Putin puts troops in western Russia on alert in drill 1.1

[Deleted]

Check separatists from that Western Ukrainian side btw (Rusins):
http://02varvara.wordpress.com/2014/...ukrainisation/
Looking at internet they are still active, potentially in control of major gas transit hub, and it might still play out.

Slovakia could take over Podkarpatskaya Rus…

We should, but we won't. Well, if Kiev falls, everything is possible. At least Rusyns in "Ukraine" would for the first time be recognized, since there's more of them in Slovakia than in Ukraine (self-identified).

[Ulmita]

They can't accept that because its not 80% Russian. The population is 42% ethnic ukranian + tartar.

You could have googled this in thirty seconds.

Source and date of the census please =)

Because in the 2001 census it has Russians at almost 60%. And that is the 2001.

Also read this:


Polling by the Razumkov Centre in 2008 found that 63.8% of Crimeans (76% of Russians, 55% of Ukrainians, and 14% of Crimean Tatars, respectively) would like Crimea to secede from Ukraine and join Russia and 53.8% would like to preserve its current status, but with expanded powers and rights. Razumkov characterized Crimeans' views as confused, unsteady, and sometimes contradictory and therefore vulnerable to internal and external influences.[32] A poll by the International Republican Institute in May 2013 found that 67% wanted to remain in Ukraine and 23% wanted to join to Russia.[33] A poll conducted by the Crimean Institute of Political and Social Research on 8–10 March 2014 found that 77% of respondents planned to vote for "reunification with Russia", and 97% assessed the current situation in Ukraine as negative.[34] A poll conducted by the GfK Group on 12–14 March 2014 with 600 respondents found that 70.6% of Crimeans intended to vote for joining Russia, 10.8% for restoring the 1992 constitution and 5.6% did not intend to take part in the referendum.[35][36] The poll also showed that if Crimeans had more choices, 53.8% of them would choose joining Russia, 5.2% restoration of 1992 constitution, 18.6% a fully independent Crimean state and 12.6% would choose to keep the previous status of Crimea.[35]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean...ferendum,_2014


Bottom line is this: Having a legit win on the voting is a probable scenario that noone can disregard.

[Tierbook]

Source and date of the census please =)

Because in the 2001 census it has Russians at almost 60%. And that is the 2001.



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean...ferendum,_2014


Bottom line is this: Having a legit win on the voting is a probable scenario that noone can disregard.

Indeed, however the legitimacy of that referendum is what people question.

[Ulmita]

Indeed, however the legitimacy of that referendum is what people question.

According to Kiev's legislation indeed it was illigal. But i mean which country will ever accept a referendum? Would US accept N.Y state going back to the natives? I bet we would have a second slaughter in our hands in no time dude.

[Tierbook]

According to Kiev's legislation indeed it was illigal. But i mean which country will ever accept a referendum? Would US accept N.Y state going back to the natives? I bet we would have a second slaughter in our hands in no time dude.

Actually it's been illegal to secede from the US since our deadliest war.

[Ulmita]

Actually it's been illegal to secede from the US since our deadliest war.

What i am saying is that i don't think there is anywhere in the world that is allowed...

[Rukentuts]

What i am saying is that i don't think there is anywhere in the world that is allowed...

Pretty much everywhere. Secessions are only ever sanctioned by a national government, for the most part.

[Marcellus1986]

Keep attacking the poster and not the post. It doesn't change the fact you've managed to contradict yourself even with this current statement. I leave it up to you to figure it yourself as your homework: or you can, of course continue to be in denial, feel yourself free to do it.

I didn't attack you in the initial part of my post. I told you what I said. I didn't contradict myself. Perhaps you don't understand what contradict means

[Kellhound]

Ah, do you mean this airliner which was shot by air-to-air missile (and it was proven), right?

I have seen no proof of that, and the wreckage says otherwise.

- - - Updated - - -

Too bad it was otherwise. KUALA LUMPUR: Intelligence analysts in the United States had already concluded that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down by an air-to-air missile, and that the Ukrainian government had had something to do with it. This is the latest intelligence. But of course you're going to shut your eyes and ears then start crying "lalalalala I don't want to believe the truth!" Come on, do it.

I find it funny that a report with no evidence that supports an anti-Ukraine position is accepted despite the actual evidence that people can see saying the opposite....

[Morry]

despite the actual evidence that people can see saying the opposite....

Evidence noone saw of course.

[Kellhound]

Evidence noone saw of course.

Dude, the evidence was posted in pictures of the wreckage all over the internet!

[Cybran]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/0...0GD0YA20140813

The estimated death toll in the Ukraine conflict nearly doubled to at least 2,086 as of Aug. 10 from 1,129 on July 26, the United Nations human rights office said on Wednesday.

"This corresponds to a clear escalating trend. " U.N. human rights spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told Reuters in response to a query.

On average, more than 60 people a day have been killed or wounded since fighting began in mid-April in eastern Ukraine, rising to at least 70 people a day in the first week of August, she said.

Kiev keeps claiming that they are winning. If they are winning then there is something wrong with the scoreboard.

[Marcellus1986]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/0...0GD0YA20140813



Kiev keeps claiming that they are winning. If they are winning then there is something wrong with the scoreboard.

You're using the wrong scoreboard then... Conflicts aren't determined by civilian deaths. Supposedly Kiev has Donetsk surrounded and cut it off from reinforcement from Luhansk.

[Shalcker]

Supposedly Kiev has Donetsk surrounded and cut it off from reinforcement from Luhansk.

Kiev is certainly trying to do that but still did not manage to do that yet.

[bufferunderrun]

So German economic grow in q2 is -0,2% france is 0 and Italy -0,2, it's pretty funny how everyone is trying to explain that sanctions over Russia had no impact over the economies of the 3 major exporter countries in EU.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/...tes-again-live

[Cairhiin]

So German economic grow in q2 is -0,2% france is 0 and Italy -0,2, it's pretty funny how everyone is trying to explain that sanctions over Russia had no impact over the economies of the 3 major exporter countries in EU.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/...tes-again-live

No one said they had no impact.

Dutch economy grew 0.5% last quarter, as opposed to the recession from quarter one. However, prediction for quarter 3 are not good due to Russian situation.

http://nos.nl/artikel/686260-nederla...oeit-weer.html

EDIT: Besides this is quarter 2, you won't see the results of the sanctions in this. So the decline/stagnation you are seeing has nothing to do with Russia. The consequences of the Russian sanctions will only hit home in the quarter 3 results.

[Ravenblade]

Ugh, it's probably some misunderstanding, or i'm missing some huge block of information... Which NGOs?

As far as i know they had old group from 90's for reunification with Russia called "Russian Unity" (and less supported group "Russian Block"); sentiment shared by Crimean population but as seen by polls before Yanukovich being deposed noone believed it to be possible, so they were pretty fringe group. Still got 3 places in local Parliament though, most well-known of them Aksyonov.

Then Yanukovich was ousted and majority of their parliament, belonging to Party of Regions (as the only realistically pro-Russian party there and Crimea being pro-Russian region), decided to wait and see - or make deals with new government, while pro-Russian radicals (which already seen where everything was going and were setting-up various self-defence initiatives) roused up people to defend against "fascists" from Kiev and take matters into their own hands; police and local administrations were quite confused on what they should or should not do after the coup and where their loyalties should lie. Around the country many other anti-Maidan gatherings happened too. They were already calling this government Junta as early as February 24th. After mass gathering they got their guy, Chalyi set as Mayor of Sevastopol and defended him from later SBU attempts to arrest him. Then they warned about possible provocations with Crimean Tatars directed with forces linked with new government; Crimean Tatar extremists indeed came in next day to block pro-Russian protesters from protesting near Crimean Parliament, and there were apparently victims in those clashes. The very next day "Green Men" men secured it, and Aksyonov was elected as head of Crimean Autonomous Republic (though that election might have cut a few corners as many parliamentarians decided to sit this out rather then being forced to take sides).

I think this post at March 1 (from Crimea) shows nicely what Crimeans were seeing and expecting:
http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/1443190.html
And another on March 4 which perfectly explains overall Russian strategy regarding Ukraine and Eastern Ukraine, still true to this day (though he was a bit too optimistic about Russian intervention in case of civil war):
http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/1452031.html
(Now he is one of the current bloggers covering East Ukraine and promoting rebel information and support)


I seem to remember reading recently about EU also having NGOs in Eastern Ukraine working on improving support for Association Agreement before their civil war... guess that investment didn't work out.


Well, if it can be made look moral why not? It doesn't hurt to have moral justification to your actions. As morals differ around the world what feels justified for you might not be justified for others, but as long as you yourself feel that your actions were justified you would have no second thoughts about it later.

Guess it did not work out. Not all plans and programmes are going to work. Especially in an environment rife with Soviet nostalgia and militarism as well as counter-propaganda it's not. It's like missionary work in that case.

What I was referring to by the way were the pro-Russian cossack organizations with a penchant for irredentism who were readily popping up to assist as "people's militia". Interestingly enough the old adage one man's hero is another man's villain still applies. Your own radicals are seen as heroes, that of the enemy as fascists, objectively seen both sides only differ in their loyalties but not particularly in their methods to get their ideology being hammered home (sometimes literally). Needless to say I share a disdain for that kind of people, I think it's silly, backwards and barbaric. If people had more restraint in terms of violence we would not be sitting here talking about their consequences.

Making it moral is pointless when said impromptu morals are not subject to principles and not absolute. In no way the Crimean annexion was just handled smoothly because of polite Green men consisting of local militia, it was a very cleverly laid out realpolitik'esque plan which probably has been in work since a long time. It bears all the signatures of perfect choreography only an intelligence could work out so well. Throw in the fact that Putin is still an intelligence man you would be hard pressed to use mere "moral obligations" as reason.

Working as intended then.
We do need to make an example out of Ukraine in this particular case.

So you basically admit that it was all about having a little retributive action for the turning away from Russia? Sounds like like 18th century mentality to me really. It would have been enough to just increase gas prices and stick to repaying of debts with added interest but no, there have to be some territorial consequences as well! There is no easier way to fuel the radicals on the other side than by taking parts of their nation's territory even though it could be morally yours. WW I should have taught that (just check the history of Alsace-Lorraine).

I think non-interference stance was quite weak in this particular case, but to each their own i guess.

How was it weak? I am confused. By not following their wishes they - the German government - actually proved it to be useful in this case. Because the intent of saying no to their violent rhetoric was that they do not seek confrontation with Russia and further escalation either, neither did they want to have an active involvement which could be further interpreted as aggression. How exactly would a strong stance have looked like? Somewhat more impulsive and shooting beyond the line?

Obviously needs for additional talks do produce delays; and compromises might have caused some issues to be dropped. Is everything in agreements equally important though?

I can't say for sure it is, however it's usually a peace of procedural work with interdependencies between the issues and fields. Some may be independent, some require another set of guiding rules to work. Just like with real laws.

Now that's silly; in that case in Crimea it was "green men that just happened to look like Russian soldiers".

Yes, they were there in official capacity as EU diplomats... Check this for example: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...stes-time.html

The talk was about EU politicians seen on Maidan which begged the question in what role and capacity they were there. Your link only tells us that protesters asked the EU's equivalent of a foreign minister to intervene. No mentioning of her presence among protesters. She could have as well just been there as observer in order to give firsthand report.
Any other politician from an EU country there was likely there on their own accord and not acting under EU mandate.
It's not unusual that politicians go there in order to observe and talk with people on both sides. They also take a high risk of getting attacked, injured or killed as well.

Kiev is not Western Ukraine though. Western Ukraine is Lviv, Yvano-Frankovsk, Zakarpatye.

Check separatists from that Western Ukrainian side btw (Rusins):
http://02varvara.wordpress.com/2014/...ukrainisation/
Looking at internet they are still active, potentially in control of major gas transit hub, and it might still play out.

"might still play out"? Is that another call for subsequent punishment until only Kiev is left? Must be a lot of grudge here if you want to see your neighbour obliterated. Ukraine today is a construct of many territories and Russia was okay with them until only recently. What would you have them left over with until your rage of having turned away from strict Russian influence has finally subsided?
Anyway I have not heard of active militant separatism in the West, it remains to be seen on what Kiev's stance is after the elections, whether they want more separatism or less, whether they are willing to make concessions for semi-autonomy - if there's even a widespread support of it. The article you linked is fairly biased. It's all about punishing Kiev's government I guess, people living in the regions are only a minor concern.

Well, actually our representative did not sign it exactly because agreement had no measures on how it could be enforced, and neither side of agreement wielded real power...

Interesting! So we went from they should have enforced to they could not enforce it in just over a few pages. Which is exactly what I was trying to say. The agreement was far from perfect. I did not expect to last when reports about it got out. The EU officials acting as witnesses did as much as they could by trying to talk down protesters. Didn't work, so the agreement in the end showed its flaws very fast. Now we could have another round of "should have, would have" but the matter of fact is that in retrospect Russia's probably happy to have passed the cup.

So German economic grow in q2 is -0,2% france is 0 and Italy -0,2, it's pretty funny how everyone is trying to explain that sanctions over Russia had no impact over the economies of the 3 major exporter countries in EU.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/...tes-again-live

Has not much to do with sanctions if any. The explanation given here is primary a decline in investments coupled with a generally weaker export compared to last year. The 0.2% loss could only be attribute to Russian sanctions if trade volume with Russia would be far bigger which it isn't really. We export more to Switzerland or Belgium than to Russia.
It's also a result of corrected growth estimates and new methods to calculate GDP making it easier to compare them to any previous quarter until 1991. Also R&D are now not used as input factor anymore but as investment. It doesn't impact the calculations of economic growth though, just makes some numbers more accurate and realistic.

[Cybran]

#FreedomApples... Can these people get more pathetic?

[Ausr]

#FreedomApples... Can these people get more pathetic?

Suppose you could treat the thread less like Facebook and not link every video you find?

[Deleted]

What exactly is pathetic about this,its kinda old news, theres similar action in Poland since like two weeks and theres huge increase of consumption. Whats wrong with helping your own producers? Its just PR action thats all, we not sending military gear to other countries or make some shady "humanitarian" convoys.At least you were trolled by some silly PR move. Save your hatred for Ukrainians.