31
   

COUP IN KYIV?

 
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 05:36 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Personally, I don't think Obama will even bark very loud when the Russian tanks roll in.


Meanwhile back in the real world.



Quote:
The prospect of Russian tanks rolling towards Kiev is extremely unlikely, but there are ways, especially in the Crimean peninsula in the south of the country, in which Russia could justify a military presence in its pro-European neighbour.

According to Sir Andrew Wood, an associate fellow at Chatham House and a former British ambassador to Russia, ways to justify a military presence in the east of the country could be justified.

"The most probable form of direct Russian interference would be in relation to Crimea where they have substantial forces and substantial intelligence, and where they have distributed Russian passports," he told Channel 4 News.

"They could be claiming to protect Russian citizens as they did in Ossetia and Abkhazia."

"Their ability to stir up internal unrest is proportionally relatively high. They could stir up unrest and then send in people as protection."



They could argue that it was not part of the historic Ukraine. It was something that Khrushchev gave away whilst he was drunk or something. There are people in Russia that would buy that sort of argument.
Sir Andrew Wood, former British ambassador to Russia

His comments chime with a statement from Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, who said on Monday that there is a "real threat to our interests and the lives of our citizens". He said the uprising in Kiev was an "armed mutiny" and that foreign support for it is an "aberration".

However, Sir Andrew said that, though Russia appears to be "extremely angry" at the events in Ukraine, it would not necessarily be "sensible" to stir up trouble in the east.

He did say, though, that the Crimea region of the country, which traditionally has the closest affiliation with Russia, is a "particular issue".

Sevastapol, on the Crimean peninsula, remains a base for the Russian navy and the population is majority Russian.

In the Crimean city of Kerch on Saturday, pro-Russian demonstrators clashed violently with Maidan protesters

Russia also said on Monday that the concerns of MPs in the Crimean peninsula, as well as the east and south of the country, must be listened to.

Sir Andrew said: "They could argue that it was not part of the historic Ukraine. It was something that Khrushchev gave away whilst he was drunk or something. There are people in Russia that would buy that sort of argument."

One possible Russian reaction would be through economic means – pushing up the price of gas, or halting the movement of European goods across the Ukrainian border.

On Monday Eduard Stavytsky, Ukraine’s acting energy minister, said he hoped the price the country pays for Russian gas would not change. Russia lowered the price that Ukraine pays for gas at the end of December as a part of the deal that saw ousted President Viktor Yanukovych walk away from closer ties with the EU.

Such economic measures would be unlikely to convince Ukrainian people to change their minds, argues Sir Andrew.

"There is an urge within Ukraine to form a more accountable law-based form of government and not to follow the Russian model which is further down the road to the authoritarian system," he said.

Indeed, Sir Andrew argues that it is this strength of feeling amongst the majority of Ukrainian people that Russia has consistently misjudged.

He points out that Russia's record in the Ukraine is "not endearing" since the annexation of the western Ukrainian territories in 1939.

"Russia has got it wrong in judging what it was that Ukrainians wanted, in judging their degree of support, in judging the degree to which Yanukovych could get on top through indirect or implied use of force," he said.

But, Sir Andrew argues, it is likely that Russia will do "the most sensible thing" – "say very little about it apart from that they want stability, and see how things work out over the next days and weeks."


http://www.channel4.com/news/ukraine-russia-european-union-military-intervention-crimea

Quote:
Ambassador: 'I apologise to the people of Ukraine'

Volodymyr Khandogiy, Ukraine's ambassador to the UK, tells Jonathan Rugman that the deaths in the streets over the last few days would not have happened without President Yanukovych's blessing.

Follow link for video.
http://www.channel4.com/news/ambassador-i-apologise-to-the-people-of-ukraine

Quote:
'British supporting Ukraine's neo fascist groups' - video

Sergei Markov, director of the Institute for Political Studies in Moscow, tells Channel 4 News that "geopolitical games" are being played in Ukraine and "we are disappointed by western attitudes".


Follow link for video. Sergei Malkov has Putin's ear. In the video he talks of Russian military action only if Russia is attacked, or Russians are attacked inside Ukraine. He does however, say that Yanukovych would not be welcome in Russia.
http://www.channel4.com/news/russia-ukraine-kiev-legitimacy-moscow-sergei-markov-maidan
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 05:38 pm
@izzythepush,
I'm sure that was your considered opinion when friction developed between Russia and Georgia.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 05:41 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
I haven't a clue what the Ukraine trouble is all about, I only know that troops are shooting at people.
I keep meaning to google and read up on it but in the meantime perhaps A2K can explain in just a couple of sentences-
Why don't the people like their Kiev government, and do all the people feel the same way or are the rebels just a minority?

The Ukrainian people are fairly evenly split between favoring the East and West.

This has relatively little to do with the views of the Ukrainian people however. It's a straight-up struggle between Washington and Moscow, and neither side cares all that much about the interests of the Ukrainians.


Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Whose side are A2Kers on?

The trend seems to be blind acceptance of Western propaganda. There are a few dissenters however.

I for one will be happy if Ukraine manages to tell both Washington and Moscow to go to hell (though I hold little hope that it will happen).
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 05:41 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
The Wests nearly universal approval of this assault on democracy will not end well.

I'm not sure the approval is nearly universal in the West.

If you recall the "F*** the EU" comment that American diplomats got caught uttering a few weeks ago, it seems clear that the EU was not on board with the US' plans for an outright coup in Ukraine.

But now that we've actually engineered the coup, I suspect the EU feels they have no choice but to ride the tiger along with us.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 06:30 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
At least I have an opinion. You have to watch Fox News to be told how to think, and instead of looking at the issue focus on how it affects the Obama presidency.

This is about Kiev, and then along you come rattling on about Obama like the myopic little partisan you are. Not wishing to observe things, or even consider whether or not Western intervention would even be a good thing, just that non-interference can only mean weakness. That's the sort of monochromatic thinking that you get when you watch Fox News.

There are similarities with Georgia in that Nagorno-Karabakh, like Crimea, is very much pro Russian. If Ukraine tries to use military measures to secure its grip on Crimea, like Georgia did with Nagorno-Karabakh, Russia will invade, (the Crimea at least,) and it will be very hard for the West to support intervention when the Crimeans are throwing flowers at Russian tanks.

Btw, if you read my post you'll notice most of it is quoted. It's not my opinion it's the opinion of Sir Andrew Wood, an associate fellow at Chatham House and a former British ambassador to Russia. I'll take his opinion over that of the gobshites at Fox News any day.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 24 Feb, 2014 07:16 pm
@izzythepush,
Izzy: not my opinion it's the opinion of Sir Andrew Wood, an associate fellow at Chatham House and a former British ambassador to Russia.
------

Did he support Blair in his war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 12:02 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
But now that we've actually engineered the coup, I suspect the EU feels they have no choice but to ride the tiger along with us.

I have been super busy of late so keeping up is a challenge, but you had better be wrong about that. Besides, after what we did to the Iraqis in 1991 could the Ukrainians actually be stupid enough to take any promises of support for rebelion from America seriously? How about after Syria 2011?
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 12:41 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
I have been super busy of late so keeping up is a challenge, but you had better be wrong about that. Besides, after what we did to the Iraqis in 1991 could the Ukrainians actually be stupid enough to take any promises of support for rebelion from America seriously? How about after Syria 2011?

Have you listened to that recording from a couple weeks ago where the American diplomat was caught saying "F**k the EU"?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26079957
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 12:55 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

At least I have an opinion.

Btw, if you read my post you'll notice most of it is quoted. It's not my opinion it's the opinion of Sir Andrew Wood, an associate fellow at Chatham House and a former British ambassador to Russia.


You know what they say about opinions.

Presumably, your comment "Meanwhile back in the real world." had its origins in your mind rather than Sir Andrew's, and so you don't get to dodge the mantle of stupidity earned by suggesting that a Russian invasion of the Ukraine is a fantasy.

This (thread) is about the situation in the Ukraine and what might happen next. Clearly any and all reasoned discussion must consider how Russia will react, and it would be foolish to discuss such a reaction without also discussing how the West (and particularly the US) will respond to Russian actions.

Your view is quite narrow thanks to your strong anti-American bias. It doesn't require militaries to bump chests with Putin on this matter, but if it's absolutely clear that a military response will never be forthcoming, a bare-chested Putin on horseback will quite easily swat away all US protestations.

If Obama was incapable of responding to a minor despot's flaunting of his high dudgeon and red lines, why would we expect a truly muscular strongman like Putin to give a second thought to warnings coming from DC?

It is quite clear that a Russian invasion of the Ukraine will invoke nothing more than a tut-tut from the US. How Europe responds is less certain, although, personally, I doubt that the Get-Along Gang of the EU has the stomach for direct confrontation with Putin.

Your blather about the Crimea is just that.

The Soviets salted their holdings with Russian settlers for an advantage. It's unlikely that they did so as to justify invasions to protect these settlers, but, never-the-less, the strategy has served Putin well. That a country like the Ukraine has a given region populated by ersatz Ukrainians is hardly a reason for a Russian invasion, and if the tables were turned and a Western power was trying such a blatant ploy you would be squealing like a stuck pig.

There is no justification for Russia to invade the Ukraine, any more than there was for it to invade Georgia. Sure, if there was a Ukrainian effort to rid their country of anyone with a Russian heritage we might all be calling for intervention by the rest of the world (How Rwanda influences the Clinton legacy), but there is absolutely no indication that this is or will transpire.

As Set has noted, now that the Olympics are over Putin gets to go full throttle as respects KIEV (sorry, but this Kyiv spelling is just pretentious crap), and how the West will respond is very much a significant aspect of the overall discussion.

Clearly, you are entitled to your own opinion on this matter, but it sure seems that your opinion is influenced by the notion that Russia has some sort of manifest claim on this region.

Gosh, can izzy be one of those Leftist apologists for Soviet imperialism?
Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 01:57 am
From France24 News Channel......


"Viktor Yanukovich clearly felt he had something to hide when he fled Kiev. Numerous documents that he attempted to destroy have been found at his residences – and even at first glance, there is plenty of incriminating evidence.


http://scd.france24.com/en/files/element_multimedia/image/Documents-Palace.jpg


As people roam the park surrounding one of the guest houses on the sprawling grounds of Viktor Yanukovich's estate, inside the house a small team of volunteers is working day and night to save thousands of documents found dumped in a lake nearby. Most relate to financial transactions.

“Not as much things were burned because we think they had no time to burn it, and that's why they put it into the water,” said Inna Brozylo, of the Chesno anti-corruption project. “[We] think maybe the most important agreements between different companies were burned.”

Documents are also spread around the house. For now, it's not about analysing their content but about physically preserving them.

“Here we save the folders that are already worked by us. Every wet paper, we cover it with two new ones,” Brozylo said......."


Video clip.....( 30 second unavoidable advert at beginning)
http://www.france24.com/en/20140225-destroyed-documents-yanukovich-palace-corruption/
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:02 am
@Lordyaswas,
Super, but getting rid of a corrupt leader must be done under the orders set by the Constitution. Was it here?
Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:08 am
@hawkeye10,
Do you have a constitution in a dictatorship, hawkeye?

From the majority of accounts, that is what the country had effectively become.

Question back to you now....

Why would he be burning financial papers, and dumping many more in a lake? We're not talking national security here, we appear to be talking about billions of dollars/euros of naked embezzlement.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:30 am
I shouldn't be surprised, but i admit that i was at first surprised to see some of these jokers attempting to make this about Obama, and about the U.S. versus Russia. It's about a President run amok, cronyism, corruption and that Presient's unilateral decision to break off negotiations with EU prepresentatives, depsite the will of the Ukrainian people. Members of Yanukovych's own party voted for his ouster. Not every thing is about the U.S. In fact, the U.S. has almost nothing to do with this. This is not between Moscow and Washington. It's between Brussels and Moscow, and that only because Yanukovych sought to make that the axis of conflict.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:37 am
@Lordyaswas,
Quote:
Do you have a constitution in a dictatorship, hawkeye?

From the majority of accounts, that is what the country had effectively become.

SO that is the test, once I decide that Obama has superseded his powers with his presidential decrees I can consider the Constitution null and void?

Good to know.....................
Lordyaswas
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:38 am
@hawkeye10,
How would you feel if Obama had arranged the imprisonment of his political rivals over the past few years?
If this, and other unacceptable actions led the people to demonstrate in Washington, would you have joined in, or at least approved?
How would you then feel if those demonstrators were fired upon, using live ammunition, and over 500 killed (proportionately about the same) and many more hundreds injured?
Outrage? Anger, possibly?

And so it goes.....
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:38 am
@Setanta,
Yes, because to a joker like you this has nothing to do with the one superpower nation in the world and its current president, and Kiev is spelled Kyiv.

If and when Russian tanks roll across the border into the Ukraine, I suppose it will still have nothing to do with the US and Obama.
Lordyaswas
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:41 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn, I very much doubt that the ordinary Ukranian even thought about apple pie and baseball when consideration came to signing an economic trade agreement with the European Union.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:41 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Maybe Obama could take a leaf out of Reagan's playbook and dribble out the corner of his mouth like when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

Instead of trying to make this all Obama's fault why not look at the facts? Despite Yanukovych's blatant corruption and mismanagement, there are still large amounts of people in the Ukraine who support greater ties with Russia, the greatest concentration being in the Crimea.

Any future Ukrainian government would be wise to remember that, and not antagonise the Russian speaking part of the population. When Georgia attacked the separatists in Nagorno-Karabakh, it played right into Russia's hands.

The Russians cite Kosovo as a precedent, despite being nominally Serbian most of the population are ethnic Albanians. It may still be in legal limbo as far as being a nation is concerned, but it's no longer Serbian.

Instead of drooling about the prospect of further conflict, the West should be trying to reconcile Russia and Ukraine. There's been enough bloodshed already.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:43 am
@Lordyaswas,
Totally irrelevant M'Lord as, according to the great and powerful Setanta, this has nothing to do with the US.

To quote the wart:

"Hehehehehe"
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 25 Feb, 2014 02:45 am
@Lordyaswas,
Can you be more of a dolt?

The involvement of the US in this matter has nothing to do with the American culture you find so contemptuous.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » COUP IN KYIV?
  3. » Page 7
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/07/2024 at 02:38:24