COUP IN KYIV?

@Setanta,

Quote:

The Black Sea fleet is based there for historical reasons, not because it's a good place for such a base.

Which would explain why the Russians have not till now spent hardly any money on it, to the point that it is almost combat worthless now until and unless the russians get some new ships (which they claim are coming) , The Ukrainian fleet is in even worse shape, and they cant even claim to be doing anything about it because they dont have resources.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Condy Rice has an interesting insight. She says it's primarily because Obama "reset" our relationship with Putin - ostensibly erasing the sanctions set by the Bush administration as a result of Putin's move into Georgia.

3 Replies

@Lash,

That's just political point scoring. Bush didn't stop Putin attacking Georgia. This happened because Putin's attempt to influence all of Ukraine failed, and he's just trying to keep hold of those bits he still can influence. Crimea was the low hanging fruit, a Russian majority and a Russian military base. What's important is he stops there or tries to get parts of Eastern Ukraine as well.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Regardless, Russia blocked the Ukraine Navy ships from leaving Crimea.

Vladimir Putin scuttles his own navy warship in Black Sea to BLOCK Ukrainian vessels from leaving port as Crimeans face referendum on whether to join Russia

Quote:

The Russian Black Sea fleet has blockaded Ukrainian warships by scuttling an anti-submarine ship at the entrance to their port in Crimea.

Russian sailors scuttled the decommissioned warship Ochakov at the entrance to Donuzlav Bay, the location of Ukraine's Southern Naval Headquarters in the west of the peninsula.

It came as Crimea's parliament voted unanimously in favour of a snap referendum to decide whether the region should join the Russian Federation.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

Regardless of what? Are you actually attempting to say that that has any relevance to the issue of the suitability of Sebastopol as a naval base?

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Regardless, Russia blocked the Ukraine Navy ships from leaving Crimea.

Yes, from Sebastopol, which is THE main basis. (The others, much smaller, are located in Novoozerne, Yevpatoria, and Odessa.)

1 Reply

@Lash,

I suppose you have forgotten Bush's crush on Putin, gazing into his eyes seeing he the windows of his soul, inviting him to his ranch for talks?

Mr. Bush Gets Another Look Into Mr. Putin’s Eyes

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

If you go take a look at a map of Donuzlav Lake, it looks to be a better situation than Sebastopol. I don't, of course, know about the depth of the anchorage, nor the dredging requirements from silt.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

No, just saying that Ukraine has it west naval base in Crimea and Russia managed to block their warships from going into the black sea just by sinking a ship.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Actually, Sevastopol is the home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and to the smaller part of the Ukrainian Naval Forces.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Germany keeps its eye on east Ukraine

Quote:

The EU's foreign ministers have enacted phase two of Russian sanctions. They hope phase three is never needed. To ensure that, Germany wants observers in east Ukraine now - and not next week or the week after.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foofie wrote:
Also, stop bellyaching about what Europe cannot deal with.

Who are you to tell me what I have to do or not to do? Especially on this thread, where you didn't add anything substantially.
Besides that: where have I've bellyaching here?

In my opinion, your concerns about Russia using a democratic referendum, considering no democratic referendum was used to give Crimea to the Ukraine in the 20th century, gives me the impression of begrudging Russia the right to correct a situation that only took place when Crimea was under the Soviet Union, and therefore it might not have mattered if it was part of the Ukraine, or not. Today Crimea's identity is quite important, and Russia is just using a democratic referendum to prove that over 90% of Crimeans want to be part of Russia. Otherwise, it is the Ukraine that has the "Iron Curtain."

To answer your question, as to who I am to comment on my opinion of your bellyaching, whether I am correct or not, is silly. But, to answer your question, I am Foofie sitting atop a very high horse. Many people on this forum, in my opinion, treat you with kid gloves. I guess I am not impressed with your academic credentials, your prior professional status, or your ancestral free farmers. Welcome to the world of non-pandering.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Better minds than Foofie know such.

That's not saying much.

Do I discern a sense of humour in your usual serious repartee?

0 Replies

@Foofie,

A sheynem dank!

2 Replies

@revelette2,

You must mistake my agreement of Condi Rice's assessment and Bush's sanctions to be some blanket approval of everything Bush ever did or said?

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

A sheynem dank!

I have no idea what you are saying?

1 Reply

@Foofie,

"Thank you so much"

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Quote:

begrudging Russia the right to correct a situation that only took place when Crimea was under the Soviet Union, and therefore it might not have mattered if it was part of the Ukraine, or not. Today Crimea's identity is quite important, and Russia is just using a democratic referendum to prove that over 90% of Crimeans want to be part of Russia. Otherwise, it is the Ukraine that has the "Iron Curtain."

The argument goes that the negotiations and agreements reached upon the death of the Soviet Union was Russia's one and only chance to seek the return of Crimea, that once Russia signed on to a set of lines it must forever hold its peace.

1 Reply

@Lash,

I wonder why you provided the link to Condi's assessment if you didn't see some merit in it or provided a clue that you didn't see any merit in it.

In any case, in what ways did Obama reset the sanctions which were put in place by EU and the US and how did those appeasements encourage Putin to send his troops into Ukraine? Specifics.

I believe both this administration and the last is pretty much handling both the Georgia situation and now Crimea in the same way.

It's like Gates said, Georgia happened on Bush's watch and no one accused Bush of appeasement though they could have with his expressions of love and all. The Bush administration was cozying up to Putin in hopes of getting the nuclear shield thing through without hassle from Russia prior to the Georgian invasion by Russia.

3 Replies

@revelette2,

Quote:

It's like Gates said, Georgia happened on Bush's watch and no one accused Bush of appeasement though they could have with his expressions of love and all. The Bush administration was cozying up to Putin in hopes of getting the nuclear shield thing through without hassle from Russia prior to the Georgian invasion by Russia.

Bush had a record of being vigorous in his use of hard power, Obama has a record of being critical of the use of hard power and letting others dictate actions. Nobody could say that Bush was an appeaser with a straight face, but a lot of people think Obama is, thus the double standard.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know