Sooo....no talk on Kiev's gradual descent into Mad Max beyond Thunderdome status??

2Quik4UHoes

Why you had to go?
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
63,038
Reputation
18,150
Daps
233,679
Reppin
Norfeast groovin…
I thought Bush was the one who staarted that whole Georgia confict :mjpls:

I remember seeing this young Girl comin' on foxnews saying how russia actually helped them. Foxnews achor was like: ":merchant: lets go to break" :heh:



Nah, the Georgians attacked parts of Russia and were killing Russians in Georgia so Putin sent the troops there was already blood on the ground before shyt started.
 

gho3st

plata or plomo
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
34,371
Reputation
2,745
Daps
82,262
Reppin
2016
A lot of those people don't even know what's goin on to be so gung ho about gettin involved. Europe isn't gonna step up to help Ukraine if this turns into war, them and the US were a little too early in their celebrations as well as naive to believe that Moscow would just accept what happened. If the opposition stuck with the Feb 21st agreement none of this would be going on. Since the opposition felt tough enough to declare themselves as in charge, Putin felt tough enough to test just how in charge they really are. :ehh:
At some point russia was going to draw a line. I guess that time is now. :manny:


Nah, the Georgians attacked parts of Russia and were killing Russians in Georgia so Putin sent the troops there was already blood on the ground before shyt started.
I know. What im saying is that there were reports of non-georgian forces in georgia's army. .
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
305,925
Reputation
-34,254
Daps
616,199
Reppin
The Deep State
From reddit:

Avien [+1] 306 points 4 hours ago* (359|54)

This is entirely speculation on my part, though I think I've read enough to make an informed opinion.

Russia was cool with Yanukovych being in power. He scuttled the talks of Ukraine joining the EU. And he approved the extension of the loan of the naval base in Crimea to Russia for another 25 years back in 2010.

I think Russia invading Ukraine is 100% a geopolitical move. Knowing that Ukraine favored talks of joining the EU, Russia would lose a buffer state and a critical base in the Black Sea. It's no surprise that the first part of Ukraine they invade is Crimea since that has the largest geopolitical importance to Russia.

Any further invasion into Ukraine will probably be an attempt to show influence in the region, and to keep it from joining with the west. The west would probably immediately try to set up bases in the Ukraine. There was speculation that the U.S. would want to set up missile defense systems in the region. They would probably give Ukraine oil/natural gas for these bases since Russia would immediately revoke their foreign aid if Ukraine sided with the west. Western bases in Ukraine would also effectively place the western foreign powers on Putin's doorstep.

So before any of this can or could happen, Putin sees an opportunity in political instability in Ukraine and makes the first move to invade.
 

Ohnoits

All Star
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
4,004
Reputation
200
Daps
6,318
Reppin
NULL
Ukraine's revolutionaries lost; everyone knows that if the military does not side with you it's over-but to make matters even worse, they side with the invaders :smh:
 

Leasy

Let's add some Alizarin Crimson & Van Dyke Brown
Supporter
Joined
Jun 17, 2012
Messages
44,626
Reputation
4,407
Daps
96,961
Reppin
Philly (BYRD GANG)
From reddit:

Avien [+1] 306 points 4 hours ago* (359|54)

This is entirely speculation on my part, though I think I've read enough to make an informed opinion.

Russia was cool with Yanukovych being in power. He scuttled the talks of Ukraine joining the EU. And he approved the extension of the loan of the naval base in Crimea to Russia for another 25 years back in 2010.

I think Russia invading Ukraine is 100% a geopolitical move. Knowing that Ukraine favored talks of joining the EU, Russia would lose a buffer state and a critical base in the Black Sea. It's no surprise that the first part of Ukraine they invade is Crimea since that has the largest geopolitical importance to Russia.

Any further invasion into Ukraine will probably be an attempt to show influence in the region, and to keep it from joining with the west. The west would probably immediately try to set up bases in the Ukraine. There was speculation that the U.S. would want to set up missile defense systems in the region. They would probably give Ukraine oil/natural gas for these bases since Russia would immediately revoke their foreign aid if Ukraine sided with the west. Western bases in Ukraine would also effectively place the western foreign powers on Putin's doorstep.

So before any of this can or could happen, Putin sees an opportunity in political instability in Ukraine and makes the first move to invade.

This is basically what was happening before Russia came to the scene.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
305,925
Reputation
-34,254
Daps
616,199
Reppin
The Deep State
TheLostBigBoss 196 points 4 hours ago* (246|50)

Basically this.

This isn't Russia/Putin trying to "Show dominance and restory former Soviet glory".

It's Russia going for broke. They don't have any other moves to keep that naval base, the new government, no matter how much Russia denies it's existence, would break that lease and Russia would be shyt out of luck.

It's desperation.

EDIT: Also, people should remember this. Russia still sees the ousted Ukraine president as the holder of the office. Yanukovych gave Russia permission to enter Crimea, so by Russian's PoV it's not an invasion.

--------------------


–]MixMixBrad [+2] 72 points 3 hours ago (90|18)

Why would Russia lose their base exactly? The Ukraine already signed an agreement to keep it well into 2035. I don't recall anyone in Ukraine calling to break their agreements and ruin their credibility.


------------------------

CSFFlame 140 points 3 hours ago (179|39)


They would revoke it. Russia might have been able to keep it if they behaved, but they just invaded Ukraine.

Ukraine will not trust Russia anymore and certainly won't want any Russian military in Ukraine.

Hell, Russia violated the anti-nuke treaty by invading.
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,385
Daps
32,640
Reppin
humans
Cold War never ended, it just took a break. Russia is reloading. Obviously, Russia is nowhere near the level it once was, but I'd argue that the Combination of Russia and China are damn near there. They share a lot of common interests.

Syria, Iran, Africa, Ukraine... The Proxies are heating up again.

Hopefully detente will prevail at the beginning this time.
 

FaTaL

Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
101,635
Reputation
4,917
Daps
203,064
Reppin
NULL
If ole buddy comes back to office A LOT of people are going to be executed/jailed :whoo:

he is gonna be back in power to restore stability to ukraine, he'll be putins puppet but at least he'll get his job back

those opposition people better high tail it out of there, there gonna end up being executed or worse spend the rest of their lives in hard labor camps in siberia
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
305,925
Reputation
-34,254
Daps
616,199
Reppin
The Deep State
from reddit:


ManyBeasts (374|69)

A lot of unnecessary drama in here.

The situation from Russia's perspective:

Primarily Russia is securing the future of the Black Sea Fleet, in case the Ukrainian hardline Nationalists decide to break the treaty and take the Russian naval bases in Crimea. Base reinforcement was a preventative measure to nip any such action in the bud. Had Putin not done so and if the new Ukrainian government was foolish enough to take it by force (as some were suggesting) then there would have been an unavoidable war. Russia NEEDS warm water ports in Europe, this has been the the historical catalyst for over a dozen wars for Russia, under no circumstances will they give up their naval bases in Crimea. A show of strength is intended to show their commitment to keeping those bases. That is the bottom line of this situation, the ports must stay at all costs.

Naturally Russia is not happy with the turnout of the Ukrainian revolution. The way it sees it, a violent nationalist opposition overthrew the pro-Russian majority elected President of their close neighbor and ally. As a result a significant (ethnically and politically Russian) segment of the Ukrainian population now finds itself without due representation in government. In response Crimea, a historically and ethnically Russian region, declared autonomy from the "usurper" government in Kiev. A new government that through both action and rhetoric has shown that it is both volatile and not opposed to using violence to silence its pro-Russian opposition, something that they themselves condemned when it suited them. The Crimean administration has requested Russian troops stationed in Ukraine for protection from an otherwise likely attempts by the Kiev government to violently put down the Crimean revolt until the situation stabilizes.

Now this is where the situation could have got messy. A pro-Russian"wannabe" breakaway state (at least on paper), with a majority ethnically Russian populace, being threatened with violence right on Russia's own doorstep. The situation is starting to mirror the lead up to the 2008 Russian-Georgian war. However Russia has learned from that conflict and has altered their preventative doctrine accordingly. Instead of waiting for Ukraine to attack Crimea and then inevitably counterattacking, Russia laid out its cards on the table by deploying their forces within and outside of Ukrain. Through doing so they hope to cower the Ukrainian government into inaction and avoiding war in the process.

Neither side wants a war. The only way it could happen is through rash and foolish action undertaken by volatile elements in an attempt to get an easy win where there is none. In 2008 South Ossetia looked like an "easy win" for Georgia and many paid dearly for that illusion. If prior to troop mobilization Sevastopol and other Crimean bases looked "easy" then now they most certainly do not. Using Russian troops for protection of key points of infrastructure such as the Simferopol airport only strengthens their ability to protect the interests of Russia and the Crimean people.

Russia is being very cautious in how it chooses to proceed. So far Russia is following the existing treaties to the letter. No breach of any kind has so far taken place, despite all the media sensationalism. Note that the troops defending the Simferopol airport intentionally don't have magazines in their rifles and no armour has been deployed, their presence around the airport in the current manner does not legally constitute an act of aggression or occupation. They are legally there as an informal peace keeping force. Russian troops are present around the airport, but officially they are not the ones controlling it, the Crimeans are running the show, at least on paper. The Russian troops are currently there in a role of an enabling shield, not a sword. Russian bases have been reinforced within the levels permitted by the 1994 treaty and their troop movements both within and outside of Ukraine are legally in the clear. Russia is taking every step to ensure that they are toeing the line of international laws and treaties.

Although Putin has obtained Duma's approval to deploy troops in Ukraine, so far it is held as a chip to strengthen the Russian position. A chip that has not been cashed in. Doing so without Ukrainian provocation would undermine the Russian position. Russia already has over 20,000 troops legally present within Ukraine. Double the force that was used to defeat Georgia.

In essence this tells us several things about Russian intention:

1) Such caution is not indicative of a country that set out to illegally annex Ukraine. Even without warnings from Western Powers such action would have made no sense for Russia.

2) Russia aims to remove Ukraine's ability to silence the Crimean opposition by force, by legally deploying troops around key Crimean access points and reinforcing their bases Russia is placing their own forces as a buffer between the pro-Russian Crimean opposition and potential use of Ukrainian forces to regain control of Crimea. A Russian show of strength on Ukrainian border is meant to signal to Ukraine that trying to force Russia out of Crimea will have serious consequences. The potential for Russia to instantly pour pre-approved troops into Ukraine further leverages Kiev away from seeking a military resolution.

3) Without the option to use force Ukraine will have to rely solely diplomatic means in order to negotiate with the Crimean opposition. This is greatly advantageous to Russia, the heavy pro-Russian sentiment of the population forms a Win-Win-Win scenario with the following outcomes:

WIN 1: Russia get to use its political leverage over Crimea to ensure that the Black Sea Fleet stays in Crimea in return for facilitating the reintegration of Crimea into Ukraine.

+

WIN 2: In doing so Crimean and other pro-Russian views will have to be represented within the new government, thus Russia regains a portion of its political influence in Ukraine.

or

Win 3: Crimea agrees to split away from Ukraine following the March referendum, joining Russia as a fully or semi-autonomous region.

Russia has its foot in the door, thus Ukraine is forced to respect the rights of the Crimean people. The only way Russia loses out is if Ukraine attacks, in that event everyone loses. Russia has been trying to prevent that from happening by flexing muscles to show that any such attack would be suicide.

tl,dr: Russia wants to keep the naval bases in Ukraine as the bottom line, protect the ethnic Russian population and to force the Ukrainian government to seek diplomatic solution in regard to Crimea. Through doing so they either regain some of their political influence within the new Ukrainian government or gain control of Crimea outright. All without firing a single shot.
 

2Quik4UHoes

Why you had to go?
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
63,038
Reputation
18,150
Daps
233,679
Reppin
Norfeast groovin…
TheLostBigBoss 196 points 4 hours ago* (246|50)

Basically this.

This isn't Russia/Putin trying to "Show dominance and restory former Soviet glory".

It's Russia going for broke. They don't have any other moves to keep that naval base, the new government, no matter how much Russia denies it's existence, would break that lease and Russia would be shyt out of luck.

It's desperation.

EDIT: Also, people should remember this. Russia still sees the ousted Ukraine president as the holder of the office. Yanukovych gave Russia permission to enter Crimea, so by Russian's PoV it's not an invasion.

--------------------


–]MixMixBrad [+2] 72 points 3 hours ago (90|18)

Why would Russia lose their base exactly? The Ukraine already signed an agreement to keep it well into 2035. I don't recall anyone in Ukraine calling to break their agreements and ruin their credibility.


------------------------

CSFFlame 140 points 3 hours ago (179|39)


They would revoke it. Russia might have been able to keep it if they behaved, but they just invaded Ukraine.

Ukraine will not trust Russia anymore and certainly won't want any Russian military in Ukraine.

Hell, Russia violated the anti-nuke treaty by invading.

But Crimea is already semi-autonomous and self governing as is. Plus with an upcoming referendum to further increase this independence it'll keep the Russian bases out of Kiev's influence. I don't see this as Russia going for broke so much as I see it as a challenge to what they believe to be an illegitimate regime which has destabilized Ukraine. Plus lesbianas, Putin's plan for a Eurasian bloc to rival the EU would be ruined if Ukraine fell through his grasps. If he's set to make that economic bloc a reality then the new regime in Kiev better fall back....only problem is they don't run the streets in Kiev the mobs of protesters do.

The opposition overplayed its hand and Putin just put them in an even worse position knowing the EU/US would be reluctant to intervene. :ld:
 

Leasy

Let's add some Alizarin Crimson & Van Dyke Brown
Supporter
Joined
Jun 17, 2012
Messages
44,626
Reputation
4,407
Daps
96,961
Reppin
Philly (BYRD GANG)
Cold War never ended, it just took a break. Russia is reloading. Obviously, Russia is nowhere near the level it once was, but I'd argue that the Combination of Russia and China are damn near there. They share a lot of common interests.

Syria, Iran, Africa, Ukraine... The Proxies are heating up again.

Hopefully detente will prevail at the beginning this time.

Yeah Russia trying to reach deals with Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua about using their airfields when the time is needed.
 
Top