NYT : Arm Ukraine or Surrender

funny how all talking heads and media from western countries seem to pushing toward world war III..

all this posturing and propaganda coming from the west seem surreal..

this is cold war part 2 , with the US as the bad guy and the russian as the good guy.. a reverse of cold war part 1

a reply to: buntalanlucu

It seems like chances of WWIII have vastly reduced as Donbass rebels have repulsed the Ukies attack on their lands.

If there is any little ounce of sense left in the Junta's mind, they will pull back their forces out of these two areas and seek negotiations on the table instead on the battlefield radio.

Also it looks like Junta forces are spent up in the terms "morale" and regular army might not want to take further senseless orders. If asked to do so, the army might revolt and throw Junta out, crush the right wing, declare emergency and then seek terms with Russia as during the Yanukovich times. Even in this scenario, Donbass region will stand to function with high degree of autonomy and not pay any taxes to Kiev.

That is the best way to keep Ukraine intact in some form. Only other way is to break off the Galicia bulge near Poland and give it an independence. Then tell anyone who wants to go the new republic is more than welcome to. Rest will seek a non aligned political future as NovoRossiya and seek closer terms with Moscow and BRICS.

a reply to: FraternitasSaturni

You need to stop using the why hate Russia obfuscation when you are incapable of countering facts that don't support your position. You've done this in another thread with me.

How about you refute the facts since you obviously think you are right.

a reply to: buntalanlucu

Putin and pro Russians keep talking nukes and war with the west, not the other way around.

I think you guys do this knowing you would not win a war if Russia starts one.

The OP misses the point of the NYT article completely.

If the West wanted to start a third world war, they could nuke Russia, for example - at least its major military centers - don't think Hiroshima. At which point Russia would probably still be able to retaliate - with tragic results in Europe. (I'm not sure US defense would not annihilate attacks across the ocean. Perhaps they could.)

No one wants to use nuclear arms any more - except perhaps North Korea - until a state's very existence is threatened and they are desperate, paranoid people risking their own total demise. However, Putin could shoot up a few nuclear plants just to spite the "evil" Ukrainians - think Chernobyl wafting across the EU in multiple times... But at this point I don't think he is so unrealistic. He would prefer ruling a territory by proxy war and using it instead of destroying.

Putin's Russia is not threatened in any way actually. He wants to expand the former Soviet empire in a nationalistic guise and it is so far failing, though he won some battles. But if Russian is forceful and ingenious enough, it can conquer a good part of Ukraine and perhaps Moldova. At which point all the NATO countries from Turkey to the Baltic would be suddenly up in arms to defend themselves but still not enter the Ukraine, a non-Nato and non-EU country.

The point of supplying Ukraine with weapons and training (and intelligence) is precisely in the hope that they can defend themselves, without nukes (which they don't have), by air and on ground, in the hope the conflict will be contained in the East and subside some time in the future.
If it won't, Ukraine would be like a big Yugoslavia and people will suffer for a long time, and Europe will be out of Russian gas, and Russia will become either much poorer or much more aggressive.

NATO stepping in would still be one step away since it would not attack Russia except Russian troops on foreign soil. However, NATO will not step in unless they attack a NATO country and even then it isn't automatic.

a reply to: Kokatsi

Putin's Russia is not threatened in any way actually. He wants to expand the former Soviet empire in a nationalistic guise and it is so far failing, though he won some battles. But if Russian is forceful and ingenious enough, it can conquer a good part of Ukraine and perhaps Moldova.

Putin likes NATO as it is and NATO should like Russia as it is.

Hence the common sense says, do not invite new members in NATO and in return Russians do not expand into other countries with your little green men.

World is peaceful and progressive as a result.

a reply to: Kokatsi

sorry to say it is you that missed the point completely since you subscribe to the same delusion as the writer of that article..

this is what can be called the result of 'american exceptionalism' doctrine which describe russia as evil and america as good..

any non american or american who dont subscribe to that doctrine will immediately see that the article is full of provocative statements and the author presented it as either you-or-them attitude..

Basically the author nudge the warmongering americans who want to see the relevancy of American Hegemony continued .. They want to attack russia now while it is still weak.. Once russia joined with china, it will be impossible to attack..

disgusting piece of op-ed from NYT , along with it's lies and half-truth in news reporting..

I am not encouraging we get involved in the Ukraine..

But I do find it funny, especially on this board..

The Rebels were all but beaten when the "humanitarian" Aid went in.. now all of a sudden they seem to have more numbers, better weaponry, and armor to launch a counter offensive.

Yet some people will still swear up and down that Russia has nothing to do with it... MAYBE.. just maybe the numbers are just random people moved by the plight of the ethnic Russians in the Ukraine. But that doesn't explain the weaponry, and the armor that has suddenly materialized.

originally posted by: phinubian
a reply to: buntalanlucu
The UN Security council wants to condemn Russia but the question is, what is up with the great U.N. not being able to independently verify whether or not the Russians have in fact sent troops into Ukraine?

They have -

If you guys watch the UN security council meetings almost every single one has a representative from one of the UN agencies give the council a briefing on whats occurring / what they are seeing / hearing.

UN Webcast

You can look at the archives from the meetings. If you have never used the site most of the archive clips are in native audio, meaning whatever rep is speaking you will hear them in their language. There is a setting for audio where you can pick your language. It will give you translations of what everyone is saying.

This is another issue people have with Crimea. While Russia makes the claims it all was lawful the updates by the UN investigations show anything but.

With that said the UN oinly reports. Its up to the members to deal with the info presented. As an example when the report on Crimea came out the UN wanted a resolution condemning Russia. Russia vetoed it, which resulted in the non binding vote from the general assembly condemning Russian actions.

originally posted by: Irishhaf

Yet some people will still swear up and down that Russia has nothing to do with it... MAYBE.. just maybe the numbers are just random people moved by the plight of the ethnic Russians in the Ukraine. But that doesn't explain the weaponry, and the armor that has suddenly materialized.

That's the problem... Like Putin, they MUST take the position they pushed.

With the amount of propaganda Russia has pushed with regards to using the terms Junta and Nazis over and over when referring top Ukraine, do we really expect Putin to back away from that and admit he was lying? How would Russian propaganda be received at home with the announcement the pro Russian /Russians lost to the "Nazi Junta"?

I said it before and I will say it again - Putin has backed himself into a corner - in Ukraine, in his propaganda, denial of direct Russian involvement, and sanctions.

At some point critical mass is going to hit with one of those areas and bury putin.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Irishhaf

Yet some people will still swear up and down that Russia has nothing to do with it... MAYBE.. just maybe the numbers are just random people moved by the plight of the ethnic Russians in the Ukraine. But that doesn't explain the weaponry, and the armor that has suddenly materialized.

That's the problem... Like Putin, they MUST take the position they pushed.

With the amount of propaganda Russia has pushed with regards to using the terms Junta and Nazis over and over when referring top Ukraine, do we really expect Putin to back away from that and admit he was lying? How would Russian propaganda be received at home with the announcement the pro Russian /Russians lost to the "Nazi Junta"?

I said it before and I will say it again - Putin has backed himself into a corner - in Ukraine, in his propaganda, denial of direct Russian involvement, and sanctions.

At some point critical mass is going to hit with one of those areas and bury putin.

those who always refering to personage like 'putin this' or 'obama that' do not understand how real world works. only the simpleton who subscribe to the massive propaganda campaign see the world like this.

it just read like how the conservative/right in USA constantly blaming obama as if there's only obama to blame.. same with the case of Putin and his demonization by deluded westerner..

historically, hitler was demonized so badly that even the usually rational westerner going crazy everytime they hear that name.. how can the supposedly civilized and educated people believe such a lie and propaganda ? hitler alone cannot do anything, there many people of the same ilk that supported him from the beginning and even until the end..

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
From the linked article here:
www.voanews.com - Poll: Ukrainians Want Freedom from Outside Intervention...

........
The poll showed broader support for the 28-nation European Union and the United States in western Ukraine, with diminishing identity with the West in the eastern reaches of the country, where pro-Russian separatists have engaged in armed clashes with Kyiv's security forces.

More than 84 percent of those polled in western Ukraine said the country should join the EU, but only 19 percent in eastern Ukraine want EU membership. Across Ukraine, a majority of ethnic Ukrainians support EU membership, but only one in five ethnic Russians do, and a plurality of Ukrainians oppose membership in the NATO alliance.
.........

YOu said "they" want closer ties to Europe, but you can't be necessarily talking about those in the east, as only 19 percent want EU membership there. As well, only 20% of ethnic russians support it. Further, "plurality" means relative majority, meaning a relative majority of Ukrainians oppose membership in the NATO alliance.

Bottom line, there's no super strong support of EU, as you imply, and there's still division between the west and eastern parts of Ukraine, probably rooted in the ethnic russian population influencing the politics on the eastern portions.

But it's clear many (48%) Ukrainians do not think Russia's involvement in Crimea reflects the actual desires of people in Crimea. And it's also clear 78% of those polled (outside Crimea) in east/southern ukraine DO NOT want foreign governments to interfere in the decision making of Ukraine. Which implicitly means they probably do not want Russia bullying them - which is a strong possibility of Russia is givning aide and support to the rebels.

Note the question in the poll about whether the listed countries are positive or negative doesn't distinguish between west or east and so the 66.4% figure is not giving a clear picture - as well it doesn't include Crimea.

Note how each region responds to the percentage question about whether Russia has played mostly a positive role. Only 1% in the west agreed Russia had a positive influence. Yet in the east it was 35% who thought it was positive. In the south it was 28%. While this does not show widespread support of Russia in the crises, it does show there's still a stark divide which is not going to be good for peace in hte region.

(Also note that a similar question as posed above but referring to the US showed that only 17% of east ukraine thought the US played a mostly positive role, whereas in the west the result was 58%.)

The question is not whether people wnat Russia out of Ukraine, but whether there's enough support and extremism to fuel the rebels. Given that Russia has not tried to quiet the extremism and has instead chosen to fan the fires, it does look like there's enough to fuel it.

a reply to: jonnywhite

Has it not occurred to you that is the Ukrainians in the east / south wanted nothing to do with Ukraine that they would be out in force?

Polls taken in East and South Ukraine have shown they don't want to be a part of Russia. Something Russia has insisted since this started.

The East and the South of Ukraine are so "pro Russian" that the pro Russian rebels had to beg Russia for support.

My god the village idiot comes to the right conclusion before the Nobel laureate.

a reply to: jonnywhite

Most of your reply echoes mine. Your one true line of dissent .. is not really dissent. We have Democrats and Republicans in the US. Ask Republicans about the Democrat choice and you will get even lower numbers than 20%, and vice versa, both sides can't get their way. The fact different groups have varying opinions does not detract from the facts I presented. Eastern Ukraine voted for the President who was pro-EU, except in the places the rebels refused to let people vote.

So while they may not like the EU in Eastern Ukraine .. they wanted the pro EU guy to be President because they are even more anti-Russian.

Want to say I made my previous post (scroll up to see) last night and had to go to bed so couldn't really finish my thoughts.

Above all, I was just trying to make it clear there wasn't a unanimous turn towards Europe as I believed was being suggested by one of hte posters, as though tomorrow if they could they'd join the EU. If the decision to join EU was determined more by the western/northern oblasts then maybe, but there're eastern and southern oblasts who serve as opposition to this. Instead what hte Gallop poll shows is while the combined results from the poll shows Ukrainians do look upon Europe more favorably than Russia, and even in east Ukraine it's clear they think (with 64.3%) Russia's influence has been mostly negative (instead of mostly positive), there's still a strong division between west and east on most (if not all) of these issues.

(Also take into consideration much of the poll excluded Crimea. And in 2001 the census showed much of the Russian ethnicity was in Crimea. There're a few other places with higher concentrations in the southern and eastern oblasts - they're apparently industrial too. I'm unsure how much less the russian ethnicity in Ukraine is without Crimea, but it may affect results. The poll shows russian ethnicity has a large influence on viewpoints.)

In conclusion, Russia is not finding many friends in Ukraine as it sends aide and supplies to the rebels, and will almost surely hurt itself more than help due to sanctions by the west and escalating military conflicts driven by their lack of respect for the borders of Ukraine.

But even if Russia falls back or is defeated in some way, I don't believe conflicts in Ukraine will end. As stated, there's still strong division between west and east. It will take many years and lots of failings on Russia's part for the eastern and souther oblasts to come into balance with the others.

Here's the US-based Gallop poll I mention:
www.bbg.gov - Gallop poll...

I am reading this now:
en.wikipedia.org - Russians in Ukraine...

i understand the US/NATO intention to keep relevant in today's climate, but provoking WW3 with russia over ukraine is really a stupid move

originally posted by: buntalanlucu
i understand the US/NATO intention to keep relevant in today's climate, but provoking WW3 with russia over ukraine is really a stupid move

Please explain, in detail with supporting sources / links, how NATO / US is provoking WW3 with Russia over Ukraine.

Lets review the facts -
The Ukraine parliament, elected in 2012 by the Ukrainian people, whose election was accepted by Russia, voted to remove Yanukovych once the former Constitution was reinstated, 24-48 hours AFTER Yanukovych signed the agreement. There was nothing else for him to sign. The agreement required the Parliament to sign off on it and the head of the rada to sign it, which was completed.

With the former Constitution in effect, the streamlined impeachment process was reinstated as it was a part of that constitution, and used to remove yanukovych. That removal met all requirements set out in the restored constitution.

Yanukovych fled to Russia (Says the Russian media).
Yanukovych had a meeting in a border city and visited Russia (says Yanukovych).

Even if you still wish to debate the impeachment all we need to do is look at the other reasons listed that can merit removal. Once of those is failure to do their job by absence. Since he left the country and didn't bother to come back, he met that criteria as well.

Putin stated Yanukovych fled because his life was in danger.
Yanukovych stated he did not flee and his life was not in danger.

We then have Russia invading Ukraine, illegally annexing Crimea. How do we know this? Because Putin stated the green men with no insignias were in fact Russian troops (after he constantly lied to the media about them not being Russian).

How is this an invasion?

Because they arrived on Crimean soil, armed, and in violation of the agreement with Ukraine, BEFORE any vote ever took place on Crimeas status (which was illegal as well but since it occurred AFTER Russians troops arrived, its an invasion).

The rebels then get their asses handed to them in the south and east. Just when they are about to lose, Russia sends in an "aid convoy", at which point the rebels get direct Russian military support by way of vacations.

And the west is provoking WW3 with Adolph Putin...

I don't think so.

The rebels used superior training and tactics to draw the Ukraine army in and then attacked their exposed sides

Non lethal aid Ukraine gets from America also includes training,sounds like their training is sub standard!

On tonight, live from 10PM Eastern time!

Show thread with listening information