Jump to content
H1nd

Strategic and tactical realities in CMBS

Recommended Posts

 

Well, I've got to hand it to Steve, he's got the counterpoint arguement down pat! ;)   If we were to codify these, this one would go under the "change the subject/divert attention" heading.

 

Nice job bringing up the NATO/US arms Vladimir Tarasov, people bit on it.  However, you forgot to respond to Vanir's excellent post above.  Where did those tanks come from and who could be driving them?  Interested in your response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too many people, unfortunately. You should value being able to filter crappy information as a true blessing ;)

And the knowledge that the voting masses don't as pure mental torture to haunt you in your best moments  ;)

Edited by Kraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw some civilian clothes hanging on a clothelines in a pic from the area.

 

Who can prove, without doubt, that they arent the clothes of a Polish person???

 

~MASTERSTROKE~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I've got to hand it to Steve, he's got the counterpoint arguement down pat! ;)   If we were to codify these, this one would go under the "change the subject/divert attention" heading.

 

Nice job bringing up the NATO/US arms Vladimir Tarasov, people bit on it.  However, you forgot to respond to Vanir's excellent post above.  Where did those tanks come from and who could be driving them?  Interested in your response.

If you think Putin is stupid enough to send 2012 model T-72B3s to Ukraine then you are probably full of it. I must have missed his post I'll respond to it here, As you know eastern Ukraine also has bases right? Where T-72s and T-64s are located at? But you probably think "Putler" will send in tanks to a zone with a huge population that has cameras. It is alright you guys think whatever, I'm planning on going to Donetsk again maybe this time I'll volunteer for other jobs too instead of helping out spreading water and food.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get the point of all this "Prove to me that Russia is involved" yelling. The only people that this needed to be proven to are the people in power in nations with influence across the world. Multiple rounds of sanctions, and the whole free world telling Putin to get out of Ukraine during the Austrailian G20 shows pretty clearly that the powers that were interested in finding out the truth have in fact found it out. At this point Russian denials are only good enough to allow "neutral" nations like China to save face when deciding not to join in on the sanctions train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Says "Ukrainian rebels", not "Russian Armed Forces".

 

 

At the same time it is as consistent with simple delivery of vehicles, as there is no actual specific geolocation, much less independently verified geolocation. The video appears to be filmed from the car registrator.

 

Also, regulational green is the standard colour for essentially all Soviet/post Soviet vehicles.

 

Thus this video does not actually prove direct Russian participation in fighting, it only provides strong (but not legally conclusive) evidence that the rebels indeed did receive equipment from Russia.

 

Back from work late I'm a bit surprised of your recent posts. You have made quite a number of well reasoned and informed posts, which I appreciate. However, a sharp eye can make conclusions for itself apart from legal fictions. While I have not digged into this conflict as others have, I have seen quite the number of movies. I want to remind you of two movies I remember from post downing MH-17 period, which I followed closely because a large number of (Dutch) citizens in a commercial airplane were shot out of the sky. The first movie is of a clearly amateurish ex-delivery driver now turned to local soldier with control over a part of the crash site. He holds up a found teddy bear and makes a cross over it to mourn the (probable) dead child owner of the said teddy bear. Few days later there was a movie of soldiers guarding the trains in Torez, holding the found remains of the MH-17 victims. The soldiers I saw in that movie were professional (very clear for a 'sharp eye')  Professional volunteers? I bet. But they volunteered long before the trains got to Torez and were obviously there on orders from higher up and not on their own initiative. Apart from that I think it was a good thing they were there at that moment and place. Obviously those weren't Mossad, CIA or MI6 agents ;) Considering the geo political events at the time, it was (for me) 100% clear that troops on direct orders from Moscow, equipped by Moscow, were on the scene. 

 

Before that and after that, there have been plenty of movies on sites like liveleak.com, youtube.com, therestoftheinternet.google. Many feature professional (special) non-Ukrainian forces, There are plenty of movies like the one Sgt Joch posted (the large mechanized unit driving around in 'Novorussia') . Those *could* theoretically be very well organized Seperatists armed by Russia (with a part of them being from Russian soil agreed by all parties). Since they aren't fielding any markings, it is unclear what the legal status of those troops is. According to international law they are violent non-state military actors operating in Ukraine. Often such force are called Terrorists, Separatists or Freedom fighters (depending which side one supports). For any critical thinking person it is clear that the forces like the mechanized unit in Sgt Joch's video are orchestrated from Moscow. Whether they are reorganized in deniable formations or structured as when they are housed on Russian soil; it is clear that Russian soldiers are fighting in Ukraine on orders of Moscow. Legalities are important for legal matters, not for simple reality. Russia is fighting a war in Ukraine. 

 

Edited by Lethaface

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a TOW missile.  However it's from a batch that could have gone anywhere from Saudi Arabia, to Turkey, to Italy and beyond.  It's no more a sign of US involvement than finding an RPG-7 is a sign of Russian infiltration.

Actually, you forgot the most logical source... Lebanon. Hezbollah was using them against Israelis not too long ago. Since Hezbollah is a major force fighting in Syria, that's the most logical explanation. Especially since at the time this bit of Russian propaganda was doing the rounds on the Internet the US government was still sitting straight back with thumb firmly up its backside. And even if this was from the US...

In terms of Syria, I'm sorry where are the Syrian government's tanks and attack helicopters coming from?    If you're going to talk about fueling a civil war, Russia was pouring arms in well before the west was offended enough to send what little it has sent.

Don't confuse 'em with reality. It really makes them mad.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there were photographs with serial numbers of those TOW rounds, which allow them to be tracked into US inventory. Would it be helpful if I provide those?

Would reply about Ukraine stuff when I get to my pc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well then.  Someone apparently has been on vacation.

The Russian Army must be a great institution where individuals can, on their own, decide to go on vacation and fight in a foreign country for months at a time. I wonder if they could instead opt to take their vacation in the south of France? After all, Putin sent Le Pen $45,000,000 recently. You know, to fight fascism by funding fascists.

It really doesn't make sense to send them M4s.  We've got a small mountain of Soviet/Russian stuff that we could send and no one would be the wiser.  That said the Russian government did capture a large pile of Bushmaster AR-15s the Georgians had purchased.  Wonder where they all went.

One of them was seen by a "self defense" guy in Crimea. There was a lot of commentary about this at the time.

Oh, and the first MANPADs seen in separatist hands were Polish. Guess who had them? Georgia. Guess who captured a warehouse full of them? Russia.

Ah, but Russia isn't doing anything in Ukraine so I should not start spreading conspiracy theories. Everybody knows that American AR-15s and Polish MANPADs are available at any decent sporting goods store in Russia. Don't even need a license to buy them either, I expect.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think there were photographs with serial numbers of those TOW rounds, which allow them to be tracked into US inventory. Would it be helpful if I provide those?

 

 

Fire away, they're the wrong numbers.  The serial number would tell you were the weapon went maybe, but the NSN and part number which is what gets people all hot and bothered is just the tracking number for ANY TOW missile of that model.  Same number would be on the same type of missile in the USMC, Lebanon, Italy, my basement.  The corresponding screenshot showing its a US military missile is just that, the reference page for what a "NSN 12345whateve" is in the National Stock Number system, not, again showing that particular missile was anything but made in America and given to someone.

 

We've got enough RPG-29s, RPG-7s, and even various ATGMs from various sources.  It'd be like Afghanistan if we were supplying them, we only started sending Stingers because SA-7s weren't doing the job.  There's no reason to ship US military TOWs to Syria if we were to send military aid, and it's readily apparent when we DID send military aid to the Kurds it was largely from these stocks of second hand stolen/borrowed/seized from other sources stocks.

 

It'd be dumb.  Like giving BUKs out to untrained operators dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I have not seen one BTR-82 or T-72B3

Ah, the "I didn't see it so it didn't happen" way of thinking. Well, it's interesting that you've been into the DPR, but your personal observations are not proof of anything. Because there is this:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28961080

Not only Russian tanks in this article, but Russian soldiers! Of course they must have been "lost" together.

And this showing BTR-82 from the strikeforce that went through Marynivka northward to cut behind Ukrainan forces during the August offensive:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NydKpqZ1sIM

Stills from the above:

zilcSK-L0Yo.jpg

LSAdprkFAh8.jpg

cZc153qge5Y.jpg

Or this list of dead from the 17th Guards:

640x765.jpg

Article on the infamous deaths of the 76th Pskov:

http://slon.ru/fast/russia/v-pskove-proshli-zakrytye-pokhorony-mestnykh-desantnikov-1147710.xhtml

Shoigu's visit to Pskov resulted in the 76th Pskov (the one that lost quite a few soldiers and equipment) being awarded the "Order of Suvorov", which is a combat operations award. Weeks later when he was asked why a combat award was given to a combat unit that had not participated in combat (according to him and other Russian officials) since the Soviet Union collapsed, his answer was (I don't have the exact quote handy) "well, they have fought in combat long ago so why not give them an award?". Yeah, I believe that.

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/116661-ukraine-military-vs-russia/?view=findpost&p=1558397

Oh, and this one from the "lightly armed" separatists that took all their stuff from Ukrainian police stations:

BrynsA0CQAEOOrH.jpg

Bry-N74CQAA6Cvj.jpg

This was taken at Slavyansk when it was liberated by Ukraine on July 5th. And this even earlier one in May when separatists were complaining about not having any AT weapons and then they suddenly "found" this truck loaded with RPG-18 at a time when pretty much nobody on the Ukrainian side had one:

YpiZ5_pJ2MA.jpg

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/116661-ukraine-military-vs-russia/page-13?p=1558302#entry1558302

There's *SO MUCH MORE* I could post. But I doubt it would change the discussion any to have some facts put on the table, so I'll just leave it as is.

Im not gonna deny Russian troops there but what I will deny is the amount of Russian troops that America and its allies says to be there.

If they have even ONE unit operating in Ukraine then the Russian government is lying from top to bottom. If they have even ONE unit operating in Ukraine then they are in gross violation of international law. Which is, of course, why Russia refuses to admit they have Russian military forces there.

The spike in Russian forces was during the August counter offensive. Although there seems to be another spike going on now.

Its not fair to Russia, If you compare the lists of things NATO bombed or went to war with you would understand this.

The small difference, of course, it that NATO never lied about it. NATO countries when to the UN and, of course, Russia tried to block any action. Even when genocide was involved. That's because genocide is not something that troubles the minds of the Kremlin.

Its not fair that the people who are there did not get to vote, Just right wings protesting

Wait... I'm confused. You are saying that you are opposed to the "referendum" in Crimea that didn't have a "no" vote and Russian biker and armed thugs beat up anybody who was trying to organize against the referendum? Wow, that is a surprising position to hear from you. Or were you talking about something else?

Because I can show you evidence that America supported the protest in Ukraine.

Of course the US supported the protests in Ukraine. That's because people were sick of being repressed and having their tax money pay for gold toilet seats for the ruling elite. The person most responsible for Maidan is Yanukovych. The second person most responsible for Maidan is Putin. The US only helped people who wanted to be free from oppression help themselves. Which, according to Russian mentality I've seen, is a bad thing. Because repressed people should not seek something better for themselves.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire away, they're the wrong numbers.  The serial number would tell you were the weapon went maybe, but the NSN and part number which is what gets people all hot and bothered is just the tracking number for ANY TOW missile of that model.  Same number would be on the same type of missile in the USMC, Lebanon, Italy, my basement.  The corresponding screenshot showing its a US military missile is just that, the reference page for what a "NSN 12345whateve" is in the National Stock Number system, not, again showing that particular missile was anything but made in America and given to someone.

Yup, though you are once again trying to confuse this discussion with facts. Shame on you :D

 

We've got enough RPG-29s, RPG-7s, and even various ATGMs from various sources.  It'd be like Afghanistan if we were supplying them, we only started sending Stingers because SA-7s weren't doing the job.  There's no reason to ship US military TOWs to Syria if we were to send military aid, and it's readily apparent when we DID send military aid to the Kurds it was largely from these stocks of second hand stolen/borrowed/seized from other sources stocks.

Not to mention arming the Iraqi and Afghan forces predominantly with Soviet type weapons (some were Chinese, some Egyptian, etc.). It's what they are used to, it's what ammo is floating around, it's what the enemy uses, and what else are we going to do with all that captured crap?

I've seen pictures of rebels in Syria using Sturmgewehr-44. They found a container with a few thousand of them. By this logic, the Nazis armed the Syrian rebels :D

 

It'd be dumb.  Like giving BUKs out to untrained operators dumb.

Sure, if that happened. Which of course it didn't. And the Apollo moon landings were done in a sound stage too!

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stuff about MH-17 snipped

I no longer bother to argue about MH-17. There's the most obvious, and therefore most likely, scenario which is supported by plenty of evidence. This is the *only* scenario the West believes in. Then there are the half dozen or so Russian stories which are not supported by the evidence or even by the laws of physics. Someone who wants to believe the least likely, or even downright impossible, scenario is not someone worth having a debate with. No more than it's useful to debate a holocaust denier or someone who believes people are regularly abducted by aliens.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think we are going into offtopic again. While I am all ready and fired up to reply to all those posts made before, I do wonder if we should all show self restraint and avoid the topic all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Pictures - SOF units operating, supply convoys, special purpose equipment. That all has been discussed and is within the boundaries of what most Russian citizens believe to be our involvement in Ukraine. It is within boundaries of what I believe our involvement to be as well. No proof of any masses of greenhorn recruits riding around in battalion formations spanking Ukrainians though, and there will never be unless they actually do it.  

 

@Larger Russian involvement - Every time the Ukrainian's fail, they always have a good scapegoat - the ghost divisions. That memorial stone that is so spread around everywhere, that comes back to my first point. Small scale involvement is undeniable. Ukrainians crying wolf every time they lose is also undeniable. 

 

@T-72B3/BTR-82A - Ukrainian conflict proves a supreme testing ground for those vehicles, so sending them there in limited amounts makes sense to me from testing perspective. It makes a good case for why we haven't seen any more since early-late autumn.

 

@NATO vs Russia in terms of being silent or clear - When you are the world hegemony, you can afford to be vocal about almost anything. When you are not, silence is sometimes the best case scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Pictures - SOF units operating, supply convoys, special purpose equipment. That all has been discussed and is within the boundaries of what most Russian citizens believe to be our involvement in Ukraine. It is within boundaries of what I believe our involvement to be as well. No proof of any masses of greenhorn recruits riding around in battalion formations spanking Ukrainians though, and there will never be unless they actually do it.  

 

@Larger Russian involvement - Every time the Ukrainian's fail, they always have a good scapegoat - the ghost divisions. That memorial stone that is so spread around everywhere, that comes back to my first point. Small scale involvement is undeniable. Ukrainians crying wolf every time they lose is also undeniable. 

 

@T-72B3/BTR-82A - Ukrainian conflict proves a supreme testing ground for those vehicles, so sending them there in limited amounts makes sense to me from testing perspective. It makes a good case for why we haven't seen any more since early-late autumn.

 

@NATO vs Russia in terms of being silent or clear - When you are the world hegemony, you can afford to be vocal about almost anything. When you are not, silence is sometimes the best case scenario.

 

You know nothing John Snow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the US supported the protests in Ukraine. That's because people were sick of being repressed and having their tax money pay for gold toilet seats for the ruling elite. The person most responsible for Maidan is Yanukovych. The second person most responsible for Maidan is Putin. The US only helped people who wanted to be free from oppression help themselves. Which, according to Russian mentality I've seen, is a bad thing. Because repressed people should not seek something better for themselves.

Steve

I thought only children believe in generous US that supports protests and revolutions in various countries over the world just becouse US loves liberty and freedom so much that it wants to share it with all other nations . Now I see that I was wrong. Even some old people belive in these fairtales. Steve, you are from US, right? If so, you live in the country where big brother watching you even more closely now than it was in USSR evil empire or in modern Russia. Did you hear anything about "big data"? US goverment watching all citizens automatically without any adjudgement. US goverment also use tortures against citizens of other countries. I would say that some European countries are much more democratic places to live than modern US in fact. Do you really beilve that such country as US really want to save other nations from some kind of  dictatorship while US slowly transforms into George Orwell's novel itself?

US invades other countries or support protests and revolutions there if US has some real profit from it. Why US won't invade north korea now and won't free poor north korean people from dictatorship? No profit for US to invade there, so they don't care about poor north korean people. Why US supported protests and even revolution in Ukraine? Cause Ukraine is a Russian sattelite. US treats Russia as an opponent and will do everything to make Russia weaker. Taking Ukraine from Russian influence will make Russia weaker. Creating a conflict between Russia and Europe will make both Europe and Russia weaker. US doesn't need nor strong Russia nor strong Europe nor let them to cooperate. The same way US acts in Asia against China or supports various conflicts in middle east. So now Russia and US fighting for Ukraine in fact. Russia supports local rebells and provide them with weapon (sure they wouldn't be able to fight against regular Ukraine army without a weapon) , money and mentorship I suppose. US supports the new Urkanian goverment and provide it with money, political support, mentorship, will lilkely send some weapon to it soon either, and pushing Russia with sanctions of course.

The funny thing here is that Russia called and prosecuted as agressor in this case while US did the same things over the world (US supported Libian rebbels figting against their govermernt for example) and nobody prosecuted US for this simply becouse US is a superpower and can do anything it wants. It just shows that we live in a world of double standards. What the hell US did in Irac or Afganistan or Lybia? All these countries have nothing to do with US in fact. When USSR invanded Afganistan or when Russia has some interests at Ukraine now it have a clear reason for it at least cause these countries are USSR/Russian neighbours so it's a matter of Russian national security either what way these countries following by. The same as US had a valid reason to be furious about Cuba being  USSR satellite and about USSR missiles at Cuba, Russia has a valid reason to be furrious about Urkaine becoming US satellite and by possible US/NATO missiles at Ukraine in the future.

Edited by Rusknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.... Russia supports local rebels and provide them with weapon...

Well, in this case, first Russia created the "local" rebels, then provided them with support and weapons.

The US didn't create the Libyan rebels ( unless you think that the general ill-feeling against the US in the Middle-East just miraculously didn't apply in that case ).

The funny thing here is that Russia called and prosecuted as aggressor in this case while US did the same things over the world (US supported Libyan rebels fighting against their government for example) and nobody prosecuted US for this simply because US is a superpower and can do anything it wants.

Actually the reason nobody prosecuted US is because all the support - mostly enforcement of a no-fly zone - was done under UN resolutions. There was no need for strenuous denials that the support was occurring.

Not only did everyone know it was happening, they all agreed that it should happen.

It's also strange that both in the case of Libya and Ukraine, it seems to be inconceivable to you that people might be protesting government corruption and repression just because they're sick and tired of corruption and repression.

There's no need for US involvement, because people just naturally don't like corruption and repression ( or being shot - which is a common theme in both cases - it was only after the government starting shooting protesters that things escalated ).

...Creating a conflict between Russia and Europe will make both Europe and Russia weaker...

A point that may be true, but it seems to have escaped Putin - since he's "providing them with weapons" ( according to you ) and/or "testing his T72B3/BTR-82A's" ( according to BTR ) - thus keeping a conflict going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US invades other countries or support protests and revolutions there if US has some real profit from it. Why US won't invade north korea now and won't free poor north korean people from dictatorship? No profit for US to invade there, so they don't care about poor north korean people. Why US supported protests and even revolution in Ukraine? Cause Ukraine is a Russian sattelite. US treats Russia as an opponent and will do everything to make Russia weaker. Taking Ukraine from Russian influence will make Russia weaker. Creating a conflict between Russia and Europe will make both Europe and Russia weaker. US doesn't need nor strong Russia nor strong Europe nor let them to cooperate. The same way US acts in Asia against China or supports various conflicts in middle east. So now Russia and US fighting for Ukraine in fact. Russia supports local rebells and provide them with weapon (sure they wouldn't be able to fight against regular Ukraine army without a weapon) , money and mentorship I suppose. US supports the new Urkanian goverment and provide it with money, political support, mentorship, will lilkely send some weapon to it soon either, and pushing Russia with sanctions of course.

 

The US wont do anything about North Korea because they have the capability to launch functioning nuclear weapons that would certainly make large holes in South Korea, not because they dont care. Its best to save money and let them burn out.

 

 

The funny thing here is that Russia called and prosecuted as agressor in this case while US did the same things over the world (US supported Libian rebbels figting against their govermernt for example) and nobody prosecuted US for this simply becouse US is a superpower and can do anything it wants. It just shows that we live in a world of double standards. What the hell US did in Irac or Afganistan or Lybia? All these countries have nothing to do with US in fact. When USSR invanded Afganistan or when Russia has some interests at Ukraine now it have a clear reason for it at least cause these countries are USSR/Russian neighbours so it's a matter of Russian national security either what way these countries following by. The same as US had a valid reason to be furious about Cuba being  USSR satellite and about USSR missiles at Cuba, Russia has a valid reason to be furrious about Urkaine becoming US satellite and by possible US/NATO missiles at Ukraine in the future.

 

I can see the strategic sense of Russia not wanting Ukraine to become a NATO country on its border, however I disagree the way they are pursuing their strategy. Creating local militias and such can only lead to uncontrollable unlawful killings - as we have seen. They should of just done the same as in Crimea, occupied the donbass and said right this is another country now - creating the buffer zone (buffer country) they desire and avoiding a prolonged conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't say russian current strategy is good. Frankly speaking if I were a president of Russia I don't know what decision I would make in case of Ukraine since all decisions look as no-win decisions for Russia. Just let Ukraine go to west and become a part of EU and NATO? it would be a great strategical fail for Russia irrespective of whether Russia see itself as some local empire or as a democratic state. NATO and US are not friends of Russia anyway and won't be its friends untill Russia won't become their satellite while Russia wants to stay independent. Support rebbels there preventing Ukraine becoming a EU and NATO member? - it costs Russia a lot already politically and economically so it's not a perfect decision either.

What I say here is that the way Russia choosen by supproting rebels is not something new. US did the same thing in other countries supporting rebbels when they wanted to change the goverment of these countries to more loyal for US or just creat a mess there. US actually supported rebbels and revolution in Ukrain first initiating all this mess. Then Russia had to react by supporting the opposite force.

When you speak about people protesting against corruption and so, I do agree that it's a valid point to protets but it still not a valid reason for US to come there and creat a mess just to have a mess and nothing else. Lybia wasn't a democratic state for sure, but people there actually had a better life before US and NATO decided that Lybia is not democratic enough. What's the result? A lot of people killed and a complete mess and anarchy there now. The same thing happend with Irac already. US came there and created a complete mess as a result. Looking at this I am comming to an idea that creating a mess all other world making other countries weaker by stimulating some local conflicts and civil wars there is a real strategy of US in fact to stay the only big, stable and powerfull country in the world of chaos.

Edited by Rusknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just shows that we live in a world of double standards.

 

How is that any different than what has gone on in 10,000 years of "civilized" humanity?

 

We all know how the game is played, US, EU and Russia all have competing interests in Ukraine, but there are rules under which international diplomacy is conducted. The West supported the "Orange Revolution" in 2004  because it suited its interest. However, when Yanukovych was elected in 2010, you did not see NATO invading Western Ukraine, we just waited to see what would happen. Yanukovych turned out to be a very inept politician which is what caused his ultimate downfall. Russia could have chosen to continue playing by the rules, using Gas, money and trade to influence Ukrainian politics, instead it went for a military solution.

 

Russia is free to do what it wants, it can choose to support rebels in East Ukraine, it can choose to annex Crimea, but the inverse is that the US/EU are free to choose how they react.

Edited by Sgt Joch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't say russian current strategy is good. Frankly speaking if I were a president of Russia I don't know what decision I would make in case of Ukraine since all decisions look as no-win decisions for Russia. Just let Ukaine go to west and become a part of EU and NATO? it would be a great strategical fail for Russia irrespective of whether Russia see itself as some local empire or as a democratic state - NATO and US are not friends of Russia anyway and won't be its friends anyway. Support rebbels there preventing Ukraine becoming a EU and NATO member? - it costs Russia a lot already politically and economically so it's not e perfect decision either.

What I say here is that the way Russia choosen by supproting rebels is not something new. US did the same thing in other countries supporting rebbels when they wanted to change the goverment of these countries to more loyal for US or just creat a mess there. US actually supported rebbels and revolution in Ukrain first initiating all this mess. Then Russia had to react by supporting the opposite force.

When you speak about people protesting against corruption and so, I do agree that it's a valid point to protets but it still not a valid reason for US to come there and creat a mess just to have a mess and nothing else. Lybia wasn't a democratic state for sure, but people there actually had a better life before US and NATO decided that Lybia is not democratic enough. What's the result? A lot of people killed and a complete mess and anarchy there now. The same thing happend with Irac already. US came there and created a complete mess as a result. Looking at this I come to an idea that creating a mess all other world making other countries weaker is a real aim of US in fact.

For not being friends we certainly invested a fair amount early on under Yeltsin. I don't think you have a clear perception of how Russia is viewed in the west. A democratic govt participating as an economic partner is actually highly desirable. What isn't acceptable is a rogue state that feels it can militarily intervene unilaterally against it's neighbors who are also part of that economic community. There was actually a significant out pouring of excitement and hope right from the beginning of Glasnost that we had entered a new period where the major powers were all working in partnership to reduce the risks of war and establish a sense that we would all function based upon an agreed set of standards. That the major powers would act jointly to reduce tensions, isolate and undermine dictatorships and generally improve the overall condition of humanity after a very long counter productive Cold War. From our view Putin has made a turn to the past, a past no one in the west has any interest in living through again. To us he represents all of the worst of failed policies of the USSR. Policies that created misery for most of Eastern Europe (how many of the former soviet allies support Putin'). We do not view the current path charted by Russian leadership as productive for anyone, least of all Russia. Putin is condemning the Russian people to another generation lost pursuing objectives that simply are no longer achievable or relevant in the 21st century. Hell if Russia had managed to stay on course from where things originally were going it might have joined NATO itself. NATO does not have to be an "anti Russia" alliance. Hell until the events of the past year NATO was foundering as a security alliance without a clear purpose.

The international space station is just one example of where people here hoped things were going, we were jointly doing space exploration with Russia. Now we are working to create our own capabilities again independent of Russia, such a waste.

As to Iraq, yeah I'd have to agree the US made a major mess. I don't think that is so much based on a strategy to make people weak so much as a leadership that didn't want to face facts and had an agenda with huge blinders on. In a sense not much different than current Russian policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is that any different than what has gone on in 10,000 years of "civilized" humanity?

 

We all know how the game is played, US, EU and Russia all have competing interests in Ukraine, but there are rules under which international diplomacy is conducted. The West supported the "Orange Revolution" in 2004  because it suited its interest. However, when Yanukovych was elected in 2010, you did not see NATO invading Western Ukraine, we just waited to see what would happen. Yanukovych turned out to be a very inept politician which is what caused his ultimate downfall. Russia could have chosen to continue playing by the rules, using Gas, money and trade to influence Ukrainian politics, instead it went for a military solution.

 

Russia is free to do what it wants, it can choose to support rebels in East Ukraine, it can choose to annex Crimea, but the inverse is that the US/EU are free to choose how they react.

 

This is true.

 

I would disagree Rusknight that the west wants Russia to become its satellite - just look at the time period of 1991 - 2011, there is twenty years of my lifetime where the west and Russia have both have positive and productive relations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...