# United States: Russia directly involved in battles in  Ukraine



## Bleipriester

USA and NATO accuse Russia of a direct involvement in battles between the Seperatists and the western supported Ukrainian army.  According to their report, Russian armored forces directly supported the rebels. Russia has denied the involvement but meanwhile, Putin compared the Ukrainian army with the Wehrmacht.

U.S. official says 1 000 Russian troops enter Ukraine - CNN.com


----------



## Crystalclear

Russia should stop the stupid warmongering in Ukraine and supplying the pro-Russian sepetarists.


----------



## 1776

Uh the separatists are and always have been RUSSIANS.

There has never been any local uprising by Ukrainians against their own country.

Local Ukrainians don't like these Russians and other foreigners in their country stealing parts of Ukraine for Putin in the name of some bullshit local uprising.

Just now announcing Russia is involved is a lie....they have been involved the entire time, it's just that Obama and the EU are pussies that didn't want to admit it.


----------



## Bleipriester

1776 said:


> Uh the separatists are and always have been RUSSIANS.
> 
> There has never been any local uprising by Ukrainians against their own country.
> 
> Local Ukrainians don't like these Russians and other foreigners in their country stealing parts of Ukraine for Putin in the name of some bullshit local uprising.
> 
> Just now announcing Russia is involved is a lie....they have been involved the entire time, it's just that Obama and the EU are pussies that didn't want to admit it.


Nonesense. The "uprising" took place in 2013. Western supported fascist movements toppled the government that was replaced by the national socialist influenced "European Choice" regime. The regime opresses the people with Russian roots. They were not sent by Russia but live there due to historic developements.


----------



## 1776

Stupid fuck....Russia had their puppet in place in Kyiv but he lied to the people that Ukraine would work more with the EU and quit being Russia's bitch. So the people protested him and his goons killed protestors in Kyiv which set off more violence and eventually the Russian puppet fled to Russia after stealing millions from Ukraine.

Oh, but you support that...eh idiot?

Russia responded by invading Crimea and stealing it under the lies of separatist locals somehow showing up with weapons, amazing locals have APCs, AK47s, tanks, etc...enough weapons to surround the Ukrainian military based inside Crimea.

Now Russia is doing the same bullshit in eastern Ukraine, sending in troops and weapons....even shooting down a third party's civilian airliner and stealing evidence from the crime scene.

Explain that shitstain....



Bleipriester said:


> Nonesense. The "uprising" took place in 2013. Western supported fascist movements toppled the government that was replaced by the national socialist influenced "European Choice" regime. The regime opresses the people with Russian roots. They were not sent by Russia but live there due to historic developements.


----------



## Vikrant

Putin is a nut case. He is considering selling S-400 to China. That is insane.


----------



## Pennywise

This is Obama's increased flexibility after he won re-election at work.


----------



## bugs

Bleipriester said:


> USA and NATO accuse Russia of a direct involvement in battles between the Seperatists and the western supported Ukrainian army.  According to their report, Russian armored forces directly supported the rebels. Russia has denied the involvement but meanwhile, Putin compared the Ukrainian army with the Wehrmacht.
> 
> U.S. official says 1 000 Russian troops enter Ukraine - CNN.com



still waiting for kickoff....


----------



## B. Kidd

Vikrant said:


> Putin is a nut case. He is considering selling S-400 to China. That is insane.



They are beginning to form a strategic alliance.


----------



## Bleipriester

1776 said:


> Stupid fuck....Russia had their puppet in place in Kyiv but he lied to the people that Ukraine would work more with the EU and quit being Russia's bitch. So the people protested him and his goons killed protestors in Kyiv which set off more violence and eventually the Russian puppet fled to Russia after stealing millions from Ukraine.
> 
> Oh, but you support that...eh idiot?
> 
> Russia responded by invading Crimea and stealing it under the lies of separatist locals somehow showing up with weapons, amazing locals have APCs, AK47s, tanks, etc...enough weapons to surround the Ukrainian military based inside Crimea.
> 
> Now Russia is doing the same bullshit in eastern Ukraine, sending in troops and weapons....even shooting down a third party's civilian airliner and stealing evidence from the crime scene.
> 
> Explain that shitstain....


The government was democratically elected. Then it was forced to resign by brutal gangs causing far reaching destruction and killing policemen during their "peaceful protests". Watch my thread "Ukraines Nazi Party in the Government" and (try to) explain.


----------



## Bleipriester

Vikrant said:


> Putin is a nut case. He is considering selling S-400 to China. That is insane.


Why is it insane? Its just a defensive weapon system. What really insane is, is that western companies hand their whole know-how out to Chinese authorities for the permissen to produce in China in cooperation (joint venture) with a Chinese company.


----------



## B. Kidd

Wow! This didn't take long. 

What It s All About Russia China Begin Construction Of World s Largest Gas Pipeline Zero Hedge


----------



## Vikrant

Bleipriester said:


> Why is it insane? Its just a defensive weapon system. What really insane is, is that western companies hand their whole know-how out to Chinese authorities for the permissen to produce in China in cooperation (joint venture) with a Chinese company.



Western companies who hand over technical know how to China are acting very irresponsibly. 

Let us come back to Russia for a few seconds though. Russia already has an enemy in the west which is attacking Russian interests as we speak. Now Russia is enabling its eastern enemy China by supplying it sophisticated weapons. If China and the west both decide to take on Russia simultaneously then Russia will be in big trouble considering China will have much more modern military if Russia continues to assist Chinese military's modernization program. So the Russian decision to supply China with S-400  does sound insane. BTW, when the war breaks out, your enemy's defensive capabilities become your nightmare because it will impede your ability to neutralize your enemy. 

I understand that Russia is facing a tough situation. A number of western countries are acting hostile towards Russia. But the western hostility may be temporary and may cease in future but if Russia helps China with its weapons' program, this will create a permanent problem for Russia. The best course of action for Russia would be to ride this storm out without causing irreparable damage to Russian future.


----------



## Bleipriester

Vikrant said:


> Western companies who hand over technical know how to China are acting very irresponsibly.
> 
> Let us come back to Russia for a few seconds though. Russia already has an enemy in the west which is attacking Russian interests as we speak. Now Russia is enabling its eastern enemy China by supplying it sophisticated weapons. If China and the west both decide to take on Russia simultaneously then Russia will be in big trouble considering China will have much more modern military if Russia continues to assist Chinese military's modernization program. So the Russian decision to supply China with S-400  does sound insane. BTW, when the war breaks out, your enemy's defensive capabilities become your nightmare because it will impede your ability to neutralize your enemy.
> 
> I understand that Russia is facing a tough situation. A number of western countries are acting hostile towards Russia. But the western hostility may be temporary and may cease in future but if Russia helps China with its weapons' program, this will create a permanent problem for Russia. The best course of action for Russia would be to ride this storm out without causing irreparable damage to Russian future.


There will be no Russian-Chinese war. It is the West who made itself completely dependend on China. Germany and Japan are the only western countries which export more to China than they import from. And this might change, too. So, in dependence on Russian resources, Chinese goods and Brazil food, it is the West who could run into trouble with China. Russia and China could be forced to be allies then. 

Advanced weaponry could be a problem for the West in a war with China, but the sheer size of the Chinese army alone grants invincibility anyway. However, China plans to be technologically at eye level with the US for as soon as 2020.


----------



## Vikrant

^ How can you be so sure that there will be no Russo-China war? 

Japan is not a western country. Japan is an eastern country - a wealthy but an eastern country nevertheless. 

I completely agree with you on that the west should stop enabling China. In enabling China, the west is simply creating a future existential threat for itself.


----------



## Bleipriester

Vikrant said:


> ^ How can you be so sure that there will be no Russo-China war?
> 
> Japan is not a western country. Japan is an eastern country - a wealthy but an eastern country nevertheless.
> 
> I completely agree with you on that the west should stop enabling China. In enabling China, the west is simply creating a future existential threat for itself.


Politically, economically and culturally but not geographically, Japan is a western country.

You ask, why I am sure that there will be no Russian-Chinese war. I am sure, because such a war would contain no advantages for both.


----------



## Vikrant

Bleipriester said:


> Politically, economically and culturally but not geographically, Japan is a western country.
> 
> You ask, why I am sure that there will be no Russian-Chinese war. I am sure, because such a war would contain no advantages for both.



Japan is geographically located in the east. Majority of its population is Buddhist. That makes it an eastern country. There are plenty of countries in the east that are democratic. So know this that the west does not have a monopoly on democracy. The number of  countries that are wealthy in the east is even higher than the number of countries that are democratic. So none of your criteria placing Japan in the west makes any sense at all. 

What makes you think China sees no advantage in defeating Russia?


----------



## bugs

B. Kidd said:


> Wow! This didn't take long.
> 
> What It s All About Russia China Begin Construction Of World s Largest Gas Pipeline Zero Hedge



Zero Hedge Sucks..


----------



## Bleipriester

Vikrant said:


> Japan is geographically located in the east. Majority of its population is Buddhist. That makes it an eastern country. There are plenty of countries in the east that are democratic. So know this that the west does not have a monopoly on democracy. The number of  countries that are wealthy in the east is even higher than the number of countries that are democratic. So none of your criteria placing Japan in the west makes any sense at all.
> 
> What makes you think China sees no advantage in defeating Russia?


Read, before you teach me where a country is located. The majority of Germany is Christian, you may say, but the majority is not religious enough to go to the church or to pray at all. Valid also for Japan. Same cultural environment. Short: local customs combined with American way of life and the peculiarities that result from the mix.

China could not defeat Russia or achieve anything in a war.


----------



## Vikrant

Bleipriester said:


> Read, before you teach me where a country is located. The majority of Germany is Christian, you may say, but the majority is not religious enough to go to the church or to pray at all. Valid also for Japan. Same cultural environment. Short: local customs combined with American way of life and the peculiarities that result from the mix.
> 
> China could not defeat Russia or achieve anything in a war.



I think I have done enough to illustrate that Japan is an eastern country. But if it helps you sleep at night then continue to assert that Japan is a western country. I have no problem with that. This will be my last text on that issue. 

Moving to Russia and China, why do you think China could not defeat Russia? Where are you coming up with all these assumptions?


----------



## Richard-H

Would you buy defensive weaponry from the people that may attack you?

Seems that it would be easy enough for the Russians to embed code into these systems that would enable the Russians to disable them.

Wouldn't be hard to do what Kirk did in "Wrath of Khan".


----------



## 1776

Shitstain.....people get overthrown when they lie to the public about doing one thing and do another, then attack the protestors with violence. The Russian puppet that was in charge lied about working with the EU once Putin paid him off and threatened him.

Explain why the Russian puppet stole millions from Ukraine and why he fled to RUSSIA.....



Bleipriester said:


> The government was democratically elected. Then it was forced to resign by brutal gangs causing far reaching destruction and killing policemen during their "peaceful protests". Watch my thread "Ukraines Nazi Party in the Government" and (try to) explain.


----------



## Stratford57

It would be completely adequate for Putin to bring his troops to protect SE Ukraine (which was a part of Russia till 1917 and still it’s population has Russian roots) from Ukrainian Nazi regime, which is now flattering Donbass villages and cities  and killing hundred civilians daily (the other day even CNN showed it). Ukrainian government's job should be to protect its own people, not to exterminate them, agreed? Why doesn’t NATO admit that there are  a lot of of Polish, Lithuanians, Georgians and even American Blackwater company fighting on Ukrainian side (a lot of their IDs  were found after some battles)?


Instead of looking for Putin’s troops under every bush in Ukraine and yelling about Russian aggression all the world should be concerned about  Neo Nazis dictatorship coming to power in the middle of Europe. Otherwise it might be too late when you guys wake up. The example with ISIS, when the terrorist were used for “help” in Syria initially and became a huge threat for the whole world when they went out of control and decided to act on their own in Iraq.

Besides, all that noise about Russian troops in Ukraine may be about nothing. The other day NSA veterans wrote a letter to Merkel and claimed: information  from NATO about Russian troops invasion into Ukraine is not true

 Ex-NSA Director US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War Alex Jones Infowars There s a war on for your mind


----------



## 1776

To sum it up.....scum like the OP and other Russians believe they have the right to invade other countries like Ukraine when they don't like the politics of that country....especially when that country is trying to become free from slavery under the Russian boot.


----------



## 1776

Hey shitstain....I've seen the intel photos that show Russian troops inside Ukraine.

Ukraine captured RUSSIAN troops inside Ukraine...


----------



## Bleipriester

1776 said:


> To sum it up.....scum like the OP and other Russians believe they have the right to invade other countries like Ukraine when they don't like the politics of that country....especially when that country is trying to become free from slavery under the Russian boot.


You call me scum an accuse Russia of what was done by the other side in 2013. 

To sum it up. You are a pathetic freak who uses lies, empty accusations and insults as main "discussion tools." Really poor, you are. I can only laugh.


----------



## Politico

1776 said:


> Hey shitstain....I've seen the intel photos that show Russian troops inside Ukraine.
> 
> Ukraine captured RUSSIAN troops inside Ukraine...


Haven't you heard? They were doctored pictures taken from a video game


----------



## 1776

Asswipe...you come here lying out your ass like a Russian PR puppet.

We understand you scum in Russia actually believe your Information Operations will convince the world to believe your lies. Russia is nothing more than a dying nuclear power thanks to drunks and criminals for men that don't like women.



Bleipriester said:


> You call me scum an accuse Russia of what was done by the other side in 2013.
> 
> To sum it up. You are a pathetic freak who uses lies, empty accusations and insults as main "discussion tools." Really poor, you are. I can only laugh.


----------



## Stratford57

Hey you, free Ukrainian, so far everybody could see you being free only in a way of not choosing a proper language. You say you don't want to be slave to Russia, so  you guys were celebrating for 23 years  Day of "Independence", being slaves to Russia??? Then - bravo, Russia!!! I wonder, what kind of special things has Ukraine learned to do  during those 23 years away from Russia besides 
- blaming Russia for all Ukrainians faults, 
- stealing Russian gas,
- shooting civilian planes??? (First civilian plane shot by Ukrainians in 2001 was TU-154 Israel-Russia and looks like the second one was Malaysian, see the link) 

MH17 Pockmarks look like from very very heavy machine gun fire says first OSCE monitor on-scene New Straits Times


----------



## 1776

*XXXXXXX*

FYI asswipe....I'm an American and I get to see what your scumbag Putin is doing when I go to work.....



Stratford57 said:


> Hey you, free Ukrainian, so far everybody could see you being free only in a way of not choosing a proper language. You say you don't want to be slave to Russia, so  you guys were celebrating for 23 years  Day of "Independence", being slaves to Russia??? Then - bravo, Russia!!! I wonder, what kind of special things has Ukraine learned to do  during those 23 years away from Russia besides
> - blaming Russia for all Ukrainians faults,
> - stealing Russian gas,
> - shooting civilian planes??? (First civilian plane shot by Ukrainians in 2001 was TU-154 Israel-Russia and looks like the second one was Malaysian, see the link)
> 
> MH17 Pockmarks look like from very very heavy machine gun fire says first OSCE monitor on-scene New Straits Times


----------



## bendog

Vikrant said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read, before you teach me where a country is located. The majority of Germany is Christian, you may say, but the majority is not religious enough to go to the church or to pray at all. Valid also for Japan. Same cultural environment. Short: local customs combined with American way of life and the peculiarities that result from the mix.
> 
> China could not defeat Russia or achieve anything in a war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have done enough to illustrate that Japan is an eastern country. But if it helps you sleep at night then continue to assert that Japan is a western country. I have no problem with that. This will be my last text on that issue.
> 
> Moving to Russia and China, why do you think China could not defeat Russia? Where are you coming up with all these assumptions?
Click to expand...


China doesn't have Russia's military technology, e.g. the S-400 and fighter aircraft.  But, the poster's view that the west has given China control over them does not grasp the global marketplace, because China cannot live w/o the west now ... or it loses all its investments.  That's sort of a Russian (soviet bloc) type world view, in that it still sees borders as being subject to military change. 

Even if we assume the Maiden in Ukraine as being sort of cheney inspired, that doesn't detract from Poland having a righteous fear of the Ukraine being a Russian proxy state on its border.  Putin may rightly see the West as conspiring against him so as to "box in" Russia, but even if that is a correct view, it wouldn't mean the West was not logically perceiving Putin and New Russia as being a threat to the free flow of capital and interference with internal politics of the West.
Washington Puzzled as Putin Doesn 8217 t Back Down The American Conservative


----------



## tinydancer

bendog said:


> Vikrant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read, before you teach me where a country is located. The majority of Germany is Christian, you may say, but the majority is not religious enough to go to the church or to pray at all. Valid also for Japan. Same cultural environment. Short: local customs combined with American way of life and the peculiarities that result from the mix.
> 
> China could not defeat Russia or achieve anything in a war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have done enough to illustrate that Japan is an eastern country. But if it helps you sleep at night then continue to assert that Japan is a western country. I have no problem with that. This will be my last text on that issue.
> 
> Moving to Russia and China, why do you think China could not defeat Russia? Where are you coming up with all these assumptions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> China doesn't have Russia's military technology, e.g. the S-400 and fighter aircraft.  But, the poster's view that the west has given China control over them does not grasp the global marketplace, because China cannot live w/o the west now ... or it loses all its investments.  That's sort of a Russian (soviet bloc) type world view, in that it still sees borders as being subject to military change.
> 
> Even if we assume the Maiden in Ukraine as being sort of cheney inspired, that doesn't detract from Poland having a righteous fear of the Ukraine being a Russian proxy state on its border.  Putin may rightly see the West as conspiring against him so as to "box in" Russia, but even if that is a correct view, it wouldn't mean the West was not logically perceiving Putin and New Russia as being a threat to the free flow of capital and interference with internal politics of the West.
> Washington Puzzled as Putin Doesn 8217 t Back Down The American Conservative
Click to expand...


The threat was and always has been to Russia the military coup that the west backed to remove a duly elected President and government. To Russia the enemy is us. We started this bullshit. 

All in all I'd say the Russians been fairly civilized about all of this. 

As compared to our frothing at the mouth banty strutting roosters who keep piling on the sanctions because Putin outsmarted all of our western leaders and he's got Crimea, the jewel of the Ukraine, without firing a shot. 

And to say that Putin and the New Russia are the once that are the interfering bastards on the planet is a giant joke.

Since the 90's.

Russia = Georgia

West = Iraq x 2, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine

Hell's bells Obama won't be happy till he removes Assad and fucks up Syria too.


----------



## tinydancer

Anybody bitching about Russia has a lot of freaking nerve. Mega hypocrites.

We dump Mubarak and give Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi.Thank heavens the Egyptians came to their senses and dumped Morsi and the MB.

We bomb the fuck out of Libya, remove and get Gaddafi killed.

Remember this? "We came, we saw, he died" and we handed the country over to militias who will now control 1/5 of the worlds oil supplies.

Oh and they're having pool parties at the US Embassy in Tripoli. How's that for a successful Arab freaking Spring story?

And if Obama and other western leaders including my own haven't fucked up the ME enough, these assholes decide Assad must go and allow ISIS to become the most powerful and wealthy terror organization on the planet.

Swell. Just fucking swell.

And the Ukraine. Our idiots back a coup that hands over power to the likes of Svoboda and Right Sector and cause a civil war.

Our leaders are assholes.


----------



## bendog

tinydancer said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vikrant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read, before you teach me where a country is located. The majority of Germany is Christian, you may say, but the majority is not religious enough to go to the church or to pray at all. Valid also for Japan. Same cultural environment. Short: local customs combined with American way of life and the peculiarities that result from the mix.
> 
> China could not defeat Russia or achieve anything in a war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I have done enough to illustrate that Japan is an eastern country. But if it helps you sleep at night then continue to assert that Japan is a western country. I have no problem with that. This will be my last text on that issue.
> 
> Moving to Russia and China, why do you think China could not defeat Russia? Where are you coming up with all these assumptions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> China doesn't have Russia's military technology, e.g. the S-400 and fighter aircraft.  But, the poster's view that the west has given China control over them does not grasp the global marketplace, because China cannot live w/o the west now ... or it loses all its investments.  That's sort of a Russian (soviet bloc) type world view, in that it still sees borders as being subject to military change.
> 
> Even if we assume the Maiden in Ukraine as being sort of cheney inspired, that doesn't detract from Poland having a righteous fear of the Ukraine being a Russian proxy state on its border.  Putin may rightly see the West as conspiring against him so as to "box in" Russia, but even if that is a correct view, it wouldn't mean the West was not logically perceiving Putin and New Russia as being a threat to the free flow of capital and interference with internal politics of the West.
> Washington Puzzled as Putin Doesn 8217 t Back Down The American Conservative
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The threat was and always has been to Russia the military coup that the west backed to remove a duly elected President and government. To Russia the enemy is us. We started this bullshit.
> 
> All in all I'd say the Russians been fairly civilized about all of this.
> 
> As compared to our frothing at the mouth banty strutting roosters who keep piling on the sanctions because Putin outsmarted all of our western leaders and he's got Crimea, the jewel of the Ukraine, without firing a shot.
> 
> And to say that Putin and the New Russia are the once that are the interfering bastards on the planet is a giant joke.
> 
> Since the 90's.
> 
> Russia = Georgia
> 
> West = Iraq x 2, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine
> 
> Hell's bells Obama won't be happy till he removes Assad and fucks up Syria too.
Click to expand...


I'd say trying to assassinate someone with dioxins when they propose engaging with the West is NOT being fairly civilized. 

That said, Russia has some potentially legitmate issues.  A Ukraine that is unaligned and more on the Austria model worked out by Ike and Kruschev might not be a bad beginning.


----------



## ScienceRocks

If Russia was directly involved would there even be a government in Kiev?

I'd think they'd put up a hell of a better fight then this.


----------



## tinydancer

1776 said:


> Shitstain.....people get overthrown when they lie to the public about doing one thing and do another, then attack the protestors with violence. The Russian puppet that was in charge lied about working with the EU once Putin paid him off and threatened him.
> 
> Explain why the Russian puppet stole millions from Ukraine and why he fled to RUSSIA.....
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> The government was democratically elected. Then it was forced to resign by brutal gangs causing far reaching destruction and killing policemen during their "peaceful protests". Watch my thread "Ukraines Nazi Party in the Government" and (try to) explain.
Click to expand...


He was duly elected as was his parliament. Stop lying. You have no proof of theft from the Ukraine. And you bettcha he fled to Russia to save his life and his family's life.

The so called  protestors were armed to the teeth in Maiden Square. This was not a peaceful protest. Bullshit on this. They were Svoboda and Right Sector running a violent coup with our backing.

And that's hysterical that you think that someone who lies to get elected should be removed from power. 

We'd be so busy tossing all our politicians into jail we wouldn't have time to freaking interfere in any other country. 

One more time. There were observers. 

*Yanukovych set to become president as observers say Ukraine election was fair*
• Yulia Tymoshenko under pressure to concede defeat
• Monitors praise 'impressive display' of democracy

Luke Harding in Kiev
The Guardian, Monday 8 February 2010 14.27 GMT
Yanukovych set to become president as observers say Ukraine election was fair World news The Guardian

.


----------



## tinydancer

What would Obama do if there were "protestors" like this on Capitol Hill?







Would Obama's response be non violent?

Would Obama hold a beer summit with protestors and Capitol Hill police?

I'm really sick of all the lies that this was just a student protest gone awry and the President of the Ukraine was way over the top in his response.


----------



## Stratford57

bendog said:


> I'd say trying to assassinate someone with dioxins when they propose engaging with the West is NOT being fairly civilized.
> 
> That said, Russia has some potentially legitmate issues.  A Ukraine that is unaligned and more on the Austria model worked out by Ike and Kruschev might not be a bad beginning.



You guys were not reported by your media that THERE WAS NO Dioxin involved!!! Before elections Yuschenko did a not very successful plastic surgery and his advisers recommended him to use it for PR. And it worked, the world believed...  The truth is: if KGB wanted to poison somebody, they would do it "without noise and dust", they never were known to put a show around it. Shows work for those, who want to distract world's attention from their own actions.


----------



## bendog

Stratford57 said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say trying to assassinate someone with dioxins when they propose engaging with the West is NOT being fairly civilized.
> 
> That said, Russia has some potentially legitmate issues.  A Ukraine that is unaligned and more on the Austria model worked out by Ike and Kruschev might not be a bad beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys were not reported by your media that THERE WAS NO Dioxin involved!!! Before elections Yuschenko did a not very successful plastic surgery and his advisers recommended him to use it for PR. And it worked, the world believed...  The truth is: if KGB wanted to poison somebody, they would do it "without noise and dust", they never were known to put a show around it. Shows work for those, who want to distract world's attention from their own actions.
Click to expand...

It was just RUSE.  Of course it was.  You are pathetic.

National news from McClatchy DC News Washington DC


----------



## Decus

The democratically elected Ukrainian Parliament ousted Yanukovych because he was one of was the most corrupt politicians in modern history. He robbed the country blind and Ukrainians could no longer tolerate the situation.

August 13, 2014

"In a building in central Kiev, anti-corruption campaigners are piecing together tattered documents in their efforts to trace more than *$30bn that prosecutors believe former President Viktor Yanukovich and his network stole* from the Ukrainian state."

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3a6cf942-222e-11e4-ad60-00144feabdc0.html

Read up on Yanukovych's lifestyle, that of his family and cronies and there can be no doubt of just how bad he is.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

And why should we just uncritically take the claims of the U.S. government at face value when it's their goal to expand NATO and completely isolate Russia? Not to mention their direct involvement in undermining the former Ukrainian government. It's not like they're a disinterested third party.


----------



## Stratford57

Decus said:


> The democratically elected Ukrainian Parliament ousted Yanukovych because he was one of was the most corrupt politicians in modern history. He robbed the country blind and Ukrainians could no longer tolerate the situation.
> 
> August 13, 2014
> 
> "In a building in central Kiev, anti-corruption campaigners are piecing together tattered documents in their efforts to trace more than *$30bn that prosecutors believe former President Viktor Yanukovich and his network stole* from the Ukrainian state."
> 
> http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3a6cf942-222e-11e4-ad60-00144feabdc0.html
> 
> Read up on Yanukovych's lifestyle, that of his family and cronies and there can be no doubt of just how bad he is.



That may be right but all the other presidents/prime ministers were (and are!) stealing even more. After International Currency Fund gave billions of euros to Yulia Timoshenko, when she was a prime minister, money disappeared in one-two-three counts..  All Ukrainian "rulers" were only good in stealing money, including current president Poroshenko, one of the richest oligarchs in Ukeaine


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

I wonder why the U.S. is so interested in Ukraine.

EconomicPolicyJournal.com Company In Which Joe Biden s Son Is Director Prepares To Drill Shale Gas In East Ukraine

Oh.


----------



## Stratford57

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> I wonder why the U.S. is so interested in Ukraine.
> 
> EconomicPolicyJournal.com Company In Which Joe Biden s Son Is Director Prepares To Drill Shale Gas In East Ukraine
> 
> Oh.



Thank you for bringing this subject. Vice President Joe Biden son Hunter Biden has joined the board of Burisma Holdings, Ukraines largest private gas producer. They say is just a coincidence. The U S is pouring a billion dollars into the Ukraine and Hunter Biden is tapped for a job in the SE Ukraine where the fighting is going on. Im sure he is just receiving minimum wage. Or perhaps he's the only attorney in the entire world that could handle sure a big job. Either way, Im sure there's no quid pro quo going on.

Burisma's chairman, Alan Apter says Biden was hired totally on merit. I feel a lot better now. But wait, there's another problem. Devon Archer another new Burisma board member works with Biden at Rosemont Seneca partners which is half own by Archer and Christopher Heinz, John Kerry's stepson. Sounds like someone is collecting on the billion dollars that the U S is sending the Ukraine. Im sure Ill receive my share any day now. Would anybody like some share too?


----------



## tinydancer

Decus said:


> The democratically elected Ukrainian Parliament ousted Yanukovych because he was one of was the most corrupt politicians in modern history. He robbed the country blind and Ukrainians could no longer tolerate the situation.
> 
> August 13, 2014
> 
> "In a building in central Kiev, anti-corruption campaigners are piecing together tattered documents in their efforts to trace more than *$30bn that prosecutors believe former President Viktor Yanukovich and his network stole* from the Ukrainian state."
> 
> http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3a6cf942-222e-11e4-ad60-00144feabdc0.html
> 
> Read up on Yanukovych's lifestyle, that of his family and cronies and there can be no doubt of just how bad he is.



When the protests started no one had even heard of a corruption case against the President. And no one has proof to date that he stole 30 Billion.

Surely you're not trying to unload a pantload of caca on us that the protests were about corruption are you?



That would be bullshit. 

Oh and btw. when they overthrew him they did so against their constitution. This was a violent coup backed by the west to overthrow a duly elected President and his party.


----------



## Indofred

Crystalclear said:


> Russia should stop the stupid warmongering in Ukraine and supplying the pro-Russian sepetarists.



Should America have set up the coup that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government?
You can hardly complain about political instability when you set it off.


----------



## tinydancer

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> I wonder why the U.S. is so interested in Ukraine.
> 
> EconomicPolicyJournal.com Company In Which Joe Biden s Son Is Director Prepares To Drill Shale Gas In East Ukraine
> 
> Oh.




Didn't you love how the media just glossed over this? The classic "nothing to see here, move along".

Also at stake were the huge oil reserves off Crimea. Exxon and BP were in negotiations till whoopsies, Crimea voted to rejoin Russia. 

That's one of the major reasons so many in the West are pissed off royally over Crimea. That of course and the West actually thought that Putin and Russia were going to give up their key ports without a murmur.


----------



## tinydancer

I have not one problem with anyone having an opinion. Everyone has a right to an opinion.

BUT no one has a right to their own facts.

Now for those who aren't up to speed on the Ukrainian Constitution here's the part that was not followed consequently the removal of the President was illegal.

There was no investigation and that is a mandate in the procedure to impeach. This is clearly outlined in the Constitution.

There is no gray here. This was not done. 

"after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime."


*Article 111*
The President of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.

The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is initiated by the majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

To conduct the investigation, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine establishes a special temporary investigatory commission whose composition includes a special Prosecutor and special investigators.

The conclusions and proposals of the temporary investigatory commission are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

For cause, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, by no less than two-thirds of its constitutional composition, adopts a decision on the accusation of the President of Ukraine.

The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.

Constitution of Ukraine 2004 - Wikisource the free online library


----------



## Decus

tinydancer said:


> Decus said:
> 
> 
> 
> The democratically elected Ukrainian Parliament ousted Yanukovych because he was one of was the most corrupt politicians in modern history. He robbed the country blind and Ukrainians could no longer tolerate the situation.
> 
> August 13, 2014
> 
> "In a building in central Kiev, anti-corruption campaigners are piecing together tattered documents in their efforts to trace more than *$30bn that prosecutors believe former President Viktor Yanukovich and his network stole* from the Ukrainian state."
> 
> http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3a6cf942-222e-11e4-ad60-00144feabdc0.html
> 
> Read up on Yanukovych's lifestyle, that of his family and cronies and there can be no doubt of just how bad he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When the protests started no one had even heard of a corruption case against the President. And no one has proof to date that he stole 30 Billion.
> 
> Surely you're not trying to unload a pantload of caca on us that the protests were about corruption are you?
> 
> 
> 
> That would be bullshit.
> 
> Oh and btw. when they overthrew him they did so against their constitution. This was a violent coup backed by the west to overthrow a duly elected President and his party.
Click to expand...


.

The timing of the 2005 Orange revolution was in part a protest against corruption and fraud in Ukrainian politics. People were fed up and took to the streets. Nothing changed but Ukrainians were very, very aware of the extent of corruption practised by Yanukovych and his kind. Everyone knew how corrupt Yanukovych was/is. This was one of many reports in 2012:

_"*It was sleaze and ballot-box fraud which triggered the "Orange Revolution" street protests of 2004-5* that doomed Yanukovich's first bid for the presidency and paved the way for Viktor Yushchenko's election in a re-run vote.

But the new 'Orange' leaders never purged the system before they were swept away by Yanukovich's comeback in a 2010 vote which won a clean bill of health from international monitors.

*Findings of international agencies support the view that corruption is only accelerating under the present leadership*.
_
*Transparency International, which monitors corporate and political corruption, downgraded Ukraine to 152nd place out of 183 countries in a study in 2011.*
_
Ernst & Young has set *Ukraine among the world's three most corrupt nations* alongside Colombia and Brazil."_

Corruption No. 1 problem as Ukraine heads for election Reuters

The Orange Revolution is a fact and worsening corruption under Yanukovych is also a fact. To say that corruption did not contribute to the unrest and Yanukovych's ouster is a crock.

Also try to remember that Yanukovych was impeached by a democratically elected Parliament.

"*Parliament votes 328-0 to impeach Yanukovych on Feb. 22*"

Parliament votes 328-0 to impeach Yanukovych on Feb. 22 sets May 25 for new election Tymoshenko free VIDEO 

.


----------



## tinydancer

Decus said:


> .
> 
> The timing of the 2005 Orange revolution was in part a protest against corruption and fraud in Ukrainian politics. People were fed up and took to the streets. Nothing changed but Ukrainians were very, very aware of the extent of corruption practised by Yanukovych and his kind. Everyone knew how corrupt Yanukovych was/is. This was one of many reports in 2012:
> 
> _"*It was sleaze and ballot-box fraud which triggered the "Orange Revolution" street protests of 2004-5* that doomed Yanukovich's first bid for the presidency and paved the way for Viktor Yushchenko's election in a re-run vote.
> 
> But the new 'Orange' leaders never purged the system before they were swept away by Yanukovich's comeback in a 2010 vote which won a clean bill of health from international monitors.
> 
> *Findings of international agencies support the view that corruption is only accelerating under the present leadership*.
> _
> *Transparency International, which monitors corporate and political corruption, downgraded Ukraine to 152nd place out of 183 countries in a study in 2011.*
> _
> Ernst & Young has set *Ukraine among the world's three most corrupt nations* alongside Colombia and Brazil."_
> 
> Corruption No. 1 problem as Ukraine heads for election Reuters
> 
> The Orange Revolution is a fact and worsening corruption under Yanukovych is also a fact. To say that corruption did not contribute to the unrest and Yanukovych's ouster is a crock.
> 
> Also try to remember that Yanukovych was impeached by a democratically elected Parliament.
> 
> "*Parliament votes 328-0 to impeach Yanukovych on Feb. 22*"
> 
> Parliament votes 328-0 to impeach Yanukovych on Feb. 22 sets May 25 for new election Tymoshenko free VIDEO
> 
> .



Decus. I have put up the findings that the 2010 election were not only solid but cheered as a fabulous example of democracy at work.

He was duly elected. His parliamentarians were elected.

As to the impeachment I have also put up the Ukrainian Constitution where the articles of the removal of the President were absolutely not followed.

All makes his removal illegal. What part of coup and illegal removal BY THE UKRAINIANS OWN CONSTITUTION don't you get?

The vote means jack shit. Illegal coup. Illegal ouster. Bastards in Kiev more than happy to fire on anyone in East Ukraine. Over 3,000 dead I hear. As compared to supposedly 70 dead in Maidan Square. 

Not a peep from the West because they love their killers in Kiev.


----------



## JWBooth

Bleipriester said:


> USA and NATO accuse Russia of a direct involvement in battles between the Seperatists and the western supported Ukrai


Rule #1 Don't believe what the government says.


----------



## bendog

Tiny, it's sort of a chicken and egg thing.  The maj didn't want tighter ties to Russia, the guy tried to ram it through in his waning days, people revolted .....

At some point, you gotta stop pointing fingers, and they can be pointed at neocons and Putin, and try and find a workable solution. 

If I'm a ukranian, I wouldn't want putin's hand in the pocketbook of natl gas.  He's got an ugly history there.


----------



## Stratford57

I am from SE Ukraine (historical Russia) and can confirm: everything Tiny has posted is based on only, truly and nothing but facts. She/he really knows what she/he's talking about. All those Orange and other colorful  "spontaneous" revolution were very well prepared and paid by Western governments. Also Soros'  money were behind them everywhere around Russia. If you have noticed the countries where colorful revolutions have occurred look all together on the map like a belt under Russia's belly. Coincidence?


----------



## Decus

tinydancer said:


> Decus said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The timing of the 2005 Orange revolution was in part a protest against corruption and fraud in Ukrainian politics. People were fed up and took to the streets. Nothing changed but Ukrainians were very, very aware of the extent of corruption practised by Yanukovych and his kind. Everyone knew how corrupt Yanukovych was/is. This was one of many reports in 2012:
> 
> _"*It was sleaze and ballot-box fraud which triggered the "Orange Revolution" street protests of 2004-5* that doomed Yanukovich's first bid for the presidency and paved the way for Viktor Yushchenko's election in a re-run vote.
> 
> But the new 'Orange' leaders never purged the system before they were swept away by Yanukovich's comeback in a 2010 vote which won a clean bill of health from international monitors.
> 
> *Findings of international agencies support the view that corruption is only accelerating under the present leadership*.
> _
> *Transparency International, which monitors corporate and political corruption, downgraded Ukraine to 152nd place out of 183 countries in a study in 2011.*
> _
> Ernst & Young has set *Ukraine among the world's three most corrupt nations* alongside Colombia and Brazil."_
> 
> Corruption No. 1 problem as Ukraine heads for election Reuters
> 
> The Orange Revolution is a fact and worsening corruption under Yanukovych is also a fact. To say that corruption did not contribute to the unrest and Yanukovych's ouster is a crock.
> 
> Also try to remember that Yanukovych was impeached by a democratically elected Parliament.
> 
> "*Parliament votes 328-0 to impeach Yanukovych on Feb. 22*"
> 
> Parliament votes 328-0 to impeach Yanukovych on Feb. 22 sets May 25 for new election Tymoshenko free VIDEO
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Decus. I have put up the findings that the 2010 election were not only solid but cheered as a fabulous example of democracy at work.
> 
> He was duly elected. His parliamentarians were elected.
> 
> As to the impeachment I have also put up the Ukrainian Constitution where the articles of the removal of the President were absolutely not followed.
> 
> All makes his removal illegal. What part of coup and illegal removal BY THE UKRAINIANS OWN CONSTITUTION don't you get?
> 
> The vote means jack shit. Illegal coup. Illegal ouster. Bastards in Kiev more than happy to fire on anyone in East Ukraine. Over 3,000 dead I hear. As compared to supposedly 70 dead in Maidan Square.
> 
> Not a peep from the West because they love their killers in Kiev.
Click to expand...



First of all the claim of Nazis, killers and that it was a coup was made by Yanukovych and his cronies and later used by Putin's propaganda machine to justify Russia's theft of Ukrainian territory and has been so effective that it remains part of the story told by Putin to justify his actions.

"In the statement broadcast on Ukrainian television, Yanukovych said the ongoing turmoil in Ukraine *had all the hallmarks of a coup attempt and likened opposition forces' activities to those of the Nazis in the 1930s*."

Yanukovych Says He Won t Give In to Bandits News The Moscow Times

What would you expect a crook like Yanukovych to say?

Take a look at Article 111 of the Ukrainian Constitution which reads:

*"Article 111*
_ 

The President of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason *or other crime*._"

Constitute

The 1996 version of Article 111 reads the same way.

The debate over the constitutionality of Yanukovych's impeachment cannot negate that the Rada does have the constitutional power to remove the president. Rada as you know is the name for parliament.

That Ukrainians aspire to have the same opportunities that are enjoyed by new member states like the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, etc, rather than face a return to a new and improved Soviet empire seems very reasonable. You might want to read up on the Eurasian Union and Putin's dream of the USSR 2.0.

I'll tell you what Tiny, when the Czech Republic votes to rejoin the Soviet Bloc I'll admit that you were right all along and that Yanukovych is just a victim of a plot against Ukrainian interests.

.


----------



## Decus

Stratford57 said:


> I am from SE Ukraine (historical Russia) and can confirm: everything Tiny has posted is based on only, truly and nothing but facts. She/he really knows what she/he's talking about. All those Orange and other colorful  "spontaneous" revolution were very well prepared and paid by Western governments. Also Soros'  money were behind them everywhere around Russia. If you have noticed the countries where colorful revolutions have occurred look all together on the map like a belt under Russia's belly. Coincidence?




To have to depend on Russia for your freedom is not a desirable prospect. If you listen to Putin, he decides which countries can be independent and those that belong to Russia. Here is his latest claim of ownership about a week ago:

_"Fears are growing in Kazakhstan over Moscow's rhetoric towards the country following Russia President Vladimir Putin's claim that "Kazakhstan never had any statehood", it was "created".


The Russian leader told a pro-Kremlin youth camp at Lake Seliger near Moscow that Kazakhstan's President Nursultan Nazarbayev had "created a state on a territory that never had a state."


"*Kazakhs never had any statehood*, he has created it," he said."_

Vladimir Putin Continues Soviet Rhetoric by Questioning Kazakhstan s Created Independence

Screwing with Kazakhstan could get Putin knocked on his ass and he better be very careful with this one. China as you may know has made huge investments in Kazakhstan and a pipeline is being built to pump oil directly to China. They will not sit by and allow the Russians to take over the oil fields.


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> I am from SE Ukraine (historical Russia) and can confirm: everything Tiny has posted is based on only, truly and nothing but facts. She/he really knows what she/he's talking about. All those Orange and other colorful  "spontaneous" revolution were very well prepared and paid by Western governments. Also Soros'  money were behind them everywhere around Russia. If you have noticed the countries where colorful revolutions have occurred look all together on the map like a belt under Russia's belly. Coincidence?


Did your family migrate to Ukraine after Russia with guidance from Stalin cleansed the Ukraine population with the Holodomor murders. Like Tiny, you sound like a traitor to Ukraine. You can not support Russians coming from Russia to kill people born and raised in Ukraine and not be a traitor. The Ukraine Army is full of Russian speaking Ukrainians who have relatives over in Russia. They are loyal to Ukraine. There are more of them fighting the Russian invaders and terrorist than there are with the separatist. Without the Russian invaders their would be no separatist.


----------



## Vigilante




----------



## 1776

It is funny seeing the uneducated shit cheer on for Putin and invent lies about the EU and the US "meddling" in Ukraine.

Russia has invaded Ukraine you stupid fuck sacks of shit.


----------



## guno

Bleipriester said:


> USA and NATO accuse Russia of a direct involvement in battles between the Seperatists and the western supported Ukrainian army.  According to their report, Russian armored forces directly supported the rebels. Russia has denied the involvement but meanwhile, Putin compared the Ukrainian army with the Wehrmacht.
> 
> U.S. official says 1 000 Russian troops enter Ukraine - CNN.com



*German TV Shows Nazi Symbols on Helmets of Ukraine Soldiers*
Germans were confronted with images of their country’s dark past on Monday night, when German public broadcaster ZDF showed video of Ukrainian soldiers with Nazi symbols on their helmets in its evening newscast. In a report on the fragile cease-fire in eastern Ukraine, Moscow correspondent Bernhard Lichte used pictures of a soldier wearing a combat helmet with the "SS runes" of Hitler’s infamous black-uniformed elite corps. A second soldier was seen with a swastika on his gear. “
German TV Shows Nazi Symbols on Helmets of Ukraine Soldiers - NBC News


----------



## 1776

Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.

One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.

Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.


----------



## 1776

Putin is the one following the Nazi's playbook invading a weaker neighbor with lies about being threatened by them and so-called liberating the Russians for the motherland.

Ask people in Poland, Austria, Czech Republic, etc what they think about Germany invading them to "free" the German people....


----------



## guno

1776 said:


> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.





1776 said:


> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.




You are one steaming piece of fecal matter, read history and what the Ukrainians did and who they supported before being liberate by the red army


----------



## guno

guno said:


> 1776 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1776 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are one steaming piece of fecal matter, read history and what the Ukrainians did and who they supported before being liberate by the red army
Click to expand...


*Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator*
Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator - Channel 4 News


----------



## guno

guno said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1776 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1776 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You are one steaming piece of fecal matter, read history and what the Ukrainians did and who they supported before being liberate by the red army
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator*
> Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator - Channel 4 News
Click to expand...


The Soviets lost over 25 Million people to the fascist  hoards, Interesting who the US is now backing


----------



## 1776

Shitstain....there are OSCE observers in Ukraine that have not said one word about the GOV in Kyiv being "Nazis."

Finding Nazis in Ukraine is like finding them in your family, not hard to do. Many Ukrainians aligned with the Nazis during WW2 to get back at the Polish people that ruled over western Ukraine.

These facts don't make the GOV in Kyiv "Nazis," but of course you believe the lying sack of shit Putin who is arresting media and political enemies in Russia to keep his power.....Hitler comes to mind.

Oh, you don't have a clue about the people being kidnapped, tortured and killed by the Russians in eastern Ukraine but it will eventually come out like the war crimes by the Nazis in WW2.

go kill yourself



guno said:


> You are one steaming piece of fecal matter, read history and what the Ukrainians did and who they supported before being liberate by the red army


----------



## Stratford57

Camp said:


> Did your family migrate to Ukraine after Russia with guidance from Stalin cleansed the Ukraine population with the Holodomor murders. Like Tiny, you sound like a traitor to Ukraine. You can not support Russians coming from Russia to kill people born and raised in Ukraine and not be a traitor. The Ukraine Army is full of Russian speaking Ukrainians who have relatives over in Russia. They are loyal to Ukraine. There are more of them fighting the Russian invaders and terrorist than there are with the separatist. Without the Russian invaders their would be no separatist.



It's such a mixture of different things which have one thing in common: they all are falsification.
1. Scottish people are going to have a referendum about separation from UK, nobody calls them separatists or terrorists. When we wanted to have ours Kiev junta did not allow it and started war against us instead. Ukrainian army is exterminating mainly civilians in SE, I'll try to attach a documentary.That kind of army you want me to help? See the post above from Guno about their Nazi symbolic. Instead helping that kind of army they should be judged as terrorists.
2. Golodomor is a term, invented by Yuschenko. In reality (my grandparents and all the people of that age told a lot about it during Soviet times, they were the witness) due to wrong Stalin's politics almost all the USSR was staved to death, Ukraine was just one of the numerous areas of the USSR, where people were dying from hunger.
3. Ukraine  is a piece of land combined from different historical lands. On this map it's shown:
red: Ukraine as was in 1654;
yellow: presents from Russian czars 1654-1917;
blue: Lenin's "present" in 1922;
green: Stalin's "present" in 1939, 1945;
purple (Crimea): Khrushchev's "present"  in 1954.

As you can see, there was no need "to move" to Ukraine, we always _lived_ on our historical Russian lands.
All these pieces tried to live together till Feb, 2014 when Kiev junta started dictating SE its fascist laws. Being loyal to Ukraine right now means to support the fascist ideology.


----------



## 1776

So Russia can just invade their neighbors on lies today because Putin feels that land is really their land. Russia is such a tiny little country, eh dumbfuck?

I guess you scumbags are for Mexico invading the western US.....if they were able to given they are losers that could lose all of Mexico to us today if we snapped our fingers.


----------



## Stratford57

This is a promised documentary of what Ukrainian army has done to civilians of SE Ukraine during a month from July,17 till August,17 this year.( Don't let the children watch. ) I am not going to support such kind of "Army".


----------



## tinydancer

bendog said:


> Tiny, it's sort of a chicken and egg thing.  The maj didn't want tighter ties to Russia, the guy tried to ram it through in his waning days, people revolted .....
> 
> At some point, you gotta stop pointing fingers, and they can be pointed at neocons and Putin, and try and find a workable solution.
> 
> If I'm a ukranian, I wouldn't want putin's hand in the pocketbook of natl gas.  He's got an ugly history there.



Have you ever seen the vote on a map? The country is as divided as we are in the States and in Canada.

This was a coup. A western coup in more ways than one. Maybe I have more on the line than others. I've been following this for more than some time. 

I'm a serious Uk descendant in Canada. We have the largest UK population outside of the Ukraine and Russia.

Last year when I was alerted to Svoboda and Right Sector moving in to take over the Square I knew where this would lead.

Look. I hate Russia. Or used to. I spent my whole life hating what happened to family members in the 40's. There is no love lost here. And I was on this shit from the beginning because I really do still involve myself in my history and where I live now. 

That was Stalin. This is now. 

What happened in Kiev was a western backed coup.And trust me I'm on the verge of leading a charge to overthrow my Prime Minister over this and I am a conservative

This was a coup. The President and his parliament were duly elected. I have proof of it. I've put it up so many times I want to bazooka barf.

Euro Maidan was a joke. It was all designed to overthrow the duly elected government. Obama/Harper/Cameron and Exxon and BP are pushing this. 

Not a conspiracy theory. I can show you that they were negotiating before this coup took place. 

Now we really are on the precipice of WWIII.


----------



## tinydancer

1776 said:


> Wow....a few idiots with Nazi stuff on their helmets.
> 
> One can also find Nazi shit, black gang shit, Hispanic gang shit in the US Army.
> 
> Of course the shit-eater is aligned with the closet socialist Putin.



Why don't you put up Svoboda's Charter? By all means. Do so.


----------



## tinydancer

1776 said:


> So Russia can just invade their neighbors on lies today because Putin feels that land is really their land. Russia is such a tiny little country, eh dumbfuck?
> 
> I guess you scumbags are for Mexico invading the western US.....if they were able to given they are losers that could lose all of Mexico to us today if we snapped our fingers.



Prove the invasion of Crimea or shut up.


----------



## tinydancer

guno said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> USA and NATO accuse Russia of a direct involvement in battles between the Seperatists and the western supported Ukrainian army.  According to their report, Russian armored forces directly supported the rebels. Russia has denied the involvement but meanwhile, Putin compared the Ukrainian army with the Wehrmacht.
> 
> U.S. official says 1 000 Russian troops enter Ukraine - CNN.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *German TV Shows Nazi Symbols on Helmets of Ukraine Soldiers*
> Germans were confronted with images of their country’s dark past on Monday night, when German public broadcaster ZDF showed video of Ukrainian soldiers with Nazi symbols on their helmets in its evening newscast. In a report on the fragile cease-fire in eastern Ukraine, Moscow correspondent Bernhard Lichte used pictures of a soldier wearing a combat helmet with the "SS runes" of Hitler’s infamous black-uniformed elite corps. A second soldier was seen with a swastika on his gear. “
> German TV Shows Nazi Symbols on Helmets of Ukraine Soldiers - NBC News
Click to expand...


Guno. You are a strange bird. Sometimes you are so wrong, but when you are right you nail it.

I don't get you. 

Kiev are Nazis. On this you are correct.


----------



## guno

tinydancer said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> USA and NATO accuse Russia of a direct involvement in battles between the Seperatists and the western supported Ukrainian army.  According to their report, Russian armored forces directly supported the rebels. Russia has denied the involvement but meanwhile, Putin compared the Ukrainian army with the Wehrmacht.
> 
> U.S. official says 1 000 Russian troops enter Ukraine - CNN.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *German TV Shows Nazi Symbols on Helmets of Ukraine Soldiers*
> Germans were confronted with images of their country’s dark past on Monday night, when German public broadcaster ZDF showed video of Ukrainian soldiers with Nazi symbols on their helmets in its evening newscast. In a report on the fragile cease-fire in eastern Ukraine, Moscow correspondent Bernhard Lichte used pictures of a soldier wearing a combat helmet with the "SS runes" of Hitler’s infamous black-uniformed elite corps. A second soldier was seen with a swastika on his gear. “
> German TV Shows Nazi Symbols on Helmets of Ukraine Soldiers - NBC News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Guno. You are a strange bird. Sometimes you are so wrong, but when you are right you nail it.
> 
> I don't get you.
> 
> Kiev are Nazis. On this you are correct.
Click to expand...



I lost 5 members of my family to the nazi hoards in the camps, Never again


----------



## bendog

tinydancer said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tiny, it's sort of a chicken and egg thing.  The maj didn't want tighter ties to Russia, the guy tried to ram it through in his waning days, people revolted .....
> 
> At some point, you gotta stop pointing fingers, and they can be pointed at neocons and Putin, and try and find a workable solution.
> 
> If I'm a ukranian, I wouldn't want putin's hand in the pocketbook of natl gas.  He's got an ugly history there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever seen the vote on a map? The country is as divided as we are in the States and in Canada.
> 
> This was a coup. A western coup in more ways than one. Maybe I have more on the line than others. I've been following this for more than some time.
> 
> I'm a serious Uk descendant in Canada. We have the largest UK population outside of the Ukraine and Russia.
> 
> Last year when I was alerted to Svoboda and Right Sector moving in to take over the Square I knew where this would lead.
> 
> Look. I hate Russia. Or used to. I spent my whole life hating what happened to family members in the 40's. There is no love lost here. And I was on this shit from the beginning because I really do still involve myself in my history and where I live now.
> 
> That was Stalin. This is now.
> 
> What happened in Kiev was a western backed coup.And trust me I'm on the verge of leading a charge to overthrow my Prime Minister over this and I am a conservative
> 
> This was a coup. The President and his parliament were duly elected. I have proof of it. I've put it up so many times I want to bazooka barf.
> 
> Euro Maidan was a joke. It was all designed to overthrow the duly elected government. Obama/Harper/Cameron and Exxon and BP are pushing this.
> 
> Not a conspiracy theory. I can show you that they were negotiating before this coup took place.
> 
> Now we really are on the precipice of WWIII.
Click to expand...


You call it a coup, but it wasn't exactly Allende in chile.  The Russian backed Ukraine govt sought to ink a trade pact with Russia that would but the country on a path of not having free trade with the EU, despite the Ukraine have been negotiating with the EU all along, and the govt was facing an election is knew it would most likely lose.

A majority don't want Putin in charge of gas reserves in the eastern Ukraine.  I don't blame them. 

You try to analogize to the west, but there is none.  Imagine the dems being opposed to a Nafta, and the gop ramming it through despite being down ten in the polls with an election coming up in six months.  LOL

But yes, the neocons and Putin are interfering with internal Ukrainian politics.


----------



## 1776

Stupid bitch....I see you can't explain away RUSSIAN troops, tanks, APCs, etc inside Eastern Ukraine now.

You claimed they had the right to invade Crimea but they wouldn't invade the rest of Ukraine.....uh you are wrong again, bitch.

Oh, you believe the Russian lies despite people from every country in Europe saying there are Russian troops that invaded Crimea and eastern Ukraine. It is clear you are fucking insane.



tinydancer said:


> Why don't you put up Svoboda's Charter? By all means. Do so.


 


tinydancer said:


> Prove the invasion of Crimea or shut up.


----------



## 1776

shut the fuck up, shit eater.



guno said:


> I lost 5 members of my family to the nazi hoards in the camps, Never again


----------



## guno

1776 said:


> shut the fuck up, shit eater.
> 
> 
> 
> guno said:
> 
> 
> 
> I lost 5 members of my family to the nazi hoards in the camps, Never again
Click to expand...



Go rotate the tires on your trailer house


----------



## guno

1776 said:


> So Russia can just invade their neighbors on lies today because Putin feels that land is really their land. Russia is such a tiny little country, eh dumbfuck?
> 
> I guess you scumbags are for Mexico invading the western US.....if they were able to given they are losers that could lose all of Mexico to us today if we snapped our fingers.


----------



## Stratford57

Guno, thank you, that was real funny.


----------



## montelatici

I don't think anyone can justify a US inspired coup (the Nuland woman was caught on tape) just because the then Government decided to heed to the wishes of about 50% of the population who wanted to remain Russia's trading partner.


----------



## 1776

Inbreeding among trailer trash and apes is on display on these pro-Putin threads.


----------



## B. Kidd

1776 said:


> Inbreeding among trailer trash and apes is on display on these pro-Putin threads.



Butthurt by the truth. A common affliction among members of the She-Man Putin Haters Club.
You'll get used to it.


----------



## Stratford57

B. Kidd said:


> Butthurt by the truth. A common affliction among members of the She-Man Putin Haters Club.
> You'll get used to it.


Some people are so deeply brainwashed by their media so that they don't bother to understand one very simple thing: Ukrainian conflict is not about Putin, it's about fascism


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Stratford57 said:


> B. Kidd said:
> 
> 
> 
> Butthurt by the truth. A common affliction among members of the She-Man Putin Haters Club.
> You'll get used to it.
> 
> 
> 
> Some people are so deeply brainwashed by their media so that they don't bother to understand one very simple thing: Ukrainian conflict is not about Putin, it's about fascism
Click to expand...

Well, it's about many things. Fascism, western imperialism, Putin, etc...


----------



## bendog

And hopefully we'll move to a Ukraine free to trade with all and with protections for individual freedom and educational opportunity.


----------



## B. Kidd

The EU leaders have effectively made the choice against peace in the Ukraine. The ceasefire is basically holding, even confirmed by Porshenko. Yet the EU is going ahead with a new round of sanctions tomorrow. Like our leaders, Europe has gone nuts too.


----------



## bendog

nah.  The EU doesn't want war, they want Gazprom's gas.  Putin's always taken one step back, and two forward.  The EU is calling him out, and saying at the same time that if he backs off on territorial pillaging, he gets his euros and ships.  And, he'll keep Crimea, though it'll be expensive.


----------



## Camp

B. Kidd said:


> The EU leaders have effectively made the choice against peace in the Ukraine. The ceasefire is basically holding, even confirmed by Porshenko. Yet the EU is going ahead with a new round of sanctions tomorrow. Like our leaders, Europe has gone nuts too.


Putin is not honoring his agreements for the ceasefire. He has no credibility. No one trust him. He still lies and claims Russia has not sent troops and weapons to Ukraine. Even after troops and weapons have been captured, photographed, video taped and seen in satellite images. Plus he still maintains tens of thousands of troops on the Ukraine border. Mothers in Russia are pissed off and speaking out about their sons coming home from Ukraine and having to be buried in quite and secret funerals.


----------



## B. Kidd

Camp said:


> B. Kidd said:
> 
> 
> 
> The EU leaders have effectively made the choice against peace in the Ukraine. The ceasefire is basically holding, even confirmed by Porshenko. Yet the EU is going ahead with a new round of sanctions tomorrow. Like our leaders, Europe has gone nuts too.
> 
> 
> 
> Putin is not honoring his agreements for the ceasefire. He has no credibility. No one trust him. He still lies and claims Russia has not sent troops and weapons to Ukraine. Even after troops and weapons have been captured, photographed, video taped and seen in satellite images. Plus he still maintains tens of thousands of troops on the Ukraine border. Mothers in Russia are pissed off and speaking out about their sons coming home from Ukraine and having to be buried in quite and secret funerals.
Click to expand...


Quite a summarization by 'unnamed sources'.


----------



## Camp

B. Kidd said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B. Kidd said:
> 
> 
> 
> The EU leaders have effectively made the choice against peace in the Ukraine. The ceasefire is basically holding, even confirmed by Porshenko. Yet the EU is going ahead with a new round of sanctions tomorrow. Like our leaders, Europe has gone nuts too.
> 
> 
> 
> Putin is not honoring his agreements for the ceasefire. He has no credibility. No one trust him. He still lies and claims Russia has not sent troops and weapons to Ukraine. Even after troops and weapons have been captured, photographed, video taped and seen in satellite images. Plus he still maintains tens of thousands of troops on the Ukraine border. Mothers in Russia are pissed off and speaking out about their sons coming home from Ukraine and having to be buried in quite and secret funerals.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quite a summarization by 'unnamed sources'.
Click to expand...

Who says they are unnamed sources? This stuff is in Russian news and Ukrainian news everyday. Also in Reuters and BBC.


----------



## 1776

Actually shitstain....intel agencies say so....



B. Kidd said:


> Quite a summarization by 'unnamed sources'.


----------



## 1776

What truth do you have kook?

It is nowhere near what I know, fucktard.

Let me give you a hint.....I know what each party is doing behind closed doors.



B. Kidd said:


> Butthurt by the truth. A common affliction among members of the She-Man Putin Haters Club.
> You'll get used to it.


----------



## bendog

hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.

EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News

In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

bendog said:


> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.


Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.


----------



## 1776

I didn't realize NATO was blocking him in the Arctic or sneaking up on him from the south, maybe that is why he is talking about invading Kazakhstan now...

Putin is actually making a slow move into the Arctic to steal the disputed resources there like oil under the sea.

Oh, but you will blame NATO, US, Bush, the boogey man, etc for Putin possibly starting a war over disputed Arctic resources.



Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.


----------



## bendog

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
Click to expand...


Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.

Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.

Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.


----------



## Decus

Russia's economy is approximately that of Italy's. 80% of Russian exports are commodities (raw materials, energy...) and other than an arms industry, Russia doesn't produce anything of significant export value.

Putin is also losing Central Asian nations like oil-rich Kazakhstan. Given that China has made huge investments in the region and financed oil pipelines to China, the Chinese won't allow Russia to reassert control in Central Asia. Putin tried to scare Kazakhstan at the end of August but was told to go fuk himself.

_"Our independence is our dearest treasure, which our grandfathers fought for," Nazarbayev added. "First of all, we will never surrender it to someone, and secondly, we will do our best to protect it."_

Vladimir Putin Continues Soviet Rhetoric by Questioning Kazakhstan s Created Independence

Even the oligarchs seem to be rumbling their discontent:

_"Russian authorities have placed Vladimir Yevtushenkov, one of the country’s richest men, under house arrest on charges of money laundering."_

_"In Russia, criminal investigations are often used as a way to settle political scores."_

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d901ac58-3dc5-11e4-b175-00144feabdc0.html

With Russia's resources he could have bought Europe, but sadly he is unable to adapt. 

.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

bendog said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.

You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.

The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
Click to expand...

Lots of speculation that can't be backed up along with big doses of generic Russian propaganda.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of speculation that can't be backed up along with big doses of generic Russian propaganda.
Click to expand...

And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?

Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs


----------



## 1776

shitstain....when did NATO attack the USSR/Russia????

Please tell nutjob....



Kevin_Kennedy said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
Click to expand...


----------



## 1776

You read uneducated pontificating blowhards like yourself, while I read what is really going on inside the war zone and Crimea....



Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of speculation that can't be backed up along with big doses of generic Russian propaganda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?
> 
> Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
> John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs
Click to expand...


----------



## Stratford57

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?
> 
> Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
> John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs


Kevin, there are certain sort of people who would never hear you no matter what kind of arguments you present. Hopeless cases...


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Stratford57 said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?
> 
> Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
> John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin, there are certain sort of people who would never hear you no matter what kind of arguments you present. Hopeless cases...
Click to expand...

Yes, boring people.


----------



## B. Kidd

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Stratford57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?
> 
> Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
> John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin, there are certain sort of people who would never hear you no matter what kind of arguments you present. Hopeless cases...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, boring people.
Click to expand...


You guys are too polite. They are, in reality, 'Cold War-Whores'.


----------



## Camp

B. Kidd said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stratford57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?
> 
> Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
> John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin, there are certain sort of people who would never hear you no matter what kind of arguments you present. Hopeless cases...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, boring people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You guys are too polite. They are, in reality, 'Cold War-Whores'.
Click to expand...

Right, so without any intellectual means of promoting the Putin agenda, just go ahead and resort to name calling. But some of us fought that Cold War and some of us have interest in Ukraine. You know, like family and friends.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> B. Kidd said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stratford57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what am I supposed to make of the complete absence of specifics with your claims?
> 
> Regardless, this essay is quite good on the subject.
> John J. Mearsheimer How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis Foreign Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin, there are certain sort of people who would never hear you no matter what kind of arguments you present. Hopeless cases...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, boring people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You guys are too polite. They are, in reality, 'Cold War-Whores'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Right, so without any intellectual means of promoting the Putin agenda, just go ahead and resort to name calling. But some of us fought that Cold War and some of us have interest in Ukraine. You know, like family and friends.
Click to expand...

Right, so calling me a propagandist without adding anything to the actual discussion is the height of intellectualism. Nailed it.


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
Click to expand...

You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
Click to expand...

They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm, so the EU grants tariff relief to help Ukraine export to the EU, while at the same time delaying Ukranian consumers cheaper access to EU imports, which will keep them buying inferior and more expensive Russian stuff.  And the loss of exports to Ukraine was one of Russia's reasons for unhappiness.
> 
> EU delays entry into force of free trade pact with Ukraine - Yahoo News
> 
> In a nutshell, imo that's always been one central basis for the conflict.  Yes, Putin regrets Russia's loss of Ukraine as a puppet state, but even more so the loss of the portions of what are now eastern Ukraine, but which were at one time Russian, until the Soviets coupled them to Ukraine.  But, more centrally Putin's Russia does not operate with a free flow of capital, and championed by Thatcher and Reagan.  It's economy cannot compete with the west in terms of efficient production, and Russia is left with its petro products and tying them to also accepting defective Russian commerce.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
Click to expand...

Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's also not forget that Putin doesn't want to be surrounded by NATO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
Click to expand...

According to who?


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, "surrounded" was hyperbole.  But there's no doubt Putin sees Nato as a threat, but the question is why.  He's not insane.  Nato has no interest in a war with Russia, or to take any Russian territory.  There's no reason to think that Putin is not believing himself when he says the greatest calamity of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union.  Putin invaded Georgia and Moldova prior to the Ukraine.  It's nonsensical to argue that Putin's involvement in the Ukraine is because he perceives Nato as some military threat.
> 
> Further, it would require thinking he is unbalanced to reason that he seeks former satellite territories as a buffer against another conventional attack on Russia, as Napoleon and Hitler mounted.
> 
> Some suggest that Putin's real goal is to be president for life, and that may be, but imo it under estimates his legitimate concern for his country.  And it is the trade pact.  It's not Nato.  What Putin can't have is former soviet satellites right on his border having the economic progress of places like Poland, the Czech Rep and Slovokia.  Putin runs Russia as his personal bank.  There are oligarchs who survive at his will.  There's no way that kind of economy can compete with a freely capitalist economy.  Having that right on his border would do two things:  first, there's no way inferior Russian goods will compete in an import market, and second it's not in his personal interest of surviving for Russians to decide they'd like that kind of economy too.  But, even that may be underestimating his real patriotic concerns.  It may be that he really does not think Russia can be anymore than a UK or France economically.
> 
> 
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to who?
Click to expand...

What part of my comment do you question?


----------



## Decus

Back in 2005 Putin expressed his feelings for end of the USSR:

_"“First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that *the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century*,” Putin said. “*As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy*. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory."_

Soviet collapse a tragedy Putin says - World news NBC News

Three years later he invaded Georgia. He has now invaded Ukraine and most recently he has threatened Kazakhstan.

NATO is a minor annoyance for Putin and nothing more. What Putin wants is to reestablish the influence Russia enjoyed under the old system.

Putin is a KGB alumni that longs for the good old days. You can try to put lipstick on this pig, but he's still a pig.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.
> 
> 
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
Click to expand...

That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
Click to expand...

Crimea is not the same as all the eastern Oblast of Ukraine. The vote in Crimea has never been recognized as a legitimate election. The ballots didn't even give a clear choice. It was in fact a sham election. 
I do not know a single Russian speaking Ukrainian that wanted or wants to be annexed to Ru. Not one.


----------



## bendog

Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.

You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.

The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.[/QUOTE]

That's absurd Kevin.  Nato is hardly neocon.  WTF would anyone want with Russia.  They have carbon energy and a third world economy.  It's a basket case.  And that's the point.  Putin simply cannot afford to have tiger economies on his doorstep.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> 
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Crimea is not the same as all the eastern Oblast of Ukraine. The vote in Crimea has never been recognized as a legitimate election. The ballots didn't even give a clear choice. It was in fact a sham election.
> I do not know a single Russian speaking Ukrainian that wanted or wants to be annexed to Ru. Not one.
Click to expand...

No, it's not, but I'm still not seeing any independent polling backing up your claim. You can say the vote hasn't been recognized, but it hasn't been recognized by who? The west. Not a disinterested party in this situation, so not a reliable source. That would be like me saying that Russia says it was a legitimate vote as if it were a legitimate argument. So you don't know any, that's nice anecdotal evidence but hardly compelling.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

bendog said:


> Why wouldn't Putin see NATO as a military threat? Here you have an organization that is chock full of governments that are ready, willing, and able to depose governments that they dislike for little or imagined offenses. Given the rhetoric towards Putin from the U.S. government I'd say it'd be perfectly reasonable for Putin to be wary of having NATO on his doorstep, the same way the U.S. would be if Russia setup a military alliance with Mexico. It's a perfectly rational fear.
> 
> You also have to keep in mind that the U.S. and E.U. just helped overthrow Putin's puppet-government in the Ukraine. Now you could point out that Putin has no right to a puppet-government in the Ukraine, which is true, but how would the U.S. react if Putin overthrew their puppet-government in Iraq, for example? With hostility, the same way Putin reacted when it was done to him.
> 
> The simple fact is that the U.S. and E.U. deliberately decided to provoke Putin knowing what his response would be.



That's absurd Kevin.  Nato is hardly neocon.  WTF would anyone want with Russia.  They have carbon energy and a third world economy.  It's a basket case.  And that's the point.  Putin simply cannot afford to have tiger economies on his doorstep.[/QUOTE]
What would anybody want with Iraq? It was even worse off than Russia is now, but that didn't stop the U.S. and others from overthrowing Saddam. Why would the U.S. want Putin out of power in Russia and replaced with a more compliant government? The question answers itself.


----------



## Stratford57

Camp said:


> I do not know a single Russian speaking Ukrainian that wanted or wants to be annexed to Ru. Not one.


About 70 to 80% of SE Ukraine can't wait to "be annexed" by Russia, FYI. And it's more than 15 million people. I am so sick and tired from discussions about Ukraine by people who see its situations with the eyes of Western or Ukrainian media (they are singing the same song and misinforming their listeners). And besides half a country does NOT want any association with EU. Last year the people wanted to have a referendum about it, but it was never allowed (probably the results were too obvious).


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are promoting the idea that the US and EU helped to overthrow the government when in fact what the US and EU did was react to a situation created by Ukraine citizens. The Russians have promoted the idea that their actions are related to NATO expansion, but that occurred over a decade ago without this kind of reaction from Russia. You are speculating with "what if's" to shape an analysis and conclusions based on speculations and ignoring actual facts.
> There is no justification for Russia to use it's military to annex the portions of Ukraine it wants. If you want to ignore the fact that the portion they want is the industrial heartland of Ukraine that produces a huge portion of Russia's military hardware and brings in billions of dollars in exports, you are free to do so. But those are not speculations, those are facts.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
Click to expand...


un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm

bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know a single Russian speaking Ukrainian that wanted or wants to be annexed to Ru. Not one.
> 
> 
> 
> About 70 to 80% of SE Ukraine can't wait to "be annexed" by Russia, FYI. And it's more than 15 million people. I am so sick and tired from discussions about Ukraine by people who see its situations with the eyes of Western or Ukrainian media (they are singing the same song and misinforming their listeners). And besides half a country does NOT want any association with EU. Last year the people wanted to have a referendum about it, but it was never allowed (probably the results were too obvious).
Click to expand...

What do you include as SE Ukraine and where is your link to a poll or whatever? Is Kremenchuk inside of SE Eastern Ukraine?


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't simply react, they aided one group in overthrowing the Ukrainian government, and I suppose we're simply supposed to ignore the fact that in doing so they helped themselves by helping to install a government with more pro-western sympathies. Pretending they're a disinterested third party is nonsense. As for Russia, nobody is trying to portray them as disinterested. I've clearly stated on many occasions that the Ukrainian government that was overthrown was a Russian puppet, and nobody denies that Putin has many interests in the Ukraine. My point has only ever been that trying to portray Putin as some kind of imperialist while completely ignoring the role the west played in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, an imperialist move, and in deliberately provoking Putin by doing so is ridiculous. As for why NATO expansion is different this time, it's because it's right on Putin's doorstep and because it's been building to this.
> 
> 
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
> 
> bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416
Click to expand...

What does that show?


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your views seem balanced and well thought out. I do not however think you have a true or accurate grasp of the feelings of the Ukrainian people in regards to the replacement of the government in Kyiv and how they feel today. There was no way they would accept dumping the EU for the Russian deal. Some wanted to go EU all the way and some wanted to see a balance of combining agreements with both, but few wanted to go RU all the way. Even today, annexation to Russia is not desired by anyone other than the extremist along the border with Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
> 
> bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that show?
Click to expand...

It shows that the international community does not recognize the vote to have been legitimate or legal and rejects the claim of it's outcome.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to who?
> 
> 
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
> 
> bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that show?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It shows that the international community does not recognize the vote to have been legitimate or legal and rejects the claim of it's outcome.
Click to expand...

Not particularly surprising, but where is the evidence?


----------



## Camp

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> What part of my comment do you question?
> 
> 
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
> 
> bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that show?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It shows that the international community does not recognize the vote to have been legitimate or legal and rejects the claim of it's outcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not particularly surprising, but where is the evidence?
Click to expand...

Evidence? I provided a link to the actual United Nations General Assembly Resolution 11493 that rejected the election and sham vote in Crimea and a link to a BBC article that reported on the vote and rejection of the legality of the vote. What kind of evidence do you need? Do you need a country by country account of parliaments and governments that have independently rejected the vote?


----------



## B. Kidd

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
> 
> bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that show?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It shows that the international community does not recognize the vote to have been legitimate or legal and rejects the claim of it's outcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not particularly surprising, but where is the evidence?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Evidence? I provided a link to the actual United Nations General Assembly Resolution 11493 that rejected the election and sham vote in Crimea and a link to a BBC article that reported on the vote and rejection of the legality of the vote. What kind of evidence do you need? Do you need a country by country account of parliaments and governments that have independently rejected the vote?
Click to expand...


Interesting enough, the U.N. resolution DID NOT mention Russia or directly blame or accuse Russia of violating Ukraines territorial integrity.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

Camp said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> That nobody would prefer closer ties with Russia than with the EU, that a minority want to be a part of Russia rather than the Ukraine, etc... It seems to me there was a fairly conclusive vote that took place in Crimea on the subject that said the opposite. You can say it was a sham vote, which it may have been, but I'm not inclined to take the word of the U.S. or E.U. on the subject anymore than I am to take Russia's word. So unless an actual disinterested party has done some sort of conclusive polling I can't see how any of your claims regarding what the people want are anything more than your speculations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
> 
> bbc.com/news/world-europe-26776416
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that show?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It shows that the international community does not recognize the vote to have been legitimate or legal and rejects the claim of it's outcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not particularly surprising, but where is the evidence?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Evidence? I provided a link to the actual United Nations General Assembly Resolution 11493 that rejected the election and sham vote in Crimea and a link to a BBC article that reported on the vote and rejection of the legality of the vote. What kind of evidence do you need? Do you need a country by country account of parliaments and governments that have independently rejected the vote?
Click to expand...

That a government rejects an election is not evidence that the vote was in fact fraudulent.


----------



## Stratford57

[/QUOTE]Camp said:
What do you include as SE Ukraine and where is your link to a poll or whatever? Is Kremenchuk inside of SE Eastern Ukraine?[/QUOTE]

SE Ukraine includes: Donetsk, Lugansk, Kharkov, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye cities and their areas (villages ans towns around). Official polls never existed, we can approximately say 70% of those areas want to be with Russia by watching protesting demonstrations (against junta) in spring. Now all the protests are suppressed, the leaders are in prison or "disappeared" , unfortunately it is very common for "democratic" Ukraine, supported by US&EU.  I was one of those numerous protesters, so I could see what was going on with my own eyes. By the way "democratic" Ukraine has shut down all the Russian TV channels, so that there would be possible only "Ukrainian truth" to broadcast.
Kremenchug as far as I know belongs to Poltava area and seems to be more pro-Ukrainian than pro-Russian.


----------



## Camp

Camp said:
What do you include as SE Ukraine and where is your link to a poll or whatever? Is Kremenchuk inside of SE Eastern Ukraine?[/QUOTE]

SE Ukraine includes: Donetsk, Lugansk, Kharkov, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye cities and their areas (villages ans towns around). Official polls never existed, we can approximately say 70% of those areas want to be with Russia by watching protesting demonstrations (against junta) in spring. Now all the protests are suppressed, the leaders are in prison or "disappeared" , unfortunately it is very common for "democratic" Ukraine, supported by US&EU.  I was one of those numerous protesters, so I could see what was going on with my own eyes. By the way "democratic" Ukraine has shut down all the Russian TV channels, so that there would be possible only "Ukrainian truth" to broadcast.
Kremenchug as far as I know belongs to Poltava area and seems to be more pro-Ukrainian than pro-Russian.[/QUOTE]
The point is that if you dropped a person off in Kremenchuk they would think they were in a Russian city because all the people not only speak Russian, they have Russian family background and the culture is hard core Russian. All the people I know there have relatives in Russia. More of them speak English than Ukrainian. And as you confirm, the people are more pro Ukraine than pro Russian when it comes to separating from Ukraine. So, your estimate of 70% in favor of separating from Ukraine may reflect the area where you live but it is just a guess. Perhaps in some of the border Oblast your estimates may be accurate, but it is fair to contest that figure as not representative of all the heavily populated ethnic Russian areas.


----------



## 1776

These kooks here with their lies about "Russia being innocent" can't explain why Germany, England, France, Italy, Poland, Holland, the US, Canada, etc are all on one side against Russia being the evil troublemaker in this mess, not the bogus Nazis in Ukraine.

Kooks....please explain how all these different countries are wrong and Russia is right....


----------



## Stratford57

Situation in Ukraine according to Western media. 






Meanwhile the real picture looks like following:





We need to use our heads not only for eating, don't you think?


----------



## 1776

shithead...there are Nazis in the US, UK, etc.



Stratford57 said:


> Situation in Ukraine according to Western media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile the real picture looks like following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We need to use our heads not only for eating, don't you think?


----------



## Stratford57

Those clowns at the picture above are from "Azov" battalion, which belongs to Ukrainian Army (it's printed on their T-shirts). The emblem of the battalion displays "The Wolf's hook", which is an old Nazi's symbol


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> Those clowns at the picture above are from "Azov" battalion, which belongs to Ukrainian Army (it's printed on their T-shirts). The emblem of the battalion displays "The Wolf's hook", which is an old Nazi's symbol


Azov battalion in not part of the Ukraine Army. They are a volunteer group that numbers between 300 to 500 members. They are frequently used by the Ukraine Army as shock troops and pay a high price for that distinction. The members vow to bring battle to Kyiv when fighting is done in Eastern Ukraine. They are hard core nationalist and racist. Many of them are Russian speaking ethnic Russians who detest Putin and his invasion of Ukraine.


----------



## Decus

1776 said:


> These kooks here with their lies about "Russia being innocent" can't explain why Germany, England, France, Italy, Poland, Holland, the US, Canada, etc are all on one side against Russia being the evil troublemaker in this mess, not the bogus Nazis in Ukraine.
> 
> Kooks....please explain how all these different countries are wrong and Russia is right....




Funny but even China is siding with the Ukraine:

_"But *China* has also said it would like to continue to develop "friendly cooperation" with Ukraine and that it *respects Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity*."_

China s Xi repeats calls for political solution for Ukraine Reuters


----------



## Stratford57

Camp said:


> Stratford57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those clowns at the picture above are from "Azov" battalion, which belongs to Ukrainian Army (it's printed on their T-shirts). The emblem of the battalion displays "The Wolf's hook", which is an old Nazi's symbol
> 
> 
> 
> Azov battalion in not part of the Ukraine Army. They are a volunteer group that numbers between 300 to 500 members. They are frequently used by the Ukraine Army as shock troops and pay a high price for that distinction. The members vow to bring battle to Kyiv when fighting is done in Eastern Ukraine. They are hard core nationalist and racist. Many of them are Russian speaking ethnic Russians who detest Putin and his invasion of Ukraine.
Click to expand...


You're right about Azov battalion doesn't really belong to Ukrainian army, but it fights along with it and has the same purposes: exterminating new declared republics in SE (Novorossia) and shelling all the territories with "Grads", "Uragans", etc. And again: 
THERE IS NO PUTIN'S INVASION of UKRAINE, unfortunately, we would love to have it. 
  NSA veterans wrote to A. Merkel: information from NATO about Russian troops invasion into Ukraine is not true. 

Ex-NSA Director US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War Alex Jones Infowars There s a war on for your mind


----------



## Decus

Stratford57 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stratford57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those clowns at the picture above are from "Azov" battalion, which belongs to Ukrainian Army (it's printed on their T-shirts). The emblem of the battalion displays "The Wolf's hook", which is an old Nazi's symbol
> 
> 
> 
> Azov battalion in not part of the Ukraine Army. They are a volunteer group that numbers between 300 to 500 members. They are frequently used by the Ukraine Army as shock troops and pay a high price for that distinction. The members vow to bring battle to Kyiv when fighting is done in Eastern Ukraine. They are hard core nationalist and racist. Many of them are Russian speaking ethnic Russians who detest Putin and his invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're right about Azov battalion doesn't really belong to Ukrainian army, but it fights along with it and has the same purposes: exterminating new declared republics in SE (Novorossia) and shelling all the territories with "Grads", "Uragans", etc. And again:
> THERE IS NO PUTIN'S INVASION of UKRAINE, unfortunately, we would love to have it.
> NSA veterans wrote to A. Merkel: information from NATO about Russian troops invasion into Ukraine is not true.
> 
> Ex-NSA Director US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War Alex Jones Infowars There s a war on for your mind
Click to expand...


Alex Jones??? Infowars??? Really???  Too funny


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stratford57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those clowns at the picture above are from "Azov" battalion, which belongs to Ukrainian Army (it's printed on their T-shirts). The emblem of the battalion displays "The Wolf's hook", which is an old Nazi's symbol
> 
> 
> 
> Azov battalion in not part of the Ukraine Army. They are a volunteer group that numbers between 300 to 500 members. They are frequently used by the Ukraine Army as shock troops and pay a high price for that distinction. The members vow to bring battle to Kyiv when fighting is done in Eastern Ukraine. They are hard core nationalist and racist. Many of them are Russian speaking ethnic Russians who detest Putin and his invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're right about Azov battalion doesn't really belong to Ukrainian army, but it fights along with it and has the same purposes: exterminating new declared republics in SE (Novorossia) and shelling all the territories with "Grads", "Uragans", etc. And again:
> THERE IS NO PUTIN'S INVASION of UKRAINE, unfortunately, we would love to have it.
> NSA veterans wrote to A. Merkel: information from NATO about Russian troops invasion into Ukraine is not true.
> 
> Ex-NSA Director US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War Alex Jones Infowars There s a war on for your mind
Click to expand...

That letter was written by a guy with a political agenda against President Obama and he is not taken seriously. Perhaps you are not permitted to read about captured Russian soldiers and mothers in Russia protesting their sons coming home in body bags or injured from Ukraine. And perhaps you are not aware of admissions of Russians in Ukraine with the excuse that they are "on leave" and "vacation" and "volunteers".


----------



## Stratford57

Picture to the left:
Chelyabinsk meteorite, just a few  seconds of its flight are taped on                            
hundreds of cell phones,                                                   
cameras and video registers.

Picture to the right:                   
  Russian Army  several months is invading Ukraine  and is impossible to catch for any                 recording devices.


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> Picture to the left:
> Chelyabinsk meteorite, just a few  seconds of its flight are taped on
> hundreds of cell phones,
> cameras and video registers.
> 
> Picture to the right:
> Russian Army  several months is invading Ukraine  and is impossible to catch for any                 recording devices.


Maybe that is because all the photo's show vehicles and uniforms with identification removed before entering Ukraine.


----------



## Stratford57

Camp said:


> [QUOTE="Camp, post: 9859811, member: 44680"
> 
> Ex-NSA Director US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War Alex Jones Infowars There s a war on for your mind
> That letter was written by a guy with a political agenda against President Obama and he is not taken seriously. Perhaps you are not permitted to read about captured Russian soldiers and mothers in Russia protesting their sons coming home in body bags or injured from Ukraine. And perhaps you are not aware of admissions of Russians in Ukraine with the excuse that they are "on leave" and "vacation" and "volunteers".



FYI, volunteers from several countries are fighting  for both sides,  it's no secret.
And according to the polls more than half of the country does not support Obama, should they all just shut up till the next Presidential election???


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> [QUOTE="Camp, post: 9859811, member: 44680"
> 
> Ex-NSA Director US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War Alex Jones Infowars There s a war on for your mind
> That letter was written by a guy with a political agenda against President Obama and he is not taken seriously. Perhaps you are not permitted to read about captured Russian soldiers and mothers in Russia protesting their sons coming home in body bags or injured from Ukraine. And perhaps you are not aware of admissions of Russians in Ukraine with the excuse that they are "on leave" and "vacation" and "volunteers".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, volunteers from several countries are fighting  for both sides,  it's no secret.
> And according to the polls more than half of the country does not support Obama, should they all just shut up till the next Presidential election???
Click to expand...

Of course he should not shut up and has a right to voice his opinion and say whatever he wants to say. But people who write of speak with such obvious political leanings or agenda's and omit pertinent facts are not taken very seriously. I was just putting the letter you posted in perspective. We have access here from the international press and even some Russian press that has shown us the mothers protesting their sons being sent to Ukraine. We have seen articles about burials of Russian soldiers and injured soldiers. We have seen interviews of captured Russian soldiers. When the so called invasion began the separatist were led by "former" Russian military and security officers.


----------



## Stratford57

Why haven't you seen Polish, Lithuanian, Georgian, American (BlackWaters) and  mothers from many other countries who's sons were fighting for Kiev junta's side? Whole bunch of IDs from those countries were found. Why do they only show you Russian mothers? Smells like propaganda and brainwash...


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> Why haven't you seen Polish, Lithuanian, Georgian, American (BlackWaters) and  mothers from many other countries who's sons were fighting for Kiev junta's side? Whole bunch of IDs from those countries were found. Why do they only show you Russian mothers? Smells like propaganda and brainwash...


We do here about those guys, but the mothers aren't protesting because those guys volunteered and they weren't soldiers in those counties armies. They were and are civilian volunteers.


----------



## Stratford57

I'm not aware about any mothers' protests in Russia, I've seen hundreds of mothers in  several areas of Ukraine for several days blocking the main roads and demanding their sons back from the war. Those protests were going on for a long time


----------



## 1776

The leaders and military of Ukraine are not "Nazis," that is a lie being spread by Putin to justify his invasion of Ukraine.

Putin knows calling someone a Nazi puts them at the top of the hate list in Russia because of WW2...but he doesn't mention Russia was in bed with the Nazis until Hitler duped them.


----------



## Camp

Stratford57 said:


> I'm not aware about any mothers' protests in Russia, I've seen hundreds of mothers in  several areas of Ukraine for several days blocking the main roads and demanding their sons back from the war. Those protests were going on for a long time




bbc.com/news/world-europe-28949582

bbc.com/news/world-europe-29300213


----------



## bendog

To the Gulag!

Is Russia s Paul McCartney a traitor The Kremlin would like you to think so. - Yahoo News


----------



## Stratford57

15 years in a row Putin does not allow the opposition and USA to make Russia a powerful and flourishing country such as Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Ukraine.

While telling the whole world that Russia is directly involved in Ukrainian crisis, Washington keeps supporting and producing  Kiev junta, exterminating the people from SE Ukraine, who disagree with their Nazi  policy. 

The Pentagon has dispatched more than a dozen military personnel to Kiev this week to provide tips to Ukrainian security
	
 forces on counterinsurgency and military planning tactics.

Military staff will share with the Ukrainians some of the Pentagon’s planning tactics, techniques and procedures while collecting data on the needs of its security forces, according to Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez. Staff arrived in Kiev, the country’s capital, on Thursday and Friday and are beginning to assess the operations
	
 of the Ukraine Ministry of Defense, Ms. Lainez told The Washington Times.

Ukraine gets U.S. counterinsurgency experts after saying it can t win the war with blankets - Washington Times


----------



## bendog

It would seem that the US and Nato are not prepared to eject the soviet forces from the Ukraine even if that means a Georgia type solution


----------



## bendog

Dzerzhinsky returns

Plaster Monument to Iron Felix Erected in Front of Former KGB Headquarters News The Moscow Times

And in other Putin news

Putin Renames Police Unit After Bloody Cheka Founder Dzerzhinsky News The Moscow Times


----------



## Stratford57

Happy birthday, Mr. Putin!!!






Be a Dzudo & Sambo master, be a professional Special Service agent, be a personality, which prevents your country from collapse, be a nightmare for your geopolitical enemies... and after that I may listen to you when you start criticizing this person!


----------



## bendog

Did Putin kill a journalist for this year's birthday celebration?


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

bendog said:


> Did Putin kill a journalist for this year's birthday celebration?


Has Obama prosecuted James Risen on his birthday yet?


----------



## bendog

Last I heard he was still alive and "at large," kevin.  any other digressions you'd like to add?


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

bendog said:


> Last I heard he was still alive and "at large," kevin.  any other digressions you'd like to add?


And for how long will he be free? Point being that the U.S. government is no friend to a free and adversarial press either.


----------



## Henrik

I think Russia should not supported the pro-Russian rebles and they would also try to end the violence.


----------



## 1776

Ukraine has been holding their own in recent battles...Putin has a hard time explaining body bags of troops sent out for "training."


----------



## bendog

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Last I heard he was still alive and "at large," kevin.  any other digressions you'd like to add?
> 
> 
> 
> And for how long will he be free? Point being that the U.S. government is no friend to a free and adversarial press either.
Click to expand...

If you have any information on the US govt assassinating reporters, post it, or stfu.  Yes the US govt is not happy with "leaks."  Sgt Manning is in jail, but receiving decent treatment, and soldiers cannot disobey orders.  Snowden .... he'd have done time, but I don't think public opinion in the US would allow for him being sentenced like Pollard.  There's a distinction you are dishonestly attempting to evade.

I don't know that Putin can disengage from Ukraine.  I don't think there's any disagreement amongst non Russians that Putin's goals are to stay in power, and either as part of that end, or sheer patriotism, he does not want Russia folded into a capitalist, private property state in the European markets because .... Russia's economy is smaller than Belgium, and aside for energy it cannot produce anything.  Russians take pride in being a world power.  But, Russia can't produce anything because the powers of capital exist solely to the Oligarchs who only answer to Putin, who allows them to keep the capital so long as they swear allegiance to him, personally.  He sees, quite clearly, that being in a union with a post-soviet state is not attractive to former soviet cold bloc "republics."  So, the West is creeping eastward.  And now, Putin is taking from one Oligarch to prop up another who suffers from sanctions.

There needs to be a way to let him out of the box he's in.  But, the problem is that negotiation is premised upon all players wanting the same end result, so they compromise and achieve less than their full agenda.  The West can pressure Ukraine to offer decent civil protections to ethnic Russians, but it's not really about that.  It's about Russia's sphere of economic influence and trade.  Some in the EU would be happy to let Putin dominate Ukraine, which offers the West little beyond natl gas, which no doubt is part of Putin's goal.  But, Putin would dearly love to have the Baltics back in Russian orbit.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy

bendog said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bendog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Last I heard he was still alive and "at large," kevin.  any other digressions you'd like to add?
> 
> 
> 
> And for how long will he be free? Point being that the U.S. government is no friend to a free and adversarial press either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you have any information on the US govt assassinating reporters, post it, or stfu.  Yes the US govt is not happy with "leaks."  Sgt Manning is in jail, but receiving decent treatment, and soldiers cannot disobey orders.  Snowden .... he'd have done time, but I don't think public opinion in the US would allow for him being sentenced like Pollard.  There's a distinction you are dishonestly attempting to evade.
> 
> I don't know that Putin can disengage from Ukraine.  I don't think there's any disagreement amongst non Russians that Putin's goals are to stay in power, and either as part of that end, or sheer patriotism, he does not want Russia folded into a capitalist, private property state in the European markets because .... Russia's economy is smaller than Belgium, and aside for energy it cannot produce anything.  Russians take pride in being a world power.  But, Russia can't produce anything because the powers of capital exist solely to the Oligarchs who only answer to Putin, who allows them to keep the capital so long as they swear allegiance to him, personally.  He sees, quite clearly, that being in a union with a post-soviet state is not attractive to former soviet cold bloc "republics."  So, the West is creeping eastward.  And now, Putin is taking from one Oligarch to prop up another who suffers from sanctions.
> 
> There needs to be a way to let him out of the box he's in.  But, the problem is that negotiation is premised upon all players wanting the same end result, so they compromise and achieve less than their full agenda.  The West can pressure Ukraine to offer decent civil protections to ethnic Russians, but it's not really about that.  It's about Russia's sphere of economic influence and trade.  Some in the EU would be happy to let Putin dominate Ukraine, which offers the West little beyond natl gas, which no doubt is part of Putin's goal.  But, Putin would dearly love to have the Baltics back in Russian orbit.
Click to expand...

UN Torture Chief 8217 s Report Officially Condemns US Treatment of Bradley Manning The Dissenter

Yeah, "decent treatment." It's not saying that Obama is as bad as Putin on press freedom when pointing out that the U.S. has no leg to stand on in criticizing others on that issue. No Risen isn't going to be killed, but he is being investigated and will likely be prosecuted despite the First Amendment. So, again, look to your own backyard before criticizing somebody else's.


----------



## 1776

Putin fucked up going into Ukraine.

Russia is paying out the nose for maintaining Crimea and keeping their invasion of eastern Ukraine on-going.

Back in Russia his rich supporters are losing money and their economy is on the verge of collapse.

Putin thought Ukraine would rollover once he invaded them but the idiot doesn't know his history that Ukraine supplied many of the great warriors that helped Russia in WW2.


----------

