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.

 

US expansion into Eurasia - USS Advantage illegally docks in Ukrainian port of Feodosiya

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Now their President is accusing Russia for creating this problem.





Russian MPs have flown in to offer their support, a development that has prompted Mr Yushchenko to rush through legislation allowing him to deport foreigners taking part in the protests. Pro-Russian forces accused Mr Yushchenko and Nato of planning to build a Nato base in Crimea and of shipping in toxic waste. Both allegations have been denied and the government has suggested Russian special forces have had a hand in whipping up the protests.

The Our Ukraine party went even further yesterday, accusing Moscow of directly fomenting the crisis. "The deliberate incitement of Crimean residents over the multinational military exercises by certain political forces directly supported by Moscow endangers not only the international image of this country, but also the national security and interests of Ukraine," it said in a statement.

The Indepedent



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


All this fuss over joint military exercises is ridiculous.




posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Would there be this much of an uproar if Russia were the one's instead of the U.S. doing the military exercises under the same exact set of situations?


Almost. Not in Crymea, but in West Ukraine which is overly nationalistic. Basically they hate Russia (not on a personal level, but as am imperial idea) enough to prefer another imperial idea, the US, in its stead.

IF Russian troops landed for an exercise, this would be welcome news in East Ukraine.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
IF Russian troops landed for an exercise, this would be welcome news in East Ukraine.


Even if it is illegal as others are saying in this thread? Can't have it both ways.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Thats the issue. Russia would not hold military exercises in Ukraine besides Crimea. Why? Because they don't need to. Unlike what some of you may think, Putin isn't interested in playing old Cold War games like Bush. Putin is interested in rebuilding Russian economy based on nationalized natural resources, and improving trade links with neighboors- much like he has done with Kazakhstan, Germany, Italy, China, Japan, and others. Military build-up is on the bottom of Russian things-to-do list, while it's way up top on the US list. The only reason why Russian military is/was present in Crimea is because not long before the fall of the Soviet Union they pumped lots of money into building military bases and infrastructure there- to face off against NATO member Turkey. I know alot about this because I lived for 2 years on one of the Black Sea Fleet bases near Feodosiya. And now Americans are bringing their ships only miles from where the Russian ships used to be only years ago, and a few still remain.

Russia doesn't need to hold military exercises in Ukraine. Neither is it interested in invading Ukraine. It's would be like U.S. invading Canada. Similarly Ukraine has no need for NATO to protect it against Cold War boogeymen.

Sure Ukraine could improve relations with the US and EU- nobody is keeping them from it except the Ukrainians themselves. But why go into a military alliance so quick after Yushenko came to power? Americans might not understand this- but this is reason to suspect. Yushenko is likely afraid that he will lose next elections- probably to Timoshenko (who as not as pro-US, but neither is pro-Russian yet), and he wants to secure the US investments in the Orange Revolution by inviting them over for some war games. First war games, then military bases, then peaceful occupation, then a basis for a new Cold War. US is well used to occupying countries in this way and it is a wonder all Ukrainians don't see it.

i have nothing against Ukraine forming close economic ties with US and Ukraine- more power to them. But Yushenko is spitting in the face of Russia- old friends (and yes they were friends and partly still remain such) and partners- by inviting NATO in. What I am worried about is that this will not sit well with Russia.



Bush keeps trumpeting his war on Terrorism AKA OilProducingCountriesUnfriendlyToUS, and wonders why Russia isn't at their side for this crusade. Well here is your answer. Fighting Iraq with one hand, and pushing Russia away from Europe with another hand. Bush should choose one war and finish it before starting new conflicts. Hasn't anyone taught him not to make too many enemies- especially as powerful as Russia. Why US is interested in restarting the Cold War is beyond me, and I can only guess. But it is equally troubling that people in America are paying so little attention to the events that could define the rest of this century.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Is the history of Russian extermination of Ukrainians a nd the recent cut off of gas bt Russia the reason for the paranoia of foreign troops?



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   
It is surprising that most people don't realize what US is doing all over Eurasia with their color-coded revolutions, including that in Ukraine. They have their own agenda and couldn't give two ****'s about interests of the nations they are exploiting. US wants to make sure that its old mortal enemy and the ubiquitous evil empire, Russia, is neutralized from all sides. God forbid Cold War strat again, but this time US is ready. They will surround Russia with puppet states like Ukraine and Georgia, and isolate it from Europe, where God forbid Russia is telling others what to pay for Russian energy resources. NOOOO that can't happen- US dictates energy prices world wide- how can Putin not know that. Ukrainians are just being used by US in its quest for restructuring the world in its favor. This has nothing to do with what is better for Ukraine, and all to do with US.


Well as I said before Russia is looking for allies in unlikely places to know- compliments to US.
1. New oil pipeline to China and heavy investment by China in Russia. Possibly military partnership looming.
2. An alliance on the way with India which is already buying loads of newest Russia military tech and holding war games together. No wonder Bush recently looked into improving relations with India himself.
3. Selling war jets to Mexico.
4. New contracts with Venezuela. Look for improving relations with Bolivia, Peru, and other Latin countries in the near future.
5. Quietly blocking US action against Iran.
6. Holding talks with factions in Gaza, Syria, Sudan, and Turkey.

I do not have alot of sources, but this stuff is easy to look up on google. My father and grandfather are both political historians and were professors in state university in St. Petersburg. They have alot of insider opinions on these events but I will not go into those.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by bobz086
Is the history of Russian extermination of Ukrainians a nd the recent cut off of gas bt Russia the reason for the paranoia of foreign troops?


No it's not. What Ukrainians have against Russia and against NATO are two different things.

Yes many despise that Russia had its nose in Ukrainian politics after the fall of the Union. But similarly US has its nose in the politics of most states friendly to the US. All powerful world powers (China, India, Russia, US) are concerned about the stability of neighbooring states, and try to have as much influence there as possible. I already mentioned that Russia and even the Communists have long ago denounced all actions by Stalin under who the extermination took place throughtout Soviet Union, not just ukraine.

Gas cut off has nothing to do with military interests, and is a regional squabble that started 15 years ago. US news only started paying attention to it now, and unfairly making it seem as if it is political. Its all economic and not political/military in nature. Similar squabble is now going on between Russia and Belarus. I am not gonna go into details.


Current paranoia is against NATO in particular. This is a military alliance most Ukraines and Soviets came to despise during the Cold War. The younger generation has a different outlook, but perhaps not well informed. Many Ukrainians understand that NATO just needs their land for bases and doesn't care about Ukrainian own interests. Its imperialistic exploitation to the max. Russia at least had strong economic and cultural ties to Ukraine. US has neither of those, and its doubful these ties will develop.


Here are some interesting neutral links about color-coded revolutions - alas in Georgia not Ukraine. But very similar situation. 9sorry if I dont know how to post links correctly)

www.diacritica.com...

www.diacritica.com...

Especially this link summarizing the whole issue \/

www.diacritica.com...



[edit on 6-6-2006 by maloy]

[edit on 6-6-2006 by maloy]



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   
This was back in March of 2005, however, it reads pretty similar to things going on today:

www.jamestown.org...

www.mosnews.com...



On March 23-24, a Russian naval landing force held for approximately 24 hours a beachhead near Feodosia on Ukraine's Crimea peninsula, as part of a military exercise not authorized by Ukraine.

At 6am on March 23, a Russian marine infantry unit based in Temryuk, Krasnodar Krai, Russia, landed 142 men and 28 vehicles (mainly APCs) ashore near Feodosia. The amphibious assault ship Nikolai Filchenkov of Russia's Black Sea Fleet based in Sevastopol, Ukraine, had picked up the landing unit in Novorossiysk, Russia, from where it had reached the Ukrainian coast during the night. The Russian ship notified the Ukrainian authorities when it crossed into Ukraine's territorial waters, but it did not provide the required information about its purpose, personnel, and cargo aboard. Upon landing, the marine infantry unit began setting up a training ground for an annual large-scale landing exercise, without pre-notification to Ukraine, much less permission from it as required. This exercise is usually held in April by prior arrangement.


If you read further in the article, they make it clear that Russia does indeed hold military exercises in Ukraine. And isn't there a joint Russian/Ukranian naval base in Sebastopol?



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jadette

If you read further in the article, they make it clear that Russia does indeed hold military exercises in Ukraine. And isn't there a joint Russian/Ukranian naval base in Sebastopol?



Yes Russia is holding military exercises there, but it's only in Crimea. And they have paid the agreed-upon lease for the military bases they are using. Just before the fall of Soviet Union they made huge investments to build new bases and infrastructure in Crimea, and understandingly they did not want to lose it all. Ukraine in the 90's signed an agreement to allow Russia to lease them. The protests against Russian exercises only appeared after the Orange Revolution. The protesters were mostly Ukrainian youths (under age of 20) who are members of the new nationalist movement.

The same movement that is funded by the US. The same movement that calls for banning Russian language, which is spoken by 60% of Ukrainians and 95% of Crimeans. In fact recently there were regional brawls and small conflicts between pro-Russian Crimeans and nationalist Ukrainians who mostly come to Crimea to protest from Kiev and Western Ukraine. These nationalists are not welcome there.


last year i have visited my friends in Simferopol and personally witnessed a group fight between nationalists from Kiev and local Crimeans. Its a shame that this national divide is all America's making. Before Yuschenko this would have never happened. Now the nation is dangerously divided.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Come on America is to blame for how Ukraine is run? I am sorry you have such anger towards the USA in your view.

en.rian.ru...

The above link basically says there are 6 military exercises this year in Ukraine. So Moldova, Slovokia, Poland, Britain should be included in expanionists in your eyes too. Why is not these names in the thread title? Because you do not like the USA and are not saying other countries will be coming too. Please be more fair.

I see foriegn troops in exercises have been banned since early 2006 without the parliments permission. Don't blame the USA for your presidents bending of Ukraines laws. Blame your president.



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Moldova, Slovakia and Poland all recently became outposts of American military bases, or are cooperating with NATO, and Britain is a full pledged member of NATO. They are all playing America's game. Before Yuschenko Ukraine never cooperated militarily with those nations.

Last year Yuschenko promised Ukrainians that NATO or any other foreign power would cooperate with/enter Ukraine only with the consent of the overwhelming majority. However even the pro-Orange factions (like Timoshenko) are against this current incursion. US and Yuschenko don't seem to care however.


And if you go to blame Yuschenko one should also blame US. It was US who installed him as president there, and each of his actions has been to bring the US closer to forming military bases there. And US is in on it. If American ships knew they are not welcome and would cause a stir- and they did know- why did they still decide to enter?

[edit on 6-6-2006 by maloy]



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 03:49 AM
link   
The Project for the New American Century called for this kind of expansion in their 2000 report "Rebuilding America's Defenses." Since many of the members of PNAC went on to high positions within the Bush Administration, this is hardly suprising. In fact, 9/11 will probably be the excuse for this expansion of American influence. You know it's all part of the "War on Terror." Interesting to note is that they recognized the "transformation in military affairs" they call for in the same report, acknowledges that it would be a hard sell to the public, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - a new Pearl Harbor."



However, changes should be made to reflect the larger shift in European security needs. U.S. Army Europe should be transformed from a single corps of two heavy divisions and support units into versatile, combined-arms brigade-sized units capable of independent action and movement over operational distances. U.S. Air Force units in Europe need to undergo a similar reorientation. The current infrastructure in England and Germany should be retained. The NATO air base at Aviano, Italy, long the primary location for air operations over the Balkans, needs to be substantially improved. As with ground forces, serious consideration should be given to establishing a permanent and modern NATO and U.S. airfield in Hungary for support to central and southern Europe. In Turkey, Incirlik Air Base, home of Operation Northern Watch, also needs to be expanded, improved and perhaps supplemented with a new base in eastern Turkey.Although U.S. Navy and Marine forces generally operate on a regular cycle of deployments to European waters, they rely on a network of permanent bases in the region, especially in the Mediterranean. These should be retained, and consideration given to establishing a more robust presence in the Black Sea. As NATO expands and the pattern of U.S. military operations in Europe continues to shift to the south and east, U.S. naval presence in the Black Sea is sure to increase. However, as will be discussed in detail below, this presence should be based less frequently on full-scale carrier battle groups.




That's from Page 17 of the report, 1st paragraph

Looks like they considered it. What do you think they decided upon?
You should really take the time to read it. It's like they predicted the future!


[edit on 7-6-2006 by derdy]

[edit on 7-6-2006 by derdy]



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
I'd read, (given my sum knowledge of all this is what I've dug up in the last two days, so bear with me) things that make me think that, as well as the West stirring up trouble there, Russia is too. Is that correct? There's sort of a 'war' going on between the two factions? I got the impression that there's a lot of pressure from Russia to try and reassimulate Ukraine. Or at least, control it. And then there's the whole gas thing too.

www.ukrainianjournal.com...
www.opendemocracy.net...
www.nato.int...
www.heritage.org...

One thing that's very clear to me, there's a great deal going on in that region, in respects to the whole global game. And it is funny we don't hear more about it here in the US.



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
All this fuss over joint military exercises is ridiculous.

No its not. If you wanted to take over the state, you'd be able to sneak in military forces in such a way. Conspiracy theory is very popular in eastern europe, it dictated policy in Serbia in the lead up and follow up to the Nato-Serb war, for example. Paranoia about a plot of outsiders to take over the state isn't ridiculous. Consider all the conspiracy theories about a secret UN takeover of the US, they're not so ridiculous as they first appear.



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

No its not. If you wanted to take over the state, you'd be able to sneak in military forces in such a way. Conspiracy theory is very popular in eastern europe, it dictated policy in Serbia in the lead up and follow up to the Nato-Serb war, for example.


My bad. Sorry I was thinking out side of the conspriacy box. Sorry



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   
No conspiracy here. It's all very obvious if you bother to look at the history of events there (as well as in Georgia) in the last 3 years.

1. After 9/11 US makes an entire plan for gaining more influence in the region.
2. US heavily invests in opposition parties and funds protests.
3. US protests every election where pro-US party loses, and praises every election where pro-US party wins.
4. One by one the old pro-Russian parties lose power to pro-US parties.
5. US goes ahead with placing military outposts in their new contingent states.
6. US launches a campaign across Europe critisizing Putin and his strengthening of control in Russia, while behind the curtain it is supporting corrupt governments in post-Soviet republics.
6 Americans don't know much of what is going on because all the focus is on Iraq/Iran.

All is well for America here- New military bases, new corrupt governments to pad on the back- nothing to worry about. Heck I live in the US, and if I didn't know any better this is great news- our world wide power is growing.

Except one thing- Russia is watching the whole thing, and hardly liking it. How would you feel if China or Russia suddenly placed military bases in Canada, Mexico, and all over the Carribeans, and at the same time had the courage to critisize Bush on his un-Democratic behavior.

All's cool. Have your military bases all over Eastern Europe. But do not be surprised when Russia forms a military alliance with China, India, Iran and Venezuela. That will give us a few more things to worry about than Osama and his Pushtun buddies.



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jadette
I got the impression that there's a lot of pressure from Russia to try and reassimulate Ukraine.


There is some of that, but it's so heavy handed and inefficient, it only achieves the opposite effect.

It is true, however, that the population of East Ukraine is pro-Russian. There are many ethnic Russians there, and Ukranian was never widely spoken there in the first place. They speak either pure Russian or sometimes a dialect known as surzhik (Russian grammar + Ukranian vocabulary). Mostly Russian, though.

I'm talking from the first hand experience. The region is industrialized and stands to profit from unfettered business links to Russia. Any more to EU is clearly detrimental to East Ukraine (and I believe to the rest of that country).


Or at least, control it. And then there's the whole gas thing too.


Russians have the right to charge the fair price for the gas. Is it a form of pressure? Yes. But for Gossakes, the current leadership of Ukraine wants to join NATO, which is clearly and anti-Russian step. Why should Russia give Ukraine preferential status, under those circumstances?



posted on Jun, 7 2006 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
Russians have the right to charge the fair price for the gas. Is it a form of pressure? Yes. But for Gossakes, the current leadership of Ukraine wants to join NATO, which is clearly and anti-Russian step. Why should Russia give Ukraine preferential status, under those circumstances?


Russia is in tough situtation itself. With pro-US governments in Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, the Baltics, Poland, Turkey and Romania among others, all of the pipelines running from Russia to Europe pass through at least one of those countries. Russia heavily depends on those pipelines for profit, just like much of Europe depends on those pipelines for gas. Its a mutual situation, and Russia has to balance prices and politics. If they charge too much for gas, the host countries might just cut off the pipeline thats on their land.

All might change with a new pipeline thats being built through the baltic sea. Its a cooperation with Germany, and not surprisingly most of Europe is opposed to it.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 04:42 AM
link   
My respect to yanchek, sardion2000, Aelita, pavil, maloy, smallpeeps.


Convoys? Demonstrators? Where?


Astyanax, I do read Russian, and so far there have been over 30 NATO/Crimes articles just from lenta.ru, and not including other Russian/Ukrainian publications. It has been a prime time headliner since May27th. Unfortunately and was not able to find even a mention of these events from any English reading sources.


A "day of a journalist" was celebrated in Ukraine, and Yuschenko has named him self as an honorary journalist, and personally appointed him self as a member of Mass Media.

A pseudo-democratic President assured the people that what he said is true because he appointed him self as a honouree journalist.

Just like Nixon saying "I'm not a crook.... and you have to believe me because I just named my self the most honest journalist ever."

glavred.info.../archive/2006/06/06/171211-5.html

"Our Ukraine" party is headed by Yuschenko, the President that will NOT be re-elected and possibly impeached, and every news release proclaiming that there is no unrest, or that the unrest has been created by Russia has originated from "Our Ukraine" press center.

Unfortunately I'm not able to read this article though;

www.kyivpost.com...

I for one do not have a paid subscription to KYIVpost.com, much as I don't have a paid subscription to KREMLINpost, PENTAGONpost or MOSSADpost.

I prefer to draw my news from open source publications.

This quote is completely not true though;


NATO officials refused to comment on either the protest or the operation.


Not only NATO's spokesman James Appaturai made an official statement that NATO has nothing to do with Sea Breeze 2006, but the statement was confirmed by Genadi Moskal, a personal representative of Yushenko.

FIle it under "creative" journalism.

Source - lenta.ru...

The independent.uk article, "Ukraine accuses Russia of inciting new 'Crimean war'" was written by "Andrew Osborn in Moscow".

Anybody who know ANYTHING about journalism knows, that when a corresponded is not on location, they just "cut and paste" the first official release, and in this case it was a Yushenkos "Our Ukraine" party press center release.

In other current developments;

The Parliament of Ukraine has unanimously voted to declared Ukraine and not only Crime as a "NATO free territory".

Shortly after Yushchenko dispatched a detachment of 500 special forces troops to the Crimea region, and stated that it has nothing to do with the social unrest in the area, while entirely dismissing the Parliament vote and forcing the continuation of "exercises".

Ulia Timoshenko's finance director was assassinated by a shotgun blast upon entering the stall of his apartment building.

Today an anti-NATO activist Yuri Chadartsov (movement for Ukraine, Belorussian and Russia) was assassinated by two shots in the head. His body was found in his car. The victim was responsible for mobilisation of anti-NATO protests.

Score of journalist were rounded up and arrested and deported by pro-Kiev forces.

Wide spread protests spread from Crime to whole Ukraine and in defiance of NATO protesters are burning American flags.

In short, armed support to Yuschenko by US forces under the false flag of NATO is forcing an escalation of hostilities into an armed conflict.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   
yall are talking to deeply into this. all this talk of mexican soldiers in the USA for relief efforts should have, by law, been repelled. and now, this boat in Ukraine that had approval from the president but not the parliament or whatever....

well, uhhh, whatever. these are things we just need to let slide and stop talking about it.
in the end, J-walking is illegal too. i'm sure you've done it. so is drinking alcohol before you're 21. im sure you've done it. and i've actually heard(sorry i cannot find a source) from a middle school teacher of mine that sex without the intent of procreation is illegal. im not sure if that is a federal law or just some states- or even 1 state carries that law. all i know is that not only makes you guilty, but condom manufacturers and all their employees an accessory.

sometimes you just gotta say.... "whatever."



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join