The Situation in the Ukraine. #13

Neutrality wrote:Nuland is going to Moscow this Sunday. I don't know why it's so soon because she's basically Kerry's deputy and Kerry himself has visited Moscow just a few days ago. Why the sudden rush? Obama right now is doing heavy lobbying in the Middle East, assuring security (the recently announced anti-rocket shield). McCain refused to be one of Poroshenko's advisors and apparently other members have bailed too ( I don't know who specifically these people are). I don't want to sound overly optimistic but I really think Poroshenko is being dumped in an accelerated pace. Something major is going to happen very soon but I can't pinpoint exactly what.

The whole thing stinks of a deal. Maybe Nuland offer a VERBAL promise to lift sanctions and normalize partnership if Russia invades New Russia and apprehend all NAF leaders including Zackarchenko. If Putin falls for it then that would be worse than the breakup of USSR when NATO promised not to expand to Russia's border and broke its own VERBAL promise. In the west, VERBAL promises are nothing.

Putin at this point does not care about New Russia. It was Strelkov who set up New Russia. Putin never planned for New Russia nor does he want it. Putin always talks about partnership with the US, the EU, brother relations with Ukraine. So it would not be surprising if the Russian army is ordered to invade New Russia together with Ukraine like what the USSR and Germany did to Poland in 1939.

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150517/1022228426.html

Meanwhile,

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/kyiv-opens-day-of-europe-388737.html

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/poroshenko-nothing-will-make-ukraine-to-betray-european-aspirations-388734.html

Zuckerberg says Facebook deletes hate speech in Ukraine, specially Ukrainians on Facebook calling for slaughtering ethnic Russians and genocide of ethnic Russians.

http://rt.com/news/258981-ukraine-poroshenko-facebook-office/

It looks like Poroshenko or Yatsenut or both will be dumped soon.. if a deal reached in Moscow.
US already have control of Ukraine ,and it will be in their interest to maintain it ,even if that means forcing kiev to become a more democratic nation.. and do some trade off with the rebels and give them some autonomy.. it makes sense for them..  This means delaying the ukrainian
full anti Russian project ,and first save Ukraine economy from collapsing and later when conditions better do it again. Because so far the west still can get Ukraine into NATO in an association without DOnetsk and Lugansk and Crimea and deploy their missile shield there in
the zones controlled by Kiev like kharkiv etc..  US companies can make a lot of money with the
privatization of Ukraine ,buying land for almost free.  So thinking like mafia or devils advocate..
they will be foolish to allow Ukraine disband in pieces ,and later lose total control of it and Russia to gain control of half of Ukraine from Odessa to Kharkiv.  So for them makes sense delay things
and end the war and focus of re-organizing Ukraine economy ideal for American Interest..
if my estimates are correct.. it sounds like the less bad option for Russia. than disbanding the nation and see for example the nuclear reactors destroyed by CIA criminals all of them and have 25 million refugees in RUssia.  And neither is good for US government to lose the support of majority of Europe over their hostile policies in Ukraine.

Mcain and the Republicans are saying in public they dissappointed with Obama for not providing
lethal weapons to kiev.. And recently approved sending lethal weapons to ukraine.. .So effectively there is a division not only in Europe over how to solve Ukraine conflict ,but also in US Goverment too.   Still the danger is not over.. the CIA and Republican Senate and Contress can continue creating problems in Ukraine ,even if Obama move in the other direction..
But at least now it looks like there is hope.. for war to end for at least the rest of the year.

and no Russia will not betray the leadership of Donetsk and Lugansk.. it will never allow Ukraine
to overrun Rebel positions and start a major deportation of ethnic Russians to other zones ,stealing their properties.. Strelkov was removed because he wanted to go with tanks to kiev..
He is patriotic to Russia and good leader ,but he is not good in politics.. do not understand the dangers and huge time bomb that ukraine is... neither understand the many civilians that they will end fighting moving to kiev .. it will have been really bad if the war continues.

Flagship Victory wrote:Zuckerberg says Facebook deletes hate speech in Ukraine, specially Ukrainians on Facebook calling for slaughtering ethnic Russians and genocide of ethnic Russians.

http://rt.com/news/258981-ukraine-poroshenko-facebook-office/

And facists supporters tried to boycott Facebook and accused it of being influenced by... Russia

http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150516/1022224068.html

He doesn't even deny it... because he's actually proud to be murdering the "subhumans".

It seems thankfully there are still a few drops of journalistic integrity in french journalism.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:
He doesn't even deny it... because he's actually proud to be murdering the "subhumans".

It seems thankfully there are still a few drops of journalistic integrity in french journalism.

It's interesting how he tries to externalize onto blaming Putin.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:
He doesn't even deny it... because he's actually proud to be murdering the "subhumans".

It seems thankfully there are still a few drops of journalistic integrity in french journalism.

When he is asked about the kerry/lavrov meeting, he says that in his opinion sochi is not the best resort.

Maybe he can think of a better resort?

Like crimea?

Muhahahahaah

A hypothetical view of the politics behind the scenes is that the US at the moment has the opportunity to eventually have NATO bases directly on the Ukranian border with Russia  and be, as the crow flies, little more than 400 km from Moscow. While the Baltic states are already NATO members, I do not see any NATO bases appearing that will contain enough forces for an offensive war to be launched from then, only a holding operation or diversion. This will of course will be deadly to the populations of those countries with no risk to American cities, as usual. However, Ukraine is very different and hostile forces on the border are, IMO, an existential threat to Russia. I do not say these hypothetical NATO bases will appear overnight, but they will eventually. I cannot see America spoiling the chance to have a substantial offensive force on the Russia/Ukraine border by allowing the circumstances to develop that would give Russia the excuse to invade Ukraine. I mean within the present circumstances involving the situation in Ukraine and not specifically to pre-empt any attempt by NATO to gain a foothold, tho of course this may have to happen anyway. I think that America will see it as a fair trade off to let Donetsk and Lugansk become seperate states in the first instance, and later, when the dust has settled in a few years, become part of Russia, if otherwise Ukraine still exists and Americans can gradually move offensive forces to the border.

To Washington, Kiev is nothing and Ukranians are cattle to be milked for America's purposes. Ukraine, Belarus and western Russia, in a non nuclear scenario or in any hypothetical pre nuclear phase of WWIII will be the battleground. So, Poroshenko not ditched but sidelined and a very convoluted diplomatic dance will now take place that will probably see Donetsk and Lugansk eventually properly free of Kiev so long as America has the possibility to plant NATO bases on the border. I have a gloomy view on this and believe that WWIII began at Maidan and all that followed is simply a precursor to an inevitable war. I think Poroshenko knows exactly what his true position is and will make an attempt before it is too late to resolve the situation militarily whether the Americans agree or not. The American calculation being to decide if Poroshenko can win, therefore giving the US an even longer length of border to control, or if Russia will intervene with the possibility of it getting out of control and Ukraine at least to the Dnepr being lost to the Americans. Looking further ahead, in either scenario of DNR/LNR gaining or loosing independance, if America has the border as it is now from north of Lugansk to Belarus, then look to the next Maidan being in Minsk. Lukashenko will not live for ever, stuff happens at times and any leader, no matter how strong, is dependent on the loyalty of those around him. Don't forget what happened to Choushesku, and others in the past.

flamming_python wrote:Respect for him and FB, at least someone is doing something about it.

Is not like losing more users to Vkontakte has nothing to do with it.

Khepesh wrote:A hypothetical view of the politics behind the scenes is that the US at the moment has the opportunity to eventually have NATO bases directly on the Ukranian border with Russia  and be, as the crow flies, little more than 400 km from Moscow. While the Baltic states are already NATO members, I do not see any NATO bases appearing that will contain enough forces for an offensive war to be launched from then, only a holding operation or diversion. This will of course will be deadly to the populations of those countries with no risk to American cities, as usual. However, Ukraine is very different and hostile forces on the border are, IMO, an existential threat to Russia. I do not say these hypothetical NATO bases will appear overnight, but they will eventually. I cannot see America spoiling the chance to have a substantial offensive force on the Russia/Ukraine border by allowing the circumstances to develop that would give Russia the excuse to invade Ukraine. I mean within the present circumstances involving the situation in Ukraine and not specifically to pre-empt any attempt by NATO to gain a foothold, tho of course this may have to happen anyway. I think that America will see it as a fair trade off to let Donetsk and Lugansk become seperate states in the first instance, and later, when the dust has settled in a few years, become part of Russia, if otherwise Ukraine still exists and Americans can gradually move offensive forces to the border.

To Washington, Kiev is nothing and Ukranians are cattle to be milked for America's purposes. Ukraine, Belarus and western Russia, in a non nuclear scenario or in any hypothetical pre nuclear phase of WWIII will be the battleground. So, Poroshenko not ditched but sidelined and a very convoluted diplomatic dance will now take place that will probably see Donetsk and Lugansk eventually properly free of Kiev so long as America has the possibility to plant NATO bases on the border. I have a gloomy view on this and believe that WWIII began at Maidan and all that followed is simply a precursor to an inevitable war. I think Poroshenko knows exactly what his true position is and will make an attempt before it is too late to resolve the situation militarily whether the Americans agree or not. The American calculation being to decide if Poroshenko can win, therefore giving the US an even longer length of border to control, or if Russia will intervene with the possibility of it getting out of control and Ukraine at least to the Dnepr being lost to the Americans. Looking further ahead, in either scenario of DNR/LNR gaining or loosing independance, if America has the border as it is now from north of Lugansk to Belarus, then look to the next Maidan being in Minsk. Lukashenko will not live for ever, stuff happens at times and any leader, no matter how strong, is dependent on the loyalty of those around him. Don't forget what happened to Choushesku, and others in the past.

Didn't Poroshenko promise a national referendum about American bases on Ukrainian soil? Or was it purely to decide whether or not the country should join NATO?

Regarding Belarus, I agree it's a country with a potential uprising in the making but so far the country is far from being Ukraine pre-Maidan. The economic situation seems to be more or less stable but it's certainly not as bad as it was in Ukraine before Maidan. The authoritarian system makes it hard for any uprising to take place and even if it does, like it almost happened several years ago, it will be met with a harsh response. The West can't threaten with sanctions because the country is already more or less isolated from significant international participation (AFAIK).

The barbaric and ruthless uprising of Maidan and its effects today (= economic collapse) will be a lesson to the people of Belarus and Russia on what NOT to do. What it did instead is show that a strong and united coutry is needed. Its sovereignty preserverd and foreign meddling kept out. There's a saying in Russian: if you don't want to feed your army, you'll feed another army. That's precisely what's happening in Ukraine right now with American soldiers.

Flagship Victory wrote:Intense firefight. NAF using small arms and a 23 mm AA gun because not allowed to use heavy weapons because of Minsk. UAF using mortars and ATGM not restricted by Minsk. This differential in heavy weapons NAF not allowed to use UAF allowed to use puts NAF at a significant disadvantage Thanks Putin. Can't wait for Putin to be out of office. 3 more years. Yes We Can!  

Is it really true that Putin is hostile to Novorossiya and preventing Novorossiya a fair fight against the Kiev junta? What is his motive? It seems strange that Putin would wish a defeat for Novorossiya since it would be terrible for Russia and Russia's security.

Nice change of mind in Israel newspaper

Putin says Ukraine being overrun by fascists - and he may be right

Flagship Victory wrote:Intense firefight. NAF using small arms and a 23 mm AA gun because not allowed to use heavy weapons because of Minsk. UAF using mortars and ATGM not restricted by Minsk. This differential in heavy weapons NAF not allowed to use UAF allowed to use puts NAF at a significant disadvantage Thanks Putin. Can't wait for Putin to be out of office. 3 more years. Yes We Can!  

Majority of the people here reacted and react emotionally about the entire war of US and its vassals and Israel against russia and russians, more than a half of people here would already send in full force and fuck up relations on a long term run to secure russia and all russians and for benefit of all slavic people while undermining and bedding the US into its own dug up grave in economy ad political sphere. You in position of a commander you would act like 1st Chechen war sending in tanks in cities without any tactics and would f*ck it up big time. Wars are won by cold blooded calculation and management of resources not by throwing in everything you have in the first round like you would play Poker and go all in.

What i said about 6 month's ago is still the case it is a war on long term goals, aimed to destabilize and excelerate over time into a european WW3 scenario we see that with the NATO EU countries that are saber-rattling and making alot of bullshit headlines for fear mongering to justify new budgets and more money for military, like this nonsense of "Von der Leyen inspects G-36 and deems them unsufficient" a cvnt that has never ever held a weapon in her life, like this nonsense of DM53 not being sufficient now they want DEPLETED URANIUM into service to pollude Europe in a Euro-Meatshield against russia.

If people by now haven't figured out the parallels and the signs for a major War than you are probably the ones being part of fueling it by being silent and pretending there is nothing to happen.

Karl Haushofer wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:Intense firefight. NAF using small arms and a 23 mm AA gun because not allowed to use heavy weapons because of Minsk. UAF using mortars and ATGM not restricted by Minsk. This differential in heavy weapons NAF not allowed to use UAF allowed to use puts NAF at a significant disadvantage Thanks Putin. Can't wait for Putin to be out of office. 3 more years. Yes We Can!  

Is it really true that Putin is hostile to Novorossiya and preventing Novorossiya a fair fight against the Kiev junta? What is his motive? It seems strange that Putin would wish a defeat for Novorossiya since it would be terrible for Russia and Russia's security.

I'm starting to loose count of just how many times the DPR/LPR have been "defeated" by the junta thanks to the evil traitor Putin....can some you "geniuses" please remind me

Cyberspec wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:Intense firefight. NAF using small arms and a 23 mm AA gun because not allowed to use heavy weapons because of Minsk. UAF using mortars and ATGM not restricted by Minsk. This differential in heavy weapons NAF not allowed to use UAF allowed to use puts NAF at a significant disadvantage Thanks Putin. Can't wait for Putin to be out of office. 3 more years. Yes We Can!  

Is it really true that Putin is hostile to Novorossiya and preventing Novorossiya a fair fight against the Kiev junta? What is his motive? It seems strange that Putin would wish a defeat for Novorossiya since it would be terrible for Russia and Russia's security.

I'm starting to loose count of just how many times the DPR/LPR have been "defeated" by the junta thanks to the evil traitor Putin....can some you "geniuses" please remind me

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

Flagship Victory wrote:The whole thing stinks of a deal. Maybe Nuland offer a VERBAL promise to lift sanctions and normalize partnership if Russia invades New Russia and apprehend all NAF leaders including Zackarchenko. If Putin falls for it then that would be worse than the breakup of USSR when NATO promised not to expand to Russia's border and broke its own VERBAL promise. In the west, VERBAL promises are nothing.

Putin at this point does not care about New Russia. It was Strelkov who set up New Russia. Putin never planned for New Russia nor does he want it. Putin always talks about partnership with the US, the EU, brother relations with Ukraine. So it would not be surprising if the Russian army is ordered to invade New Russia together with Ukraine like what the USSR and Germany did to Poland in 1939.

Nice fantasy movie, when can I watch it?

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Russia is not the US... Putin can express an opinion without being morally obliged to invade a foreign country.

Neutrality wrote:

Khepesh wrote:A hypothetical view of the politics behind the scenes is that the US at the moment has the opportunity to eventually have NATO bases directly on the Ukranian border with Russia  and be, as the crow flies, little more than 400 km from Moscow. While the Baltic states are already NATO members, I do not see any NATO bases appearing that will contain enough forces for an offensive war to be launched from then, only a holding operation or diversion. This will of course will be deadly to the populations of those countries with no risk to American cities, as usual. However, Ukraine is very different and hostile forces on the border are, IMO, an existential threat to Russia. I do not say these hypothetical NATO bases will appear overnight, but they will eventually. I cannot see America spoiling the chance to have a substantial offensive force on the Russia/Ukraine border by allowing the circumstances to develop that would give Russia the excuse to invade Ukraine. I mean within the present circumstances involving the situation in Ukraine and not specifically to pre-empt any attempt by NATO to gain a foothold, tho of course this may have to happen anyway. I think that America will see it as a fair trade off to let Donetsk and Lugansk become seperate states in the first instance, and later, when the dust has settled in a few years, become part of Russia, if otherwise Ukraine still exists and Americans can gradually move offensive forces to the border.

To Washington, Kiev is nothing and Ukranians are cattle to be milked for America's purposes. Ukraine, Belarus and western Russia, in a non nuclear scenario or in any hypothetical pre nuclear phase of WWIII will be the battleground. So, Poroshenko not ditched but sidelined and a very convoluted diplomatic dance will now take place that will probably see Donetsk and Lugansk eventually properly free of Kiev so long as America has the possibility to plant NATO bases on the border. I have a gloomy view on this and believe that WWIII began at Maidan and all that followed is simply a precursor to an inevitable war. I think Poroshenko knows exactly what his true position is and will make an attempt before it is too late to resolve the situation militarily whether the Americans agree or not. The American calculation being to decide if Poroshenko can win, therefore giving the US an even longer length of border to control, or if Russia will intervene with the possibility of it getting out of control and Ukraine at least to the Dnepr being lost to the Americans. Looking further ahead, in either scenario of DNR/LNR gaining or loosing independance, if America has the border as it is now from north of Lugansk to Belarus, then look to the next Maidan being in Minsk. Lukashenko will not live for ever, stuff happens at times and any leader, no matter how strong, is dependent on the loyalty of those around him. Don't forget what happened to Choushesku, and others in the past.

Didn't Poroshenko promise a national referendum about American bases on Ukrainian soil? Or was it purely to decide whether or not the country should join NATO?

Regarding Belarus, I agree it's a country with a potential uprising in the making but so far the country is far from being Ukraine pre-Maidan. The economic situation seems to be more or less stable but it's certainly not as bad as it was in Ukraine before Maidan. The authoritarian system makes it hard for any uprising to take place and even if it does, like it almost happened several years ago, it will be met with a harsh response. The West can't threaten with sanctions because the country is already more or less isolated from significant international participation (AFAIK).

The barbaric and ruthless uprising of Maidan and its effects today (= economic collapse) will be a lesson to the people of Belarus and Russia on what NOT to do. What it did instead is show that a strong and united coutry is needed. Its sovereignty preserverd and foreign meddling kept out. There's a saying in Russian: if you don't want to feed your army, you'll feed another army. That's precisely what's happening in Ukraine right now with American soldiers.

Politicians will say whatever they think "their" people need or want to hear. Besides, circumstances can change in a few days and what was once seen as unthinkable can soon be seen as a necessity. It does not even need Ukraine to be part of NATO as they can make a bilateral treaty with USA to let their country be used as a base for their own "protection" as America "cares" about them so much.

Well, no, I don't see a maidan happening in Minsk soon, but I do see America wanting one to happen and doing whatever they can to create one whether it is in five years or twenty years. It has taken 24 years to get to the position we have in Ukraine and I believe that while specific actions are not part of any "master plan", there is a plan to reduce Russia to it's core, and all surrounding countries, except China, being in the pocket of America, even the central Asian republics eventually. I do not doubt that America will do all it can to provoke a maidan in Minsk as the puppeteers in Washington are meglomaniac loonies.

And this is why Russia needs to act, not sitting on the sidelines waiting to eventually be invaded by USA. Soon, Russia will effectively be by itself with no allies or partners, and if they get surrounded by NATO and US bases and troops, they may feel they have the opportunity to kill off Russia and invade. Putin will go down in history as weak and foolish for allowing all of this to happen and did nothing to prevent it.

But they wont attack directly. They will throw separatists around and eventually Russia will be a tenth the size it is now.

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Since when has Putin sent weapons? Sounds like propaganda to me.

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Sure you low life troll, sending weapons to protect russia for its existence is fueling the war...russia has buinsess there, the west never will have buisness there.

Werewolf wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Sure you low life troll, sending weapons to protect russia for its existence is fueling the war...russia has buinsess there, the west never will have buisness there.

You know, I know, we all know what US goal is. In the end, Russia will be completely surrounded by US and NATO, and if a war does not start, it will allow US to easily influence Russia and Russians, and convince them to break apart Russia. So Russia could never again be a power. And US has been quite successful due to Russias gross incompetence. No, it isnt in Russias place to take care of other nations economically, but if they do not want to be invaded in multitude of ways, they will need to start taking care of other nations like US does.

Now Russia has a rather large "brotherly" nation at its borders willing to help US invade it. While Putin and Co sit on their collective asses and do f all.

People here say Putin won. What has he won? He lost another nation, at his borders, that will gladly host US bases and is openly hostile to Russia. That sounds like a MAJOR defeate to me. I fear for Russias future.

Werewolf wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Sure you low life troll, sending weapons to protect russia for its existence is fueling the war...russia has buinsess there, the west never will have buisness there.

Oh, so you admit that russia is not interested in peaceful solution? Thanks for proving my point buddy