Ukraine

Napoleon and then Hitler discovered that Russia is not as easy to beat as appears on the surface. For those armchair warriors casually discussing a total war scenario involving tens of millions of causalities on both sides we would need a much stronger cause than the current dispute.

Daryl wrote:Napoleon and then Hitler discovered that Russia is not as easy to beat as appears on the surface. For those armchair warriors casually discussing a total war scenario involving tens of millions of causalities on both sides we would need a much stronger cause than the current dispute.

And Chamberlain and company required more than ...

Next thing you know you have one that is big enough. Well not really who cared about Poland. If you asked France after they lost in 1940 they wouldn't have thought it was worth the cost.

Not suggesting at this time it is worth it but ...

There really isn't any simple answer in any of this. They won't get any better either. Based on past history it generally gets worse.

T2M

Why is it in the US interest to support the EU in establishing Hegemony over all of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East? I would prefer to keep Russia intact but with further political and economic reforms to ensure that the EU does not aggregate overwhelming economic, political and potential military power over the US.

England played "The Great Game" by triangulating between various power blocks in Europe for centuries to preclude the formation of a power block that could overwhelm them. No reason that US should not do the same.

Russia is no longer the Soviet Union with a political philosophy that they wish to export and Russia recognizes the Islamic threat. I see no reason to not support Putin.

thinkstoomuch wrote:

Daryl wrote:Napoleon and then Hitler discovered that Russia is not as easy to beat as appears on the surface. For those armchair warriors casually discussing a total war scenario involving tens of millions of causalities on both sides we would need a much stronger cause than the current dispute.

And Chamberlain and company required more than ...

Next thing you know you have one that is big enough. Well not really who cared about Poland. If you asked France after they lost in 1940 they wouldn't have thought it was worth the cost.

Not suggesting at this time it is worth it but ...

There really isn't any simple answer in any of this. They won't get any better either. Based on past history it generally gets worse.

T2M

Some folks believe in Conspiricy Theories;
some folks don't!

Meanwhile, Map-addict Predicts that
you and I will continue to amaze each other.

Mounds? or Almond Joy?

HTM

namelessfly wrote:You better go watch the Victoria Nuland video and read the transcript offer intercepted phone call. CIA provided training, logistical support and advanced computer and communications technology toArab Spring rebels so it is ikely they did the same to Ukraine.

Obviously the US can not conjure up a rebellion
where there are no conv[fl]icts but the US can
inflame an denable existing conflicts.

This is such an established method that I am amazed that you would even argue it.

namelessfly

Howard T. Map-addict wrote:Obama must be pretty powerful,
to be so able to incite a rebellion that
otherwise would not have happened!
(Unless this "O did it!" theory is mistaken, of course.)

HTM

quote="namelessfly"
[snip - htm]
US news including FOX News is unwilling to concede that Obama incited the rebellion that created the crisis.
[snip - htm]

Some interessting things where said here, but I think the views are a little to much power politics.

Break the EU hegomony ... total war ... but maybe thats just american things to say .

I will just offer my perspective, but first: I'm from Germany (and a big Honor Harrington Fan, thats why I ended up here in the forum ^^), and not only from germany but member of a real left wing party. Not 'left wing-oh my god, they want to give us health care', but really left. Real socialist. But keep in mind, the most 'right-wing' party in Germany (CDU with chancellor Merkel) that matters, is I think still left from the US Democratic Party. So from a German perspective all Republicans are nuts ^^ okay, not really, but most of the repbulican policy of the last 10 to 20 Years would never have a chance to be implemented in germany (as far as I know republican policy - I get most of my american policy knowledge from the Daily Show with Jon Stuart ^^).
So even in Germany I'm left-wing, so you at least know where my perspective comes from.

To the Ukraine and Krim-Crises:

1. The Opposition in the Ukraine who had overthrown Janukowitschs Government is not under the controll of EU or USA/CIA Agents as some have suggested here.
Janukowitsch fucked really up, by postponing a Law that would have glued the Ukraine to the EU, or which he promoted years in advance. The protests he spark by postponing this one law where his own fault. He said for two years, we will do this, we will come closer to the EU and we will all benefit from that and than he said, oh sorry, I don't want to do it anymore. That sparked the rebellion. That all ukrain governmets are really corrupt just helped.
Than the revolution got highjacked by fascist partys and by other oligarchs who opposed Janukowitsch.
Also their were some influences from the EU and the USA, the Ukrainien Revolution would have take place without them.
And its an ugly revolution. Now fascist (real fascist, not republicans but real neonazis) are in the Ukrainien Government. Their is evidence, that the Snipers were not Janukowitschs snipers, but paid by some members of the opposition.
The new government is not really legimitate and the ukrainian public is split in half.
All by itself its just fucked up.

2. Now, why does Putin invades the Krim?
Because of 20 years of EU and US Policy which said, fuck russia, we don't want to play with you, just go and die.
After the end of the Soviet Union, their was the promise that the Nato will not be extended to the Eastern Europa Countries as an exchange for a peaceful transition of power in this states.
Now lets look where the Nato is now: http://www.isnichwahr.de/r56105997-no-t ... -live.html
By continueing the expansion of the Nato they pissed of Russia. By exluding Russia for over 20 years, by rejecting it as a partner to work with, they made Putin possible.

Putin is the reaction of the diminishing of Russia by the USA and the EU.
Putin made Russia strong again and it will not stand by the side for another expansion of the Nato or EU to the Russian Border.
This whole conflict could have been prevented if the US, Nato and EU would have stand to their word and hadn't expand the Nato into eastern european countries.
This would have all been prevented by including Russia in decisions and not excluding it as the Kids who nobody wants to play with.

The Ukrain was used as pawn in a game against Russia and now Russia says, fuck you, I don't play, you will not get the Krim out of my reach.

The peaceful solution would have been to use Ukraine as connection between Russia and the EU and not as a pawn, a prize to fight over, but to use it as a link between east and west. But thats maybe 10 to 20 Years to late.

Their can be still a peaceful solution. But for that on both sides the heads need to cool down and their must be a change of mindset how to regard Russia.
Don't act against it with fancy political maneuvers to reduce russias power but offer a partnership that respects Russia.
Its hard to do that now and it would have been much easier, if it would have been done 20 years ago, but it is the only chance to have a longterm peaceful solution.

The foreign policy of the US and the EU regarding Russia of the last 15-20 years are perfect if you want to provoke a (cold) war. I can only guess that the reason behind this foreign policy was, that they thought that russia is so weak, they they couldn't and wouldn't do anything. But Putin changed that.

So their are two options on the table for the US/EU/Nato. Continue with fancy political maneuvers like in the last 20 years to gain more influence and surround Russia and risk war or stop that shit and start searching for a peaceful solution in a way, that is not completly disrespectful to Russia.

Natas wrote: ...some really smart stuff...

Pretty much what I think too - my hat's off to you for the clear and concise picture.

Unfortunately, there may be too much political /and cultural/ inertia for the good things to happen.

Natas wrote:1. The Opposition in the Ukraine who had overthrown Janukowitschs Government is not under the controll of EU or USA/CIA Agents as some have suggested here.

If you refer to me, i never ever said anything about under control. I said that EU and USA sponsored the troubles in Ukraine and that is pretty much as proven as can be.

Natas wrote:Janukowitsch fucked really up, by postponing a Law that would have glued the Ukraine to the EU, or which he promoted years in advance. The protests he spark by postponing this one law where his own fault. He said for two years, we will do this, we will come closer to the EU and we will all benefit from that and than he said, oh sorry, I don't want to do it anymore. That sparked the rebellion. That all ukrain governmets are really corrupt just helped.

Oh yes. But without outside interference, matters would almost certainly not have deteriorated as completely and as quickly as it did.

And "things" like Svoboda would be much less likely to be in control of the Ukrainian army.

A party which had it´s own stormtroopers and SS until 2007. Now it "merely" have those unofficially.

And that party, my own dear PM and foreign minister is cooperating with happily, while they run around in circles trying to keep SD, a nationalist party here, from getting any power at all, despite the fact that they´re friendly kittens compared to the Ukraine facists they´re dealing with. *shudder*

Natas wrote:the Ukrainien Revolution would have take place without them.

Maybe. But it stinks far too much like the "orange revolution", you know that spontaneous popular uprising which amazingly had managed to hire sound systems big enough for a citywide concert months in advance, for the exact time they were later used. And the money and equipment just happened to come from "elsewhere".

Natas wrote:There is evidence, that the Snipers were not Janukowitschs snipers, but paid by some members of the opposition.

Yes, and the evidence looks like it´s getting reasonably reliable even. And that´s really ugly.

Natas wrote:The new government is not really legimitate and the ukrainian public is split in half.
All by itself its just fucked up.

Pretty much yeah.

Big mess.

Natas wrote:2. Now, why does Putin invades the Krim?
Because of 20 years of EU and US Policy which said, fuck russia, we don't want to play with you, just go and die.

There´s also the Crimean vote for independence in 1991:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_s ... ndum,_1991
in which 94% wanted to NOT be part of Ukraine.

Natas wrote:After the end of the Soviet Union, their was the promise that the Nato will not be extended to the Eastern Europa Countries as an exchange for a peaceful transition of power in this states.

EU and USA isn´t very good at keeping promises it seems...

A friend of mine has warned about this since the mid 90s. He doesn´t expect Russia to start a war, he´s afraid that they will be forced into a war.

Like when Georgia started one(after years of getting training and equipment from USA, or money for buying it elsewhere). Amazingly, just around the 2008 olympics, and now this happens during another olympics, it stinks really bad when there´s so many "coincidences".

Natas wrote:By continueing the expansion of the Nato they pissed of Russia. By exluding Russia for over 20 years, by rejecting it as a partner to work with, they made Putin possible.

Heck, Putin isn´t so bad. Remember just how bad shape Russia was in after Jeltsin, he haven´t really had much choice but to play the big bad hardass. I can easily live with him in charge. He´s far more honest and reliable than the current government here at least!

But yes, treating Russia as if it was merely a crippled USSR, it´s just so stupid...

I´ve said it before and i´ll say it again, treat someone like they´re a villain and chances are they will eventually be forced to become a villain.

EU and USA are doing a decent job at that.

Natas wrote:The peaceful solution would have been to use Ukraine as connection between Russia and the EU and not as a pawn, a prize to fight over, but to use it as a link between east and west. But thats maybe 10 to 20 Years to late.

Sadly yes.

Natas wrote:The foreign policy of the US and the EU regarding Russia of the last 15-20 years are perfect if you want to provoke a (cold) war.

They pretty much almost continued the cold war, just with a bit less extreme chill.

Russia was still the "GREAT EVIL ENEMY" and whenever Russia opposed USA or EU doing something questionable, it was obviously because they were so horribly evil!

And the media propaganda is just pathetic. I have a handful of people i know in Russia, both natives and immigrants, and by those alone i find out just how badly propagandising EuroUSA media is.

It´s like having all massmedia being scripted by FOX News whenever Russia is involved.

Natas wrote:Continue with fancy political maneuvers like in the last 20 years to gain more influence and surround Russia and risk war or stop that shit and start searching for a peaceful solution in a way, that is not completly disrespectful to Russia.

And especially, does NOT make Russia feel like it´s about to have a repeat of Operation Barbarossa to come calling.

USAs use of Georgia, which then ran off the leash and started it´s war without being nice stooges and asking for permission first, well that just made it bloody obvious to Russia that USA and EU were essentially hostile.

Setting up a nearly useless ABM radar in the center of Europe while rejecting the Russian offer to give access to their southern Caucasus radar site, uh yeah, that was like shouting "we cant work with our REAL enemies!".

kiddmeier wrote:
Unfortunately, there may be too much political /and cultural/ inertia for the good things to happen.

Yeahh, thats a big problem. The other political partys in my country, except mine, don't even want to acknowdlege, that their are fascist in the new ukrainien government and they talk, like that the new government are some fredom and peaceloving people and that only russia is the problem.

Its real madness. In the long run this will leads to war.

Tenshinai wrote:
If you refer to me, i never ever said anything about under control. I said that EU and USA sponsored the troubles in Ukraine and that is pretty much as proven as can be.

Na. Its more a matter of how much did they do and not wheter if they did it .
For example the UDAR, the third strongest political party in Ukraine is supported by the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (a conservative german think tank that belongs to the political party of Chancellor Merkel). That led to some speculations in Germany (mostly in really left-wing and conspiracy parts), how much influence this think tank had on the revolution.
The thing is, the UDAR is a German product. Klitschko, the leader of the UDAR, is an Ukrainien Boxer who is really famous for boxing in Germany. But the influence is, that German Media in Germany made him strong. Its like when Fox News would say, that X would be a good president to Country Y and than Kerry would say it, too. That is about 50% of the influence Germany had taken in the Ukraine.
The other support is by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung by giving seminars on how to make a political party, how to get members and so on (which is funny ... the CDU (Partey of Chancellor Merkel) lost over the last two decades half of its members, I don't think they are really qualified to advise somebody on that ^^).

Their is influence, but at least for Germany its not some covert operation thing, like some people think it is (and I don't mean on this board, but in my country).

@ Natas

Welcome to the politics subforum. I always enjoy reading different opinions and perspectives. Although from your description, I suspect you and I will agree on almost nothing!

This is truly amazing.

From my political perspective, Hengis Kahn and Atilla the Hun were liberals, yet I agree with most of what you say.

One thing to remember is that Russia is not the Soviet Union and is no longer an existential threat. The parallels to Hitler and Chamberlain are obvious, but they are invalid because of differences in the demographic realities. In the early 20th Century the population growth rate was positive and increasing, so everyone was contemplating the need to expand territory. Hitler was unique for having the integrity to articulate the idea of taking other people's land and exterminating the inhabitants to secure living room for his people. Almost, or perhaps all countries in Europe have below replacement level birth rates. Russia and the former Warsaw pact countries are imploding. No one in the region thinks that they need more living room. Putin would like very much to secure Ukraine's industrial capacity (or the portion in Crimea, how much?), but what he really wants is more Russians to expand Russia's population base.

Natas wrote:Some interessting things where said here, but I think the views are a little to much power politics.

Break the EU hegomony ... total war ... but maybe thats just american things to say .

I will just offer my perspective, but first: I'm from Germany (and a big Honor Harrington Fan, thats why I ended up here in the forum ^^), and not only from germany but member of a real left wing party. Not 'left wing-oh my god, they want to give us health care', but really left. Real socialist. But keep in mind, the most 'right-wing' party in Germany (CDU with chancellor Merkel) that matters, is I think still left from the US Democratic Party. So from a German perspective all Republicans are nuts ^^ okay, not really, but most of the repbulican policy of the last 10 to 20 Years would never have a chance to be implemented in germany (as far as I know republican policy - I get most of my american policy knowledge from the Daily Show with Jon Stuart ^^).
So even in Germany I'm left-wing, so you at least know where my perspective comes from.

To the Ukraine and Krim-Crises:

1. The Opposition in the Ukraine who had overthrown Janukowitschs Government is not under the controll of EU or USA/CIA Agents as some have suggested here.
Janukowitsch fucked really up, by postponing a Law that would have glued the Ukraine to the EU, or which he promoted years in advance. The protests he spark by postponing this one law where his own fault. He said for two years, we will do this, we will come closer to the EU and we will all benefit from that and than he said, oh sorry, I don't want to do it anymore. That sparked the rebellion. That all ukrain governmets are really corrupt just helped.
Than the revolution got highjacked by fascist partys and by other oligarchs who opposed Janukowitsch.
Also their were some influences from the EU and the USA, the Ukrainien Revolution would have take place without them.
And its an ugly revolution. Now fascist (real fascist, not republicans but real neonazis) are in the Ukrainien Government. Their is evidence, that the Snipers were not Janukowitschs snipers, but paid by some members of the opposition.
The new government is not really legimitate and the ukrainian public is split in half.
All by itself its just fucked up.

2. Now, why does Putin invades the Krim?
Because of 20 years of EU and US Policy which said, fuck russia, we don't want to play with you, just go and die.
After the end of the Soviet Union, their was the promise that the Nato will not be extended to the Eastern Europa Countries as an exchange for a peaceful transition of power in this states.
Now lets look where the Nato is now: http://www.isnichwahr.de/r56105997-no-t ... -live.html
By continueing the expansion of the Nato they pissed of Russia. By exluding Russia for over 20 years, by rejecting it as a partner to work with, they made Putin possible.

Putin is the reaction of the diminishing of Russia by the USA and the EU.
Putin made Russia strong again and it will not stand by the side for another expansion of the Nato or EU to the Russian Border.
This whole conflict could have been prevented if the US, Nato and EU would have stand to their word and hadn't expand the Nato into eastern european countries.
This would have all been prevented by including Russia in decisions and not excluding it as the Kids who nobody wants to play with.

The Ukrain was used as pawn in a game against Russia and now Russia says, fuck you, I don't play, you will not get the Krim out of my reach.

The peaceful solution would have been to use Ukraine as connection between Russia and the EU and not as a pawn, a prize to fight over, but to use it as a link between east and west. But thats maybe 10 to 20 Years to late.

Their can be still a peaceful solution. But for that on both sides the heads need to cool down and their must be a change of mindset how to regard Russia.
Don't act against it with fancy political maneuvers to reduce russias power but offer a partnership that respects Russia.
Its hard to do that now and it would have been much easier, if it would have been done 20 years ago, but it is the only chance to have a longterm peaceful solution.

The foreign policy of the US and the EU regarding Russia of the last 15-20 years are perfect if you want to provoke a (cold) war. I can only guess that the reason behind this foreign policy was, that they thought that russia is so weak, they they couldn't and wouldn't do anything. But Putin changed that.

So their are two options on the table for the US/EU/Nato. Continue with fancy political maneuvers like in the last 20 years to gain more influence and surround Russia and risk war or stop that shit and start searching for a peaceful solution in a way, that is not completly disrespectful to Russia.