Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
scorza said:
So in other words, "they brought it on themselves"? :D
Click to expand...

A European Union investigation concluded that Georgia had started the "unjustified" war, but it was a "mere culmination of series of provocations". It also concluded that Russia would had the right to intervene in case of an attack on the Russian peacekeepers, but that the further Russian advance into the "Georgia proper" had been disproportionate. Commission found that all parties involved in the conflict had acted in violation of international law.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Russia–Georgia_war

We have already been through this and already proved that Russia is not at fault for intervening. Buy you don't care for facts do you ;)
 
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116810/putin-declares-war-ukraine-why-and-what-next

Decent article on the mindset of Putin and his allies. Also may explain how I've been able to pretty accurately predict Russia's actions over the last few days:

All you really need to do to seem clairvoyant about (Russia) is to be an utter pessimist. Will Vladimir Putin allow the ostensibly liberal Dmitry Medvedev to have a second term? Not a chance. There are protests in the streets of Moscow. Will Putin crackdown? Yup. There's rumbling in the Crimea, will Putin take advantage and take the Crimean peninsula? You betcha. And you know why being a pessimist is the best way to predict outcomes in Russia? Because Putin and those around him are, fundamentally, terminal pessimists. They truly believe that there is an American conspiracy afoot to topple Putin, that Russian liberals are traitors corrupted by and loyal to the West, they truly believe that, should free and fair elections be held in Russia, their countrymen would elect bloodthirsty fascists, rather than democratic liberals
Click to expand...

Rather worringly:

Russia's next target is eastern Ukraine. Because pessimism conquers all, don't bet that Putin is going to stop once he wrests Crimea from Kiev's orbit. Eastern, Russian-speaking Ukraine—and all its heavy industry—is looking pretty good right now.
Click to expand...
 
Crippled Potato said:
I'm struggling to understand these news articles on "Russia approves troops for Ukraine." they don't explain things properly. Are they planning sending troops across the whole of Ukraine? Or just troops to Crimea? And if so why did Putin need "approval" to send troops after he's already sent them :confused:
Click to expand...

He needs approval to continue the façade that Russia is a democratic country rather than a dictatorship. Being approved to the use of troops on Ukraine is pretty self explanatory, this isn't just an attack on Crimea it is an attack on the entire sovereign country of Ukraine.
 
Crippled Potato said:
I'm struggling to understand these news articles on "Russia approves troops for Ukraine." they don't explain things properly. Are they planning sending troops across the whole of Ukraine? Or just troops to Crimea? And if so why did Putin need "approval" to send troops after he's already sent them :confused:
Click to expand...

Troops sent before approval fall under agreement of black sea fleet between Russia and Ukraine (or at least so Kremlin claims, as Ukraine quite obviously treats it as invasion).

The vote that russian parliament just passed is (my speculation here) to allow russian troops on the western border invade Ukraine.
 
ubersonic said:
Because this isn't something that's just exploded overnight it's been a long time brewing. Originally we (those of us following the situation) expected that Ukraine would go ahead with EU membership and that Crimea would rebel in response bringing Russia into it.
Click to expand...
Since 2008? (when she predicted it) Really?
 
Crippled Potato said:
I'm struggling to understand these news articles on "Russia approves troops for Ukraine." they don't explain things properly. Are they planning sending troops across the whole of Ukraine? Or just troops to Crimea? And if so why did Putin need "approval" to send troops after he's already sent them :confused:
Click to expand...

Nobody knows what military action will take place if any, Crimea is the focus point for obvious reason though.

Why did Putin ask for approval for something he's already done, constitutional reasons if any. Don't be confused, that's just Putin, he does what the hell he wants, do you not realise how far from a democracy Russia is?
 
qqg3 said:
Nobody knows what military action will take place if any, Crimea is the focus point for obvious reason though.

Why did Putin ask for approval for something he's already done, constitutional reasons if any. Don't be confused, that's just Putin, he does what the hell he wants, do you not realise how far from a democracy Russia is?
Click to expand...
He asked the constitution for permission to send the military into Ukraine which is different (apparently.) I don't know the laws behind the Russian/Crimea relationship, I doubt anyone here does really, but from what I've heard it's got links to Russia which gives permission for Russian forces to operate on its territory under request by the Crimea leadership which is independent from Ukraine to some degree.

Whether that's true or not, I don't know, if someone genuinely does know I'd be interested to find out (not the usual, oh it's Putin's Russia, they've made it up)
 
Does anyone else find it ironic that Russia is always the first country telling everyone else to back off and stay out, yet they couldn't wait to get stuck into the Ukraine crisis.
 
eggyoke said:
He asked the constitution for permission to send the military into Ukraine which is different (apparently.) I don't know the laws behind the Russian/Crimea relationship, I doubt anyone here does really, but from what I've heard it's got links to Russia which gives permission for Russian forces to operate on its territory under request by the Crimea leadership which is independent from Ukraine to some degree.

Whether that's true or not, I don't know, if someone genuinely does know I'd be interested to find out (not the usual, oh it's Putin's Russia, they've made it up)
Click to expand...

There are Russian bases all over Ukraine, including Crimea... Russian forces are allowed to move tanks around the bases or even move them in from Russia into those bases in Ukraine.

Although, boots on the ground like near buildings... That is taking it too far and is not in the agreement, hence why they wore no insignia.
 
Brookert said:
Does anyone else find it ironic that Russia is always the first country telling everyone else to back off and stay out, yet they couldn't wait to get stuck into the Ukraine crisis.
Click to expand...

The main difference is Russia are keeping peace in the countries on their own doorstep, whereas we travel half way around the world to stir up ****.

If Russia had control of the worlds media and institutions like the UN we'd all be being told it's for humanitarian reasons anyway, much like our excursions.
 
mmj_uk said:
The main difference is Russia are keeping peace in the countries on their own doorstep, whereas we travel half way around the world to stir up ****.

If Russia had control of the worlds media and institutions like the UN we'd all be being told it's for humanitarian reasons anyway, much like our excursions.
Click to expand...

The UN is controlling the world's media and institutions? With the help of the Illuminati, perhaps?
 
The real question is how far will Putin go? Annex the russian speaking/settled east/southeast yes, but how about the western ukrainian speaking part? Kiev? There will be a lot of opposition to russian troops there.

At the end of the day Russia holds all the economic cards especially with its gas pipeline, the EU won't do anything militarily and Obama is non-interventionist, and he won't go up directly against Russian troops anyhow. Its proxy wars around the world instead.

Can the EU bail out western Ukraine economically? If not then western Ukraine will fall under Putin's influence whether it likes it or not.
 
m4rk84 said:
He needs approval to continue the façade that Russia is a democratic country rather than a dictatorship. Being approved to the use of troops on Ukraine is pretty self explanatory, this isn't just an attack on Crimea it is an attack on the entire sovereign country of Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Nerusy said:
Troops sent before approval fall under agreement of black sea fleet between Russia and Ukraine (or at least so Kremlin claims, as Ukraine quite obviously treats it as invasion).

The vote that russian parliament just passed is (my speculation here) to allow russian troops on the western border invade Ukraine.
Click to expand...

qqg3 said:
Nobody knows what military action will take place if any, Crimea is the focus point for obvious reason though.

Why did Putin ask for approval for something he's already done, constitutional reasons if any. Don't be confused, that's just Putin, he does what the hell he wants, do you not realise how far from a democracy Russia is?
Click to expand...
Thanks for explaining, BBC are terrible for basic details on a story.

Brookert said:
Does anyone else find it ironic that Russia is always the first country telling everyone else to back off and stay out, yet they couldn't wait to get stuck into the Ukraine crisis.
Click to expand...
Well not really, because Russia hasn't done anything in terms of an "invasion" as yet. They have assets in Crimea and Russian nationals in Ukraine which they will have an high priority to protect. obviously, the story is a lot more complicated than that but it's vastly different than us wanting to get straight to bombing Syria.
 
Crippled Potato said:
Well not really, because Russia hasn't done anything in terms of an "invasion" as yet. They have assets in Crimea and Russian nationals in Ukraine which they will have an high priority to protect. obviously, the story is a lot more complicated than that but it's vastly different than us wanting to get straight to bombing Syria.
Click to expand...

The Russians in Crimea weren't in danger, they didn't need protection, the Russians simply saw an oppotunity they couldn't pass. As for Syria, there were various opinions and, in the end, the only thing that prevented the West to start bombing, like they did in Lybia, was the democratic process, not Putin.
 
Interesting tweet from ITN's James Mates:

Latvia+Lithuania have invoked NATO art. 4 in response to #crimea NATO now obliged to hold emerg council meeting. Only 4th time in history
Click to expand...

Article 4 is the "all for one and one for all" clause I believe.
 
Putin is a typical oil rich dictator, but Ukraine nationalists have created the split themselves (revoking russian as second state language few days back). Without scenes like this (in Donetzk, Kharkiv not just Crimea!) Putin would have nevere dared to pull such a stunt, now he is "saviour" to Ukrainian Russians
 
scorza said:
Interesting tweet from ITN's James Mates:



Article 4 is the "all for one and one for all" clause I believe.
Click to expand...

The less potent Article 4, which merely invokes consultation among NATO members has been invoked four times

Taken from wikipedia

"Article 5 of the North Atlantic treaty, requiring member states to come to the aid of any member state subject to an armed attack"

Again pulled from wiki
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom