Russia wants answers on NATO troop movement in Eastern Europe

reply to post by paraphi


It's what they are reporting!

They are rallying against fascism, and they are saying that police are protecting gangs that are attacking them (some reports have even said with guns and improvised bombs) so they are defending themselves.

Video of the uprisings

EDIT: and you can cry all you want about Russian conspiracy, but this is the same thing that happened in Kiev from the western angle back in February, just the roles are inversed. The truth comes out with the facts on the ground. Do you really think the tens of thousands of Ukrainians rallying in eastern Ukraine against the junta is some Russian provocation? They didn't ask for fascists to run their lives! They did not ask for an oligarch to be put in charge of their region.

And your lack of comprehension of the history of this region is astounding. Svobida is running Kiev. Svobida is neo-nazi and it's national idols are Nazi puppets from WWII. These people in eastern Ukraine have not forgotten what happened there during WWII, when the Nazis stormed through and the USSR sacrificed millions to push them back. They do not forget the invasion that their forefathers died for!

Demonstrators in city of Nikolaev (as reported) clearly demonstrating against NATO.

The anti-Russia crowd claims that Russia is directing these demonstrations in order to annex Ukraine. However, it is clear that these eastern Ukrainians view NATO as the instigator of the junta, not just some internal problem.

Russia and eastern Ukraine have always viewed this situation as geopolitical moves by NATO. The west and it's media claim that there was a democratic revolution in Kiev and that eastern reaction must be countered by western measures.

How many years will it take for the majority of the west to look back in retrospect and realize that NATO was the pusher here for a long time? Just like we realize now the lies concerning Iraq?

reply to post by Vovin


Any sources that say this is a demo against NATO???

Can't seem to find any!!!


Peace Vovin!!!

reply to post by Vovin


It seems more and more that Russia is going to invade and annex the territories of Ukranian SSR territories. The outmost western bulge of the former Polish area added to Ukraine in 1939 will be left out as Western Ukraine. Russia is not going to leave Kiev out and that means it will take all that belonged to Russia before 1939.

It seems KGB has decided to invade rather than wait for elections and hope for Party of Regions to take power in Kiev. NATO will not get involved for a non-alliance member it seems.

Protests in several cities cannot be that coordinated by common people alone. There have been reports that police gave right of the way to protestors and did not stop them from taking government buildings. With such variables, it would not make sense for West Uks leadership to send forces to fight the Russians in the eastern region. When local crowd is hostile then it is very hard to fight a fair war. It is the Uks that will be facing guerrilla warfare not the Russians it seems.

victor7
reply to post by Vovin

 

It seems more and more that Russia is going to invade and annex the territories of Ukranian SSR territories. The outmost western bulge of the former Polish area added to Ukraine in 1939 will be left out as Western Ukraine. Russia is not going to leave Kiev out and that means it will take all that belonged to Russia before 1939.

It seems KGB has decided to invade rather than wait for elections and hope for Party of Regions to take power in Kiev. NATO will not get involved for a non-alliance member it seems.

Protests in several cities cannot be that coordinated by common people alone. There have been reports that police gave right of the way to protestors and did not stop them from taking government buildings. With such variables, it would not make sense for West Uks leadership to send forces to fight the Russians in the eastern region. When local crowd is hostile then it is very hard to fight a fair war. It is the Uks that will be facing guerrilla warfare not the Russians it seems.

edit on 6-4-2014 by victor7 because: (no reason given)

that is correct, 8 million Russians in Ukraine who are against current government in Kiev and who are increasingly demanding referendum for joining Russia is a factor big enough to dismiss any possible NATO involvement in Ukraine.
They will be the force Kiev has to face not Russian Army. And you are right this is well coordinated ever since Crimea events started. One step at the time. Add to that police and army who are not willing to interfere and here we go.

I always find funny how people on these discussion boards think that NATO can just jump in and sort out those bad Russians.
Do you have any idea the procedure each of those 28 NATO countries have to go through within their own parliament in order to get involved in Ukraine? Do you have any idea what each of those countries would face? A massive and violent public resistance.
We had massive protest and public outrage for involvement in Serbia, Iraq, Libya. Against weak countries.
Can you imagine resistance for war against a nuclear powerhouse such as Russia?
People please wake up and pray that Ukraine will split as peacefully as possible.

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by Vovin

 

Any sources that say this is a demo against NATO???

Can't seem to find any!!!


Peace Vovin!!!

A few social media groups that I follow are reporting, from the ground, that this is the consensus among the pro-Russian demonstrators.

I think these uprisings were coordinated, but by eastern Ukrainians, not Russians. I don't believe that Russia would have such a backwards ambition to simply want to take as much land as possible, considering that Russia is quite efficient at playing the modern rules of empire where overt economic control determines the boundaries.

Russia will protect its people, because where there are Russians, Russia exerts control. But everybody knows that the uprising will be confronted by the junta. And both Russia and the west will push their de facto proxies to victory. Russia will only play into the west's hands if they move in now.

In fact, here are the victory conditions:

Russia: let the junta assault the uprising until the junta looses credibility as a democratic force on the world stage. This happened in Syria- before, Assad's regime was "replace" by "recognized" leadership of the rebels, and now it is undisputed that Assad is still in control of the state and the insurgency is nothing more than an insurgency.

West: lure Russia into occupying east Ukraine. Look what happened when the US lured the USSR into Afghanistan.

reply to post by Vovin

In fact, here are the victory conditions:

Russia: let the junta assault the uprising until the junta looses credibility as a democratic force on the world stage. This happened in Syria- before, Assad's regime was "replace" by "recognized" leadership of the rebels, and now it is undisputed that Assad is still in control of the state and the insurgency is nothing more than an insurgency.

West: lure Russia into occupying east Ukraine. Look what happened when the US lured the USSR into Afghanistan.

Russia goes now or later, the only difference will be the PR on global stage. West will still try to have a guerrilla warfare, in both scenarios, against the Russians by supplying arms and financial backing to junta entities. Then it will be upto the junta to decide if they want a crippling civil war or just do Czechoslovakia and break into two parts peacefully.

Best would be if Eastern Ukraine regions just stop cooperating with the western regions. Most of the industries and resources are in the eastern regions. This will further cripple the Junta's hold on power.

Money given by EU at around $15B is not coming to Kiev. It is a loan that will pay off interest payments to avoid the default by the Uks economy. If Junta opts for a civil war then that would collapse the economy and Ukraine as a functioning nation.

So much sacrifice for the NEVER ENDING DESIRES...............to wash dishes in EU and roam the streets of Paris and Berlin as hookers.

Guess a soup of boiled veggies with bread is much much better than garbage dumpster diving at the back of a busy restaurant.

Looks like stupid Uks did not learn anything....anything.......from the shameful sufferings of post 1991 USSR break up.

macedoniaonline.eu...

Moody's downgrades Ukraine to "Default Imminent"

Moody’s further noted that this assessment accounts for the near-term liquidity relief recently hammered out with the IMF.

Finally, due to a “sizable fiscal deficit,” the agency expects a significant contraction of GDP and a sharp currency depreciation as the debt to GDP ratio hits between 55-60 percent by year’s end.

reply to post by Vovin


Nice one Vovin!!!

I'd expect Russia to go in as soon as it looks dangerous...

You're right that they shouldn't be lured in...
International Law recognises Troops entering a Country without permission or warning as long as a certain ethnic group is in danger!!!
I shared the link to this International Law previously in a Crimea Thread!!!

I'll try and look for it, although it was ignored by most of the Western supporters conveniently!!!


Peace Vovin!!!

There are three cases in which one state may use force in or against another state:
When the Security Council authorizes it under Chapter VII;
When the territorial state consents;
Or when it is acting in self-defense against the territorial state.

Self-defense: Russia’s most prominent justification for sending troops into Crimea is to protect Russian citizens. International law generally recognizes a “defense of nationals” concept, under which one state may enter another state without consent in order to protect its nationals against an imminent threat, at least where the territorial state is unwilling or unable to protect those nationals itself. States have invoked this justification in three general situations: where their nationals have been taken hostage (U.S. Embassy in Tehran); where their nationals are under actual attack; and where their nationals face a more generic threatening situation (U.S. in Grenada; UK in Libya in 2011). The more tangible the threat to the nationals and the lower the concern about pretextual intervention, the more likely it is that the intervening states are able to avoid condemnation.

International Law Source!!!

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by Vovin

 

Any sources that say this is a demo against NATO???

Can't seem to find any!!!

If Google wants people to think that everyone supports side "B" and not side "A" then they not only have the power to do this but do just that all the time.

Most people in Europe, real people on the streets are against the USA interfering in Europe and lots of american military bases all over our land but doing a Goolge you would think it was just a very small minority, so small it's not worth a mention.

People in the Ukraine don't want Russia in control and the same people don't what NATO or the USA in control and they sure as hell don't want the hired thugs that sold out to the west for a few dollars to stay in power.

Don't worry you will get to see this game played out first hand when the race riots start but know that it was planned all along by the same people (Bankers) that are pulling the string in the Ukraine today.

reply to post by VirusGuard


Doesn't seem fair on Ukraine that it's a choice between Russia or NATO...
But who else will support them?
& if they truly are the only choices who's better equipped to help?
Real help as well... Not just a military presence, but economic structure & cultural solidity!!!
I'd say Russia as a fellow Eastern European group!!!

NATO, in my personal opinion will only care about surrounding Russia a bit more, Russia, as well as assuring their own personal space, do still seem interested in helping these places thrive, of course the way they're going about it doesn't seem good enough for Western policy!!!

China has been quite silent though... Eventually the UN will have to get involved!!!
Both sides have been persuading/coercing Ban Ki Moon, depending on which term we prefer to use!!!

Peace Virus!!!

AP, April 09 2014 - AP INTERVIEW: US TROOPS MAY BE SENT TO E EUROPE

"Essentially what we are looking at is a package of land, air and maritime measures that would build assurance for our easternmost allies," Breedlove told the AP. "I'm tasked to deliver this by next week. I fully intend to deliver it early."

Asked again if American soldiers might be sent to NATO's front-line states closest to Russia, the four-star U.S. general said, "I would not write off contributions from any nation."

BBC, April 08 2014 - Ukraine crisis: Is Russia ready to move into eastern Ukraine?

Looks like I finally found the elusive satellite photos that NATO kept clambering about as evidence of imminent Russian invasion (my previous post's link said the images were released to the press).

And quite frankly, I am not surprised. The photos are all blurry and you wouldn't even know what you're looking at if somebody didn't write it on there.

The clearest photo is of an airstrip in a military airport with a dozen or so combat jets and some helicopters. Wow military aircraft at a military airbase what a shocker!

It is pure garbage. Why are people falling for this crap? Of course there's a military base there: the Russians have military units stationed at every major Russian city and always have. Some textbox on the image claiming "this blurry dot indicates 40,000 hardcore superelite mega soviet paratroopers primed for annihilating Ukraine" just doesn't do it for me. Maybe I'm missing the real release?

reply to post by Vovin


The BBC, for what it's worth, does have a sequence of photographs showing those exact same bases a few months ago almost bereft of any equipment, tents and soldiers. Russia itself, prior to seizing Crimea, publicly showed 150,000 troops suddenly going on "exercise" in those regions. They also do not deny the extra troops are there and have said they reserve the right to use them to "protect their citizens".

It's pretty hard to deny the troop build-up when you have both sides of the fence admitting they are there.

stumason
reply to post by Vovin

 

The BBC, for what it's worth, does have a sequence of photographs showing those exact same bases a few months ago almost bereft of any equipment, tents and soldiers. Russia itself, prior to seizing Crimea, publicly showed 150,000 troops suddenly going on "exercise" in those regions. They also do not deny the extra troops are there and have said they reserve the right to use them to "protect their citizens".

It's pretty hard to deny the troop build-up when you have both sides of the fence admitting they are there.

And so what? Russia shouldn't have some military units within its borders, in an already existing base, right next to a region in Ukraine where the Ukrainian military has been mobilizing forces on the pretext of cracking down on separatists?

There's a difference between invasion force and a contingent force. Photos of two dozen warplanes and helicopters outside of a Russian city is how it is in Russia. Blurry satellite images of some kind of military base on the ground proves nothing. A medical camp does not constitute an invasion force.

The truth is that none of it makes any sense, which is why the media spent a month promoting this NATO story before releasing the dodgy photographs. We may as well be looking at pictures of bigfoot.

reply to post by Vovin


Do you have Google Earth pal???

Because the satellite pictures look doctored to be honest!!!

Maybe I'm wrong, & don't have the outlet of G.E to check it's authenticity!!!


Then again pictures on Google Earth can be upto a few years old so who knows what's there now???



As you say it's irrelevant... The Base wasn't built overnight, so they're more than entitled to fill the base with personnel!!!


Peace Vovin!!!

After the joint US/NATO/EU attempt to surround Russia and make the Ukraine into a 'Debt Vassal' state, Putin had no choice but to do what he is doing. If they had got their way, the EU would have thrown money at the the Ukraine that they'd have no way of repaying for decades, if ever. NATO exists for no reason other than to threaten and fight Russia, when that time comes. That time might be very soon. The US should be aware that if WWIII comes about Russia will win. Don't forget about China, who are monitoring this situation very closely... The best thing that the US/EU/NATO could do is to keep their noses out of other peoples business, be quiet and go home.

JingLi
After the joint US/NATO/EU attempt to surround Russia and make the Ukraine into a 'Debt Vassal' state, Putin had no choice but to do what he is doing. If they had got their way, the EU would have thrown money at the the Ukraine that they'd have no way of repaying for decades, if ever. NATO exists for no reason other than to threaten and fight Russia, when that time comes. That time might be very soon. The US should be aware that if WWIII comes about Russia will win. Don't forget about China, who are monitoring this situation very closely... The best thing that the US/EU/NATO could do is to keep their noses out of other peoples business, be quiet and go home.

edit on 10-4-2014 by JingLi because: syntax

edit on 10-4-2014 by JingLi because: syntax

What US/NATO/EU actually did is a complete opposite of what their intentions were. Crimea already a part of Russia, south east Ukraine is just about to do the same. They have just awaken Russian nationalism in Ukraine and left those in power in Kiev to deal with it. They have dismantled Ukraine as a state.

reply to post by cosmonova


There's also a lot of pro-Russian rallying in Odessa. Photos and video show a lot of Soviet imagery. It's not so much about separatism as it is about Ukrainian people reacting to neo-Nazis, as if they actually remember that whole WWII thing that many western commentators seem to ignore.