Jump to content

Kiev Is Burning


X-Files

Recommended Posts

 

... nor curbed oligarchs' accumulation of wealth.

 

 

Rather than attempt to control wealth distribution, ensuring rule of law and free enteprise would do wonders for income inequality (something that Bush II forgot and Obama never understood). Get .gov out of .biz, ensure laws and courts are simple, honest, and fair, then stand back and watch the working and middle classes bloom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Roman Alymov

    14453

  • Stuart Galbraith

    9942

  • glenn239

    4654

  • Josh

    3422

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

 

 

That theory, besides being utter twadle, also conveniently reaffirms the rather useful* fiction that US foreign policy is dictated by the president - it isn't.

 

* useful for some.

 

Which conveniently ignores the reality that the US president may not dictate but he sure does shape and mold foreign policy.

 

 

Just to state the obvious, POTUS and SECSTATE have a lot more influence when their leanings match those of the upper executives of the State Dept. When POTUS wants to crack the knuckles of the Israelis, then he has all sorts of impact on American foreign policy. When he wants to crack the knuckles of Hamas, its like the bridge signalling full aft on a CVN steaming at 30 kts; the whole State Dept bureaucracy will resist, delay, and obfuscate longer than POTUS will be in office. Or to put it another way, POTUS/SECSTATE can set policy, but the org chart executes actions. Actions may or may not align with policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That Yugoslav nastyness was meant to end a more nasty series of Balkan wars. Kosovo was the thing that did more harm to international law.

Finally, I'm sorry, but those two approaches graphic humor have the same credibility as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

 

Well I know there is no way to convince you – but for your entertainment I advise you to take a look at Taken and Taken-2. Of course it is fiction, but it might give you the idea of why Serbs were reluctant to live peacefully with Albanians (as, after Boston, USians might get the idea why Chechens were not liked by many Russians).

What about Protocols of the Elders of Zion –as far as I remember Tony Blair was accused of drawing his county into war on fake reasons by UK Parliament committee…..

 

Please. Spare us the simplistic propaganda. These are the same things we see the stupid lefties trotting out. Iraq is as much a puppet government as Japan and Germany are. We didn't take oil, if we did, we'd not be in greater debt when it was all said and done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know for certain that the older MILAN ATGMs were easy as hell to get up and running. Newer ones (and those of similar generation to Milan-I) shouldn't be any harder. I don't know about MANPADs though.

 

Incidentally, I find it funny that journalists are running up and down the border and saying that there's no Russians! Well duh, do you think they'd be in line of sight of such? They'd at least be at larger caliber rocket artillery range.

 

Even the new MILANs that were given to the Libyan rebels didn't necessarily turn the tide against Gadaffi...it was NATO airpower. And keep in mind by the time Libya's war went into full gear, there were a number of experienced foreign fighters along with defected military personnel who were fighting against Gadaffi's joke of an army....and the learning curve was still quite steep. I'm just not convinced that a bunch of ATGMs and MANPADs will do the trick in convincing the Russians to leave. They sure as hell didn't leave Chechnya even though they lost entire battalions at a time, and they won't with Crimea or other parts of Ukraine if they choose to invade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they won't. Though I doubt Russia could sustain a protracted fight against a motivated insurgency; sure, they could roll over the conventional armed forces (though the casualties will be probably more than mild), but if it goes to an insurgency after they hold towns.... That'll just be one big mess for everyone.

 

In other news, it seems like NATO has chickened out by not letting Ukraine in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia to scrap Ukraines gas discount.

http://news.sky.com/story/1235397/russia-scraps-ukraines-large-gas-discount

 

No reason why they HAVE to keep in place what was ostensibly a charitable act in fairness. But with the timing being what it is, its perhaps worth taking note that its just yet more pressure being put on the Ukrainian Government.

It was not charity, Kharkiv deal between Putin and Yanuk involved prolonged lease of BSF base in exchange for discount on gas prices.

 

Oh, and btw from 7th April Russia imposes ban on pork imports from Poland and Lithuania, by accident the two countries that according to Putin were 'training Maidan fascists'. :D

Edited by urbanoid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they won't. Though I doubt Russia could sustain a protracted fight against a motivated insurgency; sure, they could roll over the conventional armed forces (though the casualties will be probably more than mild), but if it goes to an insurgency after they hold towns.... That'll just be one big mess for everyone.

 

In other news, it seems like NATO has chickened out by not letting Ukraine in.

Letting Ukraine in won't solve anything, sadly, if Russia wants to pounce, it would pounce before anything can be signed and formalised.

 

However Ukraine should serve as a wake-up call to NATO countries to increase their readiness. And maybe (okay, who am I kidding?) shift the holy Grail from "small warfare" to include conventional war again. And do away with "We don't need the Capability X, if SHTF someone else will provide it".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I don't see Ukraine trying to invade Russia, though I've seen a lot of the opposite.

 

Putting them in NATO is a big, "we won't be bullied by some Russians who want to be big and tough", so if they signed it yesterday, Russia would never invade more of the Ukraine. That's the point. Stopping them.

 

The only negative, is if Ukraine try to get its territory back, and that's what has all of NATO shaking in their boots. Boo hoo. You have to step up sometimes, or else the new bully that thinks he's big and tough will continue to push and push until..., well, you know how that goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia to scrap Ukraines gas discount.

http://news.sky.com/story/1235397/russia-scraps-ukraines-large-gas-discount

 

No reason why they HAVE to keep in place what was ostensibly a charitable act in fairness. But with the timing being what it is, its perhaps worth taking note that its just yet more pressure being put on the Ukrainian Government.

No additional pressure in fact: Ukrainian Government is not paying for gas anyway, and Russian Government can’t just cut it off since it will also cut off supply for significant part of European clients (who pay for their gas)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, Oz should go over and annex New Zealand. The US should do Canada too. Both of those are "brothers".

 

I mean, no one would care, right?

You mean...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RenRILqwhJs

 

?

 

 

Btw this might be also the biggest concern of the Texas Separatists ;) The biggest threat might not be evul federal gubmint, but Zetas supported by Mexican military and areas around the border.

 

And don't give me the crap about "they are better off here so why would they want to become Mexico?". Sudeten Germans were better off in Czechoslovakia than Germany was (esp. during the crisis), did not stop them, arguably same for Hungarians, it could be argued that Ireland would benefit from being part of the UK, same with Scottish separatists... These things are often decided on other than economical foundation.

 

Not to mention that under armed intimidation it is easy to get 97% "Yes".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I dont argue their right to do so Roman. I just think in the middle of a crisis its not the most entirely helpful thing to do.

 

Gas is continuing to flow into Ukraine - so there is no immediate harm to Ukrainian economy and population. Rising debt would be sooner or later written off (most likely perspective) or paid by Western loans (that, again, would then be written off) – so de-facto it is Russian or Western taxpayer who is subsidizing all this. Hope Russia will get at least some money back, but it is highly unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw this might be also the biggest concern of the Texas Separatists ;) The biggest threat might not be evul federal gubmint, but Zetas supported by Mexican military and areas around the border.

It is Kosovo scenario IMHO, not Crimean one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im increasingly of the opinion that Scotland will actually vote for independence. The only positive side is im equally convinced that 10 years hence they will be pleading to rejoin.

Are national feelings so high in Scotland, or it is just economy? Another takeover video BTW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqj9h563X-Y

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History as proven, in time of fear people flock together, usually to long established institutions. And unfortunately, a lot of the Eastern European states (and in fact some of the Western ones!) are now afraid of Russia in light of recent actions.

 

It works only if there is a fear – but seems like it is not enough fear in US and “Old Europe”, at least according to Western politicians speaking about “Russia is doing this or that out of weakness, not of strength, will collapse soon, Russian economy is falling, population is dying out etc.” So there is no political reason for additional waste of money, at list according to this point of view.

Will see how things evolve.

One more atricle: http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/russia-and-united-states-negotiate-future-ukraine

"Most important, the United States is not clear on what it wants from the Russians. In part it wants to create a constitutional democracy in Ukraine. The Russians actually do not object to that so long as Ukraine does not join NATO or the European Union, but the Russians are also aware that building a constitutional democracy in Ukraine is a vast and possibly futile undertaking. They know that the government is built on dangerously shifting economic and social sands. There are parts of the U.S. government that are concerned with Russia emerging as a regional hegemon, and there are parts of the U.S. government still obsessed with the Middle East that see the Russians as challengers in the region, while others see them as potential partners."

Edited by Roman Alymov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Please. Spare us the simplistic propaganda...

 

Been to Kosovo recently?

Were you to Albania recently? Do you know why probably about 75% of population, despite all claims of solidarity hates Kosovo Albanians?

If not ask those who were (hint - there are few on this forum) in Kosovo and were observant who actually rules there - and no it not EU, NATO or any kind of government, it is clan leaders heavily involved in narco-trafficking. Same narco-trafficking supplied KLA, insurgency in Macedonia and southern Serbia. Same narco-trafficking brings shitloads of heroine to Euro market. EU and NATO are unwilling to crack on that as it would bring insurgency again and then whole "humanitarian intervention" bull falls apart.

 

Bonus question, who is David Hicks and where did he spend 1998/99?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your judgment is based on believe that “If Russia behave itself according to West demands, it would prosper”. The practice show us it is not plausable. There is no way Russia might be more obedient then it was in Yeltsin years – and what was results? I am not trying to convince you, just showing you popular opinion in Russia now.

And regarding this numerous mentioning of “German foreign policy playbook of the 1930s” - it is pointless IMHO: Austria and Germany historically were parts of two separate empires, while Russia and Ukraine are historically part of one state. So it is more like Germany reunification in 1990th.

 

I'd make a claim that the result of Russias GDP now vs. Yeltsin has not very much to do with Putins vs Yeltsin or for the matter being pro-west vs anti-west. I'd say that whoever semi-competent leader who would of been chosen by Yeltsin instead of Putin at a time, when he stepped down would gotten similar growth result. How is that logical would you ask? Well just look at the charts below.

 

The first chart is Russias GDP vs. Oil price

 

6a01310f54565d970c017c325d2c8b970b.png

 

As you can see, Russias GDP follows very closely oil price. Meaning that if price went up, Russias GDP would also go up.

Now just take a look at the longer term oil price chart:

 

 

If you just compare the Yeltsin period of 1991 to 2000 vs Putin 2000+ its quite obvious that essentially the

first is very flat ant the second one just grows very fast.

Has the oil price growth anything to do with Putin? Well I dont think so.

 

So in essence Putin was just lucky he got into office, when he did. Because of oil prices economy started to grow and people

in Russia started to believe everything he touches is gold.

 

As it happens to be Putin believes in the glorification of the "golen era" of USSR when its was Russia vs West. I'm sure that if he would of had some different views, it would of been poplar with the people as well.

Edited by carrierlost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it was not Putin who drive oil prices up (probably it was US administration BTW, of their own business interests) – but it was Putin & Co who stopped all oil and gas income from falling right into the hands of oligarchs as it was initially. There is still a lot of corruption, but at least significant part of money is put into good use and benefit all population, not just few.

General public mood here in Russia is something like this: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=694421507267367&set=a.649525981756920.1073741826.100000985717895&type=1 (“Russia is declared Europe’s worst country for gay people – I am proud of my country”) and seems like resemble some opinions in US in 1960th-1980th

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iYY2FQHFwE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iYY2FQHFwE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTR82, nice vehicle. It strikes me we have been spending billions not developing FRES, when we could have bought some of those. Which on the face of it would not be any worse than the lamentable Saxon...

 

BTR-82 is obsolete in terms of protection and configuration (lack of ramp). The positive part is that price is quite low (development covered mostly in Soviet times and large production).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile Kiev is still burning: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26841732

"Late on Monday evening, an argument in Kiev's centre between a member of the group and another self-defence unit reportedly led to shots being fired. Three people, including a deputy mayor of Kiev, were injured."

 

BTW one of the injured in the incident (self-defence activist as young as 17) is very badly injured :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...