Are we witnessing the beginning of ethnic cleansing in Ukraine?

a reply to: Vovin

If the rebels are so dangerous then why is it that Kiev is assaulting them on their own land?

Ah yes the land known as Ukraine.

Why aren't these so-called terrorists waging war across the country?

Because Russia isn't able to support a full fledge insurgency across the whole country, not to mention that would bring a severe international response that he doesn't want.

originally posted by: Vovin

The UN report is garbage.

Because you don't want to believe it.

There is clear evidence of warcrimes, yet the report whitewashes this in favour of Western democracy.

The report sticks to the facts

Explain to me why Kiev's forces cannot just roll right into these cities and be treated like liberators? Because surely this would be possible if this was the will of the people there, right?

Instead, Kiev's forces bombard these rebel towns and cities with artillery and air strikes, and have already killed hundreds of civilians. They target hospitals, schools, industrial businesses, residential districts. Assassination attempts have been made on leaders of the rebel regions.

There is no evidence that they specifically target such buildings (though the insurgents may be using such buildings with the deliberate intent of provoking attack?) and only a few hundred people have died in total - mostly combatants from both sides. Not aware of any assinastination attempts on Strelkov and his gang, but yes, there are reports of attacks, torture and murder of those who do not do as he says.

Refugees are fleeing by the thousands to Russia while Ukraine government spokeswoman Psaki thinks that refugees are fleeing Russia into Ukraine.

Do you have a link to support that. I find it odd that Russians are fleeing into the Donbass!

Obviously, civilians will flee a combat zone regardless of whether they support one side or the other or none at all

If the rebels are so dangerous then why is it that Kiev is assaulting them on their own land? Why aren't these so-called terrorists waging war across the country?

Well yes, the Ukrainians are engaging the insurgents in the part of Ukraine in which the insurgents have taken over public buildings, appointed themseles as unelected leaders and have been intimidating any civilians who oppose them. That there is no uprising elsewhere suggests perhaps that the majority of Ukrainians do not hold the same views. Or maybe Donbass is just easier to supply from Russia?

Of course, if the people of Donbass want independence, then rather than following the lead of Chechyna (and we all know how the Russians ended that peacefully!) maybe they should look to Scotland? Last I heard not a single person had been tortured to death for opposing Scottish independence and not a single missile fired on Glasgow .....

Just a thought

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Vovin

Instead, Kiev's forces bombard these rebel towns and cities with artillery and air strikes, and have already killed hundreds of civilians. They target hospitals, schools, industrial businesses, residential districts. Assassination attempts have been made on leaders of the rebel regions.

Well that is because that is where separatists are trying to hide so they can use the human shield defense.

So let me get this right...you think Ukraine should just let Russia intrude on their country with foreign fighters and military hardware and have not have a response for such actions?

So now tell me something...Would Russia allow this to happen in their country?

Why do you keep bringing up Russia? Are you unable to understand that this is a civil war, and that the "Russians" that you refer to are, in reality, Ukrainians of Russian descent?

The reality of the situation is that Kiev is directing the Ukrainian forces in attacking Ukrainians in the east of the country. The east Ukrainians are rising up against this assault.

Instead of blaming the Russians as your delusions presume, maybe you should spend more time thinking about why the government of Ukraine started this "counterterror" operation in the first place. They claim it was to stop radical terrorist invaders, yet there were no invaders and they committed no terrorist acts.

All they wanted to do was break away from the new Ukraine that was formed in Kiev, because it certainly did not represent their interests. You're going to sit there and tell me that a far-right unelected coup government imposing billionaire oligarchs as regional governors is a good thing for society? It just does not get anymore corrupt then that, putting political affairs directly into the hands of the corporate elite... Otherwise known as tyranny of the minority, aka fascism.

The coup did not want to lose these regions because they represent the industrial economy of Ukraine. So they felt that they had no choice but to crush real democracy there.

If Russia was involved, there would be no more civil war there, because the fascist would be burning Kiev to the ground before Russian tank columns enter its streets. The fascist usurpers and fascist militias would find themselves surrounded by the majority of Ukraine citizens who would rather be on side with Russia then the assemble that the fascists represent.

So if you could maybe back up your claims that Russia is involved, then maybe your arguments may start to make sense. And I'm talking about real evidence, not some "official statements" from the perpetual liars in NATO or the USA government.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Video of Psaki saying refugees are fleeing Russia. Obviously a slip-up, but just like all her other slip-ups it is due to her inability to actually comprehend the situation from a realist perspective. Isn't surprising, considering that he job is to filter information to the press.

As for your other points I have no interest in discussing them. Just like in all other conflicts, there's the imperialist perspective and the rebel perspective, and the realist analysis (which is what I'm trained for). In order words, the invaders (who either full out invade or covertly meddle) make up the same old BS every time, and despite being proven to be lies at the end of every instance, some people still believe in it.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Vovin

Thanks for your opinion, troll. I seem to have to read it after almost every post I make regarding Ukraine.

Then please provide the evidence the whole Ukraine gov't are facist neo nazi's since you like to call them that. You see your making a claim that has yet to be shown true.

Also know that sweet talking will get you nowhere.

Since my reply was removed for "off topic drift", I'll reply again.

I never claimed this. I don't believe this. I don't know where you came up with this, other than just to provoke me, which you do a lot. Funny how ATS staff won't do anything about it though.

ethnic cleansing of Russians in Ukraine?

Yes and No.


First, this wouldn't even be a topic today if US/Nato/IMF didn't have their grubby little hands involved with exploding this crisis. Now Ukraine is witnessing a level of violence which it hasn't seen in a long time.

Western backed Ukraine won't get full austerity bailout unless they get rid of those ethnic Russians in east.


. . . And thats what we're witnessing - the liquidation of ethnic Russians who have been living there for generations. All in the name of IMF austerity bailout (puke).

Just so happens in that Eastern region lies: steel mills, mines, agriculture, fracking potential & other heavy industry.

What better way to liquidate ethnic Russians by employing, funding & advising Nazi radicals/sympathizers. The real kicker is that Ukraine's 'far-right' don't even like EU or the West. Oh no, this won't have future back-fire written all over it *cough ISIS cough*


Like I said, wouldn't even be an issue until the IMF gave that ultimatum.

Russophobia and hatress towards Russians, forces of Maidan and well before current fightings, still wonder why people of Novorossiya
do not want to be a victim of this madness?

originally posted by: Vovin
Instead of blaming the Russians as your delusions presume, maybe you should spend more time thinking about why the government of Ukraine started this "counterterror" operation in the first place.

Is not the self proclaimed prime minister of the Donetsk People's Republic a Russian citizen called Alexander Borodai. His mate, Igor Girkin, the Supreme Commander also a Russian citizen. With so many Russians running the pro Russian separatist side one can argue the Russians are to blame.

On the "why", well it is because Ukraine needs to restore their authority in their lands.

Regards

a reply to: Vovin

Why do you keep bringing up Russia? Are you unable to understand that this is a civil war, and that the "Russians" that you refer to are, in reality, Ukrainians of Russian descent?

So your going to try and say that Russia had nothing to do with what is happening in Ukraine?

You do know that Ukraine was around before they were a Russian territory?

You may want to check your history.

A chaotic period of warfare ensued after the Russian Revolution. The internationally recognized Ukrainian People's Republic emerged from its own civil war. The Ukrainian–Soviet War followed, in which the Red Army established control in late 1919.[6] The conquerors created the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which on 30 December 1922 became one of the founding republics of the Soviet Union. Initial Soviet policy on Ukrainian language and Ukrainian culture made Ukrainian the official language of administration and schools. Policy in the 1930s turned to russification

en.wikipedia.org...

The coup did not want to lose these regions because they represent the industrial economy of Ukraine. So they felt that they had no choice but to crush real democracy there.

You are kidding me right?

If Russia was involved, there would be no more civil war there, because the fascist would be burning Kiev to the ground before Russian tank columns enter its streets. The fascist usurpers and fascist militias would find themselves surrounded by the majority of Ukraine citizens who would rather be on side with Russia then the assemble that the fascists represent.

Russia is involved and it has been proven you are just to stuck on Russia being some kind of savior to even see that.

So if you could maybe back up your claims that Russia is involved, then maybe your arguments may start to make sense. And I'm talking about real evidence, not some "official statements" from the perpetual liars in NATO or the USA government.

Crimea is where it started and Russia has admitted to using there troops there so that alone shows they are involved in the situation in Ukraine, but that doesn't matter because Russian media tells you something different.

As far as perpetual liars are you kidding me?

Russia and it's state run media have been shown to be lying since the first hint of trouble in Crimea so you really don't have much of an argument there now do you?

Sorry but most of the lies have been coming from the Kremlin and your favorite sources...The Russian media.

And one last thing where is the evidence that Ukraine did what Russia said as a reason to annex Crimea and the reason it is backing the separatists in the East, because as of yet none of it has been shown to be true.

Care to give that a shot?

a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica

First, this wouldn't even be a topic today if US/Nato/IMF didn't have their grubby little hands involved with exploding this crisis. Now Ukraine is witnessing a level of violence which it hasn't seen in a long time.

Now you seem to have forgotten someone on your little list...Russia.

a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica

. . . And thats what we're witnessing - the liquidation of ethnic Russians who have been living there for generations. All in the name of IMF austerity bailout (puke).

You do understand Ukraine wasn't a Russian territory until 1922 so that means anyone living there before that were not ethnic Russians?

The Ukrainian–Soviet War followed, in which the Red Army established control in late 1919.[6] The conquerors created the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which on 30 December 1922 became one of the founding republics of the Soviet Union. Initial Soviet policy on Ukrainian language and Ukrainian culture made Ukrainian the official language of administration and schools. Policy in the 1930s turned to russification.

en.wikipedia.org...

So the ethnic Russian ruse the Kremlin is spouting really holds no grounds for the insurgency in Ukraine.

Sergei Glazyev, adviser to Russian President, insight of Ukrainian crisis.
Recommended to watch.

Regarding the policies of Kiev, let me say this:
Kiev is clearly conducting a policy of genocide
to eliminate the whole population of Donbass.
They are unashamedly destroying the social infrastructure.
They've smashed Europe's finest airport
without batting a eyelid.
Aside from the monstrous number of victims,
this was a gigantic infrastructure project, the pride of Donbass.
They're destroying hospitals, kindergartens, schools,
The fate they're preparing for the people of Donbass is serfdom,
which they make no secret of.
Just listen to the statements made by Kiev's chief ideologists, such as Liashko.
Poroshenko's position is not significantly different.
They see Donbass purely as a source of income, a place to pump out profits from,
by horrific exploitation of the people.
As it is, the population is already being exploited brutally:
wages are low - and paid in envelopes,
the pension funds are bankrupt,
safety conditions for the workers are worse than in the last century.
It's a merciless exploitation of the people.
Conditions are being established to make people leave the place.
Those who are not tied to work in the factories and mines are being driven out.
They are the refugees whom we are receiving in our country today.
The Kiev authorities are brutally destroying the social infrastructure of Donbass.
They're not interested in the region's manufacturing and science potential.
So they have no sympathy for the engineering industry there,
which is closely integrated into the Russian industrial complex and otherwise would cease to exist.
It's obvious that the United States is fully controlling
the Kiev Nazis, Poroshenko personally, and the government,
and is pushing them to pursue this war against Donbass to the very end.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Vovin
Instead of blaming the Russians as your delusions presume, maybe you should spend more time thinking about why the government of Ukraine started this "counterterror" operation in the first place.

Is not the self proclaimed prime minister of the Donetsk People's Republic a Russian citizen called Alexander Borodai. His mate, Igor Girkin, the Supreme Commander also a Russian citizen. With so many Russians running the pro Russian separatist side one can argue the Russians are to blame.

On the "why", well it is because Ukraine needs to restore their authority in their lands.

Regards

Ukraine is a nationstate, national government is a whole different concept. What you mean to say is that the government in the capital needs to enforce authority under their interpretation of Ukraine social order.

And the problem is that the government in Kiev was never democratically chosen. Their opponents were forced out by radicals and radical nationalist politicians took their seats. Then they initiated a military campaign to assault millions of their own countrymen who did not accept the coup or its policies of discrimination against their ethnicity.

Then some sham elections took place after the military operation already began and people like yourself claim that the millions of separatists, who held their own elections for autonomy, should submit to punitive military force and accept their role as "subhuman" industrial working class for the benefit of the oligarchs emplaced as their regional governors.

Is that an effective summary or what?

Funny how people in the east aren't running into the streets to greet Kiev's forces as liberators, if the rebellion was only just a handful of evil Russian agents.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica

. . . And thats what we're witnessing - the liquidation of ethnic Russians who have been living there for generations. All in the name of IMF austerity bailout (puke).

You do understand Ukraine wasn't a Russian territory until 1922 so that means anyone living there before that were not ethnic Russians?

The Ukrainian–Soviet War followed, in which the Red Army established control in late 1919.[6] The conquerors created the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which on 30 December 1922 became one of the founding republics of the Soviet Union. Initial Soviet policy on Ukrainian language and Ukrainian culture made Ukrainian the official language of administration and schools. Policy in the 1930s turned to russification.

en.wikipedia.org...

So the ethnic Russian ruse the Kremlin is spouting really holds no grounds for the insurgency in Ukraine.

What does the territorial status of Ukraine have to do with ethnicity of the immigrants?

originally posted by: Vovin
What you mean to say is that the government in the capital needs to enforce authority under their interpretation of Ukraine social order.

No, what I meant to say is what I said. Ukrainian authorities are entitled to impose their authority across Ukraine. There is no evidence that the separatists represent anyone but themselves and a minority Eastern Ukraine. The fact that a portion of the leadership of the separatists are Russians from outside Ukraine is telling.

originally posted by: Vovin
And the problem is that the government in Kiev was never democratically chosen.

Well the election in May for the current President was, with free elections except in areas under the influence of armed separatists in a part of Eastern Ukraine. It was a bit more transparent that the Crimean affair, but that's another story.

originally posted by: Vovin
Is that an effective summary or what?

No, not really.

originally posted by: Vovin
Funny how people in the east aren't running into the streets to greet Kiev's forces as liberators, if the rebellion was only just a handful of evil Russian agents.

No, it's not funny. Being caught in the crossfire is not nice, especially as the separatists seem to be rather nasty if the UN report detailed several times already in this thread is to be believed. Frankly, I would rather believe the UN's word than YouTube or RT.com.

Regards

a reply to: Vovin

What does the territorial status of Ukraine have to do with ethnicity of the immigrants?

And exactly what immigrants are you talking about, because aren't most of those who became separatists born in Ukraine so they really can't be considered immigrants now can they?

And I found this interesting...

Ethnic differences are not inherited; they are learned.

www.cliffsnotes.com...

a reply to: Vovin

And the problem is that the government in Kiev was never democratically chosen.

And how was that, because there seemed to be fairly good choice of candidates...



You do know what the word democratically means, because they were in fact democratically elected.

democratically (ˌdeməˈkrætɪkəlɪ)

Definitions
adverb

1.(politics) by the people
2.in an egalitarian way

www.collinsdictionary.com...

Or do you have a different def of democratically elected?

a reply to: paraphi

The UN is whitewashing genocide and war crimes, just like it has been doing for a long time. If the UN was useful at all then why is a racist apartheid like Israel still allowed a set of double standards in its unofficial deployment and development of weapons of mass destruction and its treatment of Palestinians as if they were animals? Yet the UN is used to push economic sanctions on countries like Iran, North Korea and Syria in order to stagnate their economic growth and radicalize their people with the goal of regime change.

In other words, the UN is a farce that refuses to call a spade a spade because a certain country may cut most of their funding if they did (hint: it's the same country that has screwed up Ukraine to start with).

And no, they were not "free elections" and even if they were, "free elections" do not make a democracy. If they did then how do you explain a country like the USA where there are "free elections" to vote for one of two parties with the same overall goals? "Free elections" cannot hide the obvious deepstate of patronage in state institutions that ultimately run countries.

As for your assertions that the "leaders of the rebels are Russian is telling"... Tells how little you grasp the cultural geography of that part of the world where eastern Ukraine is pretty much Russian itself in terms of culture, economy, infrastructure, etc.

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Vovin

And the problem is that the government in Kiev was never democratically chosen.

And how was that, because there seemed to be fairly good choice of candidates...

You do know what the word democratically means, because they were in fact democratically elected.

democratically (ˌdeməˈkrætɪkəlɪ)

Definitions
adverb

1.(politics) by the people
2.in an egalitarian way

www.collinsdictionary.com...

Or do you have a different def of democratically elected?

And what is the context again? A coup that ousted a president and his ruling party that was elected democratically, followed by elections that totally excluded the former reigning party. That's not democracy, it's a show for western media because millions of Ukrainians certainly didn't believe in it, hence the civil war.