It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia 'lost 220 troops' in Ukraine - Nemtsov report

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

georgia attacked a russian protected city. taking the rest of ossetia was a bonus to sending a message to both georgia and nato. and its worked seeing as even georgia in now showing some tact when it comes to dealing with russia.

and obvious'y any russian in his right mind knows that a russian union is important to security. dismantlung the soviet union was a mistake. we cant live in a world where east and west thiink they can meddle in each others intrests. its bad news ffor the whole world. if the soviet union was stiill a thing none of this would be happening.




posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

Like crimea, russia occupied a foreign city in a sovereign nation.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

yeah they sure did. thats how the game is played.

the world works like this, when someone gets in your way you try diplomacy and manipulation, and if that doesnt work you stomp their teeth in. quit thinking your on some moral highground, your country works in the exact same way.
edit on 13-5-2015 by AVoiceOfReason because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Oh c'mon, you do realize that Nazism = Fascism? What about the Azov brigade, Right sector, Svibodja? Odessa massacre? Oleg Buzinas death (by nazi thugs, according to hacked emails leaked by the cyber-berkut group)

No, no nazis at all.
/sarcasm_off



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: MacChiavell1
a reply to: dragonridr

Hot damn...what meds are you on? You seem to have a disconnect with reality my friend. The ukies are the nazis...banderistas to be precise, part of waffen-ss back in the day.

while putin is certainly a nationalist, he is not a fascist.


I wont have this argument here but your wrong he spent his time in a German concentration camp. He pulled a Stalin basically he tried to ally him self with the Nazis to fight the soviets. He wanted them out of Ukraine no wonder considering the death and destruction they caused. And much like Stalin the Nazis turned on him surprise their huh? Either way he never rose to political power in Ukraine and was criminalized by the Soviets during there prolonged occupation. The recent revival is nothing more than a national identity issue in Ukraine. Their history is so tied to Russia that he is seen now as a liberator from the Soviets this isnt accurate either in context of history. But do to Soviet censorship mant Ukrainians dont reallt know about the history of their country its been sanitized.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: MacChiavell1

Can you point out where nato ships are moored now?



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: MacChiavell1
a reply to: Xcathdra

Oh c'mon, you do realize that Nazism = Fascism? What about the Azov brigade, Right sector, Svibodja? Odessa massacre? Oleg Buzinas death (by nazi thugs, according to hacked emails leaked by the cyber-berkut group)

No, no nazis at all.
/sarcasm_off


Yes all russian propaganda has is right sektor. They have no political power lost badly in last elections. But of course Russian media has to parade then out like they are everywhere there group is very small a couple of thousand members total. Russia has far larger nationalist parties and they do have control in the government. As far as the Murders to be expected honestly. Putin runs an armed insurgency which is killing Ukrainians and you wonder why people would get upset, when an individual publicly supports Putinand his policies? It could of been nazis but could have been someone whos son died fighting in eastern Ukraine. By the way the hacked emails are a joke there from a person in Canada that publicly posted information about what they consider enemies of Ukraine. This is truly an eastern European thing i find odd. Even in Russia people put up websites with personal information and discuss what they want to do to that person for their beliefs. In most civilized countries this this doesnt occur. But maybe in times of war things are just different i dont know.Now lets look at odessa two sides to a coin. They werent killed because Nazis they were killed because two groups clashed. It started when pro Russians attacked a group celebrating a local victory of their team. Then they were chased back to their HQ and things got out of hand and alot of people died needlessly. But this is the garbage that happens when you set two groups against each other.

This is why Russia continually spewing out garbage in propaganda is so dangerous. Instead of uniting them their all Ukrainians after all Russia has pushed to alienate them. This leads to us against them mentality which then leads to needless violence. Their were many lifes lost do to the incorrect beliefs of both parties in this fight. To continue to perpetuate them like Russian media is irresponsible and dare i say criminal.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: MacChiavell1

Ukraine was stuck between a rocks and a hard place during WWII. Either ally with Germany or ally with Russia. Considering the genocide that was the Holomdor was fresh in the minds of the Ukrainians it doesn't seem like much of a decision.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
All sounds like misdirectional BS to me. This is not about Russian aggression, this is about Russias struggle to survive. The US is following the Wolfowitz doctrine, intent upon total global domination and hegemony, and set to isolate and undermine any nation who has the potential to rise as a competitive power. This is all about neutralizing Russia and China as emerging competitors. Russia made the mistake of self determination in Syria rather than following washingtons designs, and this demonstration of free will is not to be tolerated by the powers in Washington. This is a struggle to determine whether the US will be the dominant controlling force in the world for the foreseeable future, able to control all the worlds resources and markets. If Russia comes out on top, which they may do, we will have a multipolar world, and it most likely will result in better lives for the vast majority of the third world population, as they have options for their partners....as opposed to our intended US monopoly, which will subject all the world to the rapacious designs of our banking and corporate cartels. In the "Russia wins" scenario, the eastern block (SCO, etc) and the western will have to compete for the alliances and resources of the third world, so the poor nations will likely get better terms, whereas now they are forced to take the austerity imposed by the IMF and WB.....which leaves no nation off better than before but sure does profit investors.

As to the "annexations"....well, if Russia had not done what crimeans were ASKING them to do, (this point is moot, by the way....much less important than...) crimea would now be in the same state as the other eastern regions of Ukraine.... in other words, assaulted, devastated, and under siege. At any rate, there is indeed a difference between what Russia has done here and what the US has done to the middle east, south America, and African nations. Russia has indeed taken in crimea, and also claimed responsibility for their future well being. The US, on the other hand, merely goes in, destroys a nations infrastructure, steals their resources, uses them for sweat shops (and opium production, apparently), and leaves the vast populations to live in squalor, misery, and bare subsistence, while laying the blame for it upon the despotic corrupt rulers that the US appointed them. It is not apples to apples, and yes, one of the two options is far the worst. We can easily see the results of the US policy in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and looking at history we can see what the countries of Columbia, chile, Vietnam, cuba, etc went through though they are finally recovering now, no thanks to us.

Last note....if Russia does appear to be coming out on top, and a polar shift (to sharing and balance) is signified.....I think it most likely the US will resort to war, including massive regional wars, most likely willingly devastating most of the globe, in the name of maintaining hegemony. If they can not rule this one in dominance, they have shown by their character that they will likely prefer ruling over the rubble and ruins of destroyed civilizations rather than being an equal partner in a shared globe where other nations are allowed to have different opinions and economic paradigms.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

Yeah I heard that fanciful story before it's all baloney.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

You are absolutely right about them being stuck in between a rock and a hard place, still no excuse to revive tje worst of their history IMHO...
"Those that do not learn from the lessons of history, are bound to re-live it."
(Paraphrased - cannot remember exact quote)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

I actually have a "friend"/old accomplice in the st. Marys battallion (pro-govt), a.k.a. the orthodox Taliban, based in Mariupol, and according to him, that "misinformation" is just the tip of the iceberg of what is going on, just that most crimes committed by either side goes completely unreported because nobody cares. Rapes, thefts, "mil. advisors" from both western and eastern countries... But lets not trust him because obvious misinfo, no?

Full disclosure: I dont trust him either, he accused me of ratting him out on something I really didnt, so I dont trust him either, but boasts of his new toys and crew, I do.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Furthermore, i dont rely on any national media, but read loads of them, from the NYT/WP to RT/Sputniknews...all of them are propaganda, and I take them all with a grain of salt, like you should. There is no such thing as impartiality, you need to combine the data yourself from multiple & polar opposite sources, and derive the probable truth yourself.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

And one can clearly see the outcome of Russia's actions. By taking Crimea they dealt a devestating blow to Ukraine's economy. Will Russia compensate Ukraine for that? Probably not considering shortly after taking it they called upon Ukraine to pay their gas bill. Then the fomented rebellion in Ukraine's other major industrial area. Let's not forget that the original leaders of the separatists were from Russia. Some with ties to Nazi groups. So Russia has destroyed Ukraine's economy to the point where it will take decades to recover.

But it's all fine because Russia will take responsibility for Crimea. They'll probably even build the infrastructure to take advantage of those newly discovered oil deposits. And all the people of the peninsula will have to pay for it is the stricter control over the press in all of Russia and renewed persecution of the native Tatars.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Well considering the coup was fomented by the us, I don't think anyone Can lay the Russians predictable reaction to protect their national security interests as their "aggression", just as when Vietnam went in to save Cambodia from pol pot who we created was not Vietnamese aggression. At any rate, we destroyed Ukraine's economy when we quickly stole all their gold right after the coup we fomented, and the government we installed further degrades their economy by taking usurious loans from the imf and spending it all on weapons, and then by forcing all their men to a war they don't want, at gun point, there's destroying their own future labour force.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

And yet neither you nor anyone claiming a Western backed coup have proven that claim. What I see is a natural progression of events. Yanukovych promises closer ties to the EU. Russia gets pissy and threatens Ukraine. Yanukovych backtracks on his promise. Pro-EU citizens protest Yanukovych allowing their country to be bullied by Russia. These protests lead to Euromaidan. Parliament believes that Yanukovych has lost control of the country. Even his own party votes to impeach him. Yanukovych flees the country. A new president is elected by the people.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




russia persuaded yanukovych not to take the eu deal in a totally peaceful manner and the us forced him out and started a civil war.


Sure they did...


Glazyev, speaking on the sidelines of the discussion, said the exact opposite was true: "Ukrainian authorities make a huge mistake if they think that the Russian reaction will become neutral in a few years from now. This will not happen."

Instead, he said, signing the agreement would make the default of Ukraine inevitable and Moscow would not offer any helping hand. "Russia is the main creditor of Ukraine. Only with customs union with Russia can Ukraine balance its trade," he said. Russia has already slapped import restrictions on certain Ukrainian products and Glazyev did not rule out further sanctions if the agreement was signed.


And then we have this...


The Kremlin aide added that the political and social cost of EU integration could also be high, and allowed for the possibility of separatist movements springing up in the Russian-speaking east and south of Ukraine. He suggested that if Ukraine signed the agreement, Russia would consider the bilateral treaty that delineates the countries' borders to be void.


www.theguardian.com...

So if you call strong arming someone totally peaceful you may want to look up what peaceful is again?


"We don't want to use any kind of blackmail.


I guess the definition of blackmail is different in RUssia than it is in the US?


"Signing this treaty will lead to political and social unrest," said the Kremlin aide. "The living standard will decline dramatically … there will be chaos."


www.theguardian.com...

Is it me, or are the Russian's able to see into the future, because this is from 2013 and is exactly what happened as if it was planned...Very Interesting.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr
Yes it seems both countries only agree with international law when it is convenient or agrees with their interests.

Putin was against the Iraq invasion without the UN security council agreeing with the US first, but then went ahead into Georgia without even acknowledging them.
Putin was against any action in Syria but the annexation of Crimea was legitimate.

Seems like this all has less to do with right or wrong, and more to do with which country is trying to strengthen itself, and unfortunately, neither country can claim moral superiority.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




georgia attacked a russian protected city.


A Russian protected city in the country of Georgia...so when did Georgia become part of Russia again?

You see you can't say cities are yours in a sovereign country just because you don't like the fact that country is free from you.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: AVoiceOfReason




georgia attacked a russian protected city.


A Russian protected city in the country of Georgia...so when did Georgia become part of Russia again?

You see you can't say cities are yours in a sovereign country just because you don't like the fact that country is free from you.


A Russian protected city is very specifically different from a Russian city.

Much like Ukraine, that particular area voted (99%) to be free of Georgia and Russia even went as far as issuing them passports. Russia claims that as they declared their independence from Georgia and voted to become part of Russia, they were expected to protect their new citizens.

I understand the reasoning behind this claim, even if it doesn't hold any water in the international community. Did they go about this the right way? No. They should have waited for the newly formed state to be recognized and then they would have a leg to stand on when they go in to protect their citizens.
\
But again, this is all about strengthening a country under the guise of being worried for its citizens. You get stronger by growing.




top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join