever Russia's interests are in the region they are obviously more than ours and naval and air defence assets and keeping supply routes from Russia open to them,obviously form a large part of those interests.
That's what I'm saying, they (NATO) didn't. The interest they are showing now is because Russia has broken the Budapest agreement, entered an independant country and taken part of it for themselves. That doesn't usually go down too well on the international stage a) because it's morally and legally wrong, and b) because everybodys wondering who could be next.Technically speaking, despite the 'referendum', the international community should be standing up for the rights of Ukrainian international borders and sending in the troops (like we did for Kuwait, and Poland) to get the Russians out.
That is what the UN and international agreements actually exist for.
Trouble is, there's alot of unfathomable history down in that corner of the world, the population of Crimea doesn't seem to mind it, and the world doesn't really need another s
tstorm of a war if it can help it - especially one where the enemy is Russia.Edited by Cobnapint on Tuesday 2nd September 02:13
Which then leaves the question of do we really want to go to war with Russia over moving NATO into Eastern Ukraine and Crimea as opposed to letting Russia keep it.Which is basically what the argument is all about.
DMN said:
Now we have the thinnly veiled threat from Putin:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/02/putin...
For all of XJ-Tinfoliers rhetoric about stopping NATO's expansion eastwards, its not working out that way for Putin is it. All he is doing is drawing those countries further towards NATO.
If he wants to stop NATO, then he needs to stop sending his troops in the Ukraine.
NATO's eastward expansion having nothing whatsoever to do with Putin because it started before Putin was ever in office is a fact not tinfoil hat theory.In addition to the 'fact' that NATO's intent to move into all of Ukraine against the wishes of Russia was clear as of 2008 at least.The bit I would say is from Russia's point of view 'if' he wants to stop NATO then the way to do it is by using the Russian nuclear threat to the US homeland.Not by sending in troops to deal the problem on NATO's terms as NATO. expects.Which I'd guess is what he was referring to concerning his nuclear cababilities.Being that there's no point in trying to hold onto Eastern Ukraine and nuking it to do it.The problem is that America is so far in denial that the Cold War is back on that it doesn't even realise or understand the threat.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/02/putin...
For all of XJ-Tinfoliers rhetoric about stopping NATO's expansion eastwards, its not working out that way for Putin is it. All he is doing is drawing those countries further towards NATO.
If he wants to stop NATO, then he needs to stop sending his troops in the Ukraine.
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:29
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:32
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:40
alfaman said:
XJ Flyer said:
Octoposse said:
vonuber said:
The main thing of course is that if Russia hadn't intervened directly, the fighting would in all likelihood have been well over by now.
Yep - and if we'd encouraged Kiev to seek a political solution rather than a military one it wouldn't even have started . . . Ukraine is a sovereign state who wants to turn it's back on Russian control and interference.
It has every right to do that.
You seem to think Ukraine belongs to Russia. It doesn't.
Using your warped conspiratorial logic ... If Scotland voted for independence and join the euro : England would have a right to mass it's army on the border , invade , take over southern Scotland, cause mayhem, to 'protect English interests in Scotland whose rights were being denied by the scots' - especially if the scots didn't want an English puppet as their leader.
toppstuff said:
The Chinese and the Russians are like two silverback gorillas however. They ain't never going to be friends.
And it is China who is in charge.
There seems to be some strange idea amongst the British that China is more of a threat to Russia than it is to us.Almost,if not,to the point of seeing China as an ally.Bad idea.In general no one with any sense arms their enemies.And it is China who is in charge.
www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-china-russia...
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:57
XJ Flyer said:
There seems to be some strange idea amongst the British that China is more of a threat to Russia than it is to us.Almost,if not,to the point of seeing China as an ally.Bad idea.In general no one with any sense arms their enemies.
www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-china-russia...
And two years later not a single piece of military equipment has changed hands.www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-china-russia...
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:57
It is believed this is because the claims of Chinese arm's sales were fabricated by the Russian manufacturer's to drum up interest on the international markets.
Arguably the Chinese have already reached parity with the Russian's military technology.
skyrover said:
Christ! well surely thats the end of Ukraine as we know it, there is no way they have an answer to even slow that lot down let alone stop it seeing as they are already running away from rebels recent growth.Got to feel sorry them though as not that long ago they had Luhansk and Donetsk surrounded and cut off, then the humanitarian aid arrived and seems to have made the Ukrainian army run s
t scared as far as Mariupol. And that will be taken fairly easily..rich85uk said:
Christ! well surely thats the end of Ukraine as we know it, there is no way they have an answer to even slow that lot down let alone stop it seeing as they are already running away from rebels recent growth.
Got to feel sorry them though as not that long ago they had Luhansk and Donetsk surrounded and cut off, then the humanitarian aid arrived and seems to have made the Ukrainian army run st scared as far as Mariupol. And that will be taken fairly easily..
Remember the humanitarian bombing of Libya, this is a humanitarian column in a similar vein.Got to feel sorry them though as not that long ago they had Luhansk and Donetsk surrounded and cut off, then the humanitarian aid arrived and seems to have made the Ukrainian army run s
t scared as far as Mariupol. And that will be taken fairly easily..alfaman said:
You really do talk some utter lopsided crap/ come across as willfully blind.
Ukraine is a sovereign state who wants to turn it's back on Russian control and interference.
It has every right to do that.
You seem to think Ukraine belongs to Russia. It doesn't.
Well, the colossal opening flaw in your argument is that Ukraine – as a matter of unimpeachable fact – did notwant to turn it's back on Russian control and interference . . . Ukraine is a sovereign state who wants to turn it's back on Russian control and interference.
It has every right to do that.
You seem to think Ukraine belongs to Russia. It doesn't.
OK, there were internal division on the issue, but the outcome of the democratic and peaceful political process in Ukraine was the opposite. Strangely (by you logic) it somehow didn’t have every right to do that – so we went for regime change, from which all the subsequent tragedies have flowed.
But never mind the facts, let’s entirely accept your premise: what then is your suggested way forward? Encourage Kiev to fight to the last Ukrainian, or fast track them into NATO so we can fight to the last Dane? We could start the humanitarian appeal now for food, shelter and medical aid for half a million or so refugees.
Or maybe, just maybe, compromise on the sort of deal (recognition of Russian sovereignty in Crimea, minor tweaks to the Ukrainian Constitution, mutual security guarantees) that Moscow is clearly eager to sign up to, and has been eager to sign up to for six months now.
skyrover said:
wow!!! That is a fkload of amour there 
skyrover said:
XJ Flyer said:
There seems to be some strange idea amongst the British that China is more of a threat to Russia than it is to us.Almost,if not,to the point of seeing China as an ally.Bad idea.In general no one with any sense arms their enemies.
www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-china-russia...
And two years later not a single piece of military equipment has changed hands.www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-china-russia...
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:57
It is believed this is because the claims of Chinese arm's sales were fabricated by the Russian manufacturer's to drum up interest on the international markets.
Arguably the Chinese have already reached parity with the Russian's military technology.
http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/china-backs-russia-...
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 22:43
XJ Flyer said:
NATO's eastward expansion having nothing whatsoever to do with Putin because it started before Putin was ever in office is a fact not tinfoil hat theory.In addition to the 'fact' that NATO's intent to move into all of Ukraine against the wishes of Russia was clear as of 2008 at least.The bit I would say is from Russia's point of view 'if' he wants to stop NATO then the way to do it is by using the Russian nuclear threat to the US homeland.Not by sending in troops to deal the problem on NATO's terms as NATO. expects.Which I'd guess is what he was referring to concerning his nuclear cababilities.Being that there's no point in trying to hold onto Eastern Ukraine and nuking it to do it.The problem is that America is so far in denial that the Cold War is back on that it doesn't even realise or understand the threat.
Your "argument" is that Putin is pushing back to stop NATO.Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:29
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:32
Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 2nd September 16:40
The fact is, it isn't working.
Instead of making theose he wishes to have power over come running back, their going even further towards NATO.
If Putin is trying to build a buffer between Russia and NATO, he has failed.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff