The Situation in the Ukraine. #15

Erk wrote:

Khepesh wrote:
I understand what he says perfectly and have said I agree with him. But he does not understand, or shows that he understands, that the war is here now and that people die. His argument in context of what happens now in Donbass can be construed as saying that the people of Donbass should accept bombardment and death for the "greater good", the "cunning plan", and I find that immoral.

Yep, that makes perfect sense, politicians work on percentages, they don't really care about exact casualties etc. What's happening in Donbass is a sin.

So how is anyone going to stop the shelling of Donbass by Kiev and the neo-Nazis?

Khepesh wrote:So, Dennis Pushilin says war within hours, which I have said is hype, yet now a senior journalist at anna-news, Sergei Veselovsky, has made a very strong statement that Ukraine spits on Minsk-2 and that Russia should stop pretending a drop of rain has fallen on cheek when in fact was shot in the face, and that inactivity and silence is seen by the West as simply weakness and that war must now happen. I absolutely do not suggest that Pushilin and Veselovsky say what they do "with permission", but it gets interesting.

Flagship Victory wrote:

Erk wrote:

Khepesh wrote:
I understand what he says perfectly and have said I agree with him. But he does not understand, or shows that he understands, that the war is here now and that people die. His argument in context of what happens now in Donbass can be construed as saying that the people of Donbass should accept bombardment and death for the "greater good", the "cunning plan", and I find that immoral.

Yep, that makes perfect sense, politicians work on percentages, they don't really care about exact casualties etc. What's happening in Donbass is a sin.

So how is anyone going to stop the shelling of Donbass by Kiev and the neo-Nazis?

There is an easy way to stop Maidan shelling Donbas. If Russia accepts Donbas request to join Russia or even deploy Russian peacekeepers, Maidan would not dare to shell Donbas. Russia is a super power. Maidan never dares to mess with Russia. How many bullets fell into Crimea? 0

Maybe not the wisest thing to do diplomatically, but it is the wisest thing to do morally. Maidan could massacre everyone in Donbas yet I don't see Putin accepting Donbas request for peacekeepers.

Back in the early 1990s, Yeltsin accepted South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria's requests to deploy Russian peacekeepers, and therefore Yeltsin stopped Georgia and Moldova from massacring the people of South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria. Putin is not as bold as Yeltsin.

PapaDragon wrote:Russia is not superpower.

Those who put morals before logic quickly put themselves in the grave.

Yeltsin was not bold. Yeltsin was drunk retard.

PapaDragon wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:

Erk wrote:

Khepesh wrote:
I understand what he says perfectly and have said I agree with him. But he does not understand, or shows that he understands, that the war is here now and that people die. His argument in context of what happens now in Donbass can be construed as saying that the people of Donbass should accept bombardment and death for the "greater good", the "cunning plan", and I find that immoral.

Yep, that makes perfect sense, politicians work on percentages, they don't really care about exact casualties etc. What's happening in Donbass is a sin.

So how is anyone going to stop the shelling of Donbass by Kiev and the neo-Nazis?

There is an easy way to stop Maidan shelling Donbas. If Russia accepts Donbas request to join Russia or even deploy Russian peacekeepers, Maidan would not dare to shell Donbas. Russia is a super power. Maidan never dares to mess with Russia. How many bullets fell into Crimea? 0

Maybe not the wisest thing to do diplomatically, but it is the wisest thing to do morally. Maidan could massacre everyone in Donbas yet I don't see Putin accepting Donbas request for peacekeepers.

Back in the early 1990s, Yeltsin accepted South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria's requests to deploy Russian peacekeepers, and therefore Yeltsin stopped Georgia and Moldova from massacring the people of South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria. Putin is not as bold as Yeltsin.

Russia is not superpower.

Those who put morals before logic quickly put themselves in the grave.

Yeltsin was not bold. Yeltsin was drunk retard.

PapaDragon wrote:

Khepesh wrote:So, Dennis Pushilin says war within hours, which I have said is hype, yet now a senior journalist at anna-news, Sergei Veselovsky, has made a very strong statement that Ukraine spits on Minsk-2 and that Russia should stop pretending a drop of rain has fallen on cheek when in fact was shot in the face, and that inactivity and silence is seen by the West as simply weakness and that war must now happen. I absolutely do not suggest that Pushilin and Veselovsky say what they do "with permission", but it gets interesting.

We all forgot one little detail here. Remember that EU sanctions vote? It should be any day now. Either EU drops the whole thing or they officially go full retard. Depending on that either overall environment changes or, should sanctions stay officially in place (more likely option) rebels will be given green light to officially open hunting season on ukrops lasting until December.

This might be the reason for current waiting game. No need to jump the gun until you have the data you need.

For the record, I fully support ''hunting season'' option here but one that is well organized and planned  to tiniest detail. I do not believe in going all ''Leeroy Jenkins'' like some members here suggest.

If you are doing something, do it right.

Flagship Victory wrote:You know, as much as I hate to say it, if Yeltsin is in the Kremlin now, there would be no fighting in Donbas. Why? Because Yeltsin would have accepted Donbas request to deploy Russian peacekeepers to Donbas back in May last year. Yeltsin accepted Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia requests to deploy Russian peacekeepers to prevent Moldova and Georgia from attacking them, and it worked like a charm.

Flagship Victory wrote:You may say bad things about Yeltsin, at least Yeltsin deployed peacekeepers and prevented massacres in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, at least Yeltsin fought 2 Chechen wars to regain Chechnya.

Flagship Victory wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:Russia is not superpower.

Those who put morals before logic quickly put themselves in the grave.

Yeltsin was not bold. Yeltsin was drunk retard.

Russia may or may not be a super power but Russia is the biggest country on the planet. And right now, Russia is not acting like it.

You may say bad things about Yeltsin, at least Yeltsin deployed peacekeepers and prevented massacres in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, at least Yeltsin fought 2 Chechen wars to regain Chechnya. Putin has allowed massacre in Donbas to happen because he refuses to send peacekeepers to Donbas. Putin failed to stop Maidan in its infancy when he could have done so. And had it not been for the heroism of Strelkov, today's Crimea would have been like today's Donbas.

Flagship Victory wrote:Russia may or may not be a super power but Russia is the biggest country on the planet. And right now, Russia is not acting like it.

BKP wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:Russia may or may not be a super power but Russia is the biggest country on the planet. And right now, Russia is not acting like it.

This made me laugh. It's as if someone who had $4,500 cash on hand and was told that the purchase of a home would require a minimum $10,000 cash down payment. Then the person replied "but, but... I've got a whole closet full of Chinese firecrackers!"

Like, so what? That's a complete non-sequitur. Don't really mean to bag on you dude, but that was funny.

Rodinazombie wrote:i think you are spot on, as for the eu vote, im hoping that the eu will vote to keep sanctions in place, and maybe even bring in stricter sanctions in order to force russias hand.  Here you can see the irony and stupidity of the thinking in brussels and washington - if sanctions were dropped it would lessen the chance of russia using force in ukraine, more sanctions does the opposite and pushes russia towards the 'f**k it' point.

Russia is clearly on its best behaviour here,  but allowing people to die without response is unacceptable in my opinion regardless of the sanctions situation. Does russia think that ukraine will stop killing people in donbass if the sanctions are dropped? No, they will continue, so ukrainian aggression must be matched sanctions or no sanctions.

Brin

Flagship Victory wrote:I do not agree with papa that Russia is not a super power. Sure the US may have a more powerful navy, but Russia's land forces sure is a whole lot more powerful. The point is, Russia is acting too soft as the world's biggest country. Russia should at least, AT LEAST, accept Donbas request and send peacekeepers to Donbas to stop the ethnic cleansing. I think even a weak country like Cambodia would have done that if ethnic Cambodians are massacred in a neighboring country.

Flagship Victory wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:Russia is not superpower.

Those who put morals before logic quickly put themselves in the grave.

Yeltsin was not bold. Yeltsin was drunk retard.

Russia may or may not be a super power but Russia is the biggest country on the planet. And right now, Russia is not acting like it.

You may say bad things about Yeltsin, at least Yeltsin deployed peacekeepers and prevented massacres in South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, at least Yeltsin fought 2 Chechen wars to regain Chechnya. Putin has allowed massacre in Donbas to happen because he refuses to send peacekeepers to Donbas. Putin failed to stop Maidan in its infancy when he could have done so. And had it not been for the heroism of Strelkov, today's Crimea would have been like today's Donbas.

Ukrainian leadership, including the president and prime minister, has failed to change the course of the nation for the better: the country is plagued by deep financial and economic troubles, ravaged by an ongoing war, pulled back by widespread corruption and the lack of meaningful reforms.

Yet the people who promised to tackle these major challenges but failed to deliver on their promises remain in power.

For the majority of Ukrainians war is the worst time to change those in charge, said Telepolis, a German Internet magazine. "Above all the war in eastern Ukraine is an important stabilizing factor for the current government," the media outlet added.

In other words, to remain in power they need to flare the flames of war in eastern Ukraine. But few are willing to fight for Kiev there, Telepolis said.

According to the magazine, there is no one, who could replace Poroshenko or Yatsenyuk. Yet the latter has managed to dash the hopes of almost everyone since the February 2014 coup which brought him to power.

"Ukrainians are not satisfied with the work of current Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Both Ukrainians and the governments in the West viewed him as an ideal candidate at the time of an economic crisis, but in the end almost everyone is disappointed in Yatsenyuk," Telepolis explained.

Generally speaking, "hardly anyone is satisfied with the unsuccessful policies [of the current authorities]," the media outlet said, adding that the Yatsenyuk government has completely failed in some areas, for instance with regard to tax reform.

Why do Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk remain in power then?

Ukrainian society "seems to be too tired to introduce any new changes after the second Maidan revolution," Telepolis concluded.

ZN via Google Translate wrote:Украина осталась без драйверов экономического роста
Ukraine was left without a driver of economic growth
Sergei Sledz, Vadim Basta June 12 00:00

The main drivers of growth and development of the economy are exports, investment attractiveness and consumer demand. No business, no jobs, no income, no taxes - must again include the printing press.

Export is not to help

According to data published by the Kiev Institute of Economic Research and Policy Consulting, in turn based on a study of the German Advisory Group, exports of goods and services in the past year has fallen in Ukraine $ 13 billion. US, or 16.6%. In the context of product fell by $ 9.4 billion., Or 14.8%, on services - $ 3.6 billion., Or 24%. Particularly noticeable suffered heavy industry exports: machinery (30.6%), chemical products (28.8%), metals (13%). Exports of transport services has fallen by 27.6%. Almost unchanged food exports - a symbolic drop was 2.1%. Half of the decline in GDP in the last year is explained by the weak export. In 2014, real GDP fell by 6.8% compared to 2013 .; half, i.e. 3.4% fall - "on the conscience" of exports. The export of goods and services in the countries of the Customs Union (CU) decreased by 8.7 billion dollars., Which corresponds to 67% of the total (13 billion US dollars.) Drop in exports. Sales in the EU, contrary to popular belief about the growth also declined, albeit only slightly - by 0.2 bln. (0.8%). The reason - the decline in exports of services. At the same time product segment showed an increase of 1.5%. The drop in sales to the countries of the Customs Union is not good news, but also has a positive aspect - reducing Ukraine's dependence on Russian markets. In the structure of exports of goods was realized offset from heavy industry to the food group. This means that the further development of agriculture and food industry is a key factor for the economy. However, this trend does not remove from the agenda and solving the problems of heavy industry. Among the positive factors affecting the export - the devaluation of the hryvnia and, accordingly, greater international competitiveness, duty-free access to the EU market due to preferences. Among the negative factors inhibiting exports, - the lack of VAT refund to exporters, the weakness of the economy, protectionism from other countries. There has long been the establishment of export promotion. However, a one-time solution to this problem does not exist. Therefore, most likely, the export as a factor of economic growth will have only a limited effect on the resumption of positive macro-economic processes in the future. Continue reading.

Graham Phillips wrote:When Graham Met Texas

Sputnik wrote:Ukraine Delivers New Passenger Jet to North Korea
MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE 13:45 14.06.2015(updated 13:49 14.06.2015)

North Korea has leased a new passenger jet from Ukraine apparently to improve its aging aviation fleet.

North Korea has leased a new passenger jet from Ukraine, South Korean officials said Sunday, Yonhap media reported.

The move comes to enhance North Korea’s aging aviation fleet. Antonov An-148 was delivered to North Korea from Ukraine on March 14, bringing the total number of the twin-engine commercial aircraft in service by North Korea's state-run airline, Air Koryo, to two. Continue reading.

Regardless of the speculations that the forthcoming Ukrainian default will be just "technical," not an "official" one, Michael Hudson, a research professor of economics at University of Missouri, Kansas City, insists that the euphemism of "technical" default bears no relation to reality — "a default is a default," the economist states.

"A default is a default. The attempted euphemism of 'technical' default came up with regard to the Greek debt in 2012 at the G8 meetings. Geithner and Obama lobbied the IMF and ECB shamelessly to bail out Greece, simply so that it could pay bondholders, because US banks had issued credit default insurance (CDS) against Greek bonds and were on the hook for a big loss if a default occurred," Michael Hudson said in an interview with an American military analyst, the author of the leading blog covering the Ukraine crisis who writes under the alias "The Saker."

According to the economist, the Ukrainian government cannot reject its financial obligations to Russia, since credit defaults can be initiated only if a debt restructuring is approved by "a governmental authority and a sufficient number of holders of such obligation to bind all holders," according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA).

In April 2015, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov signaled clearly that Russia is the sole final holder of Ukraine's bonds and does not plan to restructure the $3 billion debt.

Moscow bought Ukraine's $3-billion Eurobond in December 2013, just before the infamous Euromaidan coup, as a part of a bailout program aimed at bolstering the country's fading economy.

Professor Hudson stressed that if the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were to state that the Kremlin's $3 billion loan is not official, "this would rewrite international law and mean that loans from Sovereign Wealth funds of any nation (OPEC, Norway, China, etc.) have no international protection."

Furthermore, such a move would have shattered the world's debt markets "along New Cold War lines," "with financial warfare replacing military warfare," the economist underscored, adding that the world is not ready for this.

On the other hand, Professor Hudson denounced the decision of Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada to seize Russia's assets in Ukraine as a "radical step" that it is "beyond civil law."

"If Ukraine did this while still receiving IMF, US and Canadian lending, its creditors could be held as responsible," he remarked.

Meanwhile, it seems that the Western financial aid to Ukraine still goes into a "black hole," due to the country's high corruption and lack of transparency. It is highly doubtful though that Washington or Brussels will simply print money and lend it to President Petro Poroshenko endlessly.

"The 'West' is not in the charity business. Its firms do not want to lose money, and the EU Constitution bans the European Central Bank and European taxpayers from financing foreign governments," the economist emphasized.

The present Ukrainian kleptocracy "is not a very safe umbrella" to various economic transactions with the West. Although Western magnates such as George Soros hope to acquire Ukraine's lands and infrastructure via sponsor privatization selloffs, there is still a possibility that future Ukrainian governments may repudiate financial transactions and back out of deals made under "the junta" in the same way "that the Allies cancelled Germany's internal debts in 1947/48 in the currency reform — on the logic that most debts were owed to former Nazis," the professor noted.

"Even Ukraine's debt to the IMF and other international agencies may be rejected as "odious debts" that financed a government at war against its own population," Mr. Hudson elaborated.

In his interview to The Saker, Professor Hudson underscored that the US interventionism and deep involvement in domestic affairs of other countries will eventually do a disservice to Washington.

"US forieign policy is simply "Do what we say, privatize and sell to US buyers, and permit them to avoid paying taxes by transfer pricing and financialization gimmicks, or we will destroy you like we did Libya, Iraq, Syria et al," the professor pointed out, stressing that such an approach will prompt foreign countries to unify into a resistance and to create a viable alternative to American financial hegemony.

The US' selfishness and "the-winner-takes-all" approach is self-defeating, the economist remarked.

2SPOOKY4U wrote:

BKP wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:Russia may or may not be a super power but Russia is the biggest country on the planet. And right now, Russia is not acting like it.

This made me laugh. It's as if someone who had $4,500 cash on hand and was told that the purchase of a home would require a minimum $10,000 cash down payment. Then the person replied "but, but... I've got a whole closet full of Chinese firecrackers!"

Like, so what? That's a complete non-sequitur. Don't really mean to bag on you dude, but that was funny.

Geographic size is a rather important thing, usually synonymous with resources.

So going along with your scenario, the guy with 4,500 dollars in cash, says he will give the guy water supplies, or a free lift.

Funny you mention firecrackers, specifically Chinese ones...

Flagship Victory wrote:I do not agree with papa that Russia is not a super power. Sure the US may have a more powerful navy, but Russia's land forces sure is a whole lot more powerful. The point is, Russia is acting too soft as the world's biggest country. Russia should at least, AT LEAST, accept Donbas request and send peacekeepers to Donbas to stop the ethnic cleansing. I think even a weak country like Cambodia would have done that if ethnic Cambodians are massacred in a neighboring country.