Putin puts troops in western Russia on alert in drill

[Kreeshak]

Yeah because the whole genocide thing totally makes that comparison equal.

I don't have sources, and I dont trust the media reports of "your" sources. The Serbs I have interacted with consider what you call a genocide as an act of defense against the serbian nation. To their eyes albanian minority were the murderers. It is known the history is written by the winners of the conflict. No argument there.

[Ausr]

Yet, you didn't.
Get outta here.

- - - Updated - - -



So hold on hold on.
Because Putin's election MIGHT have been rigged, it must have been rigged for yanukovich too?

- - - Updated - - -



See bakis? So if I don't accept this... how can I put it... retarded claims I'm pro russian?

Oh this'll be easy.

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...7#post26477837
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...0#post26477010
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...5#post26474385
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...8#post26467838


I'd link more posts but I want to try and keep it short just for you since you lack the ability to read anything under 100 words.

"get outta here." lawl

[malgin]

John Brennan (CIA director) allowed the military operation in Ukraine. Finland intellegence said that there is no any russian millitary in Ukraine. Coup killing protestors.

[Jackmoves]

How about we stop arguing about semantics and things this thread is not about, and talk about the fact that heavy fighting has broken out in a few cities now in the eastern ukraine, including air operations against civilian"militia"?



Surely this will anger the people that thought using armed police against people doing much the same way of protesting was wrong?

In any other country you would have swat teams and counter terrorist units at the site far sooner then what we have seen so far from the Ukrainian interim government. They have been lenient. And there is a very good reason for that, 40-50k russian troops on high readiness on the other side of the border.

Lets presume there are no Russian troops infiltrated and active in the east(just for jokes and giggles), and that this is just half trained militia.

A. What would have happend if some minority group in the US did the same? Lets say mexicans taking over a base or government building in Texas.
B. Would they have been able to actually hold on to the police station(or whatever building they had) if FBIs HRT stormed the building? The SSU took casulties and as far as I read didnt retake the place, that to me, indicates that they either went easy on them or that they faced a well drilled, tight team of warriors that could actually put up a fight, no "randoms", no half trained militia guys, but actual well trained fighters.

[malgin]

I don't have sources, and I dont trust the media reports of "your" sources. The Serbs I have interacted with consider what you call a genocide as an act of defense against the serbian nation. To their eyes albanian minority were the murderers. It is known the history is written by the winners of the conflict. No argument there.

Yes, it was a genocide of serbs supported by UN/US. Belgrad was bombed 3 times in history. One by Hitler 1941, one by allied forces 1944 (germans left the city long ago) and one by NATO/US/UN 1999

[TooMuch]

What fucking Finland intelligence?

Aren't you Finnish yourself?

[malgin]

What fucking Finland intelligence?

http://yle.fi/uutiset/eun_tiedustelu...ainaan/7190544

https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgij_Alafuzoff

[Ravenblade]

[...]
Can you point out to source of that map? What is it? Not "published in newspaper" (because that newspaper published hundreds of thousands different things).

Obviously Soviet government had idea of what they would like to happen. Was this map actually final map as it was agreed upon?

It published that map on Sep 18th 1939 (also correction of a typo above). It was a top story so it appeared on page 1. If you do not believe it check out http://icon.crl.edu/digitization.php#Q which against a fee provides access to digitized versions of all kinds of newspapers including old Izvestiia editions.
The site I took it from is actually from there but keep in mind he is a hardcore Stalinist who does not apologize for anything and doesn't see the land grab as breach of word rather as keeping word within the context of the treaty. So I really do not see a point in denial here, it is a common view among Stalinists, the other sort denies that the treaty existed but what pretext would Stalin have had and why would he coincidentally had stuck with the borders and the conditions as outlined in the secret protocol (which were not so secret at all at that time)?

[Kreeshak]

Yes, it was a genocide of serbs supported by UN/US. Belgrad was bombed 3 times in history. One by Hitler 1941, one by allied forces 1944 (germans left the city long ago) and one by NATO/US/UN 1999

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or actually agreeing with my hesitance to judge russians as evil.

But since you are into linking stuff (lots of links), could you *please* link me some online tutorial, to get me started with web scrapping? :P

[malgin]

How the heck did you manage to get it so wrong?

He is the head of EU Military intelligence, and what he said is that there are no large amounts of active duty Russian Federation Army soldiers operating in eastern Ukraine, but he says that it is clear that there are volunteers from Russia working with the Ukrainian separatists.

On separate note, I didn't know what the head of EU military intelligence is former Finnish military intelligence leader. That's pretty cool.

That's why I posted it here to get the clear translate Anyway this is clearly opposite to what Ukraine officials said.

[Shalcker]

God forbid we prevent a civil war instead of coming too late/making it worst for once.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...-kiev-23321083

The White House is confirming that CIA Director John Brennan was in the Ukrainian capital over the weekend.

White House press secretary Jay Carney confirmed Russian media reports of the trip to Kiev. Carney says Brennan's visit was part of a trip to Europe.

Ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych (yah-noo-KOH'-vich) is accusing the CIA of being behind the new government's decision to turn to force. But the CIA denies that Brennan encouraged Ukrainian authorities to conduct tactical operations.

Well, since they SAID they didn't encourage anyone that must be Truth(tm)! Obviously CIA is well-know for their peace-loving efforts!

Same thing on RT (with more quotes from Yanukovich)
http://rt.com/usa/white-house-confirms-cia-ukraine-448/

[malgin]

Yanukovich reminds me Gorbachev. He did everything to put last nail into Ukraine koffin.


Protestors in Kramatorsk said that military actions against them performed by well trained English speaking mercenaries with support of Ukraine aircrafts. There are atleast 4 dead and several injured from their side.

[Shalcker]

It published that map on Sep 18th 1939 (also correction of a typo above). It was a top story so it appeared on page 1. If you do not believe it check out http://icon.crl.edu/digitization.php#Q which against a fee provides access to digitized versions of all kinds of newspapers including old Izvestiia editions.
The site I took it from is actually from there but keep in mind he is a hardcore Stalinist who does not apologize for anything and doesn't see the land grab as breach of word rather as keeping word within the context of the treaty. So I really do not see a point in denial here, it is a common view among Stalinists, the other sort denies that the treaty existed but what pretext would Stalin have had and why would he coincidentally had stuck with the borders and the conditions as outlined in the secret protocol (which were not so secret at all at that time)?

But if you look at Sep 28 1939 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territo...e_Soviet_Union it doesn't look anywhere close...
Look where Warshaw is on your map (right on demarcation line) and here...

and your map from newspaper at Sep 18:



At the same time it definitely was land grab; we needed buffer between "USSR proper" and Germany, and that couldn't be Poles in their own country because they already proven themselves to be hostile toward USSR beyond any reason (hence their "relocation" after this land grab).

But it wasn't pre-planned; we simply reacted to German actions and did our thing protected by non-agression pact, two weeks after Germans attacked and when it was clear that neither UK nor France are going to do anything.

[Deleted]

Oh this'll be easy.

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...7#post26477837
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...0#post26477010
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...5#post26474385
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...8#post26467838


I'd link more posts but I want to try and keep it short just for you since you lack the ability to read anything under 100 words.

"get outta here." lawl

I don't know what this post means and what you are trying to say by linking four unrelated posts about nothing. You drunk or something?

[Rukentuts]

Yeah the CIA always sends directors instead of field agents to stir up shit.

[malgin]

Yeah the CIA always sends directors instead of field agents to stir up shit.

Someone has to work in CIA. Atleast 1 man doing something there.

[Ravenblade]

But if you look at Sep 28 1939 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territo...e_Soviet_Union it doesn't look anywhere close...
Look where Warshaw is on your map (right on demarcation line) and here...

It does not invalidate the map I quoted. It shows that the treaty existed and that actual borders were re-adjusted after, first through facts (hence why the map dates to September 28th, 11 days after the Soviets finally moved in,almost a months after Germany already started their war) and then through additional diplomatic talks. The Soviets were well aware of the German advancements and they were slow. Throw in the fact that Hitler never respected what Ribbentrop had worked out in detail it shouldn't come as surprise that the original plan and the final demarcation lines looked different.



Those denying the secret protocols are doing actual Stalinists a disservice because it undermines their argument that they never attacked Poland and had to make additional concessions to Nazi Germany as well when they took what was left of the area formerly known as Poland (Polish govt. escaped to Romania, so according to Hitler's logic it was de facto without government and without head to talk to).

[Deleted]

According to the Russian Finance Minister. Russia may not see any GDP growth this year.

Mr Siluanov told a government meeting: "GDP growth is estimated as rather low, 0.5%. Perhaps it will be around zero."

He added that money was leaving the country because of geopolitical instability - understood to mean Russia's involvement in the Ukraine crisis and increased pressure in eastern Ukraine.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27031630#TWEET1101640

[Deleted]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...-kiev-23321083

Well, since they SAID they didn't encourage anyone that must be Truth(tm)! Obviously CIA is well-know for their peace-loving efforts!

Same thing on RT (with more quotes from Yanukovich)
http://rt.com/usa/white-house-confirms-cia-ukraine-448/

Act before security council. Reminds me of Iraq.

[Shalcker]

It does not invalidate the map I quoted. It shows that the treaty existed and that actual borders were re-adjusted after,

Or that treaty did not exist and newspaper published what Soviets hoped for.

How exactly _wrong map_ shows that treaty existed? Which leap of logic is required to see that?

first through facts (hence why the map dates to September 28th, 11 days after the Soviets finally moved in,almost a months after Germany already started their war) and then through additional diplomatic talks. The Soviets were well aware of the German advancements and they were slow. Throw in the fact that Hitler never respected what Ribbentrop had worked out in detail it shouldn't come as surprise that the original plan and the final demarcation lines looked different.

Obviously if you want to rationalize it this way you can rationalize anything. "Mistake in publishing"; one who drawn that map simply had no idea about contents of secret protocols; "post-signing talks changed final lines".

But if you go with post-pact talks why do you need "secret protocol" in the first place? There is already reassurance that Germans do not plan to attack with non-aggression pact; there is already fact that France and UK are not going to intervene, as they didn't for two weeks, so this threat to Soviets is accounted for. Where exactly secret protocol gets relevant then if you still need to talk and use diplomacy with your enemy? :/

What you're saying is that "secret protocol existed but wasn't respected", did i get it right? Well, then it's just a paper that held no relevance in actual politics, even if it was actually signed.

Those denying the secret protocols are doing actual Stalinists a disservice because it undermines their argument that they never attacked Poland and had to make additional concessions to Nazi Germany as well when they took what was left of the area formerly known as Poland (Polish govt. escaped to Romania, so according to Hitler's logic it was de facto without government and without head to talk to).

I'm not Stalinist though; i see polish invasion as necessary land grab, as you can see added in my previous message

I hold no love for Stalin; i just see no need to demonize him either.