# Russian invasion of Ukraine



## TheRH100 (Mar 1, 2014)

So a recent, MAJOR event that has happened in Ukraine was Russia's occupation of Crimea. And now it was reported that the Russians are mobilizing troops more as Britain and the United States might, MIGHT, intervene on the other side due to a defense treaty signed with Ukraine in 1994. Hopefully Obama could deviate from that treaty and avoid war altogether, that would be the one good deviation Obama has done. But still, Obama bashing aside, I don't think a war between the United States and Russia is really worth it, if anything, Ukraine should be divided and end in a relatively peaceful result.

Just pray or something that this war will end and everything goes back to normal, back to the way it was for Ukraine if it hadn't had a revolution.


----------



## Volkodav (Mar 1, 2014)

People should just give up what they're doing the second Russia becomes involved


----------



## Sar (Mar 1, 2014)

In an ideal world, it would make sense to split the country. But it has been found that countries cannot share land. It needs some form if negotiation within the new government to create their own sort of compromise on the situation. Sadly I don't see this stopping in a hurry but it is just a matter of waiting and seeing how this progresses.


----------



## Jabberwocky (Mar 1, 2014)

I also hear that the US will potentially get involved.
Nope. Fuck that. This is the ONE THING this country absolutely MUST NOT GET INVOLVED IN.


----------



## Migoto Da (Mar 1, 2014)

Seems the US's involvement is dependent on Russia's actions.


----------



## Jabberwocky (Mar 1, 2014)

Migoto Da said:


> Seems the US's involvement is dependent on Russia's actions.


but really I think it best to stay out of it. This is too big to take on.


----------



## Carta (Mar 1, 2014)

Fucking Venezuela crisis taking up all of my local news.

What's NATO stance on this? Sitting down with their thumb up their asses I suppose?


----------



## Kalmor (Mar 1, 2014)

Migoto Da said:


> Seems the US's involvement is dependent on Russia's actions.


Sure is. The US has made some stupid military decisions in the past but I doubt they'd be stupid enough to start WWIII. :V



Carta said:


> Fucking Venezuela crisis taking up all of my local news.
> 
> What's NATO stance on this? Sitting down with their thumb up their asses I suppose?


"The NATO head said Saturday that members of the Western military alliance were coordinating their responses to possible Russian military engagement in Ukraine."

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/03/01/3967132/nato-chief-warns-russia-on-ukraine.html


----------



## Volkodav (Mar 1, 2014)

Americans are babies who cry


lol
yeah i wouldnt get involved.


----------



## Distorted (Mar 1, 2014)

I also think America shouldn't get involved in this. But I seriously am afraid of what Putin intends on doing exactly.


----------



## Volkodav (Mar 1, 2014)

Distorted said:


> I also think America shouldn't get involved in this. But I seriously am afraid of what Putin intends on doing exactly.



"Russian President Vladimir Putin demanded and won his parliament's approval on Saturday to invade Ukraine, where the new government warned of war, put its troops on high alert and appealed to NATO for help.

Putin's open assertion of the right to send troops to a country of 46 million people on the ramparts of central Europe creates the biggest confrontation between Russia and the West since the Cold War."


So can someone sum up exactly why they're killing each other over there
I haven't been paying full attention


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 1, 2014)

It's just going to be Syria/Egypt/Libya/every other "revolution" in the last 5 years or so. It's a cycle.

1. We're going to say we support the revolutionaries because democracy. 

2. We're gonna posture about how if Country X does this we'll intervene. 

3. Country X will do just that. 

4. We'll move the goal posts and either secretly give the revolutionaries some guns or do nothing. 

5. If the revolution is a "success" some asshole will seize the power vacuum and make things worse and we'll go back to number 1, or things will stalemate forever. 

No one is stupid enough to start a war, it's just a bunch of posturing which will lead to nothing on all sides.


----------



## Distorted (Mar 1, 2014)

PastryOfApathy said:


> No one is stupid enough to start a war, it's just a bunch of posturing which will lead to nothing on all sides.



So basically, like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7e2AtZjafA


----------



## Carta (Mar 1, 2014)

Distorted said:


> So basically, like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7e2AtZjafA


UN security council meeting.mp4


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 1, 2014)

Distorted said:


> So basically, like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7e2AtZjafA



Yes, Obama and Putin are going to meet up in the UN parking lot and just rip off their shirts. It'll be like the fight with Apollo Creed in Rocky 4 minus the death.


----------



## Gnarl (Mar 1, 2014)

just a bunch of posturing... isn't that what they said about Hitler?


----------



## Lobar (Mar 1, 2014)

Clayton said:


> So can someone sum up exactly why they're killing each other over there
> I haven't been paying full attention



The people of Ukraine wanted to join the EU, but the Ukrainian President (who won the election under suspicions of fraud) was a huge shill for Putin and said "fuck no, also I'm going to take out a huge loan with a shitty rate that we don't really need from Russia".


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 1, 2014)

Gnarl said:


> just a bunch of posturing... isn't that what they said about Hitler?



Putin is a lot of things, but he isn't Hitler. All sides are well aware a full-blown war wouldn't really benefit anyone and there's no overwhelming Nationalism to cloud their judgement.


----------



## Volkodav (Mar 1, 2014)

Lobar said:


> The people of Ukraine wanted to join the EU, but the Ukrainian President (who won the election under suspicions of fraud) was a huge shill for Putin and said "fuck no, also I'm going to take out a huge loan with a shitty rate that we don't really need from Russia".



Ooohh
Okay, ty
The civilians are rioting against the government in protest of this then, i assume?

Jesus


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 2, 2014)

Interesting. Given Russia's internal discontent right now though another conflict with a strong outside force may actually cause grander issues...


Russia is being a dumbass basically, it can hardly hold itself together as is, let alone a real war.


----------



## Sioras F. Nightfire (Mar 2, 2014)

Ahh, I see they're still butthurt over losing in hockey. :V

Seriously though. Nothing about this whole situation seems like a good idea. Our military is already stretched too thin as it is. Getting into a war with RUSSIA of all people will just pour salt battery acid into the wound. There's a reason we spent nearly a half-century avoiding armed conflict with these guys.


----------



## Migoto Da (Mar 2, 2014)

If Putin is smart (Hint: He isn't) then he'll pull his troops back. He doesn't want everyone looking at his country as the bad guy, especially with how the world already views them.


----------



## Picea (Mar 2, 2014)

The Ukraine is an ancient country, it's borders seem almost flexible, as  with many central European countries.   I have never been to Europe,   however I am absolutely sure there are places in Ukraine that are  beautiful beyond belief-  I'd be greatly  humbled to see them, and meet  the folks there too.

 The US did solidify a legal disarmament  treaty to protect the Ukraine from any invasion on behalf of a nuclear  equipped country in return for its dissolution of its ridiculous number  of nuclear devices. 

However, that was designed to go through the UN, and that is where the conflict of interests  and treaties meets.    HMMMMmmmmm.

The  world now seems too interconnected to allow a major war to play out -  if it was imminent,  I'd sure of hell been asked to join a branch of the  forces five times a month by now,  considering I'm able bodied,  uncomfortably poor, educated, mechanically minded, overflowing with  common sense, and have a straight line record. 

  There might be a  hurricane of U.N. meetings, and I think whatever happens next will be  softened and used as an example of how "flexible and humanitarian" the  world has become, disregarding the terrible things that have happened  there already.  There will be more bad news from their lands.  Much like  the weather channel's bullshit winter storm apocalypses, which occur  ever few days.

 Considering the best of that, I would be a fool  to guess what comes of this. It's far surpassed my bizarre combination  of ideological non-violence mixed with by-any-means self preservation,  and I hope for the best considering I have not learned if i can offer  any help at this time.

  I could sing them songs, though that might be a better defensive tool than a general morale thing.   

 Lastly, what do you call wood from Russia?    Redwood, Haw Haw haw!


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 2, 2014)

Sioras F. Nightfire said:


> Ahh, I see they're still butthurt over losing in hockey. :V
> 
> Seriously though. Nothing about this whole situation seems like a good idea. Our military is already stretched too thin as it is. Getting into a war with RUSSIA of all people will just pour salt battery acid into the wound. There's a reason we spent nearly a half-century avoiding armed conflict with these guys.


 Considering the US military is functionally immense and has bases around the world... It's not stretched too thin. All that would be needed is a priority shift, and considering a large part of the EU would likely join in, The conflict would be rather... one sided.

Russia is not making a wise move. It may be the bear... but it's an old bear with severe malnutrition and obvious aging.


----------



## thoughtmaster (Mar 2, 2014)

Well, first of all, I TOLD YOU SO! Now, on to more serious matters. Underestimating Putin and posturing to get him to back off is about the dumbest thing the U.S. can do, because he would most likely call our bluff. We strongly don't want a war with Russia, seeing as it has all those Cold War era nuclear weapons, so a war with them would lead to M.A.D. going into effect, and no one wants that. As for the E.U., I think it is about time they face something opposed to their expansion. Right now, the E.U. faces the debts of the member nations, so they can't afford to fight a war, Russia has the ability to veto any UN resolution so that makes the UN useless, and as earlier mentioned, America going to war would lead to a nuclear holocaust, so the best option is to let Russia take Ukraine, but set up NATO instalations throughout Eastern Europe so if Russia tries expanding again, they will be faced with an invasion.


----------



## Picea (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> Considering the US military is functionally immense and has bases around the world... It's not stretched too thin. All that would be needed is a priority shift, and considering a large part of the EU would likely join in, The conflict would be rather... one sided.
> 
> Russia is not making a wise move. It may be the bear... but it's an old bear with severe malnutrition and obvious aging.




If we are relying on our immense, indestructible, and earth shattering  Navy, ( Much like Brittan once did), what prevents any country from emulating the '02 
Hormuz test where many -inspirationaly massive and "in-destructive"- U.S. ships were sunk from thousands of cheap machine gun and missile boats in an embarrassing time? 

  The navy provides the quick on-point work, and weeks follow between other branches.     If Russia is a bear, our gnats will only piss it off more.  Considering a "priority shift" would have to be processed through our political meat grinder, known as "The House" and "Congress".


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 2, 2014)

Picea said:


> If we are relying on our immense, indestructible, and earth shattering  Navy, ( Much like Brittan once did), what prevents any country from emulating the '02
> Hormuz test where many -inspirationaly massive and "in-destructive"- U.S. ships were sunk from thousands of cheap machine gun and missile boats in an embarrassing time?
> 
> The navy provides the quick on-point work, and weeks follow between other branches.     If Russia is a bear, our gnats will only piss it off more.  Considering a "priority shift" would have to be processed through our political meat grinder, known as "The House" and "Congress".


I think you overestimate Russia's Military capacity as is, and it's ability to control the civil unrest another war will cause. I think Russia is bluffing.


----------



## Picea (Mar 2, 2014)

How many sovereign states is Russia allowed to take?  Where do you leave your house and demand an end to that?

 Also, I apologize for sounding brash, Russia is a landmass as much as America is, where good people live, and have to deal with their government, too.  I would be shit-damn honored to go to rural Russia, which is m a s s i v e , and meet whoever I could.  I bet they build the best log cabins there, and know how to farm *anything* in the summer. 

  Russia is not bluffing, it is sure as shit a world power.  Right now, after Syria, we are bluffing.


----------



## Sioras F. Nightfire (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> Considering the US military is functionally immense and has bases around the world... It's not stretched too thin. All that would be needed is a priority shift, and considering a large part of the EU would likely join in, The conflict would be rather... one sided.
> 
> Russia is not making a wise move. It may be the bear... but it's an old bear with severe malnutrition and obvious aging.



A war with Russia would hardly be the landslide you've made it out to be, even with the backing of our European allies. Russia's military may not be as effective as it was during the height of the Cold War, but they ain't pushovers by any stretch.

Just ask Adolf Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 2, 2014)

Sioras F. Nightfire said:


> A war with Russia would hardly be the landslide you've made it out to be, even with the backing of our European allies. Russia's military may not be as effective as it was during the height of the Cold War, but they ain't pushovers by any stretch.
> 
> Just ask Adolf Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte


 You don't have to invade Russia, just push it back and bruise it's grip.


----------



## thoughtmaster (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> You don't have to invade Russia, just push it back and bruise it's grip.


And how the heck do you propose we do that? The UN is useless in this matter because Russia has a permanate seat on the security council! The US is busy in Afghanistan, Lybia, Syria, and many other middle eastern countries. The millitary bases in Europe, all infirmaries for those wounded in the Middle East. Seeing as we all believed the Cold War was over, we moved much of our resorces to the Middle East and east Asia to counter North Korea and deter China. In other words, We're screwed.


----------



## Sioras F. Nightfire (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> You don't have to invade Russia, just push it back and bruise it's grip.



Believe me, I get that part. The question you have to ask yourself though is; what's it gonna take to get them to turn tail and back off? How much are we going to have to commit before they realize they're in over their heads? I don't know about you, but I don't see Vladimir Putin playing half-ass with ANY conflict that involves the US, regardless of who else gets involved.


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 2, 2014)

Sioras F. Nightfire said:


> Believe me, I get that part. The question you have to ask yourself though is; what's it gonna take to get them to turn tail and back off? How much are we going to have to commit before they realize they're in over their heads? I don't know about you, but I don't see Vladimir Putin playing half-ass with ANY conflict that involves the US, regardless of who else gets involved.


Not sure if the US is the solution though. The EU on the other hand, could use the economic stimulation that is war more than a little.


----------



## ceacar99 (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> Considering the US military is functionally immense and has bases around the world... It's not stretched too thin. All that would be needed is a priority shift, and considering a large part of the EU would likely join in, The conflict would be rather... one sided.
> 
> Russia is not making a wise move. It may be the bear... but it's an old bear with severe malnutrition and obvious aging.



the issue is how long it would take to collect these resources together into something that can fight a war against a competent army. the us machine is a military juggernaut with immense resources but in its current posture it would take what would feel like a lifetime to square up against a single target. IF the united states decided to contest russia in a war tomorrow any attacks from us would likely be pathetic and we would certainly take a beating because our guard is so thin.

in such a case my REAL worry comes into play. our lack of ability to replace equipment. assholes like lockheed martin have made some exceptional equipment but in order to ensure maximum profits they have made exceptionally complicated and lengthy manufacturing processes. we could experience the same thing that the germans AND the japanese did in 1943. loose so much equipment in one blow that our industry is physically unable to replace it and we get squashed by our enemy. 

*in reply to general topic*

considering that the crimea is a jewel that russia fought for again and again in the past its not surprising that russia may want to at least "assist" a nearly independent crimea to rejoin russia. there are many many things about crimea that makes it very important to russia and worth salivating over. this is the same case as the ancient germanic territory of danzig in 1939.  

looking at the situation i think appeasement is likely. the united states is the only force in the world that could square up with russia with the POSSIBLE exception of china and our president nor our people do not have the will to engage in any such endeavor. putin was very clever to take advantage just when the united states is experiencing a substantial internal push to end military crusades and cut military alliances. we also have some very unstable situations in our country such as the state of connecticut toying with the idea of forcibly confiscating firearms which considering this nation's history is a very very dangerous thing to suggest.

our weak position was highly expressed to russia over syria and putin is betting on it if this coup is his plan. and with the united states sitting it out the muscle in the nato alliance is gone. russia may gain serious "bad boy points" over this but anything substantive in response is highly unlikely.


----------



## Sioras F. Nightfire (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> *Not sure if the US is the solution though.* The EU on the other hand, could use the economic stimulation that is war more than a little.



Pretty much the point I've been trying to make all along. If the rest of Europe wants to pick a fight with the Russians - fine. Let them have it out. I just don't want my own country getting involved. We've got enough problems inside our own borders, and pissing off the Russians will be on a level of stupidity roughly equivalent to the Temperance Movement.


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 2, 2014)

Sioras F. Nightfire said:


> Pretty much the point I've been trying to make all along. If the rest of Europe wants to pick a fight with the Russians - fine. Let them have it out. I just don't want my own country getting involved. We've got enough problems inside our own borders, and pissing off the Russians will be on a level of stupidity roughly equivalent to the Temperance Movement.


 Eh, half the point of getting involved is to start getting Russians pissed off with Russians. They themselves need a good revolution.


----------



## Sioras F. Nightfire (Mar 2, 2014)

Mokushi said:


> Eh, half the point of getting involved is to start getting Russians pissed off with Russians. They themselves need a good revolution.



'Cause we have such a favorable success rate with that, don't we?


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 2, 2014)

Migoto Da said:


> If Putin is smart (Hint: He isn't) then he'll pull his troops back. He doesn't want everyone looking at his country as the bad guy, especially with how the world already views them.


  I don't think Russia really cares about their image.


----------



## mcjoel (Mar 2, 2014)

This is probably going to be a flexing match.


----------



## Picea (Mar 2, 2014)

Sioras F. Nightfire said:


> Pretty much the point I've been trying to make all along. If the rest of Europe wants to pick a fight with the Russians - fine. Let them have it out. I just don't want my own country getting involved. We've got enough problems inside our own borders, and pissing off the Russians will be on a level of stupidity roughly equivalent to the Temperance Movement.



  What we need to spent on our infrastructure dwarfs whatever we have to deal with on foreign shores.   I was around for the Minneapolis bridge collapse.  I-85 I think.  I had to check for debris in the Mississippi River.   I don't buy the bullshit about our "cyber" security costs, especially when an ice storm throughout the mid-atlantic states can knock out power to hundreds of thousands of folks, if strong enough.  For fucks sake, If that wasn't a natural cause, it'd be called an act of  terrorism this-or-that. Remember "Sandy"?  I lost a pine in the front yard that tore out the neighbors lines, and had a few transformers doing the blue dance around it.  You can not avoid things like that, and I bet many times-over repaired electrical systems can't take a small ice storm.   ( I did enjoy using propane gas stoves to cook with for a week, however...)

  This country could go a long ways using it's own antiquated natural resources, and shit damn, when only the most responsible folks lead developments will there be a decent self sustaining power source, but I do not see that happening.   Flammable water in PA?  I don't like buying my water from a store because my town water is bad, having no choice, and not being  reimbursed by the damn county that asked for mining or drilling to happen, for the sake of "jobs"  Hell, remember that water problem in Charlotte, VA less than a month ago?  Folks paid for their amnesty, by letting the local councils give into whatever the hell paid most.   Have fun in your chemical burn showers!
 Anyway, I'm always confused when I know this country was started as an independent land, avoiding costly and frivolous wars, yet  has steadfastly grown into the omnipresent state it is, unquestionably.  


 If i was sent to the Ukraine, on some sort of morale reconnaissance, I wouldn't last a minute.  How do you go about your life without armed *representatives* making sure the last call you made about he availability of pork wasn't about a pig with the ol' dynamite in it?          ugh


----------



## Gryphoneer (Mar 2, 2014)

Actually, military reprisal from the West (that includes both the US and Europe) is very much necessary in this situation.

History is repeating itself, Putin wants to make Crimea another "separatist province" under economic stranglehold like South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another vassal in the emergent Ruso-Eurasian power bloc. Best case scenario is a coalition between EU and US forces (the latter hopefully better run under the current Commander-In-Chief) routs out the Russians of Ukraine. Putin would fold as a consequence of the defeat and don't touch Ukraine again.

Sadly, we will most likely see another repeat of the same mistakes, meaning the West will sit on their collective arses and let Putin play Strong Man with Russia's military might.


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

Well, honestly, what Russia is supposed to do ? Our neighbor's goverment got overthrown by bunch of neo-nazis, who are openly anti-russian, anti-jew, anti-anything. And then there's Crimea and it's 2 million population are russians or strongly russian-related. Should we evacuate all these people, who lived there for decades ? Or should we leave them under nazist goverment that hates them ?
Crimea's independence is going to be a democratic referendum on 25th May. Our forces in Crimea are just making sure Kiev doesn't try anything funny before that.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 2, 2014)

Are the protesters actually neo-nazis?


----------



## Gryphoneer (Mar 2, 2014)

Geez, Cass, you should watch less Russian state TV and more independent, propaganda-free news media.

Any nationalist elements among the Ukrainian popular uprising are a minority, and the free people of Ukraine got sick of their kleptocratic Putin toady of a President (who most probably rigged the elections).

Crimea may be an autonomous republic, but it's still part of Ukraine. Any marching in of military forces represents a grave violation of international law. Do you really think an electorate can decide freely in a referendum if they're surrounded by fucking occupation forces?


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

I can read in both languages, and I've read articles in Guardian on that matter too (which are just as biased as ours). 
What's more important - I talk every day with two people, my friends, who actually live there. Unikorny from Odessa, and Dark Arlett from Kerch. If you don't believe me - ask Arlett yourself, here's her FA page http://www.furaffinity.net/user/darkarlett/
From our Skype logs : russian military promised Crimean population to defend them from local muslims (who just gone berserk recently) and (citation) "anyone who wishes you harm". 
Most of local population sincerely supports Russia and it's forces. Again - said by actual residents of Crimea.
I don't know how can we even argue about that.


----------



## DrDingo (Mar 2, 2014)

Says on BBC News that yesterday, Barack Obama had a 90-minute telephone conversation with Putin, urging him to pull his forces back.
Imagine having to do that. Many lives potentially hanging in the balance simply based on what you say down a phone line. Takes a special set of skills.

But of course, in the end Putin said that if anything, he must push even further to eliminate any threats to the nation. He's a stubborn man.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 2, 2014)

If the crimean people need protecting UN forces should perhaps have been deployed as peace keepers, rather than a nation with a vested interest and loads of drama invading.


----------



## ADF (Mar 2, 2014)

The world seems to be consolidating into multi country superpowers... It was only a matter of time before someone's empire building stepped on someone else's toes, sparking conflict over which super power a country is aligned with. In this case the EU or Russia.

How many problems are caused by the ambitions of politician...


----------



## Maejin (Mar 2, 2014)

It is gonna be a freak party, bring your own beer...


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Mar 2, 2014)

I heard the Polaks have put their troops up on the Polish-Ukranian border. They're a bit anxious.

If anything happens to Poland, NATO (Yes, the UK, Western Europe, _and_ the US of A whether you like it or not) is obligated to rush in and help, and by help, I do mean join the firefight. This means that an escalation is entirely possible _unless_ the threat of such is a deterrent to Russia but Putin seems to have a big dick over the idea of gaining something from a conflict.

Better hold on to your butts.


----------



## ADF (Mar 2, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26405082



> The Ukrainian ambassador to the UN, Yuriy Sergeyev, says Ukraine is preparing to defend itself against Russia and will ask other countries for military aid if Russian activity expands.



We're so close to war breaking out it's scary...


----------



## Kalmor (Mar 2, 2014)

ADF said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26405082
> 
> 
> 
> We're so close to war breaking out it's scary...


Tell me about it... Things will get VERY ugly if Russia goes a little too far in its expansion.


----------



## DrDingo (Mar 2, 2014)

On a less serious note-
If war happens, I wonder how this'd change online gaming when playing on a server with Russians.
Anyone on this thread who plays on European game servers knows what I'm talking about!


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

People already hate us in Dota 2 and WoW battlegrounds. Nothing new.


----------



## Wither (Mar 2, 2014)

I'm wondering what America is going to do with its now shitty, half-assed military. Can't really just re-hire people :v
Maybe he'll send the government (that he so excitedly strengthened over military) to war. Somehow I don't believe Joe Biden would make a good Rambo :V. 

Also kind of wondering if Putin will try to reestablish the Satellite States. I mean, half of the stans will willingly join if he says he'll rid Israel (then again, I feel he really wants to destroy most of those Muslim countries). :I He has Georgia and Armenia already. China might want to jump to arms with Russia as well :c
It's scary really. If he tries this, I just really hope we won't need to put a draft into affect. Though we'll mostly have to if we join in the war.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 2, 2014)

Your military is the among if not the largest in the world with the largest budget, and you're complaining about there not being enough resources devoted to it?


----------



## Gryphoneer (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> From our Skype logs : russian military promised Crimean population to defend them from local muslims (who just gone berserk recently) and (citation) "anyone who wishes you harm".


Oh, so they _promised_. Phew, now I'm relieved! After all, who's more trustworthy than a head of government who assassinates his critics with radioactive material?

Funny how they welcome their Russian liberators in Crimea and on mainland Ukraine with forming self-defense militias... Shouldn't it be the job of the Spetznaz thugs to protect them from the evil Nazi Mooslims?


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Mar 2, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> Your military is the among if not the largest in the world with the largest budget, and you're complaining about there not being enough resources devoted to it?



And there's a problem with being _over_ supplied in the US military.

For example congress wanted the DoD to purchase/build more tanks.

"Increase military spending! Build more tanks!"
"B-but we don't need any more tanks we already have loads we don't even use at all."
"BUILD. MORE. TANKS."
"k fine"

They can't standardize the proven-superior SCAR platform for many reasons, and the excess of rifles on the AR-15 platform are a contributor to that.

Though Russia's military is more or less stuck in the 80s due to a worse over-supply problem. They're having trouble replacing AK-74s with the AK-107 (let alone the magical AK-12) due to having a ridiculous amount of older rifles in surplus. They're _still_ employing the AKM.

This extends to many other technologies. To get an idea of what they're like, note that the T-34 has been in use til the late 60s. It was first created in 1940 while many other countries have been happily working on improving their systems ever since. It's not an example of pure almighty Russian robustness, it's an example of their addiction to producing a ridiculous amount of X to a point where they're having trouble incorporating Y while everyone else is about to start with Z.


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

Gryphoneer said:


> Oh, so they _promised_. Phew, now I'm relieved! After all, who's more trustworthy than a head of government who assassinates his critics with radioactive material?


Your "relief" is barely related, since you're on the other side of Atlantic Ocean, safe to read your awesome and democratic wikipedia and FoxNews sources.
While I'm actually relieved : because there's great bond between crimean and russian people, and I'd rather trust russian soldiers than UN or Nato. Because many russians have friends and even families among people of Crimea.
What's wrong with forming militia though ? Crimea isn't a part of Russia, so they need to have their own military, we can't watch over them forever.


----------



## Wither (Mar 2, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> Your military is the among if not the largest in the world with the largest budget, and you're complaining about there not being enough resources devoted to it?


Oh it was, and for the moment still is, no doubt. As of 5 or so days ago: Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel plans to shrink the United States Army to its smallest force since before World War II. 

However, those plans may change with recent events. (Also, seriously, I know America has the largest military. It's been having major budget cuts for the past year, a shitton of people have been laid off and they plan to do even more. I don't blame you for not knowing though, it doesn't hit the news much, and I only know because of family, and recent news.)


Gibby said:


> It's not an example of pure almighty Russian robustness, it's an example of their addiction to producing a ridiculous amount of X to a point where they're having trouble incorporating Y while everyone else is about to start with Z.



Funnily, they've had that issue since Peter the great :u


----------



## Gryphoneer (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> Your "relief" is barely related, since you're on the other side of Atlantic Ocean, safe to read your awesome and democratic wikipedia and FoxNews sources.


The assassination is very much related to the invasion, as both crimes expose Putin as a bloodthirsty despot. Of course, you could argue that the World Police didn't find any polonium in Putin's office, so obviously that must mean he's innocent, and that Wikipedia and Fox News are the same, but I don't think these arguments hold much water.



> While I'm actually relieved : because there's great bond between crimean and russian people, and I'd rather trust russian soldiers than UN or Nato. Because many russians have friends and even families among people of Crimea.


Say that to all the Russians who are brutalized by their own authorities on a daily basis, or the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The great bond boils down to a jackboot to the face.



> What's wrong with forming militia though ? Crimea isn't a part of Russia, so they need to have their own military, we can't watch over them forever.


The point of said militias is to protect the Ukrainian/Crimean people _from the Russian invaders_.

Goddamn, the logical contortions nationalists will undergo...


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

See, this is the problem with most americans, and the reason nobody likes the USA. You're not simply clueless, you're agressively clueless. You have no idea about things outside of your continent, and at the same time don't want to actually, you know, learn it. You accept that your media tells you, because that suits your stereotypes, and then you have the nerve to tell the ACTUALL PARTICIPANTS how the things really are there. 
I said already - if you don't believe me (and you have all rights to not believe me) ask Arlett yourself. Her page is right there, I linked it. Send her a note on FA, her internet works fine lately, she even plays Primal Carnage every evening.
Just stop with this Red Scare Cold War era bullshit. Don't be agressively clueless, do the research.


----------



## Shade_Winters (Mar 2, 2014)

Russia will be making a big mistake.  As a member of NATO the US will have to oppose them for political reason as well as all other members of NATO and the UN will have to get involved especially if Ukraine asks for aid.  And even the EU will want to do something (though it'll be a first for them).  Russia just wants more territory (which don't you think they have enough) and control.  China wouldn't like Russia expanding it boarders and committing war near its borders so China won't be happy.  Really, Russia better think things through.

EDIT: I think this is more of a kind of bluff by Russia to get everyone's attention and for political reasons.  Also remember people this is the Russian government doing it not the people per say.  I swear almost every Russian person I met is nice as hell.


----------



## Toboe Moonclaw (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> See, this is the problem with most americans, and  the reason nobody likes the USA. You're not simply clueless, you're  agressively clueless.


Who tells him?


Cassedy said:


> You  have no idea about things outside of your continent, and at the same  time don't want to actually, you know, learn it. You accept that your  media tells you, because that suits your stereotypes, and then you have  the nerve to tell the ACTUALL PARTICIPANTS how the things really are  there.


Yeah, your knee-jerkiness totally is a sign of you  knowing stuff, "being an Participant" and so on. Totally doesn't make  you sound like somebody who ate more than their fair share of propaganda  and is now reigurating it.


Cassedy said:


> I said already - if you don't believe me (and you  have all rights to not believe me) ask Arlett yourself. Her page is  right there, I linked it. Send her a note on FA, her internet works fine  lately, she even plays Primal Carnage every evening.


 If you  don't believe this random internet person, just ask that internet  person, she totally is legit!


Cassedy said:


> Just stop with this Red Scare  Cold War era bullshit. Don't be agressively clueless, do the  research.


Pot, Kettle... you know



On the topic:  and the worst of it, the EU has to solve it (with such independent nations like Germany and the UK having power) without involving the USA, or we have the USA (the beacon of reliability, human rights, and so on) in the whole mess up against their favourite old enemy, Russia


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

Another clueless american, agressive in his ignorance. How interesting.


----------



## Shade_Winters (Mar 2, 2014)

Toboe Moonclaw said:


> On the topic:  and the worst of it, the EU has to solve it (with such independent nations like Germany and the UK having power) without involving the USA, or we have the USA (the beacon of reliability, human rights, and so on) in the whole mess up against their favourite old enemy, Russia



EU solve it?  HA!?! The EU is incompetent concerning world events.  Look at the Balkans during the 90s.  The idea of the European countries working together always makes me laugh, they never get along with each other and likely never will.  Look at WWII, WWI, and even before then.


----------



## Kosdu (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> Another clueless american, agressive in his ignorance. How interesting.



I'm interested in seeing your side of this in more detail, of russian politics and culture. 

To me, in all honesty, it seems to be one ruled by.... Ignorance. I mean no offence, but that is my side and I'd like to see yours.


----------



## Gryphoneer (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> See, this is the problem with most americans, and the reason nobody likes the USA. You're not simply clueless, you're agressively clueless. You have no idea about things outside of your continent, and at the same time don't want to actually, you know, learn it. You accept that your media tells you, because that suits your stereotypes, and then you have the nerve to tell the ACTUALL PARTICIPANTS how the things really are there.


I'm German.

A hit and a miss.


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

Kosdu said:


> I'm interested in seeing your side of this in more detail, of russian politics and culture.
> 
> To me, in all honesty, it seems to be one ruled by.... Ignorance. I mean no offence, but that is my side and I'd like to see yours.


Maybe in PMs or Skype, don't want to make more people mad by not joining "western democratic values" circlejerk.


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

Gryphoneer said:


> I'm German.
> 
> A hit and a miss.



Being mistaken for american is a worrying symptome, I'm just saying.


----------



## Rassah (Mar 2, 2014)

Hahaha, "governments" 9.9

Seriously, though, this is kinda bullshit from so many sides. I mean, first, Crimea was part of Russia for a while, and was only given to Ukraine by Soviet Union iin 1954. I'm fairly certain that a lot of Crimeans are Russian. That said, I think the only good opion for them is to just be independent. Trade with Ukraine and Russia both. Heck, they can probably do really well just by being a tourism economy country. Though I, and obviously many others, are concerned about Putin wanting to be the next Stalin. Sorry, but, people aside, that whole government over there is fucked up.
Secoond, there's no neo-nazis, or whatever the hell doing protesting in Ukraine. There's a small faction of nationalists whom the protesters tolerate but the protests are against a questionably-elected president who changed government laws, gave himself too much power, stole billions of the country's dollars, and wanted to be a dictator. The only reason protests on Maidan turned to intense is because Yanukovich passed a law that made protesting a crime punishable for 15 years. So, you either keep protesting and get the fucker out, or you go to jail for 15 years. They didn't have much of a choice. Cass might have friends in Odesa and Kerch, but I have friends in Kiev and Kiev. One of them runs a major web ticketing service in Ukraine, and, along with colleagues (one of whom was severely beaten and another was shot and killed) was providing internet and WiFi services to people on Maidan. The other is a single mom, who stayed at home, but who's parents, who are retired pensioners, would ride down to Maidan to deliver food and water every day. None of them were fascists or antisemites or anything like that. They were just pissed off at their president who robbed them and was taking too much power. That's it.
As for Russians, Ukrainians hate RUSSIA, not russians. They tolerate Russians. Frankly, most of Kiev speaks Russian, and when you hear them speaking Ukrainian on Maidan, for many it may even just be posturing. The friends I mentioned still speak russian with me, instead of ukrainian, and the two languages are so interchangeable that no one really gives a shit. (Where I lived, just 15 minutes north of downtown, we spoke ukrainian in school, but all the kids spoke russian amongst themselves). I seriously doubt any russians are in any danger there.

As for government posturing, I hope it doesn't result in any fighting, because it will literally be fighting between those at the top of governments, with those actually living in the areas not giving a shit, other than that they're being shot at. There are nationalists on both sides, and there is obviously fear of the Russian government taking over (I'd say waranted, because of that whole 70 year Societ Union and 6+ million dead thing), but it's not like there is a nationalist conflict there.

If shit does hit the fan and explode all over Ukraine, it's gonna cost me many thousands of dollars... So I also really hope it doesn't


----------



## Wither (Mar 2, 2014)

Rassah said:


> If shit does hit the fan and explode all over Ukraine, it's gonna cost me many thousands of dollars... So I also really hope it doesn't



Your PR people must really not like you or you have no PR.


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Mar 2, 2014)

Rassah said:


> If shit does hit the fan and explode all over Ukraine, it's gonna cost me many thousands of dollars...


----------



## Gryphoneer (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> Maybe in PMs or Skype, don't want to make more people mad by not joining "western democratic values" circlejerk.


Yeah, who needs this whole "democratic values" pishposh anyway?

What we need is a Strong Man who holds the nation together and shows them ferriners what's what. By the way, how many rubel do you get for one euro these days? 50?



Cassedy said:


> Being mistaken for american is a worrying symptome, I'm just saying.


Now you just bore me.



Rassah said:


> If shit does hit the fan and explode all over  Ukraine, it's gonna cost me many thousands of dollars...


...thousands of theoretical Internet dollars, that is.


----------



## Toboe Moonclaw (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> Being mistaken for american is a worrying symptome, I'm just saying.


As is automatically assuming that everybody who doesn't join your circle jerk has to be american.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> Your "relief" is barely related, since you're on the other side of Atlantic Ocean, safe to read your awesome and democratic wikipedia and FoxNews sources.
> While I'm actually relieved : because there's great bond between crimean and russian people, and I'd rather trust russian soldiers than UN or Nato. Because many russians have friends and even families among people of Crimea.
> What's wrong with forming militia though ? Crimea isn't a part of Russia, so they need to have their own military, we can't watch over them forever.



Russian forces' presence in the region risks escalation. If forces must be present they ought to be impartial, so that escalation is not risked.



Cassedy said:


> Being mistaken for american is a worrying symptome, I'm just saying.



Racism; really?


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 2, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> Racism; really?



Ya, really. Because your media calls these people "protesters" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkiSPMpTp_I . 
And our soldiers - "thugs, gunmen, bandits" etc. 
Double standards at their best.


----------



## ADF (Mar 2, 2014)

Flipping between the BBC and Russia Today, the bias between the channels is quite interesting. I wouldn't call those people protesters, peaceful protesters don't set police on fire. Though of course the RT channel has its own biases, they never show the police being violent themselves. Basically both channels paint the other side as being the perpetrators of the violence.


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 2, 2014)

ADF said:


> Flipping between the BBC and Russia Today, the bias between the channels is quite interesting. I wouldn't call those people protesters, peaceful protesters don't set police on fire. Though of course the RT channel has its own biases, they never show the police being violent themselves. Basically both channels paint the other side as being the perpetrators of the violence.



News stations showing biases in times of crisis? Holy shit what a shocker.


----------



## ceacar99 (Mar 2, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> If the crimean people need protecting UN forces should perhaps have been deployed as peace keepers, rather than a nation with a vested interest and loads of drama invading.



supposing there IS an ethnic violence threat(which is supposing a great deal) lets play devils advocate and look at this. russia cannot be trusted to contribute forces to this(as you mentioned) and the united states will sit it out meaning almost all of the teeth in the un is gone. so what we have left is a primarily european led endeavor. 

and we ALL know how effective *european* international forces were in ending the ethnic violence in the balkans in the 1990's... i mean seriously many didn't even have the authorization to shoot *rolls eyes*. the violence went on and on. 



			
				Cassedy said:
			
		

> See, this is the problem with most americans, and the reason nobody likes the USA. You're not simply clueless, you're agressively clueless. You have no idea about things outside of your continent, and at the same time don't want to actually, you know, learn it. You accept that your media tells you, because that suits your stereotypes, and then you have the nerve to tell the ACTUALL PARTICIPANTS how the things really are there.
> I said already - if you don't believe me (and you have all rights to not believe me) ask Arlett yourself. Her page is right there, I linked it. Send her a note on FA, her internet works fine lately, she even plays Primal Carnage every evening.
> Just stop with this Red Scare Cold War era bullshit. Don't be agressively clueless, do the research.



luckily i'm a cold calculating pragmatist of an american.

i KNOW that the crimea is a territory that russia has had claim on since way back when catherine the great ripped it from the cold dead hands of the ottomans. ukrane and russia practically speak the same language and these borders have constantly shifted over the centuries and sometimes they have been one nation. reuniting the beautiful crimea with russia certainly is a powerful ambition of a leader trying to at least momentarily calm tensions in the vast and diverse nation of russia. he even has you enthralled in this. 

I also know putin has a moment of great strength in his nation when to be quite frank the united states either cannot or will not actually contest him. we see how much discontentment and near civil disorder grew in just two weeks when our president made threats to syria. in this way putin has much to gain his russian people with very little risk from the backbone of the western alliances. the european union alliance often has very good weapons but no will to fight(and to be honest very small armies that would take a year with mandatory drafts to get up to any real strength) so again there putin has little risk. 

looking at how well timed and executed this push is i realize that anything putin says about the possible ethnic violence in crimea and all that is really just an excuse. some of it may be true but in truth its just a means to acquiring a prized ancient russian territory and trying to restore some of russia that had fractured off. in the end the validity of the threats of violence and what have you doesn't matter real or not.


----------



## DrDingo (Mar 2, 2014)

ADF said:


> Flipping between the BBC and Russia Today, the bias between the channels is quite interesting. I wouldn't call those people protesters, peaceful protesters don't set police on fire. Though of course the RT channel has its own biases, they never show the police being violent themselves. Basically both channels paint the other side as being the perpetrators of the violence.


Well, it's no surprise really. Both are presenting it in the way that the government want it to be presented! 
If it ends up in a war, this could potentially become the first total war involving us in which the internet as well as other forms of mass media can be greatly utilised.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 2, 2014)

Cassedy said:


> Ya, really. Because your media calls these people "protesters" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkiSPMpTp_I .
> And our soldiers - "thugs, gunmen, bandits" etc.
> Double standards at their best.



I'm not an American. American media is not 'my' media. By contrast the BBC, the source of the video you chose to highlight far-right groups' presence amongst the protesters,* is* 'my' media.


This is why your judgements are racist. I failed to agree with you on every detail, therefore you assume that I'm an American who's been brainwashed by propaganda. :\ ...and then use news broadcasts from my own country to show me what 'proper' news should be like.


----------



## Shade_Winters (Mar 2, 2014)

ceacar99 said:


> supposing there IS an ethnic violence threat(which is supposing a great deal) lets play devils advocate and look at this. russia cannot be trusted to contribute forces to this(as you mentioned) and the united states will sit it out meaning almost all of the teeth in the un is gone. so what we have left is a primarily european led endeavor.
> 
> and we ALL know how effective *european* international forces were in ending the ethnic violence in the balkans in the 1990's... i mean seriously many didn't even have the authorization to shoot *rolls eyes*. the violence went on and on. .



Exactly.  We had to deal with the Balkans while the EU sat back and did nothing.  This is why I get angry when people complain about the US being the world police.  Mainly due because no one else has the ability or will take on the role seriously.  We sometime get forced into other affair with countries and have tried to avoid that and be isolationist... but we all know how that has worked out. We save someone and do good, almost all others get angry and unhappy. We don't do anything, we get others angry and unhappy.  EU is incompetent, UN is a... well not a good solution nor a bad one. A good documentary (on Netflix last I checked) is "A World Without US" very informative. 

I would love for us to tell the rest of the world to F off and let them deal with each other, but then we tried that as well.  I'll love the day we become isolationist and other countries beg us to aid them and we respond with... NO.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 2, 2014)

Essentially this thread is full of people who think their nation is best and that everyone else is either brainwashed or too doof to be trusted or both.


----------



## ADF (Mar 2, 2014)

DrDingo said:


> Well, it's no surprise really. Both are presenting it in the way that the government want it to be presented!
> If it ends up in a war, this could potentially become the first total war involving us in which the internet as well as other forms of mass media can be greatly utilised.



I'd be surprised if RT was still available in the UK if it broke out into war, few governments allow their enemies to speak directly to their citizens. As for the internet, who knows. Maybe they'll use the new porn filtering controls they put in place to "protect the children" to block access to certain information.

However it plays out, it's always the ambitions of the political elite that lead to these sort of problems. No one wants conflict, except them in their territory expanding activities... Yet of course they'll be expecting us to rally behind the flags and become all patriotic should it come to a war, to cheer for violence in the name of their petty ambitions.

The bastards, all of them.


----------



## DrDingo (Mar 2, 2014)

ADF said:


> I'd be surprised if RT was still available in the UK if it broke out into war, few governments allow their enemies to speak directly to their citizens. As for the internet, who knows. Maybe they'll use the new porn filtering controls they put in place to "protect the children" to block access to certain information.
> 
> However it plays out, it's always the ambitions of the political elite that lead to these sort of problems. No one wants conflict, except them in their territory expanding activities... Yet of course they'll be expecting us to rally behind the flags and become all patriotic should it come to a war, to cheer for violence in the name of their petty ambitions.
> 
> The bastards, all of them.


What do ya mean by RT? All I can think of is the Radio Times!
I _could_ imagine America blocking web access for Russians.


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Mar 2, 2014)

DrDingo said:


> What do ya mean by RT? All I can think of is the Radio Times!
> I _could_ imagine America blocking web access for Russians.



Russia Today, it's their news channel.

It's not exactly the most unbiased/reliable source of information when Putin is doing something shady.


----------



## Migoto Da (Mar 2, 2014)

I just really don't think this is going to end well, at all. I'd be lying if I said that I thought there was a high chance of things just resolving peacefully.

Putin is a stubborn bastard. He'll do anything to ensure Russia's continued survival... though he's doing a terrible job at it in my opinion.


----------



## ADF (Mar 2, 2014)

Gibby said:


> Russia Today, it's their news channel.
> 
> It's not exactly the most unbiased/reliable source of information when Putin is doing something shady.



At times it takes an outside perspective to get a proper view of your own country, they report on things that the BBC either hides in a sub section or doesn't report on at all. But as you said, like our BBC they're a biased source when it comes to their own country. It's healthy to use a range of news sources, the truth is usually somewhere between.


----------



## Kalmor (Mar 2, 2014)

UK official stament concerning Ukraine:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-on-ukraine-2-march-2014

Which, interestingly enough, said (among other things):



> The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have also decided that it would be inappropriate for UK ministers to attend the Sochi Paralympics in current circumstances.


----------



## Toboe Moonclaw (Mar 2, 2014)

Shade_Winters said:


> We save someone and do good, almost all others get angry and unhappy. We don't do anything, we get others angry and unhappy.


*BULLSHIT*
People get angry at the USA, because the USA* FUCKS UP*


----------



## Rassah (Mar 2, 2014)

Gryphoneer said:


> ...thousands of theoretical Internet dollars, that is.



Funny, those thousands of theoretical internet dollars that I have already sent there were still able to provide non-theoretical food and support to those in Maidan, and within only two days after I sent them. It's also somewhat funny that no one seems to be pointing out that it is only because of the non-theoretical money, such as rubbles and dollars being controlled and printed into existence by their respective governments, that these governments can even afford their militaries and threats of war. No one ever asks "who is funding this conflict BS?" and just accepts it as a fact of life. It sure as hell isn't coming out of Putin's personal bank account.

But no. I mean thousands of real dollars. For real airplane tickets. For real people and their families. To really evacuate them from there. For real. Because ""sha-ring?" "Com-pa-shun?" What's that?



Cassedy said:


> Ya, really. Because your media calls these people "protesters" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkiSPMpTp_I .
> And our soldiers - "thugs, gunmen, bandits" etc.
> Double standards at their best.



The difference is not in who has guns, looks scarier, and is shooting at people. The difference is who the thugs are being violent against. If they are being violent against their government, they are not gunmen, bandits, or thugs. They are people who are fighting against an organization that is supposed to represent them, but is apparently not. If the thugs are government being violent against their citizens, then the "supposed to represent their people" is apparently not working out.
One group claims the exclusive right to and has a monopoly on violence. The other does not. You are not a thug for defending yourself against that monopoly, but you are for enforcing it.


Here's a though. If Putin really is only interested in peace, how about US making it a joint effort and sending their own troops to stand and protect alongside the Russian troops. Not in a different area, where there will be tensions between areas protected by Russia and areas protected by US, but right in the exact same areas? Where the troops can mingle, talk, get to know each other, etc. If there is an actual threat of muslim uprising or Ukrainians attacking Russians, there will be more troops on the ground to keep the peace. Putin will get to feel vindicated about being right with regards to the claims about threat to his people, while being in a position of not being able to escalate to a war, with opposing troops being right there. And the actual troops will get to know each other and maybe build some comraderrie, which will hopefully keep them from wanting to shoot each other. At worst, US will have to admit that they just didn't see the possible threat to peace that Putin did.


----------



## Wither (Mar 2, 2014)

Fallowfox said:


> Essentially this thread is full of people who think their nation is best and that everyone else is either brainwashed or too doof to be trusted or both.



I like Sweden best though :c
Or am I thinking of Switzerland? I forget which one is which :u


Rassah said:


> Funny, those thousands of theoretical internet dollars that I have already sent there were still able to provide non-theoretical food and support to those in Maidan, and within only two days after I sent them. It's also somewhat funny that no one seems to be pointing out that it is only because of the non-theoretical money, such as rubbles and dollars being controlled and printed into existence by their respective governments, that these governments can even afford their militaries and threats of war. No one ever asks "who is funding this conflict BS?" and just accepts it as a fact of life. It sure as hell isn't coming out of Putin's personal bank account.
> 
> But no. I mean thousands of real dollars. For real airplane tickets. For real people and their families. To really evacuate them from there. For real. Because ""sha-ring?" "Com-pa-shun?" What's that?



Your idiocy really makes me want to donate to that charity. I think you'll do wonders with my money. You're a real likeable guy. Geewiz, I really want to invest in bitcoins with people like you in charge! 
:I


----------



## PastryOfApathy (Mar 2, 2014)

Rassah said:


> Funny, those thousands of theoretical internet dollars that I have already sent there were still able to provide non-theoretical food and support to those in Maidan, and within only two days after I sent them. It's also somewhat funny that no one seems to be pointing out that it is only because of the non-theoretical money, such as rubbles and dollars being controlled and printed into existence by their respective governments, that these governments can even afford their militaries and threats of war. No one ever asks "who is funding this conflict BS?" and just accepts it as a fact of life. It sure as hell isn't coming out of Putin's personal bank account.
> 
> But no. I mean thousands of real dollars. For real airplane tickets. For real people and their families. To really evacuate them from there. For real. Because ""sha-ring?" "Com-pa-shun?" What's that?.



Holy shit can you like, keep your bitcoin fetish to one thread? It's starting to become obnoxious.


----------



## Rassah (Mar 2, 2014)

Wither said:


> Your idiocy really makes me want to donate to that charity. I think you'll do wonders with my money. You're a real likeable guy. Geewiz, I really want to invest in bitcoins with people like you in charge!
> :I



Donate to what charity? You mean the one in my sig? I already raised a few hundred k, and we can't give the money away fast enough, so we aren't looking for donations. Why do you think I work for a PR group?

Sorry, a few of these aholes have been relentlessly attacking me for my magic internet money, and claims that I hate the poor's or something, on other threads. That's where the "sha-ring?" and "Com-pa-shun?" came from - a direct mockery of their own words. If you are civil with me, I can be really nice, compassionate, loyal, and likeable. If you are not, you get the exact same level of respect you offer to me. Would it have been better if I had said "If shit hits the fan and explodes all over there, it would mean I would have to spend probably $5,000 to $10,000 to smuggle my friends and family out of there (they live in Kiev and Lviv) and fly them to US temporarily, which is money I'd much rather not have to spend?"



PastryOfApathy said:


> Holy shit can you like, keep your bitcoin fetish to one thread? It's starting to become obnoxious.



Blame Gryphoneer. I wasn't the one who brought up magical internet money.


----------



## Kalmor (Mar 2, 2014)

Rassah can discuss his bitcoin fascination in any thread as long as it keeps relatively close to the topic in the OP. Lets not derail this into a standard bitcoin debate (a derail Rassah didn't start, funnily enough), but you can discuss them in the context of Russia's actions effecting the market.

Now get off his back and start discussing the impending WWIII. :V


----------



## Rassah (Mar 2, 2014)

I would love to talk about how Russia banned bitcoin a sort while ago, and that bitcoin price is already reflecting that, so any further moves by Russia are unlikely to have any effect. Or how when the fights broke out on Maidan, people rushed to pull their money from banks, creating an actual bank run, because they were worried about things ranging from severe like Ukraine Central Bank collapsing with the rest of the government, to simple like banks and ATMs simply not working because the power and internet were getting shut down (_RealMoney_ doesn't work too well without electricity or internet ether). Or how funding methods to Ukraine are shutting down one by one, and the ones left are now charging enormous fees, so Ukranians on Maidan are actually resorting to using news media to ask for bitcoin donations, with it being one of the few remaining methods that actually work. Or how Ukrainian currency crashed about 20% just this week, hurting people's savings, and meaning if you got a paycheck for $1,000 on Monday, you just lost $200 of it. Or how Ukranians often prefer to use the much more stable currency, US dollars, but just a couple of days ago banks in Ukraine imposed $100/day withdrawal limits because banks don't actually have most of people's money, and now even using supposedly safe and stable currencies like dollars is extremely limited and risky.
I'd love to talk about all that, but that isn't something that people here are interested in. So I won't.


To get this back on track, anyone have opinions on this?



> Here's a though. If Putin really is only interested in peace, how about US making it a joint effort and sending their own troops to stand and protect alongside the Russian troops. Not in a different area, where there will be tensions between areas protected by Russia and areas protected by US, but right in the exact same areas? Where the troops can mingle, talk, get to know each other, etc. If there is an actual threat of muslim uprising or Ukrainians attacking Russians, there will be more troops on the ground to keep the peace. Putin will get to feel vindicated about being right with regards to the claims about threat to his people, while being in a position of not being able to escalate to a war, with opposing troops being right there. And the actual troops will get to know each other and maybe build some comraderrie, which will hopefully keep them from wanting to shoot each other. At worst, US will have to admit that they just didn't see the possible threat to peace that Putin did.


----------



## TheRH100 (Mar 2, 2014)

Migoto Da said:


> I just really don't think this is going to end well, at all. I'd be lying if I said that I thought there was a high chance of things just resolving peacefully.
> 
> Putin is a stubborn bastard. He'll do anything to ensure Russia's continued survival... though he's doing a terrible job at it in my opinion.



Putin is practically being Russia's Obama right now. He's doing unnecessary actions to help his country survive, and really he is hurting it really badly. It's funny how the two guys hate each other when they are doing pretty similar things to their respective countries, their intentions point towards similar, bright futures, while their actions point towards still similar, bleak futures.


----------



## Volkodav (Mar 2, 2014)

[yt]fzLtF_PxbYw[/yt]


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 2, 2014)

Actually current situation looks exactly the same as it was before russian 'interventions' in Chechenya in 1990 and 2000, rebellion in Uzbekistan in 2005, and in Osetia (Georgia) in 2008 not to mention Abchasia and some else. Also it's very similar to USSR annexation of baltic republics etc. as well as USA actions in Guam, Puerto Rico and Panama in late XIX century. Actually the list goes on and on, because this scenario was used by almost every imperium in any era: we simply mix into our neighbour affairs, we incite rebellion (sorta), then a group of minority (under our aspices, but nobody knows about that) cries for help, stating that their rights/lives/etc are in danger. Then we invade, because "we just wanted to help".

So far in that case we had everything apart invasion. 

Also, I suspected that russians are behind it as far back as month ago, when the shit began, but I'm in prviledged situation, as my tutor was general polish consul in polish consulate in Petersburg for 5 years, so I have news first-handed from a person who knows virtually everything about Russia and Ukraine. It was logical, and not really hard to deduce.

As for Poland, we're ready. In case some major shit goes on, we already dislocated our forces on eastern border. But I really doubt that Russia will risk a full scale war, since Ukraine is not some Georgia or a small republic. In my opinion everything will end with talks, with Ukraine resigning from Crimea voluntarily... well, at least sorta.

If somebody is interested in any specific thing regarding Ukraine or Russia just ask (if you re not afraid of broken grammar)... Although I'm a historian who specialises in XVI/XVII century Poland and Russia (and thus Ukraine), volens-nolens i know more about them than average european just because research projects, joint projects with ruskies and ukrainians et cetera. Also been to ukraine like 10 times and 3 times in russia


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 3, 2014)

Rassah said:


> Here's a though. If Putin really is only interested in peace, how about US making it a joint effort and sending their own troops to stand and protect alongside the Russian troops. Not in a different area, where there will be tensions between areas protected by Russia and areas protected by US, but right in the exact same areas? Where the troops can mingle, talk, get to know each other, etc. If there is an actual threat of muslim uprising or Ukrainians attacking Russians, there will be more troops on the ground to keep the peace. Putin will get to feel vindicated about being right with regards to the claims about threat to his people, while being in a position of not being able to escalate to a war, with opposing troops being right there. And the actual troops will get to know each other and maybe build some comraderrie, which will hopefully keep them from wanting to shoot each other. At worst, US will have to admit that they just didn't see the possible threat to peace that Putin did.


That actually sounds as great idea and I wish USA or EU would voice, as it basicly would corner Putin into cooperating, or exposing his intents.
Which start to look shady even to me : There're 750 000 registered refugees from Ukraine, that fled here during the last month. From Ukraine, but not from Crimea. Crimean border is closed. If Putin really is after safety of people in that region, why he doesn't let them leave ..? :/


----------



## Rassah (Mar 3, 2014)

Ayattar said:


> Although I'm a historian who specialises in XVI/XVII century Poland and Russia (and thus Ukraine)




Poland and Russia... and thus Ukraine... What??? Are you implying that Ukraine is/was just a part of Poland and Russia???


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 3, 2014)

Well... Term 'Ukraine' was used for the first time in 1590 y, when it belonged to Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Back then there even werent such a nationality as "ukrainians", only "ruthenians".

I'll try to be quick

First real medevial eastern european country was called Kievan Rus and was estabilished in 882. Of course it was in existance even earlier, and this is only contractual date. Kievan Rus had majority of territories of todays Ukraine, as well as western Russia. But there weren't ukrainians back there, only ruthenians, even their language was different (well, not very, if you want to see the difference between russian and ruthenian language try reading XIV century english. It's understandable, just a bit, erm... weird). Everything was fine till early 1100'. Back then in Europe was a custom to split the states between sons of a ruler after his death. Because of that (and because rurikovich dynasty which was ruling in Rus was a really fertile one) during roughly 50 years Rus divided into dozens of small states. Then some of the rulers tried to unite Rus, but that I ll skip, cause its a really long story. What interest us is that thanks to them russia felt into decline, and into dependence to neighbours. Blah blah blah. Then the mongols came and fucked up everything that remained. Together with lithuanians they splitted russian clay in half. In XIV/XV century Rus (territories of modern ukraine) belonged to lithuania, kingdom of poland and grand principality of moscow. So it was until union between poland and lithuania, then there was only Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Moskva which changed later name to Russia that had those territories. And we were always fighting over them  For like, 300 years. First ukraninan (as im considering cossacks to be first "true" ukrainians) aspirations to statehood we can be dated circa 1650, before that they were good with their current status (well, lets say, too long to explain). Basically the term ukrainians was used for the first time to determine the nation in second half of XIX century (so after 1850). After 1795 poland collapsed, and after that ukraine belonged solely to russia (with short period between wolrd wars when it was splitted again between poland and USSR). 

Thus all the fuck up. Right now in ukraine you have ukrainians - still young nation, that can be compared to americans, russians, poles and even mongols (known as tatars), and dozens of smaller ethnicities. Plus, deep inside every neighbour has some grieviances over lost territories. Russia wants crimea as it was "always russian" (bullshit, but 500 years is indeed a long time), poland wants lviv, as it was "always polish" (also bullshit, but no wonder, since lviv was polish for like 400 years) et cetera et cetera. Of course ukrainnians also want some cities. Well, this is really fucked up. If i wanted to explain everything and all grievances it would take me few days 

About ukrainians as a nation, nope, im not being chauvenist or something. As you well know, nations die and rise, sometimes literally from nowhere (just look at bellarussians, never a nation and suddenly - bam). Nowadays ukrainians like to say that southern ruthenians were ukrainians, but it ain't true. Of course they were their predecessors, but not ukrainians. To find understandable comparison... Just think about english settlers in northern america. Before USA declared indepedence - were they american or english? Theoretically ukraine and ukrainians "exist" for only 20 years (since collapse of the USSR), in practice its a great nation that was somewhat molded in continous wars. A nation without a country for like 100 years. Finally they have their own country, but it's borders aren't defined by ethnicity. On Crimea there are 80% of russians (well, people who define "russian" not "ukrainian" as their primary language).


----------



## Cassedy (Mar 3, 2014)

Ayattar said:


> .then there was only Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Moskva which  changed later name to Russia that had those territories. And we were  always fighting over them



Remember those False Dmitries you kept sending to us ? I think, we launched one of them back to Poland from the cannon ... Fun times. 
Anyway, a pleasure to see someone with professional historical knowledge.


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 3, 2014)

Sure. Actually right now I'm working on an article about defining the borders between Poland and Russia after the Treaty of Polyanovka. Funny stuff, most of the documents are describing polish-russian XVII century vodka parties, and how polish and russian deputies with a massive hangover were erecting border posts (actually not posts but mounds) Well, sometimes history can be funny  But, what I wrote above is really simplified version of history (my tutor would kill me, as there are a lot of, well, if not lies then at least understatements), but i dont want to overdo it. I can't expect a casual, expecially from america to understand european history. Sometimes its like circus and you know it 

But on the other hand, without historical background it's really impossible to understand well whats going on in Ukraine.

Well, right now please do excuse me as i need to decipher dat shit on tommorows paleography. I'll be back in an hour or so.


----------



## Wither (Mar 3, 2014)

Rassah said:


> Donate to what charity? You mean the one in my sig? I already raised a few hundred k, and we can't give the money away fast enough, so we aren't looking for donations. Why do you think I work for a PR group?



I love you Raptros, but this. THIS. 
I want to just emphasize this post. It's amazing. Truly. I have tears in my eyes. I guess I can officially say a charity told me to basically fuck off.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 3, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26424738

and another escalation


----------



## ceacar99 (Mar 3, 2014)

Ayattar said:


> Sure. Actually right now I'm working on an article about defining the borders between Poland and Russia after the Treaty of Polyanovka. Funny stuff, most of the documents are describing polish-russian XVII century vodka parties, and how polish and russian deputies with a massive hangover were erecting border posts (actually not posts but mounds) Well, sometimes history can be funny  But, what I wrote above is really simplified version of history (my tutor would kill me, as there are a lot of, well, if not lies then at least understatements), but i dont want to overdo it. I can't expect a casual, expecially from america to understand european history. Sometimes its like circus and you know it
> 
> But on the other hand, without historical background it's really impossible to understand well whats going on in Ukraine.
> 
> Well, right now please do excuse me as i need to decipher dat shit on tommorows paleography. I'll be back in an hour or so.



part of the fun in sorting out borders with the rus is that the land itself really fights you on that. to create identifyable borders between all the factions and poland you really would need to erect mounds. that part of the world is so vast and.... flat. part of the difficulties for the people of the russia's throughout history has always been just that. interesting, thats why the rus as the middle easterners called them(aka the vikings) built "gorods" or forts along rivers the first defining structure to that vast landscape. some cities still have "gorod" in the name.

its also interesting that because of this history and geography it seems that when the "russias" finally began to unite under moscovy we can see a cultural belief that such a vast land with no discernible borders and no unifying culture, heritage or background naturally needed a strong central leader to provide some sort of a degree of stability.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 3, 2014)

Well, now we'd use GPS, to divide borders.


----------



## Ayattar (Mar 3, 2014)

Actually it's pretty interesting, because if you read descriptions it  shows up that every single forest, stream, hill or even some  characterictic trees had their own names. For example: "from Yeofimiejs'  (name) grove, east to pond, from pond north to skomorokhy (name of  village), from skomorokhy along the lvivskaja doroga (name of road) to  chiornyi patok (name of stream), from (...)" etc. Actually, some of  those places can be recognised even today. Boundary stones and mounds  were erected only as the last resort (and some are still recognisable).

You're  right but you're refering to other border, the one that never  existed... And paradoxically it was the best border ever - not a single  human being in 200km, so no problem. And in that area people were  actually free to move (but there weren't many eager ones, since tatars,  cossacks and stuff). Actually this strategy was adapted by communist  russia, as it was prohibited to settle within 20km from the USRR border.

There  were no border fortresses in this part of the world (todays eastern  Ukraine). There were fortresses but on main routes - borders and plains  were (and still are) so vast, that there was only sence in having  cavalry stationing in those several fortresses, reacting to enemy forces  movement. Hence a disproportion between eastern and western Europe in  numbers of used regular infantry and cavalry. Whilst western Europe had  superior infantry and irregular cavalry in eastern Europe there was no  professional infantry (we, both Poland and Russia used mercenaries -  mainly scottish and german) at all, but our cavalry was unmatched. As in  modern warfare, the most important thing was to have an army that will  suit needs.

With the second statement I fully agree. It's the land that defines a man. Or at least it was.

Okay, I'm ending this off-topic


----------



## Hooky (Mar 3, 2014)

Thing is, Russia took the first move and even now we're lagging behind slightly. We're reacting, not really instigating. Putin may be relying on this (and a few other things) to aggravate the west further, until we have no choice but to moved into armed combat. I hope that this situation can be grasped before it escalates past the point of no return. (You could even say we've reached that point without realizing.)


----------



## thoughtmaster (Mar 3, 2014)

Hooky said:


> Thing is, Russia took the first move and even now we're lagging behind slightly. We're reacting, not really instigating. Putin may be relying on this (and a few other things) to aggravate the west further, until we have no choice but to moved into armed combat. I hope that this situation can be grasped before it escalates past the point of no return. (You could even say we've reached that point without realizing.)


Why the heck do you believe Putin would want the West to go into armed conflict? I don't see any reason why he would want something like that to occur. Could you please explain why he would want a war?


----------



## ceacar99 (Mar 3, 2014)

Hooky said:


> Thing is, Russia took the first move and even now we're lagging behind slightly. We're reacting, not really instigating. Putin may be relying on this (and a few other things) to aggravate the west further, until we have no choice but to moved into armed combat. I hope that this situation can be grasped before it escalates past the point of no return. (You could even say we've reached that point without realizing.)



his intention is not armed conflict. his calculation quite astutely is that nato is completely unable to counteract him in an armed manner.


----------

