Russia declares war on Ukraine. Live updates from inside Ukraine

a reply to: mash3d

Thanks, I'm under the impression they, Donetsk, want to be part of the Russian "Federation" but still be Donetsk.

That is the most plausible scenario I see, and it just makes sense.

originally posted by: ausername
Putin clearly does not want to invade Ukraine or to be further isolated from the international community through economic sanctions. I believe that Putin and Russia would be satisfied with a Ukraine that is aligned with Moscow and without NATO and western influence being dominant in Ukraine.

Without NATO brings an interesting though / possibility -

What if this Ukraine mess was nothing more than Putin testing NATO to see exactly how far they have come and what their resolve is. Its non NATO so the chance of NATO involvement were small. Ukraine is a large enough country that would allow Russia to test its military assets while at the same time Putin knows Ukraine would not pose much of a threat militarily.

It would allow Russian surveillance assets to see how former SSR's have advanced as independent countries while also giving an insight into their current leadership. Russia has sent long range aircraft / surveillance vessels to the coast of the US (which is nothing new). Those flights, possibility to test US response, would also give them the possibility to see things the overhead satellites would not show (if you know a satellites location in space its safe to assume then enemy knows about it and knows its flyover schedule, allowing anything of importance to be stopped / hidden until the satellite passes by.

just a thought....

originally posted by: ausername
Putin clearly does not want to invade Ukraine or to be further isolated from the international community through economic sanctions. I believe that Putin and Russia would be satisfied with a Ukraine that is aligned with Moscow and without NATO and western influence being dominant in Ukraine.

Without NATO brings an interesting though / possibility -

What if this Ukraine mess was nothing more than Putin testing NATO to see exactly how far they have come and what their resolve is. Its non NATO so the chance of NATO involvement were small. Ukraine is a large enough country that would allow Russia to test its military assets while at the same time Putin knows Ukraine would not pose much of a threat militarily.

It would allow Russian surveillance assets to see how former SSR's have advanced as independent countries while also giving an insight into their current leadership. Russia has sent long range aircraft / surveillance vessels to the coast of the US (which is nothing new). Those flights, possibility to test US response, would also give them the possibility to see things the overhead satellites would not show (if you know a satellites location in space its safe to assume then enemy knows about it and knows its flyover schedule, allowing anything of importance to be stopped / hidden until the satellite passes by.

just a thought....

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: mash3d

Thanks, I'm under the impression they, Donetsk, want to be part of the Russian "Federation" but still be Donetsk.

That is the most plausible scenario I see, and it just makes sense.

Rule by proxy is nothing new for Russia and has been at the cornerstone of Soviet domination since WWII.

originally posted by: mash3d
I'm just wondering how can NATO be expanding when the US pulled out ALL of it heavy Armor Tank units in 2013?
www.stripes.com...

Granted they did return about 29 tanks to Germany this year as part of a training brigade.
But that's no where near Cold war numbers.

At the height of the Cold war NATO had 30 Armored Divisions and 6,000 tanks.
I don't think all of NATO combined is anywhere near that now.
Claiming NATO expansion and doing the actual logistics of it are two different beasts.

That's the issue Russia has right now... The heavy elements of US NATO are gone from Europe. Everything that has happened in Europe and NATO only undermines the claim NATO is a threat to Russia.

Its a defensive alliance.

It still brings us back to the idiot ass decisions Putin made, which have had the complete and total opposite effect of what Putin was wanting.

* - We don't want Ukraine in NATO - so they invade - Ukraine is looking at joining the NATO issue again.

* - We don't want nations who border us in NATO - Ukraine and Finland and Georgia all looking/exploring to join NATO.

* - We don't want NATO assets in our back yard - Because of Russian hostility NATO nations near Russia who have never hosted NATO bases or Personnel have now requested NATO military assets to counter Russian aggression.

* - Russia consistently states military maneuvers in its own nation are no one else's business yet they seem to not understand that the reverse also applies. What nations bordering Russia do within their own borders is no business of Russia's.

If Russia wishes to be treated as a sovereign nation then they need to extend the same courtesy to nations around it.


Russia may have pulled off the Crimean operation superbly, but that high success is not a liability. While Russia critiqued its own actions, so did every other nation who was watching. Russia showed some plays from their new playbook. Trying to use them again wont be as easy.

As to how many troops or tanks US has left in Europe does not matter.

European NATO alone has 500 Generation 4.5 planes...........Russia has only 3 dozen of Su-35s. Similar ratios in other areas too.

In two nights, using C-17s alone US can send in 25,000 troops to anywhere on earth. Taking help from airlines etc. in a real real real intense scenario, upto 100,000 troops land in Europe in 48 hours. I am sure Pentagon has such contingency plans in place, although USAF is strong enough to keep any adversary at bay or advancing substantially, using air war assets alone. Lastly, NATO nations are required to keep up with certain 'force prep levels' at all the times. Even against Russia, these local forces will not be a pushover by any means.

US pulled back from Europe as Russian defense expenditures in 1990s came down by 90% and even now it is only upto 30-40% (purchasing power parity included) of the 1991 figures. It costs US $100K per year to maintain a soldier domestically. Outside like Europe, I do not know. In a war theater like Afghanistan these costs were upto $2M annually.

So European NATO is not crying for MaMa loudly or shivering in fear.

Leave Russia's near abroad as a buffer territory and 90% of issues like Ukraine are solved.

originally posted by: ALoveSupreme

originally posted by: darkorange

originally posted by: Dutzy
a reply to: MessageforAll

An invasion would have been hard to miss

All is quiet, so far.

Invasion will never happen. To resist NWO in SE region will take volunteers a couple of hundreds who have relatives in Ukraine. Once Chechen volunteers move in to defend SE borders, right Sector teens will run back to the cave.

You know Chechen volunteers, they cut heads then ask questions. Brutal people. Not sure for how long Russia is capable to keep them back.


cheers) No to NWO!

Sickening that you would cheer this on.

Your delusional fight against the 'NWO' must not take into account who exercises power in Russia.

(As if their interests weren't ultimately tied to the same International petroleum and investment corporations.)

Yes, I remember, you spent number of years in Dubai, came in close encounter with some Russian business folks and now you know what kind of power there in Russia. On the other hand, I have been in 15 countries, lived in the US of A for eleven. I know a thing or two about political 'health' there.

You know all well about NWO, the thing is, that makes you a supporter of unilateral order, simply coz it's originating from USA. This sort of giving you a moment of pride because you are from the country -originator (or other common wealth entity). Gives you the ultimate chance to look down at other nations forever if agenda passes .

You think, you will become an elite just because of that fact. All that you say and pretend to believe is silly rhetoric. Easy to see through and prove. And you know it)) Expert))


cheers )

ps. Sorry for offtopic. Should have been moved to private messaging. Not sure how to do it, working off tiny 10inch tablet display.

originally posted by: victor7
Leave Russia's near abroad as a buffer territory and 90% of issues like Ukraine are solved.

We don't see eye to eye on a lot of issues, this one included. What you just stated though I am in agreement with, except for one thing.


Its not "Russia's" near abroad. That "near abroad" are sovereign nations with their own people, culture, style of government, political / economic / foreign policy directions. Russia, nor the US/west - have any right to make an agreement with one another that deals directly with 3rd party nations.

For Putin to continue to claim one of the justifications for invading Ukraine was to protect ethnic Russians whose culture was under threat while arguing they have a right to self determination flies in the face of a "near abroad". I know in threads like this people have brought up the fact Russia can choose who they wish to work with, like Cuba and Venezuela and I know for a fact people don't consider those nations a US "near abroad".

There is no "near abroad" for Russia, China, the US or EU - period. What there is are sovereign nations who have a right to decide actions based on the will of their people instead of another arbitrary curtain.

Since Russia is reestablishing its ties with Cuba, including use of their military bases, and based on your position to date, you would have no issues should the US invade Cuba under the guise of it representing a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.

Cuba is in our "near abroad" is it not?
Venezuela is in our "near abroad" is it not?

When was the last time NATO invaded Russia?
When was the last time NATO invaded East Europe?
When was the last time NATO invaded any former SSR?

Trying to hide defacto control over sovereign nations by using the slick term of near abroad does not work and the more that position is pushed by Putin, the closer he is going to drive those nations towards the West / NATO / EU / US.

Where in the formulae for determining a near abroad doctrine were those nations who are inside the near abroad consulted?

a reply to: Xcathdra

cnsnews.com...


Record 20% of Households on Food Stamps in 2013

To wrap it all up...........It would be much better if DC focuses more on solving the Food Stamp issues of 60 Million Americans.......rather than encroaching NATO on Russia's borders, even if local nations are crying/begging/pleading for such a status.

Such endevours can result in 120 Million Americans on the food stamps..........as a result of Cold War II.....gotten kick started........to keep the dear Ukrainians safe from the Moscow Bandits.

a reply to: victor7

Your attempt to deflect while trying to get another snide remark in about the US is ever present with you isn't it. I have no issues if you wish to take the US to task however you really need to do more research and actually understand what the term "separate sovereigns" mean in regards to the relationship between the US Federal government and the State governments.


Now, bringing the thread back around to the claim you made about Russia and a fake "near abroad" bs argument and your inability to support the claim.

Wanna take another swing to support your claim?

a reply to: Xcathdra

No one is deflecting here. Before entering the battle, each side should know the current and future costs involved.

I have repeatedly told my views on Russia's "near abroad". If you have problems is comprehension then get some help.

Only $100B..........only $100B worth of weapons procurement by Russia will

a) negate 1 for 10 ratio lead that European Nato has vrs RuAF on the 4.5 Gen planes. Still leave $80B on the table.

b) mere one geopolitical move in some other area of the world to get US grossly invovled will ratchet up the costs of its treasury for years down the road. Afghanistan, Iraq etc. can up warmed up with just $20M of investment.

A nation with 100% of its GDP equivalent to debt would be "wise enough" to not play into the trap of Cold War II.

off topic:

Russian - China:

Long term cooperation at work

Ukraine could have taken part in the project. There are heavy machinery production plants as far as I have heard. Ukraine could have earn tons of credentials signing for participation in the project. Passage through the canal can be made free of charge.

a reply to: victor7

REally?

I raised several points in my post and included some questions.

At no point was food stamps a part of my post yet your response centered on it.

You deflected and obfuscated... Just as you are doing in this response.

If you cannot support your claim - stop making them.

a reply to: darkorange

Except for the fact its a private Chinese firm, unless you are admitting all Chinese businesses are owned / run behind the scenes by the Chinese government? Secondly Russia is not involved in it. Third improvements / upgrades to the panama canal have been ongoing to account for larger vessels.

If Ukraine businesses have the ability to bid for parts of the contract more power to them. However to imply they are missing out simply because they wont dance to Russia's tune is naïve.

Back to on topic issues (which don't include food stamps) -

Euromaidan PR ‏@EuromaidanPR · 18m
Ukrainians are asking you: Stop #Putin, Stop the war! www.youtube.com... … |EMPR #Ukraine

MaidanOnline ‏@MaidanOnline · 31m
Dmitry Tymchuk’s Military Blog: Summary – May 8, 2014 wp.me... fb.me...

Euromaidan PR ‏@EuromaidanPR · 35m
Angela Merkel: it would be a "pity" if Putin were to "use" the commemorations to visit Crimea. www.bbc.com... … pic.twitter.com/hEgWXXzAPQ

Euromaidan PR ‏@EuromaidanPR · 1h
Pres Turchynov + PM Yatsenyuk propose "Round Table" to resolve conflict http://(link tracking not allowed)/1j8o9Krn |EMPR #Ukraine pic.twitter.com/DdSVGX7Mpy

originally posted by: darkorange
off topic:

Russian - China:

Long term cooperation at work

Ukraine could have taken part in the project. There are heavy machinery production plants as far as I have heard. Ukraine could have earn tons of credentials signing for participation in the project. Passage through the canal can be made free of charge.

Russia isnt involved in the project and has nothing to do with Ukraine so whats your point exactly.

Euromaidan PR ‏@EuromaidanPR · 1h
POLL RESULTS: 77% want a unified #Ukraine Putin's propaganda fails yhoo.it... |EMPR pic.twitter.com/6SPJ0L0VZr

Poll: Most Ukrainians want a unified country

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) — A strong majority of Ukrainians want their country to remain a single, unified state and this is true even in the largely Russian-speaking east where a pro-Russia insurgency has been fighting for autonomy, a poll released Thursday shows.

The survey results were released just hours before the pro-Russia forces in eastern Ukraine said they would go ahead with a referendum on autonomy planned for Sunday, ignoring Russian President Vladimir Putin's call to delay the vote.

Interestingly enough the information about Crimea is in line with the poll numbers from the Russian Presidents Council.


* - 77 percent of people nationwide want Ukraine to maintain its current borders
* - in the east the figure is 70 percent
* - Only among Russian speakers does the percentage drop significantly, but it is still over half at 58 percent.
* - central government in Kiev has the confidence of only about 41 percent of Ukrainians
* - west of the country, where support is 60 percent,
* - east, where it is 24 percent, according to the poll.
* - Russia, however, is viewed with great suspicion, with three times as many Ukrainians surveyed saying Russia is having a bad influence on their country as saying its impact is positive.

Click link for remainder of article

I seriously think there is a mental issue with Putin and there are times I don't think he knows who he is or what he is doing.

Putin’s Ukrainian U-turn

A DEFINING feature in the diplomacy of Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, is to keep everyone guessing—because he can use doubt to magnify his threats, conceal his weaknesses and gain the initiative. That was the effect of his words on May 7th, one of the few public occasions he has spoken formally about the crisis in Ukraine. Mr Putin urged the pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country to postpone the referendums they planned for this weekend. He said that he saw Ukraine’s presidential election due on May 25th as a “step in the right direction”, contradicting his own foreign minister, who has repeatedly called it absurd. And he reported that he had ordered Russian troops to pull back from the border.

A few welcomed this as the turning-point in a crisis that has now escalated into a low-intensity war. It is to be hoped that they are right. But many more, including this newspaper, will greet Mr Putin’s words with due scepticism. Throughout the crisis, Russia has said one thing and done another. Even as the diplomacy takes its course, the West must sustain its pressure on Russia and its support for Ukraine.

Click link for article

This is right up there with Lavrov / Churkin maintaining the non insignia people in green were not Russian while at the same time Putin's giving a press conference where he states the non insignia men in green were Russian military.


Is there anything in the Russian constitution that would allow Putin to be removed from power do to a mental lapse / deficiency?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: victor7

REally?

I raised several points in my post and included some questions.

At no point was food stamps a part of my post yet your response centered on it.

You deflected and obfuscated... Just as you are doing in this response.

If you cannot support your claim - stop making them.

It seems you have NO CLUE on the correlation between economics, society, war machine, actual wars etc. etc.

I find it intellectually not challenging enough to discuss any further.

ps: get some help !!

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: darkorange
off topic:

Russian - China:

Long term cooperation at work

Ukraine could have taken part in the project. There are heavy machinery production plants as far as I have heard. Ukraine could have earn tons of credentials signing for participation in the project. Passage through the canal can be made free of charge.

Russia isnt involved in the project and has nothing to do with Ukraine so whats your point exactly.

Russia is involed in the project.
And what is wrong with Ukraine to cooperate with China, leaving Russia out?

a reply to: victor7

and I see you still have no idea how the American government works.

You failed to answer the questions while at the same time brining up something not directly related to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

try again

Its not "Russia's" near abroad. That "near abroad" are sovereign nations with their own people, culture, style of government, political / economic / foreign policy directions. Russia, nor the US/west - have any right to make an agreement with one another that deals directly with 3rd party nations.

For Putin to continue to claim one of the justifications for invading Ukraine was to protect ethnic Russians whose culture was under threat while arguing they have a right to self determination flies in the face of a "near abroad". I know in threads like this people have brought up the fact Russia can choose who they wish to work with, like Cuba and Venezuela and I know for a fact people don't consider those nations a US "near abroad".

There is no "near abroad" for Russia, China, the US or EU - period. What there is are sovereign nations who have a right to decide actions based on the will of their people instead of another arbitrary curtain.

Since Russia is reestablishing its ties with Cuba, including use of their military bases, and based on your position to date, you would have no issues should the US invade Cuba under the guise of it representing a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.

Cuba is in our "near abroad" is it not?
Venezuela is in our "near abroad" is it not?

When was the last time NATO invaded Russia?
When was the last time NATO invaded East Europe?
When was the last time NATO invaded any former SSR?

Trying to hide defacto control over sovereign nations by using the slick term of near abroad does not work and the more that position is pushed by Putin, the closer he is going to drive those nations towards the West / NATO / EU / US.

Where in the formulae for determining a near abroad doctrine were those nations who are inside the near abroad consulted?

originally posted by: darkorange

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: darkorange
off topic:

Russian - China:

Long term cooperation at work

Ukraine could have taken part in the project. There are heavy machinery production plants as far as I have heard. Ukraine could have earn tons of credentials signing for participation in the project. Passage through the canal can be made free of charge.

Russia isnt involved in the project and has nothing to do with Ukraine so whats your point exactly.

Russia is involed in the project.
And what is wrong with Ukraine to cooperate with China, leaving Russia out?

nothing in the link states Russia is involved... No request has been made for Ukraine to assist, let alone any open bid processes.

Can you link us to the info where it supports what you are saying? Can we put it in a new thread to discuss it there so we don't derail this one?