Ukraine Revolt/Civil War News, Reports, Data, etc.

Miragedriver

Brigadier
What remains of a tank after it ran over a 203mm ammunition used as a land mine
880Jm5a.jpg



Back to bottling my Grenache
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
NO labeling of either side with inappropriate names/labels/monikers.

Broccoli, you are getting a warning for going down that path.

When you see this type of thing...inform myself or another moderator. You can report it with the REPORT button. Do not engage or argue, it will lead to dissension on the thread, warnings for all, and ultimate suspensions and closing the thread.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
 
so called Nemtsov Report released (for the background in English, you may read
Boris Nemtsov allies release report on Russian troops in Ukraine
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)
and my Polish source says the original is available at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

but I haven't been able to download it for like ten minutes now ... background in Russian:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Black Shark

Junior Member
Well, the fact that Russians troops have entered into what once was a part of the Ukraine (the Crimea) and helped, in essence annex it (and I know all about the long term history of the Crimea, so no need to rehash that here), and the fact that the Russians have been very involved with rebel forces (clearly materially, intelligence wise, and with personnel - whether they "volunteered" or were sent there specifically makes little difference on the ground), fighting a bloody civil war in the Ukraine...this all makes it easy to understand why they would want to do such a thing.

Will it work?

Well, if it does, my guess is that there will be a huge dogleg in their "wall" because I doubt at this point, or at any point in the near future that the provinces seeking more autonomy or independence would ever allow such a "wall" to be erected between themselves and Russia.

Like it or not, Kiev is going to have to deal with that reality.

In order to do that, both sides have to craft a cease fire that holds based on mutual trust and a willingness to stop the killing long enough for them to sit down and hash out the reality of the situation.

And at this point I simply cannot see that happening without Kiev being willing to grant rather broad autonomy to at least two of those provinces...and to do so in good faith.
They did not enter Crimea they were already there and legally 25.000 troops could be on Crimea along with military equipment based on a treaty and the naval base along with logistical supply chains.

No such thing as annexing, since Annexing is seizing soil by military force. Remind me how many have been killed by this invasion?

According to UN Charta it is self determination and is called a sezession. The ukrainian "sovereignity" was destroyed when over 30 of our western politicians have been spotted on Maidan steering up protestors and telling them the West is with you, now let us imagine Lawrow would hand out bread at Ferguson. Would that be interference in internal politics of a souvereign country or not?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Black Shark, I am not going to go into detail or get drawn into a argument about this.

Everyone knows that numerous more Russian troops entered the Crimea. Everyone knows that they were dispersed throughout the province where they were not legally allowed to be. Everyone knows that the vote there occurred under their watchful eyes and guns.

That is not "self determination." That is coercion.

I have always maintained that the Russians are not going to give the Crimea back...short of all-out war, or an absolute financial failure like the Soviet Union experienced. It's called Real Politik...and Putin knows how to play that game in this part of the world on his doorstep.

But that does not make it right under UN or any other international law...it just makes it a fait accomplice.

I even maintain that it would have been likely that, in those circumstances, the people of Crimea would have voted that way in any case...but when it happened as it did...with those troops from a foreign nation occupying the whole of the country at the time...you cannot seriously call it anything other than it was...a grab by Putin in circumstances where there was really no viable way to stop him or keep it from happening.

Let that be the end of it...okay?

Russia has the Crimea and it is not likely that it is going to be going back.
 

Black Shark

Junior Member
The troops were legally there, they were outside their bases that is the only thing they are guilty of, but considering the Maidan sniper provocateurs it was very well legitimate to protect their interest. They never exceeded 18.000 troops and the referendum was observed by EU parlament individuals like Ewald Stadler who has dissmissed this nonsense of "vote under the gun" no one was forced to vote anything and all crimeans are happy to not face the same fate as eastern ukraine, it is russian land and was illegaly connected to Ukraine which again is a failed state that never existed before. By UN charta it is legitimate referendum unlike Kosovo, where no referendum has taken place at all, it was just declared by US (UN).
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Sorry Black Shark...it is clear to everyone what happened...and as I say, it is not likely to be overturned or changed.

But it was Real Politik, plain and simple.

The arguments about it (Crimea) being "illegally connected," are pretty lame when it was the Soviet Premier who placed the Crimea as a part of Ukraine at the time, and then later, when the Soviet Union fell apart, when Russia signed an agreement itself, when the Ukraine returned the nucs to respect, and in fact uphold the then current borders of the Ukraine.

But that is past now, and hopefully things will stabilize and the fighting will stop. I know I pray that is the case. Sadly, I am sure people like Putin would love to make that "illegally connected," argument about places like Finland, Latvia, Estonia, etc., etc.

At any rate, as I sad before, there is no sense arguing any further about it. We have both said our piece and I believe SD members can make up their own minds.

As regards Crimea, it makes little difference at this point either way.

This discussion however, ends now.
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Where do Ukraine’s rebels get arms from? Old Soviet bases, says Russia’s top brass

xb0iryt.jpg

Russia is not waging war in Ukraine’s east, and is not supplying rebels with military equipment, according to Russian deputy defense minister Anatoly Antonov. The anti-Kiev forces get their arms at old Soviet storages - same as government troops do.

“Surely, Russia doesn’t wage any war. Vladimir Putin’s policy is aimed at not allowing the situation to develop according to the worst-case scenario. There are, unfortunately, forces that try to push two peoples against each other to start a real war between Russia and Ukraine,” Antonov said, speaking with journalists in Slovakia.

Addressing the claims that Russia supplies weapons to the eastern Ukrainian self-defense forces, he explained where the militia may get their weaponry from.

“First, one shouldn’t forget that Ukraine used to be a part of the Soviet Union. There were many weapon storages on the territory of the Soviet Union, so when Ukraine and Russia became independent states, clearly some storages remained on Ukrainian territory.

“Currently, in the region engulfed by this disaster, by the bloodshed, where the “punishment” operation is being carried out by Kiev against its own people, some of these storages have been seized by the self-defense forces. That’s why saying that Russians supplied the weapons to Lugansk and Donetsk is simply incorrect. Look at the Ukrainian army’s weaponry. It’s fighting with the Russian weapons – or, more precisely, with Soviet weapons,” Antonov said.

FVsizKq.jpg

Another source is operational trophies, the deputy defense minister said. “The self-defense forces seize large amounts of National Guard’s and the Ukrainian army’s weapons. Hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers fled into Russia, leaving the weapons they used to own,” he added.

The cost of the war - be it “anti-terrorist operation” as Kiev puts it or a “military operation for protecting East Ukraine civilians” as the rebel forces have it - comes at a cost. To Russia, it is a stream of refugees, who “didn’t enter our territory just to “visit their grannies”,” Antonov said.

More than 130,000 Ukrainians have asked for either refugee status or temporary asylum in Russia since the conflict in the country’s east started in April, according to the Federal Migration Service, while some 820,000 Ukrainian citizens have moved to Russia.

“Those who come to Russia need to be given medical aid, provided with a job… There is no lighting, morgues and the sewage doesn’t function, there is no water, the people choke because of the unbelievable damage that the Kiev government has done. In this situation, we couldn’t be uninvolved…”Antonov said.

MnGkLY9.jpg

If Moscow sends anything to Ukraine, it is supplies to civilians caught up in turmoil as Ukraine’s east is plunging into a humanitarian crisis. Cities in Donetsk have been without water and electricity for weeks now, there are food shortages and it is hard to leave the conflict zone.

“What do we send there? We send wheat, buckwheat, medical supplies, mini electricity stations to ensure there is electricity at least in hospitals… That’s what we send!” Antonov stressed. “It was said that we would use those trucks to carry out some military intervention. I would like to say openly: it’s all nonsense. It was all counted: the number of trucks which came to Lugansk exactly corresponded with the number of those which returned to Russia, empty.”

Since April, almost 2,000 people, many of them civilians, have been killed in the fighting. Over 130,000 people have been declared internally displaced, according to the UN, while the number of those who have fled into Russia is nearing a million, according to the Russia’s government.



Back to bottling my Grenache
 
Top