No and neither did the Ukrainians (e.g. residents of Crimea) vote for a military invasion. The US invaded Iraq along with many other countries under UN Resolution 1441. And UN Resolution 1441 was passed with unanimous support of the UN Security Council. Yeah, I call that democratic and I think most people with half a functional brain do too. The US did not annex Iraq, instead it set up a democratic government, conducted open transparent elections which were monitored by independent observers, and exited the country. That isn’t what Russia did. Russia has illegally invaded neighboring states, not once but twice. What is disconcerting is Russia has established a pattern of illegal behavior and is operating outside accepted norms and its actions in the Ukraine were condemned by a recent UN General Assembly vote. Russia invaded Crimea without provocation and without UN authority. Those uniformed well trained troops, fully equipped with armored vehicles, communications gear, and trucks, which magically showed up one day, and were subsequently proven to be Russian Army troops (Putin has subsequently admitted as much after his initial denials) were indeed Russian troops perpetrating an invasion of foreign land. If you believe a bunch of yahoos who earn on average $178/month and go down to their local store and fully equip with the latest Russian issue military goods and organize an army overnight without anyone noticing, I have a number of bridges I want to sell you. No one but ignorant fools believes that crap. Unfortunately there are a lot of ignorant fools around. Russia then hastily conducted balloting where there were only two options on the ballot, immediate annexation or annexation latter. Not being annexed wasn’t an option on the ballot. So one vote for annexation on the ballot was enough to ensure annexation would occur. Russia couldn’t loose. It was the kind of balloting which was reminiscent of Soviet era. And unlike the US and its allies, Russia didn’t allow independent observers. The balloting wasn’t transparent as it was in Iraq. And the Crimea balloting was conducted under the auspices of armed thugs. Western media and UN observers were roughed up and thrown out. No, I don’t call that democratic either.
what Alliance with China? Do you mean the BRIC'S, they are basicly neigbours who try not to upset each other and try to reduce american influence on them, they have no true real Alliance yust a set of commen goals theirs certainly to Mutual defense pact like NATO or CSTO. There is also the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation but I had to look that up. ANd probably nobody ever heard of it
No no. Much less like BRICs and much more like "Hey pal hows it goin?". I must have posted a link or two on earlier posts. They are kinda like developing some intimacy.
Indeed. I am sure China would love to buy Russian oil and gas at below market prices. And then there is the matter of China's territorial claims on lands which belong to its neighbors. China has done a lot of sabre rattling.
China is a other can of worms but screwing the russians over with cheap gas isn't good for the world stability either, nobody wants a war and nobody want's a bankrupt Russia either. Putin should really consider simply returning Crimea To ukrain he often stated the referendum stating 96.77% wanted to join Russia, if support is really that high he could win over Crimea the legal way (for comparison take the Scotland/Great Brittain referendum for splitting). So it takes a bid longer at least deals will be made on how the state debt is distributated (2 million people [4.5%] live in Crimea I do believe they should get at least a part of the state debt because they also used that gas), what the electric bills and water bills be like etc. Basicly be a politician in stead of a conqueror if he really had 96.77% approval this would be a piece of cake. A other alternative is that Crimea stays with Ukraine and becomes a militarised version of aland that's autonomous this way if Ukraine ever would join the EU Russia get's a free seat in the EU (not ideal but Russia can both keep it's distance from the EU and influence it at the same time)
Yes if the Ukrainian citizens living in Crimea really wanted to be annexed into Russia, they didn't need a Russian invasion and occupation to do it. And yes a weak unstable Russia doesn't benefit the West either. But the West doesn't have much say in the matter. It's Putin's call. The West and the world for that matter, is threatened by a strong and unstable Russia.
One of the main reasons Russia was giving Ukraine discounts on gas was because it was meant to be a downpayment on the rental fees for their bases at Sevastopol and elsewhere. Now they're saying that since they've stolen Crimea without payment, there's no reason to have ever given a discount, so Ukraine "owes" the money back on top of getting nothing for the countless billions in stolen state property and unpaid shares of national debts owed by Crimea's citizens. It's just more fascist bullying bulls*** from Putin and his friends, thinking their lies will become the truth in time if they keep repeating them with a straight face.
Meanwhile Crimea still got all it's water and electricity from Ukraine even (for free unless Crimea's still pay's Ukrains taxes and respect ukrainian law). Ukraine would seriously loose out if the Russian gas was cut off, but their are other sources including russian gas coming from a detour in poland or Romania. Not to mention investments in more ifficient technology (they use more gas then Germany with a fraction of the industry). Meanwhile whilst Crimea could build power plants the construction time would be around a decade even powerecables around that proposed bridge would take 3 years to build and it isn't the first time they build that bridge. Then their is no alternative for the water. Basicly Ukrain can limb on without Russian gas Crimea dies without water in that respect the price of the water could be renegotiated.
This may be the weekend when shit really hits the fan in the Ukraine. Russian forces have detained and continue to rough up and detain journalists and independent observers, just as they did before invading Crimea. Russian troops are reportedly on the move under the guise of "training" exercises. The same pro Russian individuals who showed up in Georgia and Crimea prior to massive Russian troop invasion - the same guys Putin claims went to their local stores and equipped an army with all the latest Russian military gear - are present in Eastern Ukraine. Russian troops cross the Ukrainian border over the course of the next few days. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/ukraine-official-fears-russian-invasion-23474745 "KIEV, Ukraine — For two weeks, the mysteriously well-armed, professional gunmen known as “green men” have seized Ukrainian government sites in town after town, igniting a brush fire of separatist unrest across eastern Ukraine. Strenuous denials from the Kremlin have closely followed each accusation by Ukrainian officials that the world was witnessing a stealthy invasion by Russian forces. Now, photographs and descriptions from eastern Ukraine endorsed by the Obama administration on Sunday suggest that many of the green men are indeed Russian military and intelligence forces — equipped in the same fashion as Russian special operations troops involved in annexing the Crimea region in February. Some of the men photographed in Ukraine have been identified in other photos clearly taken among Russian troops in other settings. And Ukraine’s state security service has identified one Russian reported to be active among the green men as Igor Ivanovich Strelkov, a Russian military intelligence operative in his mid- to late 50s. He is said to have a long résumé of undercover service with the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Russian general staff, most recently in Crimea in February and March and now in and around the eastern Ukrainian city of Slovyansk. “There has been broad unity in the international community about the connection between Russia and some of the armed militants in eastern Ukraine, and the photos presented by the Ukrainians last week only further confirm this, which is why U.S. officials have continued to make that case,” Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said Sunday. The question of Russia’s role in eastern Ukraine has a critical bearing on the agreement reached Thursday in Geneva among Russian, Ukrainian, American and European diplomats to ease the crisis. American officials have said that Russia would be held responsible for ensuring that the Ukrainian government buildings were vacated, and that it could face new sanctions if the terms were not met." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/21/w...asked-men-in-east-ukraine-to-russia.html?_r=0
He's a great politician. He's more popular than ever in Russia, which means he can more easily solidify Russia as a fascist state.
Ukrainian elections are scheduled for May 25th and that is the last thing Putin wants to see happen. A successful election would be detrimental to Putin's annexation effort. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27161578 The election most certainly will elect someone hostile to Putin's annexation effort. So I think Putin will do whatever it takes to prevent that election. If he doesn't invade before May 25, I think he will most definitely deploy his special forces to wreak havoc in Eastern Ukraine.
He can, but then there is the not so small matter of his ego. The man would like to be viewed favorably by as many people as possible. This is all about Putin's ego. He can and does control the media inside Russia, but he doesn't control the world. Visions of Alexander and Caesar may dance in his head, but his problem is making reality match his visions of greatness. If it were not about his ego, as you point out, he could have invaded, occupied and annexed all of the Ukraine in a matter of days and he could have done it long ago. It is also about cost. How much are those who enable Putin willing to spend to appease his ego? When Russian soldiers begin coming home in body bags and when Russian unemployment and inflation spiral, those who enable Putin might think twice about their great leader. A war, an asymmetrical war in the Ukraine will be long and expensive. Putin's predecessors had experiences with asymmetrical war in Afghanistan. It didn't work out so well for them.
Russian military aircraft invaded Ukrainian airspace today. And S&P today downgraded Russian debt. One more debt downgrade and Russian debt will enter junk status. What is more disturbing, is folks who know Putin, businessmen and foreign leaders, think he is delusional. Apparently he surrounds himself with sycophants - not good for someone who has his fingers on nukes. Business associates also report Putin has very limited patience and is a very volatile individual.
I don't believe that. A war for Ukraine wouldn't be long. Russia's military is overwhelmingly more powerful.
As I previously noted, you could have said the same about Afghanistan. How well did that superior military work for them when they invaded Afghanistan? How well did the Chechen invasion go for Russia?
Being populair and good aren't the same thing. Wiki has actually a intersting article Basicly Crimea has tried to become independed the moment it left the USSR. The reason why it stayed with Ukraine isn't explicity mentioned but considering their was political turmoil abouth the quota of Crimean Tatars represented I can make a educated gues. So Crimea wanted to be part of Russia starting the collapse of the USSR and it's tartar population that stoped it. This went on until shit hit the fan and that's how I see it. Then the political trouble happened and in the turmoil Russia pretty much took Crimea... This wasn't right on Russias part and Putin used a lot of mirrorring in that time claiming the west took advantage of Russia when it was weak (I can't help but wonder if he really felt somewhat bad of take advantage of Ukraine when it was weak). So how to get Crimea if the majority want's to join but Ukraine and the Tartars are stopping it? Despite everything their was already turmoil in Ukrain with the revolution in that time Crimea/Russia could have demanded a referendum abouth more autonomous rights/splitting off. At this point if the referdum was held Putin would get the majority vote but the Crimean tartars would block it (meaning Russia would loose). So how to get the Tartars at Russias side? Possible? Crimean tartars where persecuted in the time of stalin and he displaced many. Of those 245 000 found their way back to Crimea and they hate Russia for it, however theirs abouth 188 772 Crimeans still in Uzbekistan. Russia could have made a deal that if they joined Russia that amongst other benefits Russia would negotiate with Uzbekistan to give these people the change to Return home considering that wages are 10 times higher then in uzbekistan and Crimea is their home country majority would probably agree and that's one mighty carrot especialy if those Crimeans are allowed to vote on the referendum and their permanent stay is uncertain if they don't vote yes. This could have worked I believe and even if it failed the Crim would have gained more independence from Ukraine and the tartars now with a 150% their Original population would have to admit that in this case Russia did help them inproven the situation somewhat. That would have been the acts of a good politician because you even if you loose you still gain goodwill
The west and the likes of Gorbachev turds would love to see Russia crumble into pieces, thus in fact supporting the Russian Yanukovich. Now he lives in Orlando, Florida, alone.
