The West´s silly Ukrainian ISIS Nazi Army

[ESay]

I thought you said that there would be no companies in Eastern Ukraine that thugs could collect taxes from. Too funny.

In my post 129? If I understand correctly, we were talking about a possible war for a corridor to Crimea.

 

[Decus]

I thought you said that there would be no companies in Eastern Ukraine that thugs could collect taxes from. Too funny.

In my post 129? If I understand correctly, we were talking about a possible war for a corridor to Crimea.

Any territory taken will have to be deep enough into the Ukraine so that Putin can give part of the territory back in order to claim that he is only interested in peace. This was his tactic in Georgia and it worked. The EU was thankful that Russia returned some of the land he stole from Georgia. He will use the same tactic in Ukraine:

"Russian troops began pulling back from checkpoints in western Georgia ahead of a key deadline in a peace deal brokered by the European Union. But a new diplomatic battle is shaping up over international access to the Russian-backed separatist regions."

"Russia's decision to meet Monday's deadline for pulling out those troops will come as a big relief to European Union foreign ministers, who meet in Brussels Monday to discuss the next steps in EU efforts to resolve the conflict. According to EU diplomats involved in preparations for Monday's meeting, much of that debate and the statement that will come out of it hinge on whether Russia meets the Monday deadline."

Russian Troops Pull Back From Georgia - WSJ

Putin is using many of the same tactics in Ukraine that he used in Georgia. His next move will be to claim that Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine are at risk and he has no choice but to send Russian troops to protect them.

If this tactic is repeated there will be more than enough territory and companies to rob or tax in order to pay for a separatist militia.

.

 

[tinydancer]

I thought you said that there would be no companies in Eastern Ukraine that thugs could collect taxes from. Too funny.

In my post 129? If I understand correctly, we were talking about a possible war for a corridor to Crimea.

Any territory taken will have to be deep enough into the Ukraine so that Putin can give part of the territory back in order to claim that he is only interested in peace. This was his tactic in Georgia and it worked. The EU was thankful that Russia returned some of the land he stole from Georgia. He will use the same tactic in Ukraine:

"Russian troops began pulling back from checkpoints in western Georgia ahead of a key deadline in a peace deal brokered by the European Union. But a new diplomatic battle is shaping up over international access to the Russian-backed separatist regions."

"Russia's decision to meet Monday's deadline for pulling out those troops will come as a big relief to European Union foreign ministers, who meet in Brussels Monday to discuss the next steps in EU efforts to resolve the conflict. According to EU diplomats involved in preparations for Monday's meeting, much of that debate and the statement that will come out of it hinge on whether Russia meets the Monday deadline."

Russian Troops Pull Back From Georgia - WSJ

Putin is using many of the same tactics in Ukraine that he used in Georgia. His next move will be to claim that Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine are at risk and he has no choice but to send Russian troops to protect them.

If this tactic is repeated there will be more than enough territory and companies to rob or tax in order to pay for a separatist militia.

.

Putin has his eye on the prize. Not eastern Ukraine although he will support a continuing effort for peace in the east.

No, the prize is Greece. Putin is focused on a potential Grexit. It would be a most divine retribution to the western leaders and the EU for backing the coup in Kiev if Putin can pull Greece into his sphere.

Just last week, Greece and Russia signed a mega pipeline deal with Russia financing the deal. Turkey is making motions towards Russia as well.

This is getting so interesting.

 

[Decus]

Putin is interested in dividing the EU and Greece would be one of the tools to do so. The Greeks are pissed and if they have any influence in setting the price of gas in Europe they may well use it to try and punish countries like Germany. Putin's approach is however to fuel discontent wherever it exists in Europe. Putin funds extreme right wing parties or promises loans to countries tired of austerity in the hopes of further weakening the EU. The prize is not Greece but rather an EU in disarray.

 

[Decus]

Regarding Putin's tactics in Europe:

"There have been well-documented reports that Mr Putin has been using his network of former KGB officers to fund a number of Right-wing parties in Europe, including giving loans worth millions of pounds to Marine Le Pen’s Front National in France, which advocates an uncompromising anti-EU agenda."

"So far as Mr Putin is concerned, any party that is likely to cause the Brussels establishment discomfort is fine with him. So it can be no coincidence that the first well-wishers knocking on the door on Syriza’s victorious leader and newly elected prime minister Alexis Tsipras has been the Russian envoy to Greece, Andrei Maslov, who handed over a personal letter of congratulations from Mr Putin, in which he urged closer relations between the two countries."

Putin s meddling in Europe is not limited to Greece - Telegraph

Putin s far-right ambition Think-tank reveals how Russian President is wooing and funding populist parties across Europe to gain influence in the EU - Europe - World - The Independent

.

 

[Tehon]

Decus, why are you so desperate to demonize Putin that you would resort to posting such obvious propaganda. I don't care how many accusations are crammed into a story, without facts to back them up the accusations are meaningless to any person possessing even a modest ability to think critically.

 

[Bleipriester]

I thought you said that there would be no companies in Eastern Ukraine that thugs could collect taxes from. Too funny.

In my post 129? If I understand correctly, we were talking about a possible war for a corridor to Crimea.

Any territory taken will have to be deep enough into the Ukraine so that Putin can give part of the territory back in order to claim that he is only interested in peace. This was his tactic in Georgia and it worked. The EU was thankful that Russia returned some of the land he stole from Georgia. He will use the same tactic in Ukraine:

"Russian troops began pulling back from checkpoints in western Georgia ahead of a key deadline in a peace deal brokered by the European Union. But a new diplomatic battle is shaping up over international access to the Russian-backed separatist regions."

"Russia's decision to meet Monday's deadline for pulling out those troops will come as a big relief to European Union foreign ministers, who meet in Brussels Monday to discuss the next steps in EU efforts to resolve the conflict. According to EU diplomats involved in preparations for Monday's meeting, much of that debate and the statement that will come out of it hinge on whether Russia meets the Monday deadline."

Russian Troops Pull Back From Georgia - WSJ

Putin is using many of the same tactics in Ukraine that he used in Georgia. His next move will be to claim that Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine are at risk and he has no choice but to send Russian troops to protect them.

If this tactic is repeated there will be more than enough territory and companies to rob or tax in order to pay for a separatist militia.

.

Putin has his eye on the prize. Not eastern Ukraine although he will support a continuing effort for peace in the east.

No, the prize is Greece. Putin is focused on a potential Grexit. It would be a most divine retribution to the western leaders and the EU for backing the coup in Kiev if Putin can pull Greece into his sphere.

Just last week, Greece and Russia signed a mega pipeline deal with Russia financing the deal. Turkey is making motions towards Russia as well.

This is getting so interesting.

Russia is not going to give Greece loan by loan. That´s for sure.

 

[Decus]

Decus, why are you so desperate to demonize Putin that you would resort to posting such obvious propaganda. I don't care how many accusations are crammed into a story, without facts to back them up the accusations are meaningless to any person possessing even a modest ability to think critically.

Putin has been very clear about his views. He has stated that he regrets the demise of the Soviet Union and more recently has come to express a respect for Stalin. By the way. how many millions died under Stalin's reign?

"Putin's embrace of Stalin's power-play tactics is applauded by many Russians and other former Soviet citizens as the sort of decisive leadership they longed for while watching communism collapse around them. To the proponents of a reinvigorated Russia, reformist Mikhail Gorbachev and his successor, Boris Yeltsin, are seen as having submitted Russia to Western domination."

Putin once critical of Stalin now embraces Soviet dictator apos s tactics - LA Times

No one trusts Putin as his motivations are clear to anyone willing to honestly examine his actions. Even his "allies" know what he is capable of:

"New cracks emerged Thursday in a Russia-led economic alliance, with the president of Belarus warning that his nation may opt out of it.

Alexander Lukashenko also sternly warned Moscow Thursday that his nation of 10 million will never be part of the "Russian world," a term coined by the Kremlin that reflects its hopes to pull ex-Soviet nations closer into its orbit.

"Those who think that the Belarusian land is part as what they call the Russian world, almost part of Russia, forget about it!" Lukashenko said. "Belarus is a modern and independent state.""

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/01/29/world/europe/ap-eu-belarus-lukashenko.html?_r=0

Putin is treacherous and even his "allies" don't trust him.

 

[Decus]

Kazakhstan is another "ally" that doesn't trust Putin. Historically the oil-rich nation of Kazakhstan sent the majority of its oil to Russia. Not any more:

"As a result of this and other problems, Kazakhstan's relationship with Russia in the energy sphere has become increasingly contentious. At the same time, Western companies have been unable to provide significant investment into Kazakhstan's economy. Consequently, China has taken advantage of the economic and geopolitical vacuum and Beijing is increasingly casting itself as Kazakhstan's major economic and implicitly geopolitical partner. The expansion of Kazakhstan's energy relationship with China has paralleled the increasing friction between Astana and Moscow."

Kazakhstan Drifts to China Amid Tension with Russia

China has become the dominant player in Central Asia and countries like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan no longer look to Moscow but are firmly in the grasp of China.

Kazakhstan s Defence Cooperation with China China in Central Asia

 

[Sbiker]

Nice Ukrainians!

You are really never think about if Russia really "defeated and have no chance to live", it also have no moral and political barriers to use nuclear weapon in your territory? You know, how really easy, having some dollars, to drive truck with "something" in cargo in the center of Kiev, through all your "territorial" batallions and other brave army formations... Just stop jumping and repeating "who not jumping - is moskal" and turn on the mind (if it really exist ))

 

[Tehon]

Decus, why do you fear Russia so? Is it geography?
Your links are all predicated on the belief that Putin is acting provocatively. I don't see this to be the case. I see Putin's moves to be reactive in nature. Putin's annexation of Crimea was a reaction to an illegal coup that threatened Russian security. That can't be denied. In eastern Ukraine Putin had the same type of scenario laid out before him, the people wanted to be annexed, yet Putin didn't do it. How do you reconcile that fact with your belief that Putin is aggressively attempting to rebuild the Soviet empire?

I understand the need in the West to demonize Putin. The sheeple need to be herded. Tensions are running high and the situation has the potential of getting out of hand and Putin has to be blamed. But some of you people need to get your head out of your ass and start looking at the big picture. It is the West that has it's foot on the peddle and is driving us to the cliffs edge not Russia. The evidence is ample and a hell of a lot more convincing than the propaganda that you use to support your beliefs.

 

[Decus]

Remember Afghanistan.

 

[Decus]

Decus, why do you fear Russia so? Is it geography?
Your links are all predicated on the belief that Putin is acting provocatively. I don't see this to be the case. I see Putin's moves to be reactive in nature. Putin's annexation of Crimea was a reaction to an illegal coup that threatened Russian security. That can't be denied. In eastern Ukraine Putin had the same type of scenario laid out before him, the people wanted to be annexed, yet Putin didn't do it. How do you reconcile that fact with your belief that Putin is aggressively attempting to rebuild the Soviet empire?

I understand the need in the West to demonize Putin. The sheeple need to be herded. Tensions are running high and the situation has the potential of getting out of hand and Putin has to be blamed. But some of you people need to get your head out of your ass and start looking at the big picture. It is the West that has it's foot on the peddle and is driving us to the cliffs edge not Russia. The evidence is ample and a hell of a lot more convincing than the propaganda that you use to support your beliefs.

You are just too funny. You must seriously miss that miserable experiment known as the Soviet Union.

The fact that "allies" like Belarus and Kazakhstan want nothing to do with Putin is very telling. Georgia and Moldova don't seem to want to return to that socialist paradise either.

The fact is that Russia's biggest problem isn't in the West but rather the East. China has already replaced Russia in Central Asia and with some 5 million Chinese immigrants in Siberia, the Chinese may soon surprise the Russians in their backyard.

You say I am spouting propaganda but I have used reputable sources to back up my claims. You on the other hand haven't produced jack shit to back up your bullshit.

.

 

[Decus]

Regarding Siberia:

"Any kind of Chinese expansion into the region will eventually bring about a question: What is Beijing’s claim there? Most of the border region — an area roughly the size of Iran — used to be Chinese. Russia took the territory in 1858 and 1860 with the Treaties of Aigun and Peking, respectively. Of all of the unequal treaties forced upon the Qing dynasty by outside powers in the 19th century, these are the only two China has not managed to overcome. China and Russia signed a border agreement in 1999, but the Beijing government has never formally accepted the Aigun and Peking treaties."

Analysis Russia s Far East Turning Chinese - ABC News

 

[ESay]

Any territory taken will have to be deep enough into the Ukraine so that Putin can give part of the territory back in order to claim that he is only interested in peace. This was his tactic in Georgia and it worked. The EU was thankful that Russia returned some of the land he stole from Georgia. He will use the same tactic in Ukraine:

"Russian troops began pulling back from checkpoints in western Georgia ahead of a key deadline in a peace deal brokered by the European Union. But a new diplomatic battle is shaping up over international access to the Russian-backed separatist regions."

"Russia's decision to meet Monday's deadline for pulling out those troops will come as a big relief to European Union foreign ministers, who meet in Brussels Monday to discuss the next steps in EU efforts to resolve the conflict. According to EU diplomats involved in preparations for Monday's meeting, much of that debate and the statement that will come out of it hinge on whether Russia meets the Monday deadline."

Russian Troops Pull Back From Georgia - WSJ

Putin is using many of the same tactics in Ukraine that he used in Georgia. His next move will be to claim that Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine are at risk and he has no choice but to send Russian troops to protect them.

If this tactic is repeated there will be more than enough territory and companies to rob or tax in order to pay for a separatist militia.

Actually, claims about Russian speakers in E. Ukraine being threatened won’t be the next move, just because the Russian rulers have already been claiming that almost from the beginning of the Euromaidan.

I browsed the Internet and found some information.
Russian PM Medvedev said in the August of 2014 that Russia would spend 700 billion roubles in the course of five years in Crimea’s development, including 660 billion from the federal budget. He didn’t specify whether the costs on the bridge were included in the figure. Okay, we will think that they were. The costs on the bridge are supposed to be no more than 230 billion roubles. So, the spending without the bridge will be at the tune of 470 billion roubles. The total population of Crimea is approximately 2.3 million. So, annual share of every Crimean will be: 470 bln / 2.3 mln / 5 years = 40 870 roubles.
Considering even that that in Crimea hasn’t been war in the last years and considering that the Russian troops placed here are financed directly from Moscow, the Russian government is unable to find money within Crimea (through taxes, for example) to finance reforms. So, almost 95 per cent of the money will come from federal budget.
I don’t know how many people will live in the corridor-related territory, but I think that the amount of spending per person will be even higher than Crimean’s – because there will be a war, there will be destructions of enterprises, and so on. So, what makes you think that taxes from locals will save Putin’s money?

And what about money which Russia will lose as a result of additional sanctions which will be imposed on it if its rulers decide to wage a war? Or there will be no further economic sanctions?

 

[Decus]

Any territory taken will have to be deep enough into the Ukraine so that Putin can give part of the territory back in order to claim that he is only interested in peace. This was his tactic in Georgia and it worked. The EU was thankful that Russia returned some of the land he stole from Georgia. He will use the same tactic in Ukraine:

"Russian troops began pulling back from checkpoints in western Georgia ahead of a key deadline in a peace deal brokered by the European Union. But a new diplomatic battle is shaping up over international access to the Russian-backed separatist regions."

"Russia's decision to meet Monday's deadline for pulling out those troops will come as a big relief to European Union foreign ministers, who meet in Brussels Monday to discuss the next steps in EU efforts to resolve the conflict. According to EU diplomats involved in preparations for Monday's meeting, much of that debate and the statement that will come out of it hinge on whether Russia meets the Monday deadline."

Russian Troops Pull Back From Georgia - WSJ

Putin is using many of the same tactics in Ukraine that he used in Georgia. His next move will be to claim that Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine are at risk and he has no choice but to send Russian troops to protect them.

If this tactic is repeated there will be more than enough territory and companies to rob or tax in order to pay for a separatist militia.

Actually, claims about Russian speakers in E. Ukraine being threatened won’t be the next move, just because the Russian rulers have already been claiming that almost from the beginning of the Euromaidan.

I browsed the Internet and found some information.
Russian PM Medvedev said in the August of 2014 that Russia would spend 700 billion roubles in the course of five years in Crimea’s development, including 660 billion from the federal budget. He didn’t specify whether the costs on the bridge were included in the figure. Okay, we will think that they were. The costs on the bridge are supposed to be no more than 230 billion roubles. So, the spending without the bridge will be at the tune of 470 billion roubles. The total population of Crimea is approximately 2.3 million. So, annual share of every Crimean will be: 470 bln / 2.3 mln / 5 years = 40 870 roubles.
Considering even that that in Crimea hasn’t been war in the last years and considering that the Russian troops placed here are financed directly from Moscow, the Russian government is unable to find money within Crimea (through taxes, for example) to finance reforms. So, almost 95 per cent of the money will come from federal budget.
I don’t know how many people will live in the corridor-related territory, but I think that the amount of spending per person will be even higher than Crimean’s – because there will be a war, there will be destructions of enterprises, and so on. So, what makes you think that taxes from locals will save Putin’s money?

And what about money which Russia will lose as a result of additional sanctions which will be imposed on it if its rulers decide to wage a war? Or there will be no further economic sanctions?

Personally I doubt that Putin will make the levels of investments in Crimea originally promised. Putin's interest is Sevastopol and his Black Sea fleet and little else in Crimea. Any territories taken will deliver either a political, military or economic value to him or he will return them as a gesture of "good faith".

Given the recent costs overruns for the Vostochny Cosmodrome, I also believe that the Kerch bridge could ultimately cost double the 230 billion roubles cost to build the bridge you mention.

Personally I hope that you are right and that things won't get any worse but sadly Putin's actions don't seem to be turned towards peace and he doesn't have the money to build a bridge.

 

[ESay]

Personally I doubt that Putin will make the levels of investments in Crimea originally promised. Putin's interest is Sevastopol and his Black Sea fleet and little else in Crimea. Any territories taken will deliver either a political, military or economic value to him or he will return them as a gesture of "good faith".

Given the recent costs overruns for the Vostochny Cosmodrome, I also believe that the Kerch bridge could ultimately cost double the 230 billion roubles cost to build the bridge you mention.

Personally I hope that you are right and that things won't get any worse but sadly Putin's actions don't seem to be turned towards peace and he doesn't have the money to build a bridge.

Actually, he still has a lot of money. The total sum of all Russian reserve funds is nearly 360 billion dollars or so (if I remember correctly). Furthermore, don’t forget that so-called ‘infrastructure projects’ are very good source for refilling oversees bank accounts of Russian elite.

As I said above, I think that the Russian rulers are seeking the ways out of this crap, with an opportunity to save their face (it is only my opinion, it may well be that I am wrong). Whether such an opportunity will be handed to them or not – very few people know about that. But if Putin eventually decides that he has got in a tight corner, then everything is possible.

Putin's interest is Sevastopol and his Black Sea fleet and little else in Crimea. Any territories taken will deliver either a political, military or economic value to him or he will return them as a gesture of "good faith".

Do you mean Putin mayl return Crimea (except of Sevastopol) to Ukraine as a gesture of "good faith"?
To tell you the truth, I have doubts about it. But in any case – no, thanks. It will be a grave mistake to accept Crimea back in the foreseeable future.

 

[Tehon]

The fact is that Russia's biggest problem isn't in the West but rather the East. China has already replaced Russia in Central Asia and with some 5 million Chinese immigrants in Siberia, the Chinese may soon surprise the Russians in their backyard.

You say I am spouting propaganda but I have used reputable sources to back up my claims. You on the other hand haven't produced jack shit to back up your bullshit.

.

Yeah, Russia's problem right now is the West. The last article you linked was from 2006. It's true that Russia and China have a mixed past but the West's recent provocations are promoting a closer working relationship between the two now. Google search

Yes, you are promoting propaganda and I'm not convinced as to the reliability of the sources. Though I'm not attacking the sources, only the content of the articles. Only a little bit of critical thinking is required to expose the true nature of the articles you linked. If you wish I would be happy to deconstruct one for you and show you why it fails.

 

[Sbiker]

Personally I doubt that Putin will make the levels of investments in Crimea originally promised. Putin's interest is Sevastopol and his Black Sea fleet and little else in Crimea. Any territories taken will deliver either a political, military or economic value to him or he will return them as a gesture of "good faith".

Given the recent costs overruns for the Vostochny Cosmodrome, I also believe that the Kerch bridge could ultimately cost double the 230 billion roubles cost to build the bridge you mention.

Personally I hope that you are right and that things won't get any worse but sadly Putin's actions don't seem to be turned towards peace and he doesn't have the money to build a bridge.

Actually, he still has a lot of money. The total sum of all Russian reserve funds is nearly 360 billion dollars or so (if I remember correctly). Furthermore, don’t forget that so-called ‘infrastructure projects’ are very good source for refilling oversees bank accounts of Russian elite.

As I said above, I think that the Russian rulers are seeking the ways out of this crap, with an opportunity to save their face (it is only my opinion, it may well be that I am wrong). Whether such an opportunity will be handed to them or not – very few people know about that. But if Putin eventually decides that he has got in a tight corner, then everything is possible.

Putin's interest is Sevastopol and his Black Sea fleet and little else in Crimea. Any territories taken will deliver either a political, military or economic value to him or he will return them as a gesture of "good faith".

Do you mean Putin mayl return Crimea (except of Sevastopol) to Ukraine as a gesture of "good faith"?
To tell you the truth, I have doubts about it. But in any case – no, thanks. It will be a grave mistake to accept Crimea back in the foreseeable future.

Putin never return Crimea just to avoid incidents with civilians, like this:

I saw death

 

[ESay]

Putin never return Crimea just to avoid incidents with civilians, like this:

Oh, incidents with civilians.
Okay, I will repeat you what I said some time ago – make your government find their balls and resolve this conflict directly; or make them stop fuelling the conflict and the amount of incidents with civilians will significantly cease. But you Russian citizens are supporting your government in this ‘hybrid war’ (which virtually was waged in the March of 2014) and are crying on forums about the victims of this war. Hypocritical fools.