Ukraine

[redrun]

Post removed.

As satire yes, but not as humor.

[paulbaxter]

More seriously, I thought this was very good. Motyl had a similar piece a few weeks ago.
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog ... g-it-wrong

[GreenGoo]

Post removed.

As satire yes, but not as humor.

I thought it was funny. The only issue I took with it was that you muddled who was "offering up" terrain, so it confused me and I had to parse what you were trying to say rather than what you said. After that, I thought "solid effort". Russia was the one "offering up" and Ukraine was the one "accepting it". Your wording had me thinking the other way around.

So...I thought it was funny. ish.

[Holman]

Fred Kaplan had a good reminder on the state of Russia's military a few days back. While not a paper tiger, Russia's forces haven't kept pace with the U.S., and the professional skill of its force is nothing like ours.

Nor, even with its own borders, is the Russian army the formidable force it once. According to data gathered by GlobalSecurity.org, Russian troop levels have declined since 1990 from 1.5 million to 321,000. Over the same period, tank divisions have been slashed from 46 to five, artillery divisions from 19 to five, motorized rifle divisions from 142 to 19, and so it goes across the ranks.

One point to remember is that the Warsaw Pact has simply evaporated. A large portion of the "Soviet threat" during the Cold War comprised the armies of East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc. Today those armies are NATO.

[GreenGoo]

None of that really matters unless you're willing to get into a shooting fight with them. Since you are not (and you shouldn't be, imo) the state of their military compared to the US is irrelevant.

[Rip]

None of that really matters unless you're willing to get into a shooting fight with them. Since you are not (and you shouldn't be, imo) the state of their military compared to the US is irrelevant.

It does matter because as a member of NATO we need to make sure there are appropriate assets to allow repulsing them if they decide to engage with a another NATO member. Proper placing of assets and prepared plans that can deal with potential threats is more than half of winning a military battle if one ever does happen. I doubt we are willing to get into a fight with them to defend Ukraine, I hope we are willing to do so however if that try that crap with a NATO member.

[Holman]

None of that really matters unless you're willing to get into a shooting fight with them. Since you are not (and you shouldn't be, imo) the state of their military compared to the US is irrelevant.

Holy Shit! When did Canada quit NATO??

[Rip]

None of that really matters unless you're willing to get into a shooting fight with them. Since you are not (and you shouldn't be, imo) the state of their military compared to the US is irrelevant.

Holy Shit! When did Canada quit NATO??

I think he is just acknowledging the well known fact that Canada is not much more than a US possession like Puerto Rico.

[GreenGoo]

None of that really matters unless you're willing to get into a shooting fight with them. Since you are not (and you shouldn't be, imo) the state of their military compared to the US is irrelevant.

Holy Shit! When did Canada quit NATO??

If you want to talk about NATO as a whole, you probably shouldn't say things like:

While not a paper tiger, Russia's forces haven't kept pace with theU.S., and the professional skill of its force is nothing like ours.

In any case, if you WERE talking about NATO as a whole and the above was a typo, just replace "the US" with "NATO" in my previous comment.

[GreenGoo]

I think he is just acknowledging the well known fact that Canada is not much more than a US possession like Puerto Rico.

As has been discussed previously and no one refuted, the US *IS* NATO. Very few military actions are gonna happen if the US decides to sit it out. The idea that NATO sans the US would take on Russia is laughable.

We're not your possession, you're our meatshield. Duh.

[Holman]

If you want to talk about NATO as a whole, you probably shouldn't say things like:

While not a paper tiger, Russia's forces haven't kept pace with theU.S., and the professional skill of its force is nothing like ours.

In any case, if you WERE talking about NATO as a whole and the above was a typo, just replace "the US" with "NATO" in my previous comment.

The linked article was a direct response to people hyperventilating that "NATO can't defend Europe." That Russia hasn't kept pace with the U.S. is relevant because obviously the U.S. is the backbone of NATO's strength.

[GreenGoo]

The linked article was a direct response to people hyperventilating that "NATO can't defend Europe." That Russia hasn't kept pace with the U.S. is relevant because obviously the U.S. is the backbone of NATO's strength.

So we're back to "NATO is not and will not enter a shooting war with Russia. Relative armies strengths are irrelevant".

Call me when a shooting war is realistically on the table. Otherwise, yawn.

If you want to talk about economic stability or the geo-political strengths of the two entities relationships with their allies let's do it.

[Rip]

The linked article was a direct response to people hyperventilating that "NATO can't defend Europe." That Russia hasn't kept pace with the U.S. is relevant because obviously the U.S. is the backbone of NATO's strength.

So we're back to "NATO is not and will not enter a shooting war with Russia. Relative armies strengths are irrelevant".

Call me when a shooting war is realistically on the table. Otherwise, yawn.

If you want to talk about economic stability or the geo-political strengths of the two entities relationships with their allies let's do it.

If by enter one you mean initiate one, then yes I agree. But if Russia began to encroach into a NATO member territory then they will fight(at least I hope so).

I realize you don't believe that will happen. I don't expect it to but I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck their toe in to see how hot the water is.

[Holman]

I don't think anyone is expecting a shooting war at this point. But the question of "how far NATO strength has fallen" has been in the air, and the article is a response to that.

[GreenGoo]

If by enter one you mean initiate one, then yes I agree. But if Russia began to encroach into a NATO member territory then they will fight(at least I hope so).

I realize you don't believe that will happen. I don't expect it to but I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck their toe in to see how hot the water is.

And if they nuked washington world war III would start. It's not a matter of what I think (or you) will happen in the future. The current situation will not provoke a military reaction from the west. Discussing relative army strengths is an interesting aside, as is discussing possible scenarios where armed conflict might take place.

None of which are relevant to the current situation. Everyone (including you, Rip) has agreed that the US will not attack Russia over Crimea. Barring some unknown future event, fighting isn't happening.

Let's talk about reality and what can be done now (if anything). Hypotheticals about some future military conflict might be interesting and entertaining, but they have little to do with Ukraine/Crimea/Russia and the western response.

[GreenGoo]

I don't think anyone is expecting a shooting war at this point. But the question of "how far NATO strength has fallen" has been in the air, and the article is a response to that.

Cool.

But my point was only that it doesn't matter other than as an aside to the central topic.

[Rip]

The central topic is pretty much dead. Russia has Crimean and there isn't much we can do about it. If they want to take more or all of Ukraine pretty much the same. The real topic is about whether Ukraine or part of it is all they want. That is yet to be known.

[GreenGoo]

The central topic is pretty much dead. Russia has Crimean and there isn't much we can do about it. If they want to take more or all of Ukraine pretty much the same. The real topic is about whether Ukraine or part of it is all they want. That is yet to be known.

Ok.

I keep hearing about more sanctions and blah blah blah and germany taking to russia and blah blah blah like something was still being "done".

It's cool though. I didn't mean to make this a discussion.

[Herman Hum]

It's done and Russia won't be giving it back.

[Rip]

It's done and Russia won't be giving it back.

I agree, what are your thoughts about whether they will look for more?

[Carpet_pissr]

It's done and Russia won't be giving it back.

I agree, what are your thoughts about whether they will look for more?

I hear Kazakhstan is beautiful this time of year.

[Rip]

America's leaders should stop throwing “childish tantrums” over the annexation of Crimea and instead “do yoga”, a Russian official said on Thursday, in a caustic intervention in the confrontation between Moscow and Washington.
Sergei Rybakov, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said decisions by the US to end military and civilian cooperation, including that between Nasa and the Russian space agency, ran against “the free will of the people of Crimea”.
He added that the Americans were being “childish” if they thought that such actions could change the situation.
“What advice can we give our American colleagues? Spend more time in the fresh air, practise yoga, a balanced diet, maybe watch some sitcoms on TV,” he said. “Its better than 'cheating’ yourself and others, knowing that the train has left and childish tantrums and tears are not going to help,” he said.
The comments came after a government inquiry in Kiev reported that Ukraine’s special riot police and special forces units had worked with Russian FSB officers during the operation that led to the massacre of dozens of people in February.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ls-US.html

Fuck you Sergei!

[Rip]

IGOR NILOAKAEVICH CHUBAROV: Now I have a very simple task, for the time being I’m saying the only key thing to those EU HoMs. I’m repeating: “Guys, we’ve taken away Crimea but it’s not the fucking end. [laughter] In the future we’ll take away your [laughter] fucking Catalonia, Venice, as well as Cattleland (Scotland), and Alaska. And we’ll never rest content with that” [laughter].

SERGEY VIKTOROVICH BAHAREV: At first stage we will.

CHUBAROV: Agreed, only at first stage, and later we’ll think it over. All those fucking limitrophes, e.g. Latvia, Estonia, and other Europeans as well as Romanians, and Bulgarians, we’ll kick their asses in the right direction – where they have to be.

VIKTOROVICH BAHAREV: Oh no, it’s better not to touch them, we are not going to kick them in. It’ll be better for us to disturb “Californialand,” “Miamiland,” that sort of desolated regions [laughter]

CHUBAROV: You’re right, there’s practically fucking 95 percent of our citizens in “Miamiland” [laughter]

VIKTOROVICH BAHAREV: Exactly.

CHUBAROV: We have full right to hold a referendum.

VIKTOROVICH BAHAREV: As well as “Londonland!”

CHUBAROV: Yes certainly, you’re right. We’ll leave for a while Romanians and Bulgarians, let them stay so far in the EU [laughter]

VIKTOROVICH BAHAREV: Together with the Baltic shit.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security ... aked-call/

Make my day, douchebags.

[Holman]

... ... ...

http://freebeacon.com/national-security ... aked-call/

Fake, or fakest fake ever?

[Rip]

... ... ...

http://freebeacon.com/national-security ... aked-call/

Fake, or fakest fake ever?

I don't think it is fake as much as that they were joking around talking shit.

[Holman]

It looks like the "Washington Free Beacon" is taking at face value an essentially anonymous (not even Anonymous) video in which two voices talk to each other in bad movie-villain dialogue about the outline of their Sinister Plan. Do they sound like ambassadors, or do they sound like sock puppets for Russian Evil?

Verification? Sourcing? Does the Washington Free Beacon know some reason to accept this for what it purports to be?

I do hate Russian Evil, but I also hate sloppy internet reporting.

[paulbaxter]

http://news.yahoo.com/u-n-treat-crimea- ... 11386.html

I'm quite sure the saga of Crimea isn't even close to being done.

[GreenGoo]

Fuck you Sergei!

He's trolling you (universal american you). Don't let it get to you.

In fact, it seems specifically designed to taunt the US into doing something without thinking.

[Carpet_pissr]

For what it's worth, much, much earlier in the thread, I made the comment that I had read that Ukrainian military in Crimea had facilitated the takeover, and someone else mentioned that was BS (paraphrasing obviously).

Interesting to note the majority of troops stationed in Crimea are choosing to stay. Admittedly, if your home is already in the Crimea, then that changes things quite a bit, but still. From what I can tell (HIGHLY dependent on the source, obviously) the vast majority of troops stationed there are choosing to stay, thus putting quite a dent in the Ukraine military.

If it was so preposterous an idea that at some level, the gate was left open, as it were, by Ukraine military (even a few at top level), then I don't think you would see these kinds of numbers staying.

[Rip]

For what it's worth, much, much earlier in the thread, I made the comment that I had read that Ukrainian military in Crimea had facilitated the takeover, and someone else mentioned that was BS (paraphrasing obviously).

Interesting to note the majority of troops stationed in Crimea are choosing to stay. Admittedly, if your home is already in the Crimea, then that changes things quite a bit, but still. From what I can tell (HIGHLY dependent on the source, obviously) the vast majority of troops stationed there are choosing to stay, thus putting quite a dent in the Ukraine military.

If it was so preposterous an idea that at some level, the gate was left open, as it were, by Ukraine military (even a few at top level), then I don't think you would see these kinds of numbers staying.

From what I have seen 8000 men stayed(which is about half I believe), I doubt that will much of a dent in the Ukrainian military which is something like 150K.

[Grifman]

Fred Kaplan had a good reminder on the state of Russia's military a few days back. While not a paper tiger, Russia's forces haven't kept pace with the U.S., and the professional skill of its force is nothing like ours.

Interesting article, I thought Putin had made an effort to rebuild their military, I had no idea it was still so bad off, and am totally amazed that the army had shrunk so much. I thought they still had numbers, if little more.

[Holman]

Fred Kaplan had a good reminder on the state of Russia's military a few days back. While not a paper tiger, Russia's forces haven't kept pace with the U.S., and the professional skill of its force is nothing like ours.

Interesting article, I thought Putin had made an effort to rebuild their military, I had no idea it was still so bad off, and am totally amazed that the army had shrunk so much. I thought they still had numbers, if little more.

Apparently he has modernized certain elite units with advanced equipment, but Russian military culture is thought to be very unprofessional compared to Western armies. It's a conscript force, very rigid and hierarchical without the flexibility and initiative we cultivate. The Russian army has a significant desertion rate even in peacetime.

[Holman]

Pat Buchanan: God is on Russia's Side

Buchanan's column is here. While he doesn't actually praise Putin directly, he puts him on a heroic pedestal. Putin is apparently a good-guy defender of God and of revived Christian nationalism.

The first Rome was the Holy City and seat of Christianity that fell to Odoacer and his barbarians in 476 A.D. The second Rome was Constantinople, Byzantium, (today's Istanbul), which fell to the Turks in 1453. The successor city to Byzantium, the Third Rome, the last Rome to the old believers, was -- Moscow.

Putin is entering a claim that Moscow is the Godly City of today and command post of the counter-reformation against the new paganism.

Putin is plugging into some of the modern world's most powerful currents. Not only in his defiance of what much of the world sees as America's arrogant drive for global hegemony. Not only in his tribal defense of lost Russians left behind when the USSR disintegrated.

He is also tapping into the worldwide revulsion of and resistance to the sewage of a hedonistic secular and social revolution coming out of the West.

And Pat Buchanan is a fucking fascist.

[Grifman]

Apparently he has modernized certain elite units with advanced equipment, but Russian military culture is thought to be very unprofessional compared to Western armies. It's a conscript force, very rigid and hierarchical without the flexibility and initiative we cultivate. The Russian army has a significant desertion rate even in peacetime.

Yeah, I've known that, I've heard they've thought of going to an all professional force and dropping the conscription. I was just surprised that the number was so low. It's been a long time since the Russian/Soviet army was smaller than that of the United States, if it ever was.

[paulbaxter]

Pat Buchanan: God is on Russia's Side

Buchanan's column is here. While he doesn't actually praise Putin directly, he puts him on a heroic pedestal. Putin is apparently a good-guy defender of God and of revived Christian nationalism.

The first Rome was the Holy City and seat of Christianity that fell to Odoacer and his barbarians in 476 A.D. The second Rome was Constantinople, Byzantium, (today's Istanbul), which fell to the Turks in 1453. The successor city to Byzantium, the Third Rome, the last Rome to the old believers, was -- Moscow.

Putin is entering a claim that Moscow is the Godly City of today and command post of the counter-reformation against the new paganism.

Putin is plugging into some of the modern world's most powerful currents. Not only in his defiance of what much of the world sees as America's arrogant drive for global hegemony. Not only in his tribal defense of lost Russians left behind when the USSR disintegrated.

He is also tapping into the worldwide revulsion of and resistance to the sewage of a hedonistic secular and social revolution coming out of the West.

And Pat Buchanan is a fucking fascist.

I remember the days when I liked Pat Buchanan. Republican primaries in 92 when he was running against GHW Bush. My opinion of him has dropped at a fairly constant rate since then, and it's been over twenty years. Like our current president, he has a gift for saying the wrong thing with a certain amount of eloquence and charm.

[Isgrimnur]

Further rumblings in the east:

The Ukrainian government dispatched its highest-level police and security officials to the eastern part of the country Monday in an effort to put down separatist violence described as inspired by Russia and following a script that played out in Crimea.

“The plan is to destabilize the situation,” Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk told an emergency cabinet meeting Monday morning. “The plan is for foreign troops to cross the border and seize the country’s territory, which we will not allow.”

On Sunday, pro-Russian demonstrations in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk that had been orderly the last few weekends turned dangerous when crowds broke off and began to occupy government buildings in the three cities.

In a meeting with reporters Monday, Foreign Minister Andrii Deshchytsia said the interior minister, the heads of the Security Service and the National Security Council and a deputy prime minister had gone to eastern Ukraine to bring the situation under control.

“The response will be tough,” he said, in contrast to what happened in Crimea.
...
Thousands of Russian troops have been camped along the eastern Ukrainian border for days, and officials in Kiev fear that Moscow has been promoting separatist sentiment and demonstrations so it could move across the frontier on the pretext of restoring order and protecting a largely Russian-speaking population. Russian officials deny they have any intention of invading Ukraine and say their troops are on routine maneuvers.

In Moscow, the head of the defense and security committee of the upper house of parliament said Russia could not send peacekeepers into Donetsk without approval from the United Nations Security Council — which is highly unlikely.

Viktor Ozerov told the Interfax news agency that a country cannot simply send in peacekeeping troops at the request of local authorities. He said the Russian legislature authorized the use of troops in Crimea out of a perceived need to enhance security at Russian military bases there and under the terms of the agreement Russia signed with Ukraine to keep those bases. Ukrainian officials sharply dispute that point.

[Matrix]

Well it agrees with what i thought would happen, take the Crimea and then stay away from the rest. Since it seems now there are actual riots and revolts happening in Ukraine without Russian help, but of course all this domino effect came from Russia taking Crimea. Crappy time to be in Ukraine.

Further rumblings in the east:

“
Viktor Ozerov told the Interfax news agency that a country cannot simply send in peacekeeping troops at the request of local authorities. He said the Russian legislature authorized the use of troops in Crimea out of a perceived need to enhance security at Russian military bases there and under the terms of the agreement Russia signed with Ukraine to keep those bases. Ukrainian officials sharply dispute that point.

[Rip]

Well it agrees with what i thought would happen, take the Crimea and then stay away from the rest. Since it seems now there are actual riots and revolts happening in Ukraine without Russian help, but of course all this domino effect came from Russia taking Crimea. Crappy time to be in Ukraine.

Further rumblings in the east:

“
Viktor Ozerov told the Interfax news agency that a country cannot simply send in peacekeeping troops at the request of local authorities. He said the Russian legislature authorized the use of troops in Crimea out of a perceived need to enhance security at Russian military bases there and under the terms of the agreement Russia signed with Ukraine to keep those bases. Ukrainian officials sharply dispute that point.

There is Russian help being provided to the protesters, it just isn't overt help. It is also too early to say they won't intervene overtly. They are just trying to get the situation to become violent enough they have an excuse.

[El Guapo]

Russia certainly can change its tune when and if it wants to. Of course, I would think that they would at least leave it more ambiguous - saying that they would need UN Security Council authorization for any action in eastern Ukraine is awfully specific and would cause them unnecessary problems if they later decide to act. That gives me some hope that Russia isn't planning on invading eastern Ukraine.

[Matrix]

Russia certainly can change its tune when and if it wants to. Of course, I would think that they would at least leave it more ambiguous - saying that they would need UN Security Council authorization for any action in eastern Ukraine is awfully specific and would cause them unnecessary problems if they later decide to act. That gives me some hope that Russia isn't planning on invading eastern Ukraine.

Yep, the specific part is the kicker here. If they even slightly considered invasion as an option, they would never mention UN Council approval. Since that's like giving live ammo to your opponent. They wouldn't be giving live ammo to anyone if they even thought of more take over as plan D. They trying to show that they are playing fair and after Crimea we wont be seeing them jumping on anything for a while.