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 'distributing passports in the Crimea'

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jefwane
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.




I'm less concerned about the Georgai/SO passport/ethnic identification issue than I am about such activities if they turn up in parts of the Ukraine and Baltics. The Georgia/SO issue seems to have been let fester by all parties for whatever motives. If the issuing of passports to other regions comences it is no longer an isolated dispute and becomes a pattern of aggression.


So, you think the Russians plan to retake all the breakaway republics? I don't know...

I think you may be on to something, not that Russia will attempt invasions per se, but that they have a vested interest in inciting civil unrest in the surrounding areas.

Obviously there's a proxy war going on in the region, it's not new. The color revolutions really irked Russia, for obvious reasons.

Anything Russia can do to thwart the Western influence is a good play, from their perspective.



Certainly Putin expected some type of reaction from the West over this. The question is, was he expecting some type of Chamberlainesque response or something closer to what we are seeing.


I don't know, good question. Knowing what he expected would go a long way to explaining his precise motives.

If I had to guess, I'd say that Russia counted on harsh words and no action. Just a guess, mind you.



Russia is blessed to be so mineraly rich, but when you see the lack of respect for private property and rule of law, one has to wonder if its worth it to do business with them.


Well, it's worth it if you're willing to do business on their terms. They've proven this.

It's not worth it if you plan on trying to pull a fast one, and smuggle wealth out of the country. We've seen what happens then - you cool your heels in Siberia for a while.

First and foremost, he's a nationalist, I think, not a capitalist. His actions always, to me at least, appear to be in the interest of Russia's place in the world and their bottom line. If you can do business with Putin/Russia that is mutually beneficial, I don't think there are any roadblocks to that.

I still can't understand why Russia didn't shut off the gas to Ukraine. I just don't get it. Have you got any ideas? International pressure is essentially meaningless, it can't just be that simple. (This has been bugging me for a while)


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 01:24 AM
link   
The Russian's sure are stirring the pot,It more and more looks like it may end up a regional conflict of Russian creation.To forestall the NATO expansion. I am sure this was on the table at the latest NATO meeting,IMO NATO's decision will be pivotal.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by WyrdeOne
 





So, you think the Russians plan to retake all the breakaway republics? I don't know...


That IMHO is THE QUESTION.




First and foremost, he's a nationalist, I think, not a capitalist. His actions always, to me at least, appear to be in the interest of Russia's place in the world and their bottom line. If you can do business with Putin/Russia that is mutually beneficial, I don't think there are any roadblocks to that.


I agree about the nationalist, I believe we could use a few more nationalists and many fewer internationalists, at least until the ramifications of rampant globalization are better digested by the economy in particular manufacturing. It has become increasingly difficult for Western companies to do business that is mutually beneficial.



I still can't understand why Russia didn't shut off the gas to Ukraine. I just don't get it. Have you got any ideas?


It's not Winter yet? Waiting to see thier/international reaction? The recent drop in Oil. Keeping making money off of them until it's thier turn?

I'm of the opinion that this has set back US/Russian relations 20yrs. I have many many more questions than answers. Perhaps Putin though that the West, with its major millitary power extended, European and US economies in tenuous positions, and general weakness in NATO that they though this was the perfect time to settle old scores, see what they could get away with, and reinstate a Russian "sphere of influence".

One thing I know for certain, unintended consequences are sure to arise from this round of move counter-move.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by jefwane]

[edit on 19-8-2008 by jefwane]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   
The USA pay money and arms to `help` radical elements within countries - look at iran for example ; but thats oh so right as its the USA funding terrorism , but when russia take a different approach its the big bad bear - even when no bombs or guns or drugs are used!



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Turiddu
reply to post by WyrdeOne
 


It isn't really an act of aggression but the concern is that Russia will use the excuse of protecting "passport holders" as a guise to take control of the Crimea (home of a very important port for the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Sevastopol). When Russia occupied the two breakaway regions of Georgia it did so under the pretense of protecting "Russian passport holders".

The Crimea and other parts of the eastern Ukraine have many Pro-Russian allegiances so this scenario is not total fantasy I guess.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by Turiddu]

Pro-russian alligences sure but to say your being persecuted come save us ,and an Army coming to occupy a democratic country?No.This has to do with Russia wanting to absorb these democratic states.If these russians want to live in Russia they can move there.Its like me saying im canadian living in the US but i want the Canadian army to annex this territory from the US because of "ethnic cleansing by US forces".Its a ploy used in the past by dictators not democratic societies.HItler did it before world war 2 with austria ,czechslovakia and the Danzig corridor.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by Justice11]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by WyrdeOne
 



Hi. I appreciate you are taking a fair-minded approach to this whole issue. I just wanted to come back to you with reference to something you said on the first page:


Well, the region in question has always identified with Russia more than Georgia, to the tune of 80-90% of the population I think. If they want to be Russians, and Russia will accept them, I don't see what's wrong with it.

Surely the issue is that if the Ukrainian government decided to organize a referendum and Eastern Ukraine voted to secede, that would be one thing, but if Russia is deliberately taking steps that could lead to civil unrest that is another.

I have been saying for years that dividing Ukraine would make some sense in the light of the 50-50 election results over recent years, (largely split along ethnic lines). However there are many complications. For example:

Is splitting along ethnic lines always progressive?

Would respective minority populations be treated as second-class citizens?

Would this perhaps open the door to other border disputes and civil unrest?

Furthermore:

If the border of Russia were suddenly to move westwards might it not increase East-West tensions in general?

What will be the result once (following division) pro-Russian Federation Eastern Ukrainians wake up to the fact that the Russian government only wants their territory as a buffer zone, i.e. that they are not intrinsically interested in the fate of the inhabitants. (After 50 years the peoples of Eastern Europe woke up to this fact - this time it could happen a lot more quickly.)

The Ukrainian Question could easily open a real can of worms.




[edit: to clarify]

Obviously many in Eastern Europe were unhappy throughout their occupation / integration into the Russian sphere of influence. The point is it took that long for them to fully realise how being tied to the Russian economy and political system was not only an issue of them not possessing self-determination, it was a dead-end in terms of development. And in case of global war they would be expendable!

[edit on 19/8/08 by pause4thought]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:39 PM
link   
i know this is nuts but i hope we attack russia.




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jefwane
As one who grew up at the end of the Cold War, I had high hopes for the people of Russia's future. If there is any people that deserve the chance to live in peace and freedom for a little while it's them.


I would agree with that. However, how does surrounding Russia with NATO bases help address these issues? If you read reputable sources like Stratfor or slightly less reputable article from Pat Buchanan, the West went for the jugular when it decided to corner Russia to the point that the country is, to quote Stratfor, "indefensible". What about those chances "to live in peace and freedom"?



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by damagemouse
i know this is nuts but i hope we attack russia.


This is indeed nuts, no question about it! Glad you know it.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.




Surely the issue is that if the Ukrainian government decided to organize a referendum and Eastern Ukraine voted to secede, that would be one thing, but if Russia is deliberately taking steps that could lead to civil unrest that is another.


Well, I think it's a safe bet that there will be no referendum on this issue, right? If the country is to be split, it will most likely be the result of a long and drawn out civil war, with support from America and Russia for their respective 'dogs in the fight'.



Is splitting along ethnic lines always progressive?


Progress is a double-edged sword - this fact is perfectly illustrated by this scenario we're discussing. In order to achieve progress and learn to live together, people have to be at each others' throats for some time before they grow weary of the status quo and opt for change.

So, in the name of progress, we could put a million cobras in a large arena with an equal number of mongoose, with the intent of fostering common ground and mutual understanding. It may take a thousand years...



Would respective minority populations be treated as second-class citizens?


Probably, and it's a shame. So often the liberated, having just had the boot of oppression lifted off their neck, choose to place their own boot on someone else's neck. It's a shameful and all-too familiar cycle in most parts of the world. The best example I an think of, off the top of my head, is Rwanda. Certainly though, there are endless examples.



Would this perhaps open the door to other border disputes and civil unrest?


Without a doubt. If you create a new border, you will necessarily create new border disputes.



The point is it took that long for them to fully realise how being tied to the Russian economy and political system was not only an issue of them not possessing self-determination, it was a dead-end in terms of development. And in case of global war they would be expendable!


I see what you're saying, but I have to call foul. Most people will abandon any notion of self-determination, and even freedom, if the standard of living improves and they can feed their families. People NEED food, more than they need freedom, and they know this. So, economic stability and the creation of jobs will almost always win out over esoteric notions of free will. Almost always...

Russia holds the key to economic prosperity for the region, and indeed they hold the key to comfort and survival when it comes to the pipelines. Could the breakaway republics manage on their own? Definitely. Would it be a lot harder, at least at the beginning? Certainly. That's the crux, isn't it. Will the people of the region sacrifice NOW for LATER?

And, to your second point, about the people of the region, and even the region itself, being expendable...

It doesn't matter which side they play for, they're expendable. The only hope they have of NOT being expendable is to forge ahead on their own, without being beholden to either the Russia or the West. Unfortunately..and I hate to say this, but it's true, in that case, they are expendable to both sides, and without support.

These are fledgling governments, and they require a great deal of support in order to remain solvent and functioning. So, they turn to the superpowers, and exchange their self-determination for some much needed capital. It's a choice, and no choice comes without consequences.

Georgians know that they will be expendable, whether they side with Russia or the West. If they didn't know it a couple of weeks ago, they almost certainly know it now. It's a hard lesson to learn, but necessary.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
reply to post by Justice11
 



My argument is so weak that you won't address it directly, but you have to pull out a straw man?

You think Russians are so stupid they don't know whether or not they like Putin? Have you actually seen the press coverage of the man in his home country? It's not all glowing.

If you just think Americans are genetically superior or something, there's no arguing with you - you will never see reason.


Well considering the OP and the thread is about Crimea And not Georgia (Just a precedent made by the russians in Georgia Using the same tactics)

Your reply (Pardon me) Doesn't make much sense.

The original topic i think you missed is the fact Russia is (Suposidly) offering Russian passports to Crimean citizens. And the entire reason why russia has said they feel justified in their actions against Georgia is because they were protecting Russian citizens. (People they gave Passports to a few years ago)

So........ Crimea is justifiably concerned that Russia's actions in offering passports to its people is a attempt at the same bs that is going on in Georgia. IE.. Create a situation where they can claim they are defending their own people (Russian passport holders) and take over Crimea like they have apparently taken over Georgia.

The only corleation here between Georgia and Crimea is the fact Russia used the passport issue to commence military operations against Georgia. Something Crimea doesn't want happening.




[edit on 19-8-2008 by wolfmanjack]

[edit on 19-8-2008 by wolfmanjack]



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by WyrdeOne
 


That was a well-considered response, even though it paints a very dark picture in many ways.

I'll just address on or two points.


Russia holds the key to economic prosperity for the region, and indeed they hold the key to comfort and survival when it comes to the pipelines.


Not necessarily. An independent Ukraine, or any theoretical future entity - Western Ukraine - for argument's sake, could at least become a partner of the European Union. If Turkey, with its appalling human rights record and non-European culture, can get to the home straight of EU membership, Ukraine can overcome its barriers, such as endemic corruption (which the government is fighting with considerable determination) and an economy traditionally tied to Russia.

I can't agree that NATO would regard border countries as expendable in the same way the Warsaw Pact existed to provide buffer zones for mother Russia. However if you have evidence to that effect, by all means make it available. Yes, NATO countries have self-interest at heart, but they also have a genuine (albeit flawed) history of promoting human rights, self-determination and freedom of expression. And the Marshall Plan demonstrates how even their enemies have been treated humanely once neutered.



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Justice11

Pro-russian alligences sure but to say your being persecuted come save us ,and an Army coming to occupy a democratic country?No.This has to do with Russia wanting to absorb these democratic states.If these russians want to live in Russia they can move there.Its like me saying im canadian living in the US but i want the Canadian army to annex this territory from the US because of "ethnic cleansing by US forces".Its a ploy used in the past by dictators not democratic societies.HItler did it before world war 2 with austria ,czechslovakia and the Danzig corridor.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by Justice11]


WoW... How old are you? 12? My bad... you are 11!
You do know that S.Osetia and Abhazia were never part of Republic of Georgia... Russia did not invade Georgia, It was defending citizens of Russia in S.Osetian region who have lived there for hundreds of years... now who the hell are you to say something like "If these Russians want to live in Russia they can move there."

Russia was hoping for hash words from US and NATO? ROFL Has anything more then that happened? What you think Russia will get scared because US and NATO will freeze relationship? You do know that Russia has ability to self sustain... yet most of UN countries will have no power, gas, oil that they buy from Russia. No wonder US is taking over Oil rich countries in the Middle East huh? I wonder if US thinks by pulling strings in Georgia and Ukraine they will make Russia immobile to respond when US goes to war with Iran? Do you all actually think Russia cares much about Georgia? Let me tell you something about Georgia... it is corrupt from the bottom to the top... in Abhazia most of these people are Muslim... Georgia does not produce anything much... I should know... I was born in Georgia and lived most of my life there... no jobs... no economy... the only way they survive is by trading with other countries...
Georgian president finished school in US... hmm I wonder where he got all that money to make "Rose Revolution" what a name...
hmm I wonder why US President who was elected to the office through the back door has been supporting Georgian president who was elected to the office same way...
I also wonder why everyone forgot about 2000 killed in S.Osetia by Georgian troops... as I remember when 9/11 happened US went to war and invaded Afghanistan, Iraq... killed who knows how many Afghanis and Iraqis... for "War on Terror" BS... yet not even one of UN Countries said anything...
This administration has lied over and over... believing anything they say is retarded. They call them Terrorists... Iraqis who fight call them selves Freedom Fighters... What would you do if US would get accused of being a Terrorist State and Invaded by UN.... would not even one US Patriots take on arms and defend his Country?
I bet you all belive what you see on TV... The first thing I seen on TV was "Russia invaded Georgia" yet in reality it was "Georgia Killed 2000 Russian citizens"

In any case "Distributing passports in the Crimea"... yeah right... You have to be in Russia to get passport... This news is another propaganda focused on making Russians look bad.... Looks like US really wants to invade Iran... look how far they are going!


[edit on 20-8-2008 by CTPAX]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join