The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Warship Derby Off Crimea
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Latest reports that Kiev is planning to impose martial law.

Anyhow.

Poroshenko’s only real hope of getting reelected is by having a short victorious war (as I suggested back in May).

Though the “victorious” part will be really hard.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Geopolitics, Piracy, Ukraine 
Hide 452 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. O/T

    What’s up in Armenia? Is the country going into the EU orbit?

    • Replies: @g2k
    A mixed bag. It's what Pasinyan was promising in opposition, but, now he's in government, he'll have to be a bit more responsible (we can hope). He has less room for manoeuvre than Saakashvilli had, because Armenia still has disputed territory to lose and Armenia gets its subsidised energy from Russia* and not Azerbijian. Georgia really was at rock bottom in the mid 00s. A lot of his party activists are atlanticist, soros trpes, others are more pragmatic and disliked the Karabakh clique for entirely understandable reasons. The only thing we know for sure is that someone's going to get cucked over there; It could go either way, but his party was always likely to get a superiority.

    *It's not just for heating, almost all of their vehicle fleet runs on compressed natural gas and there's now a lot of dutch style heated greenhouses exporting all of their produce via Verkhniy lars. Their railway is also a subsidiary of rzd.
    , @Cato
    Funny that Armenia could be a candidate for the EU: it's on the south side of the Caucasus, and technically in Asia.
    , @Seraphim
    You may get a fair assessment from the blog:
    "Heralding the Rise of Russia. Russo-Armenian relations, Eurasian geopolitics and resisting the Western alliance"@http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/
  2. In Putler’s Russia, border violates you.

    On a more serious note: transparent really uncreative turn of events that was predicted even by Timoshenko months ago: https://strana.ua/news/150018-poroshenko-khochet-vvesti-voennoe-polozhenie-i-sorvat-vybory-timoshenko.html

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  3. Reading Unz.com the past little while I conclude this has something to with autocephaly (which kinda sounds like fun).

  4. What are the odds that this escalates to an actual war? It would certainly be preferable to have some kind of conclusion rather than an endless frozen proxy conflict.

    • Replies: @joun
    The odds are exceptionally low. A frozen conflict isn't necessarily an unwelcome outcome.
  5. Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.

    LOL!

    These “gunboats” have an armament of a 30 mm autocannon and a few automatic grenade launchers. For perspective, a T-72 tank parked near the shore would have no trouble blowing one of these boats out of the water, and the gunboat’s weapons wouldn’t even be able to land a scratch on it in return.

    This maybe the most pathetic show of naval force the world has witnessed in the last century.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Pretty much, more or less.
    The cannon with proper ammo IS able to do much more than a scratch in that exchange. Academic, of course, here.

    And, the 30 mm cannon barrel(s) were prudently and carefully covered.

    Pathetic attempt in technological/tactical sense for sure, BUT, in the world we live in that means nothing.

    It's all about managed perceptions and agendas.

    I can't see the regime in Kiev doing this without approval from..ahm...abroad.

    The question I don't have an answer for now is..why now?

    What Washi...I mean, Kiev, was/is hoping to achieve here?

    , @AP

    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.
     
    Assuming it was deliberate (probably was, but error cannot be ruled out) do you really think the purpose was the beat the Russian Navy, or to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine?
    , @Anon

    "Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing..."
     
    Russia confiscated this embarrassment from those monkey grenadiers, and is keeping it from public eyes.
  6. @Vendetta
    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.

    LOL!

    These “gunboats” have an armament of a 30 mm autocannon and a few automatic grenade launchers. For perspective, a T-72 tank parked near the shore would have no trouble blowing one of these boats out of the water, and the gunboat’s weapons wouldn’t even be able to land a scratch on it in return.

    This maybe the most pathetic show of naval force the world has witnessed in the last century.

    Pretty much, more or less.
    The cannon with proper ammo IS able to do much more than a scratch in that exchange. Academic, of course, here.

    And, the 30 mm cannon barrel(s) were prudently and carefully covered.

    Pathetic attempt in technological/tactical sense for sure, BUT, in the world we live in that means nothing.

    It’s all about managed perceptions and agendas.

    I can’t see the regime in Kiev doing this without approval from..ahm…abroad.

    The question I don’t have an answer for now is..why now?

    What Washi…I mean, Kiev, was/is hoping to achieve here?

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    To prolong the existance of the regime. Ukrainian election is scheduled to take place next March. Poroshenko is currenly polling at 8% and has incentives to take risks.
    , @Mitleser

    I can’t see the regime in Kiev doing this without approval from..ahm…abroad.
     
    I do.

    By the way seems like this time pro-Ukrainian actions were not approved and pre-arranged with US - as US RC-135V plane only came to the area when events already over
     
    https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5bfbadc79a794774f8aa51e4?from=newsfeed
    https://twitter.com/ua4wiy_/status/1066933710824583173
    http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=38893&page=900#entry1399775

    Washington is not going to stop supporting Porky against Russia, but they are not going to save him from domestic pro-Americans either.

    The martial law is a move agains the latter.

    https://twitter.com/svynarenko/status/1067069085555535873
  7. @Adam
    What are the odds that this escalates to an actual war? It would certainly be preferable to have some kind of conclusion rather than an endless frozen proxy conflict.

    The odds are exceptionally low. A frozen conflict isn’t necessarily an unwelcome outcome.

  8. @peterAUS
    Pretty much, more or less.
    The cannon with proper ammo IS able to do much more than a scratch in that exchange. Academic, of course, here.

    And, the 30 mm cannon barrel(s) were prudently and carefully covered.

    Pathetic attempt in technological/tactical sense for sure, BUT, in the world we live in that means nothing.

    It's all about managed perceptions and agendas.

    I can't see the regime in Kiev doing this without approval from..ahm...abroad.

    The question I don't have an answer for now is..why now?

    What Washi...I mean, Kiev, was/is hoping to achieve here?

    To prolong the existance of the regime. Ukrainian election is scheduled to take place next March. Poroshenko is currenly polling at 8% and has incentives to take risks.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Makes sense.
    Thx.
  9. There are a lot of threats being passed back and forth between Russia and the US right now, many out of (or almost out of) public view.

    Truly a pivotal time in history.

    • Replies: @joun
    Where might I read about some of these threats?
  10. @JLK
    There are a lot of threats being passed back and forth between Russia and the US right now, many out of (or almost out of) public view.

    Truly a pivotal time in history.

    Where might I read about some of these threats?

    • Replies: @JLK
    Where? I'd go right to the propaganda outlets like rt.com and svoboda.org instead of what is filtered through the mainstream media.

    Read between the lines.
  11. I think that this is another example of Ukrainians taking things too literally. I guess they’ve must have heard from their mentors – US, about gunboat diplomacy.

    US probably failed to mention to the Ukrainians that gunboat diplomacy is not likely to be very effective if that’s all you got – gunboats.

    Then again, the US could have really played a prank on the Ukrainians by telling them that there is such a thing as inflatable raft diplomacy. Imagine the embarrassment on the faces of those “diplomats” upon reaching the Russian shores.

  12. @joun
    Where might I read about some of these threats?

    Where? I’d go right to the propaganda outlets like rt.com and svoboda.org instead of what is filtered through the mainstream media.

    Read between the lines.

  13. @Felix Keverich
    To prolong the existance of the regime. Ukrainian election is scheduled to take place next March. Poroshenko is currenly polling at 8% and has incentives to take risks.

    Makes sense.
    Thx.

  14. Not relevant to this topic, but to follow up on your twitter feed, but apparently the AP is reporting that the trials in question have already resulted in live births. The first genetically engineered humans have already been born. Apparently 7 pregnant women carrying the engineered children for the trials, the first of which have already come to term resulting in the birth of twin girls.

    Resistance to HIV and Cholera is all nice and all, but I want my future descendants to be superhuman demi gods with strength, intelligence, reflexes, and fortitude all at least 3 standard deviations above the base homo sapiens sapiens norm. Why roll the dice when you can min-max your descendants or better yet fix the random number generator in your favour.

    • Replies: @utu

    I want my future descendants to be superhuman demi gods with strength, intelligence, reflexes, and fortitude all at least 3 standard deviations above the base homo sapiens sapiens norm
     
    They won't be your descendants. You descendant can be smarter than you only if you couple with a very smart women and then their smartness will be more hers than yours.
  15. @Vendetta
    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.

    LOL!

    These “gunboats” have an armament of a 30 mm autocannon and a few automatic grenade launchers. For perspective, a T-72 tank parked near the shore would have no trouble blowing one of these boats out of the water, and the gunboat’s weapons wouldn’t even be able to land a scratch on it in return.

    This maybe the most pathetic show of naval force the world has witnessed in the last century.

    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.

    Assuming it was deliberate (probably was, but error cannot be ruled out) do you really think the purpose was the beat the Russian Navy, or to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    It was a smart trap. They sent these boats to Crimean waters, so that Russian invocations of international law would sound feeble, so Russia had to do something. First they sent some small ships, which resulted in the ramming (again seems to be deliberate with the Ukrainian boat simply stopping in front of the Russian vessel), and then when they persisted, Russia finally stormed the vessels. Had it not done so, I’m sure the Ukrainian boats would’ve eventually found a way to provoke Russia further. I don’t think there was a smarter course for Russia.
    , @Beckow

    ...to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine
     
    What could that be? I know the 'perception' is more important than reality crowd will go and on about how this hurts Russia in the Western media, or how this 'weakens' Kremlin, blabla...
    I see, Russia's Western coverage will get worse...how is that even possible?

    Perception is a just an attribute of reality, a relatively small one and it does nothing. It can help fools feel better, or maybe it can help Western press fool their captive audience. But what is the purpose? My guess is that the departing oligarch-government needs few months of distractions to be able to pack in peace and get the hell out of Kiev (with their luggage) before the next group of 'European democrats' takes over. It is a slight of hand so the suffering people won't get too upset as the golden-plated planes depart. It will also allow the next boss (Timoshenko?) to claim some moderation after taking office. It was the same game Porky used to climb to power 4 years ago.
  16. @Duke of Qin
    Not relevant to this topic, but to follow up on your twitter feed, but apparently the AP is reporting that the trials in question have already resulted in live births. The first genetically engineered humans have already been born. Apparently 7 pregnant women carrying the engineered children for the trials, the first of which have already come to term resulting in the birth of twin girls.

    Resistance to HIV and Cholera is all nice and all, but I want my future descendants to be superhuman demi gods with strength, intelligence, reflexes, and fortitude all at least 3 standard deviations above the base homo sapiens sapiens norm. Why roll the dice when you can min-max your descendants or better yet fix the random number generator in your favour.

    I want my future descendants to be superhuman demi gods with strength, intelligence, reflexes, and fortitude all at least 3 standard deviations above the base homo sapiens sapiens norm

    They won’t be your descendants. You descendant can be smarter than you only if you couple with a very smart women and then their smartness will be more hers than yours.

  17. “Poroshenko’s only real hope of getting reelected is by having a short victorious war.”

    Ah, the farce of democracy continues. Remember back when Bush justified illegally attacking Iraq with claims that democracies “don’t go to war with each other”? What a close-mined, ahistorical view of reality.

  18. So, can anyone predict:

    1. Whether this will actually become a formal war between Russia and Ukraine?

    2. If Ukraine loses (most likely), what will happen to it?

    3. Will this cause Russia sanctions to get upgraded to Iran levels?

    • Replies: @AP
    1. Very doubtful

    2. Land corridor to Crimea, perhaps loss of Kharkiv.

    3. If invasion of Ukraine - most likely.

    ::::::::::::::

    I doubt elections will be cancelled; small chance of delay. Most likely martial law will mean populist crackdown on oligarchic anti-Poroshenko media which will serve two purposes = make anti-Poroshenko nationalists happy, and limit anti-Poroshenko articles in media. Idealistically (but doubtfully) extra-legal corruption crackdown against non-Poroshenko figures (Putin-like consolidation).
  19. CNN just ran an overly biased account that included the unchallenged input of this establishment individual:

    https://twitter.com/MarkHertling?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    The UNSC will be meeting on this issue today.

  20. anon[193] • Disclaimer says:

    “CNN just ran an overly biased account that included the unchallenged input of this establishment individual”

    Pro tip: most of the more prominent American “news” sites such as CNN and the NYT are state propaganda by proxy. The government may not directly staff or fund them on paper (they do clandestinely through tax breaks and payment for services rendered schemes – and there is a revolving door between media employees and the US federal government), but the people who run and influence these outlets do speak for the US government/deep state; hence, the schizophrenic love/hatred for Trump: they love the guy when he carries out deep state policies such as attacking Syria but hate him when he publicly challenges their empire by pointing out uncomfortable facts about NATO or threatens their immigration plans (they are trying to compete with China in terms of population). Public opinion be damned.

    The NSA infiltrates tech companies and international bodies in order to influence tech policy making in their favor, and I can promise other government agencies do the same with the media. They did in Iraq when they embedded reporters – an effort to reduce negative criticism. You don’t think they do the same with the Times and CNN? You don’t think it’s merely a coincidence that all of these early Trump admin leakers were leaking to their former roommates at prominent “news” sites until that fact was pointed out, do you? My, what a coincidence. One might be led to believe that some prominent “journalists” got their jobs based on who they know in the government and not based on their talent or CV.

    Don’t you find if funny how outfits like the WaPo – ostensibly accountable to paying readers – could be so pro-war in spite of public opinion/the opinion of their own readers? Well, I’m sure that CIA funding/US mail subsidy/non-enactment of anti-trust legislation against an obvious monopoly to Jeff Bezos’s Amazon has nothing to do with that…hint, hint. And you don’t find it funny that the NYT, the same outfit that supported Bush’s Iraq War, could be so tone-deaf as to post a cartoon attacking Trump for defending the borders with a group of US soldiers telling him they signed up to fight wars in the Middle-East, instead? In my experience, virtually none of these enlisted guys signed up for that. It’s almost like the government and its shills are trying to tell people what to think as opposed to merely relating public opinion objectively, hint hint.

  21. anon[288] • Disclaimer says:

    “Whether this will actually become a formal war between Russia and Ukraine?”

    My hope is that the Americans will tell the Ukrainians to STFU. However, democracy is rule by idiots, so who knows. And Trump has surrounded himself with the likes of John Bolton and Mike Pompeo – two utter buffoons.

    “If Ukraine loses (most likely), what will happen to it?”

    Not sure. A formal declaration of war must be met with extraordinary seriousness, in my opinion. If I were the Russians, I might remove Ukraine’s ability to make war by eliminating its government in an opening salvo – similar to what the US tried doing to Iraq circa 2003 – the hope being a quick end to the conflict without sparking a conflagration elsewhere. The danger here is that there might not be anyone left to sign a peace treaty with or that attacking their government makes an all-out slugfest inevitable; in such case, Russia should invade and take the entirety of the country in perpetuity*. But the benefit, assuming success, is that an unpopular loser is removed from power, breaking the backs of the Ukrainians in the process and perhaps leading to a cease-fire quickly; it’s better than the alternative: drawn out war.

    “Will this cause Russia sanctions to get upgraded to Iran levels?”

    That’s probably what they are aiming for.

    The Russians should wait for a declaration of war first before striking. This will muddy the waters a bit since it would be the Ukrainians who technically started things, and the American public will have no stomach for confrontation against a country seen to be merely defending itself against a war declaration.

    *Seemingly resource intensive, but Russia would not need to occupy the entire country to get something out of it. They could merely disband/destroy Ukrainian armed forces and maintain a moderately-sized force outside of the urban areas tasked with preventing the formation of any serious attempt to rebuild a Ukrainian military through airstrikes and special forces raids. Basically, hunker down and prepare for siege warfare – destroy arms shipments to Ukraine and destroy/permanently keep down their military while otherwise leaving the country alone to make its own policies.

  22. @AP

    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.
     
    Assuming it was deliberate (probably was, but error cannot be ruled out) do you really think the purpose was the beat the Russian Navy, or to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine?

    It was a smart trap. They sent these boats to Crimean waters, so that Russian invocations of international law would sound feeble, so Russia had to do something. First they sent some small ships, which resulted in the ramming (again seems to be deliberate with the Ukrainian boat simply stopping in front of the Russian vessel), and then when they persisted, Russia finally stormed the vessels. Had it not done so, I’m sure the Ukrainian boats would’ve eventually found a way to provoke Russia further. I don’t think there was a smarter course for Russia.

    • Agree: melanf
  23. Ukraine’s fleet has not yet perished.

  24. It is safe to assume that all such actions needs to be authorized with their US masters first. So the question is what the the US wants to achieve with this? They don’t really need excuses to do sanctions as they create new ones from a whim, so one must assume that they either want to add Ukraine into NATO using some kind of crises narrative or they really want to have an open war with Russia.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The US is deeply dysfunctional, unfortunately, so it’s possible that Poroshenko (who has his own reasons with the election approaching) simply got encouraged or vaguely authorized to escalate by some deputy assistant secretary in an office of a bureau in the Department of State. And that this official never considered the risks of a further escalation or what Russian reactions might be (there’s a reason he never got promoted to assistant secretary), and that some of his bosses might be horrified by all this.

    Then, contrary to what you wrote, the possibility that they want to use it for further sanctions cannot be ruled out. While the US can sanction Russia at whim, this is not true of lower level DOS officials. So they might encourage the Ukrainians to escalate in the hope of being able to push the US government or Congress to introduce further sanctions.
  25. @neutral
    It is safe to assume that all such actions needs to be authorized with their US masters first. So the question is what the the US wants to achieve with this? They don't really need excuses to do sanctions as they create new ones from a whim, so one must assume that they either want to add Ukraine into NATO using some kind of crises narrative or they really want to have an open war with Russia.

    The US is deeply dysfunctional, unfortunately, so it’s possible that Poroshenko (who has his own reasons with the election approaching) simply got encouraged or vaguely authorized to escalate by some deputy assistant secretary in an office of a bureau in the Department of State. And that this official never considered the risks of a further escalation or what Russian reactions might be (there’s a reason he never got promoted to assistant secretary), and that some of his bosses might be horrified by all this.

    Then, contrary to what you wrote, the possibility that they want to use it for further sanctions cannot be ruled out. While the US can sanction Russia at whim, this is not true of lower level DOS officials. So they might encourage the Ukrainians to escalate in the hope of being able to push the US government or Congress to introduce further sanctions.

  26. US reconnaissance aircraft is flying close to the Crimea, both to the south over the Black Sea and to the north in Ukrainian airspace.

    https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-air-force-aircraft-makes-reconnaissance-mission-in-ukrainian-airspace.html

  27. @AquariusAnon
    So, can anyone predict:

    1. Whether this will actually become a formal war between Russia and Ukraine?

    2. If Ukraine loses (most likely), what will happen to it?

    3. Will this cause Russia sanctions to get upgraded to Iran levels?

    1. Very doubtful

    2. Land corridor to Crimea, perhaps loss of Kharkiv.

    3. If invasion of Ukraine – most likely.

    ::::::::::::::

    I doubt elections will be cancelled; small chance of delay. Most likely martial law will mean populist crackdown on oligarchic anti-Poroshenko media which will serve two purposes = make anti-Poroshenko nationalists happy, and limit anti-Poroshenko articles in media. Idealistically (but doubtfully) extra-legal corruption crackdown against non-Poroshenko figures (Putin-like consolidation).

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    On the PR front, already plenty of biased anti-Russian BS on this evident at CNN and the BBC.
  28. Glorious victory for make benefit Poroshenko! :-D :-D

  29. There are rumors about that this could have been intended as something more serious than an election prank for Porky. From Sic Semper Tyrannis:

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/11/incident-in-the-kerch-strait-ttg.html

    I can’t vouch for it, of course. But it really makes you wonder what’s going on.

    • Replies: @Swarmy Greek
    Sites like southfront or russia insider's comments are full of tinfoil conspiracies. I wouldn't lend much credence to any anonymous comment on such sites . The Ukies used a tug because their boats are not fit for sea travel, in case they broke down and needed to be tracted.
  30. Anonymous[346] • Disclaimer says:

    @RonUnz

    There could be a lot more to this than we know. A lot more!

    nb: TTG is a high-IQed guy (RPI grad) who spent his career in the U.S. military in Joint Special Operations Command. He’s a regular contributor over at the Sic Semper Tyrannis blog and is drawing attention to an anonymous post of SouthFront.

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/11/incident-in-the-kerch-strait-ttg.html

    Incident in the Kerch Strait – TTG

    Earlier today Russian Navy, Coast Guard and Aerospace Forces intercepted and captured three Ukrainian vessels as they attempted to pass through the Kerch Strait en route to Mariupol. Russian authorities claim the Ukrainians failed to coordinate the passage and illegally entered Russian territorial waters. Ukraine claims their ships were illegally seized during a routine transit of the Strait. A detailed account of the incident, including a video of the deftly executed collision with the tugboat, can be read on the SouthFront site and many other sites by now.
    These types of incidents occur from time to time. Remember the Navy patrol boats seized by the Iranians? They’re eventually resolved after much huffing and puffing and diplomatic activity. What strikes me about this incident is the lengths the Russians went to in stopping one Ukrainian tugboat and two small gunboats. The passage under the Kerch bridge was blocked by a large cargo ship. Two each Su-25 aircraft and Ka-52 attack helicopters flew overhead. The surface fleet consisted of several Sobol and Mangust class fast patrol craft, and a Svetlak class corvette. That tugboat was not going to pass through the Strait or get close to that new Crimean Bridge. Was there more to this than a mere provocation or coordination SNAFU? The following anonymous comment is from a SouthFront article. It may be just a conspiracy theory from a tinfoil hat wearing crazy. The commenter definitely has a flair for the dramatic. It may be disinformation. But what if there’s some truth in it? If so, holy crap!

    ————

    Very important Info appeared briefly on Russian media (before being scrubbed) that a NATO SADM, possibly a Diver deployable device, was being transported by Ukrainian and British Special Forces to the Kerch Straight to be used on the Crimean bridge. The device was being tracked by the Russians and they knew it had been loaded on to a Ukrainian Tug (escorted by 5 warships!! – 3 in the Black Sea, including one NATO vessel, and 2 waiting in the Sea of Azov).
    This is why the Russians acted!
    They never react with force and have never blockaded the Sea of Azov. Ground attack jets and Helicopter gunships, plus a warship armed with ASM and Torpedos were waiting.
    This level of force would not be used just for a tug and a few old Ukrainian ships. But a tug carrying a tactical nuclear device about to bring down one of the worlds most strategic bridges, a bridge hated by NATO – as per the recent Op Ed in the ‘Washington Examiner’ (Ukraine should bomb the Crimean Bridge).
    Ukraine regularly provokes Russia to little effect, but today the Russians acted to stop a terrible event.
    Ukraine is now in panic mode and there may be direct NATO intervention if the to cover this, if the Russians make this public.
    The device may have come from the UK.
    The UK have been psychologically preparing their people for a war with Russia.
    The SADM explosion would have brought down the bridge and melted the foundations, but looked like a conventional IED blast from above due to the underwater detonation and relatively low yield of less than 1KT.
    This was a WW3 level provocation STOPPED by the Russian FSB and SF’s!
    All traces of these reports are being scrubbed as I write!
    Get this out before the story is completely scrubbed.
    I will not contact you again.
    (SouthFront comments)

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the 'Devil's Alternative' when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.

    , @reiner Tor
    But why wouldn't Russia parade around the British nuclear device? The Britons don't even have an independent nuclear force. I doubt they'd use a nuclear device anyway. If the goal was merely damaging (or even destroying) the bridge, they could easily have used a conventional TNT device. And it'd still be paraded around by the Russians.

    Even if their goal was to destroy the bridge, I think the Ukrainians might be smarter here. They might simply use these incidents to create a crying wolf situation for the Russians - after a long series of provocations, the Russian might lower their guard. Which would then be the time to use the device. Of course, a more likely explanation is simply facilitating Poroshenko's re-election or postponing the election.
  31. @AP
    1. Very doubtful

    2. Land corridor to Crimea, perhaps loss of Kharkiv.

    3. If invasion of Ukraine - most likely.

    ::::::::::::::

    I doubt elections will be cancelled; small chance of delay. Most likely martial law will mean populist crackdown on oligarchic anti-Poroshenko media which will serve two purposes = make anti-Poroshenko nationalists happy, and limit anti-Poroshenko articles in media. Idealistically (but doubtfully) extra-legal corruption crackdown against non-Poroshenko figures (Putin-like consolidation).

    On the PR front, already plenty of biased anti-Russian BS on this evident at CNN and the BBC.

  32. Responding to the crisis

    Carpenter [a nonresident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center] said the United States should “respond immediately by giving Ukraine radars to boost its maritime domain awareness and land-based anti-ship missiles so it can defend its Azov Sea littoral.”

    “The United States should also impose a complete asset freeze on at least one major Russian bank, such as Sberbank, VTB, or Gazprombank. The sanctioning of a Russian bank—or several banks if Russia fails to respond initially—should be made conditional on Russia restoring Ukraine’s access to its own ports and withdrawing its troops from the Donbas. Until this happens, the costs on the Kremlin should continue to mount,” he added.

    Anders Åslund, a resident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, said: “NATO and the United States should send in naval ships in the Sea of Azov to guarantee that it stays open to international shipping.”

    Such action, Åslund said, “would be in full compliance with the UN Law of the Sea Convention of 1982 and the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits of 1936.”

    http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russia-ukraine-feud-heats-up-the-sea-of-azov

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Hack like replies for sure. Muted from that spin is the notion that Russia has a right to police water reasonably within its territory.

    Russia is claiming the Ukrainian side had previously adhered to this understanding by providing proper notice. In this instance, the Russian side has said that no such notice was given. There's also the matter of some casually calling for terror attacks against the bridge in that area. Tom Rogan comes to mind:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/10/23/naming-top-anti-russian-advocates.html

    Bridge safety for a narrow waterway is understandable along the lines of airport safety. Imagine if some planes suddenly decided to land as they please in a busy airport.

    This matter has the appearance of a possible political move on the part of Petro Poroshenko, along the lines of his state intervention in the affairs of the church.

  33. So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.

    • Replies: @Swarmy Greek
    The live broadcasting of the security council made it pretty obvious that the entire incident was a farce cooked up by Mr Chocolate so as to avoid elections.I'm interested in seeing how Poroshenko will use his new prerogatives to consolidate power.
    , @Mr. Hack
    It finally caught up to Russia, that became one over 20 years ago when Putler took over.
    , @Anon

    So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.
     
    Note that when nationalist orcs straight out of the Maidan were dying by the truckloads in Ilovaisk, the Ukrainians were screaming about Russian intervention, and I actually believe Russia did send help to Donbass rebels there.

    Thousands of "best sons of Ukraine" died over there, and no martial law was imposed. Now, after a non-deadly altercation on the sea but 4.5 months to an election, they impose a martial law.

    Interesting...
  34. @Anonymous
    There are rumors about that this could have been intended as something more serious than an election prank for Porky. From Sic Semper Tyrannis:

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/11/incident-in-the-kerch-strait-ttg.html

    I can't vouch for it, of course. But it really makes you wonder what's going on.

    Sites like southfront or russia insider’s comments are full of tinfoil conspiracies. I wouldn’t lend much credence to any anonymous comment on such sites . The Ukies used a tug because their boats are not fit for sea travel, in case they broke down and needed to be tracted.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    The Ukies used a tug because their boats are not fit for sea travel, in case they broke down and needed to be tracted.
     
    Yes. Or got damaged in confrontation.
  35. @Anonymous
    @RonUnz

    There could be a lot more to this than we know. A lot more!

    nb: TTG is a high-IQed guy (RPI grad) who spent his career in the U.S. military in Joint Special Operations Command. He’s a regular contributor over at the Sic Semper Tyrannis blog and is drawing attention to an anonymous post of SouthFront.

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/11/incident-in-the-kerch-strait-ttg.html


    Incident in the Kerch Strait - TTG

    Earlier today Russian Navy, Coast Guard and Aerospace Forces intercepted and captured three Ukrainian vessels as they attempted to pass through the Kerch Strait en route to Mariupol. Russian authorities claim the Ukrainians failed to coordinate the passage and illegally entered Russian territorial waters. Ukraine claims their ships were illegally seized during a routine transit of the Strait. A detailed account of the incident, including a video of the deftly executed collision with the tugboat, can be read on the SouthFront site and many other sites by now.
    These types of incidents occur from time to time. Remember the Navy patrol boats seized by the Iranians? They’re eventually resolved after much huffing and puffing and diplomatic activity. What strikes me about this incident is the lengths the Russians went to in stopping one Ukrainian tugboat and two small gunboats. The passage under the Kerch bridge was blocked by a large cargo ship. Two each Su-25 aircraft and Ka-52 attack helicopters flew overhead. The surface fleet consisted of several Sobol and Mangust class fast patrol craft, and a Svetlak class corvette. That tugboat was not going to pass through the Strait or get close to that new Crimean Bridge. Was there more to this than a mere provocation or coordination SNAFU? The following anonymous comment is from a SouthFront article. It may be just a conspiracy theory from a tinfoil hat wearing crazy. The commenter definitely has a flair for the dramatic. It may be disinformation. But what if there’s some truth in it? If so, holy crap!

    ————

    Very important Info appeared briefly on Russian media (before being scrubbed) that a NATO SADM, possibly a Diver deployable device, was being transported by Ukrainian and British Special Forces to the Kerch Straight to be used on the Crimean bridge. The device was being tracked by the Russians and they knew it had been loaded on to a Ukrainian Tug (escorted by 5 warships!! - 3 in the Black Sea, including one NATO vessel, and 2 waiting in the Sea of Azov).
    This is why the Russians acted!
    They never react with force and have never blockaded the Sea of Azov. Ground attack jets and Helicopter gunships, plus a warship armed with ASM and Torpedos were waiting.
    This level of force would not be used just for a tug and a few old Ukrainian ships. But a tug carrying a tactical nuclear device about to bring down one of the worlds most strategic bridges, a bridge hated by NATO - as per the recent Op Ed in the 'Washington Examiner' (Ukraine should bomb the Crimean Bridge).
    Ukraine regularly provokes Russia to little effect, but today the Russians acted to stop a terrible event.
    Ukraine is now in panic mode and there may be direct NATO intervention if the to cover this, if the Russians make this public.
    The device may have come from the UK.
    The UK have been psychologically preparing their people for a war with Russia.
    The SADM explosion would have brought down the bridge and melted the foundations, but looked like a conventional IED blast from above due to the underwater detonation and relatively low yield of less than 1KT.
    This was a WW3 level provocation STOPPED by the Russian FSB and SF's!
    All traces of these reports are being scrubbed as I write!
    Get this out before the story is completely scrubbed.
    I will not contact you again.
    (SouthFront comments)
     

    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the ‘Devil’s Alternative’ when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?
     
    Yeah, TTG, a career JSOC officer with decades of U.S. special forces operations command and had full access to TS-SCI/NATO cleared operations who made reference to it. Too bad he doesn’t have benefit of the wisdom of armchair Clausewitzes who can immediately dismiss this as ludicrous.
    , @peterAUS
    Agree.
    , @Gerard2

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the ‘Devil’s Alternative’ when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.
     
    I agree. Those sailers arrested speak the most natural, perfect Russian and move, look ,gesture in a such a quintessentially Russian way...and look unbelievably relaxed in mood and demeanor ( as if chatting with their mates ( the FSB) in a bar or with their brothers).....that it would be impossible to call these guys " Ukrainian nationalists" you twerp.

    Did you even see the video? Those guys all talk Russian at a million-miles per hour, I would not be surprised if they have never spoken a word of "Ukrainian" in their lives. Over what is a huge international and bilateral incident, and with a few of their countryman injured due to the orders of their pseudo-state.....this is the most unbelievably relaxed series of chats of military prisoners with interrogators from the "aggressor state" that will ever exist.

    Look at them you idiot....these "Ukrainian" sailors are Russian in every sense of the way

    So for the fantasist retard idea of "Ukrainian " nation we now have to take away all regions with a coast, because coastal oblast =Navy recruitment area , Navy=Russia in historical sense for insecure Banderatards and navy areas=Russia...and will always be open to allegations of '5th column" and so on, this to go with the east being Russian, Kiev being the most russian city of all, and the Russianess of the north of Ukraine criminally underrated by the authorities....and Zakarpattia not being "Ukrainian"....then all we have left are a bastard freakshow group of non-entities comprising of the pseudo idea of "Ukraine"

  36. @Anatoly Karlin
    So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.

    The live broadcasting of the security council made it pretty obvious that the entire incident was a farce cooked up by Mr Chocolate so as to avoid elections.I’m interested in seeing how Poroshenko will use his new prerogatives to consolidate power.

    • Replies: @neutral
    It is no longer a crazy hypothetical to believe that the US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings, combined with some astro turfing colour revolution thing where the people demand to be "liberated". Could such a secret plan avoid detection from the Russian spy services (considering that Karlin has said they are not very good) and if such a plan was successfully executed would Russia send its full military into Crimea or would it give up Crimea?
  37. Russia will not start a war in Ukraine.

    Nord Stream 2 is on the horizon, gas consumption/heating season is starting, and election outcomes in Ukraine actually work in Russian favour: fragmentation, large chance of Poroshenko ousting etc.
    In addition, EU parliament elections are approaching and parties and movements less anti-Russian are poised to increase their share. Several EU countries have voiced their desire for closer cooperation with Russia in the future.

    So Russia would very much like to keep things quiet in Crimea and a frozen conflict in Donbass.

    I believe the injuries are related to ramming and boarding action subduing by special forces, and not due to use of firearms and shipborne armament of Russian ships taking part in operation.

    I am not buying the nuclear device tugboat for one second – Southfront, Russia Insider and RT comment sections are full of shit, false flag shills and disinfo.

  38. Anonymous[346] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Hack
    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the 'Devil's Alternative' when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.

    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?

    Yeah, TTG, a career JSOC officer with decades of U.S. special forces operations command and had full access to TS-SCI/NATO cleared operations who made reference to it. Too bad he doesn’t have benefit of the wisdom of armchair Clausewitzes who can immediately dismiss this as ludicrous.

  39. @for-the-record

    Responding to the crisis

    Carpenter [a nonresident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center] said the United States should "respond immediately by giving Ukraine radars to boost its maritime domain awareness and land-based anti-ship missiles so it can defend its Azov Sea littoral."

    “The United States should also impose a complete asset freeze on at least one major Russian bank, such as Sberbank, VTB, or Gazprombank. The sanctioning of a Russian bank—or several banks if Russia fails to respond initially—should be made conditional on Russia restoring Ukraine's access to its own ports and withdrawing its troops from the Donbas. Until this happens, the costs on the Kremlin should continue to mount,” he added.

    Anders Åslund, a resident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, said: “NATO and the United States should send in naval ships in the Sea of Azov to guarantee that it stays open to international shipping.”

    Such action, Åslund said, “would be in full compliance with the UN Law of the Sea Convention of 1982 and the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits of 1936.”
     
    http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russia-ukraine-feud-heats-up-the-sea-of-azov

    Hack like replies for sure. Muted from that spin is the notion that Russia has a right to police water reasonably within its territory.

    Russia is claiming the Ukrainian side had previously adhered to this understanding by providing proper notice. In this instance, the Russian side has said that no such notice was given. There’s also the matter of some casually calling for terror attacks against the bridge in that area. Tom Rogan comes to mind:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/10/23/naming-top-anti-russian-advocates.html

    Bridge safety for a narrow waterway is understandable along the lines of airport safety. Imagine if some planes suddenly decided to land as they please in a busy airport.

    This matter has the appearance of a possible political move on the part of Petro Poroshenko, along the lines of his state intervention in the affairs of the church.

  40. @Anatoly Karlin
    So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.

    It finally caught up to Russia, that became one over 20 years ago when Putler took over.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    The Ukraine is indeed about 20 years behind Russia in many things.

    This gap will probably increase even further now. Martial law allows for the arbitrary confiscation of civil assets for the needs of defense, which I am sure is never going to be abused in a country such as the Ukraine. (Just kidding. Even the Babchenko fake assassination was cover for the SBU to raid an arms factory). Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.
  41. @Mr. Hack
    It finally caught up to Russia, that became one over 20 years ago when Putler took over.

    The Ukraine is indeed about 20 years behind Russia in many things.

    This gap will probably increase even further now. Martial law allows for the arbitrary confiscation of civil assets for the needs of defense, which I am sure is never going to be abused in a country such as the Ukraine. (Just kidding. Even the Babchenko fake assassination was cover for the SBU to raid an arms factory). Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Yes, it's a possible outcome, if Poroshenko goes full dictator. Though he might become some kind of Ukrainian Putin.
    , @Mr. Hack

    Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.
     
    Kind of a quick assessment, or are you getting fed some sort of a script from somewhere higher up?
  42. The U.S. must’ve had prior knowledge of this. The Ukraine is now a fully-owned subsidiary of Foggy Bottom and Ukraine needs our approval to even take a shit. I wonder which restaurant in Georgetown it was decided that Poroshenko will be the leader of the Ukraine indefinitely? And what restaurant in Arlington it was decided to split the Orthodox Church? Lol.

  43. Looking at the video again, the Russian vessel turns inexplicably left right before the collision. Well, it’s only inexplicable if we assume that they didn’t intentionally ram the tugboat.

    So I’d think it was intentional ramming. Still it looks like a provocation by the Ukrainians – the two Russian vessels obviously tried to push the tugboat to the right, instead it stopped, which probably led to the Russian captain’s decision to ram it to show he means business.

    • Replies: @Spisarevski
    Of course the ramming was intentional. The Russians simply got sick of their shit.

    During the last several months there were a number of incidents - a small fishing ship being arrested (recently it got sold on an auction organized by Ukraine, I am not sure if the crew is still in jail or free) and even a tanker! A real Somalia on the Black Sea. Also frequent incursions in Russia's territorial waters and refusal to do the proper warnings and requests for permission to pass through is reason enough for someone to finally get pissed.

    That southfront comment sounds like complete bullshit but it's not like blowing up the bridge hasn't been suggested by Ukrainian public figures and by American journalists, like that one time in the Washington Post.

    There was also a similar provocation recently, but the rusty buckets were simply escorted by the coast guard that time. They went to build a base in Berdyansk I believe, which will be hosting old Oliver Perry class frigates gifted by the United States.

  44. @Anonymous
    @RonUnz

    There could be a lot more to this than we know. A lot more!

    nb: TTG is a high-IQed guy (RPI grad) who spent his career in the U.S. military in Joint Special Operations Command. He’s a regular contributor over at the Sic Semper Tyrannis blog and is drawing attention to an anonymous post of SouthFront.

    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/11/incident-in-the-kerch-strait-ttg.html


    Incident in the Kerch Strait - TTG

    Earlier today Russian Navy, Coast Guard and Aerospace Forces intercepted and captured three Ukrainian vessels as they attempted to pass through the Kerch Strait en route to Mariupol. Russian authorities claim the Ukrainians failed to coordinate the passage and illegally entered Russian territorial waters. Ukraine claims their ships were illegally seized during a routine transit of the Strait. A detailed account of the incident, including a video of the deftly executed collision with the tugboat, can be read on the SouthFront site and many other sites by now.
    These types of incidents occur from time to time. Remember the Navy patrol boats seized by the Iranians? They’re eventually resolved after much huffing and puffing and diplomatic activity. What strikes me about this incident is the lengths the Russians went to in stopping one Ukrainian tugboat and two small gunboats. The passage under the Kerch bridge was blocked by a large cargo ship. Two each Su-25 aircraft and Ka-52 attack helicopters flew overhead. The surface fleet consisted of several Sobol and Mangust class fast patrol craft, and a Svetlak class corvette. That tugboat was not going to pass through the Strait or get close to that new Crimean Bridge. Was there more to this than a mere provocation or coordination SNAFU? The following anonymous comment is from a SouthFront article. It may be just a conspiracy theory from a tinfoil hat wearing crazy. The commenter definitely has a flair for the dramatic. It may be disinformation. But what if there’s some truth in it? If so, holy crap!

    ————

    Very important Info appeared briefly on Russian media (before being scrubbed) that a NATO SADM, possibly a Diver deployable device, was being transported by Ukrainian and British Special Forces to the Kerch Straight to be used on the Crimean bridge. The device was being tracked by the Russians and they knew it had been loaded on to a Ukrainian Tug (escorted by 5 warships!! - 3 in the Black Sea, including one NATO vessel, and 2 waiting in the Sea of Azov).
    This is why the Russians acted!
    They never react with force and have never blockaded the Sea of Azov. Ground attack jets and Helicopter gunships, plus a warship armed with ASM and Torpedos were waiting.
    This level of force would not be used just for a tug and a few old Ukrainian ships. But a tug carrying a tactical nuclear device about to bring down one of the worlds most strategic bridges, a bridge hated by NATO - as per the recent Op Ed in the 'Washington Examiner' (Ukraine should bomb the Crimean Bridge).
    Ukraine regularly provokes Russia to little effect, but today the Russians acted to stop a terrible event.
    Ukraine is now in panic mode and there may be direct NATO intervention if the to cover this, if the Russians make this public.
    The device may have come from the UK.
    The UK have been psychologically preparing their people for a war with Russia.
    The SADM explosion would have brought down the bridge and melted the foundations, but looked like a conventional IED blast from above due to the underwater detonation and relatively low yield of less than 1KT.
    This was a WW3 level provocation STOPPED by the Russian FSB and SF's!
    All traces of these reports are being scrubbed as I write!
    Get this out before the story is completely scrubbed.
    I will not contact you again.
    (SouthFront comments)
     

    But why wouldn’t Russia parade around the British nuclear device? The Britons don’t even have an independent nuclear force. I doubt they’d use a nuclear device anyway. If the goal was merely damaging (or even destroying) the bridge, they could easily have used a conventional TNT device. And it’d still be paraded around by the Russians.

    Even if their goal was to destroy the bridge, I think the Ukrainians might be smarter here. They might simply use these incidents to create a crying wolf situation for the Russians – after a long series of provocations, the Russian might lower their guard. Which would then be the time to use the device. Of course, a more likely explanation is simply facilitating Poroshenko’s re-election or postponing the election.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
  45. @Swarmy Greek
    The live broadcasting of the security council made it pretty obvious that the entire incident was a farce cooked up by Mr Chocolate so as to avoid elections.I'm interested in seeing how Poroshenko will use his new prerogatives to consolidate power.

    It is no longer a crazy hypothetical to believe that the US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings, combined with some astro turfing colour revolution thing where the people demand to be “liberated”. Could such a secret plan avoid detection from the Russian spy services (considering that Karlin has said they are not very good) and if such a plan was successfully executed would Russia send its full military into Crimea or would it give up Crimea?

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    This is politically and militarily unrealistic on every level.
    , @peterAUS

    ...US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings...
     
    Oh......oh my.
    Whoah.
    Even with the fast skimming through the comments this got me. Had to re-read it a couple of times.
    Moving on.
    , @Den Lille Abe
    Often feel like that, having thoughts like this ?
    I recommend you seek medical advice urgently. Such delusions can lead to severe life threatening situations.
  46. @Anatoly Karlin
    The Ukraine is indeed about 20 years behind Russia in many things.

    This gap will probably increase even further now. Martial law allows for the arbitrary confiscation of civil assets for the needs of defense, which I am sure is never going to be abused in a country such as the Ukraine. (Just kidding. Even the Babchenko fake assassination was cover for the SBU to raid an arms factory). Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.

    Yes, it’s a possible outcome, if Poroshenko goes full dictator. Though he might become some kind of Ukrainian Putin.

    • Replies: @AP
    Basically zero chance of Poroshenko becoming a dictator (unless you treat Ukraine like western media treats Russia). Elections may be delayed by a month or three but not cancelled. The likely outcome is that martial law will enable Poroshenko to do to his rivals what Putin did to his. Much of Ukraine's mass media is still owned by eastern oligarchs who are not very friendly towards Poroshenko. This will likely be treated like Gusinsky's media empire was in the early 2000s. Poroshenko places second in most presidential polls, with more media control he may find a way to get to first place.

    The hryvnia has dropped (as has the ruble) but I doubt policies that result in the halt of the post 2015 economic recovery will be implemented. Poroshenko doesn't have the power to state in power if the people hate him. They don't now.

  47. An example of BBC bias:

    https://twitter.com/irenatar?lang=en

    This particular svido was on the BBC, where she said that Porky has nothing to gain by initiating a provocation with Russia – instead calling it a Russian conspiracy theory. There was no challenge whatsoever to her. The Kiev regime has at least a hat trick for unnecessarily provoking things.

    - the Babchenko stunt
    - state interference with a church matter
    - its response to this latest incident.

    • Replies: @Gerard2
    look at her twitter account...the account of a typical blinkered and crazed Ukro-nazi bitch. The English Russia Correspondents are just as braindead and unprofessional.

    One good thing they did though was a completely fair documentary on Viktor Bout, it made clear the plentiful BS in the American operation and allegations against him
  48. Does anyone else share my feeling that Maidan actually benefited Russia and Russians in Ukraine in the long-term?

    Yanukovych in power would mean more wasted Russian subsidies, more Russian purchases of Ukrainian-made products but more importantly: more time for methodical, steady Ukrainization of “pro-Russian Ukrainians” (themselves mostly descendants of Russians and Sovoks) and remaining Russians in Ukraine through education, state-mandated propaganda and soft power of diaspora, USA, Canada.

    Faced with Maidan, Svoboda, radicals etc. all of this was brought to an abrubt halt and they were faced with the final decision – bow down and integrate, or double down and wake their Russianes, their opposition to Banderists, Ukrainian unitarians, uniats etc.

    This might sound cynical, but Sovoks+pro-Russians of Ukraine by themselves are not a particularly useful long-term “resource” for Russia. Gaining Crimea, eradicating Donbass industry, crippling Ukraine with war, exodus and brain-drain (Russia received a large share) might be their optimal utility.

    Ukraine doesn’t look any more modern, less-corrupt and “Western-style” than prior to revolution, it has arguably degraded in freedom of speech, business and media, and with the martial law in power, the economy and prospects in the future might get even worse.

    • Replies: @Anon
    I don't think the Maidan benefited anyone but certain Ukrainian oligarchs (not Kolomoysky though in the end) and the US government, which got to conserve Ukraine in an anti-Russian mode in a situation where the West is considerably weaker and no longer able to expand and integrate further countries into the Euro-Atlantic space.

    The people that are happy with post-Maidan situation are rather rare in Ukraine. Some statistics I have seen say about 8% are happy. The situation does not benefit ordinary Ukrainians, it does not benefit Russia, Crimea, DNR and LNR, it does not benefit Europe either.

    It is true though that Crimea and Donbass are free from Kiev's current Ukrainisation of all facets of life agenda. But in a situation, where the government is weak and unpopular, there is no reason somewhere in the future Russian language will not get equal rights with Ukrainian in Ukraine proper. It is a language of a significant number of people.
  49. @Anatoly Karlin
    The Ukraine is indeed about 20 years behind Russia in many things.

    This gap will probably increase even further now. Martial law allows for the arbitrary confiscation of civil assets for the needs of defense, which I am sure is never going to be abused in a country such as the Ukraine. (Just kidding. Even the Babchenko fake assassination was cover for the SBU to raid an arms factory). Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.

    Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.

    Kind of a quick assessment, or are you getting fed some sort of a script from somewhere higher up?

    • Replies: @Anon

    Kind of a quick assessment, or are you getting fed some sort of a script from somewhere higher up?
     
    I would very much like to do business in a country, where the government can arbitrarily confiscate it. Who wouldn't?
  50. The Ukrainian ambassador in Germany has demanded that EU and NATO warships should be sent to the Black and Azov sea to deter Russia:

    https://jungefreiheit.de/politik/ausland/2018/ukraine-fordert-nato-kriegsschiffe-gegen-russland-an/

    What a bunch of deluded assholes.

  51. @Vendetta
    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.

    LOL!

    These “gunboats” have an armament of a 30 mm autocannon and a few automatic grenade launchers. For perspective, a T-72 tank parked near the shore would have no trouble blowing one of these boats out of the water, and the gunboat’s weapons wouldn’t even be able to land a scratch on it in return.

    This maybe the most pathetic show of naval force the world has witnessed in the last century.

    “Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing…”

    Russia confiscated this embarrassment from those monkey grenadiers, and is keeping it from public eyes.

  52. Anon[422] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.

    So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.

    Note that when nationalist orcs straight out of the Maidan were dying by the truckloads in Ilovaisk, the Ukrainians were screaming about Russian intervention, and I actually believe Russia did send help to Donbass rebels there.

    Thousands of “best sons of Ukraine” died over there, and no martial law was imposed. Now, after a non-deadly altercation on the sea but 4.5 months to an election, they impose a martial law.

    Interesting…

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Excellent point. Just saw "Putin's banker" on the Fox News Business channel. In terms of giving a mainstream Russian perspective, a much better job could've been done in that exchange.
  53. @Mr. Hack

    Business is going to flee, and I now expect the lumbering progress that the Ukraine has been making since 2015 to reverse.
     
    Kind of a quick assessment, or are you getting fed some sort of a script from somewhere higher up?

    Kind of a quick assessment, or are you getting fed some sort of a script from somewhere higher up?

    I would very much like to do business in a country, where the government can arbitrarily confiscate it. Who wouldn’t?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Why don't you consider moving to Russia then??...
  54. @reiner Tor
    Looking at the video again, the Russian vessel turns inexplicably left right before the collision. Well, it's only inexplicable if we assume that they didn't intentionally ram the tugboat.

    So I'd think it was intentional ramming. Still it looks like a provocation by the Ukrainians - the two Russian vessels obviously tried to push the tugboat to the right, instead it stopped, which probably led to the Russian captain's decision to ram it to show he means business.

    Of course the ramming was intentional. The Russians simply got sick of their shit.

    During the last several months there were a number of incidents – a small fishing ship being arrested (recently it got sold on an auction organized by Ukraine, I am not sure if the crew is still in jail or free) and even a tanker! A real Somalia on the Black Sea. Also frequent incursions in Russia’s territorial waters and refusal to do the proper warnings and requests for permission to pass through is reason enough for someone to finally get pissed.

    That southfront comment sounds like complete bullshit but it’s not like blowing up the bridge hasn’t been suggested by Ukrainian public figures and by American journalists, like that one time in the Washington Post.

    There was also a similar provocation recently, but the rusty buckets were simply escorted by the coast guard that time. They went to build a base in Berdyansk I believe, which will be hosting old Oliver Perry class frigates gifted by the United States.

  55. @neutral
    It is no longer a crazy hypothetical to believe that the US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings, combined with some astro turfing colour revolution thing where the people demand to be "liberated". Could such a secret plan avoid detection from the Russian spy services (considering that Karlin has said they are not very good) and if such a plan was successfully executed would Russia send its full military into Crimea or would it give up Crimea?

    This is politically and militarily unrealistic on every level.

  56. @Anon
    O/T

    What's up in Armenia? Is the country going into the EU orbit?

    https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1066782275805732864

    A mixed bag. It’s what Pasinyan was promising in opposition, but, now he’s in government, he’ll have to be a bit more responsible (we can hope). He has less room for manoeuvre than Saakashvilli had, because Armenia still has disputed territory to lose and Armenia gets its subsidised energy from Russia* and not Azerbijian. Georgia really was at rock bottom in the mid 00s. A lot of his party activists are atlanticist, soros trpes, others are more pragmatic and disliked the Karabakh clique for entirely understandable reasons. The only thing we know for sure is that someone’s going to get cucked over there; It could go either way, but his party was always likely to get a superiority.

    *It’s not just for heating, almost all of their vehicle fleet runs on compressed natural gas and there’s now a lot of dutch style heated greenhouses exporting all of their produce via Verkhniy lars. Their railway is also a subsidiary of rzd.

  57. Anon[422] • Disclaimer says:
    @Epigon
    Does anyone else share my feeling that Maidan actually benefited Russia and Russians in Ukraine in the long-term?

    Yanukovych in power would mean more wasted Russian subsidies, more Russian purchases of Ukrainian-made products but more importantly: more time for methodical, steady Ukrainization of "pro-Russian Ukrainians" (themselves mostly descendants of Russians and Sovoks) and remaining Russians in Ukraine through education, state-mandated propaganda and soft power of diaspora, USA, Canada.

    Faced with Maidan, Svoboda, radicals etc. all of this was brought to an abrubt halt and they were faced with the final decision - bow down and integrate, or double down and wake their Russianes, their opposition to Banderists, Ukrainian unitarians, uniats etc.

    This might sound cynical, but Sovoks+pro-Russians of Ukraine by themselves are not a particularly useful long-term "resource" for Russia. Gaining Crimea, eradicating Donbass industry, crippling Ukraine with war, exodus and brain-drain (Russia received a large share) might be their optimal utility.

    Ukraine doesn't look any more modern, less-corrupt and "Western-style" than prior to revolution, it has arguably degraded in freedom of speech, business and media, and with the martial law in power, the economy and prospects in the future might get even worse.

    I don’t think the Maidan benefited anyone but certain Ukrainian oligarchs (not Kolomoysky though in the end) and the US government, which got to conserve Ukraine in an anti-Russian mode in a situation where the West is considerably weaker and no longer able to expand and integrate further countries into the Euro-Atlantic space.

    The people that are happy with post-Maidan situation are rather rare in Ukraine. Some statistics I have seen say about 8% are happy. The situation does not benefit ordinary Ukrainians, it does not benefit Russia, Crimea, DNR and LNR, it does not benefit Europe either.

    It is true though that Crimea and Donbass are free from Kiev’s current Ukrainisation of all facets of life agenda. But in a situation, where the government is weak and unpopular, there is no reason somewhere in the future Russian language will not get equal rights with Ukrainian in Ukraine proper. It is a language of a significant number of people.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    US foreign policy establishment realist John Mearsheimer, was really off when he said that Russia is trying to wreck Ukraine:

    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/will-ceasefire-ukraine-russian-separatists-last

    Give him another Valdai invite over some others. Russia doesn't benefit from having a country on its border as large as Ukraine flop.
  58. A recording of an Ukrainian crewman begging the Russians for help

    The Russians tell him that their (ukies’) boats are armed, so they have to come out with their hands visible and unarmed and surrender, while the Ukrainian repeats his pleas and coordinates.

    It’s pretty funny and pathetic, but on 1:53 you can hear someone in the background say “Whoever doesn’t jump is a Moskal” – a popular maidanist/anti-russian slogan.
    You really can never be sure and can never assume that you are dealing with normal people when dealing with Ukrainians, so preventing a possible threat to the bridge is not as unrealistic as it may sound.
    I believe I heard in one of the news videos that the Russians also requested to inspect the vessels before they can pass, and the Ukrainians denied the request. So it had to be done the hard way.
    No need for British nukes conspiracy theories here, everything makes perfect sense.

  59. Ukraine may need to purchase another new navy, before their next incursion.

    Putin has impounded these 3 ships.

    Perhaps Ukraine can get their crews returned.

  60. @Anon

    Kind of a quick assessment, or are you getting fed some sort of a script from somewhere higher up?
     
    I would very much like to do business in a country, where the government can arbitrarily confiscate it. Who wouldn't?

    Why don’t you consider moving to Russia then??…

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    For that matter, you could go to Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.
  61. @AP

    Ukraine’s latest provocation is embarrassing even by their standards. Two 50-ton gunboats (an export design for river and lake patrol in Uzbekistan, taken into service by Ukraine in lieu of their ability to afford anything better) and a tug, sent to challenge the Russian fleet in its home waters.
     
    Assuming it was deliberate (probably was, but error cannot be ruled out) do you really think the purpose was the beat the Russian Navy, or to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine?

    …to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine

    What could that be? I know the ‘perception‘ is more important than reality crowd will go and on about how this hurts Russia in the Western media, or how this ‘weakens‘ Kremlin, blabla…
    I see, Russia’s Western coverage will get worse…how is that even possible?

    Perception is a just an attribute of reality, a relatively small one and it does nothing. It can help fools feel better, or maybe it can help Western press fool their captive audience. But what is the purpose? My guess is that the departing oligarch-government needs few months of distractions to be able to pack in peace and get the hell out of Kiev (with their luggage) before the next group of ‘European democrats‘ takes over. It is a slight of hand so the suffering people won’t get too upset as the golden-plated planes depart. It will also allow the next boss (Timoshenko?) to claim some moderation after taking office. It was the same game Porky used to climb to power 4 years ago.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Russia could be hit by even harder sanctions, and Ukraine would receive further military assistance. Due to the coverage of the issue in the Western press, it could force the hands of the USG/EUSA/NATO collective leaderships.

    So basically Ukraine lost a few ships, but will receive way more military assistance, meanwhile its enemy Russia will be hit with further sanctions, which might make it easier for Ukraine to keep increasing its relative position.
    , @peterAUS

    ...It is a slight of hand so the suffering people won’t get too upset as the golden-plated planes depart. It will also allow the next boss (Timoshenko?) to claim some moderation after taking office. It was the same game Porky used to climb to power 4 years ago
     
    Sounds plausible.
  62. @peterAUS
    Pretty much, more or less.
    The cannon with proper ammo IS able to do much more than a scratch in that exchange. Academic, of course, here.

    And, the 30 mm cannon barrel(s) were prudently and carefully covered.

    Pathetic attempt in technological/tactical sense for sure, BUT, in the world we live in that means nothing.

    It's all about managed perceptions and agendas.

    I can't see the regime in Kiev doing this without approval from..ahm...abroad.

    The question I don't have an answer for now is..why now?

    What Washi...I mean, Kiev, was/is hoping to achieve here?

    I can’t see the regime in Kiev doing this without approval from..ahm…abroad.

    I do.

    By the way seems like this time pro-Ukrainian actions were not approved and pre-arranged with US – as US RC-135V plane only came to the area when events already over

    https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5bfbadc79a794774f8aa51e4?from=newsfeed

  63. “The US is going to invade Crimea.” “A British tactical nuclear device.” “Gunboat diplomacy.”

    This has gotten way out of control, folks.
    Let us just hope that the Ukrainians haven’t actually procured a ex-Soviet “loose nuke.”
    Couldn’t blame them considering how things have turned out since 1991.
    The Russians probably are seeking a land bridge to their newly acquired territory of Crimea which has been under Russian control for the vast majority of the last few centuries.
    The Ukrainians should probably cede them that land bridge if it would mean the removal of all those little green men in the other parts of their country.
    Seems like a fairly equitable trade, all things considered.

    Otherwise, literally anything could and probably will happen. It’s incredible how many people seem to be watering at the mouth for a conflict.
    Nobody profits from broken windows except the MIC which produces the billion dollar weapon systems used to actually break the glass and a whole lot of other things.

  64. A land bridge could have been a feasible strategy back in 2014, for a short while, before Russia decided to back off and only provide the bare necessities of assistance to keep LDNR afloat.

    Now there’s an up-and-running proper bridge across the Kerch strait however, so…

  65. @Swarmy Greek
    Sites like southfront or russia insider's comments are full of tinfoil conspiracies. I wouldn't lend much credence to any anonymous comment on such sites . The Ukies used a tug because their boats are not fit for sea travel, in case they broke down and needed to be tracted.

    The Ukies used a tug because their boats are not fit for sea travel, in case they broke down and needed to be tracted.

    Yes. Or got damaged in confrontation.

  66. @Mr. Hack
    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the 'Devil's Alternative' when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.

    Agree.

  67. @Beckow

    ...to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine
     
    What could that be? I know the 'perception' is more important than reality crowd will go and on about how this hurts Russia in the Western media, or how this 'weakens' Kremlin, blabla...
    I see, Russia's Western coverage will get worse...how is that even possible?

    Perception is a just an attribute of reality, a relatively small one and it does nothing. It can help fools feel better, or maybe it can help Western press fool their captive audience. But what is the purpose? My guess is that the departing oligarch-government needs few months of distractions to be able to pack in peace and get the hell out of Kiev (with their luggage) before the next group of 'European democrats' takes over. It is a slight of hand so the suffering people won't get too upset as the golden-plated planes depart. It will also allow the next boss (Timoshenko?) to claim some moderation after taking office. It was the same game Porky used to climb to power 4 years ago.

    Russia could be hit by even harder sanctions, and Ukraine would receive further military assistance. Due to the coverage of the issue in the Western press, it could force the hands of the USG/EUSA/NATO collective leaderships.

    So basically Ukraine lost a few ships, but will receive way more military assistance, meanwhile its enemy Russia will be hit with further sanctions, which might make it easier for Ukraine to keep increasing its relative position.

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @DreadIlk
    Ukraine does not decide anything.
    , @Beckow
    There is no such thing as sustainable 'harder sanctions'. We are at a point that only very basic and almost unavoidable business transactions are taking place, there is not much more that could be 'sanctioned'. If the West sanctions Russian energy, it will trigger a recession at home. If it sanctions Swift, it will undermine global finance and splinter reserve currency policies even more. If they ban more Putin 'friends' from travel or expropriate their investments, Russia can easily retaliate by taking over very substantial Western investments in the Russian energy and minerals.

    This is a cul-de-sac, we have sanctioned this to death, there is no rational place to go. And Russia will clearly survive, it is hardly isolated, more than half of the economic world is joyfully trading with them (China, Korea, most of Asia, Latin America, Turkey, Izrael, India...). Europe and Russia have lowered their economies by around 2-3% with the mutual sanctions, noticeable, but also not catastrophic.

    Ukraine has no way to benefit from more weapons. They are not in the same league militarily as Russia, so more weapons means very little. What are they going to do with more weapons, invade Russia? This is a lose-lose, sooner or later even Kiev will realize it. But first they have to get over their emotions. The real problem in the Azov See is that there is almost no trading activity, the industry is dead, sending tug boats on a fishing expedition is a sign of that economic collapse.

  68. @neutral
    It is no longer a crazy hypothetical to believe that the US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings, combined with some astro turfing colour revolution thing where the people demand to be "liberated". Could such a secret plan avoid detection from the Russian spy services (considering that Karlin has said they are not very good) and if such a plan was successfully executed would Russia send its full military into Crimea or would it give up Crimea?

    …US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings…

    Oh……oh my.
    Whoah.
    Even with the fast skimming through the comments this got me. Had to re-read it a couple of times.
    Moving on.

  69. @Beckow

    ...to get the Russians to respond in a way that would be advantageous to Ukraine
     
    What could that be? I know the 'perception' is more important than reality crowd will go and on about how this hurts Russia in the Western media, or how this 'weakens' Kremlin, blabla...
    I see, Russia's Western coverage will get worse...how is that even possible?

    Perception is a just an attribute of reality, a relatively small one and it does nothing. It can help fools feel better, or maybe it can help Western press fool their captive audience. But what is the purpose? My guess is that the departing oligarch-government needs few months of distractions to be able to pack in peace and get the hell out of Kiev (with their luggage) before the next group of 'European democrats' takes over. It is a slight of hand so the suffering people won't get too upset as the golden-plated planes depart. It will also allow the next boss (Timoshenko?) to claim some moderation after taking office. It was the same game Porky used to climb to power 4 years ago.

    …It is a slight of hand so the suffering people won’t get too upset as the golden-plated planes depart. It will also allow the next boss (Timoshenko?) to claim some moderation after taking office. It was the same game Porky used to climb to power 4 years ago

    Sounds plausible.

  70. The Kerch incident is probably best viewed as part of a pattern of escalation including Syria, the Norway exercises, the growing ties between Russia and China, etc. Russia has been pushing back against US hegemony, and the US has been broadening the front to take advantage of its superior resources.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    One of these incidents might be miscalculated by one side or the other. It's highly unlikely, but probabilities are additive. As the number of incidents increases, the chances of a serious screwup due to miscalculation increase, too.

    It's unlikely, this time, or the next. But over the next twenty years? Let's hope tensions will decrease sooner.
  71. @JLK
    The Kerch incident is probably best viewed as part of a pattern of escalation including Syria, the Norway exercises, the growing ties between Russia and China, etc. Russia has been pushing back against US hegemony, and the US has been broadening the front to take advantage of its superior resources.

    One of these incidents might be miscalculated by one side or the other. It’s highly unlikely, but probabilities are additive. As the number of incidents increases, the chances of a serious screwup due to miscalculation increase, too.

    It’s unlikely, this time, or the next. But over the next twenty years? Let’s hope tensions will decrease sooner.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    ...over the next twenty years...
     
    If only.
    I'd half that time span; on a gloomy day tend to half that half.

    The paradigm appears to have everything wrong going along exponential curves.
  72. @reiner Tor
    One of these incidents might be miscalculated by one side or the other. It's highly unlikely, but probabilities are additive. As the number of incidents increases, the chances of a serious screwup due to miscalculation increase, too.

    It's unlikely, this time, or the next. But over the next twenty years? Let's hope tensions will decrease sooner.

    …over the next twenty years…

    If only.
    I’d half that time span; on a gloomy day tend to half that half.

    The paradigm appears to have everything wrong going along exponential curves.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Well, I'm pretty sure we won't survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that'd be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.
  73. Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened? BBC says that these waters are mutually shared by treaty and that free passage for both countries has been the norm but that Russia has recently begun searching Ukrainian vessels. If so this seems like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Russia.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Ukrainians detained a Crimean (Kerch) fishing boat called "Nord" in March, and held its crew as prisoners until recently (so like over half a year), demanding that they renounce their Russian citizenship and admit being Ukrainians. They accused the captain (and maybe the rest of the crew) of violating the rules of visiting Crimea (Ukraine basically prohibits non-Crimeans from traveling there without Ukrainian permission). This looked like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Ukraine.

    The Ukrainians were also threatening to blow up the bridge the Russians just built. So it's somewhat understandable that the Russians want to make sure it won't be happening.
    , @peterAUS

    Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened?
     
    Don't think so.
    You've, so obviously, made your mind there.I mean....hahaha...BBC......
    Crackup.

    All good.Free will and such.

    Ah...just seen reiner Tor reply. Admirable.
    , @Mikhail
    The answer to your inquiry has already been stated at this thread in comment 40 as well as some others.
    , @E
    This is probably as good an account as you'll find which also details the international law aspects:
    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/11/russia-blocks-ukrainian-navy-from-militarizing-the-sea-of-azov.html

    Ukraine also had treaty obligations which they didn't live up to.
  74. @peterAUS

    ...over the next twenty years...
     
    If only.
    I'd half that time span; on a gloomy day tend to half that half.

    The paradigm appears to have everything wrong going along exponential curves.

    Well, I’m pretty sure we won’t survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that’d be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Well, I’m pretty sure we won’t survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that’d be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.
     
    Feels like it.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.
     
    Well....probably better methodology than presently used in any of major western capitols in any serious decision making process.

    This is the part when being old works rather well. I do remember 80's, Pershings etc. Was part of the system then.

    The players, then, were, in my book, wizards comparing to players now.
    Public feels even worse. Much worse, actually. I am quite sure that 80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work. And...hehe....those are, at least, interested in the topic.

    What can go wrong.....

  75. @neutral
    It is no longer a crazy hypothetical to believe that the US is planning to take Crimea by force. Something like sending some special forces to take over key military bases and key administration buildings, combined with some astro turfing colour revolution thing where the people demand to be "liberated". Could such a secret plan avoid detection from the Russian spy services (considering that Karlin has said they are not very good) and if such a plan was successfully executed would Russia send its full military into Crimea or would it give up Crimea?

    Often feel like that, having thoughts like this ?
    I recommend you seek medical advice urgently. Such delusions can lead to severe life threatening situations.

    • Replies: @neutral
    Fuck off moron, if 5 years ago somebody said that Ukraine is sending its troops to the Russian border as a hostile force - would you have believed it? The intention to take back Crimea is absolutely clear, combine that with the foreign policy behaviour of the US in the last few decades and an increasingly fanatical American population, everything is on the cards - absolutely everything.
  76. @Anonymous
    Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened? BBC says that these waters are mutually shared by treaty and that free passage for both countries has been the norm but that Russia has recently begun searching Ukrainian vessels. If so this seems like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Russia.

    Ukrainians detained a Crimean (Kerch) fishing boat called “Nord” in March, and held its crew as prisoners until recently (so like over half a year), demanding that they renounce their Russian citizenship and admit being Ukrainians. They accused the captain (and maybe the rest of the crew) of violating the rules of visiting Crimea (Ukraine basically prohibits non-Crimeans from traveling there without Ukrainian permission). This looked like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Ukraine.

    The Ukrainians were also threatening to blow up the bridge the Russians just built. So it’s somewhat understandable that the Russians want to make sure it won’t be happening.

    • Replies: @AP
    Yes, but Russia has also been stopping and searching all ships going to and from Ukraine's ports on the Azov sea. This costs $10,000s per day for each ship.
  77. @Anonymous
    Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened? BBC says that these waters are mutually shared by treaty and that free passage for both countries has been the norm but that Russia has recently begun searching Ukrainian vessels. If so this seems like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Russia.

    Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened?

    Don’t think so.
    You’ve, so obviously, made your mind there.I mean….hahaha…BBC……
    Crackup.

    All good.Free will and such.

    Ah…just seen reiner Tor reply. Admirable.

  78. @reiner Tor
    Well, I'm pretty sure we won't survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that'd be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.

    Well, I’m pretty sure we won’t survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that’d be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.

    Feels like it.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.

    Well….probably better methodology than presently used in any of major western capitols in any serious decision making process.

    This is the part when being old works rather well. I do remember 80′s, Pershings etc. Was part of the system then.

    The players, then, were, in my book, wizards comparing to players now.
    Public feels even worse. Much worse, actually. I am quite sure that 80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work. And…hehe….those are, at least, interested in the topic.

    What can go wrong…..

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    The real big war (e.g., WWIII between the dying empire and either Russia or China) is highly unlikely. The US elites want huge military budgets to steal billions from, but they must realize that to enjoy their loot they have to be alive. They don’t give a hoot about Ukrainians or other aborigines dying to provide them a pretext to further increase Pentagon budget, but they won’t sacrifice even their own gardeners, let alone themselves.
    , @reiner Tor

    80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work
     
    I’m unfamiliar with the technical details. I know that before reentry the warhead (basically, multiple warheads packed together in the part of the missile which is still traveling) automatically disintegrates into multiple smaller vehicles, each directed at a different target. This means, I think, not one targeting Los Angeles and another New York, rather something like LA and San Diego. They use, I believe, some kind of wings to change course, both to correct their course to hit their targets more precisely and to avoid anti-missile defense systems. Once above the target, at an optimal distance, the warhead detonates. Not all warheads are created to be equal, some being better at both steering themselves and knowing where to detonate than others. One big enough ICBM could probably wipe out a larger US state, at least the big cities. The smaller towns are probably safer, at least from the initial detonations.
  79. @reiner Tor
    Yes, it's a possible outcome, if Poroshenko goes full dictator. Though he might become some kind of Ukrainian Putin.

    Basically zero chance of Poroshenko becoming a dictator (unless you treat Ukraine like western media treats Russia). Elections may be delayed by a month or three but not cancelled. The likely outcome is that martial law will enable Poroshenko to do to his rivals what Putin did to his. Much of Ukraine’s mass media is still owned by eastern oligarchs who are not very friendly towards Poroshenko. This will likely be treated like Gusinsky’s media empire was in the early 2000s. Poroshenko places second in most presidential polls, with more media control he may find a way to get to first place.

    The hryvnia has dropped (as has the ruble) but I doubt policies that result in the halt of the post 2015 economic recovery will be implemented. Poroshenko doesn’t have the power to state in power if the people hate him. They don’t now.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Good points.
  80. @reiner Tor
    Ukrainians detained a Crimean (Kerch) fishing boat called "Nord" in March, and held its crew as prisoners until recently (so like over half a year), demanding that they renounce their Russian citizenship and admit being Ukrainians. They accused the captain (and maybe the rest of the crew) of violating the rules of visiting Crimea (Ukraine basically prohibits non-Crimeans from traveling there without Ukrainian permission). This looked like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Ukraine.

    The Ukrainians were also threatening to blow up the bridge the Russians just built. So it's somewhat understandable that the Russians want to make sure it won't be happening.

    Yes, but Russia has also been stopping and searching all ships going to and from Ukraine’s ports on the Azov sea. This costs $10,000s per day for each ship.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Though they started it only after the Ukrainians refused to release the boat or even the crew.

    However, it’s possible that it’s all linked to the bridge, in which case it’s more the Russians’ fault. The whole situation with the unrecognized Crimea annexation is just highly unstable, because now there’s a bridge which is vulnerable to attack, but while it’s there, it interferes with the traffic, and merely to protect it from possible sabotage (and it’s obvious that the world wouldn’t blame Ukraine for it, if it were to happen), the Russians have to go to such lengths which causes a lot of inconvenience and economic harm to Ukraine.

    I cannot see an easy solution here.
  81. @reiner Tor
    Russia could be hit by even harder sanctions, and Ukraine would receive further military assistance. Due to the coverage of the issue in the Western press, it could force the hands of the USG/EUSA/NATO collective leaderships.

    So basically Ukraine lost a few ships, but will receive way more military assistance, meanwhile its enemy Russia will be hit with further sanctions, which might make it easier for Ukraine to keep increasing its relative position.

    Ukraine does not decide anything.

  82. @Anon

    So the Ukraine becomes a literal junta today, LOL.
     
    Note that when nationalist orcs straight out of the Maidan were dying by the truckloads in Ilovaisk, the Ukrainians were screaming about Russian intervention, and I actually believe Russia did send help to Donbass rebels there.

    Thousands of "best sons of Ukraine" died over there, and no martial law was imposed. Now, after a non-deadly altercation on the sea but 4.5 months to an election, they impose a martial law.

    Interesting...

    Excellent point. Just saw “Putin’s banker” on the Fox News Business channel. In terms of giving a mainstream Russian perspective, a much better job could’ve been done in that exchange.

  83. @Anon
    I don't think the Maidan benefited anyone but certain Ukrainian oligarchs (not Kolomoysky though in the end) and the US government, which got to conserve Ukraine in an anti-Russian mode in a situation where the West is considerably weaker and no longer able to expand and integrate further countries into the Euro-Atlantic space.

    The people that are happy with post-Maidan situation are rather rare in Ukraine. Some statistics I have seen say about 8% are happy. The situation does not benefit ordinary Ukrainians, it does not benefit Russia, Crimea, DNR and LNR, it does not benefit Europe either.

    It is true though that Crimea and Donbass are free from Kiev's current Ukrainisation of all facets of life agenda. But in a situation, where the government is weak and unpopular, there is no reason somewhere in the future Russian language will not get equal rights with Ukrainian in Ukraine proper. It is a language of a significant number of people.

    US foreign policy establishment realist John Mearsheimer, was really off when he said that Russia is trying to wreck Ukraine:

    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/will-ceasefire-ukraine-russian-separatists-last

    Give him another Valdai invite over some others. Russia doesn’t benefit from having a country on its border as large as Ukraine flop.

    • Replies: @anon
    That link is from 2014! Although it seems like it might as well been yesterday. I'm concerned that the neocons are so pleased with developments.

    Meanwhile anyone else find it interesting that Russia announced retaliation for rebel chlorine gas shells used in Syria last week. The West seemed to be caught by surprise by this incident. I suspect that in the past, Syria would have responded to an ineffective chlorine attack with the always lethal high explosive weapons.

    Also--the increasingly non lethal chemical WMDs were denounced when US border agents used tear gas on Central Americans storming the US border.

    I have a hard time taking anyone seriously who expresses moral outrage over non lethal or barely lethal alleged WMDs. I'm calling out Obama on this one.
  84. @Mr. Hack
    Why don't you consider moving to Russia then??...

    For that matter, you could go to Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I'm not the one who's clamoring for a place to go where somebody might "very much like to do business in a country, where the government can arbitrarily confiscate it. Who wouldn’t?"

    How about you, Mickey what's keeping you from moving to Russia? Russian language classes would be relatively inexpensive and you could watch all sorts of Russian hockey too? Think about it, you could finally master the language of your forefathers and put a stop to the constant ridicule that you have to undergo so often for not knowing the language of the country you profess to be an expert in? You could cross over from the make believe side to the other real side and finally be a real Russia expert and know the language too? Why not, what's there not to like?

  85. @Anonymous
    Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened? BBC says that these waters are mutually shared by treaty and that free passage for both countries has been the norm but that Russia has recently begun searching Ukrainian vessels. If so this seems like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Russia.

    The answer to your inquiry has already been stated at this thread in comment 40 as well as some others.

  86. I thought you meant John Derbyshire was intervening.

  87. Today’s UNSC meeting on the situation under discussion:

    http://webtv.un.org/watch/ukraine-security-council-8410th-meeting/5971739778001/

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    My apologies, here's a link to the initial meeting the UNSC had today on the Kerch Strait situation:

    http://webtv.un.org/watch/violation-of-the-borders-of-the-russian-federation-security-council-8409th-meeting/5971686945001/
  88. Anyone else having a problem with RT being offline?

  89. @Anonymous
    Can somebody give me a non-Putinist/chauvinist account of what happened? BBC says that these waters are mutually shared by treaty and that free passage for both countries has been the norm but that Russia has recently begun searching Ukrainian vessels. If so this seems like a deliberate provocation and escalation on the part of Russia.

    This is probably as good an account as you’ll find which also details the international law aspects:

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/11/russia-blocks-ukrainian-navy-from-militarizing-the-sea-of-azov.html

    Ukraine also had treaty obligations which they didn’t live up to.

  90. @Mikhail
    For that matter, you could go to Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.

    I’m not the one who’s clamoring for a place to go where somebody might “very much like to do business in a country, where the government can arbitrarily confiscate it. Who wouldn’t?”

    How about you, Mickey what’s keeping you from moving to Russia? Russian language classes would be relatively inexpensive and you could watch all sorts of Russian hockey too? Think about it, you could finally master the language of your forefathers and put a stop to the constant ridicule that you have to undergo so often for not knowing the language of the country you profess to be an expert in? You could cross over from the make believe side to the other real side and finally be a real Russia expert and know the language too? Why not, what’s there not to like?

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You're so easy to debunk. In reply to a set of comments you obviously don't like, you suggested that a commenter other than myself go to Russia.

    In turn, I turned that table on you. Once again, your language proficiency bravado doesn't coverup your lack of intelligence - especially on the subjects that I comment on.

    As previously noted, Alexander Mercouris, David Johnson and the aforementioned (at this thread) John Mearsheimer don't appear to be more Russian fluent than yours truly. Never mind the well educated fluent Russian speakers who appreciate my input.
  91. This was deliberate provocation, pure and simple. There are only six functional ships in the Ukrainian Navy (all cutters; two of these were arrested during this provocation): their flagship frigate “Sagaydachny” is in repairs, so is corvette “Vinnitsa”, landing ship “Oliferenko” and cutter “Priluki” are out of order and not even in repairs. It must have been clear to anyone that Russian coast guard can take on the whole Ukrainian Navy and win hands down.

    To sincerely believe that Ukrainian Navy can win, Poroshenko should have been a clinical idiot. His prowess in thievery (Poroshenko is the only Ukrainian oligarch whose net worth increased after Maidan) shows that he is not a clinical idiot. The idiots are those who still support him in Ukraine. There are about 7% of those; thus, 13 out of 14 Ukrainian residents are not idiots.

    Most likely Poroshenko planned to introduce martial law and cancel presidential elections, which he has zero chance of winning, even with feasible levels of election fraud. Judging by the fact that he proposed to introduce martial law only for 30 days, and allowed Rada (Ukrainian parliament) to set presidential election date at March 31, 2019, Washington politburo actually decided to replace Poroshenko with someone more palatable and informed him and Rada deputies about that decision. In fact, Poroshenko was getting ready for that: he is already selling his assets in Ukraine preparing to run away.

  92. @Mr. Hack
    I'm not the one who's clamoring for a place to go where somebody might "very much like to do business in a country, where the government can arbitrarily confiscate it. Who wouldn’t?"

    How about you, Mickey what's keeping you from moving to Russia? Russian language classes would be relatively inexpensive and you could watch all sorts of Russian hockey too? Think about it, you could finally master the language of your forefathers and put a stop to the constant ridicule that you have to undergo so often for not knowing the language of the country you profess to be an expert in? You could cross over from the make believe side to the other real side and finally be a real Russia expert and know the language too? Why not, what's there not to like?

    You’re so easy to debunk. In reply to a set of comments you obviously don’t like, you suggested that a commenter other than myself go to Russia.

    In turn, I turned that table on you. Once again, your language proficiency bravado doesn’t coverup your lack of intelligence – especially on the subjects that I comment on.

    As previously noted, Alexander Mercouris, David Johnson and the aforementioned (at this thread) John Mearsheimer don’t appear to be more Russian fluent than yours truly. Never mind the well educated fluent Russian speakers who appreciate my input.

  93. @peterAUS

    Well, I’m pretty sure we won’t survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that’d be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.
     
    Feels like it.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.
     
    Well....probably better methodology than presently used in any of major western capitols in any serious decision making process.

    This is the part when being old works rather well. I do remember 80's, Pershings etc. Was part of the system then.

    The players, then, were, in my book, wizards comparing to players now.
    Public feels even worse. Much worse, actually. I am quite sure that 80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work. And...hehe....those are, at least, interested in the topic.

    What can go wrong.....

    The real big war (e.g., WWIII between the dying empire and either Russia or China) is highly unlikely. The US elites want huge military budgets to steal billions from, but they must realize that to enjoy their loot they have to be alive. They don’t give a hoot about Ukrainians or other aborigines dying to provide them a pretext to further increase Pentagon budget, but they won’t sacrifice even their own gardeners, let alone themselves.

  94. @reiner Tor
    Russia could be hit by even harder sanctions, and Ukraine would receive further military assistance. Due to the coverage of the issue in the Western press, it could force the hands of the USG/EUSA/NATO collective leaderships.

    So basically Ukraine lost a few ships, but will receive way more military assistance, meanwhile its enemy Russia will be hit with further sanctions, which might make it easier for Ukraine to keep increasing its relative position.

    There is no such thing as sustainable ‘harder sanctions’. We are at a point that only very basic and almost unavoidable business transactions are taking place, there is not much more that could be ‘sanctioned’. If the West sanctions Russian energy, it will trigger a recession at home. If it sanctions Swift, it will undermine global finance and splinter reserve currency policies even more. If they ban more Putin ‘friends’ from travel or expropriate their investments, Russia can easily retaliate by taking over very substantial Western investments in the Russian energy and minerals.

    This is a cul-de-sac, we have sanctioned this to death, there is no rational place to go. And Russia will clearly survive, it is hardly isolated, more than half of the economic world is joyfully trading with them (China, Korea, most of Asia, Latin America, Turkey, Izrael, India…). Europe and Russia have lowered their economies by around 2-3% with the mutual sanctions, noticeable, but also not catastrophic.

    Ukraine has no way to benefit from more weapons. They are not in the same league militarily as Russia, so more weapons means very little. What are they going to do with more weapons, invade Russia? This is a lose-lose, sooner or later even Kiev will realize it. But first they have to get over their emotions. The real problem in the Azov See is that there is almost no trading activity, the industry is dead, sending tug boats on a fishing expedition is a sign of that economic collapse.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    That’s wishful thinking.

    Of course there could be more crippling sanctions. And of course with Russia being smaller than the whole West, such sanctions are bound to be more crippling for Russia than for the West. But that’s not even what I said. I merely said that that’s what the Ukrainians and their American mentors might be pushing for, regardless of whether they are feasible.

    Regarding more weapons for Ukraine, of course they would be useful. Yes, they will never be able to conquer Russia, but that’s a silly proposal anyway. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher the cost of any war for Russia will be. It’s a big deterrent. And for the neocons it’s a win-win, since they cannot lose even if Ukraine loses such a war: it will weaken Russia, and that’s all that matters to them. But for the Ukrainians the weapons are also useful, since they decrease the likelihood of a Russian attack, eventually even in the case of a Ukrainian attack on Donbas.

    You seem to be angry at the Ukrainians and the neocons for not accepting that they are already defeated, that they cannot do anything to harm Russia. Well, they are not defeated, and they can do Russia a lot of harm.
  95. anon[707] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mikhail
    US foreign policy establishment realist John Mearsheimer, was really off when he said that Russia is trying to wreck Ukraine:

    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/will-ceasefire-ukraine-russian-separatists-last

    Give him another Valdai invite over some others. Russia doesn't benefit from having a country on its border as large as Ukraine flop.

    That link is from 2014! Although it seems like it might as well been yesterday. I’m concerned that the neocons are so pleased with developments.

    Meanwhile anyone else find it interesting that Russia announced retaliation for rebel chlorine gas shells used in Syria last week. The West seemed to be caught by surprise by this incident. I suspect that in the past, Syria would have responded to an ineffective chlorine attack with the always lethal high explosive weapons.

    Also–the increasingly non lethal chemical WMDs were denounced when US border agents used tear gas on Central Americans storming the US border.

    I have a hard time taking anyone seriously who expresses moral outrage over non lethal or barely lethal alleged WMDs. I’m calling out Obama on this one.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Mind you, he's one of the more evenhanded of the US foreign policy establishment elites. In that particular segment, I've the impression that he was seeking to find common cause with the likes of McFaul, as opposed to providing a rock solid counter.

    Typical for US mass media and body politic to dodge the latest report of chemical weapon use in Syria which you brought up.

    , @anon
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-russia-airstrikes-alleged-aleppo-poison-gas-chlorine-attack-ceasefire/

    This is getting memory holed. CBS could barely say 'alleged' since the moderate rebels couldn't possibly do this.
  96. @anon
    That link is from 2014! Although it seems like it might as well been yesterday. I'm concerned that the neocons are so pleased with developments.

    Meanwhile anyone else find it interesting that Russia announced retaliation for rebel chlorine gas shells used in Syria last week. The West seemed to be caught by surprise by this incident. I suspect that in the past, Syria would have responded to an ineffective chlorine attack with the always lethal high explosive weapons.

    Also--the increasingly non lethal chemical WMDs were denounced when US border agents used tear gas on Central Americans storming the US border.

    I have a hard time taking anyone seriously who expresses moral outrage over non lethal or barely lethal alleged WMDs. I'm calling out Obama on this one.

    Mind you, he’s one of the more evenhanded of the US foreign policy establishment elites. In that particular segment, I’ve the impression that he was seeking to find common cause with the likes of McFaul, as opposed to providing a rock solid counter.

    Typical for US mass media and body politic to dodge the latest report of chemical weapon use in Syria which you brought up.

  97. @anon
    That link is from 2014! Although it seems like it might as well been yesterday. I'm concerned that the neocons are so pleased with developments.

    Meanwhile anyone else find it interesting that Russia announced retaliation for rebel chlorine gas shells used in Syria last week. The West seemed to be caught by surprise by this incident. I suspect that in the past, Syria would have responded to an ineffective chlorine attack with the always lethal high explosive weapons.

    Also--the increasingly non lethal chemical WMDs were denounced when US border agents used tear gas on Central Americans storming the US border.

    I have a hard time taking anyone seriously who expresses moral outrage over non lethal or barely lethal alleged WMDs. I'm calling out Obama on this one.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-russia-airstrikes-alleged-aleppo-poison-gas-chlorine-attack-ceasefire/

    This is getting memory holed. CBS could barely say ‘alleged’ since the moderate rebels couldn’t possibly do this.

  98. @Mikhail
    Today's UNSC meeting on the situation under discussion:

    http://webtv.un.org/watch/ukraine-security-council-8410th-meeting/5971739778001/

    My apologies, here’s a link to the initial meeting the UNSC had today on the Kerch Strait situation:

    http://webtv.un.org/watch/violation-of-the-borders-of-the-russian-federation-security-council-8409th-meeting/5971686945001/

  99. Kind of OT.

    I don’t agree with all of Pobyedonostsev’s views but I find this to be a really beautiful defense of Tsarism.

    https://www.socialmatter.net/2018/11/23/the-political-legacy-of-konstantin-pobedonostsev/

  100. Kerch Strait Incident Follow-up

    Russian side claiming that the Ukrainian vessels at issue violated Russian territory, which was internationally recognized as such prior to Crimea’s reunification with Russia.

    RT has shown some of the detained Ukrainian personnel who acknowledge not answering the initial Russian calls.

    Looks like Russia has acted responsibly. So much for the BS spouted by the likes of Ali Velshi of MSNBC.

  101. Hehehe….trying to have your cake and eat it?

    Is that a Russian thing? This acting tough and then trying to be a “nice guy”?
    A big mistake. Again.
    The regime in Kremlin really can’t seem to get it. Or, I don’t seem to get it what they try to achieve.

    This reaction to the regime in Kiev provocation was respectable. I was pleasantly surprised.

    And…hahaha..now, what….trying, again, to explain to …WHO…that they acted properly?
    What’s wrong with them?

    You do this and say you’ll do it worse if the opposite side tries anything similar.
    THAT is the message which will be heard, understood and acted on.

    Ah…..

  102. Far superior to the coverage aired on the BBC, CNN, MSNBC and Fox News:

    http://theduran.com/the-real-reason-behind-ukraines-sudden-martial-law-video/

  103. anon[130] • Disclaimer says:

    “The real big war (e.g., WWIII between the dying empire and either Russia or China) is highly unlikely.”

    It’s much more likely than you think. A lot of people seem to have this misconception that the Ruling Class of each country is wise and motivated by rational thought. Often enough, their thoughts are ill-informed and subject to emotional, in-the-moment, manipulation. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have gotten the first world war, but we did obviously.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    People also often react in ways which might be considered silly or absurd by most observers. It’s interesting that occasionally innocent people were pressured into confessing to serious crimes by simply yelling at them for hours and draining their nerves by long interrogation sessions.

    Similarly, perhaps some politician would start a nuclear war to avoid the humiliation of having to resign.

  104. @anon
    "The real big war (e.g., WWIII between the dying empire and either Russia or China) is highly unlikely."

    It's much more likely than you think. A lot of people seem to have this misconception that the Ruling Class of each country is wise and motivated by rational thought. Often enough, their thoughts are ill-informed and subject to emotional, in-the-moment, manipulation. Otherwise, we wouldn't have gotten the first world war, but we did obviously.

    People also often react in ways which might be considered silly or absurd by most observers. It’s interesting that occasionally innocent people were pressured into confessing to serious crimes by simply yelling at them for hours and draining their nerves by long interrogation sessions.

    Similarly, perhaps some politician would start a nuclear war to avoid the humiliation of having to resign.

  105. @Beckow
    There is no such thing as sustainable 'harder sanctions'. We are at a point that only very basic and almost unavoidable business transactions are taking place, there is not much more that could be 'sanctioned'. If the West sanctions Russian energy, it will trigger a recession at home. If it sanctions Swift, it will undermine global finance and splinter reserve currency policies even more. If they ban more Putin 'friends' from travel or expropriate their investments, Russia can easily retaliate by taking over very substantial Western investments in the Russian energy and minerals.

    This is a cul-de-sac, we have sanctioned this to death, there is no rational place to go. And Russia will clearly survive, it is hardly isolated, more than half of the economic world is joyfully trading with them (China, Korea, most of Asia, Latin America, Turkey, Izrael, India...). Europe and Russia have lowered their economies by around 2-3% with the mutual sanctions, noticeable, but also not catastrophic.

    Ukraine has no way to benefit from more weapons. They are not in the same league militarily as Russia, so more weapons means very little. What are they going to do with more weapons, invade Russia? This is a lose-lose, sooner or later even Kiev will realize it. But first they have to get over their emotions. The real problem in the Azov See is that there is almost no trading activity, the industry is dead, sending tug boats on a fishing expedition is a sign of that economic collapse.

    That’s wishful thinking.

    Of course there could be more crippling sanctions. And of course with Russia being smaller than the whole West, such sanctions are bound to be more crippling for Russia than for the West. But that’s not even what I said. I merely said that that’s what the Ukrainians and their American mentors might be pushing for, regardless of whether they are feasible.

    Regarding more weapons for Ukraine, of course they would be useful. Yes, they will never be able to conquer Russia, but that’s a silly proposal anyway. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher the cost of any war for Russia will be. It’s a big deterrent. And for the neocons it’s a win-win, since they cannot lose even if Ukraine loses such a war: it will weaken Russia, and that’s all that matters to them. But for the Ukrainians the weapons are also useful, since they decrease the likelihood of a Russian attack, eventually even in the case of a Ukrainian attack on Donbas.

    You seem to be angry at the Ukrainians and the neocons for not accepting that they are already defeated, that they cannot do anything to harm Russia. Well, they are not defeated, and they can do Russia a lot of harm.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Beckow
    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn't see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine. Without good weapons, they can simply give up (and save lives, property), with enough weapons the escalation could get really ugly very quickly. And that could mean more casualties for Ukraine. Being partially armed is a pretty bad thing in an all-out fight. The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    , @peterAUS
    Pretty much.

    As for weapons, all the regime in Kiev needs is those which would make limited Russian intervention in Donbass too costly.

    It's amusing reading all those posts about Ukraine attacking Russia.
    If any attack happens it will be on a part of Donbass. Not even all. Just a part.
    Having advanced weapons would help, definitely.
    , @The Big Red Scary
    It's an ill wind.

    Both countries need stability and steady development more than anything else, but are trapped in a situation of mutual distrust aggravated by the interference of third parties.

  106. @AP
    Yes, but Russia has also been stopping and searching all ships going to and from Ukraine's ports on the Azov sea. This costs $10,000s per day for each ship.

    Though they started it only after the Ukrainians refused to release the boat or even the crew.

    However, it’s possible that it’s all linked to the bridge, in which case it’s more the Russians’ fault. The whole situation with the unrecognized Crimea annexation is just highly unstable, because now there’s a bridge which is vulnerable to attack, but while it’s there, it interferes with the traffic, and merely to protect it from possible sabotage (and it’s obvious that the world wouldn’t blame Ukraine for it, if it were to happen), the Russians have to go to such lengths which causes a lot of inconvenience and economic harm to Ukraine.

    I cannot see an easy solution here.

    • Replies: @for-the-record
    it's possible that it’s all linked to the bridge, in which case it’s more the Russians’ fault.

    So, in your view:

    1. Russia should not have annexed Crimea and/or

    2. Having annexed Crimea they should not have built the bridge.

    Is this correct?
  107. @AP
    Basically zero chance of Poroshenko becoming a dictator (unless you treat Ukraine like western media treats Russia). Elections may be delayed by a month or three but not cancelled. The likely outcome is that martial law will enable Poroshenko to do to his rivals what Putin did to his. Much of Ukraine's mass media is still owned by eastern oligarchs who are not very friendly towards Poroshenko. This will likely be treated like Gusinsky's media empire was in the early 2000s. Poroshenko places second in most presidential polls, with more media control he may find a way to get to first place.

    The hryvnia has dropped (as has the ruble) but I doubt policies that result in the halt of the post 2015 economic recovery will be implemented. Poroshenko doesn't have the power to state in power if the people hate him. They don't now.

    Good points.

  108. @peterAUS

    Well, I’m pretty sure we won’t survive twenty years with this level of tension without a world war. So that’d be 100% chance of a war in twenty years. 50% in ten years. 25% in five. Even next year is not impossible.
     
    Feels like it.

    Of course these numbers are based on scientific gut feelings, nothing more.
     
    Well....probably better methodology than presently used in any of major western capitols in any serious decision making process.

    This is the part when being old works rather well. I do remember 80's, Pershings etc. Was part of the system then.

    The players, then, were, in my book, wizards comparing to players now.
    Public feels even worse. Much worse, actually. I am quite sure that 80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work. And...hehe....those are, at least, interested in the topic.

    What can go wrong.....

    80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work

    I’m unfamiliar with the technical details. I know that before reentry the warhead (basically, multiple warheads packed together in the part of the missile which is still traveling) automatically disintegrates into multiple smaller vehicles, each directed at a different target. This means, I think, not one targeting Los Angeles and another New York, rather something like LA and San Diego. They use, I believe, some kind of wings to change course, both to correct their course to hit their targets more precisely and to avoid anti-missile defense systems. Once above the target, at an optimal distance, the warhead detonates. Not all warheads are created to be equal, some being better at both steering themselves and knowing where to detonate than others. One big enough ICBM could probably wipe out a larger US state, at least the big cities. The smaller towns are probably safer, at least from the initial detonations.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Something like that. You could've mentioned decoy warheads there too, but, overall, good enough.
    This is important:

    ...One big enough ICBM could probably wipe out a larger US state, at least the big cities....
     
    One ICBM. Just one.
    Plenty of those around, though.

    Great, a?
  109. @Mikhail
    An example of BBC bias:

    https://twitter.com/irenatar?lang=en

    This particular svido was on the BBC, where she said that Porky has nothing to gain by initiating a provocation with Russia - instead calling it a Russian conspiracy theory. There was no challenge whatsoever to her. The Kiev regime has at least a hat trick for unnecessarily provoking things.

    - the Babchenko stunt
    - state interference with a church matter
    - its response to this latest incident.

    look at her twitter account…the account of a typical blinkered and crazed Ukro-nazi bitch. The English Russia Correspondents are just as braindead and unprofessional.

    One good thing they did though was a completely fair documentary on Viktor Bout, it made clear the plentiful BS in the American operation and allegations against him

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Re: https://twitter.com/irenatar?lang=en

    Intellectually, she's a quite collapsible svido. In her (as of this posting) latest Tweet, she repeats what Ukraine's UN ambassador said at the UNSC yesterday. That ambassador also said that one of the detained Ukrainians is in critical condition. Let's see the follow-up on that claim. Russia could've done a much better job at communicating its position at yesterday's UNSC meeting. The leading Western nations were quite phony at that meeting.

    I do recall the Beeb having a Russian correspondent, who awhile back gave an eye opening (for Western mass media) mainstream Russian view - something that generally runs counter to that news venue.

    CNN keeps cranking out the false narrative that Russia is the party which was provocative in this Kerch Strait incident. At that network, Nick Paton Walsh is especially horrid.
  110. @Mr. Hack
    A pretty fantastic (and stupid) story. Let me get this right: A small tugboat sent by the Ukrainian government was outfitted with a small nuclear bomb in order to somehow be strapped to the Kerch bridge (or possibly a suicide mission?) to destroy it? Did I miss something here?

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the 'Devil's Alternative' when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the ‘Devil’s Alternative’ when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.

    I agree. Those sailers arrested speak the most natural, perfect Russian and move, look ,gesture in a such a quintessentially Russian way…and look unbelievably relaxed in mood and demeanor ( as if chatting with their mates ( the FSB) in a bar or with their brothers)…..that it would be impossible to call these guys ” Ukrainian nationalists” you twerp.

    Did you even see the video? Those guys all talk Russian at a million-miles per hour, I would not be surprised if they have never spoken a word of “Ukrainian” in their lives. Over what is a huge international and bilateral incident, and with a few of their countryman injured due to the orders of their pseudo-state…..this is the most unbelievably relaxed series of chats of military prisoners with interrogators from the “aggressor state” that will ever exist.

    Look at them you idiot….these “Ukrainian” sailors are Russian in every sense of the way

    So for the fantasist retard idea of “Ukrainian ” nation we now have to take away all regions with a coast, because coastal oblast =Navy recruitment area , Navy=Russia in historical sense for insecure Banderatards and navy areas=Russia…and will always be open to allegations of ’5th column” and so on, this to go with the east being Russian, Kiev being the most russian city of all, and the Russianess of the north of Ukraine criminally underrated by the authorities….and Zakarpattia not being “Ukrainian”….then all we have left are a bastard freakshow group of non-entities comprising of the pseudo idea of “Ukraine”

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    .then all we have left are a bastard freakshow group of non-entities comprising of the pseudo idea of “Ukraine”
     
    And what a show! And this was only the part filmed in Kyiv, 'the most Russian city of all. LOL! :-)

    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/jJnZOwW3aXM/mqdefault.jpg
  111. @reiner Tor
    Though they started it only after the Ukrainians refused to release the boat or even the crew.

    However, it’s possible that it’s all linked to the bridge, in which case it’s more the Russians’ fault. The whole situation with the unrecognized Crimea annexation is just highly unstable, because now there’s a bridge which is vulnerable to attack, but while it’s there, it interferes with the traffic, and merely to protect it from possible sabotage (and it’s obvious that the world wouldn’t blame Ukraine for it, if it were to happen), the Russians have to go to such lengths which causes a lot of inconvenience and economic harm to Ukraine.

    I cannot see an easy solution here.

    it’s possible that it’s all linked to the bridge, in which case it’s more the Russians’ fault.

    So, in your view:

    1. Russia should not have annexed Crimea and/or

    2. Having annexed Crimea they should not have built the bridge.

    Is this correct?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I don't think Russia had other options than these two, but since they broke international law here, everything that follows is more their fault than that of the Ukrainians.
  112. @for-the-record
    it's possible that it’s all linked to the bridge, in which case it’s more the Russians’ fault.

    So, in your view:

    1. Russia should not have annexed Crimea and/or

    2. Having annexed Crimea they should not have built the bridge.

    Is this correct?

    I don’t think Russia had other options than these two, but since they broke international law here, everything that follows is more their fault than that of the Ukrainians.

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    Don't you think that some norms were violated when US blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics to help overthrow Yanukovich?

    Anyway, Medvedev now says that Poroshenko has "zero chance" to remain in power in the Ukraine. Patrushev, who serves on Russia's Security Council, agrees. I wonder where this confidence comes from?
  113. @reiner Tor
    I don't think Russia had other options than these two, but since they broke international law here, everything that follows is more their fault than that of the Ukrainians.

    Don’t you think that some norms were violated when US blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics to help overthrow Yanukovich?

    Anyway, Medvedev now says that Poroshenko has “zero chance” to remain in power in the Ukraine. Patrushev, who serves on Russia’s Security Council, agrees. I wonder where this confidence comes from?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Don’t you think that some norms were violated when US blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics to help overthrow Yanukovich?
     
    Not even comparable. They gave some money to some NGOs and politicians, that's it. It was wrong to do that, but not illegal at all.
  114. The bridge itself has nothing to do with navigational restrictions in the Kerch Strait. Look up the satellite picture of the Strait.

    The navigational procedures were in place before the bridge as well, due to currents and navigational hazards, shallows and to avoid ship accidents.


    Looks like the Russians fired a “warning” 30 mm shell at the “armoured” “artillery” BOATS.

    Also, if I understood it correctly, the Ukrainian ships entered Russian territorial waters that were Russian territorial waters even prior to 2014 Crimea reunification. Yes, I am not calling it an annexation, and if anyone claims that a free, open, democratic referendum would result in Crimeans voting to remain/become a unitary part of Ukraine, he might need a shrink appointment.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Are you sure?

    Izumrud AK-630 probably didn't do that as it cannot fire single shots so most likely explanation is severalprecision hits by 12,7 mm machine gun. Otherwise I'm at the loss of what can do such a hole in a bulletproof hull of the boat. Or maybe Ukrainians skimmed the funds and forgot to add actual armor.
     
    https://forums.spacebattles.com/posts/52778677/
  115. @Den Lille Abe
    Often feel like that, having thoughts like this ?
    I recommend you seek medical advice urgently. Such delusions can lead to severe life threatening situations.

    Fuck off moron, if 5 years ago somebody said that Ukraine is sending its troops to the Russian border as a hostile force – would you have believed it? The intention to take back Crimea is absolutely clear, combine that with the foreign policy behaviour of the US in the last few decades and an increasingly fanatical American population, everything is on the cards – absolutely everything.

  116. @Epigon
    The bridge itself has nothing to do with navigational restrictions in the Kerch Strait. Look up the satellite picture of the Strait.

    The navigational procedures were in place before the bridge as well, due to currents and navigational hazards, shallows and to avoid ship accidents.


    https://thedefensepost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/berdyansk-720x610.jpg

    Looks like the Russians fired a "warning" 30 mm shell at the "armoured" "artillery" BOATS.


    Also, if I understood it correctly, the Ukrainian ships entered Russian territorial waters that were Russian territorial waters even prior to 2014 Crimea reunification. Yes, I am not calling it an annexation, and if anyone claims that a free, open, democratic referendum would result in Crimeans voting to remain/become a unitary part of Ukraine, he might need a shrink appointment.

    Are you sure?

    Izumrud AK-630 probably didn’t do that as it cannot fire single shots so most likely explanation is severalprecision hits by 12,7 mm machine gun. Otherwise I’m at the loss of what can do such a hole in a bulletproof hull of the boat. Or maybe Ukrainians skimmed the funds and forgot to add actual armor.

    https://forums.spacebattles.com/posts/52778677/

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich

    Or maybe Ukrainians skimmed the funds and forgot to add actual armor.
     
    It's the fucking Ukraine - there is no need to overthink it.
  117. @Mitleser
    Are you sure?

    Izumrud AK-630 probably didn't do that as it cannot fire single shots so most likely explanation is severalprecision hits by 12,7 mm machine gun. Otherwise I'm at the loss of what can do such a hole in a bulletproof hull of the boat. Or maybe Ukrainians skimmed the funds and forgot to add actual armor.
     
    https://forums.spacebattles.com/posts/52778677/

    Or maybe Ukrainians skimmed the funds and forgot to add actual armor.

    It’s the fucking Ukraine – there is no need to overthink it.

  118. @Gerard2

    Frederick Forsyth came up with more believable scenario in the ‘Devil’s Alternative’ when a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists hijacked an oil freighter and tried to used is in a more believable plot against the Kremlin then what we hear here.
     
    I agree. Those sailers arrested speak the most natural, perfect Russian and move, look ,gesture in a such a quintessentially Russian way...and look unbelievably relaxed in mood and demeanor ( as if chatting with their mates ( the FSB) in a bar or with their brothers).....that it would be impossible to call these guys " Ukrainian nationalists" you twerp.

    Did you even see the video? Those guys all talk Russian at a million-miles per hour, I would not be surprised if they have never spoken a word of "Ukrainian" in their lives. Over what is a huge international and bilateral incident, and with a few of their countryman injured due to the orders of their pseudo-state.....this is the most unbelievably relaxed series of chats of military prisoners with interrogators from the "aggressor state" that will ever exist.

    Look at them you idiot....these "Ukrainian" sailors are Russian in every sense of the way

    So for the fantasist retard idea of "Ukrainian " nation we now have to take away all regions with a coast, because coastal oblast =Navy recruitment area , Navy=Russia in historical sense for insecure Banderatards and navy areas=Russia...and will always be open to allegations of '5th column" and so on, this to go with the east being Russian, Kiev being the most russian city of all, and the Russianess of the north of Ukraine criminally underrated by the authorities....and Zakarpattia not being "Ukrainian"....then all we have left are a bastard freakshow group of non-entities comprising of the pseudo idea of "Ukraine"

    .then all we have left are a bastard freakshow group of non-entities comprising of the pseudo idea of “Ukraine”

    And what a show! And this was only the part filmed in Kyiv, ‘the most Russian city of all. LOL! :-)

  119. @reiner Tor
    That’s wishful thinking.

    Of course there could be more crippling sanctions. And of course with Russia being smaller than the whole West, such sanctions are bound to be more crippling for Russia than for the West. But that’s not even what I said. I merely said that that’s what the Ukrainians and their American mentors might be pushing for, regardless of whether they are feasible.

    Regarding more weapons for Ukraine, of course they would be useful. Yes, they will never be able to conquer Russia, but that’s a silly proposal anyway. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher the cost of any war for Russia will be. It’s a big deterrent. And for the neocons it’s a win-win, since they cannot lose even if Ukraine loses such a war: it will weaken Russia, and that’s all that matters to them. But for the Ukrainians the weapons are also useful, since they decrease the likelihood of a Russian attack, eventually even in the case of a Ukrainian attack on Donbas.

    You seem to be angry at the Ukrainians and the neocons for not accepting that they are already defeated, that they cannot do anything to harm Russia. Well, they are not defeated, and they can do Russia a lot of harm.

    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn’t see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine. Without good weapons, they can simply give up (and save lives, property), with enough weapons the escalation could get really ugly very quickly. And that could mean more casualties for Ukraine. Being partially armed is a pretty bad thing in an all-out fight. The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    • Replies: @AP

    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn’t see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.
     
    I reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some?
     
    I don't know about specifics. Iran and North Korea are much more heavily sanctioned than Russia so presumably much more can be done to Russia. Countries dealing with Russia (such as South Korea or China) could face start to face sanctions linked to their trade with Russia. Such countries will likely not choose trade with Russia over trade with the entire West.

    anything now would have both sides about equally
     
    West is much bigger and has many more options, so it would not suffer equally but much less. Moreover, any losses by the west would be shared by a much larger population so the hit would be less significant. If EU (population 500 million, GDP $18.8 trillion) loses $5 billion through new sanctions and Russia (population 150 million, GDP $1.6 trillion) loses $5 billion also, who suffers more?

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine
     
    But not in a prewar or limited war situation. It was a good idea for Sweden and Switzerland to have the best militaries they could have during World War II, even though neither one would have survived an invasion by Germany.

    Do you suggest that Iran unilaterally disarm itself in the face of American threats?
    , @AnonFromTN
    You are forgetting that neocons (and the US elites in general) don’t give a hoot about the lives of Ukrainians. They are treated by the US as expandable aborigines. That’s the real tragedy for poor unfortunate Ukraine. However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them. The rest of the residents suffer because they let this gang of scoundrels dominate them.
    , @peterAUS

    ....The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational...
     
    I can think of at least one scenario where having advanced weaponry and attacking Donbass can work quite well for both the regime in Kiev and their supporters abroad.
    Probably two; with a stretch even three.
    , @reiner Tor
    AP and peterAUS pretty much summarized it. Even AnonFromTN's input was interesting (i.e. neocons have different calculations than Ukrainians).

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.
     
    Anything up until North Korea style. Some countries in the Western sphere are still trading almost without restrictions with Russia (South Korea is the most obvious example), they could be pushed to join the sanctions.

    Russia being much smaller, even if sanctions cost Russia only half what they cost the West, the West is so much bigger it could more easily afford it.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine.
     
    No. AP is correct. Iran is weaker than the US, but an invasion of Iran would be costly enough for any US president to think twice before attacking them. Why is it bad for Iran?

    Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.
     
    Game theory predicts that such a totally rational man will always lose. You have to be willing to engage in irrational behavior if you want to have the best expected outcome.
  120. I wouldn’t count on the beneficence of the neocons if I was a Ukrainian leader. Western European investment and being a bridge to commerce with Russia is probably their best bet.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    That would be true if we were talking about leaders who care about the country. So far Ukraine had all sorts of scoundrels who only cared about lining their pockets. This applies to all Ukrainian presidents since 1991, not only the current nonentity.
  121. @Beckow
    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn't see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine. Without good weapons, they can simply give up (and save lives, property), with enough weapons the escalation could get really ugly very quickly. And that could mean more casualties for Ukraine. Being partially armed is a pretty bad thing in an all-out fight. The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn’t see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    I reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some?

    I don’t know about specifics. Iran and North Korea are much more heavily sanctioned than Russia so presumably much more can be done to Russia. Countries dealing with Russia (such as South Korea or China) could face start to face sanctions linked to their trade with Russia. Such countries will likely not choose trade with Russia over trade with the entire West.

    anything now would have both sides about equally

    West is much bigger and has many more options, so it would not suffer equally but much less. Moreover, any losses by the west would be shared by a much larger population so the hit would be less significant. If EU (population 500 million, GDP $18.8 trillion) loses $5 billion through new sanctions and Russia (population 150 million, GDP $1.6 trillion) loses $5 billion also, who suffers more?

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine

    But not in a prewar or limited war situation. It was a good idea for Sweden and Switzerland to have the best militaries they could have during World War II, even though neither one would have survived an invasion by Germany.

    Do you suggest that Iran unilaterally disarm itself in the face of American threats?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.
     
    So, millions of Germans supporting Hitler weren’t wrong? A fat lot of good it brought them.
    , @DreadIlk
    Sanctioning North Korea and Iran failed. Russian GDP is three times bigger then Iran's. Plus Russia and US are playing nice right now mostly doing things to each other that don't matter. Any significant sanctions would be answered the same way. As @Beckow mentioned the big sanctions would undermine global institutions. It's not the dollar amount that would worry US but the fact that alternatives will be made.
  122. I don’t know about specifics. Iran and North Korea are much more heavily sanctioned than Russia so presumably much more can be done to Russia. Countries dealing with Russia (such as South Korea or China) could face start to face sanctions linked to their trade with Russia. Such countries will likely not choose trade with Russia over trade with the entire West.

    errmmm…..the obvious difference being that sanctions on Russian disproportionately negatively effect Ukraine you stupid idiot. This gas supply in domestic homes and factories debacle, across many parts of Ukraine during the last 2 weeks is one of many, many examples of this.

    So sanctions on Ukraine have a multipler negative effect on Ukraine’s energy, Ukraine’s production, Ukraine’s manufacturing, already a catastrophic effect on Ukraine’s defence industry, their banking industry, the personal income of the creeps in charge of Ukraine ( and their wives) , medicines, pipes, automobile industry and so on. Completely different , obviously to Iran which has many local enemies and North Korea which has had near zero trade with South Korea or Japan. You see , only retarded, US controlled moron countries ask for sanctions against another country that massively weakens their own, corrupt, poor, waste of space state.

    But not in a prewar or limited war situation. It was a good idea for Sweden and Switzerland to have the best militaries they could have during World War II, even though neither one would have survived an invasion by Germany.

    ummm…worked well for France and the hopeless Poland, didn’t it you dipshit?

    I reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.

    LOL..a lowlife prick as yourself is claiming to be part of a collective of millions of Ukrainians even though you know fuck all about it or have any connection? This “millions” is utter garbage. A dreadful rating of it’s President by the population, likely to be kicked out in as much embarassment as Yushchenko, a Government liked even less then him, and a Parliament that struggles to get even 1% of it’s people approving of their work……..the only effect here is doping….by the fact Ukraine’s media is utterly corrupt and controlled by Oligarchs but for one state narrative, millions voting with their feet by leaving the country ( often to Russia) , and the fact everything is being done to turn the population against Russia, but even more being done to silence those ( and this is real millions) who view the coup as illegal and Russia as in the right and a benefit to Ukraine

  123. @Beckow
    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn't see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine. Without good weapons, they can simply give up (and save lives, property), with enough weapons the escalation could get really ugly very quickly. And that could mean more casualties for Ukraine. Being partially armed is a pretty bad thing in an all-out fight. The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    You are forgetting that neocons (and the US elites in general) don’t give a hoot about the lives of Ukrainians. They are treated by the US as expandable aborigines. That’s the real tragedy for poor unfortunate Ukraine. However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them. The rest of the residents suffer because they let this gang of scoundrels dominate them.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them.
     
    The 'only thing wrong with them' is that in fact they are not significantly the real leaders of the country. You shouldn't try and float these simplistic tropes here, especially since you claim to have lived in both Western and Eastern Ukraine. The Maidan clearly showed that Ukrainians from all corners of the country are for a free an independent Ukraine, one without the undue influence of Moscow type shills like you.
    , @AP

    However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime)
     
    Poroshenko - central Ukrainian. PM Groysman - also from central Ukraine. Parubiy - western Ukrainian. Hardly domination.

    always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.)
     
    1. Mazepa - born outside Kiev, central Ukrainian.

    2. Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russian Empire both lost. But Russian Empire lost first, to Austria-Hungary and Germany. So in the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Russia, western Ukrainians were on the winning side.

    3. Germany indeed lost World War II but the ultimate losers were Sovoks, whereas Westerners (including those Ukrainians who allied with Germans and fled West after World War II) prospered.

    Moreover your knowledge is limited. You forgot:

    Konstanty Ostrogski - supreme commander of Polish forces who defeated Moscow at battle of Orsha

    Petro Sahaidachny - Galician hetman of Zaporozhians, allied with Poles against Muscovites, defeating the Muscovites and taking a lot of territory; he also allied with Poles against Turks and with them defeated the Turks at Battle of Khotyn

    Western Ukrainians allied with Polish King John Sobieski (himself of partial Western Ukrainian descent) against Turks and won

    Napoleonic wars - western Ukrainians tended to be loyal to Austria (Poles preferred Napoleon). Austria won.

    Obviously during the Cold War, Western Ukrainians were anti-Soviet and pro-Western. Soviets lost the Cold War.

    So only during World War II did western Ukrainians choose the losing side.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia). They can join NATO or the Islamic Union (EU) or any other foolish idea they like.

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.
  124. @JLK
    I wouldn't count on the beneficence of the neocons if I was a Ukrainian leader. Western European investment and being a bridge to commerce with Russia is probably their best bet.

    That would be true if we were talking about leaders who care about the country. So far Ukraine had all sorts of scoundrels who only cared about lining their pockets. This applies to all Ukrainian presidents since 1991, not only the current nonentity.

  125. @AP

    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn’t see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.
     
    I reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some?
     
    I don't know about specifics. Iran and North Korea are much more heavily sanctioned than Russia so presumably much more can be done to Russia. Countries dealing with Russia (such as South Korea or China) could face start to face sanctions linked to their trade with Russia. Such countries will likely not choose trade with Russia over trade with the entire West.

    anything now would have both sides about equally
     
    West is much bigger and has many more options, so it would not suffer equally but much less. Moreover, any losses by the west would be shared by a much larger population so the hit would be less significant. If EU (population 500 million, GDP $18.8 trillion) loses $5 billion through new sanctions and Russia (population 150 million, GDP $1.6 trillion) loses $5 billion also, who suffers more?

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine
     
    But not in a prewar or limited war situation. It was a good idea for Sweden and Switzerland to have the best militaries they could have during World War II, even though neither one would have survived an invasion by Germany.

    Do you suggest that Iran unilaterally disarm itself in the face of American threats?

    reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.

    So, millions of Germans supporting Hitler weren’t wrong? A fat lot of good it brought them.

  126. @reiner Tor
    That’s wishful thinking.

    Of course there could be more crippling sanctions. And of course with Russia being smaller than the whole West, such sanctions are bound to be more crippling for Russia than for the West. But that’s not even what I said. I merely said that that’s what the Ukrainians and their American mentors might be pushing for, regardless of whether they are feasible.

    Regarding more weapons for Ukraine, of course they would be useful. Yes, they will never be able to conquer Russia, but that’s a silly proposal anyway. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher the cost of any war for Russia will be. It’s a big deterrent. And for the neocons it’s a win-win, since they cannot lose even if Ukraine loses such a war: it will weaken Russia, and that’s all that matters to them. But for the Ukrainians the weapons are also useful, since they decrease the likelihood of a Russian attack, eventually even in the case of a Ukrainian attack on Donbas.

    You seem to be angry at the Ukrainians and the neocons for not accepting that they are already defeated, that they cannot do anything to harm Russia. Well, they are not defeated, and they can do Russia a lot of harm.

    Pretty much.

    As for weapons, all the regime in Kiev needs is those which would make limited Russian intervention in Donbass too costly.

    It’s amusing reading all those posts about Ukraine attacking Russia.
    If any attack happens it will be on a part of Donbass. Not even all. Just a part.
    Having advanced weapons would help, definitely.

  127. @reiner Tor

    80 % of people reading and posting here have no clue how MIRVs actually work
     
    I’m unfamiliar with the technical details. I know that before reentry the warhead (basically, multiple warheads packed together in the part of the missile which is still traveling) automatically disintegrates into multiple smaller vehicles, each directed at a different target. This means, I think, not one targeting Los Angeles and another New York, rather something like LA and San Diego. They use, I believe, some kind of wings to change course, both to correct their course to hit their targets more precisely and to avoid anti-missile defense systems. Once above the target, at an optimal distance, the warhead detonates. Not all warheads are created to be equal, some being better at both steering themselves and knowing where to detonate than others. One big enough ICBM could probably wipe out a larger US state, at least the big cities. The smaller towns are probably safer, at least from the initial detonations.

    Something like that. You could’ve mentioned decoy warheads there too, but, overall, good enough.
    This is important:

    …One big enough ICBM could probably wipe out a larger US state, at least the big cities….

    One ICBM. Just one.
    Plenty of those around, though.

    Great, a?

  128. @Beckow
    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn't see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine. Without good weapons, they can simply give up (and save lives, property), with enough weapons the escalation could get really ugly very quickly. And that could mean more casualties for Ukraine. Being partially armed is a pretty bad thing in an all-out fight. The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    ….The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational…

    I can think of at least one scenario where having advanced weaponry and attacking Donbass can work quite well for both the regime in Kiev and their supporters abroad.
    Probably two; with a stretch even three.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Can you describe those scenarios?

    My idea was just simply "the Russian President blinks and decides not to intervene."
  129. @peterAUS

    ....The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational...
     
    I can think of at least one scenario where having advanced weaponry and attacking Donbass can work quite well for both the regime in Kiev and their supporters abroad.
    Probably two; with a stretch even three.

    Can you describe those scenarios?

    My idea was just simply “the Russian President blinks and decides not to intervene.”

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Can you describe those scenarios?
     
    I can.
    Caveat: it will be huge oversimplification. I simply can't do it right. Well, nobody here can; actually nobody in public. Bottom line, real, proper scenarios are state secrets as we speak.

    Having said that, let's just address one, most likely. Easiest if you will.
    Pretty much based on:

    My idea was just simply “the Russian President blinks and decides not to intervene.”
     
    I'd rephrase it in:
    "My idea was just simply “the Russian President decides to use a carefully measured response.”
    Sounds familiar?

    The regime in Kiev needs just to attack, with overwhelming force, a carefully chosen small part of the current Donbass area. Caveat: I can't say which one. A lot of work there re terrain, logistics etc. Can't do.
    Donbass itself has no forces strong enough to successfully counteratack and retake the ground.
    So...here we are.
    The regime in Kremlin will need to react and send enough forces to do the job. Oh, yes, Kremlin could do it in a blink of an eye...the question is... would it? Better armed, organized and trained Ukrainian forces are BIGGER, more visible, the Russian force will be.
    Visibility, transparency is the key.
    Visible, transparent enough....better for the regime in Kiev and Neocons everywhere.
    In practical terms: "Russian invasion" plastered all over western public sphere.

    So, here is, IMHO, the most feasible scenario:
    Incursion into Donbass->Eviction by Russian forces, ONLY->Political benefits for Kiev, Neocons...and not so sure for Kremlin.

    The only losers in that, I'd say macabre game, are the foot soldiers on the ground there. True cannon fodder, little pawns. Several hundred dead and/or mutilated men in prime of their life.

    What a world, a?
  130. @Beckow
    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn't see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine. Without good weapons, they can simply give up (and save lives, property), with enough weapons the escalation could get really ugly very quickly. And that could mean more casualties for Ukraine. Being partially armed is a pretty bad thing in an all-out fight. The point is that Russia can also escalate more, they can literally demolish most of Ukraine with air power and missiles. For that the neo-cons have no solution. Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    AP and peterAUS pretty much summarized it. Even AnonFromTN’s input was interesting (i.e. neocons have different calculations than Ukrainians).

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.

    Anything up until North Korea style. Some countries in the Western sphere are still trading almost without restrictions with Russia (South Korea is the most obvious example), they could be pushed to join the sanctions.

    Russia being much smaller, even if sanctions cost Russia only half what they cost the West, the West is so much bigger it could more easily afford it.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine.

    No. AP is correct. Iran is weaker than the US, but an invasion of Iran would be costly enough for any US president to think twice before attacking them. Why is it bad for Iran?

    Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.

    Game theory predicts that such a totally rational man will always lose. You have to be willing to engage in irrational behavior if you want to have the best expected outcome.

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @Beckow

    ...Anything up until North Korea style sanctions
     
    How would that work? Would Germany stop buying gas? Would Italy? Would they stop selling (very profitably) their goods in Russia? Does Washington still have that much power that they could just order their 'allies' to stop trading with Russia?

    Russia is not N Korea, or Iran, or Cuba. It is big, has lots of stuff that others want to buy, and has a decent market for selling stuff. I have worked with (S) Koreans and they are mean motherf...ers when it comes to business, you don't tell them what to do or what to sell.

    The analogies that people are throwing around are just the common modern mistake of seeing false analogies everywhere. The situation in Russia-Ukraine is very specific, it would play out based on its local circumstances. Russia could also play an irrational card, or one can never be sure. But I disagree with you about the irrationals having an advantage in a game theory, it is not the irrational ones, it is the ones who can threaten credible moves that appear irrational but who stay in control. The true irrationals - e.g. the current crowd in Kiev - have no plan, no moves, and their irrationality is self-defeating. Their only move is to hope for a massive Western intervention, and an almost complete breakdown of West-Russia relations - how likely is that? No matter how many provocations they stage, no matter how much their Western 'friends' egg them on, at the end of the day, the cavalry isn't coming. It will be a long way down.

  131. @Felix Keverich
    Don't you think that some norms were violated when US blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics to help overthrow Yanukovich?

    Anyway, Medvedev now says that Poroshenko has "zero chance" to remain in power in the Ukraine. Patrushev, who serves on Russia's Security Council, agrees. I wonder where this confidence comes from?

    Don’t you think that some norms were violated when US blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics to help overthrow Yanukovich?

    Not even comparable. They gave some money to some NGOs and politicians, that’s it. It was wrong to do that, but not illegal at all.

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    You didn't really answer my question.

    I can assure you, that no Russian laws were broken, when Crimea integrated into Russian Federation. Our Constitution allows it and we have a special law on admitting new Federal Subjects. ;)

    As for the notion of "international law" being broken in the Ukraine, it's really quite moot (which is why I phrased my question the way I did). To start, there is no supranational body that could enforce "international law" on countries like Russia or the US.

    Different countries have different ideas about the wording and interpretation of "international law" - whose vision should prevail? USA likes to brandish "international law" against geopolitical adversaries like Russia, China and Iran. Doesn't see a problem with Saudi war in Yemen. Or Israeli apartheid in Palestine.

    It is certainly against the norm to facilitate a coup in foreign country however, which is what America did, and it's the cause of present day Ukrainian conflict.

  132. @reiner Tor
    Can you describe those scenarios?

    My idea was just simply "the Russian President blinks and decides not to intervene."

    Can you describe those scenarios?

    I can.
    Caveat: it will be huge oversimplification. I simply can’t do it right. Well, nobody here can; actually nobody in public. Bottom line, real, proper scenarios are state secrets as we speak.

    Having said that, let’s just address one, most likely. Easiest if you will.
    Pretty much based on:

    My idea was just simply “the Russian President blinks and decides not to intervene.”

    I’d rephrase it in:
    “My idea was just simply “the Russian President decides to use a carefully measured response.”
    Sounds familiar?

    The regime in Kiev needs just to attack, with overwhelming force, a carefully chosen small part of the current Donbass area. Caveat: I can’t say which one. A lot of work there re terrain, logistics etc. Can’t do.
    Donbass itself has no forces strong enough to successfully counteratack and retake the ground.
    So…here we are.
    The regime in Kremlin will need to react and send enough forces to do the job. Oh, yes, Kremlin could do it in a blink of an eye…the question is… would it? Better armed, organized and trained Ukrainian forces are BIGGER, more visible, the Russian force will be.
    Visibility, transparency is the key.
    Visible, transparent enough….better for the regime in Kiev and Neocons everywhere.
    In practical terms: “Russian invasion” plastered all over western public sphere.

    So, here is, IMHO, the most feasible scenario:
    Incursion into Donbass->Eviction by Russian forces, ONLY->Political benefits for Kiev, Neocons…and not so sure for Kremlin.

    The only losers in that, I’d say macabre game, are the foot soldiers on the ground there. True cannon fodder, little pawns. Several hundred dead and/or mutilated men in prime of their life.

    What a world, a?

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Beckow
    Your scenario depends on the 'enemy' (Russia) not responding forcefully. When you place your faith in what the enemy will do - or not do - you are already half lost. I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude. For one, Russia is not N Korea, Iran, Iraq or even Serbia in the 90's. Russia has acted decisively in the recent past and it has the ultimate weapons. It is also unlikely any leader in Kremlin would stay in power for too long if they would watch as Donbas gets pulverised.

    So, yes you can come with a scenario, but it is so unlikely in the real world that it amounts to hoping for divine intervention (and we are back to the mental cargo cult that so often leads to disaster).

    Do you have another, more realistic scenario? If not, any military hostilities would be a disaster for the poor Ukrainian soldiers. And what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov. Do you really think when the chips are down they will worry about a nasty editorial in NY Times?
  133. @AnonFromTN
    You are forgetting that neocons (and the US elites in general) don’t give a hoot about the lives of Ukrainians. They are treated by the US as expandable aborigines. That’s the real tragedy for poor unfortunate Ukraine. However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them. The rest of the residents suffer because they let this gang of scoundrels dominate them.

    the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them.

    The ‘only thing wrong with them’ is that in fact they are not significantly the real leaders of the country. You shouldn’t try and float these simplistic tropes here, especially since you claim to have lived in both Western and Eastern Ukraine. The Maidan clearly showed that Ukrainians from all corners of the country are for a free an independent Ukraine, one without the undue influence of Moscow type shills like you.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    No answer on substance? Why am I not surprised?

    BTW, what recently captured Ukrainian sailors are saying on camera surely shows that

    Ukrainians from all corners of the country are for a free an independent Ukraine, one without the undue influence of Moscow
     
    LOL
  134. Considering current state of the Ukrainian army, especially troops stationed in Donbass, the “overwhelming force” is an unlikely proposition.

    In practical terms: “Russian invasion” plastered all over western public sphere.

    This was plastered all over Western MSM without a shred of proof for many years now. So, are the MSM expected to say “we lied to you all this time, but now we are telling the truth”? Fat chance.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    So, are the MSM expected to say “we lied to you all this time, but now we are telling the truth”? Fat chance.
     
    No, they'll get the same message, but this time backed up with lots of incontrovertible evidence.
  135. @Mr. Hack

    the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them.
     
    The 'only thing wrong with them' is that in fact they are not significantly the real leaders of the country. You shouldn't try and float these simplistic tropes here, especially since you claim to have lived in both Western and Eastern Ukraine. The Maidan clearly showed that Ukrainians from all corners of the country are for a free an independent Ukraine, one without the undue influence of Moscow type shills like you.

    No answer on substance? Why am I not surprised?

    BTW, what recently captured Ukrainian sailors are saying on camera surely shows that

    Ukrainians from all corners of the country are for a free an independent Ukraine, one without the undue influence of Moscow

    LOL

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    You're the one trying to float the old cliche of Galicians or West Ukrainians running the country, and all of the rest of the sheeple following the leader - it just isn't so. Try something new, more believable, please.
  136. @AnonFromTN
    Considering current state of the Ukrainian army, especially troops stationed in Donbass, the “overwhelming force” is an unlikely proposition.

    In practical terms: “Russian invasion” plastered all over western public sphere.
     
    This was plastered all over Western MSM without a shred of proof for many years now. So, are the MSM expected to say “we lied to you all this time, but now we are telling the truth”? Fat chance.

    So, are the MSM expected to say “we lied to you all this time, but now we are telling the truth”? Fat chance.

    No, they’ll get the same message, but this time backed up with lots of incontrovertible evidence.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Don’t you think that even clinical idiots (normal MSM audience) would notice that the evidence is presented for the first time in many years? Or maybe I overestimate the mental capacity of those clinical idiots.
  137. @reiner Tor

    Don’t you think that some norms were violated when US blatantly interfered in Ukrainian politics to help overthrow Yanukovich?
     
    Not even comparable. They gave some money to some NGOs and politicians, that's it. It was wrong to do that, but not illegal at all.

    You didn’t really answer my question.

    I can assure you, that no Russian laws were broken, when Crimea integrated into Russian Federation. Our Constitution allows it and we have a special law on admitting new Federal Subjects. ;)

    As for the notion of “international law” being broken in the Ukraine, it’s really quite moot (which is why I phrased my question the way I did). To start, there is no supranational body that could enforce “international law” on countries like Russia or the US.

    Different countries have different ideas about the wording and interpretation of “international law” – whose vision should prevail? USA likes to brandish “international law” against geopolitical adversaries like Russia, China and Iran. Doesn’t see a problem with Saudi war in Yemen. Or Israeli apartheid in Palestine.

    It is certainly against the norm to facilitate a coup in foreign country however, which is what America did, and it’s the cause of present day Ukrainian conflict.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Well, the number of coups in foreign countries the US organized in the last 100 years or so defies imagination. So, one more won’t change anything. The wonnabe Nazis brought to power in Ukraine are also far from unique: many Latin American dictatorships installed and supported by the US were no better.

    An interesting thing is that talking about Crimea, Deep State MSM never mention Kosovo. To wit, there were never any referendums in Kosovo (as opposed to Crimea), and by now a third of Kosovo population ran away from that “paradise” (again, as opposed to Crimea).

    Reminds me of the joke that foreign intelligence officers are spies, whereas our spies are intelligence officers. Roosevelt, speaking about Somosa in Nicaragua, put it best: “but he is our son-of-a-bitch”.
  138. @reiner Tor

    So, are the MSM expected to say “we lied to you all this time, but now we are telling the truth”? Fat chance.
     
    No, they'll get the same message, but this time backed up with lots of incontrovertible evidence.

    Don’t you think that even clinical idiots (normal MSM audience) would notice that the evidence is presented for the first time in many years? Or maybe I overestimate the mental capacity of those clinical idiots.

  139. @AnonFromTN
    You are forgetting that neocons (and the US elites in general) don’t give a hoot about the lives of Ukrainians. They are treated by the US as expandable aborigines. That’s the real tragedy for poor unfortunate Ukraine. However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them. The rest of the residents suffer because they let this gang of scoundrels dominate them.

    However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime)

    Poroshenko – central Ukrainian. PM Groysman – also from central Ukraine. Parubiy – western Ukrainian. Hardly domination.

    always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.)

    1. Mazepa – born outside Kiev, central Ukrainian.

    2. Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russian Empire both lost. But Russian Empire lost first, to Austria-Hungary and Germany. So in the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Russia, western Ukrainians were on the winning side.

    3. Germany indeed lost World War II but the ultimate losers were Sovoks, whereas Westerners (including those Ukrainians who allied with Germans and fled West after World War II) prospered.

    Moreover your knowledge is limited. You forgot:

    Konstanty Ostrogski – supreme commander of Polish forces who defeated Moscow at battle of Orsha

    Petro Sahaidachny – Galician hetman of Zaporozhians, allied with Poles against Muscovites, defeating the Muscovites and taking a lot of territory; he also allied with Poles against Turks and with them defeated the Turks at Battle of Khotyn

    Western Ukrainians allied with Polish King John Sobieski (himself of partial Western Ukrainian descent) against Turks and won

    Napoleonic wars – western Ukrainians tended to be loyal to Austria (Poles preferred Napoleon). Austria won.

    Obviously during the Cold War, Western Ukrainians were anti-Soviet and pro-Western. Soviets lost the Cold War.

    So only during World War II did western Ukrainians choose the losing side.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Informative.
    , @AnonFromTN
    I like the stories of glorious Polish victories supported by Western Ukrainians. Is that why when the Poles once captured Moscow they ended up eating their horses and each other in the besieged Kremlin? Is that why Germany and Russia kept dividing up Poland for two centuries?

    In terms of choosing the losing side the only competition Ukraine has is Poland. In view of recent events, Ukraine wins that competition.

    Reminds me of a joke. Wife berates her husband:
    - You are such a loser. If there was a world competition of losers, you’d take the second place!
    - Why the second?
    - Because you are a loser!
  140. @Felix Keverich
    You didn't really answer my question.

    I can assure you, that no Russian laws were broken, when Crimea integrated into Russian Federation. Our Constitution allows it and we have a special law on admitting new Federal Subjects. ;)

    As for the notion of "international law" being broken in the Ukraine, it's really quite moot (which is why I phrased my question the way I did). To start, there is no supranational body that could enforce "international law" on countries like Russia or the US.

    Different countries have different ideas about the wording and interpretation of "international law" - whose vision should prevail? USA likes to brandish "international law" against geopolitical adversaries like Russia, China and Iran. Doesn't see a problem with Saudi war in Yemen. Or Israeli apartheid in Palestine.

    It is certainly against the norm to facilitate a coup in foreign country however, which is what America did, and it's the cause of present day Ukrainian conflict.

    Well, the number of coups in foreign countries the US organized in the last 100 years or so defies imagination. So, one more won’t change anything. The wonnabe Nazis brought to power in Ukraine are also far from unique: many Latin American dictatorships installed and supported by the US were no better.

    An interesting thing is that talking about Crimea, Deep State MSM never mention Kosovo. To wit, there were never any referendums in Kosovo (as opposed to Crimea), and by now a third of Kosovo population ran away from that “paradise” (again, as opposed to Crimea).

    Reminds me of the joke that foreign intelligence officers are spies, whereas our spies are intelligence officers. Roosevelt, speaking about Somosa in Nicaragua, put it best: “but he is our son-of-a-bitch”.

    • Replies: @for-the-record
    To wit, there were never any referendums in Kosovo (as opposed to Crimea)

    You need to inform the Nobel Peace Prize President of this, 'cuz he says otherwise!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsZ346-3Eeo
  141. @AP

    However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime)
     
    Poroshenko - central Ukrainian. PM Groysman - also from central Ukraine. Parubiy - western Ukrainian. Hardly domination.

    always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.)
     
    1. Mazepa - born outside Kiev, central Ukrainian.

    2. Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russian Empire both lost. But Russian Empire lost first, to Austria-Hungary and Germany. So in the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Russia, western Ukrainians were on the winning side.

    3. Germany indeed lost World War II but the ultimate losers were Sovoks, whereas Westerners (including those Ukrainians who allied with Germans and fled West after World War II) prospered.

    Moreover your knowledge is limited. You forgot:

    Konstanty Ostrogski - supreme commander of Polish forces who defeated Moscow at battle of Orsha

    Petro Sahaidachny - Galician hetman of Zaporozhians, allied with Poles against Muscovites, defeating the Muscovites and taking a lot of territory; he also allied with Poles against Turks and with them defeated the Turks at Battle of Khotyn

    Western Ukrainians allied with Polish King John Sobieski (himself of partial Western Ukrainian descent) against Turks and won

    Napoleonic wars - western Ukrainians tended to be loyal to Austria (Poles preferred Napoleon). Austria won.

    Obviously during the Cold War, Western Ukrainians were anti-Soviet and pro-Western. Soviets lost the Cold War.

    So only during World War II did western Ukrainians choose the losing side.

    Informative.

  142. @AP

    However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime)
     
    Poroshenko - central Ukrainian. PM Groysman - also from central Ukraine. Parubiy - western Ukrainian. Hardly domination.

    always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.)
     
    1. Mazepa - born outside Kiev, central Ukrainian.

    2. Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russian Empire both lost. But Russian Empire lost first, to Austria-Hungary and Germany. So in the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Russia, western Ukrainians were on the winning side.

    3. Germany indeed lost World War II but the ultimate losers were Sovoks, whereas Westerners (including those Ukrainians who allied with Germans and fled West after World War II) prospered.

    Moreover your knowledge is limited. You forgot:

    Konstanty Ostrogski - supreme commander of Polish forces who defeated Moscow at battle of Orsha

    Petro Sahaidachny - Galician hetman of Zaporozhians, allied with Poles against Muscovites, defeating the Muscovites and taking a lot of territory; he also allied with Poles against Turks and with them defeated the Turks at Battle of Khotyn

    Western Ukrainians allied with Polish King John Sobieski (himself of partial Western Ukrainian descent) against Turks and won

    Napoleonic wars - western Ukrainians tended to be loyal to Austria (Poles preferred Napoleon). Austria won.

    Obviously during the Cold War, Western Ukrainians were anti-Soviet and pro-Western. Soviets lost the Cold War.

    So only during World War II did western Ukrainians choose the losing side.

    I like the stories of glorious Polish victories supported by Western Ukrainians. Is that why when the Poles once captured Moscow they ended up eating their horses and each other in the besieged Kremlin? Is that why Germany and Russia kept dividing up Poland for two centuries?

    In terms of choosing the losing side the only competition Ukraine has is Poland. In view of recent events, Ukraine wins that competition.

    Reminds me of a joke. Wife berates her husband:
    - You are such a loser. If there was a world competition of losers, you’d take the second place!
    - Why the second?
    - Because you are a loser!

    • Replies: @AP

    I like the stories of glorious Polish victories supported by Western Ukrainians. Is that why when the Poles once captured Moscow they ended up eating their horses and each other in the besieged Kremlin?
     
    This is like bragging about Soviet losses in 1941 to prove something about World War II.

    Although Poles were driven out of Moscow they won that war, gaining territory at the expense of Muscovy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Muscovite_War_(1605%E2%80%931618)

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Truce_of_Deulino_1618-1619.PNG/765px-Truce_of_Deulino_1618-1619.PNG

    Is that why Germany and Russia kept dividing up Poland for two centuries?
     
    If you knew some history you would know that this division was happening after Poles and Ukrainians turned against each other.

    But while they were united they were winning.

    In terms of choosing the losing side the only competition Ukraine has is Poland
     
    As we have seen, western Ukrainians chose the winning side in every war other than World War II.

    That you are unaware of this speaks to your ignorance, though this is well-established.
  143. @peterAUS

    Can you describe those scenarios?
     
    I can.
    Caveat: it will be huge oversimplification. I simply can't do it right. Well, nobody here can; actually nobody in public. Bottom line, real, proper scenarios are state secrets as we speak.

    Having said that, let's just address one, most likely. Easiest if you will.
    Pretty much based on:

    My idea was just simply “the Russian President blinks and decides not to intervene.”
     
    I'd rephrase it in:
    "My idea was just simply “the Russian President decides to use a carefully measured response.”
    Sounds familiar?

    The regime in Kiev needs just to attack, with overwhelming force, a carefully chosen small part of the current Donbass area. Caveat: I can't say which one. A lot of work there re terrain, logistics etc. Can't do.
    Donbass itself has no forces strong enough to successfully counteratack and retake the ground.
    So...here we are.
    The regime in Kremlin will need to react and send enough forces to do the job. Oh, yes, Kremlin could do it in a blink of an eye...the question is... would it? Better armed, organized and trained Ukrainian forces are BIGGER, more visible, the Russian force will be.
    Visibility, transparency is the key.
    Visible, transparent enough....better for the regime in Kiev and Neocons everywhere.
    In practical terms: "Russian invasion" plastered all over western public sphere.

    So, here is, IMHO, the most feasible scenario:
    Incursion into Donbass->Eviction by Russian forces, ONLY->Political benefits for Kiev, Neocons...and not so sure for Kremlin.

    The only losers in that, I'd say macabre game, are the foot soldiers on the ground there. True cannon fodder, little pawns. Several hundred dead and/or mutilated men in prime of their life.

    What a world, a?

    Your scenario depends on the ‘enemy’ (Russia) not responding forcefully. When you place your faith in what the enemy will do – or not do – you are already half lost. I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude. For one, Russia is not N Korea, Iran, Iraq or even Serbia in the 90′s. Russia has acted decisively in the recent past and it has the ultimate weapons. It is also unlikely any leader in Kremlin would stay in power for too long if they would watch as Donbas gets pulverised.

    So, yes you can come with a scenario, but it is so unlikely in the real world that it amounts to hoping for divine intervention (and we are back to the mental cargo cult that so often leads to disaster).

    Do you have another, more realistic scenario? If not, any military hostilities would be a disaster for the poor Ukrainian soldiers. And what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov. Do you really think when the chips are down they will worry about a nasty editorial in NY Times?

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    No, PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully.

    By the way, even now, Ukraine seems to occupy a few villages each year, so there's that.

    what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov
     
    There are Ukrainian missiles, too. If Russia starts bombing Ukrainian cities, Ukraine might start lobbing missiles at some Russian cities. Another perk of lots of military assets is that Russia might think twice about that, too.
  144. @AnonFromTN
    I like the stories of glorious Polish victories supported by Western Ukrainians. Is that why when the Poles once captured Moscow they ended up eating their horses and each other in the besieged Kremlin? Is that why Germany and Russia kept dividing up Poland for two centuries?

    In terms of choosing the losing side the only competition Ukraine has is Poland. In view of recent events, Ukraine wins that competition.

    Reminds me of a joke. Wife berates her husband:
    - You are such a loser. If there was a world competition of losers, you’d take the second place!
    - Why the second?
    - Because you are a loser!

    I like the stories of glorious Polish victories supported by Western Ukrainians. Is that why when the Poles once captured Moscow they ended up eating their horses and each other in the besieged Kremlin?

    This is like bragging about Soviet losses in 1941 to prove something about World War II.

    Although Poles were driven out of Moscow they won that war, gaining territory at the expense of Muscovy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Muscovite_War_(1605%E2%80%931618)

    Is that why Germany and Russia kept dividing up Poland for two centuries?

    If you knew some history you would know that this division was happening after Poles and Ukrainians turned against each other.

    But while they were united they were winning.

    In terms of choosing the losing side the only competition Ukraine has is Poland

    As we have seen, western Ukrainians chose the winning side in every war other than World War II.

    That you are unaware of this speaks to your ignorance, though this is well-established.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    If you knew some history you would know that this division was happening after Poles and Ukrainians turned against each other.
     
    Volhynia massacre, anyone? Internet is choke-full of pictures of murdered Poles, including little children, as “Ukrainian patriots” were so stupid that they didn’t even think of hiding their atrocities. BTW, Polish parliament declared it genocide (https://www.rferl.org/a/poland-parliament-declares-volyn-massacres-/27874252.html). Note that this link is from RFE/RL directly funded by the US. Masters betraying their slaves? Or just choosing more useful slaves over less useful?
  145. @AP

    I like the stories of glorious Polish victories supported by Western Ukrainians. Is that why when the Poles once captured Moscow they ended up eating their horses and each other in the besieged Kremlin?
     
    This is like bragging about Soviet losses in 1941 to prove something about World War II.

    Although Poles were driven out of Moscow they won that war, gaining territory at the expense of Muscovy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Muscovite_War_(1605%E2%80%931618)

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Truce_of_Deulino_1618-1619.PNG/765px-Truce_of_Deulino_1618-1619.PNG

    Is that why Germany and Russia kept dividing up Poland for two centuries?
     
    If you knew some history you would know that this division was happening after Poles and Ukrainians turned against each other.

    But while they were united they were winning.

    In terms of choosing the losing side the only competition Ukraine has is Poland
     
    As we have seen, western Ukrainians chose the winning side in every war other than World War II.

    That you are unaware of this speaks to your ignorance, though this is well-established.

    If you knew some history you would know that this division was happening after Poles and Ukrainians turned against each other.

    Volhynia massacre, anyone? Internet is choke-full of pictures of murdered Poles, including little children, as “Ukrainian patriots” were so stupid that they didn’t even think of hiding their atrocities. BTW, Polish parliament declared it genocide (https://www.rferl.org/a/poland-parliament-declares-volyn-massacres-/27874252.html). Note that this link is from RFE/RL directly funded by the US. Masters betraying their slaves? Or just choosing more useful slaves over less useful?

    • Replies: @AP
    Comment in no way contradicts what I wrote.

    However it illustrates an important point: as we have seen, when Ukrainians and Poles were united, they usually won. But when they were divided, it was a mixed record. So this is why pro-Russians like to bring up horrors such as the Volhynian massacre whenever they can.

  146. I think you didn’t, quite, get what I said.
    Let’s try again……

    Your scenario depends on the ‘enemy’ (Russia) not responding forcefully.

    No. My scenario depends on the ‘enemy’ (Russia) responding with restraint. Sounds familiar?

    When you place your faith in what the enemy will do – or not do – you are already half lost.

    The second element of METT-T.

    I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude.

    I can imagine a limited incursion and related response of that magnitude. With ease.

    For one, Russia is not N Korea, Iran, Iraq or even Serbia in the 90′s.

    Agree.

    Russia has acted decisively in the recent past and it has the ultimate weapons.

    It has and it has not re the former; irrelevant re the later.

    It is also unlikely any leader in Kremlin would stay in power for too long if they would watch as Donbas gets pulverised.

    Agree.
    Change “pulverized” with “ejecting limited incursion” and things change there for much better.

    Do you have another, more realistic scenario?

    Nope. The above is the best for the regime in Kiev and its backers abroad.
    Probably not bad for Kremlin either.
    It definitely bad for pawns and cannon fodder but, well, that’s what they are for.

    If not, any military hostilities would be a disaster for the poor Ukrainian soldiers.

    I’d say ‘not good”. Probably worse for the Donbass civilians and militias, in that order. Not quite good for Russian troops on the ground either.

    And what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov.

    Restraint. That thing which has been hailed by the “Team Russia” since Putin came into power.
    Smart moves. Long term strategy we, ordinary humans, can’t comprehend. Wisdom.
    As in Georgia, Syria and last, but not the least in Ukraine. We have to go through all that again?

    Do you really think when the chips are down they will worry about a nasty editorial in NY Times?

    What chips?
    The regime in Kremlin will benefit from “defending Donbass” internally.
    The regime in Kiev will benefit from initial success, if only within 10 Kms and crying for help later on.
    The TPTBs in West will benefit with more sanctions, propaganda and such.

    The dead and mutilated Donbass civilians won’t, of course. Combatants with similar fate at least choose that; comes with the trade.

    • Replies: @Beckow

    ...responding with restraint
     
    I think in Russia's case the 'restraint' is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be 'restrained' as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could. But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc... Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?

    The main restraint on Russia is not the fear of Kiev's might nor fear of Western intervention and sanctions. The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a 'brotherly' nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don't want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians. Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of 'let's get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties' takes over. And you get the fireworks.
  147. @Beckow
    Your scenario depends on the 'enemy' (Russia) not responding forcefully. When you place your faith in what the enemy will do - or not do - you are already half lost. I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude. For one, Russia is not N Korea, Iran, Iraq or even Serbia in the 90's. Russia has acted decisively in the recent past and it has the ultimate weapons. It is also unlikely any leader in Kremlin would stay in power for too long if they would watch as Donbas gets pulverised.

    So, yes you can come with a scenario, but it is so unlikely in the real world that it amounts to hoping for divine intervention (and we are back to the mental cargo cult that so often leads to disaster).

    Do you have another, more realistic scenario? If not, any military hostilities would be a disaster for the poor Ukrainian soldiers. And what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov. Do you really think when the chips are down they will worry about a nasty editorial in NY Times?

    No, PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully.

    By the way, even now, Ukraine seems to occupy a few villages each year, so there’s that.

    what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov

    There are Ukrainian missiles, too. If Russia starts bombing Ukrainian cities, Ukraine might start lobbing missiles at some Russian cities. Another perk of lots of military assets is that Russia might think twice about that, too.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Russia won’t bomb Ukraine for the simple reason that it isn’t cost-effective. It is playing the waiting game, as nobody ever did more damage to Ukraine than its current “leaders”. There was even a joke in Russia that Ukrainian coup leaders (and Obama, BTW) should be awarded medals “For the liberation of Crimea”. The people who suffer because of this waiting game are Donbass residents. Ukraine is dying, but headless chicken can run for a while, doing damage in his path.
    , @peterAUS

    ..PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully..
     
    Not exactly.

    The handle wrote a scenario where all major players win, and pawns and cannon fodder lose.
    Again.
  148. @reiner Tor
    AP and peterAUS pretty much summarized it. Even AnonFromTN's input was interesting (i.e. neocons have different calculations than Ukrainians).

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some? All the easy ones have been done, anything now would have both sides about equally.
     
    Anything up until North Korea style. Some countries in the Western sphere are still trading almost without restrictions with Russia (South Korea is the most obvious example), they could be pushed to join the sanctions.

    Russia being much smaller, even if sanctions cost Russia only half what they cost the West, the West is so much bigger it could more easily afford it.

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine.
     
    No. AP is correct. Iran is weaker than the US, but an invasion of Iran would be costly enough for any US president to think twice before attacking them. Why is it bad for Iran?

    Pointless bleeding in a hopeless fight is irrational.
     
    Game theory predicts that such a totally rational man will always lose. You have to be willing to engage in irrational behavior if you want to have the best expected outcome.

    …Anything up until North Korea style sanctions

    How would that work? Would Germany stop buying gas? Would Italy? Would they stop selling (very profitably) their goods in Russia? Does Washington still have that much power that they could just order their ‘allies’ to stop trading with Russia?

    Russia is not N Korea, or Iran, or Cuba. It is big, has lots of stuff that others want to buy, and has a decent market for selling stuff. I have worked with (S) Koreans and they are mean motherf…ers when it comes to business, you don’t tell them what to do or what to sell.

    The analogies that people are throwing around are just the common modern mistake of seeing false analogies everywhere. The situation in Russia-Ukraine is very specific, it would play out based on its local circumstances. Russia could also play an irrational card, or one can never be sure. But I disagree with you about the irrationals having an advantage in a game theory, it is not the irrational ones, it is the ones who can threaten credible moves that appear irrational but who stay in control. The true irrationals – e.g. the current crowd in Kiev – have no plan, no moves, and their irrationality is self-defeating. Their only move is to hope for a massive Western intervention, and an almost complete breakdown of West-Russia relations – how likely is that? No matter how many provocations they stage, no matter how much their Western ‘friends’ egg them on, at the end of the day, the cavalry isn’t coming. It will be a long way down.

  149. @AP

    I am not angry, I am baffled. I assume rational self-interest and when one doesn’t see it (e.g. most Ukrainians) it seems weird.
     
    I reasonable person would assume that perhaps you are wrong, rather than millions of those others being wrong.

    If you think there are some feasible sanctions, could you suggest some?
     
    I don't know about specifics. Iran and North Korea are much more heavily sanctioned than Russia so presumably much more can be done to Russia. Countries dealing with Russia (such as South Korea or China) could face start to face sanctions linked to their trade with Russia. Such countries will likely not choose trade with Russia over trade with the entire West.

    anything now would have both sides about equally
     
    West is much bigger and has many more options, so it would not suffer equally but much less. Moreover, any losses by the west would be shared by a much larger population so the hit would be less significant. If EU (population 500 million, GDP $18.8 trillion) loses $5 billion through new sanctions and Russia (population 150 million, GDP $1.6 trillion) loses $5 billion also, who suffers more?

    In a war situation having more weapons and still be weaker is about the worst place to be for Ukraine
     
    But not in a prewar or limited war situation. It was a good idea for Sweden and Switzerland to have the best militaries they could have during World War II, even though neither one would have survived an invasion by Germany.

    Do you suggest that Iran unilaterally disarm itself in the face of American threats?

    Sanctioning North Korea and Iran failed. Russian GDP is three times bigger then Iran’s. Plus Russia and US are playing nice right now mostly doing things to each other that don’t matter. Any significant sanctions would be answered the same way. As mentioned the big sanctions would undermine global institutions. It’s not the dollar amount that would worry US but the fact that alternatives will be made.

    • Replies: @AP

    Sanctioning North Korea and Iran failed.
     
    It kept those countries backward and poor, and weaker than they would be otherwise.

    Any significant sanctions would be answered the same way.
     
    Sure. And Russia loses that game against the West.
  150. @reiner Tor
    No, PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully.

    By the way, even now, Ukraine seems to occupy a few villages each year, so there's that.

    what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov
     
    There are Ukrainian missiles, too. If Russia starts bombing Ukrainian cities, Ukraine might start lobbing missiles at some Russian cities. Another perk of lots of military assets is that Russia might think twice about that, too.

    Russia won’t bomb Ukraine for the simple reason that it isn’t cost-effective. It is playing the waiting game, as nobody ever did more damage to Ukraine than its current “leaders”. There was even a joke in Russia that Ukrainian coup leaders (and Obama, BTW) should be awarded medals “For the liberation of Crimea”. The people who suffer because of this waiting game are Donbass residents. Ukraine is dying, but headless chicken can run for a while, doing damage in his path.

  151. Putin wants NATO to fracture and to do business with a neutral France and Germany. A shooting war with Ukraine would be very counterproductive at this point.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    That’s exactly why the US handlers egg their Ukrainian dogs to start a shooting war with Russia. If this were a spots event, Russia would have suffered a technical defeat: it did not show up for the war. The only thing that restrains current Ukrainian “leadership” is cowardice: they know the outcome and don’t want their precious skins to suffer, especially now that they stole so much and want to enjoy their loot.
  152. @peterAUS
    I think you didn't, quite, get what I said.
    Let's try again......

    Your scenario depends on the ‘enemy’ (Russia) not responding forcefully.
     
    No. My scenario depends on the 'enemy' (Russia) responding with restraint. Sounds familiar?

    When you place your faith in what the enemy will do – or not do – you are already half lost.
     
    The second element of METT-T.

    I cannot imagine a bluff of that magnitude.
     
    I can imagine a limited incursion and related response of that magnitude. With ease.

    For one, Russia is not N Korea, Iran, Iraq or even Serbia in the 90′s.
     
    Agree.

    Russia has acted decisively in the recent past and it has the ultimate weapons.
     
    It has and it has not re the former; irrelevant re the later.

    It is also unlikely any leader in Kremlin would stay in power for too long if they would watch as Donbas gets pulverised.
     
    Agree.
    Change "pulverized" with "ejecting limited incursion" and things change there for much better.

    Do you have another, more realistic scenario?
     
    Nope. The above is the best for the regime in Kiev and its backers abroad.
    Probably not bad for Kremlin either.
    It definitely bad for pawns and cannon fodder but, well, that's what they are for.

    If not, any military hostilities would be a disaster for the poor Ukrainian soldiers.
     
    I'd say 'not good". Probably worse for the Donbass civilians and militias, in that order. Not quite good for Russian troops on the ground either.

    And what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov.
     
    Restraint. That thing which has been hailed by the "Team Russia" since Putin came into power.
    Smart moves. Long term strategy we, ordinary humans, can't comprehend. Wisdom.
    As in Georgia, Syria and last, but not the least in Ukraine. We have to go through all that again?

    Do you really think when the chips are down they will worry about a nasty editorial in NY Times?
     
    What chips?
    The regime in Kremlin will benefit from "defending Donbass" internally.
    The regime in Kiev will benefit from initial success, if only within 10 Kms and crying for help later on.
    The TPTBs in West will benefit with more sanctions, propaganda and such.

    The dead and mutilated Donbass civilians won't, of course. Combatants with similar fate at least choose that; comes with the trade.

    …responding with restraint

    I think in Russia’s case the ‘restraint’ is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be ‘restrained’ as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could. But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc… Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?

    The main restraint on Russia is not the fear of Kiev’s might nor fear of Western intervention and sanctions. The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a ‘brotherly’ nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don’t want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians. Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of ‘let’s get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties’ takes over. And you get the fireworks.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    I think in Russia’s case the ‘restraint’ is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be ‘restrained’ as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.
     
    Obviously..................................................................

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could.
     
    You haven't, for some reason, defined "them"?
    I shall: Donbass people. Civilians and militiamen. In that order.
    BTW, you, for a HUGE change in similar discussions, do appear to be:
    -civil enough
    -knowledgeable
    -not quite a Putin fanboy.

    So........re the second which has been PUZZLING me since the start of all this a couple of years ago (so I can get something from this chat):
    Why we have NOT seen a properly organized armed force of Novorossya/Donbass/whatever?
    Simple question the "Team Russia" has been careful to avoid.

    Because not enough men and material there? Yeah.....
    Not enough expertise? Haha....yeah.

    All it would've been needed is a properly organized Corps (say.....3 brigades etc...) with LOCAL commanders. I say COMMANDERS. Specialists could've come from .....Papua New Guinea if necessary.
    Any ideas?

    Oh, BTW, before some amateurs start to chime in just keep in mind that I have worked, once upon a time, as a little guy in Corps H.Q. so know a thing or two about that. Or..hehe..so I say.

    But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc… Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?
     
    Now you are talking....
    Ukraine is NOT a weaker side actually. It all depends on the ....ahm...RESTRAINT in Kremlin.
    Without Kremlin help Ukraine would steamroll over that area in a couple of weeks.

    So, Ukraine can attack on front of, say, 20 Kms achieving depth in, say, 10 Kms, with not much difficulty, in, say........72 hours, then stop, consolidate, dig in,the works.
    Should Russians respond in FORCE they run for their lives back. If properly organized shouldn't be a big of a problem. THAT is, of course, utilized by the "Masters", both local and abroad.
    Now...........if there is ahm....restraint...........well...............................................................a lot of options there. A lot.

    The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a ‘brotherly’ nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don’t want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians.
     
    Main concern, agree.

    Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of ‘let’s get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties’ takes over. And you get the fireworks.
     
    The worst case scenario here re the regime in Kiev would be mauling of the force assembled for attack. Including, of course, rear echelon, depots etc. Georgia type. And then STOP.
    I do not see Russian forces going further.

    How would that be utilized in the real game here (The Empire vs Kremlin) could be an interesting conversation for some other time, perhaps.
    My take is...it would reinforce all the major players here. Hardened all positions. Till the next confrontation.

    Take this incursion as a test of sort.
  153. @AnonFromTN
    No answer on substance? Why am I not surprised?

    BTW, what recently captured Ukrainian sailors are saying on camera surely shows that

    Ukrainians from all corners of the country are for a free an independent Ukraine, one without the undue influence of Moscow
     
    LOL

    You’re the one trying to float the old cliche of Galicians or West Ukrainians running the country, and all of the rest of the sheeple following the leader – it just isn’t so. Try something new, more believable, please.

  154. @AnonFromTN

    If you knew some history you would know that this division was happening after Poles and Ukrainians turned against each other.
     
    Volhynia massacre, anyone? Internet is choke-full of pictures of murdered Poles, including little children, as “Ukrainian patriots” were so stupid that they didn’t even think of hiding their atrocities. BTW, Polish parliament declared it genocide (https://www.rferl.org/a/poland-parliament-declares-volyn-massacres-/27874252.html). Note that this link is from RFE/RL directly funded by the US. Masters betraying their slaves? Or just choosing more useful slaves over less useful?

    Comment in no way contradicts what I wrote.

    However it illustrates an important point: as we have seen, when Ukrainians and Poles were united, they usually won. But when they were divided, it was a mixed record. So this is why pro-Russians like to bring up horrors such as the Volhynian massacre whenever they can.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Are these horrors real, or a tale of pro-Russian propaganda? Were Bandera followers who committed these crimes pro-Russians? Was Maidan organized by the Kremlin to take Crimea back? Was Obama tricked by Putin into financing maidanistas for that reason?

    My condolences, though: when you stick to a false narrative, it is impossible to make things gibe.
  155. @JLK
    Putin wants NATO to fracture and to do business with a neutral France and Germany. A shooting war with Ukraine would be very counterproductive at this point.

    That’s exactly why the US handlers egg their Ukrainian dogs to start a shooting war with Russia. If this were a spots event, Russia would have suffered a technical defeat: it did not show up for the war. The only thing that restrains current Ukrainian “leadership” is cowardice: they know the outcome and don’t want their precious skins to suffer, especially now that they stole so much and want to enjoy their loot.

  156. @reiner Tor
    No, PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully.

    By the way, even now, Ukraine seems to occupy a few villages each year, so there's that.

    what exactly is there to keep Russia from tossing a few missiles at key military bases, factories, or Lvov
     
    There are Ukrainian missiles, too. If Russia starts bombing Ukrainian cities, Ukraine might start lobbing missiles at some Russian cities. Another perk of lots of military assets is that Russia might think twice about that, too.

    ..PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully..

    Not exactly.

    The handle wrote a scenario where all major players win, and pawns and cannon fodder lose.
    Again.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Well, Ukraine would win, which is what matters to Ukraine.
  157. @DreadIlk
    Sanctioning North Korea and Iran failed. Russian GDP is three times bigger then Iran's. Plus Russia and US are playing nice right now mostly doing things to each other that don't matter. Any significant sanctions would be answered the same way. As @Beckow mentioned the big sanctions would undermine global institutions. It's not the dollar amount that would worry US but the fact that alternatives will be made.

    Sanctioning North Korea and Iran failed.

    It kept those countries backward and poor, and weaker than they would be otherwise.

    Any significant sanctions would be answered the same way.

    Sure. And Russia loses that game against the West.

    • Replies: @DreadIlk
    Backward and poor was before the sanctions aswell and it is a moot point. Goal not achieved. Failure is the point.

    Sure. And Russia loses that game against the West.
     
    No everyone loses. That is why these were not undertaken. It is an escalation in conflict. It is damage to both sides.

    I know you are biased but step up your game.
  158. @AP
    Comment in no way contradicts what I wrote.

    However it illustrates an important point: as we have seen, when Ukrainians and Poles were united, they usually won. But when they were divided, it was a mixed record. So this is why pro-Russians like to bring up horrors such as the Volhynian massacre whenever they can.

    Are these horrors real, or a tale of pro-Russian propaganda? Were Bandera followers who committed these crimes pro-Russians? Was Maidan organized by the Kremlin to take Crimea back? Was Obama tricked by Putin into financing maidanistas for that reason?

    My condolences, though: when you stick to a false narrative, it is impossible to make things gibe.

    • Replies: @AP

    Are these horrors real, or a tale of pro-Russian propaganda
     
    They were, of course, real.

    Were Bandera followers who committed these crimes pro-Russians?
     
    No, but Stalin killed more Poles than did Bandera's followers so when Russian nationalists feign (I am not implying you here) horror at the loss of those Polish lives it is hypocritical.
  159. @peterAUS

    ..PeterAUS wrote a scenario where they win despite Russia acting forcefully..
     
    Not exactly.

    The handle wrote a scenario where all major players win, and pawns and cannon fodder lose.
    Again.

    Well, Ukraine would win, which is what matters to Ukraine.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    The words “Ukraine” and “win” cannot be used in the same sentence. American handling of that unfortunate would-be country since 2014 shows this clearly.
    , @peterAUS

    Well, Ukraine would win, which is what matters to Ukraine
     
    You mean the regime in Kiev and all those in/outside of Ukraine who, ahm, do NOT like Russia/Russians?
    Agree.

    Not so sure about the brigade combat team actually doing the incursion; especially air assets supporting the effort and those poor guys in the lead battalion.
    That's for the "teeth".
    As for the "tail", well....there will be some bloody excitement there too.
    Emphasize on "bloody" re Russian standoff capability.

    Comes with a job I guess.
  160. @reiner Tor
    Well, Ukraine would win, which is what matters to Ukraine.

    The words “Ukraine” and “win” cannot be used in the same sentence. American handling of that unfortunate would-be country since 2014 shows this clearly.

    • Replies: @AP
    Ukraine has been mostly winning starting in 2016. You are just living in eternal 2014.
  161. @AnonFromTN
    Are these horrors real, or a tale of pro-Russian propaganda? Were Bandera followers who committed these crimes pro-Russians? Was Maidan organized by the Kremlin to take Crimea back? Was Obama tricked by Putin into financing maidanistas for that reason?

    My condolences, though: when you stick to a false narrative, it is impossible to make things gibe.

    Are these horrors real, or a tale of pro-Russian propaganda

    They were, of course, real.

    Were Bandera followers who committed these crimes pro-Russians?

    No, but Stalin killed more Poles than did Bandera’s followers so when Russian nationalists feign (I am not implying you here) horror at the loss of those Polish lives it is hypocritical.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Stalin killed a lot fewer Poles in many years than Ukrainian nationalists during the Volhynia massacre. What’s more, his goons never nailed little children to trees or cut open bellies of pregnant women. Even German Nazis did not do that, delegating dirty work to untermenschen.
  162. @Beckow

    ...responding with restraint
     
    I think in Russia's case the 'restraint' is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be 'restrained' as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could. But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc... Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?

    The main restraint on Russia is not the fear of Kiev's might nor fear of Western intervention and sanctions. The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a 'brotherly' nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don't want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians. Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of 'let's get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties' takes over. And you get the fireworks.

    I think in Russia’s case the ‘restraint’ is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be ‘restrained’ as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.

    Obviously…………………………………………………………

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could.

    You haven’t, for some reason, defined “them”?
    I shall: Donbass people. Civilians and militiamen. In that order.
    BTW, you, for a HUGE change in similar discussions, do appear to be:
    -civil enough
    -knowledgeable
    -not quite a Putin fanboy.

    So……..re the second which has been PUZZLING me since the start of all this a couple of years ago (so I can get something from this chat):
    Why we have NOT seen a properly organized armed force of Novorossya/Donbass/whatever?
    Simple question the “Team Russia” has been careful to avoid.

    Because not enough men and material there? Yeah…..
    Not enough expertise? Haha….yeah.

    All it would’ve been needed is a properly organized Corps (say…..3 brigades etc…) with LOCAL commanders. I say COMMANDERS. Specialists could’ve come from …..Papua New Guinea if necessary.
    Any ideas?

    Oh, BTW, before some amateurs start to chime in just keep in mind that I have worked, once upon a time, as a little guy in Corps H.Q. so know a thing or two about that. Or..hehe..so I say.

    But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc… Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?

    Now you are talking….
    Ukraine is NOT a weaker side actually. It all depends on the ….ahm…RESTRAINT in Kremlin.
    Without Kremlin help Ukraine would steamroll over that area in a couple of weeks.

    So, Ukraine can attack on front of, say, 20 Kms achieving depth in, say, 10 Kms, with not much difficulty, in, say……..72 hours, then stop, consolidate, dig in,the works.
    Should Russians respond in FORCE they run for their lives back. If properly organized shouldn’t be a big of a problem. THAT is, of course, utilized by the “Masters”, both local and abroad.
    Now………..if there is ahm….restraint………..well………………………………………………………a lot of options there. A lot.

    The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a ‘brotherly’ nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don’t want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians.

    Main concern, agree.

    Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of ‘let’s get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties’ takes over. And you get the fireworks.

    The worst case scenario here re the regime in Kiev would be mauling of the force assembled for attack. Including, of course, rear echelon, depots etc. Georgia type. And then STOP.
    I do not see Russian forces going further.

    How would that be utilized in the real game here (The Empire vs Kremlin) could be an interesting conversation for some other time, perhaps.
    My take is…it would reinforce all the major players here. Hardened all positions. Till the next confrontation.

    Take this incursion as a test of sort.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Ukrainians advancing, stopping and digging in would expose them to.... well, the toys whose aftermath you see here: http://lostarmour.info

    You literally outlined the worst possible way of action, which in reality resulted in battalions and regiments savaged when caught stationary.


    Have you forgotten the map of frontlines
    from July/August 2014? https://media.giphy.com/media/13PUOUxmJGrACk/giphy.gif
    , @DreadIlk
    Talking past each other you right. On first read I was going to shit talk. On second read what you are saying makes sense.

    I would say that we can't realistically refer to the rebels as a separate side from Russia. Ethnic Russians in Donbas is Russia because Russia publicly said they will not allow ethnic Russians to get wiped out. And we can't consider Ukraine as an independent player. If it was up to Ukrainians they would never have central government seized by western Ukrainians and furthermore there would have been a partisan war in western Ukraine and not conventional war in eastern Ukraine. So all scenarios with Ukrainian military steam rolling eastern rebels is by default impossible.

    So with these considerations it becomes moot to guess how much Russians will get involved. They will constantly up the escalation to counter anything that comes down from Washington. And the second Washington loses interest the westerners will get f..ed.
  163. @AnonFromTN
    The words “Ukraine” and “win” cannot be used in the same sentence. American handling of that unfortunate would-be country since 2014 shows this clearly.

    Ukraine has been mostly winning starting in 2016. You are just living in eternal 2014.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Sweet dreams. Don’t wake up: the reality is horrible.
  164. @reiner Tor
    Well, Ukraine would win, which is what matters to Ukraine.

    Well, Ukraine would win, which is what matters to Ukraine

    You mean the regime in Kiev and all those in/outside of Ukraine who, ahm, do NOT like Russia/Russians?
    Agree.

    Not so sure about the brigade combat team actually doing the incursion; especially air assets supporting the effort and those poor guys in the lead battalion.
    That’s for the “teeth”.
    As for the “tail”, well….there will be some bloody excitement there too.
    Emphasize on “bloody” re Russian standoff capability.

    Comes with a job I guess.

  165. @AP
    Ukraine has been mostly winning starting in 2016. You are just living in eternal 2014.

    Sweet dreams. Don’t wake up: the reality is horrible.

    • LOL: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @AP
    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:

    http://d39raawggeifpx.cloudfront.net/styles/16_9_desktop/s3/articleimages/chart%20(7)%20copy.jpg
  166. As if I walked into an alternate dimension.

    Russian restraint and “non-intervention in conflict”, “cooperation with Western partners for finding peace in Ukraine” (for which Putin and government came under fire by simpletons) was in reality actual T-72B3 and T-90A tank platoons in action in another state, obvious Russian professionals dispatching an entire batallion of T-64BM Bulats near Luhansk airport that was blocking the route of White convoy, in a single night, and the obvious employment of Russian Army to eradicate those threatening Ukrainian maneuvers near the border.

    And people here write about restraint and blinking.

    Do you understand the implications of Russian tank regiments operating in Ukraine, and the message that one picture of neatly parked column of T-72B3 in Ukraine in Russian cammo was supposed to send?

    Red line. Ukraine is Russian red line. There is nowhere else to retreat – militarily and geopolitically.
    On the other hand, Russia is interested in minimalising the bloodbath, so encircled troops were admitted to Russia and then returned to Ukraine, Debaltsevo salient was evacuated after negotiations through that narrow, exposed corridor, and the Ilovaysk was in reality not the massacre it could have been, followed by release of many prisoners.

  167. @AP

    Are these horrors real, or a tale of pro-Russian propaganda
     
    They were, of course, real.

    Were Bandera followers who committed these crimes pro-Russians?
     
    No, but Stalin killed more Poles than did Bandera's followers so when Russian nationalists feign (I am not implying you here) horror at the loss of those Polish lives it is hypocritical.

    Stalin killed a lot fewer Poles in many years than Ukrainian nationalists during the Volhynia massacre. What’s more, his goons never nailed little children to trees or cut open bellies of pregnant women. Even German Nazis did not do that, delegating dirty work to untermenschen.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Why the pretend, fake sympathy for Poles killed by Ukrainians?

    It is amusing when Russians and Sovoks do it, for the sake of opposing Ukrainians. I mean, your Stalin argument could be countered with the fact how Polish resistance fighters and nationalists were dealt with by Soviets, or how RKKA stopped to let Germans extinguish Warsaw uprising.

    , @AP

    Stalin killed a lot fewer Poles in many years than Ukrainian nationalists during the Volhynia massacre.
     
    Ukrainian nationalists killed up to 100,000 Poles in Volhynia massacres:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia

    NKVD killed 111,000 Poles in 1937-1938. Another 30,000 died in gulags, so about 140,000 victims total.:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Operation_of_the_NKVD

    "The Polish Operation was the largest ethnic shooting and deportation action during the Great Terror campaign of political murders in the Soviet Union, orchestrated by Nikolai Yezhov.[9][10] It is also the largest killing of Poles in history outside any armed conflict"

    This affected ethnic Poles living in the USSR before the Soviet invasion of Poland.

    Between 1939 and 1941 another 150,000 Poles were murdered by Stalin (the 22,000 murdered in Katyn were the most famous).

    A few 100,000s more were deported; many of thee died during the process.

    Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance yet again.

    So again, some Russian nationalist, or Sovok, complaining about what Bandera did to Poles is grotesquely hypocritical.
  168. @AnonFromTN
    Sweet dreams. Don’t wake up: the reality is horrible.

    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:

    • Replies: @Jon0815

    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:
     
    Pitifully weak.

    Romania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Czechia all averaged faster GDP growth than Ukraine in 2016-2017, despite per capita GDP ranging from 4-8 times higher.

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine, also did better, with growth averaging 4.5% vs. 2.4% for Ukraine.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Yes, the twenty million, mostly old, people left in Ukraine 25 years from now could have an impressive standard of living at this rate.
  169. @peterAUS

    I think in Russia’s case the ‘restraint’ is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be ‘restrained’ as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.
     
    Obviously..................................................................

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could.
     
    You haven't, for some reason, defined "them"?
    I shall: Donbass people. Civilians and militiamen. In that order.
    BTW, you, for a HUGE change in similar discussions, do appear to be:
    -civil enough
    -knowledgeable
    -not quite a Putin fanboy.

    So........re the second which has been PUZZLING me since the start of all this a couple of years ago (so I can get something from this chat):
    Why we have NOT seen a properly organized armed force of Novorossya/Donbass/whatever?
    Simple question the "Team Russia" has been careful to avoid.

    Because not enough men and material there? Yeah.....
    Not enough expertise? Haha....yeah.

    All it would've been needed is a properly organized Corps (say.....3 brigades etc...) with LOCAL commanders. I say COMMANDERS. Specialists could've come from .....Papua New Guinea if necessary.
    Any ideas?

    Oh, BTW, before some amateurs start to chime in just keep in mind that I have worked, once upon a time, as a little guy in Corps H.Q. so know a thing or two about that. Or..hehe..so I say.

    But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc… Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?
     
    Now you are talking....
    Ukraine is NOT a weaker side actually. It all depends on the ....ahm...RESTRAINT in Kremlin.
    Without Kremlin help Ukraine would steamroll over that area in a couple of weeks.

    So, Ukraine can attack on front of, say, 20 Kms achieving depth in, say, 10 Kms, with not much difficulty, in, say........72 hours, then stop, consolidate, dig in,the works.
    Should Russians respond in FORCE they run for their lives back. If properly organized shouldn't be a big of a problem. THAT is, of course, utilized by the "Masters", both local and abroad.
    Now...........if there is ahm....restraint...........well...............................................................a lot of options there. A lot.

    The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a ‘brotherly’ nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don’t want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians.
     
    Main concern, agree.

    Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of ‘let’s get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties’ takes over. And you get the fireworks.
     
    The worst case scenario here re the regime in Kiev would be mauling of the force assembled for attack. Including, of course, rear echelon, depots etc. Georgia type. And then STOP.
    I do not see Russian forces going further.

    How would that be utilized in the real game here (The Empire vs Kremlin) could be an interesting conversation for some other time, perhaps.
    My take is...it would reinforce all the major players here. Hardened all positions. Till the next confrontation.

    Take this incursion as a test of sort.

    Ukrainians advancing, stopping and digging in would expose them to…. well, the toys whose aftermath you see here: http://lostarmour.info

    You literally outlined the worst possible way of action, which in reality resulted in battalions and regiments savaged when caught stationary.

    Have you forgotten the map of frontlines
    from July/August 2014?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    I think we are talking past each other.

    You find important something which I don't (save that "cannon fodder" element).
    You don't find important something I think is, very (the issue of non-existing local forces and, hence, the need for so visible Russian intervention....or NOT).

    All good.

  170. @AnonFromTN
    Stalin killed a lot fewer Poles in many years than Ukrainian nationalists during the Volhynia massacre. What’s more, his goons never nailed little children to trees or cut open bellies of pregnant women. Even German Nazis did not do that, delegating dirty work to untermenschen.

    Why the pretend, fake sympathy for Poles killed by Ukrainians?

    It is amusing when Russians and Sovoks do it, for the sake of opposing Ukrainians. I mean, your Stalin argument could be countered with the fact how Polish resistance fighters and nationalists were dealt with by Soviets, or how RKKA stopped to let Germans extinguish Warsaw uprising.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    There's a small but noticeable segment of pro-Russian Poles. Conversely, there're Russians who really don't want to dislike Poland - but find some difficulty in doing so - given the overall anti-Russian slant among Poles.

    Denikin was half Polish and sympathized with Poland, while identifying more with Russia and opposing Pilsudski's type of nationalism:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/08042016-fuzzy-history-how-poland-saved-the-world-from-russia-analysis/

    Russians don't collectively oppose Ukrainians. The former understandably oppose the svido variant among some of the latter.

    Related:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/22052011-pavlo-skoropadsky-and-the-course-of-russian-ukrainian-relations-analysis/
    , @Mikhail
    The aforementioned Soviet stop could very well have been for other reasons. Guderian said the Red Army needed a break. Others note the Soviets having other strategic concerns at the time, in addition to the Warsaw Uprising Poles not having told the Soviets beforehand of their plan.

    Another account says the London Poles were initially (when the Nazis withdrew from Warsaw) suggesting that the Red Army wasn't needed. Can imagine Stalin saying okay we aren't needed - let's see how they do without us.
    , @AnonFromTN
    I don’t know about you, but in my book people who nail babies to trees and cut open the bellies of pregnant women are the lowliest scum on Earth, regardless of the nationality of the victims. Maybe “democratic” values are different. Then I am proud that I don’t share them.

    Personally, I know few Poles and have nothing against them. In Moscow State I even helped one Polish girl to solve her problems with the education officials. I know from experience that in every nation there are very good people, so-so people, and scum, so I never generalize by nationality, gender, race, religion, or any other superficial thing. Again, if “democratic” values are different, I am glad that I don’t share them.

    In my book a murder is a murder, and a murderer is a murderer, whatever the nationality of either him/her/it or the victim. I know that “democratic” countries don’t give a hoot about aborigines, but I treat all human beings as human beings, and “democracy” be damned.
  171. @AnonFromTN
    Stalin killed a lot fewer Poles in many years than Ukrainian nationalists during the Volhynia massacre. What’s more, his goons never nailed little children to trees or cut open bellies of pregnant women. Even German Nazis did not do that, delegating dirty work to untermenschen.

    Stalin killed a lot fewer Poles in many years than Ukrainian nationalists during the Volhynia massacre.

    Ukrainian nationalists killed up to 100,000 Poles in Volhynia massacres:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia

    NKVD killed 111,000 Poles in 1937-1938. Another 30,000 died in gulags, so about 140,000 victims total.:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Operation_of_the_NKVD

    “The Polish Operation was the largest ethnic shooting and deportation action during the Great Terror campaign of political murders in the Soviet Union, orchestrated by Nikolai Yezhov.[9][10] It is also the largest killing of Poles in history outside any armed conflict”

    This affected ethnic Poles living in the USSR before the Soviet invasion of Poland.

    Between 1939 and 1941 another 150,000 Poles were murdered by Stalin (the 22,000 murdered in Katyn were the most famous).

    A few 100,000s more were deported; many of thee died during the process.

    Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance yet again.

    So again, some Russian nationalist, or Sovok, complaining about what Bandera did to Poles is grotesquely hypocritical.

  172. You can’t sanction Russia meaningfully because the price of commodities would go up by a multiple and the European banking system would collapse even before the impact of the commodities price surge.

  173. @Epigon
    Why the pretend, fake sympathy for Poles killed by Ukrainians?

    It is amusing when Russians and Sovoks do it, for the sake of opposing Ukrainians. I mean, your Stalin argument could be countered with the fact how Polish resistance fighters and nationalists were dealt with by Soviets, or how RKKA stopped to let Germans extinguish Warsaw uprising.

    There’s a small but noticeable segment of pro-Russian Poles. Conversely, there’re Russians who really don’t want to dislike Poland – but find some difficulty in doing so – given the overall anti-Russian slant among Poles.

    Denikin was half Polish and sympathized with Poland, while identifying more with Russia and opposing Pilsudski’s type of nationalism:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/08042016-fuzzy-history-how-poland-saved-the-world-from-russia-analysis/

    Russians don’t collectively oppose Ukrainians. The former understandably oppose the svido variant among some of the latter.

    Related:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/22052011-pavlo-skoropadsky-and-the-course-of-russian-ukrainian-relations-analysis/

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Pro-Russian Poles are a myth today, IMO. Too much bad blood and PR issues for Poles to gloss over, with both Imperial and Soviet period seeing anti-Polish repression.

    As expected, Russians feel less strongly about Poles than vice versa.

    An interesting timeline would be the one where Dmowski triumphs over Pilsudski.

  174. @Gerard2
    look at her twitter account...the account of a typical blinkered and crazed Ukro-nazi bitch. The English Russia Correspondents are just as braindead and unprofessional.

    One good thing they did though was a completely fair documentary on Viktor Bout, it made clear the plentiful BS in the American operation and allegations against him

    Re: https://twitter.com/irenatar?lang=en

    Intellectually, she’s a quite collapsible svido. In her (as of this posting) latest Tweet, she repeats what Ukraine’s UN ambassador said at the UNSC yesterday. That ambassador also said that one of the detained Ukrainians is in critical condition. Let’s see the follow-up on that claim. Russia could’ve done a much better job at communicating its position at yesterday’s UNSC meeting. The leading Western nations were quite phony at that meeting.

    I do recall the Beeb having a Russian correspondent, who awhile back gave an eye opening (for Western mass media) mainstream Russian view – something that generally runs counter to that news venue.

    CNN keeps cranking out the false narrative that Russia is the party which was provocative in this Kerch Strait incident. At that network, Nick Paton Walsh is especially horrid.

  175. @Mikhail
    There's a small but noticeable segment of pro-Russian Poles. Conversely, there're Russians who really don't want to dislike Poland - but find some difficulty in doing so - given the overall anti-Russian slant among Poles.

    Denikin was half Polish and sympathized with Poland, while identifying more with Russia and opposing Pilsudski's type of nationalism:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/08042016-fuzzy-history-how-poland-saved-the-world-from-russia-analysis/

    Russians don't collectively oppose Ukrainians. The former understandably oppose the svido variant among some of the latter.

    Related:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/22052011-pavlo-skoropadsky-and-the-course-of-russian-ukrainian-relations-analysis/

    Pro-Russian Poles are a myth today, IMO. Too much bad blood and PR issues for Poles to gloss over, with both Imperial and Soviet period seeing anti-Polish repression.

    As expected, Russians feel less strongly about Poles than vice versa.

    An interesting timeline would be the one where Dmowski triumphs over Pilsudski.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Are they really such a myth? Some have put their figure in the 10%-15% range.
  176. @Epigon
    Ukrainians advancing, stopping and digging in would expose them to.... well, the toys whose aftermath you see here: http://lostarmour.info

    You literally outlined the worst possible way of action, which in reality resulted in battalions and regiments savaged when caught stationary.


    Have you forgotten the map of frontlines
    from July/August 2014? https://media.giphy.com/media/13PUOUxmJGrACk/giphy.gif

    I think we are talking past each other.

    You find important something which I don’t (save that “cannon fodder” element).
    You don’t find important something I think is, very (the issue of non-existing local forces and, hence, the need for so visible Russian intervention….or NOT).

    All good.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    You base your conclusion on wrong premises.
    Even the double, triple the number of local militiamen would in practice be of far less importance than the colossal force
    multipliers that most modern, night-fighting suitable Russian tanks, self-guiding AT Smerch subminitions or cluster warheads, and Krasnopol and similar toys.

    Ukrainian Army roamed the countryside, utilizing the vast advantage it enjoyed in mechanized and armoured assets. Rebels controlled urban areas and major
    settlements, which were isolated one from another and partially or completely surrounded by Ukrainian Army at various points.
    Rebels simply couldn’t counter
    this and weren’t equipped and trained for combat in open terrain.

    However, Russian regulars, “volunteers”, “North wind” etc. then procedeed to systematically target, isolate and defeat those Ukrainian battle groups. The priority targets were Airmobile brigades, manned by most combat ready Ukrainians, professional soldiers, and most mobile ergo selected to secure the border and separate Donetsk and Lugansk from Russia.
  177. Over the years Tom Nichols has come across as a pretentious twerp:

    https://radio.foxnews.com/2018/11/26/professor-at-the-naval-war-college-tom-nichols-the-russians-are-trying-things-because-they-can/

    I recall him saying that Molly McKew is a worthy source. Nichols is among a slew who duck substantive point-counterpoint exchanges.

  178. @Epigon
    Why the pretend, fake sympathy for Poles killed by Ukrainians?

    It is amusing when Russians and Sovoks do it, for the sake of opposing Ukrainians. I mean, your Stalin argument could be countered with the fact how Polish resistance fighters and nationalists were dealt with by Soviets, or how RKKA stopped to let Germans extinguish Warsaw uprising.

    The aforementioned Soviet stop could very well have been for other reasons. Guderian said the Red Army needed a break. Others note the Soviets having other strategic concerns at the time, in addition to the Warsaw Uprising Poles not having told the Soviets beforehand of their plan.

    Another account says the London Poles were initially (when the Nazis withdrew from Warsaw) suggesting that the Red Army wasn’t needed. Can imagine Stalin saying okay we aren’t needed – let’s see how they do without us.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Which party allegiance would these “10-15% of Poles” have? I simply can’t see several millions of Poles being pro-Russian, not even close.

    Of course the Soviets made the right decision for Soviet war/geopolitical effort. The whole point of the uprising timing was to utilise the disarray, weakened presence and general retreat of Germans ahead of Soviet advance to liberate Warsaw before the Soviets and flip them off.

    , @AnonFromTN
    Well, it was possible: Tito liberated Yugoslavia without Soviet help, and Stalin had no pretext to move his troops there (even though he clearly wanted to). So-called Warsaw uprising was planned in London to show that Poles can free themselves. It failed. Its propagandists never mention an earlier uprising of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, who did not expect any outside help. They also studiously avoid mentioning that Poles handed Jews running away from ghetto after the uprising to the Germans. Then again, there are different shades of black: Lithuanians and Poles eagerly helped Germans to round up Jews, but there were no Lithuanian or Polish Waffen SS divisions, whereas there were Estonian, Latvian, and Ukrainian.
  179. @Epigon
    Pro-Russian Poles are a myth today, IMO. Too much bad blood and PR issues for Poles to gloss over, with both Imperial and Soviet period seeing anti-Polish repression.

    As expected, Russians feel less strongly about Poles than vice versa.

    An interesting timeline would be the one where Dmowski triumphs over Pilsudski.

    Are they really such a myth? Some have put their figure in the 10%-15% range.

  180. @peterAUS
    I think we are talking past each other.

    You find important something which I don't (save that "cannon fodder" element).
    You don't find important something I think is, very (the issue of non-existing local forces and, hence, the need for so visible Russian intervention....or NOT).

    All good.

    You base your conclusion on wrong premises.
    Even the double, triple the number of local militiamen would in practice be of far less importance than the colossal force
    multipliers that most modern, night-fighting suitable Russian tanks, self-guiding AT Smerch subminitions or cluster warheads, and Krasnopol and similar toys.

    Ukrainian Army roamed the countryside, utilizing the vast advantage it enjoyed in mechanized and armoured assets. Rebels controlled urban areas and major
    settlements, which were isolated one from another and partially or completely surrounded by Ukrainian Army at various points.
    Rebels simply couldn’t counter
    this and weren’t equipped and trained for combat in open terrain.

    However, Russian regulars, “volunteers”, “North wind” etc. then procedeed to systematically target, isolate and defeat those Ukrainian battle groups. The priority targets were Airmobile brigades, manned by most combat ready Ukrainians, professional soldiers, and most mobile ergo selected to secure the border and separate Donetsk and Lugansk from Russia.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Furthermore, the fact that Moscow imposed commanders loyal and obedient towards Moscow is completely logical. Without Kremlin, all would have been over by the end of July.

    So all those various local “famous commanders” and their personal warbands were unified and placed under control. Those unwilling to play by these ruled were replaced or probably even assassinated - this war, like all wars do, attracted shady and criminal people as well.
    , @peterAUS

    You base your conclusion on wrong premises.
     
    Yeah.

    You lost me on "....triple the number of local militiamen....".

    One day, when you have time try to, instead of that Russian "colossal force multipliers " etc. think, just for one minute, about Donbass/Novorosya/whatever "Corps".

    All good.

  181. @AP
    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:

    http://d39raawggeifpx.cloudfront.net/styles/16_9_desktop/s3/articleimages/chart%20(7)%20copy.jpg

    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:

    Pitifully weak.

    Romania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Czechia all averaged faster GDP growth than Ukraine in 2016-2017, despite per capita GDP ranging from 4-8 times higher.

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine, also did better, with growth averaging 4.5% vs. 2.4% for Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Gerard2

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine, also did better, with growth averaging 4.5% vs. 2.4% for Ukraine.
     
    ....and Belarus....and Armenia (alot) and Kyrgyzstan ....and even Priedniestrovie if we separate it from Moldova...AND almost certainly Iran and even Syria and Libya and Iraq!
  182. @Epigon
    You base your conclusion on wrong premises.
    Even the double, triple the number of local militiamen would in practice be of far less importance than the colossal force
    multipliers that most modern, night-fighting suitable Russian tanks, self-guiding AT Smerch subminitions or cluster warheads, and Krasnopol and similar toys.

    Ukrainian Army roamed the countryside, utilizing the vast advantage it enjoyed in mechanized and armoured assets. Rebels controlled urban areas and major
    settlements, which were isolated one from another and partially or completely surrounded by Ukrainian Army at various points.
    Rebels simply couldn’t counter
    this and weren’t equipped and trained for combat in open terrain.

    However, Russian regulars, “volunteers”, “North wind” etc. then procedeed to systematically target, isolate and defeat those Ukrainian battle groups. The priority targets were Airmobile brigades, manned by most combat ready Ukrainians, professional soldiers, and most mobile ergo selected to secure the border and separate Donetsk and Lugansk from Russia.

    Furthermore, the fact that Moscow imposed commanders loyal and obedient towards Moscow is completely logical. Without Kremlin, all would have been over by the end of July.

    So all those various local “famous commanders” and their personal warbands were unified and placed under control. Those unwilling to play by these ruled were replaced or probably even assassinated – this war, like all wars do, attracted shady and criminal people as well.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    ... the fact that Moscow imposed commanders loyal and obedient towards Moscow is completely logical.
     
    It is.

    ...Those unwilling to play by these ruled were replaced or probably even assassinated.
     
    I know.

    You simply don't get what I am trying to say here.
    Moving on.

  183. @Mikhail
    The aforementioned Soviet stop could very well have been for other reasons. Guderian said the Red Army needed a break. Others note the Soviets having other strategic concerns at the time, in addition to the Warsaw Uprising Poles not having told the Soviets beforehand of their plan.

    Another account says the London Poles were initially (when the Nazis withdrew from Warsaw) suggesting that the Red Army wasn't needed. Can imagine Stalin saying okay we aren't needed - let's see how they do without us.

    Which party allegiance would these “10-15% of Poles” have? I simply can’t see several millions of Poles being pro-Russian, not even close.

    Of course the Soviets made the right decision for Soviet war/geopolitical effort. The whole point of the uprising timing was to utilise the disarray, weakened presence and general retreat of Germans ahead of Soviet advance to liberate Warsaw before the Soviets and flip them off.

  184. @Jon0815

    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:
     
    Pitifully weak.

    Romania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Czechia all averaged faster GDP growth than Ukraine in 2016-2017, despite per capita GDP ranging from 4-8 times higher.

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine, also did better, with growth averaging 4.5% vs. 2.4% for Ukraine.

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine, also did better, with growth averaging 4.5% vs. 2.4% for Ukraine.

    ….and Belarus….and Armenia (alot) and Kyrgyzstan ….and even Priedniestrovie if we separate it from Moldova…AND almost certainly Iran and even Syria and Libya and Iraq!

    • Replies: @AP

    ….and Belarus
     
    Belarus -2.5% growth 2016, Ukraine +2.3% growth 2016. Belarus +2.4% growth 2017, Ukraine +2.5% growth 2017.

    This isn't even per capita.
  185. @Epigon
    You base your conclusion on wrong premises.
    Even the double, triple the number of local militiamen would in practice be of far less importance than the colossal force
    multipliers that most modern, night-fighting suitable Russian tanks, self-guiding AT Smerch subminitions or cluster warheads, and Krasnopol and similar toys.

    Ukrainian Army roamed the countryside, utilizing the vast advantage it enjoyed in mechanized and armoured assets. Rebels controlled urban areas and major
    settlements, which were isolated one from another and partially or completely surrounded by Ukrainian Army at various points.
    Rebels simply couldn’t counter
    this and weren’t equipped and trained for combat in open terrain.

    However, Russian regulars, “volunteers”, “North wind” etc. then procedeed to systematically target, isolate and defeat those Ukrainian battle groups. The priority targets were Airmobile brigades, manned by most combat ready Ukrainians, professional soldiers, and most mobile ergo selected to secure the border and separate Donetsk and Lugansk from Russia.

    You base your conclusion on wrong premises.

    Yeah.

    You lost me on “….triple the number of local militiamen….”.

    One day, when you have time try to, instead of that Russian “colossal force multipliers ” etc. think, just for one minute, about Donbass/Novorosya/whatever “Corps”.

    All good.

  186. @Epigon
    Furthermore, the fact that Moscow imposed commanders loyal and obedient towards Moscow is completely logical. Without Kremlin, all would have been over by the end of July.

    So all those various local “famous commanders” and their personal warbands were unified and placed under control. Those unwilling to play by these ruled were replaced or probably even assassinated - this war, like all wars do, attracted shady and criminal people as well.

    … the fact that Moscow imposed commanders loyal and obedient towards Moscow is completely logical.

    It is.

    …Those unwilling to play by these ruled were replaced or probably even assassinated.

    I know.

    You simply don’t get what I am trying to say here.
    Moving on.

  187. Romania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Czechia all averaged faster GDP growth than Ukraine in 2016-2017

    Russia’s was lower. Russia’s declined in 2016 while Ukraine’s grew, and Ukraine’s growth has been higher than Russia’s in 2017-2018.

    Ukraine has also done better than Belarus in 2016-2018 (Belarus better in 2018 but a lot worse in 2016-2017).

    So from 2016 Ukraine has outpaced 2 of 3 non-EU neighbors but has done more poorly than the EU members that it borders. It has also done better than non-EU member Macedonia.

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine

    Moldova’s nominal per GDP is 87% that of Ukraine and its PPP is 66% that of Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Jon0815

    Russia’s was lower. Russia’s declined in 2016 while Ukraine’s grew, and Ukraine’s growth has been higher than Russia’s in 2017-2018.

    Ukraine has also done better than Belarus in 2016-2018 (Belarus better in 2018 but a lot worse in 2016-2017).
     

    Russia has 4x Ukraine's per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it's not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it. And of course Belarus' economic fortunes are closely intertwined with Russia's.

    So from 2016 Ukraine has outpaced 2 of 3 non-EU neighbors but has done more poorly than the EU members that it borders.
     

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine's 2.4%, despite having a per capita GDP 13 x higher. The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a "European Choice" would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.

    With Ukraine's combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.

    P.S.- I'm curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014?

  188. @Gerard2

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine, also did better, with growth averaging 4.5% vs. 2.4% for Ukraine.
     
    ....and Belarus....and Armenia (alot) and Kyrgyzstan ....and even Priedniestrovie if we separate it from Moldova...AND almost certainly Iran and even Syria and Libya and Iraq!

    ….and Belarus

    Belarus -2.5% growth 2016, Ukraine +2.3% growth 2016. Belarus +2.4% growth 2017, Ukraine +2.5% growth 2017.

    This isn’t even per capita.

    • Replies: @Gerard2

    Belarus -2.5% growth 2016, Ukraine +2.3% growth 2016. Belarus +2.4% growth 2017, Ukraine +2.5% growth 2017.
     
    Which part of "Belarus having substantially higher growth than Ukraine" are you too much of a dumb fu*ckup to understand? It should be 4-5% this year end

    The fact in itself stands out inspite of your lies and imbecilic misdirection, and that is not without considering that Belarus has not experienced a double digit recession in the last 5 years, and over the last 20+ years has been significantly higher in living standard, MUCH richer and so on than Ukropia you time-wasting attention-whore maggot.

    So Armenia with all it's problems, Priednistroviye with all it's problems, Kazakhstan , Uzbekistan ( getting much closer with Russia now that Karimov has gone), Kyrgyzstan, even Tajikistan!Belarus i.e all Russia aligned countries ( particularly Belarus, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan) are doing much , much better in economic performance than the parasitic, failed state of Ukraine you idiot

    LOL...imagine being such a pathetic retard insecure useless troll account with many accountss stalking pro-Russia blogs with millions of comments....that that BS post is your answer to Syria and Iraq and Libya economically outperforming Banderastan, using your own idiot logic of 'economic performance"

    Armenia too, doesn't get to parasite 3-4% of it's GDP from gas transit fees, and Belarus basically has the same levels of direct Foreign Investment, despite being a much smaller country ( explaining it as being down to Russia won't do much considering......that Russia is still the biggest FDI for Ukraine!)

    Funny this retarded scumbagness.....if it wasn't so pathetic

  189. @reiner Tor
    That’s wishful thinking.

    Of course there could be more crippling sanctions. And of course with Russia being smaller than the whole West, such sanctions are bound to be more crippling for Russia than for the West. But that’s not even what I said. I merely said that that’s what the Ukrainians and their American mentors might be pushing for, regardless of whether they are feasible.

    Regarding more weapons for Ukraine, of course they would be useful. Yes, they will never be able to conquer Russia, but that’s a silly proposal anyway. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher the cost of any war for Russia will be. It’s a big deterrent. And for the neocons it’s a win-win, since they cannot lose even if Ukraine loses such a war: it will weaken Russia, and that’s all that matters to them. But for the Ukrainians the weapons are also useful, since they decrease the likelihood of a Russian attack, eventually even in the case of a Ukrainian attack on Donbas.

    You seem to be angry at the Ukrainians and the neocons for not accepting that they are already defeated, that they cannot do anything to harm Russia. Well, they are not defeated, and they can do Russia a lot of harm.

    It’s an ill wind.

    Both countries need stability and steady development more than anything else, but are trapped in a situation of mutual distrust aggravated by the interference of third parties.

  190. @AP

    Romania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Czechia all averaged faster GDP growth than Ukraine in 2016-2017
     
    Russia's was lower. Russia's declined in 2016 while Ukraine's grew, and Ukraine's growth has been higher than Russia's in 2017-2018.

    Ukraine has also done better than Belarus in 2016-2018 (Belarus better in 2018 but a lot worse in 2016-2017).

    So from 2016 Ukraine has outpaced 2 of 3 non-EU neighbors but has done more poorly than the EU members that it borders. It has also done better than non-EU member Macedonia.

    Moldova, with per capita GDP on par with Ukraine
     
    Moldova's nominal per GDP is 87% that of Ukraine and its PPP is 66% that of Ukraine.

    Russia’s was lower. Russia’s declined in 2016 while Ukraine’s grew, and Ukraine’s growth has been higher than Russia’s in 2017-2018.

    Ukraine has also done better than Belarus in 2016-2018 (Belarus better in 2018 but a lot worse in 2016-2017).

    Russia has 4x Ukraine’s per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it’s not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it. And of course Belarus’ economic fortunes are closely intertwined with Russia’s.

    So from 2016 Ukraine has outpaced 2 of 3 non-EU neighbors but has done more poorly than the EU members that it borders.

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine’s 2.4%, despite having a per capita GDP 13 x higher. The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a “European Choice” would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.

    With Ukraine’s combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.

    P.S.- I’m curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014?

    • Replies: @AP

    Russia has 4x Ukraine’s per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it’s not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it.
     
    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine’s 2.4%
     
    Ukraine's per capita growth has been higher.

    The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a “European Choice” would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.
     
    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn't support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    With Ukraine’s combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.
     
    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.

    I’m curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014
     
    For most residents, no different.
  191. @Jon0815

    Russia’s was lower. Russia’s declined in 2016 while Ukraine’s grew, and Ukraine’s growth has been higher than Russia’s in 2017-2018.

    Ukraine has also done better than Belarus in 2016-2018 (Belarus better in 2018 but a lot worse in 2016-2017).
     

    Russia has 4x Ukraine's per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it's not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it. And of course Belarus' economic fortunes are closely intertwined with Russia's.

    So from 2016 Ukraine has outpaced 2 of 3 non-EU neighbors but has done more poorly than the EU members that it borders.
     

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine's 2.4%, despite having a per capita GDP 13 x higher. The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a "European Choice" would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.

    With Ukraine's combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.

    P.S.- I'm curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014?

    Russia has 4x Ukraine’s per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it’s not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it.

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine’s 2.4%

    Ukraine’s per capita growth has been higher.

    The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a “European Choice” would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.

    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    With Ukraine’s combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.

    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.

    I’m curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014

    For most residents, no different.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor
     
    Do you really consider the war in Donbas a 'civil war'? Sure, I'm aware that some locals have been coopted into this war by Russia and some locals join in for lack of many other options, but wouldn't it still be more accurate to label the whole affair as a 'Russian proxy war'? Initially and for a good long while after 2014, there was ample evidence that Russians and Asians were being recruited all over Russia, but especially from its Eastern areas to take part in these actions. Social media outlets were full of stories posted from these sorts of mercenaries including their adventures in Ukraine. One would even read about recruiting stations in Russia and also about the large contingent of regular Russian forces stationed right on the Russsian/Ukrainian border (with strong inferences being made that these forces would often cross the border and take a part in operations). One can only wonder how the latest affair in Kerch will effect these recruting efforts going forward.
    , @Jon0815

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?
     
    The low-level civil war in Donbass has virtually zero impact on Ukraine's economy. The physical damage from shelling is mostly occurring in rebel-held areas not counted in Ukraine's economic statistics. The bad relations with its largest neighbor have certainly had a negative effect, but that is my point: The Maidanist policy of spurning Russia, in favor of the false promise of EU membership, has been a failure for Ukraine.

    Ukraine’s per capita growth has been higher.
     
    Not much higher. From 2016-2017 the EU (per capita GDP $33000) averaged 2.0% growth per capita, vs. 2.8% for Ukraine (per capita GDP $2500).

    Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it.
     
    Growth has been well below potential in the west and center too, though somewhat less so than in the east. And slower growth overall means fewer tax revenues to Kiev: Hence fewer/less reliable government services everywhere, than would be the case with faster growth, regardless of how that slower growth is regionally distributed.

    Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.
     

    It's true that the eastern regions have disproportionately suffered, and I have no sympathy for them. They had the opportunity to join Donbass in rebellion, and chose to remain under the rule of a regime hostile to them, so they deserve everything they get as a result. From a Russian nationalist perspective, the more that growth in eastern Ukraine lags the west, the better, since this will increase the east's alienation from the west, making it more likely that Ukraine will eventually fragment on it's own (or at least make that territory much easier to pacify after reunification with Russia by military means).

    Also, you are correct that the civil war continues thanks to Russia, but probably not the way you mean: Ukraine is the military aggressor, but Russia could end the fighting at any time by recognizing the D/LNR and allowing them to join Russia.

    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.
     

    What's the evidence for 5%+ growth no longer being possible at Ukraine's PCGDP level, other than Ukraine's failure?

    For most residents, no different.
     
    That's an evasive response, which would be technically true even if not a single resident lacked power in 2014, and 49% lacked it in 2018.

    What % of Kiev residents have currently been without power for days/weeks/months, and how does that compare to 2014?

    , @DreadIlk

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?
     
    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning. Admitting there is a civil war is not winning.

    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.

     

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan. At the very least official numbers for entire country are. Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.

    For most residents, no different.
     
    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree. Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.
  192. @Epigon
    Why the pretend, fake sympathy for Poles killed by Ukrainians?

    It is amusing when Russians and Sovoks do it, for the sake of opposing Ukrainians. I mean, your Stalin argument could be countered with the fact how Polish resistance fighters and nationalists were dealt with by Soviets, or how RKKA stopped to let Germans extinguish Warsaw uprising.

    I don’t know about you, but in my book people who nail babies to trees and cut open the bellies of pregnant women are the lowliest scum on Earth, regardless of the nationality of the victims. Maybe “democratic” values are different. Then I am proud that I don’t share them.

    Personally, I know few Poles and have nothing against them. In Moscow State I even helped one Polish girl to solve her problems with the education officials. I know from experience that in every nation there are very good people, so-so people, and scum, so I never generalize by nationality, gender, race, religion, or any other superficial thing. Again, if “democratic” values are different, I am glad that I don’t share them.

    In my book a murder is a murder, and a murderer is a murderer, whatever the nationality of either him/her/it or the victim. I know that “democratic” countries don’t give a hoot about aborigines, but I treat all human beings as human beings, and “democracy” be damned.

    • Agree: JLK
  193. @Mikhail
    The aforementioned Soviet stop could very well have been for other reasons. Guderian said the Red Army needed a break. Others note the Soviets having other strategic concerns at the time, in addition to the Warsaw Uprising Poles not having told the Soviets beforehand of their plan.

    Another account says the London Poles were initially (when the Nazis withdrew from Warsaw) suggesting that the Red Army wasn't needed. Can imagine Stalin saying okay we aren't needed - let's see how they do without us.

    Well, it was possible: Tito liberated Yugoslavia without Soviet help, and Stalin had no pretext to move his troops there (even though he clearly wanted to). So-called Warsaw uprising was planned in London to show that Poles can free themselves. It failed. Its propagandists never mention an earlier uprising of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, who did not expect any outside help. They also studiously avoid mentioning that Poles handed Jews running away from ghetto after the uprising to the Germans. Then again, there are different shades of black: Lithuanians and Poles eagerly helped Germans to round up Jews, but there were no Lithuanian or Polish Waffen SS divisions, whereas there were Estonian, Latvian, and Ukrainian.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Soviet troops were in Yugoslavia to aid the Partizans before the end of WW II. The Red Army presence was evident in Belgrade when it was liberated.
  194. If only John McCain was still around to tell us we are all Ukrainians now!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Yes, he was that kind of scum. A historic guy, though: he was the only person in history who managed to completely take an American aircraft carrier out of commission. If it weren’t for an Admiral dad and Admiral granddad, he’d spend the rest of his life in the gaol.
    , @Mr. Hack
    Don't fret, you can always watch John on youtube. There's more like this too:

    https://youtu.be/gK2U91Qy8ZU
  195. @anon
    If only John McCain was still around to tell us we are all Ukrainians now!

    Yes, he was that kind of scum. A historic guy, though: he was the only person in history who managed to completely take an American aircraft carrier out of commission. If it weren’t for an Admiral dad and Admiral granddad, he’d spend the rest of his life in the gaol.

  196. @AP

    Russia has 4x Ukraine’s per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it’s not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it.
     
    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine’s 2.4%
     
    Ukraine's per capita growth has been higher.

    The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a “European Choice” would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.
     
    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn't support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    With Ukraine’s combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.
     
    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.

    I’m curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014
     
    For most residents, no different.

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor

    Do you really consider the war in Donbas a ‘civil war’? Sure, I’m aware that some locals have been coopted into this war by Russia and some locals join in for lack of many other options, but wouldn’t it still be more accurate to label the whole affair as a ‘Russian proxy war’? Initially and for a good long while after 2014, there was ample evidence that Russians and Asians were being recruited all over Russia, but especially from its Eastern areas to take part in these actions. Social media outlets were full of stories posted from these sorts of mercenaries including their adventures in Ukraine. One would even read about recruiting stations in Russia and also about the large contingent of regular Russian forces stationed right on the Russsian/Ukrainian border (with strong inferences being made that these forces would often cross the border and take a part in operations). One can only wonder how the latest affair in Kerch will effect these recruting efforts going forward.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    The overwhelming majority of the Donbass rebel fighters are from the former Ukrainian SSR - primarily the Donbass area.

    The not so Russia friendly Serhiy Kudleia has acknowledged this as have some others including Paul Robinson.
    , @AP

    Do you really consider the war in Donbas a ‘civil war’? Sure, I’m aware that some locals have been coopted into this war by Russia and some locals join in for lack of many other options, but wouldn’t it still be more accurate to label the whole affair as a ‘Russian proxy war’?
     
    The civil war was set up largely by Russia, and continues to exist due to Russia's assistance to the rebels, but for years now the primary fighters and figures have been locals from the Donbas* so it can IMO most accurately be described as a civil war that is fueled by Russia. A proxy war would also be accurate description of course, both terms apply here.

    The Syrian civil war, prior to Russian intervention, was similar (Ukraine's is less bloody and more civilized thank God). On one side you had Syria's government, on the other side you had rebels well-armed by Turkey and Saudi Arabia, helped by foreign volunteers as well as Western special forces trainers and advisers augmented by the occasional Western air strike. It is not a Turkish-Saudi-American invasion of Syria but a Syrian civil war made possible by and fueled by anti-Syrian foreign states.

    *Generally, about 10% of the anti-Kiev fighters in Donbas have been Russian volunteers. Many of these were experienced Chechen war veterans so they were more helpful than their numbers indicate. There were also Russian military advisers and trainers involved, and Russian troops in a few critical moments such as Ilovaisk. Overall, generally analogous to experienced jihadists in Syria plus Western trainers and advisers and the occasional Western airstrike against Assad's government though of course in the Syrian case the foreign jihadists and the western military are supporting different factions.
  197. @anon
    If only John McCain was still around to tell us we are all Ukrainians now!

    Don’t fret, you can always watch John on youtube. There’s more like this too:

  198. @AnonFromTN
    Well, it was possible: Tito liberated Yugoslavia without Soviet help, and Stalin had no pretext to move his troops there (even though he clearly wanted to). So-called Warsaw uprising was planned in London to show that Poles can free themselves. It failed. Its propagandists never mention an earlier uprising of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, who did not expect any outside help. They also studiously avoid mentioning that Poles handed Jews running away from ghetto after the uprising to the Germans. Then again, there are different shades of black: Lithuanians and Poles eagerly helped Germans to round up Jews, but there were no Lithuanian or Polish Waffen SS divisions, whereas there were Estonian, Latvian, and Ukrainian.

    Soviet troops were in Yugoslavia to aid the Partizans before the end of WW II. The Red Army presence was evident in Belgrade when it was liberated.

  199. @Mr. Hack

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor
     
    Do you really consider the war in Donbas a 'civil war'? Sure, I'm aware that some locals have been coopted into this war by Russia and some locals join in for lack of many other options, but wouldn't it still be more accurate to label the whole affair as a 'Russian proxy war'? Initially and for a good long while after 2014, there was ample evidence that Russians and Asians were being recruited all over Russia, but especially from its Eastern areas to take part in these actions. Social media outlets were full of stories posted from these sorts of mercenaries including their adventures in Ukraine. One would even read about recruiting stations in Russia and also about the large contingent of regular Russian forces stationed right on the Russsian/Ukrainian border (with strong inferences being made that these forces would often cross the border and take a part in operations). One can only wonder how the latest affair in Kerch will effect these recruting efforts going forward.

    The overwhelming majority of the Donbass rebel fighters are from the former Ukrainian SSR – primarily the Donbass area.

    The not so Russia friendly Serhiy Kudleia has acknowledged this as have some others including Paul Robinson.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    That's Serhiy Kudelia .
  200. Russia Should Play Role Reversal

    Re: https://us.cnn.com/2018/11/28/politics/putin-trump-g20-meeting/index.html

    The Russian government should designate a pit bull to say that given the US government’s poor behavior over the Kiev regime’s provocations, Putin might feel the need to cancel a planned meeting with Trump.

    Said pit bull could note a pattern of Trump exhibiting a comparatively more restrained and reasoned attitude over the likes of Nikki Haley – only to then see Trump tilt to a more provocative tone.

    Poroshenko appears to be engaging in cheap nationalist acts for the purpose of trying to score immediate propaganda points.

    Regarding Nikki Haley:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/10/23/naming-top-anti-russian-advocates.html

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/29/an-unhealthy-trump-putin-summit-fallout.html

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/19042018-confronting-russia-in-syria-analysis/

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/12042017-latest-bump-in-us-russian-relations-analysis/

    Will add that Mike Pompeo and James Mattis, have been pretty obtuse on the matter of the recent incident in the area of the Kerch Strait.

  201. @Mikhail
    The overwhelming majority of the Donbass rebel fighters are from the former Ukrainian SSR - primarily the Donbass area.

    The not so Russia friendly Serhiy Kudleia has acknowledged this as have some others including Paul Robinson.

    That’s Serhiy Kudelia .

  202. In the below linked exchange, Ivan Katchanovski doesn’t note the Russian claim that some (if not all) of the Ukrainian vessels at issue had entered Russian territory, internationally recognized as Russia prior to Crimea’s reunification with that nation. In any event, it’s unsafe to have vessels not properly coordinating their movement in the Kerch Strait area with the established agreement that has been in place. That’s a key issue which the likes of Jim Mattis, Nikki Haley and much of Anglo-American mass media have downplayed or out-rightly ignored – instead engaging in hyperbolic anti-Russian propaganda.

    That heavy handed bias serves to further make Russians especially vigilant in making sure that their country is well protected – once again noting the calls to use terror against the bridge linking Crimea with the rest of Russia.

    The position taken by Poroshenko has some resemblance to Saakashvili’s provocation against Russia in 2008.

    https://www.academia.edu/37865340/Metro_Interview_Concerning_the_Incident_between_Ukrainian_and_Russian_ships_and_the_Martial_Law_in_Ukraine_English-Language_Text_

  203. @AnonFromTN
    Well, the number of coups in foreign countries the US organized in the last 100 years or so defies imagination. So, one more won’t change anything. The wonnabe Nazis brought to power in Ukraine are also far from unique: many Latin American dictatorships installed and supported by the US were no better.

    An interesting thing is that talking about Crimea, Deep State MSM never mention Kosovo. To wit, there were never any referendums in Kosovo (as opposed to Crimea), and by now a third of Kosovo population ran away from that “paradise” (again, as opposed to Crimea).

    Reminds me of the joke that foreign intelligence officers are spies, whereas our spies are intelligence officers. Roosevelt, speaking about Somosa in Nicaragua, put it best: “but he is our son-of-a-bitch”.

    To wit, there were never any referendums in Kosovo (as opposed to Crimea)

    You need to inform the Nobel Peace Prize President of this, ‘cuz he says otherwise!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Is the fact that Obama always was and still is a liar news to you?
  204. @AP

    Sanctioning North Korea and Iran failed.
     
    It kept those countries backward and poor, and weaker than they would be otherwise.

    Any significant sanctions would be answered the same way.
     
    Sure. And Russia loses that game against the West.

    Backward and poor was before the sanctions aswell and it is a moot point. Goal not achieved. Failure is the point.

    Sure. And Russia loses that game against the West.

    No everyone loses. That is why these were not undertaken. It is an escalation in conflict. It is damage to both sides.

    I know you are biased but step up your game.

  205. @peterAUS

    I think in Russia’s case the ‘restraint’ is defined as the minimum hostile activity that achieves their goals. So they will be ‘restrained’ as long as they are winning. In a scenario where the restraint no longer suffices, I am pretty sure they would escalate.
     
    Obviously..................................................................

    The idea that Ukraine can bloody them is a valid one, they certainly could.
     
    You haven't, for some reason, defined "them"?
    I shall: Donbass people. Civilians and militiamen. In that order.
    BTW, you, for a HUGE change in similar discussions, do appear to be:
    -civil enough
    -knowledgeable
    -not quite a Putin fanboy.

    So........re the second which has been PUZZLING me since the start of all this a couple of years ago (so I can get something from this chat):
    Why we have NOT seen a properly organized armed force of Novorossya/Donbass/whatever?
    Simple question the "Team Russia" has been careful to avoid.

    Because not enough men and material there? Yeah.....
    Not enough expertise? Haha....yeah.

    All it would've been needed is a properly organized Corps (say.....3 brigades etc...) with LOCAL commanders. I say COMMANDERS. Specialists could've come from .....Papua New Guinea if necessary.
    Any ideas?

    Oh, BTW, before some amateurs start to chime in just keep in mind that I have worked, once upon a time, as a little guy in Corps H.Q. so know a thing or two about that. Or..hehe..so I say.

    But in most of these uneven contests the weaker side (here Ukraine) only fights when they have superior motivation and morale to the enemy. Otherwise they tend to collapse, soldiers run away, officers hesitate to take bold action, etc… Given the well known weaknesses that Ukraine has (it is internally divided!), how likely is it that they would actually stay in the fight?
     
    Now you are talking....
    Ukraine is NOT a weaker side actually. It all depends on the ....ahm...RESTRAINT in Kremlin.
    Without Kremlin help Ukraine would steamroll over that area in a couple of weeks.

    So, Ukraine can attack on front of, say, 20 Kms achieving depth in, say, 10 Kms, with not much difficulty, in, say........72 hours, then stop, consolidate, dig in,the works.
    Should Russians respond in FORCE they run for their lives back. If properly organized shouldn't be a big of a problem. THAT is, of course, utilized by the "Masters", both local and abroad.
    Now...........if there is ahm....restraint...........well...............................................................a lot of options there. A lot.

    The main dynamic forcing restraint on Kremlin is that they see Ukraine as a ‘brotherly’ nation, that they are thinking long-term, and that they don’t want a bloody generations long vendetta to start between Russians and Ukrainians.
     
    Main concern, agree.

    Rather responsible, but I am not sure in a bloody confrontation it would last. Then a logic of ‘let’s get it done sooner, rather than later, there will be fewer casualties’ takes over. And you get the fireworks.
     
    The worst case scenario here re the regime in Kiev would be mauling of the force assembled for attack. Including, of course, rear echelon, depots etc. Georgia type. And then STOP.
    I do not see Russian forces going further.

    How would that be utilized in the real game here (The Empire vs Kremlin) could be an interesting conversation for some other time, perhaps.
    My take is...it would reinforce all the major players here. Hardened all positions. Till the next confrontation.

    Take this incursion as a test of sort.

    Talking past each other you right. On first read I was going to shit talk. On second read what you are saying makes sense.

    I would say that we can’t realistically refer to the rebels as a separate side from Russia. Ethnic Russians in Donbas is Russia because Russia publicly said they will not allow ethnic Russians to get wiped out. And we can’t consider Ukraine as an independent player. If it was up to Ukrainians they would never have central government seized by western Ukrainians and furthermore there would have been a partisan war in western Ukraine and not conventional war in eastern Ukraine. So all scenarios with Ukrainian military steam rolling eastern rebels is by default impossible.

    So with these considerations it becomes moot to guess how much Russians will get involved. They will constantly up the escalation to counter anything that comes down from Washington. And the second Washington loses interest the westerners will get f..ed.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    On second read what you are saying makes sense.
     
    You mean re the simple issue of trust?

    ... all scenarios with Ukrainian military steam rolling eastern rebels is by default impossible.
     

    ...it becomes moot to guess how much Russians will get involved. They will constantly up the escalation to counter anything that comes down from Washington.
     
    Because THIS time Kremlin will draw that red line?
    O.K......................

    And the second Washington loses interest the westerners will get f..ed.
     
    There is the option other way around. One way to find out.

    Bottom line, you guys trust Kremlin.
    I don't.

    You know......anyway.....you trust your Government, politicians, when they want you disarmed because they'll protect you? You know, police etc?
    Feels.......similar here?

    See, all I am asking is so obvious for anyone willing to think: "Why we can't protect ourselves? Why do we have to rely on YOU?". Rhetorical question, admit.

    It could've been done, with ease, so far.
    It hasn't.
    I know why.

    Good.

    It would be interesting to see a post here from somebody actually LIVING in that region. "Skin in the game" thing.

  206. @AnonFromTN
    You are forgetting that neocons (and the US elites in general) don’t give a hoot about the lives of Ukrainians. They are treated by the US as expandable aborigines. That’s the real tragedy for poor unfortunate Ukraine. However, as the Western Ukrainians (dominating in the current regime) always chose the losing side throughout history (Swedish Charles XII, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Hitler, etc.), there must be something wrong with them. The rest of the residents suffer because they let this gang of scoundrels dominate them.

    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia). They can join NATO or the Islamic Union (EU) or any other foolish idea they like.

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.

    • Replies: @AP

    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).
     
    Would you support California and other border areas of the USA with heavy ethnic concentrations joining other countries?

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.
     
    This already happened in 2014. There was no effective central government or army and all regions of Ukraine that wanted to leave Ukraine had the chance, and took it. Russia had hoped that half of Ukraine would have joined Russia, but only Crimea and the southeastern 2/3 (by population) of Donbas did so - about 15% of the pre-2014 country.
    , @AnonFromTN
    It takes two to tango. They might wish to run away from the Ukrainian madhouse (quite understandable), but would Russians wish to welcome those who did not protest against the Nazi government in Kiev? I doubt that.
  207. @AP

    Russia has 4x Ukraine’s per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it’s not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it.
     
    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine’s 2.4%
     
    Ukraine's per capita growth has been higher.

    The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a “European Choice” would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.
     
    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn't support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    With Ukraine’s combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.
     
    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.

    I’m curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014
     
    For most residents, no different.

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    The low-level civil war in Donbass has virtually zero impact on Ukraine’s economy. The physical damage from shelling is mostly occurring in rebel-held areas not counted in Ukraine’s economic statistics. The bad relations with its largest neighbor have certainly had a negative effect, but that is my point: The Maidanist policy of spurning Russia, in favor of the false promise of EU membership, has been a failure for Ukraine.

    Ukraine’s per capita growth has been higher.

    Not much higher. From 2016-2017 the EU (per capita GDP $33000) averaged 2.0% growth per capita, vs. 2.8% for Ukraine (per capita GDP $2500).

    Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it.

    Growth has been well below potential in the west and center too, though somewhat less so than in the east. And slower growth overall means fewer tax revenues to Kiev: Hence fewer/less reliable government services everywhere, than would be the case with faster growth, regardless of how that slower growth is regionally distributed.

    Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    It’s true that the eastern regions have disproportionately suffered, and I have no sympathy for them. They had the opportunity to join Donbass in rebellion, and chose to remain under the rule of a regime hostile to them, so they deserve everything they get as a result. From a Russian nationalist perspective, the more that growth in eastern Ukraine lags the west, the better, since this will increase the east’s alienation from the west, making it more likely that Ukraine will eventually fragment on it’s own (or at least make that territory much easier to pacify after reunification with Russia by military means).

    Also, you are correct that the civil war continues thanks to Russia, but probably not the way you mean: Ukraine is the military aggressor, but Russia could end the fighting at any time by recognizing the D/LNR and allowing them to join Russia.

    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.

    What’s the evidence for 5%+ growth no longer being possible at Ukraine’s PCGDP level, other than Ukraine’s failure?

    For most residents, no different.

    That’s an evasive response, which would be technically true even if not a single resident lacked power in 2014, and 49% lacked it in 2018.

    What % of Kiev residents have currently been without power for days/weeks/months, and how does that compare to 2014?

    • Replies: @AP

    "And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?"

    The low-level civil war in Donbass has virtually zero impact on Ukraine’s economy.
     
    The eastern parts of Ukraine were integrated with Donbas and this disruption has negatively affected those regions' economies. It's not a coincidence that parts of Ukraine further from the civil war zone have experienced higher economic growth than the national average.

    The bad relations with its largest neighbor have certainly had a negative effect, but that is my point: The Maidanist policy of spurning Russia, in favor of the false promise of EU membership, has been a failure for Ukraine.
     
    Maidanist policy was to focus on EU, Russia retaliated by spurning Ukraine. The result has been a boon to western and to a lesser extent central Ukraine but bad for regions more linked to Russia, who have had the double whammy of civil war disruption and Russian trade disruption.

    Under such conditions, steady 2%-3% national GDP growth (or 3% to 4% per capita growth) is not exactly terrible.

    Growth has been well below potential in the west and center too, though somewhat less so than in the east.
     
    Corruption at the national level has not helped of course; growth could be even higher. But it is still significant in the west and center.

    From a Russian nationalist perspective, the more that growth in eastern Ukraine lags the west, the better, since this will increase the east’s alienation from the west, making it more likely that Ukraine will eventually fragment on it’s own
     
    1. The clusterf*ck that is Donbas has basically inured the people of Kharkiv against rebellion.

    2. A lot of the most pro-Russian elements from this region have already left. They have been replaced by pro-Ukrainian people who fled Donbas.

    3. Eastern Ukraine's economy has lagged behind but it hasn't been catastrophic as in Donbas itself.

    The place wasn't interested in rebellion in 2014, it is even less interested now.

    Also, you are correct that the civil war continues thanks to Russia, but probably not the way you mean: Ukraine is the military aggressor, but Russia could end the fighting at any time by recognizing the D/LNR and allowing them to join Russia.
     
    Russia could also end the fight by ceasing its significant support to the rebels. (personally, I wish that this would be ended your way, as Donbas is bad for Ukraine).

    What’s the evidence for 5%+ growth no longer being possible at Ukraine’s PCGDP level, other than Ukraine’s failure?
     
    You claimed that it would be possible. What is the evidence for the claim you made?

    What % of Kiev residents have currently been without power for days/weeks/months, and how does that compare to 2014?
     
    No one has lost power (at least, no significant %).

    About 3,000 homes in a city of 3 million had been without heating or hot water for several months as of October:

    https://www.rbc.ua/rus/news/kieve-okolo-3-tys-domov-goryachey-vody-1538656439.html

    Many Ukrainians were without hot water in 2014 also:

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-09-23/hot-water-ukraine

    And in 2012:

    https://ukrainianweek.com/Society/44613

    Etc.

    In 2013 a third of Russia (1/5 of urban homes) was without heating or hot water (although as AK pointed out many of these are probably semi-abandoned Soviet towns in the far north):

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    :::::::::::::::::

    It's a Russian nationalist trick, to present this chronic and pervasive problem as new or unique and then blame Maidan.
  208. @Mr. Hack

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor
     
    Do you really consider the war in Donbas a 'civil war'? Sure, I'm aware that some locals have been coopted into this war by Russia and some locals join in for lack of many other options, but wouldn't it still be more accurate to label the whole affair as a 'Russian proxy war'? Initially and for a good long while after 2014, there was ample evidence that Russians and Asians were being recruited all over Russia, but especially from its Eastern areas to take part in these actions. Social media outlets were full of stories posted from these sorts of mercenaries including their adventures in Ukraine. One would even read about recruiting stations in Russia and also about the large contingent of regular Russian forces stationed right on the Russsian/Ukrainian border (with strong inferences being made that these forces would often cross the border and take a part in operations). One can only wonder how the latest affair in Kerch will effect these recruting efforts going forward.

    Do you really consider the war in Donbas a ‘civil war’? Sure, I’m aware that some locals have been coopted into this war by Russia and some locals join in for lack of many other options, but wouldn’t it still be more accurate to label the whole affair as a ‘Russian proxy war’?

    The civil war was set up largely by Russia, and continues to exist due to Russia’s assistance to the rebels, but for years now the primary fighters and figures have been locals from the Donbas* so it can IMO most accurately be described as a civil war that is fueled by Russia. A proxy war would also be accurate description of course, both terms apply here.

    The Syrian civil war, prior to Russian intervention, was similar (Ukraine’s is less bloody and more civilized thank God). On one side you had Syria’s government, on the other side you had rebels well-armed by Turkey and Saudi Arabia, helped by foreign volunteers as well as Western special forces trainers and advisers augmented by the occasional Western air strike. It is not a Turkish-Saudi-American invasion of Syria but a Syrian civil war made possible by and fueled by anti-Syrian foreign states.

    *Generally, about 10% of the anti-Kiev fighters in Donbas have been Russian volunteers. Many of these were experienced Chechen war veterans so they were more helpful than their numbers indicate. There were also Russian military advisers and trainers involved, and Russian troops in a few critical moments such as Ilovaisk. Overall, generally analogous to experienced jihadists in Syria plus Western trainers and advisers and the occasional Western airstrike against Assad’s government though of course in the Syrian case the foreign jihadists and the western military are supporting different factions.

  209. @RadicalCenter
    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia). They can join NATO or the Islamic Union (EU) or any other foolish idea they like.

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.

    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).

    Would you support California and other border areas of the USA with heavy ethnic concentrations joining other countries?

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.

    This already happened in 2014. There was no effective central government or army and all regions of Ukraine that wanted to leave Ukraine had the chance, and took it. Russia had hoped that half of Ukraine would have joined Russia, but only Crimea and the southeastern 2/3 (by population) of Donbas did so – about 15% of the pre-2014 country.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Fair question, but yes, that’s probably going to happen to the USA as well. It’s a sad and frightening prospect for me as an American, but seems increasingly likely — and not avoidable even with major violence.
    , @RadicalCenter
    I am talking about an actual referendum.

    As Ukraine’s population continues to collapse, and most of its supposed Western allies and trading partners — the EU countries and the UK — become muslim/African/Arab hellholes, more people in Ukraine may find union with Russia to be more desirable than they do now. Or at least, they may come to consider it the least bad of a group of unpalatable options. We will see.

    , @DFH
    I very much doubt that California/Arizona/New Mexico would ever want to rejoin Texas and have to give up the nice handouts from the rest of America and share their riches with other Mexicans
  210. @AP

    Russia has 4x Ukraine’s per capita GDP, and is having economic warfare waged against it by the West, so it’s not very impressive or meaningful that Ukraine has managed to outperform it.
     
    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    The EU averaged 2.2% GDP growth from 2016-2017, virtually the same as Ukraine’s 2.4%
     
    Ukraine's per capita growth has been higher.

    The driving force of the Maidan revolution was the promise that a “European Choice” would produce real progress on convergence with European living standards, and it has failed to deliver on that promise.
     
    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn't support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    With Ukraine’s combination of Third World poverty, high intellectual capital, and Western financial support, it should be growing at 5%-10%, as most other Eastern European and former-Yugoslav countries did when they were at a similar level of per capita GDP.
     
    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.

    I’m curious, was the power situation in Kiev better or worse in 2014
     
    For most residents, no different.

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?

    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning. Admitting there is a civil war is not winning.

    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan. At the very least official numbers for entire country are. Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.

    For most residents, no different.

    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree. Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    I don’t see a point of arguing with Ukies or presumed pro-Russians. History will render its judgement no matter what individuals or governments say. I suggest that those interested in Ukraine or Russia save the comments of the most rabid Ukies and alleged pro-Russians and reread them 10 years from now (if anyone remains alive at that time, which I think is very likely).
    , @AP

    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning.
     
    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 - for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.

    "Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways."

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan.
     
    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/map-ukraine-gdp-fall.png

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don't get a full picture of what is going on the country.

    Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.
     
    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.

    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree.
     
    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.
     
    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)
  211. @Jon0815

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?
     
    The low-level civil war in Donbass has virtually zero impact on Ukraine's economy. The physical damage from shelling is mostly occurring in rebel-held areas not counted in Ukraine's economic statistics. The bad relations with its largest neighbor have certainly had a negative effect, but that is my point: The Maidanist policy of spurning Russia, in favor of the false promise of EU membership, has been a failure for Ukraine.

    Ukraine’s per capita growth has been higher.
     
    Not much higher. From 2016-2017 the EU (per capita GDP $33000) averaged 2.0% growth per capita, vs. 2.8% for Ukraine (per capita GDP $2500).

    Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it.
     
    Growth has been well below potential in the west and center too, though somewhat less so than in the east. And slower growth overall means fewer tax revenues to Kiev: Hence fewer/less reliable government services everywhere, than would be the case with faster growth, regardless of how that slower growth is regionally distributed.

    Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.
     

    It's true that the eastern regions have disproportionately suffered, and I have no sympathy for them. They had the opportunity to join Donbass in rebellion, and chose to remain under the rule of a regime hostile to them, so they deserve everything they get as a result. From a Russian nationalist perspective, the more that growth in eastern Ukraine lags the west, the better, since this will increase the east's alienation from the west, making it more likely that Ukraine will eventually fragment on it's own (or at least make that territory much easier to pacify after reunification with Russia by military means).

    Also, you are correct that the civil war continues thanks to Russia, but probably not the way you mean: Ukraine is the military aggressor, but Russia could end the fighting at any time by recognizing the D/LNR and allowing them to join Russia.

    It is no longer the 1990s and early 2000s. That train left.
     

    What's the evidence for 5%+ growth no longer being possible at Ukraine's PCGDP level, other than Ukraine's failure?

    For most residents, no different.
     
    That's an evasive response, which would be technically true even if not a single resident lacked power in 2014, and 49% lacked it in 2018.

    What % of Kiev residents have currently been without power for days/weeks/months, and how does that compare to 2014?

    “And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?”

    The low-level civil war in Donbass has virtually zero impact on Ukraine’s economy.

    The eastern parts of Ukraine were integrated with Donbas and this disruption has negatively affected those regions’ economies. It’s not a coincidence that parts of Ukraine further from the civil war zone have experienced higher economic growth than the national average.

    The bad relations with its largest neighbor have certainly had a negative effect, but that is my point: The Maidanist policy of spurning Russia, in favor of the false promise of EU membership, has been a failure for Ukraine.

    Maidanist policy was to focus on EU, Russia retaliated by spurning Ukraine. The result has been a boon to western and to a lesser extent central Ukraine but bad for regions more linked to Russia, who have had the double whammy of civil war disruption and Russian trade disruption.

    Under such conditions, steady 2%-3% national GDP growth (or 3% to 4% per capita growth) is not exactly terrible.

    Growth has been well below potential in the west and center too, though somewhat less so than in the east.

    Corruption at the national level has not helped of course; growth could be even higher. But it is still significant in the west and center.

    From a Russian nationalist perspective, the more that growth in eastern Ukraine lags the west, the better, since this will increase the east’s alienation from the west, making it more likely that Ukraine will eventually fragment on it’s own

    1. The clusterf*ck that is Donbas has basically inured the people of Kharkiv against rebellion.

    2. A lot of the most pro-Russian elements from this region have already left. They have been replaced by pro-Ukrainian people who fled Donbas.

    3. Eastern Ukraine’s economy has lagged behind but it hasn’t been catastrophic as in Donbas itself.

    The place wasn’t interested in rebellion in 2014, it is even less interested now.

    Also, you are correct that the civil war continues thanks to Russia, but probably not the way you mean: Ukraine is the military aggressor, but Russia could end the fighting at any time by recognizing the D/LNR and allowing them to join Russia.

    Russia could also end the fight by ceasing its significant support to the rebels. (personally, I wish that this would be ended your way, as Donbas is bad for Ukraine).

    What’s the evidence for 5%+ growth no longer being possible at Ukraine’s PCGDP level, other than Ukraine’s failure?

    You claimed that it would be possible. What is the evidence for the claim you made?

    What % of Kiev residents have currently been without power for days/weeks/months, and how does that compare to 2014?

    No one has lost power (at least, no significant %).

    About 3,000 homes in a city of 3 million had been without heating or hot water for several months as of October:

    https://www.rbc.ua/rus/news/kieve-okolo-3-tys-domov-goryachey-vody-1538656439.html

    Many Ukrainians were without hot water in 2014 also:

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-09-23/hot-water-ukraine

    And in 2012:

    https://ukrainianweek.com/Society/44613

    Etc.

    In 2013 a third of Russia (1/5 of urban homes) was without heating or hot water (although as AK pointed out many of these are probably semi-abandoned Soviet towns in the far north):

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    :::::::::::::::::

    It’s a Russian nationalist trick, to present this chronic and pervasive problem as new or unique and then blame Maidan.

    • Replies: @Jon0815

    The eastern parts of Ukraine were integrated with Donbas and this disruption has negatively affected those regions’ economies. It’s not a coincidence that parts of Ukraine further from the civil war zone have experienced higher economic growth than the national average.
     
    Ukraine chose to impose an economic blockade on Donbass. It can't use its own policy as an excuse for its economic failure.

    Also, I think a bigger factor is the distance from the Russian border, not from the war zone. Regions farther from the Russian border had fewer economic ties with Russia.

    1. The clusterf*ck that is Donbas has basically inured the people of Kharkiv against rebellion.

    2. A lot of the most pro-Russian elements from this region have already left. They have been replaced by pro-Ukrainian people who fled Donbas.

    3. Eastern Ukraine’s economy has lagged behind but it hasn’t been catastrophic as in Donbas itself.

    The place wasn’t interested in rebellion in 2014, it is even less interested now.
     
    The areas of Donbass that are occupied by Kiev are certainly not doing well (so the lesson for Kharkiv there, is that if you are going to rebel against Kiev, don't get reconquered). But we don't have GDP statistics for the D/LNR, so we don't really know how the rebel-controlled areas are doing. Probably Donetsk is still less wealthy relative to Kharkiv than it was in 2014, but I think it's likely that its per capita GDP is also growing significantly faster (given that annual Russian subsidies to the D/LNR are equal to something like 10-20% of their GDP). And there is a nontrivial chance that the D/LNR will become part of Russia within the next 10 years, which would certainly improve economic conditions there, as per capita GDP naturally converged with Russia's (much higher than Kharkiv's).

    Economically, Kharkiv's decision not to rebel was the right one in the short-term, but the medium to long-term remains to be seen.


    You claimed that it would be possible. What is the evidence for the claim you made?
     
    The fact that it has been the historical norm.

    I count at least 12 former Communist countries of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, who at some point since 1991 had a per capita GDP on par with 2016-2017 Ukraine (about $2500), and none of whom were EU members at the time: Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Serbia.

    Their average per capita growth rate at that PCGDP level was about 7%, with some (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan) reaching as high as 12-14% in a single year. Only Bulgaria averaged worse at that level than Ukraine's 2.8%.

    Granted, I believe the only other such country to be on par with Ukraine's current PCGDP within the past 10 years has been Moldova (from 2012-2017) and its average per capita growth over that period has been just under 4%. But that would be very thin evidence to support your claim, since Moldova's primary obstacle to growth, extreme corruption, is shared by Ukraine.

    About 3,000 homes in a city of 3 million had been without heating or hot water for several months as of October:
     
    Based on the anecdotal reports I've seen on twitter etc., the number of Kiev residents who have been without heating/hot water this fall for at least a week, would surely be >100,000. Earlier in the year, it was reported that 1/3rd of residential buildings in Kiev had no hot water at that time. I don't know how that compares to 2014 (or for that matter, to Donetsk in 2018).
  212. @for-the-record
    To wit, there were never any referendums in Kosovo (as opposed to Crimea)

    You need to inform the Nobel Peace Prize President of this, 'cuz he says otherwise!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsZ346-3Eeo

    Is the fact that Obama always was and still is a liar news to you?

    • Replies: @for-the-record
    Is the fact that Obama always was and still is a liar news to you?

    Not at all, although I think he may well have believed what he said, which is perhaps worse.
  213. @RadicalCenter
    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia). They can join NATO or the Islamic Union (EU) or any other foolish idea they like.

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.

    It takes two to tango. They might wish to run away from the Ukrainian madhouse (quite understandable), but would Russians wish to welcome those who did not protest against the Nazi government in Kiev? I doubt that.

  214. @DreadIlk

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?
     
    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning. Admitting there is a civil war is not winning.

    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.

     

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan. At the very least official numbers for entire country are. Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.

    For most residents, no different.
     
    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree. Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.

    I don’t see a point of arguing with Ukies or presumed pro-Russians. History will render its judgement no matter what individuals or governments say. I suggest that those interested in Ukraine or Russia save the comments of the most rabid Ukies and alleged pro-Russians and reread them 10 years from now (if anyone remains alive at that time, which I think is very likely).

  215. @AnonFromTN
    Is the fact that Obama always was and still is a liar news to you?

    Is the fact that Obama always was and still is a liar news to you?

    Not at all, although I think he may well have believed what he said, which is perhaps worse.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Quite possible. The man is ill-informed and apparently not all that bright. All hype and glorification based on his race and his fashionably antiwhite agenda.
  216. @DreadIlk

    And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?
     
    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning. Admitting there is a civil war is not winning.

    Driving force was removal of Yanukovich and his regime. Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.

     

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan. At the very least official numbers for entire country are. Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.

    For most residents, no different.
     
    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree. Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.

    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning.

    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 – for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.

    “Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways.”

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan.

    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don’t get a full picture of what is going on the country.

    Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.

    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.

    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree.

    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.

    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Paraphrasing British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and Ukrainian statistics."
    , @DreadIlk

    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 – for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.
     
    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp-per-capita-ppp We will use the scale that is most generous. So 2013 number 8338 goes to a low of 7464. And from that low you have a recovery to 7894. You still in the hole as a nation. To get growth off the low is not an achievement.

    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don’t get a full picture of what is going on the country.
     
    You realize percent climbing down matter more than percent climbing up? Plus you haven't shown me real numbers yet per region other than one year snapshot that proves me right.

    Let's do an experiment 10% decline for one year then 3.3% growth for three what do you get?

    I'm not arguing that western Ukrainians are not better off then Eastern Ukrainians right this moment. But they are still worse off then if Maidan never happened. Furthermore as far as most Ukranians are concerned they would be better off if Lviv was being bombed right now instead of Donetsk and Lugansk.

    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.
     
    Russia and Ukraine were slated for a recession that year. IT industry is a service industry. It can't survive without manufacturing base. Also still would have been higher GDP PPP then it is post maidan even with shit numbers you give.

    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/
     
    That is not the point. Point is that this would not be happening now if Maidan did not happen. And if it's standard bs chronic problem Poroshenko would not be sweating and it would not be in national conversation.

    As far as Russia goes we not talking about Russia moot point. As others pointed out you don't know what is being talked about as in abandoned houses.

    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)
     
    Yeah because unlike you he is not biased or retarded.

    And matter of fact others do fail to clean snow and it is bad in those cases too. This year it was particularly bad in Kiev.
  217. @AP

    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning.
     
    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 - for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.

    "Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways."

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan.
     
    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/map-ukraine-gdp-fall.png

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don't get a full picture of what is going on the country.

    Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.
     
    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.

    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree.
     
    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.
     
    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)

    Paraphrasing British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and Ukrainian statistics.”

    • Replies: @AP
    I suppose all the new stores and the tech park being built in Lviv are also fantasies?

    http://www.uadn.net/2018/06/21/lviv-starts-construction-of-160-million-it-park/

    You are the guy who insisted that no US auto company had any factories in the USA. I guess the news of GM closing some of them is fake, in your world.

    But don't worry - the huge US factory in the town where you live (but that you claim doesn't exist) isn't being closed.
  218. @AnonFromTN
    Paraphrasing British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and Ukrainian statistics."

    I suppose all the new stores and the tech park being built in Lviv are also fantasies?

    http://www.uadn.net/2018/06/21/lviv-starts-construction-of-160-million-it-park/

    You are the guy who insisted that no US auto company had any factories in the USA. I guess the news of GM closing some of them is fake, in your world.

    But don’t worry – the huge US factory in the town where you live (but that you claim doesn’t exist) isn’t being closed.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    See my comment #215. I will look through the BS you and other Ukies are spewing in 10 years and get a good laugh. Russians appear to be right: with Ukie propaganda, who needs stand-up comedy?
    , @Mr. Hack
    I've been questioning whether this AnonFromTN is really the college biology professor he'd like everyone to believe? How could he not know that such a large GM plant existed right in his own backyard? He's probably just more cubicle plankton in some Moscow troll factory spewing out his incessant comments here (where does he find the time to complete his administrative duties?), who flunked out of biology school somewhere, with just enough knowledge about how it's all supposed to work in such a department to create this illusionary profile. :-)
  219. @DreadIlk
    Talking past each other you right. On first read I was going to shit talk. On second read what you are saying makes sense.

    I would say that we can't realistically refer to the rebels as a separate side from Russia. Ethnic Russians in Donbas is Russia because Russia publicly said they will not allow ethnic Russians to get wiped out. And we can't consider Ukraine as an independent player. If it was up to Ukrainians they would never have central government seized by western Ukrainians and furthermore there would have been a partisan war in western Ukraine and not conventional war in eastern Ukraine. So all scenarios with Ukrainian military steam rolling eastern rebels is by default impossible.

    So with these considerations it becomes moot to guess how much Russians will get involved. They will constantly up the escalation to counter anything that comes down from Washington. And the second Washington loses interest the westerners will get f..ed.

    On second read what you are saying makes sense.

    You mean re the simple issue of trust?

    … all scenarios with Ukrainian military steam rolling eastern rebels is by default impossible.

    …it becomes moot to guess how much Russians will get involved. They will constantly up the escalation to counter anything that comes down from Washington.

    Because THIS time Kremlin will draw that red line?
    O.K………………….

    And the second Washington loses interest the westerners will get f..ed.

    There is the option other way around. One way to find out.

    Bottom line, you guys trust Kremlin.
    I don’t.

    You know……anyway…..you trust your Government, politicians, when they want you disarmed because they’ll protect you? You know, police etc?
    Feels…….similar here?

    See, all I am asking is so obvious for anyone willing to think: “Why we can’t protect ourselves? Why do we have to rely on YOU?”. Rhetorical question, admit.

    It could’ve been done, with ease, so far.
    It hasn’t.
    I know why.

    Good.

    It would be interesting to see a post here from somebody actually LIVING in that region. “Skin in the game” thing.

  220. @AP
    I suppose all the new stores and the tech park being built in Lviv are also fantasies?

    http://www.uadn.net/2018/06/21/lviv-starts-construction-of-160-million-it-park/

    You are the guy who insisted that no US auto company had any factories in the USA. I guess the news of GM closing some of them is fake, in your world.

    But don't worry - the huge US factory in the town where you live (but that you claim doesn't exist) isn't being closed.

    See my comment #215. I will look through the BS you and other Ukies are spewing in 10 years and get a good laugh. Russians appear to be right: with Ukie propaganda, who needs stand-up comedy?

    • Replies: @AP

    I will look through the BS you you and other Ukies are spewing in 10 years and get a good laugh
     
    Only one spewing BS in most posts is you and those like you. And one does not have to wait 10 years in the case of your BS. Here is some funny stuff written by a Russian nationalist from 2015:

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/zakharchenko-deinego-and-pushilin-have-set-a-trap-for-poroshenko/

    "The Ukrainian economy is basically dead. There is nothing left to salvage, nevermind turn the tide and overcome the crushing economic crisis. The Right Sector is up in arms and very, very angry. Folks in the western Ukraine are already seriously considering demanding their own special autonomy status. As for Odessa with Saakashvili in charge and the daughter of Egor Gaidar as Deputy Governor, it will inevitably explode, especially since the USA officially pays their salaries."
  221. Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin, citing the fact that Russia has not yet returned the sailors and vessels to Ukraine. Already a political win for Ukraine, albeit perhaps not a very important one.

    Should they receive two rusty gunboats from the US, and there’ll be no cost to this benefit. They have no incentive to stop behaving the way they do.

    • Replies: @JLK

    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin
     
    I'd love to know if Trump has been kept in the loop of the full contents of the discussion between Bolton and Putin a few weeks ago and any other threats that may have been flying back and forth.

    He must trust his advisors if he doesn't want to hear things from the horse's mouth.
    , @AnonFromTN
    To be honest, this is hardly a punishment. As Helsinki meeting shows, holding talks with Trump is a pure waste of time. This would save Putin a few hours he can use for talks that actually make sense.

    As to rusty US gunboats, they are less rusty than the poor excuses for ships that Ukrainian Navy currently has. However, the problem of Ukraine is that it doesn’t have money to maintain them (and that’s a lot of money). Even if they find the necessary funds in their budget, everything will be stolen by Poroshenko and allied oligarchs. Ukraine is going the way of the Western Roman Empire: it lost to barbarians not because they were stronger militarily, but because pervasive corruption made the Roman Empire impotent.
    , @Felix Keverich
    Exactly, but this is what happens when you surrender all initiative to the enemy. At some point, Kremlins will have to recognise that this problem won't go away or resolve itself.
    , @for-the-record
    This was quite foreseeable, it seems to me, and no doubt part of the original plan. Ukraine is very cleverly, in a certain respect, putting NATO/Trump (and obviously NATO-member Turkey) in a position in which they are going to have to choose between doing something far more serious than sanctions, or looking weak for "backing" down in the face of Russian "aggression".

    PART I

    Closing of Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships discussed at NATO HQ

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia's violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov, Ukraine's Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.

    "The Montreux Convention clearly states: if a conflict occurs between two countries, and one of them is the aggressor, then the Bosphorus automatically closes for ships flying its flag," said Voronchenko told the Kyiv-based Interfax-Ukraine news agency during the 2nd international conference on maritime security in in Kyiv on Thursday.

    The commander of the Naval Forces of the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine noted that the topic had already been raised previously in the fall at NATO headquarters.

    "In September, at NATO's office in Naples, I asked the commander of the Turkish Navy: if there is Russian aggression against Ukraine, will you close the Bosphorus for the aggressor country. The commander replied: we will comply with the convention," Voronchenko said.

    https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/549369.html</blockquote
     

     
    , @g2k
    Every time trump meets putun nothing is agreed, the media goes ballistic and then congress introduces sanctions bills for some made up reason that the former makes no effort to stop. Putin always fails to forsee this, so the fact that trump cancelled on him is a blessing in disguise.
  222. @reiner Tor
    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin, citing the fact that Russia has not yet returned the sailors and vessels to Ukraine. Already a political win for Ukraine, albeit perhaps not a very important one.

    Should they receive two rusty gunboats from the US, and there'll be no cost to this benefit. They have no incentive to stop behaving the way they do.

    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin

    I’d love to know if Trump has been kept in the loop of the full contents of the discussion between Bolton and Putin a few weeks ago and any other threats that may have been flying back and forth.

    He must trust his advisors if he doesn’t want to hear things from the horse’s mouth.

  223. @AnonFromTN
    See my comment #215. I will look through the BS you and other Ukies are spewing in 10 years and get a good laugh. Russians appear to be right: with Ukie propaganda, who needs stand-up comedy?

    I will look through the BS you you and other Ukies are spewing in 10 years and get a good laugh

    Only one spewing BS in most posts is you and those like you. And one does not have to wait 10 years in the case of your BS. Here is some funny stuff written by a Russian nationalist from 2015:

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/zakharchenko-deinego-and-pushilin-have-set-a-trap-for-poroshenko/

    “The Ukrainian economy is basically dead. There is nothing left to salvage, nevermind turn the tide and overcome the crushing economic crisis. The Right Sector is up in arms and very, very angry. Folks in the western Ukraine are already seriously considering demanding their own special autonomy status. As for Odessa with Saakashvili in charge and the daughter of Egor Gaidar as Deputy Governor, it will inevitably explode, especially since the USA officially pays their salaries.”

    • LOL: reiner Tor
  224. @reiner Tor
    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin, citing the fact that Russia has not yet returned the sailors and vessels to Ukraine. Already a political win for Ukraine, albeit perhaps not a very important one.

    Should they receive two rusty gunboats from the US, and there'll be no cost to this benefit. They have no incentive to stop behaving the way they do.

    To be honest, this is hardly a punishment. As Helsinki meeting shows, holding talks with Trump is a pure waste of time. This would save Putin a few hours he can use for talks that actually make sense.

    As to rusty US gunboats, they are less rusty than the poor excuses for ships that Ukrainian Navy currently has. However, the problem of Ukraine is that it doesn’t have money to maintain them (and that’s a lot of money). Even if they find the necessary funds in their budget, everything will be stolen by Poroshenko and allied oligarchs. Ukraine is going the way of the Western Roman Empire: it lost to barbarians not because they were stronger militarily, but because pervasive corruption made the Roman Empire impotent.

    • Replies: @Beckow
    I agree that arguing these points today is pointless, let's wait 3-5 years (10 if you prefer).

    One of the strongest cards Kiev has is to use Trump's persuasive powers to convince Putin to blink or to at least stand aside. Given known Kremlin propensities to prefer inaction and their risk-averse nature, having Trump repeat it personally is an overall plus for Kiev. Trump not meeting Putin is in my view a loss for Poroshenko.

    There is no agreement possible, the sides are too confrontational. This will come down to mutually-assured long lasting pain (mostly economical) and eventually might resolve itself in a classical blow-up. In a blow-up the strongest guy present usually wins. It is by no means certain, West will be present, that leaves an obvious conclusion that Russia will benefit from the coming confrontation.

    By the way, the main reason for the Western Roman Empire's collapse were unsustainable and growing levels of debt. That fed the pervasive corruption, the debts were effectively the 'wealth' of the elite, but they were mostly un-collectable. Corruption was used as one way to get around that - to cash out so to speak. But the underlying issue was that two or more claimants existed on all productive activity, the producer and the multiple creditors - that always leads to an increase in corruption. Corruption is a short-cut when institutions can no longer function. We are heading to a similar situation.
  225. @AP
    I suppose all the new stores and the tech park being built in Lviv are also fantasies?

    http://www.uadn.net/2018/06/21/lviv-starts-construction-of-160-million-it-park/

    You are the guy who insisted that no US auto company had any factories in the USA. I guess the news of GM closing some of them is fake, in your world.

    But don't worry - the huge US factory in the town where you live (but that you claim doesn't exist) isn't being closed.

    I’ve been questioning whether this AnonFromTN is really the college biology professor he’d like everyone to believe? How could he not know that such a large GM plant existed right in his own backyard? He’s probably just more cubicle plankton in some Moscow troll factory spewing out his incessant comments here (where does he find the time to complete his administrative duties?), who flunked out of biology school somewhere, with just enough knowledge about how it’s all supposed to work in such a department to create this illusionary profile. :-)

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    This comment sounds particularly funny coming from someone posing as a physician practicing in the US. The number of comments on this site from a “Mr. Hack” is more consistent with him/her/it being a retired bean counter or school teacher in Zhmerinka supplementing his/her/its meager pension with a few hryvnas from the Ukrainian Ministry of Truth (thanking Orwell for prescience). LOL.
  226. @AnonFromTN
    To be honest, this is hardly a punishment. As Helsinki meeting shows, holding talks with Trump is a pure waste of time. This would save Putin a few hours he can use for talks that actually make sense.

    As to rusty US gunboats, they are less rusty than the poor excuses for ships that Ukrainian Navy currently has. However, the problem of Ukraine is that it doesn’t have money to maintain them (and that’s a lot of money). Even if they find the necessary funds in their budget, everything will be stolen by Poroshenko and allied oligarchs. Ukraine is going the way of the Western Roman Empire: it lost to barbarians not because they were stronger militarily, but because pervasive corruption made the Roman Empire impotent.

    I agree that arguing these points today is pointless, let’s wait 3-5 years (10 if you prefer).

    One of the strongest cards Kiev has is to use Trump’s persuasive powers to convince Putin to blink or to at least stand aside. Given known Kremlin propensities to prefer inaction and their risk-averse nature, having Trump repeat it personally is an overall plus for Kiev. Trump not meeting Putin is in my view a loss for Poroshenko.

    There is no agreement possible, the sides are too confrontational. This will come down to mutually-assured long lasting pain (mostly economical) and eventually might resolve itself in a classical blow-up. In a blow-up the strongest guy present usually wins. It is by no means certain, West will be present, that leaves an obvious conclusion that Russia will benefit from the coming confrontation.

    By the way, the main reason for the Western Roman Empire’s collapse were unsustainable and growing levels of debt. That fed the pervasive corruption, the debts were effectively the ‘wealth’ of the elite, but they were mostly un-collectable. Corruption was used as one way to get around that – to cash out so to speak. But the underlying issue was that two or more claimants existed on all productive activity, the producer and the multiple creditors – that always leads to an increase in corruption. Corruption is a short-cut when institutions can no longer function. We are heading to a similar situation.

    • Replies: @AP

    One of the strongest cards Kiev has is to use Trump’s persuasive powers to convince Putin to blink or to at least stand aside. Given known Kremlin propensities to prefer inaction and their risk-averse nature, having Trump repeat it personally is an overall plus for Kiev. Trump not meeting Putin is in my view a loss for Poroshenko.
     
    Trump responds very well to flattery and Putin knows what he is doing, so keeping them apart is a win for Poroshenko.
  227. @Mr. Hack
    I've been questioning whether this AnonFromTN is really the college biology professor he'd like everyone to believe? How could he not know that such a large GM plant existed right in his own backyard? He's probably just more cubicle plankton in some Moscow troll factory spewing out his incessant comments here (where does he find the time to complete his administrative duties?), who flunked out of biology school somewhere, with just enough knowledge about how it's all supposed to work in such a department to create this illusionary profile. :-)

    This comment sounds particularly funny coming from someone posing as a physician practicing in the US. The number of comments on this site from a “Mr. Hack” is more consistent with him/her/it being a retired bean counter or school teacher in Zhmerinka supplementing his/her/its meager pension with a few hryvnas from the Ukrainian Ministry of Truth (thanking Orwell for prescience). LOL.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I've never once suggested here or anywhere else that I'm a physician or any sort of a medical professional? Once again, you're displaying your loose handling of the facts, 'Mr. Professor'. :-)

    So, how was it really, that you weren't aware that a large GM plant was operating in your own backyard? You must be the real 'absent minded professor'. :-) :-)

  228. @AP
    Ukraine GDP growth rate, horrible reality for you starting in 2016:

    http://d39raawggeifpx.cloudfront.net/styles/16_9_desktop/s3/articleimages/chart%20(7)%20copy.jpg

    Yes, the twenty million, mostly old, people left in Ukraine 25 years from now could have an impressive standard of living at this rate.

  229. @AP

    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).
     
    Would you support California and other border areas of the USA with heavy ethnic concentrations joining other countries?

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.
     
    This already happened in 2014. There was no effective central government or army and all regions of Ukraine that wanted to leave Ukraine had the chance, and took it. Russia had hoped that half of Ukraine would have joined Russia, but only Crimea and the southeastern 2/3 (by population) of Donbas did so - about 15% of the pre-2014 country.

    Fair question, but yes, that’s probably going to happen to the USA as well. It’s a sad and frightening prospect for me as an American, but seems increasingly likely — and not avoidable even with major violence.

  230. @AP

    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).
     
    Would you support California and other border areas of the USA with heavy ethnic concentrations joining other countries?

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.
     
    This already happened in 2014. There was no effective central government or army and all regions of Ukraine that wanted to leave Ukraine had the chance, and took it. Russia had hoped that half of Ukraine would have joined Russia, but only Crimea and the southeastern 2/3 (by population) of Donbas did so - about 15% of the pre-2014 country.

    I am talking about an actual referendum.

    As Ukraine’s population continues to collapse, and most of its supposed Western allies and trading partners — the EU countries and the UK — become muslim/African/Arab hellholes, more people in Ukraine may find union with Russia to be more desirable than they do now. Or at least, they may come to consider it the least bad of a group of unpalatable options. We will see.

  231. @AnonFromTN
    This comment sounds particularly funny coming from someone posing as a physician practicing in the US. The number of comments on this site from a “Mr. Hack” is more consistent with him/her/it being a retired bean counter or school teacher in Zhmerinka supplementing his/her/its meager pension with a few hryvnas from the Ukrainian Ministry of Truth (thanking Orwell for prescience). LOL.

    I’ve never once suggested here or anywhere else that I’m a physician or any sort of a medical professional? Once again, you’re displaying your loose handling of the facts, ‘Mr. Professor’. :-)

    So, how was it really, that you weren’t aware that a large GM plant was operating in your own backyard? You must be the real ‘absent minded professor’. :-) :-)

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Well, maybe some other stuff Ukie here, like “AP”, made that claim. Hard to distinguish. Then it’s even more ridiculous considering comment diarrhea from that source.
  232. @for-the-record
    Is the fact that Obama always was and still is a liar news to you?

    Not at all, although I think he may well have believed what he said, which is perhaps worse.

    Quite possible. The man is ill-informed and apparently not all that bright. All hype and glorification based on his race and his fashionably antiwhite agenda.

  233. @AP

    Let western Ukraine be its own country, with small border areas of heavy ethnic concentration possibly joining their home countries (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia).
     
    Would you support California and other border areas of the USA with heavy ethnic concentrations joining other countries?

    Let the more-Russian oblasts of Eastern and southeastern Ukraine join Russia, or be independent and allied with Russia, if they wish.
     
    This already happened in 2014. There was no effective central government or army and all regions of Ukraine that wanted to leave Ukraine had the chance, and took it. Russia had hoped that half of Ukraine would have joined Russia, but only Crimea and the southeastern 2/3 (by population) of Donbas did so - about 15% of the pre-2014 country.

    I very much doubt that California/Arizona/New Mexico would ever want to rejoin Texas and have to give up the nice handouts from the rest of America and share their riches with other Mexicans

  234. @reiner Tor
    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin, citing the fact that Russia has not yet returned the sailors and vessels to Ukraine. Already a political win for Ukraine, albeit perhaps not a very important one.

    Should they receive two rusty gunboats from the US, and there'll be no cost to this benefit. They have no incentive to stop behaving the way they do.

    Exactly, but this is what happens when you surrender all initiative to the enemy. At some point, Kremlins will have to recognise that this problem won’t go away or resolve itself.

  235. @AP

    "And Ukraine is having a civil war and is having problems with it largest neighbor. How is economic growth in other places with civil war?"

    The low-level civil war in Donbass has virtually zero impact on Ukraine’s economy.
     
    The eastern parts of Ukraine were integrated with Donbas and this disruption has negatively affected those regions' economies. It's not a coincidence that parts of Ukraine further from the civil war zone have experienced higher economic growth than the national average.

    The bad relations with its largest neighbor have certainly had a negative effect, but that is my point: The Maidanist policy of spurning Russia, in favor of the false promise of EU membership, has been a failure for Ukraine.
     
    Maidanist policy was to focus on EU, Russia retaliated by spurning Ukraine. The result has been a boon to western and to a lesser extent central Ukraine but bad for regions more linked to Russia, who have had the double whammy of civil war disruption and Russian trade disruption.

    Under such conditions, steady 2%-3% national GDP growth (or 3% to 4% per capita growth) is not exactly terrible.

    Growth has been well below potential in the west and center too, though somewhat less so than in the east.
     
    Corruption at the national level has not helped of course; growth could be even higher. But it is still significant in the west and center.

    From a Russian nationalist perspective, the more that growth in eastern Ukraine lags the west, the better, since this will increase the east’s alienation from the west, making it more likely that Ukraine will eventually fragment on it’s own
     
    1. The clusterf*ck that is Donbas has basically inured the people of Kharkiv against rebellion.

    2. A lot of the most pro-Russian elements from this region have already left. They have been replaced by pro-Ukrainian people who fled Donbas.

    3. Eastern Ukraine's economy has lagged behind but it hasn't been catastrophic as in Donbas itself.

    The place wasn't interested in rebellion in 2014, it is even less interested now.

    Also, you are correct that the civil war continues thanks to Russia, but probably not the way you mean: Ukraine is the military aggressor, but Russia could end the fighting at any time by recognizing the D/LNR and allowing them to join Russia.
     
    Russia could also end the fight by ceasing its significant support to the rebels. (personally, I wish that this would be ended your way, as Donbas is bad for Ukraine).

    What’s the evidence for 5%+ growth no longer being possible at Ukraine’s PCGDP level, other than Ukraine’s failure?
     
    You claimed that it would be possible. What is the evidence for the claim you made?

    What % of Kiev residents have currently been without power for days/weeks/months, and how does that compare to 2014?
     
    No one has lost power (at least, no significant %).

    About 3,000 homes in a city of 3 million had been without heating or hot water for several months as of October:

    https://www.rbc.ua/rus/news/kieve-okolo-3-tys-domov-goryachey-vody-1538656439.html

    Many Ukrainians were without hot water in 2014 also:

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-09-23/hot-water-ukraine

    And in 2012:

    https://ukrainianweek.com/Society/44613

    Etc.

    In 2013 a third of Russia (1/5 of urban homes) was without heating or hot water (although as AK pointed out many of these are probably semi-abandoned Soviet towns in the far north):

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    :::::::::::::::::

    It's a Russian nationalist trick, to present this chronic and pervasive problem as new or unique and then blame Maidan.

    The eastern parts of Ukraine were integrated with Donbas and this disruption has negatively affected those regions’ economies. It’s not a coincidence that parts of Ukraine further from the civil war zone have experienced higher economic growth than the national average.

    Ukraine chose to impose an economic blockade on Donbass. It can’t use its own policy as an excuse for its economic failure.

    Also, I think a bigger factor is the distance from the Russian border, not from the war zone. Regions farther from the Russian border had fewer economic ties with Russia.

    1. The clusterf*ck that is Donbas has basically inured the people of Kharkiv against rebellion.

    2. A lot of the most pro-Russian elements from this region have already left. They have been replaced by pro-Ukrainian people who fled Donbas.

    3. Eastern Ukraine’s economy has lagged behind but it hasn’t been catastrophic as in Donbas itself.

    The place wasn’t interested in rebellion in 2014, it is even less interested now.

    The areas of Donbass that are occupied by Kiev are certainly not doing well (so the lesson for Kharkiv there, is that if you are going to rebel against Kiev, don’t get reconquered). But we don’t have GDP statistics for the D/LNR, so we don’t really know how the rebel-controlled areas are doing. Probably Donetsk is still less wealthy relative to Kharkiv than it was in 2014, but I think it’s likely that its per capita GDP is also growing significantly faster (given that annual Russian subsidies to the D/LNR are equal to something like 10-20% of their GDP). And there is a nontrivial chance that the D/LNR will become part of Russia within the next 10 years, which would certainly improve economic conditions there, as per capita GDP naturally converged with Russia’s (much higher than Kharkiv’s).

    Economically, Kharkiv’s decision not to rebel was the right one in the short-term, but the medium to long-term remains to be seen.

    You claimed that it would be possible. What is the evidence for the claim you made?

    The fact that it has been the historical norm.

    I count at least 12 former Communist countries of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, who at some point since 1991 had a per capita GDP on par with 2016-2017 Ukraine (about $2500), and none of whom were EU members at the time: Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Serbia.

    Their average per capita growth rate at that PCGDP level was about 7%, with some (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan) reaching as high as 12-14% in a single year. Only Bulgaria averaged worse at that level than Ukraine’s 2.8%.

    Granted, I believe the only other such country to be on par with Ukraine’s current PCGDP within the past 10 years has been Moldova (from 2012-2017) and its average per capita growth over that period has been just under 4%. But that would be very thin evidence to support your claim, since Moldova’s primary obstacle to growth, extreme corruption, is shared by Ukraine.

    About 3,000 homes in a city of 3 million had been without heating or hot water for several months as of October:

    Based on the anecdotal reports I’ve seen on twitter etc., the number of Kiev residents who have been without heating/hot water this fall for at least a week, would surely be >100,000. Earlier in the year, it was reported that 1/3rd of residential buildings in Kiev had no hot water at that time. I don’t know how that compares to 2014 (or for that matter, to Donetsk in 2018).

    • Replies: @AP

    Ukraine chose to impose an economic blockade on Donbass. It can’t use its own policy as an excuse for its economic failure.
     
    It imposed the blockade due to Donbas being owned by rebels. Donbas is owned by rebels due to the Russian support for rebels.

    The areas of Donbass that are occupied by Kiev are certainly not doing well (so the lesson for Kharkiv there, is that if you are going to rebel against Kiev, don’t get reconquered). But we don’t have GDP statistics for the D/LNR, so we don’t really know how the rebel-controlled areas are doing
     
    AK posted data showing salaries in the rebel areas are now the lowest in Ukraine, lower than the poorest Kiev-held oblasts.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/ukrotriumph/

    Economically, Kharkiv’s decision not to rebel was the right one in the short-term, but the medium to long-term remains to be seen.
     
    Long-term indeed remains to be seen but short to medium term not rebelling has been a good idea. Four years after Maidan and nobody in Kharkiv wishes that his town were another Donetsk.

    Their average per capita growth rate at that PCGDP level was about 7%, with some (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan) reaching as high as 12-14% in a single year
     
    Ukraine had growth of 12.1% in 2004 and 7.9% in 2007.

    It's a different world after 2008.

    Based on the anecdotal reports I’ve seen on twitter etc., the number of Kiev residents who have been without heating/hot water this fall for at least a week, would surely be >100,000. Earlier in the year, it was reported that 1/3rd of residential buildings in Kiev had no hot water at that time.
     
    It was 1/3 in June, 3,000 houses in late October.

    I don’t know how that compares to 2014 (or for that matter, to Donetsk in 2018).
     
    Nor do I. The point is that Ukraine (and Russia) has had such problems before and it is silly to single out such an episode now in Ukraine, and blame Maidan.
  236. @AP

    You made a statement that Ukraine is winning. 2.4% GDP after huge fall and starting from very low base is not winning.
     
    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 - for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.

    "Maidan was the work of the western and central half of the country. These parts have seen growth well above the national average. They got what they wanted and benefit from it. Economic problems with Russia and civil that continues thanks to Russia mostly hurt the parts of Ukraine that didn’t support Maidan in the first place anyways."

    Keep dreaming. I guess they are still bellow what it was before Maidan.
     
    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/map-ukraine-gdp-fall.png

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don't get a full picture of what is going on the country.

    Once we also consider the growth they could have had had they not started a civil war it becomes even more damning.
     
    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.

    22 cities with no heat before winter season starts begs to disagree.
     
    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Sharij had some videos out of Kiev where they did not even bother to clean first snow and people were sliding on ice.
     
    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)

    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 – for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp-per-capita-ppp We will use the scale that is most generous. So 2013 number 8338 goes to a low of 7464. And from that low you have a recovery to 7894. You still in the hole as a nation. To get growth off the low is not an achievement.

    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don’t get a full picture of what is going on the country.

    You realize percent climbing down matter more than percent climbing up? Plus you haven’t shown me real numbers yet per region other than one year snapshot that proves me right.

    Let’s do an experiment 10% decline for one year then 3.3% growth for three what do you get?

    I’m not arguing that western Ukrainians are not better off then Eastern Ukrainians right this moment. But they are still worse off then if Maidan never happened. Furthermore as far as most Ukranians are concerned they would be better off if Lviv was being bombed right now instead of Donetsk and Lugansk.

    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.

    Russia and Ukraine were slated for a recession that year. IT industry is a service industry. It can’t survive without manufacturing base. Also still would have been higher GDP PPP then it is post maidan even with shit numbers you give.

    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    That is not the point. Point is that this would not be happening now if Maidan did not happen. And if it’s standard bs chronic problem Poroshenko would not be sweating and it would not be in national conversation.

    As far as Russia goes we not talking about Russia moot point. As others pointed out you don’t know what is being talked about as in abandoned houses.

    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)

    Yeah because unlike you he is not biased or retarded.

    And matter of fact others do fail to clean snow and it is bad in those cases too. This year it was particularly bad in Kiev.

    • Replies: @AP

    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp-per-capita-ppp We will use the scale that is most generous. So 2013 number 8338 goes to a low of 7464. And from that low you have a recovery to 7894.
     
    1. That was 2017. Recovery in 2018 (almost over) is greater than was in 2017. So in the country overall it is close to the level in 2013, and should surpass in 2019.

    2. I did not claim that Ukraine overall has recovered. I only stated that western and central regions have recovered, and are now higher than in 2013. They have as the figures you post prove.

    Let’s do an experiment 10% decline for one year then 3.3% growth for three what do you get?
     
    Well, Lviv had 5% decline 2014-2015 and lets assume national average (it is higher) 2.5% growth for three years (2016, 2017, 2018). What do you get?

    Zhytomir in central Ukraine has 1.2% total decline 2014-2015 and lets assume national average (it is higher) 2.5% growth for three years (2016, 2017, 2018). What do you get?

    Overall 12 Ukrainian oblasts had declines of less than 6% from 2014 to 2015, and national growth has been a little over 2.5% per year on average since that time. So presumably all 12 of these oblasts are ahead of where they were in 2013. Some of them are far ahead. These 12 oblasts are almost all in the center and west (Kherson is one exception) and were pro-Maidan. So Maidan worked for them.

    I’m not arguing that western Ukrainians are not better off then Eastern Ukrainians right this moment. But they are still worse off then if Maidan never happened.
     
    Nonsense. The numbers speak for themselves. Or if you don't believe numbers look at new buildings and factories, growing companies, etc.

    IT industry is a service industry. It can’t survive without manufacturing base.
     
    You need steel mills to support IT industry?

    As far as Russia goes we not talking about Russia moot point. As others pointed out you don’t know what is being talked about as in abandoned houses.
     
    You present a problem that exists in both Russia and Ukraine and that existed in Ukriane before Maidan but blame Maidan.

    Also Russian media clears says it is not abandoned houses that are without heating. It is places where Russians live:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Tens of millions of Russians living in urban areas are struggling with a lack of basic utilities - 1 in 5 city dwellings have no hot water, and 1 in 10 no indoor sanitation.

    Russia’s Federal Statistics Service reported last year that more than a third of all Russians have no hot water and more than a fifth have no running water at all in their homes.

    So Russian Maidan?

    Now presumably, these houses are mostly not in the capital but in small post-industrial towns in the middle of nowhere. Still, it is silly to blame Maidan for a problem that is rather common in all post-Soviet areas.
  237. @reiner Tor
    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin, citing the fact that Russia has not yet returned the sailors and vessels to Ukraine. Already a political win for Ukraine, albeit perhaps not a very important one.

    Should they receive two rusty gunboats from the US, and there'll be no cost to this benefit. They have no incentive to stop behaving the way they do.

    This was quite foreseeable, it seems to me, and no doubt part of the original plan. Ukraine is very cleverly, in a certain respect, putting NATO/Trump (and obviously NATO-member Turkey) in a position in which they are going to have to choose between doing something far more serious than sanctions, or looking weak for “backing” down in the face of Russian “aggression”.

    PART I

    Closing of Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships discussed at NATO HQ

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia’s violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov, Ukraine’s Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.

    “The Montreux Convention clearly states: if a conflict occurs between two countries, and one of them is the aggressor, then the Bosphorus automatically closes for ships flying its flag,” said Voronchenko told the Kyiv-based Interfax-Ukraine news agency during the 2nd international conference on maritime security in in Kyiv on Thursday.

    The commander of the Naval Forces of the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine noted that the topic had already been raised previously in the fall at NATO headquarters.

    “In September, at NATO’s office in Naples, I asked the commander of the Turkish Navy: if there is Russian aggression against Ukraine, will you close the Bosphorus for the aggressor country. The commander replied: we will comply with the convention,” Voronchenko said.

    https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/549369.html</blockquote

    • Replies: @for-the-record
    PART II

    Ukraine president calls for Nato warships in Sea of Azov

    The Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, has called on Nato to deploy naval ships to the Sea of Azov to “provide security” amid a deepening crisis with Russia.

    Nato foreign ministers are due to meet next Monday in Brussels and will assess their existing presence in the area, but it is unlikely they will send warships to the area.

    The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, insisted there was no military solution, even after describing Moscow’s actions as unacceptable. She said she would be talking directly to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, at the G20 summit in Argentina, which starts on Friday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/29/russia-blocked-ukrainian-azov-sea-ports-minister
     
    , @peterAUS

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia’s violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov..
     
    I was going to comment on how CRAZY this sounds, but then saw who's said that.

    , Ukraine’s Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.
     
    Moving on.
  238. @for-the-record
    This was quite foreseeable, it seems to me, and no doubt part of the original plan. Ukraine is very cleverly, in a certain respect, putting NATO/Trump (and obviously NATO-member Turkey) in a position in which they are going to have to choose between doing something far more serious than sanctions, or looking weak for "backing" down in the face of Russian "aggression".

    PART I

    Closing of Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships discussed at NATO HQ

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia's violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov, Ukraine's Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.

    "The Montreux Convention clearly states: if a conflict occurs between two countries, and one of them is the aggressor, then the Bosphorus automatically closes for ships flying its flag," said Voronchenko told the Kyiv-based Interfax-Ukraine news agency during the 2nd international conference on maritime security in in Kyiv on Thursday.

    The commander of the Naval Forces of the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine noted that the topic had already been raised previously in the fall at NATO headquarters.

    "In September, at NATO's office in Naples, I asked the commander of the Turkish Navy: if there is Russian aggression against Ukraine, will you close the Bosphorus for the aggressor country. The commander replied: we will comply with the convention," Voronchenko said.

    https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/549369.html</blockquote
     

     

    PART II

    Ukraine president calls for Nato warships in Sea of Azov

    The Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, has called on Nato to deploy naval ships to the Sea of Azov to “provide security” amid a deepening crisis with Russia.

    Nato foreign ministers are due to meet next Monday in Brussels and will assess their existing presence in the area, but it is unlikely they will send warships to the area.

    The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, insisted there was no military solution, even after describing Moscow’s actions as unacceptable. She said she would be talking directly to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, at the G20 summit in Argentina, which starts on Friday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/29/russia-blocked-ukrainian-azov-sea-ports-minister

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Either of those demands means war. Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation. But more likely, world war.

    Of course, most likely nothing will come out of this. But it’s again a crisis where insane demands (which, if implemented, would mean world war) are echoed in the media without a serious pushback, like the previous demands for military intervention and a no-fly zone in Syria. Hopefully the leadership never believes its rhetoric, but... it just creates an unhealthy environment where political leaders will try to steer closer to insanity lest they be called “weak” or “Putin’s poodles.” They might fully understand the risks (or they might not), but they will move a bit to the riskier side.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Angela al-Merkel has better say there’s no military solution, as Germany has no serious military to speak of.
  239. @reiner Tor
    Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin, citing the fact that Russia has not yet returned the sailors and vessels to Ukraine. Already a political win for Ukraine, albeit perhaps not a very important one.

    Should they receive two rusty gunboats from the US, and there'll be no cost to this benefit. They have no incentive to stop behaving the way they do.

    Every time trump meets putun nothing is agreed, the media goes ballistic and then congress introduces sanctions bills for some made up reason that the former makes no effort to stop. Putin always fails to forsee this, so the fact that trump cancelled on him is a blessing in disguise.

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    You are probably right, but at the same time Russia benefits from US political chaos. Putin also gets to look like a leader of a superpower, talking "strategic security" with American president.

    BTW, Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison. I'm not sure, if Karlin still cares about her.
  240. @g2k
    Every time trump meets putun nothing is agreed, the media goes ballistic and then congress introduces sanctions bills for some made up reason that the former makes no effort to stop. Putin always fails to forsee this, so the fact that trump cancelled on him is a blessing in disguise.

    You are probably right, but at the same time Russia benefits from US political chaos. Putin also gets to look like a leader of a superpower, talking “strategic security” with American president.

    BTW, Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison. I’m not sure, if Karlin still cares about her.

    • Replies: @for-the-record
    Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison

    Don't think this is correct, she has been in solitary confinement for quite a while, what happened recently is that a judge refused her lawyer's plea to be returned to the general prison population.

    Solitary confinement may well have had its intended effect, as she is reported to be very near to agreeing a plea deal with the prosecutors. This has some already salivating at what she might say:

    If Accused Russian Spy Maria Butina Sings, Here’s What She Might Tell the Feds

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/marina-butina-plea-agreement-coming/
  241. @for-the-record
    This was quite foreseeable, it seems to me, and no doubt part of the original plan. Ukraine is very cleverly, in a certain respect, putting NATO/Trump (and obviously NATO-member Turkey) in a position in which they are going to have to choose between doing something far more serious than sanctions, or looking weak for "backing" down in the face of Russian "aggression".

    PART I

    Closing of Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships discussed at NATO HQ

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia's violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov, Ukraine's Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.

    "The Montreux Convention clearly states: if a conflict occurs between two countries, and one of them is the aggressor, then the Bosphorus automatically closes for ships flying its flag," said Voronchenko told the Kyiv-based Interfax-Ukraine news agency during the 2nd international conference on maritime security in in Kyiv on Thursday.

    The commander of the Naval Forces of the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine noted that the topic had already been raised previously in the fall at NATO headquarters.

    "In September, at NATO's office in Naples, I asked the commander of the Turkish Navy: if there is Russian aggression against Ukraine, will you close the Bosphorus for the aggressor country. The commander replied: we will comply with the convention," Voronchenko said.

    https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/549369.html</blockquote
     

     

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia’s violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov..

    I was going to comment on how CRAZY this sounds, but then saw who’s said that.

    , Ukraine’s Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.

    Moving on.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    There are two problems here. One is thee obvious, that the leadership of a large country is now warmongering for a world war. The other is that their propaganda claims are now uncritically repeated in the international media (and often echoed by influential pundits), which creates an unhealthy environment where politicians will be taking higher risks than they would otherwise be.
  242. @Felix Keverich
    You are probably right, but at the same time Russia benefits from US political chaos. Putin also gets to look like a leader of a superpower, talking "strategic security" with American president.

    BTW, Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison. I'm not sure, if Karlin still cares about her.

    Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison

    Don’t think this is correct, she has been in solitary confinement for quite a while, what happened recently is that a judge refused her lawyer’s plea to be returned to the general prison population.

    Solitary confinement may well have had its intended effect, as she is reported to be very near to agreeing a plea deal with the prosecutors. This has some already salivating at what she might say:

    If Accused Russian Spy Maria Butina Sings, Here’s What She Might Tell the Feds

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/marina-butina-plea-agreement-coming/

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    She could be put in prison for life for literally nothing. Really horrible.
    , @Gerard2

    Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison

    Don’t think this is correct, she has been in solitary confinement for quite a while, what happened recently is that a judge refused her lawyer’s plea to be returned to the general prison population.

    Solitary confinement may well have had its intended effect, as she is reported to be very near to agreeing a plea deal with the prosecutors. This has some already salivating at what she might say:
     
    What a disgusting scumbag legal system.
    She has also not been allowed to see her parents. The pilot Yaroshenko, arrested in Liberia, probably infringing on some American creeps crimes, got stinged by the Americans for supposed drug smuggling.....and it took 8 years for his wife and daughter to be able to meet him in American prison
  243. @for-the-record
    PART II

    Ukraine president calls for Nato warships in Sea of Azov

    The Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, has called on Nato to deploy naval ships to the Sea of Azov to “provide security” amid a deepening crisis with Russia.

    Nato foreign ministers are due to meet next Monday in Brussels and will assess their existing presence in the area, but it is unlikely they will send warships to the area.

    The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, insisted there was no military solution, even after describing Moscow’s actions as unacceptable. She said she would be talking directly to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, at the G20 summit in Argentina, which starts on Friday.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/29/russia-blocked-ukrainian-azov-sea-ports-minister
     

    Either of those demands means war. Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation. But more likely, world war.

    Of course, most likely nothing will come out of this. But it’s again a crisis where insane demands (which, if implemented, would mean world war) are echoed in the media without a serious pushback, like the previous demands for military intervention and a no-fly zone in Syria. Hopefully the leadership never believes its rhetoric, but… it just creates an unhealthy environment where political leaders will try to steer closer to insanity lest they be called “weak” or “Putin’s poodles.” They might fully understand the risks (or they might not), but they will move a bit to the riskier side.

    • Replies: @AP

    Either of those demands means war.
     
    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won't happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy. And NATO is not going to force its ships under the Kerch bridge into the Azov sea because it, too, is not crazy.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.
     
    This too would be a crazy move.

    Of course, most likely nothing will come out of this.
     
    Correct.

    *I wonder if in a parallel move Russian ships will have to start getting searched or delayed before using the Bosphorus.
  244. @Jon0815

    The eastern parts of Ukraine were integrated with Donbas and this disruption has negatively affected those regions’ economies. It’s not a coincidence that parts of Ukraine further from the civil war zone have experienced higher economic growth than the national average.
     
    Ukraine chose to impose an economic blockade on Donbass. It can't use its own policy as an excuse for its economic failure.

    Also, I think a bigger factor is the distance from the Russian border, not from the war zone. Regions farther from the Russian border had fewer economic ties with Russia.

    1. The clusterf*ck that is Donbas has basically inured the people of Kharkiv against rebellion.

    2. A lot of the most pro-Russian elements from this region have already left. They have been replaced by pro-Ukrainian people who fled Donbas.

    3. Eastern Ukraine’s economy has lagged behind but it hasn’t been catastrophic as in Donbas itself.

    The place wasn’t interested in rebellion in 2014, it is even less interested now.
     
    The areas of Donbass that are occupied by Kiev are certainly not doing well (so the lesson for Kharkiv there, is that if you are going to rebel against Kiev, don't get reconquered). But we don't have GDP statistics for the D/LNR, so we don't really know how the rebel-controlled areas are doing. Probably Donetsk is still less wealthy relative to Kharkiv than it was in 2014, but I think it's likely that its per capita GDP is also growing significantly faster (given that annual Russian subsidies to the D/LNR are equal to something like 10-20% of their GDP). And there is a nontrivial chance that the D/LNR will become part of Russia within the next 10 years, which would certainly improve economic conditions there, as per capita GDP naturally converged with Russia's (much higher than Kharkiv's).

    Economically, Kharkiv's decision not to rebel was the right one in the short-term, but the medium to long-term remains to be seen.


    You claimed that it would be possible. What is the evidence for the claim you made?
     
    The fact that it has been the historical norm.

    I count at least 12 former Communist countries of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, who at some point since 1991 had a per capita GDP on par with 2016-2017 Ukraine (about $2500), and none of whom were EU members at the time: Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Serbia.

    Their average per capita growth rate at that PCGDP level was about 7%, with some (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan) reaching as high as 12-14% in a single year. Only Bulgaria averaged worse at that level than Ukraine's 2.8%.

    Granted, I believe the only other such country to be on par with Ukraine's current PCGDP within the past 10 years has been Moldova (from 2012-2017) and its average per capita growth over that period has been just under 4%. But that would be very thin evidence to support your claim, since Moldova's primary obstacle to growth, extreme corruption, is shared by Ukraine.

    About 3,000 homes in a city of 3 million had been without heating or hot water for several months as of October:
     
    Based on the anecdotal reports I've seen on twitter etc., the number of Kiev residents who have been without heating/hot water this fall for at least a week, would surely be >100,000. Earlier in the year, it was reported that 1/3rd of residential buildings in Kiev had no hot water at that time. I don't know how that compares to 2014 (or for that matter, to Donetsk in 2018).

    Ukraine chose to impose an economic blockade on Donbass. It can’t use its own policy as an excuse for its economic failure.

    It imposed the blockade due to Donbas being owned by rebels. Donbas is owned by rebels due to the Russian support for rebels.

    The areas of Donbass that are occupied by Kiev are certainly not doing well (so the lesson for Kharkiv there, is that if you are going to rebel against Kiev, don’t get reconquered). But we don’t have GDP statistics for the D/LNR, so we don’t really know how the rebel-controlled areas are doing

    AK posted data showing salaries in the rebel areas are now the lowest in Ukraine, lower than the poorest Kiev-held oblasts.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/ukrotriumph/

    Economically, Kharkiv’s decision not to rebel was the right one in the short-term, but the medium to long-term remains to be seen.

    Long-term indeed remains to be seen but short to medium term not rebelling has been a good idea. Four years after Maidan and nobody in Kharkiv wishes that his town were another Donetsk.

    Their average per capita growth rate at that PCGDP level was about 7%, with some (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan) reaching as high as 12-14% in a single year

    Ukraine had growth of 12.1% in 2004 and 7.9% in 2007.

    It’s a different world after 2008.

    Based on the anecdotal reports I’ve seen on twitter etc., the number of Kiev residents who have been without heating/hot water this fall for at least a week, would surely be >100,000. Earlier in the year, it was reported that 1/3rd of residential buildings in Kiev had no hot water at that time.

    It was 1/3 in June, 3,000 houses in late October.

    I don’t know how that compares to 2014 (or for that matter, to Donetsk in 2018).

    Nor do I. The point is that Ukraine (and Russia) has had such problems before and it is silly to single out such an episode now in Ukraine, and blame Maidan.

    • Replies: @Jon0815

    It imposed the blockade due to Donbas being owned by rebels. Donbas is owned by rebels due to the Russian support for rebels.
     
    But it didn't have to economically blockade the rebel territories, that was a choice. The Syrian government hasn't cut off trade with the territories held by US and Turkish proxies.

    AK posted data showing salaries in the rebel areas are now the lowest in Ukraine, lower than the poorest Kiev-held oblasts.
     

    Yes, according to that data, in 2017 DNR wages were 64% of the Ukrainian average, down from around 115% in 2013. However, DNR wages also grew by 22% in 2017. No word yet on DNR wage growth in 2018.

    It’s a different world after 2008.
     
    Based on what evidence? A sample size of Ukraine and Moldova?

    It was 1/3 in June, 3,000 houses in late October.
     
    You're comparing two different things: The number without heat at a particular point in time, vs. the number who have been without heat for months.

    Nor do I. The point is that Ukraine (and Russia) has had such problems before and it is silly to single out such an episode now in Ukraine, and blame Maidan.
     
    How well a country does at providing a basic service like heat in its capital city, doesn't seem to me like an irrelevant indicator of how well it is succeeding.
  245. @peterAUS

    The closing of the Bosphorus Strait for Russian ships could be an adequate response to Russia’s violation of international maritime law in the Sea of ​​Azov..
     
    I was going to comment on how CRAZY this sounds, but then saw who's said that.

    , Ukraine’s Naval Forces Commander Ihor Voronchenko has said.
     
    Moving on.

    There are two problems here. One is thee obvious, that the leadership of a large country is now warmongering for a world war. The other is that their propaganda claims are now uncritically repeated in the international media (and often echoed by influential pundits), which creates an unhealthy environment where politicians will be taking higher risks than they would otherwise be.

  246. @DreadIlk

    I specifically stated that it has been winning starting in 2016 – for about 3 years. Growth was 2.3% 2016, 2.5% 2017 and looks to be about 3% in 2018. All these figures are higher per capita.
     
    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp-per-capita-ppp We will use the scale that is most generous. So 2013 number 8338 goes to a low of 7464. And from that low you have a recovery to 7894. You still in the hole as a nation. To get growth off the low is not an achievement.

    You guess wrong as usual. Western and central regions experienced a much lower drop in 2014-2015:

    Given the growth rate from 2016 to 2018 they are well above what they were pre-Maidan.

    For example Lviv oblast from January to October this year has seen 20% increase in exports, 13.1% increase in pay (vs. 7.2% increase in consumer prices), 13% increase in construction, etc.:

    http://www.lv.ukrstat.gov.ua/

    If all of your news about Ukraine comes from people you know in Kharkiv than you don’t get a full picture of what is going on the country.
     
    You realize percent climbing down matter more than percent climbing up? Plus you haven't shown me real numbers yet per region other than one year snapshot that proves me right.

    Let's do an experiment 10% decline for one year then 3.3% growth for three what do you get?

    I'm not arguing that western Ukrainians are not better off then Eastern Ukrainians right this moment. But they are still worse off then if Maidan never happened. Furthermore as far as most Ukranians are concerned they would be better off if Lviv was being bombed right now instead of Donetsk and Lugansk.

    Ukraine had become stagnant before Maidan. .2% growth in 2012, 0% in 2013. It likely would have been around 1% per year. The pre-war economic model was basically to just coast on Soviet-built industry tied to Russia. Not much was reinvested, profits went to private accounts rather than spent on improvement, it was simply stagnation. Maidan disrupted the Soviet-era economy and regions dependent on it have suffered, but opened up new possibilities that have benefited other regions. There is a really booming IT industry, outsourcing as well as R & D, in Lviv nowadays.
     
    Russia and Ukraine were slated for a recession that year. IT industry is a service industry. It can't survive without manufacturing base. Also still would have been higher GDP PPP then it is post maidan even with shit numbers you give.

    Parts of 22 cities.

    Well according to Russian media in 2013 10% of Russian city apartments had no heating at all:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/
     
    That is not the point. Point is that this would not be happening now if Maidan did not happen. And if it's standard bs chronic problem Poroshenko would not be sweating and it would not be in national conversation.

    As far as Russia goes we not talking about Russia moot point. As others pointed out you don't know what is being talked about as in abandoned houses.

    You take Sharij seriously. How cute :-)

    So nobody anywhere else failed to clean first snow and nobody anywhere else or at any other time was sliding on ice :-)
     
    Yeah because unlike you he is not biased or retarded.

    And matter of fact others do fail to clean snow and it is bad in those cases too. This year it was particularly bad in Kiev.

    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp-per-capita-ppp We will use the scale that is most generous. So 2013 number 8338 goes to a low of 7464. And from that low you have a recovery to 7894.

    1. That was 2017. Recovery in 2018 (almost over) is greater than was in 2017. So in the country overall it is close to the level in 2013, and should surpass in 2019.

    2. I did not claim that Ukraine overall has recovered. I only stated that western and central regions have recovered, and are now higher than in 2013. They have as the figures you post prove.

    Let’s do an experiment 10% decline for one year then 3.3% growth for three what do you get?

    Well, Lviv had 5% decline 2014-2015 and lets assume national average (it is higher) 2.5% growth for three years (2016, 2017, 2018). What do you get?

    Zhytomir in central Ukraine has 1.2% total decline 2014-2015 and lets assume national average (it is higher) 2.5% growth for three years (2016, 2017, 2018). What do you get?

    Overall 12 Ukrainian oblasts had declines of less than 6% from 2014 to 2015, and national growth has been a little over 2.5% per year on average since that time. So presumably all 12 of these oblasts are ahead of where they were in 2013. Some of them are far ahead. These 12 oblasts are almost all in the center and west (Kherson is one exception) and were pro-Maidan. So Maidan worked for them.

    I’m not arguing that western Ukrainians are not better off then Eastern Ukrainians right this moment. But they are still worse off then if Maidan never happened.

    Nonsense. The numbers speak for themselves. Or if you don’t believe numbers look at new buildings and factories, growing companies, etc.

    IT industry is a service industry. It can’t survive without manufacturing base.

    You need steel mills to support IT industry?

    As far as Russia goes we not talking about Russia moot point. As others pointed out you don’t know what is being talked about as in abandoned houses.

    You present a problem that exists in both Russia and Ukraine and that existed in Ukriane before Maidan but blame Maidan.

    Also Russian media clears says it is not abandoned houses that are without heating. It is places where Russians live:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Tens of millions of Russians living in urban areas are struggling with a lack of basic utilities – 1 in 5 city dwellings have no hot water, and 1 in 10 no indoor sanitation.

    Russia’s Federal Statistics Service reported last year that more than a third of all Russians have no hot water and more than a fifth have no running water at all in their homes.

    So Russian Maidan?

    Now presumably, these houses are mostly not in the capital but in small post-industrial towns in the middle of nowhere. Still, it is silly to blame Maidan for a problem that is rather common in all post-Soviet areas.

    • Replies: @DreadIlk

    1. That was 2017. Recovery in 2018 (almost over) is greater than was in 2017. So in the country overall it is close to the level in 2013, and should surpass in 2019.

    2. I did not claim that Ukraine overall has recovered. I only stated that western and central regions have recovered, and are now higher than in 2013. They have as the figures you post prove.
     

    Even with 18 you have not recovered. Plus to be back where you started is hardly a win.

    Well, Lviv had 5% decline 2014-2015 and lets assume national average (it is higher) 2.5% growth for three years (2016, 2017, 2018). What do you get?

    Zhytomir in central Ukraine has 1.2% total decline 2014-2015 and lets assume national average (it is higher) 2.5% growth for three years (2016, 2017, 2018). What do you get?

    Overall 12 Ukrainian oblasts had declines of less than 6% from 2014 to 2015, and national growth has been a little over 2.5% per year on average since that time. So presumably all 12 of these oblasts are ahead of where they were in 2013. Some of them are far ahead. These 12 oblasts are almost all in the center and west (Kherson is one exception) and were pro-Maidan. So Maidan worked for them.
     

    Didn't those regions have fuck all in the first place? Sure they have won in relative terms. Not in absolute. Their standard of living would have been much higher had Maidan not happened. You showing me paltry percentage points off of insane low. Ukraine standard of living is utter shit. With this standard of living under truly liberalized regime you should be seeing 10% growth nationally not 2.5%.

    You need steel mills to support IT industry?
     
    Yes dummy. The fact that you can't grasp this explains a lot. Manufacturing base is what your exports are. It is much harder to export services. Your hard currency comes from physical things you sell others. Plus people need working pipes before they need w.e IT would pay. This is why you seeing the west struggling now because we are losing our manufacturing.

    You present a problem that exists in both Russia and Ukraine and that existed in Ukriane before Maidan but blame Maidan.

    Also Russian media clears says it is not abandoned houses that are without heating. It is places where Russians live:

    https://www.rt.com/news/russia-city-utilities-hot-water-indoor-plumbing-251/

    Tens of millions of Russians living in urban areas are struggling with a lack of basic utilities – 1 in 5 city dwellings have no hot water, and 1 in 10 no indoor sanitation.

    Russia’s Federal Statistics Service reported last year that more than a third of all Russians have no hot water and more than a fifth have no running water at all in their homes.

    So Russian Maidan?

    Now presumably, these houses are mostly not in the capital but in small post-industrial towns in the middle of nowhere. Still, it is silly to blame Maidan for a problem that is rather common in all post-Soviet areas.
     

    First fuck off with Russia. If you can't defend your self without pointing fingers you already lost. Second the problems got worse not better in Ukraine. That is the point.

    While we on subject of Russia nothing came up when searching their opposition sites about heating problems.

  247. @for-the-record
    Russian gun activist Maria Butina has been moved to solitary confinement in American prison

    Don't think this is correct, she has been in solitary confinement for quite a while, what happened recently is that a judge refused her lawyer's plea to be returned to the general prison population.

    Solitary confinement may well have had its intended effect, as she is reported to be very near to agreeing a plea deal with the prosecutors. This has some already salivating at what she might say:

    If Accused Russian Spy Maria Butina Sings, Here’s What She Might Tell the Feds

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/marina-butina-plea-agreement-coming/

    She could be put in prison for life for literally nothing. Really horrible.

  248. That’s…interesting

    Quantitative gassing. Could this be the thing that finally makes American LNG competitive in Europe?

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Electricity prices have gone negative in Europe repeatedly due to wind power and crappy regulation.

    Supply and demand.

    The negative gas price indicates it may be opportune for them to have someone buy off the gas rather than decrease production.

  249. @Mr. Hack
    I've never once suggested here or anywhere else that I'm a physician or any sort of a medical professional? Once again, you're displaying your loose handling of the facts, 'Mr. Professor'. :-)

    So, how was it really, that you weren't aware that a large GM plant was operating in your own backyard? You must be the real 'absent minded professor'. :-) :-)

    Well, maybe some other stuff Ukie here, like “AP”, made that claim. Hard to distinguish. Then it’s even more ridiculous considering comment diarrhea from that source.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Then it’s even more ridiculous considering comment diarrhea from that source.
     
    You better be careful, you know how you have a predisposition towards mixing up your facts. You might accept some diarrhea if presented to you, instead of some chocolate - they're both brown in color, you know. :-(
  250. @reiner Tor
    Either of those demands means war. Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation. But more likely, world war.

    Of course, most likely nothing will come out of this. But it’s again a crisis where insane demands (which, if implemented, would mean world war) are echoed in the media without a serious pushback, like the previous demands for military intervention and a no-fly zone in Syria. Hopefully the leadership never believes its rhetoric, but... it just creates an unhealthy environment where political leaders will try to steer closer to insanity lest they be called “weak” or “Putin’s poodles.” They might fully understand the risks (or they might not), but they will move a bit to the riskier side.

    Either of those demands means war.

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy. And NATO is not going to force its ships under the Kerch bridge into the Azov sea because it, too, is not crazy.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.

    This too would be a crazy move.

    Of course, most likely nothing will come out of this.

    Correct.

    *I wonder if in a parallel move Russian ships will have to start getting searched or delayed before using the Bosphorus.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy.
     
    It’s going to have to do something. A blockade is an act of war. Unless Russia admits that it is an aggressor itself, it will have to view NATO as putting it under illegal blockade. It’s easy to see how this could escalate out of control.


    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.
     
    This too would be a crazy move.
     
    Less crazy than starting a world war. That’s why I wrote “ideally.” Not because I welcome such a war.

    crazy
     
    The Ukrainian leadership is now proposing crazy things. The proposals are also uncritically repeated in the western media without serious criticism. (I.e. without being called crazy.) Which makes the Ukrainian leadership less crazy, but the West more crazy.

    Look. Legally speaking, the USSR had no right to crush the Hungarian revolution in 1956. But it was understood that it was on their side of the fence, and that it was a vital Soviet interest to keep Hungary in its sphere. And it’s a good thing that a world war was not started for Hungary. Ultimately, it was good for Hungary, too, because we’d have become a battlefield of this horrible world war. It’s better it didn’t happen.

    By not accepting the status quo (I’m not talking about a legal recognition, I’m talking about a simple tacit understanding that the Crimea now belongs to Russia and will belong there into the foreseeable future), while being unable to evict Russia from there (of course), the situation has become extremely unstable and volatile. Such crises are bound to happen in the future. One of those crises will turn out horribly badly for all of us.
  251. @AP

    Either of those demands means war.
     
    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won't happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy. And NATO is not going to force its ships under the Kerch bridge into the Azov sea because it, too, is not crazy.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.
     
    This too would be a crazy move.

    Of course, most likely nothing will come out of this.
     
    Correct.

    *I wonder if in a parallel move Russian ships will have to start getting searched or delayed before using the Bosphorus.

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy.

    It’s going to have to do something. A blockade is an act of war. Unless Russia admits that it is an aggressor itself, it will have to view NATO as putting it under illegal blockade. It’s easy to see how this could escalate out of control.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.

    This too would be a crazy move.

    Less crazy than starting a world war. That’s why I wrote “ideally.” Not because I welcome such a war.

    crazy

    The Ukrainian leadership is now proposing crazy things. The proposals are also uncritically repeated in the western media without serious criticism. (I.e. without being called crazy.) Which makes the Ukrainian leadership less crazy, but the West more crazy.

    Look. Legally speaking, the USSR had no right to crush the Hungarian revolution in 1956. But it was understood that it was on their side of the fence, and that it was a vital Soviet interest to keep Hungary in its sphere. And it’s a good thing that a world war was not started for Hungary. Ultimately, it was good for Hungary, too, because we’d have become a battlefield of this horrible world war. It’s better it didn’t happen.

    By not accepting the status quo (I’m not talking about a legal recognition, I’m talking about a simple tacit understanding that the Crimea now belongs to Russia and will belong there into the foreseeable future), while being unable to evict Russia from there (of course), the situation has become extremely unstable and volatile. Such crises are bound to happen in the future. One of those crises will turn out horribly badly for all of us.

    • Replies: @AP

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy.

    It’s going to have to do something. A blockade is an act of war.
     
    Whatever it does, it will not be a war against the West.

    It’s easy to see how this could escalate out of control.
     
    Russian and Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.

    This too would be a crazy move.

    Less crazy than starting a world war.
     
    Correct, but still too crazy to be done.

    The Ukrainian leadership is now proposing crazy things. The proposals are also uncritically repeated in the western media without serious criticism.
     
    They are mostly just ignored. Nobody seems to be saying - bring NATO boats into the Azov Sea.

    Look. Legally speaking, the USSR had no right to crush the Hungarian revolution in 1956. But it was understood that it was on their side of the fence, and that it was a vital Soviet interest to keep Hungary in its sphere. And it’s a good thing that a world war was not started for Hungary. Ultimately, it was good for Hungary, too, because we’d have become a battlefield of this horrible world war. It’s better it didn’t happen.
     
    Correct, and if Ukraine were God forbid invaded by Russia I would hope there would not be a world war because of it. Although making such aggression as unlikely and painful as possible (by supporting Ukraine with arms) would be a good idea.

    Hungary too, should have been provided with weapons and support (as was Vietnam by Soviets) to make the aggression hurt as much as possible, though events were too quick in Hungary for this to have been feasible.

    By not accepting the status quo (I’m not talking about a legal recognition, I’m talking about a simple tacit understanding that the Crimea now belongs to Russia and will belong there into the foreseeable future), while being unable to evict Russia from there (of course), the situation has become extremely unstable and volatile.
     
    Well, Cyprus has been fairly stable all these years.

    But building the bridge and then limiting shipping from Ukrainian ports was a very provocative act.

    Ideally some agreement will be worked out: monitored referendum, compensation for lost assets by Ukrainians, recognition of new status.
  252. @AnonFromTN
    Well, maybe some other stuff Ukie here, like “AP”, made that claim. Hard to distinguish. Then it’s even more ridiculous considering comment diarrhea from that source.

    Then it’s even more ridiculous considering comment diarrhea from that source.

    You better be careful, you know how you have a predisposition towards mixing up your facts. You might accept some diarrhea if presented to you, instead of some chocolate – they’re both brown in color, you know. :-(

  253. Reportedly, the 3 Ukraine ships attempted to circumnavigate Crimea.

    This was in a Reuters story. I can provide the link, but it now directs to another story.

  254. @reiner Tor

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy.
     
    It’s going to have to do something. A blockade is an act of war. Unless Russia admits that it is an aggressor itself, it will have to view NATO as putting it under illegal blockade. It’s easy to see how this could escalate out of control.


    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.
     
    This too would be a crazy move.
     
    Less crazy than starting a world war. That’s why I wrote “ideally.” Not because I welcome such a war.

    crazy
     
    The Ukrainian leadership is now proposing crazy things. The proposals are also uncritically repeated in the western media without serious criticism. (I.e. without being called crazy.) Which makes the Ukrainian leadership less crazy, but the West more crazy.

    Look. Legally speaking, the USSR had no right to crush the Hungarian revolution in 1956. But it was understood that it was on their side of the fence, and that it was a vital Soviet interest to keep Hungary in its sphere. And it’s a good thing that a world war was not started for Hungary. Ultimately, it was good for Hungary, too, because we’d have become a battlefield of this horrible world war. It’s better it didn’t happen.

    By not accepting the status quo (I’m not talking about a legal recognition, I’m talking about a simple tacit understanding that the Crimea now belongs to Russia and will belong there into the foreseeable future), while being unable to evict Russia from there (of course), the situation has become extremely unstable and volatile. Such crises are bound to happen in the future. One of those crises will turn out horribly badly for all of us.

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy.

    It’s going to have to do something. A blockade is an act of war.

    Whatever it does, it will not be a war against the West.

    It’s easy to see how this could escalate out of control.

    Russian and Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.

    This too would be a crazy move.

    Less crazy than starting a world war.

    Correct, but still too crazy to be done.

    The Ukrainian leadership is now proposing crazy things. The proposals are also uncritically repeated in the western media without serious criticism.

    They are mostly just ignored. Nobody seems to be saying – bring NATO boats into the Azov Sea.

    Look. Legally speaking, the USSR had no right to crush the Hungarian revolution in 1956. But it was understood that it was on their side of the fence, and that it was a vital Soviet interest to keep Hungary in its sphere. And it’s a good thing that a world war was not started for Hungary. Ultimately, it was good for Hungary, too, because we’d have become a battlefield of this horrible world war. It’s better it didn’t happen.

    Correct, and if Ukraine were God forbid invaded by Russia I would hope there would not be a world war because of it. Although making such aggression as unlikely and painful as possible (by supporting Ukraine with arms) would be a good idea.

    Hungary too, should have been provided with weapons and support (as was Vietnam by Soviets) to make the aggression hurt as much as possible, though events were too quick in Hungary for this to have been feasible.

    By not accepting the status quo (I’m not talking about a legal recognition, I’m talking about a simple tacit understanding that the Crimea now belongs to Russia and will belong there into the foreseeable future), while being unable to evict Russia from there (of course), the situation has become extremely unstable and volatile.

    Well, Cyprus has been fairly stable all these years.

    But building the bridge and then limiting shipping from Ukrainian ports was a very provocative act.

    Ideally some agreement will be worked out: monitored referendum, compensation for lost assets by Ukrainians, recognition of new status.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    You appear to be a man on the ground, so to speak, in Ukraine. Plenty of informative posts. Let's leave it there.

    And then..... this:

    .....Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.
     
    My bold.
    Key word: rational.....

    Lucky you.
    , @reiner Tor

    Hungary too, should have been provided with weapons and support (as was Vietnam by Soviets) to make the aggression hurt as much as possible, though events were too quick in Hungary for this to have been feasible.
     
    I thought about it, and I disagree. This war to the last Hungarian soldier would've resulted in a horrible avalanche of death and destruction in Hungary, while would've achieved nothing. The Hungarian People's Army disintegrated (its commanders were captured by the Soviets a day before the final Soviet attack when they invited them to "negotiate", and some of the senior generals were communist loyalists who went into hiding), so a serious military confrontation was out of the question anyway. The armed civilians posed a serious enough problem for the Soviet Army (which was more trained and equipped to handle the Third World War and was not really up to the task of subduing a large and hostile population without destroying the infrastructure (and thus the later chance to rule the country peacefully). They needed to bring in reinforcements from elsewhere. The Hungarian People's Army theoretically could've made the task even more difficult, so would've resulted in the further destruction of the infrastructure. (Which the Soviets wanted to avoid.) So it'd have been bad for the Soviets, but even worse for the Hungarians, and nothing would've been achieved.
  255. “Russia and Ukraine accused each other of breaking international law on Sunday after Russian border guards tried and failed to stop two Ukrainian armored artillery vessels circumnavigating Crimea en route to a Ukrainian port.”

    This link, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia/russia-and-ukraine-involved-in-black-sea-naval-standoff-idUSKCN1NU0DL – now links to this edited version … https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia/russia-and-ukraine-involved-in-black-sea-naval-standoff-idUSKCN1NU0DL with no reference to ‘circumnavigate’, in any form.

    Original Credits:
    ‘Russia and Ukraine involved in Black Sea naval standoff’, MOSCOW, Reuters, Reporting by Andrew Osborn; Editing by Mark Potter, WORLD NEWS, NOVEMBER 25, 2018 / 4:31 AM / UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia/russia-and-ukraine-involved-in-black-sea-naval-standoff-idUSKCN1NU0DL

    New Credits:
    ‘Russia fires on and seizes Ukrainian ships near annexed Crimea’, Andrew Osborn, Pavel Polityuk, MOSCOW/KIEV (Reuters), Additional reporting by Michelle Nichols in New York; Writing by Andrew Osborn; Editing by Richard Balmforth, David Gregorio and Paul Tait, WORLD NEWS NOVEMBER 25, 2018 / 4:31 AM / 2 DAYS AGO

  256. Obviously, I do not know the truth of the matter.

    But circumnavigating Crimea would be more provocative than passing by.

    Refusing to be boarded by the Russian Federation Coast Guard, would likely lead to an encounter with the Russian Federation Navy.

  257. @AP

    Russia is not going to get into a world war if the Bosphorus is shut to Russian shipping (which probably won’t happen anyways, unless Russia actually invades Ukraine).* It is not crazy.

    It’s going to have to do something. A blockade is an act of war.
     
    Whatever it does, it will not be a war against the West.

    It’s easy to see how this could escalate out of control.
     
    Russian and Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.

    Ideally, Russia just conquers Ukraine as a retaliation.

    This too would be a crazy move.

    Less crazy than starting a world war.
     
    Correct, but still too crazy to be done.

    The Ukrainian leadership is now proposing crazy things. The proposals are also uncritically repeated in the western media without serious criticism.
     
    They are mostly just ignored. Nobody seems to be saying - bring NATO boats into the Azov Sea.

    Look. Legally speaking, the USSR had no right to crush the Hungarian revolution in 1956. But it was understood that it was on their side of the fence, and that it was a vital Soviet interest to keep Hungary in its sphere. And it’s a good thing that a world war was not started for Hungary. Ultimately, it was good for Hungary, too, because we’d have become a battlefield of this horrible world war. It’s better it didn’t happen.
     
    Correct, and if Ukraine were God forbid invaded by Russia I would hope there would not be a world war because of it. Although making such aggression as unlikely and painful as possible (by supporting Ukraine with arms) would be a good idea.

    Hungary too, should have been provided with weapons and support (as was Vietnam by Soviets) to make the aggression hurt as much as possible, though events were too quick in Hungary for this to have been feasible.

    By not accepting the status quo (I’m not talking about a legal recognition, I’m talking about a simple tacit understanding that the Crimea now belongs to Russia and will belong there into the foreseeable future), while being unable to evict Russia from there (of course), the situation has become extremely unstable and volatile.
     
    Well, Cyprus has been fairly stable all these years.

    But building the bridge and then limiting shipping from Ukrainian ports was a very provocative act.

    Ideally some agreement will be worked out: monitored referendum, compensation for lost assets by Ukrainians, recognition of new status.

    You appear to be a man on the ground, so to speak, in Ukraine. Plenty of informative posts. Let’s leave it there.

    And then….. this:

    …..Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.

    My bold.
    Key word: rational…..

    Lucky you.

    • Replies: @AP

    You appear to be a man on the ground, so to speak, in Ukraine
     
    No, though I am in regular touch with family who are.

    Plenty of informative posts.
     
    Thank you, though I will be back at work tomorrow so volume will decrease.

    …..Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.

    My bold.
    Key word: rational…..

    Lucky you.
     
    Well, rational enough not to get into a nuclear war.
  258. …building the bridge and then limiting shipping from Ukrainian ports was a very provocative act

    If I recall the bridge was built because Kiev started to blockade utilities to Crimea and similar ‘provocations’. Once you have an expensive bridge, you have to protect it and that naturally means controls on what sails under it.

    One thing leads to another, people exaggerate, escalate and eventually we will hit a cul-de-sac and West will have to decide how much is holding on to Ukraine worth it.

    Your ‘ideally’ suggestions run into some basic issues: no Kiev government can in the next generation accept any referendums in Crimea or Donbas. Compensation is hard to calculate, e.g. Ukraine owes Russia some substantial sums, destruction in Donbas (who pays?).

    It will either become Cyprus-like (good outcome), or something will trigger an all out fight. If there is an all out war, West only has two choices: start a WWIII over it, or watch Russia prevail. Intelligence is often defined as being able to see a few steps ahead. By that standard both the enthusiastic Maidanistas and their Obama-led supporters will be seen in history as among the dumbest groups in early 21st century. And having an IT call center outside Lviv where people make 1k/month doesn’t quite compensate for that level of stupidity.

    • Replies: @AP

    If I recall the bridge was built because Kiev started to blockade utilities to Crimea and similar ‘provocations’.
     
    From wiki:

    In 2010, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed an agreement to build a bridge across the Kerch Strait.[29] Russia and Ukraine signed a memorandum of mutual understanding on the construction of the bridge on 26 November 2010.

    Your ‘ideally’ suggestions run into some basic issues: no Kiev government can in the next generation accept any referendums in Crimea or Donbas.
     
    Not in 5 years but possible in 10.

    Compensation is hard to calculate, e.g. Ukraine owes Russia some substantial sums, destruction in Donbas (who pays?).
     
    Let's limit to Crimea. It is not too hard too calculate. Value property and assets owned by Ukrainian people or companies that were taken from them can be assessed.

    Here is an example:

    https://www.kyivpost.com/business/oschadbank-wins-case-against-russia-to-recover-1-3-billion-over-lost-crimean-assets.html

    Intelligence is often defined as being able to see a few steps ahead.
     
    Yes, beyond 2014 and 2015.

    By that standard both the enthusiastic Maidanistas and their Obama-led supporters will be seen in history as among the dumbest groups in early 21st century.
     
    Because the Maidan-supporting parts of Ukraine are doing better than they ever have, and most likely better than they would have had there been no Maidan. Prior to Maidan Ukraine was run by and for its Soviet-era elites focused on its eastern regions. How did the country to under those conditions? It fell very far behind.

    And having an IT call center outside Lviv where people make 1k/month
     
    You think that is all that has changed for the better? LOL.
  259. @peterAUS
    You appear to be a man on the ground, so to speak, in Ukraine. Plenty of informative posts. Let's leave it there.

    And then..... this:

    .....Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.
     
    My bold.
    Key word: rational.....

    Lucky you.

    You appear to be a man on the ground, so to speak, in Ukraine

    No, though I am in regular touch with family who are.

    Plenty of informative posts.

    Thank you, though I will be back at work tomorrow so volume will decrease.

    …..Western leadership are too rational to get into a hot war with each other.

    My bold.
    Key word: rational…..

    Lucky you.

    Well, rational enough not to get into a nuclear war.

    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Well, rational enough not to get into a nuclear war.
     
    Ah, you see, they don't think it would come to that, should they try to escalate confrontation with Russia/China/whoever.

    When you look at the history of modern warfare, say, from 1861 to as we speak, it's hard to see ONE war that got executed as those starting it wished and expected.

    And, I see this latest crop of Western leaders not in the same league as even those up to fall of The Wall.

    I am quite positive that we'll see, sooner or later, renewal of hostilities in Ukraine/Donbass.

    Worst case scenario: mauling of Ukrainian armed forces with heavy sanctions etc. imposed on Russia.
    The thing is is that automatic increase of combat readiness of nuclear forces, of all the major players, in the case of serious conventional clash. One mistake, human or/and technological and we could have a BIG problem.
  260. @Beckow

    ...building the bridge and then limiting shipping from Ukrainian ports was a very provocative act
     
    If I recall the bridge was built because Kiev started to blockade utilities to Crimea and similar 'provocations'. Once you have an expensive bridge, you have to protect it and that naturally means controls on what sails under it.

    One thing leads to another, people exaggerate, escalate and eventually we will hit a cul-de-sac and West will have to decide how much is holding on to Ukraine worth it.

    Your 'ideally' suggestions run into some basic issues: no Kiev government can in the next generation accept any referendums in Crimea or Donbas. Compensation is hard to calculate, e.g. Ukraine owes Russia some substantial sums, destruction in Donbas (who pays?).

    It will either become Cyprus-like (good outcome), or something will trigger an all out fight. If there is an all out war, West only has two choices: start a WWIII over it, or watch Russia prevail. Intelligence is often defined as being able to see a few steps ahead. By that standard both the enthusiastic Maidanistas and their Obama-led supporters will be seen in history as among the dumbest groups in early 21st century. And having an IT call center outside Lviv where people make 1k/month doesn't quite compensate for that level of stupidity.

    If I recall the bridge was built because Kiev started to blockade utilities to Crimea and similar ‘provocations’.

    From wiki:

    In 2010, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed an agreement to build a bridge across the Kerch Strait.[29] Russia and Ukraine signed a memorandum of mutual understanding on the construction of the bridge on 26 November 2010.

    Your ‘ideally’ suggestions run into some basic issues: no Kiev government can in the next generation accept any referendums in Crimea or Donbas.

    Not in 5 years but possible in 10.

    Compensation is hard to calculate, e.g. Ukraine owes Russia some substantial sums, destruction in Donbas (who pays?).

    Let’s limit to Crimea. It is not too hard too calculate. Value property and assets owned by Ukrainian people or companies that were taken from them can be assessed.

    Here is an example:

    https://www.kyivpost.com/business/oschadbank-wins-case-against-russia-to-recover-1-3-billion-over-lost-crimean-assets.html

    Intelligence is often defined as being able to see a few steps ahead.

    Yes, beyond 2014 and 2015.

    By that standard both the enthusiastic Maidanistas and their Obama-led supporters will be seen in history as among the dumbest groups in early 21st century.

    Because the Maidan-supporting parts of Ukraine are doing better than they ever have, and most likely better than they would have had there been no Maidan. Prior to Maidan Ukraine was run by and for its Soviet-era elites focused on its eastern regions. How did the country to under those conditions? It fell very far behind.

    And having an IT call center outside Lviv where people make 1k/month

    You think that is all that has changed for the better? LOL.

    • Replies: @Beckow
    MOU is not a contract - the bridge started in 2015 after Kiev started to blockade Crimea. There is an MOU to build another 'Panama Canal' through Nicaragua - it has been there for 25 years and nobody s building anything. MOU is a statement of intent (and good will).

    Prior to Maidan Ukraine was run by and for its Soviet-era elites focused on its eastern regions.
     
    Nonsense. In 2005-10 it was run by Yushenko and an almost identical Western Ukrainian group to Maidan people. How quickly you forget when convenient. 10 years before Maidan there was an 'Orange' Revolution.

    Damages are impossible to calculate. Who will pay for the blockade of Crimea? Who will pay for the 25 years of under-investment in Crimea? And the pensions in Crimea that were taken over by the Russian state?
  261. @Beckow
    I agree that arguing these points today is pointless, let's wait 3-5 years (10 if you prefer).

    One of the strongest cards Kiev has is to use Trump's persuasive powers to convince Putin to blink or to at least stand aside. Given known Kremlin propensities to prefer inaction and their risk-averse nature, having Trump repeat it personally is an overall plus for Kiev. Trump not meeting Putin is in my view a loss for Poroshenko.

    There is no agreement possible, the sides are too confrontational. This will come down to mutually-assured long lasting pain (mostly economical) and eventually might resolve itself in a classical blow-up. In a blow-up the strongest guy present usually wins. It is by no means certain, West will be present, that leaves an obvious conclusion that Russia will benefit from the coming confrontation.

    By the way, the main reason for the Western Roman Empire's collapse were unsustainable and growing levels of debt. That fed the pervasive corruption, the debts were effectively the 'wealth' of the elite, but they were mostly un-collectable. Corruption was used as one way to get around that - to cash out so to speak. But the underlying issue was that two or more claimants existed on all productive activity, the producer and the multiple creditors - that always leads to an increase in corruption. Corruption is a short-cut when institutions can no longer function. We are heading to a similar situation.

    One of the strongest cards Kiev has is to use Trump’s persuasive powers to convince Putin to blink or to at least stand aside. Given known Kremlin propensities to prefer inaction and their risk-averse nature, having Trump repeat it personally is an overall plus for Kiev. Trump not meeting Putin is in my view a loss for Poroshenko.

    Trump responds very well to flattery and Putin knows what he is doing, so keeping them apart is a win for Poroshenko.

    • Replies: @Jon0815

    Trump responds very well to flattery and Putin knows what he is doing, so keeping them apart is a win for Poroshenko.
     
    Trump responds to flattery by saying nice things about the person flattering him, not with actions.

    He's practically sounded in love with Kim Jong-Un, but continues to make completely unrealistic demands of North Korea before any lifting of sanctions.

    He got along well with Putin at Helsinki, then hit Russia with more sanctions.

    If Putin had any sense, he would stay far away from Trump. As we saw after Helsinki, whenever they appear on camera together, with Trump acting friendly towards Putin, this will send the US media and political establishment into paroxysms of rage, and trigger the introduction of new sanctions bills in Congress.
  262. @AP

    Ukraine chose to impose an economic blockade on Donbass. It can’t use its own policy as an excuse for its economic failure.
     
    It imposed the blockade due to Donbas being owned by rebels. Donbas is owned by rebels due to the Russian support for rebels.

    The areas of Donbass that are occupied by Kiev are certainly not doing well (so the lesson for Kharkiv there, is that if you are going to rebel against Kiev, don’t get reconquered). But we don’t have GDP statistics for the D/LNR, so we don’t really know how the rebel-controlled areas are doing
     
    AK posted data showing salaries in the rebel areas are now the lowest in Ukraine, lower than the poorest Kiev-held oblasts.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/ukrotriumph/

    Economically, Kharkiv’s decision not to rebel was the right one in the short-term, but the medium to long-term remains to be seen.
     
    Long-term indeed remains to be seen but short to medium term not rebelling has be