Ukraine on the brink of civil war. Mod Warning in OP.

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Anyway; the Russians should encourage a plebiscite in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Thats how they will gain from this. Secondly, the EU and Russia should fund a joint bailout for Ukraine, methinks, although with all the instability I'd imagine a **** load would be stolen by the state et al. Hell, even if the state wasn't unstable a good portion of it would be stolen.

The Crimea was Russian, wasn't it.
It was made part of the Ukrainian SSR during the Soviet Union, I guess they just didnt forsee the Soviet Union ending.

Id prefer they bailed out our bailout than put a cent into the Ukraine, with all the money going missing there, it least it can be determined how it went missing here.

So what will the response of the west be? Most likely - Ban Ki Moon hand wringing and whinging. The EU will send Catherine Ashton who will laugh and smile and shake hands but do sweet FA. Obama will do nothing. The Europeans will do nothing. In short no-one will do anything.

The really big question is whether the Russians will stop at the border of Crimea and lets be honest, Crimea has just been anexed and probably will never rejoin the Ukraine. The question now is if the Russians go all the way to Kiev and install their former puppet there.

If the rest of the world act credibibly, they might not go that far. But if they see further weakness and indecision, they more than likely will go all the way to Kiev. And really, who is going to stop them?

Didn't Crimea end up in the Ukrainian SSR only after Krushchev had been on a booze-sodden binge and got a mad notion in his mad Ukrainian head one night?

Some kind of military conflict is starting to look likely - holy fyck.

I can't get over how an extreme right coup d'etat is being celebrated as a triumph for democracy in the west.

So...in the red corner...the forces of Putin's fascist new Russia...in the blue and yellow corner.... a rabble of neo nazis and right wing nationalists.

I am very glad I don't live there...which is more than I can say for my in-laws.

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Do you deny that there are Russophobic types on these forums? You were the one who was describing "Russian aggression" and "imperialism".

I notice that anti-Russian sentiment is high whenever such a flashpoint crops up (I saw similar sentiment during the South Ossetia war). It is this fear of Russia which sullies our understanding of them as both a nation and a people (this goes both ways too, as many Russians similarly misunderstand our actions). I pray to god that this silliness in Ukraine doesn't erupt into overt conflict.

Secondly, I may post a lot about Russia, but that's because I essentially treat boards as a politics forum these days and I have an interest in Russian politics and foreign policy at the expense of other countries. So what? Its my interest...nevertheless, all my posts aren't virulently pro-Russian: a week or two ago I had a discussion here about how the Russian government was ineffective, overly large and cumbersome and that's just one example.



Apologies, I seem to have misunderstood you to an extent. I appreciate that you have tried to explain your reasoning to me in an understandable manner, for that you have my respect.

But I deduced from your words that you were describing me as some sort of Russophile keyboard warrior suffering from a vehement patriotism for a country that is not mine. I have a morbid fascination with Russia, I admit that. I read Russian literature, listen to Russian music and indulge myself in Russian history and culture. I appreciate the country, and I try to make my posts (far from being diatribes defending my paymaster Putin) as objective as possible while still retaining the basis of my opinions.



Perhaps you could remind me of what post you are talking about (by PM if possible- i don't want to clog up the thread further). I don't seem to recall making a post like this. If I did, it was probably due to my KGB overlords paying me double. A man has to make a living in the recession, right?

Dude, you're wasting your time: Russia (for good reason) is distrusted in the west; they've got a pretty unpleasant political set up there.

Of course Russia's an easy target for woolly thinkers and time-strapped/lazy journalists the western world over - Russia is not a democracy but it's not Saudi Arabia; neither is it anything as bad as what may emerge from the Ukrainian coup should some of its more active fascist elements (Svoboda, Praviy Sektor) gain real power.

Anyone I know from Ukraine is relieved that the Russians have stepped up.

hfallada wrote: »

How did the winter Olympics cost over $50 billion dollars, which is more than than every other winter Olympics combined when the town of Sochi was still a bit of a kip and very little was built for the Olympics. Contracts are unfairly awarded and money just goes missing from the government departments

How? Answer your own question - the Russian ruling class doesn't really give a sh!te about social or economic equality.

They're not alone - the only difference between Fine Gael/Fianna Fail and Putin is charisma, gas and an enormous military.

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

If you think Russia is a fascist state, then you may be confused about the concept of fascism.

Whatever your opinions about the Russian state, western distrust of Russia is unrelated to the quality of it's government. Even then, that's assuming that "the west" is a monolithic entity. It's not.

Some western nations have excellent trade relations with Russia, others don't. Most western countries have a reasonably neutral viewpoint towards Russia. The USA, on the other hand....to say that some political figures in the US have an anti-Putin derangement disorder would be an understatement (some of them have even made personal attacks on him rather than his admittedly authoritarian style of governance). Even then, the USA is not monolithic and there are those who have advocated a normalisation of relations with Russia.

I think most western countries recognise Russia for what it is to be fair, run by a prototypical cold war warrier/strongman who accepts no opposition in his own country and wants a Soviet Union like buffer zone around Russia. Freedom of speech and expression in Russia is extremely limited, the recent crackdowns on gay rights as well as on the right to protest in moscow is evidence of that. Russia and Putin becomes more dictatorial by the day. Where does it stop? Today Crimea, tomorrow Ukraine, after that? Poland? Finland?

6,000 Russian troops now in Ukraine, according to Sky.

Though I wonder is that just the Sevastopol garrison or are they new arrivals?

realweirdo wrote: »

Nonsense. Whenever a corrupt government like the previous one falls, immediately people pick out the most extreme elements of those who brought it down. They did it for Syria too and I am not going to digress into Syria, only to say, that people ignore the 99% of peaceful protesters or ordinary defectors fighting the Assad regime and instead highlight and exagerate the role played by extremist opponents.

Those who opposed Yanachovich came from a broad spectrum of Ukranian society. The guy was clearly a thief who lived a lavish lifestyle on a salary of perhaps 50,000 a year. You do the maths. It was also a revolution against the Ukranian oligarchs who have made fortunes in recent years while the economy at the same time was brought to its knees.

In any case Yanachovich brought it all on himself. If killing 100 people in cold blood isnt reason to overthrow a president, then what is? It wasn't a coup but a legitimate overthrowing of a mass murdering tyrant.

Svoboda has had a militia for years and until recently forbade non-ethnic Ukrainians to join. They are fascists: their hero is a WW2 - era nazi, Stepan Bandera.

The groups loosely described as 'Praviy Sektor' all share neo-nazi ideologies and are basically just violent thugs.

These two are the groups who were involved in the violence - the 'peaceful' protesters were just that - peaceful. From January onwards the fascists took over.

What happened was a fascist coup d'etat.

You do know that the Party of the Regions got over 50% of the vote when Yanokovich was elected? 50 percent?

Where's your broad spectrum? Seriously. Everyone I know from Ukraine (and I know many people from there) is appalled at the violence, terrified of the right wing thuggery unleashed on the maidan and unsure as to whether they should laugh or cry at the ignorance and duplicity of the common western belief that some kind of people's revolution has taken place.

Listen. I've lived there, I know what I'm talking about - however much you and all the western press want this to be a democratic revolution - it's just not the case.

It was, plain and simple, a fascist coup d'etat.

Of course, the Party of the Regions' administration was extremely corrupt and politically, pretty right wing, too. Yanukovich is a thug and robber and an ex-con.

You do know he was convicted of rape, too?

My point is, I'm no supporter of the Russian administration, or of Yanukovich's party: but if you think that what is likely to replace them (The centre right Fatherland and Udar parties and the thugs from Svoboda and Praviy Sektor) is more democratic, less corrupt, then you are very very mistaken: these people are dangerous and just as unconcerned with democracy as Yanukovich was.

The economy was brought to its knees over many many years - including when Tymoshenko and Yushenko were in power - Yatsenuk, too was PM as Ukraine's economy continued on, 'biznes' (pun intended) as usual and now the US sees him as the most likely future President!!!

When I lived there it was just after the Orange Revolution. I worked there for a year and paid...wait for it...no tax whatsoever. No one pays tax, everyone's on the take. Everyone.

Anyone who singles out Yanokovich is either ignorant of that fact or pretending not to see it.

And don't forget: the peaceful protestors' representatives are Yatsenuk's party (Fatherland) - whose leader is....Yulia Tymoshenko. Yulia Tymoshenko is just as corrupt as Yanukovich - everyone knows that - the fact that her imprisonment was politically motivated does not change this fact.

Wakey wakey, folks - letting the fascist genie out of the bottle is very dangerous - pretending it's the people's revolution is a betrayal of the very egalitarian ideals that you may be wishing to see put into practice.

Ukraine has a wide mix of ethnicities and political factions. They range from the far right to the far left who still admire Lenin and even Stalin, the latter who was at least as brutal as Hitler, if not more so. In between these extremes are the vast majority of Ukranians, perhaps 90%, who just want a modern prosperous Ukraine.

In recent elections, the neo nazis as you describe them have come nowhere in results. In others words, they have no popular support among the people.

Again the reason why Yanochovic was thrown out of power was that his police and army were no longer prepared to protect him after he gave orders to use live ammunition on protesters. It had very little to do with neo nazis. No president can survive when he doesn't retain the protection of his security services.

Trying to pin the blame on "neo nazis" just doesn't cut it.

A president ordered his security forces to use live ammunition on protesters. The following day a number of leaders of security services said they would no longer serve the president. He fled soon after because he no longer retained their support. How on earth can you call that a coup?

He tried to annihalate the protests and it backfired, he ran away and then cried "coup".

Seriously, the guy should be on front of the ICC, not running a country.

And towing the Putin/Yanukovych line about it being a coup, a pair of proven liars, seriously, is that be best you can come up with. Putin always says the opposite of what he really means. If he says he won't invade somewhere, you can be sure he's planning to invade.

realweirdo wrote: »

And towing the Putin/Yanukovych line about it being a coup, a pair of proven liars, seriously, is that be best you can come up with. Putin always says the opposite of what he really means. If he says he won't invade somewhere, you can be sure he's planning to invade.

What are you talking about?

Have you read what I've written about Russia and Yanokovich?

Putin has already invaded Ukraine.

His political ideology is essentially the same as that espoused by Svoboda and Praviy Sektor - he is a dangerous undemocratic, modern-day Mussolini while the guys who staged the Kiev coup d'etat are essentially nazis.

Give him some credit though, he hates Mr Cleptovitch aka Yanokovich, too.

This is nothing more than one group of extreme nationalists versus another.

The fact that I call a coup a coup doesn't mean I agree with anything that Yanokovich or Putin says, does or thinks.