Ukraine Crisis - Page 105

There is a new policy in effect in this thread. Anyone not complying will be moderated.

New policy, please read before posting:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=21393711

Go0g3n

Russian Federation410 Posts

March 01 2014 15:52 GMT

#2081

On March 02 2014 00:48 m4ini wrote:

Show nested quote +

You should drop your hobby if you can't distinguish between tanks and selfpropelled guns. Not that it would matter in the first place anyway.

I didn't say they were tanks, the picture did

Dangermousecatdog

United Kingdom7084 Posts

March 01 2014 15:53 GMT

#2082

On March 02 2014 00:36 Go0g3n wrote:

Show nested quote +

This picture is fake, taken from a "simulation": http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/
Russian tanks look differently.

Your link has no relevence to what you just said. Bluff or wrong link?

zeo

Serbia6343 Posts

March 01 2014 15:54 GMT

#2083

On March 02 2014 00:53 Dangermousecatdog wrote:

Show nested quote +

Your link has no relevence to what you just said. Bluff or wrong link?

They are not even tanks in the first place. It's just poor CNN propaganda

SilentchiLL

Germany1405 Posts

March 01 2014 15:54 GMT

#2084

On March 02 2014 00:32 zeo wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 02 2014 00:27 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:02 zeo wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:57 Sent. wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:51 zeo wrote:
Local government buildings taken by anti-junta protesters

I don't understand how can you post images with Russian flags on Ukrainian teritory and call all this crap anit-junta movement. Why don't you put some swastikas above Kiev to make it look even better?

The people of Ukraine want Russia to protect them. Carrying around Russian flags is no different than carrying EU/US flags at Maidan

Does your fixation on the belief that the Russians are always the good guys (atleast that's what I've been reading out of your posts) come from a general dislike of western countries, or from liking Russia in particular?
Don't take it the wrong way, it's a genuine question, since you sided with Russia on every point of discussion here for soon to be a hundred pages, starting with this post (you made one or two before this one, but those were mostly about criticizing the american foreign policy in similar cases if I remember correctly):

On January 27 2014 07:07 zeo wrote:

On January 27 2014 06:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:
okay well the one side is a bunch of people who put other people in jail for no legitimate reason, have the police attack protesters for no legitimate reason, pass fascist laws trying to scare people who disagree with them into submitting, and are basically a bunch of capos for Don Putin's Ukrainian interests

the other side is a bunch of people who don't want any of the above and want a free trade agreement with the EU

so there are two sides, it's just that one is crap and one isn't.

You seem to be forgetting that the last time these 'revolutioners' came to power they brought the country on the brink of economic collapse with their irrational russophobia. Practically the only thing the current president could do to save the country was turn to the only party willing to save Ukraine's ass. Russia.

Dav1oN has it right and I've said it before in this thread, the whole landscape needs to change. That won't happen as long as these hard-core nationalists, football hooligans and nazi sympathizers keep brainwashing the people in the streets to destroy their own country. Its so easy to be an internet freedom fighter circlejerker these days on TL.

Whatever a fascist wants, I want the opposite. When it became clear that the Nazi-colaborator wannabe's had taken over maidan the only logical course to take would be anti-maidan. Simple.

But they were always just a small group and even now have nearly no political power.

Go0g3n

Russian Federation410 Posts

March 01 2014 15:55 GMT

#2085

On March 02 2014 00:53 Dangermousecatdog wrote:

Show nested quote +

Your link has no relevence to what you just said. Bluff or wrong link?

Here's a direct link: http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/03/01/ukraine-acting-president-says-russia-has-invaded-ukraine-as-2000-russian-troops-military-jets-arrive/

m4ini

4215 Posts

March 01 2014 15:55 GMT

#2086

On March 02 2014 00:52 Go0g3n wrote:

Show nested quote +

I didn't say they were tanks, the picture did

Well then let me tell you, these are 2S1 Gvozdikas, russian selfpropelled howitzers. Feel free to google "2S1 122mm", you'll get the picture then. Let's not further derail on that matter, you're plain wrong if you say "russian tanks look differently".

Go0g3n

Russian Federation410 Posts

March 01 2014 15:56 GMT

#2087

On March 02 2014 00:55 m4ini wrote:

Show nested quote +

I know that, but they aren't tanks

Let's drop it.

Liman

Serbia681 Posts

March 01 2014 15:59 GMT

#2088

On March 02 2014 00:52 zeonmx wrote:
How Ukrainian soldiers are dealing with occupying Russian soldiers:

LoL now thats safe warfare.

zeonmx

United States111 Posts

March 01 2014 16:00 GMT

#2089

On March 02 2014 00:52 Derez wrote:
Russia has gone full cold war. That parliament session is such a sham that I don't even know what to say about it.

Putin has iron grip on Federation parliament. The guy is basically consolidating his power. People still don't realize this?

m4ini

4215 Posts

March 01 2014 16:01 GMT

#2090

On March 02 2014 00:56 Go0g3n wrote:

Show nested quote +

I know that, but they aren't tanks

Let's drop it.

Agree. Although, i would not call news fake just because they use the wrong term. It's on tracks, so it's a tank (their logic, not mine). You made it sound like these weren't russian vehicles, which they certainly are.

zeo

Serbia6343 Posts

March 01 2014 16:02 GMT

#2091

On March 02 2014 00:54 SilentchiLL wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 02 2014 00:32 zeo wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:27 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:02 zeo wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:57 Sent. wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:51 zeo wrote:
Local government buildings taken by anti-junta protesters

The people of Ukraine want Russia to protect them. Carrying around Russian flags is no different than carrying EU/US flags at Maidan

On January 27 2014 07:07 zeo wrote:

Whatever a fascist wants, I want the opposite. When it became clear that the Nazi-colaborator wannabe's had taken over maidan the only logical course to take would be anti-maidan. Simple.

But they were always just a small group and even now have nearly no political power.

In a sense they were a smaller group but at the end of the day they were the one doing 90% of the fighting/killing/dieing and are now at the top of the junta as a result. Maybe Right Sector don't have anyone in parliament but they are the ones with guns standing outside the parliament building making sure the revolution goes as they planned it. While the wannabe Nazi collaborators have powerful positions in the junta government now.

They are a cancer and Russia sending troops into Crimea is what happens when you come to power on the backs of fascists, the people of Ukraine wont stand for it.

Godwrath

Spain10163 Posts

March 01 2014 16:02 GMT

#2092

On March 02 2014 00:55 Go0g3n wrote:

Show nested quote +

Here's a direct link: http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/03/01/ukraine-acting-president-says-russia-has-invaded-ukraine-as-2000-russian-troops-military-jets-arrive/

I still do not understand how it stops being truth with that link, aside that they are not "tanks". Care to elaborate? what am i missing?

zeonmx

United States111 Posts

March 01 2014 16:02 GMT

#2093

Ukrainian Navy leaves Crimea and heads to Odessa.

This pretty much confirms that Ukraine is giving up Crimea to Russia.

Dangermousecatdog

United Kingdom7084 Posts

March 01 2014 16:03 GMT

#2094

From the link leading from your second link, (3 links to get to the real source!) it is not a "simulation".

Nowhere does it say it is fake or a simulation.

Even if they are not tanks, the picture appears to be entirely real from your link.
Those are real military vehicles, I suggest you go stop with the lies.

In fact, if they are self propelled howitzers, that's even worse than tanks. Those are artillery.

m4ini

4215 Posts

March 01 2014 16:04 GMT

#2095

On March 02 2014 01:02 zeonmx wrote:
Ukrainian Navy leaves Crimea and heads to Odessa.

This pretty much confirms that Ukraine is giving up Crimea to Russia.

Not much else to do there without western support.

Saryph

United States1955 Posts

March 01 2014 16:04 GMT

#2096

They're self-propelled guns, not tanks. It's like how my dad gets irritated when someone called a magazine a clip. They're different things, but to a layman they mean the same thing.

It's not fake news.

HolydaKing

21254 Posts

March 01 2014 16:04 GMT

#2097

On March 02 2014 01:02 zeonmx wrote:
Ukrainian Navy leaves Crimea and heads to Odessa.

This pretty much confirms that Ukraine is giving up Crimea to Russia.

It's very likely that a split of Ukraine will happen imo. Not sure if that is good but Russia probably likes it.

SilentchiLL

Germany1405 Posts

March 01 2014 16:05 GMT

#2098

On March 02 2014 01:02 zeo wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 02 2014 00:54 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:32 zeo wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:27 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:02 zeo wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:57 Sent. wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:51 zeo wrote:
Local government buildings taken by anti-junta protesters

The people of Ukraine want Russia to protect them. Carrying around Russian flags is no different than carrying EU/US flags at Maidan

On January 27 2014 07:07 zeo wrote:

Whatever a fascist wants, I want the opposite. When it became clear that the Nazi-colaborator wannabe's had taken over maidan the only logical course to take would be anti-maidan. Simple.

But they were always just a small group and even now have nearly no political power.

What's wrong about using them to help the revolution if their extreme ideas don't make it into the nation's politics?
You're basically punishing people for using a shovel because you don't like what a shovel would be able to do if it would come into power, but the shovel will still be a shovel.
And nobody believes in the shovel and that shovel will never have any power, so you want Russia to invade another country for things that won't happen.

hypercube

Hungary2735 Posts

March 01 2014 16:06 GMT

#2099

On March 02 2014 00:45 mcc wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 02 2014 00:22 Gorsameth wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:17 Twoflowers wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:09 Gorsameth wrote:

On March 02 2014 00:03 hypercube wrote:

On March 01 2014 23:58 Gorsameth wrote:
And so it is once again shown that EU protection is a fucking joke. We will happily promise our protection but as soon as something bigger then a fly shows up we tuck our tails between our legs and run away.

Sickening to see how spineless our leadership has become.

EU protection means something if it's backed up by US power, which in practice it usually is. TBH, I don't think Russia can effectively go through with this, they will have to back down at some point. No point in sending troops to Ukraine and risk an armed conflict when there are less direct means to achieve the same goals.

Except that seems to be what is happening at this very moment.

On March 02 2014 00:03 Twoflowers wrote:

What EU protection? We have no treaties with the Ukraine that would justify a military intervention. We also have no forces in Ukraine, while russia has a fucking naval base near the biggest crimean city. Economic threats at russia would probably not be enough to stop an invasion. So what exactly shoulod teh EU do?

The Budapest Memorandum is why atleast the US and UK have a duty atm.

And what we should do? How about following Russians example when they moved there army to Ukraine's borders and showing them that we will respond if they invade instead of flinging harsh words.
This is a game of chicken by Putin and we pulled out before it even started.

http://www.ezilon.com/maps/images/europe/political-map-of-Ukraine.gif <-- to which border do you want the uk move forces? Shit is going down a bit too fast to organize a movement of UK troops to romania, poland etc. and they would have to go through turkish territory for acces to the black sea. Also these movements would have been interpreted as agression towards russia.

And Russia moving its army to Ukrains border isn't a sign of aggression?
Is it a sign when there flying military helicopters across the border?
Is it a sign when they approve "war"?

Would the troops need to be there in an hour? no ofc not but when you have your people mobilizing for the move it shows Russia your serious

We're seeing the effects of doing next to nothing right now.

Internet-tough-guy act is not how real world works.

Real situation is that Russia has big amount of leverage on the situation. They can threaten to cripple Ukarainian economy even without the use of force. They have in some areas popular suppport. They have a military base on Ukrainian territory. They can hit Europe economically also. They can also block Western diplomacy on issues more important to the West than Ukraine is.

US has some leverage due to being US. US can hurt Russia economically somewhat and actual threat of force would put Putin in a bad position. But US capability to posture is limited due to last 13 years.

EU has some leverage as they can hurt Putin back economically. Militarily most likely not as Putin would know it is a bluff.

Neither of those parties wants war with one another. Putin can always ignore economical threats as his position in Russia is not weak. So he knows that if he limits himself to small gains he will risk nothing as nobody will do squat, because it is in nobody's interest to do anything.

Of course there is another possibility, very unlikely one, that Putin sees that Ukraine is lost and might be admitted to NATO and decides that it is inacceptable to him and goes for full-on aggression. But that would be such a risk and he never showed any inclination to risk too much.

Though considering that for Russia limiting NATO influence was always a priority, not restoring USSR territorially as you claim, who knows.

There's one little detail you're leaving out: The US has made a commitment to defend Ukraine against aggression. Of course the US has ignored some of its commitments before but that was always to extend their influence. The idea that they would give up something that they have promised to protect anyway is extremely unlikely.

TBH, I'm not even sure there's anything more important to US diplomacy than Ukraine. Dominant powers tend to honour security guarantees (unless they are the aggressors). It might be an inconvenience and they might make small concessions to avoid conflict but ultimately the logic of power kicks in. Ignoring a US security guarantee is a direct challenge to the US, no matter how important the country itself is.

There's the little detail of Russia's nuclear arsenal, of course. In the end if Russia said: "We are invading Ukraine and if you try to stop us we'll nuke you", then there's a reasonable chance even the US would back down. But than they would have other options.