Go back and read what I said. The claim is 50,000 on Ukraine's borders. If true, that would be a pretty massive serious of bases. So where are the pics of anything other than regular stuff around Rostov as part of Russia's Southern district. Then there are the seperate claims of 9,000+ Russians inside Ukraine, which would be in addition to any seperatist fighters. Again where is the evidence?
Yet you seem to swallow these claims wholesale.
you're either just dumb or willfully not reading my post .
Where did I say I believe the 50,000 or 10,000 figure ? you are the only one mentioning these figures . come on just show me where ? I have said till I'm blue in the face that I don't believe these figures so tell me how I am swallowing these claims .
Even you now believe there are some Russian soldiers in the Ukraine ...so I could accuse you of swallowing the Ukraine's propaganda.
Putin's regime is built on sand. The price of oil is collapsing, the rouble is collapsing and the Russian economy is not nearly diversified enough.
According to some posters on here Putin has done wonders for Russia ..They also believe the Russian economy is in fine shape and that Its a powerhouse.
Putin's regime is built on sand. The price of oil is collapsing, the rouble is collapsing and the Russian economy is not nearly diversified enough.
Not a problem. It could always just increase gas prices to the EU. Winter is coming... But oil's only back to 2009 prices, least we forget. It may not seem that way given there's been no sign of any reduction in prices that were increased due to 'rising energy costs'.
You really haven't read the rules here, have you? So more insults from you..
But to avoid further confusion, just how many active duty Russian troops do you think there are in combat in Ukraine... And state your sources..
If you feel I have slighted you them please do get me banned for a day . It would just prove that some posters don't really believe in freedoms and are happy to have people banned .
I don't know the figure but then neither do you . But we both agree there are some Russian Troops in Ukraine.
You've moved from the position of there are no Russian troops to there are some but not the 50,000 or 10,000 figure . I'm glad you seem to now realise that I never mentioned or supported the figures of 50 or 10 k - though I doubt you will apologise for constantly suggesting I agree with these figures .Its taken a while but you now seem to accept that there are Russian troops in the Ukraine. Unless of course you now want to change your mind again .
I don't know the figure but then neither do you . But we both agree there are some Russian Troops in Ukraine.
I doubt we do. See my previous comment-
Be clear what you mean. There probably are, just as there are British, American and other foreign military people in Ukraine, ie people who volunteered for the Ukrainian militias.
There are British soldiers in Ukraine. They're training the Ukrainians. There may be Russian soldiers doing the same thing. There are a lot of ex-Russian soldiers, ex-Soviet soldiers and even ex-UA soldiers. It's all a bit of a mess..
I'm glad you seem to now realise that I never mentioned or supported the figures of 50 or 10 k - though I doubt you will apologise for constantly suggesting I agree with these figures
I never suggested you did. But you appear to have some comprehension difficulties. I keep pointing out that was a claim made by Poroshenko via the Bbc. I've asked you if you believed the numbers are plausible, and you can't or won't answer.
Erm but we do . We both agree that there are Russian Troops in the Ukraine unless you want to change your mind ??- two posters both saying the same thing is agreeing ?t
Be clear what you mean. There probably are, just as there are British, American and other foreign military people in Ukraine, ie people who volunteered for the Ukrainian militias.
There are British soldiers in Ukraine. They're training the Ukrainians. There may be Russian soldiers doing the same thing. There are a lot of ex-Russian soldiers, ex-Soviet soldiers and even ex-UA soldiers. It's all a bit of a mess..
I'm sure there are British Military personel in the Ukraine as there are US and Nato "observers" . ! Of course there are Russian patriots who are ex military there. But also Like the UK , US and Nato there are current Russian troops in the Ukraine - your attempt to blur and change the emphasis to Ex service men is a tad obvious .
I never suggested you did. But you appear to have some comprehension difficulties. I keep pointing out that was a claim made by Poroshenko via the Bbc. I've asked you if you believed the numbers are plausible, and you can't or won't answer.
Oh I think its you have a problem with Comprehension . I've told you several times I don't believe these figures - Several times but you keep asking the same question. Please read my posts .
Well if we can't have Russia invading sovereign countries to "protect civilians" we'll need to agree to stop doing it as well.
So if the Russians use a false reason, no one else can ever use it as a true reason?
So more more Iraqs or Libyas or Afghanistans. Our quasi-annexing of Libya was no more justified than the Russian one in Crimea. Although the West has always been shrewder by installing local puppet regimes rather than take official control ourselves, it still doesn't make it right. Russia could have chose to make a big deal of our invasion of Libya, they could have said what gives the West the right to try and conquer other countries to expand it's empire. Before you say that Libya was about protecting civilians, that's the same justification Russia used for Crimea.
What is the "quasi-annexing of Libya" supposed to be about?
In any case, it was much more the Soviet Union that had puppet regimes than the West.
So what about the Baltic States, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Germany, Belgium & The Netherland.
Should we not ensure that these countries are not taken over by Russia as well.
Yes, we defend these countries as part of NATO, but within NATO, groups of countries are getting together themselves for deeper co-operation - including Poland with the Baltic States. It makes sense, because NATO is unwieldy as a single entity.
That's why I was suggesting increased co-operation with the Scandis (2 of whom aren't in NATO, but probably ought to be, certainly more than Ukraine).
The idea that the Americans want to dominate Russia is just Russian paranoia, and part of the mythology of the anti-american left. .. Russia was pennyless, and pretty much defenceless for years after the end of the Cold War. It was left alone, no one attacked it.The idea that President Obama is some sort of meglomaniac empire builder, trying to do what Reagan, and Bushes 1 and 2 didn't is just totally untenable . he couldn't have tried harder to appease Russia. Russia took nearly 20 years to recover. Its been building up its military and seeking to restore its power, and pride, for the last decade. Its now begun to flex its muscles more, as its rebuilt them. . Thats been partly to stop its position getting worse, and partly to stop countries, it regards as its territory, from moving into NATO and the EU.
Obama is now the lamest of lame ducks. He has his pet projects - rapprochement with Cuba, the one-sided nuclear deal with Iran - but beyond that, foreign policy has been taken over by the Neocons: Joe Biden (influenced by his son's business activities in Ukraine), Victoria Nuland, Ash Carter, Pentagon officials and generals like Breedlove. Obama and Kerry are undermined at every turn.
The one thing Obama has done is to so far reject the shrill calls to 'ARM UKRAINE!' which come from John McCain on a regular basis. But it seems like McCain has the whole of Congress drugged up or something, these motions are passed almost unanimously, it feels like there is no-one allowed to dispute the idea and it's become almost a form of McCarthyism. I worry though that if a full scale war does break out again - and we all know Minsk is unworkable, and will break down in the autumn when the DPR hold their rigged elections that Ukraine won't accept - McCain's coalition will be too powerful even for Obama to stop.
I do believe that if McCain had been President, we'd have already had WW3 and maybe none of us would be writing any of these posts - he is that dangerous. Anyone who seriously considered Palin as a viable VP is clearly not right. I just don't understand why this Senate Armed Services committee post he holds seems to still give him so much power and influence.
(OT, but Google John McCain and ISIS - eye-opening for a so-called US patriot).
It was never an issue before Yanukovych was deposed. USA has given them no choice, really. But Germany certainly don't want them in NATO.
This is the big issue I think. So the coup started out with perhaps the best intentions. Nuland and co picking 'Yats' and their dream team to replace Yanukovych, and what they thought of the EU is now a matter of public record.
Fast forward a bit and we've had the Ukrainian militias and their antics. Azov's flag has absolutely nothing to do with the 'black sun'. Wolfsangels also popular with Azov, the SNA, Svoboda, Pravy Sector, Patriot of Ukraine.. And if people think Putin might be homophobic, they should listen to the wisdom of Biletsky, Zbitnyev, Yarosh etc..
But those are the people we're supporting. We now have troops in Ukraine training their military. We keep getting told we should supply Ukraine with more lethal weapons. Yey! Let's ship arms and train people who consider Stepan Bandera a war hero..
And then there's the Ukrainian economy, or lack thereof. Much like Ukraines physical gold, it appears to have evaporated. As has much of it's population, especially those young and bright enough to get work abroad.
And then there's decisions like making Mikheil Saakashvili governor of Odessa. And making him Ukrainian instead of Georgian, because the Georgians want him on criminal charges. A swift change of nationality and he avoids extradition.
And then there's ongoing shenangigans with Ukraine's oligarchs, and a continuation of their graft and corruption.
But no matter. Ukraine is pro-European and worth supporting. Not Russia, which was worth billions in trade.. To the EU at least, not the US.
So Ukraine is kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place. The EU doesn't want it, Russia doesn't really want it and it's broke. So unless something happens, it'll be another failed state for someone to sort out.
So if the Russians use a false reason, no one else can ever use it as a true reason?
They can, but there hasn't been a genuine case of it for decades. It's astonishing, and quite worrying, the way that people are prepared to believe Western media without question, but consistently dismiss any contradicting media reports as "propaganda". If the West invade a country to "protect civilians" then that must be true, because all the reports confirming this can't all be lying. Yet if Russia does the same, the fact that numerous reports confirm it's to protect civilians just shows how powerful the bogeyman Putin is, managing to convince ALL those reports to say exactly what he wants.
What is the "quasi-annexing of Libya" supposed to be about?
We forced parliamentary democracy on them without the consent of the people. We had no right to go into a sovereign country, and tell the people that we knew what was best for them, and bomb them until they surrendered and let us force it on them. Predictably the first thing the puppet "elected" regime did was to make support for the old government illegal and persecute dissidents. Now it's almost impossible for the people of Libya to transition away from democracy, other than using violence to overthrow the regime. And any time they do that, the regime calls them terrorists and uses the army to quell the dissent. They've done nothing but fight among each other constantly since we left.
He is respected like no other Russian leader since Stalin, because in the opinion of many Russians he woke up the bear and made it growl again.
This was the opinion a couple of years ago of my Russian OH, who is always on the phone to her friends back there, catching up on the gossip on the ground.
Every since I have known her she has been a staunch Putin supporter, and any criticism of him went down badly. One night I was forced to sleep on the sofa after she got a major hump:D
Now, she hears things from her friends and rellies and is starting to changing her mind a bit.
I do think Russia has turned into a one man state; the tinkering with the constitution so that Putin could return as president is one example.
Putin is a Stalin of the 21st century, revered and feared in equal measure, did improve the economy albeit on dubious foundations, and took a country along with him on the ride.
But ultimately after death, revisionism took over to a certain extent.
One could extend the analogy further, that Stalin was murdered by one of his inner circle, Beria (although Stalin never really trusted him) not proven, but a respected theory.
One could extend the analogy further, that Stalin was murdered by one of his inner circle, Beria (although Stalin never really trusted him) not proven, but a respected theory.
Maybe history will repeat itself.
Let's hope not, or we may end up with another Libya, Iraq, Ukraine or possibly soon-to-be ISIL lead Syria. Sometimes it's better the devil you know.. And look at what we know about the charming Beria, and his fate in Lubyanka.. But then he was Georgian, not Russian..
Economically, over the long term since he came into power, Putin HAS done wonders for Russia. Why do you think he's been so popular for so many years?
Its an ageing conservative country . Historically its been ruled by Hard men (some women too ) whether they be the Tsars or the communist Tsars . Its easy to stay in control when you control the media and Russia's leaders have always done this with expertise .
Putin has presided over an economy based solely on revenues from Oil , gas and other commodities he has spectacularly failed to diversify the economy when he had the chance. The Russian people are now paying for his ineptitude. Allow his mates to steal wealth an stash it over seas hasn't helped.
Putin is now reduced to nationalism and an external forces mentality to hold on to power .
Distraction techniques like the Crimea , Ukraine , Georgia etc are classic examples of what happens when an undemocratic regime fails on the economy .
Comments
you're either just dumb or willfully not reading my post .
Where did I say I believe the 50,000 or 10,000 figure ? you are the only one mentioning these figures . come on just show me where ? I have said till I'm blue in the face that I don't believe these figures so tell me how I am swallowing these claims .
Even you now believe there are some Russian soldiers in the Ukraine ...so I could accuse you of swallowing the Ukraine's propaganda.
According to some posters on here Putin has done wonders for Russia ..They also believe the Russian economy is in fine shape and that Its a powerhouse.
Not a problem. It could always just increase gas prices to the EU. Winter is coming... But oil's only back to 2009 prices, least we forget. It may not seem that way given there's been no sign of any reduction in prices that were increased due to 'rising energy costs'.
You really haven't read the rules here, have you? So more insults from you..
But to avoid further confusion, just how many active duty Russian troops do you think there are in combat in Ukraine... And state your sources..
If you feel I have slighted you them please do get me banned for a day . It would just prove that some posters don't really believe in freedoms and are happy to have people banned .
I don't know the figure but then neither do you . But we both agree there are some Russian Troops in Ukraine.
You've moved from the position of there are no Russian troops to there are some but not the 50,000 or 10,000 figure . I'm glad you seem to now realise that I never mentioned or supported the figures of 50 or 10 k - though I doubt you will apologise for constantly suggesting I agree with these figures .Its taken a while but you now seem to accept that there are Russian troops in the Ukraine. Unless of course you now want to change your mind again .
I doubt we do. See my previous comment-
Be clear what you mean. There probably are, just as there are British, American and other foreign military people in Ukraine, ie people who volunteered for the Ukrainian militias.
There are British soldiers in Ukraine. They're training the Ukrainians. There may be Russian soldiers doing the same thing. There are a lot of ex-Russian soldiers, ex-Soviet soldiers and even ex-UA soldiers. It's all a bit of a mess..
I never suggested you did. But you appear to have some comprehension difficulties. I keep pointing out that was a claim made by Poroshenko via the Bbc. I've asked you if you believed the numbers are plausible, and you can't or won't answer.
That was during the Cold War.
The strategic situation during a war (regardless of it being hot or cold) is different than when there is not a war.
Oh I think its you have a problem with Comprehension . I've told you several times I don't believe these figures - Several times but you keep asking the same question. Please read my posts .
The Cold War was not a war in that sense.
The fact was the Americans didn't want Russian missiles in Cuba, while they already had their missiles in Europe that could hit Moscow.
So if the Russians use a false reason, no one else can ever use it as a true reason?
What is the "quasi-annexing of Libya" supposed to be about?
In any case, it was much more the Soviet Union that had puppet regimes than the West.
Wow!!
Yes, we defend these countries as part of NATO, but within NATO, groups of countries are getting together themselves for deeper co-operation - including Poland with the Baltic States. It makes sense, because NATO is unwieldy as a single entity.
That's why I was suggesting increased co-operation with the Scandis (2 of whom aren't in NATO, but probably ought to be, certainly more than Ukraine).
It was never an issue before Yanukovych was deposed. USA has given them no choice, really. But Germany certainly don't want them in NATO.
Obama is now the lamest of lame ducks. He has his pet projects - rapprochement with Cuba, the one-sided nuclear deal with Iran - but beyond that, foreign policy has been taken over by the Neocons: Joe Biden (influenced by his son's business activities in Ukraine), Victoria Nuland, Ash Carter, Pentagon officials and generals like Breedlove. Obama and Kerry are undermined at every turn.
The one thing Obama has done is to so far reject the shrill calls to 'ARM UKRAINE!' which come from John McCain on a regular basis. But it seems like McCain has the whole of Congress drugged up or something, these motions are passed almost unanimously, it feels like there is no-one allowed to dispute the idea and it's become almost a form of McCarthyism. I worry though that if a full scale war does break out again - and we all know Minsk is unworkable, and will break down in the autumn when the DPR hold their rigged elections that Ukraine won't accept - McCain's coalition will be too powerful even for Obama to stop.
I do believe that if McCain had been President, we'd have already had WW3 and maybe none of us would be writing any of these posts - he is that dangerous. Anyone who seriously considered Palin as a viable VP is clearly not right. I just don't understand why this Senate Armed Services committee post he holds seems to still give him so much power and influence.
(OT, but Google John McCain and ISIS - eye-opening for a so-called US patriot).
This is the big issue I think. So the coup started out with perhaps the best intentions. Nuland and co picking 'Yats' and their dream team to replace Yanukovych, and what they thought of the EU is now a matter of public record.
Fast forward a bit and we've had the Ukrainian militias and their antics. Azov's flag has absolutely nothing to do with the 'black sun'. Wolfsangels also popular with Azov, the SNA, Svoboda, Pravy Sector, Patriot of Ukraine.. And if people think Putin might be homophobic, they should listen to the wisdom of Biletsky, Zbitnyev, Yarosh etc..
But those are the people we're supporting. We now have troops in Ukraine training their military. We keep getting told we should supply Ukraine with more lethal weapons. Yey! Let's ship arms and train people who consider Stepan Bandera a war hero..
And then there's the Ukrainian economy, or lack thereof. Much like Ukraines physical gold, it appears to have evaporated. As has much of it's population, especially those young and bright enough to get work abroad.
And then there's decisions like making Mikheil Saakashvili governor of Odessa. And making him Ukrainian instead of Georgian, because the Georgians want him on criminal charges. A swift change of nationality and he avoids extradition.
And then there's ongoing shenangigans with Ukraine's oligarchs, and a continuation of their graft and corruption.
But no matter. Ukraine is pro-European and worth supporting. Not Russia, which was worth billions in trade.. To the EU at least, not the US.
So Ukraine is kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place. The EU doesn't want it, Russia doesn't really want it and it's broke. So unless something happens, it'll be another failed state for someone to sort out.
Economically, over the long term since he came into power, Putin HAS done wonders for Russia. Why do you think he's been so popular for so many years?
They can, but there hasn't been a genuine case of it for decades. It's astonishing, and quite worrying, the way that people are prepared to believe Western media without question, but consistently dismiss any contradicting media reports as "propaganda". If the West invade a country to "protect civilians" then that must be true, because all the reports confirming this can't all be lying. Yet if Russia does the same, the fact that numerous reports confirm it's to protect civilians just shows how powerful the bogeyman Putin is, managing to convince ALL those reports to say exactly what he wants.
We forced parliamentary democracy on them without the consent of the people. We had no right to go into a sovereign country, and tell the people that we knew what was best for them, and bomb them until they surrendered and let us force it on them. Predictably the first thing the puppet "elected" regime did was to make support for the old government illegal and persecute dissidents. Now it's almost impossible for the people of Libya to transition away from democracy, other than using violence to overthrow the regime. And any time they do that, the regime calls them terrorists and uses the army to quell the dissent. They've done nothing but fight among each other constantly since we left.
This was the opinion a couple of years ago of my Russian OH, who is always on the phone to her friends back there, catching up on the gossip on the ground.
Every since I have known her she has been a staunch Putin supporter, and any criticism of him went down badly. One night I was forced to sleep on the sofa after she got a major hump:D
Now, she hears things from her friends and rellies and is starting to changing her mind a bit.
I do think Russia has turned into a one man state; the tinkering with the constitution so that Putin could return as president is one example.
Putin is a Stalin of the 21st century, revered and feared in equal measure, did improve the economy albeit on dubious foundations, and took a country along with him on the ride.
But ultimately after death, revisionism took over to a certain extent.
One could extend the analogy further, that Stalin was murdered by one of his inner circle, Beria (although Stalin never really trusted him) not proven, but a respected theory.
Maybe history will repeat itself.
Let's hope not, or we may end up with another Libya, Iraq, Ukraine or possibly soon-to-be ISIL lead Syria. Sometimes it's better the devil you know.. And look at what we know about the charming Beria, and his fate in Lubyanka.. But then he was Georgian, not Russian..
It's all there in the papers how utterly bonkers the country is going
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/27/russia-destroys-food-bmw-car-racing-team-dtm
Banning Fairy Liquid for being 'toxic' is the latest one.
I hope this BMW Driving team has withdrawn from the competition.
BMW probably want to sell cars to Russians. Russia may be encouraging people to buy domestic, not imports. But in other news..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN9t8hs4l_E
iWant. Not sure the F-35 can do any of those moves, or even take off & land yet..
Those slow speed moves in the video are worthless in combat.
A combat aircraft flying at that slow a speed would be instantly shot down.
Alternatively, would the combination of sensors, computers and being extremely agile allow it to out-turn or manouver missiles?
I am no expert on aerodynamics. However there are limits to what can be done at high speed.
If those slow speed manoeuvres were done at high speed they would probably damage the aeroplane or cause it to fall out of they sky.
The big question is have the Americans attempted to copy the technology that allows Russian aeroplanes to do this.
If they have not it must be because the Americans don't see the point of doing it.
Its an ageing conservative country . Historically its been ruled by Hard men (some women too ) whether they be the Tsars or the communist Tsars . Its easy to stay in control when you control the media and Russia's leaders have always done this with expertise .
Putin has presided over an economy based solely on revenues from Oil , gas and other commodities he has spectacularly failed to diversify the economy when he had the chance. The Russian people are now paying for his ineptitude. Allow his mates to steal wealth an stash it over seas hasn't helped.
Putin is now reduced to nationalism and an external forces mentality to hold on to power .
Distraction techniques like the Crimea , Ukraine , Georgia etc are classic examples of what happens when an undemocratic regime fails on the economy .