A new Russian revolution: The cracks are starting to appear in Putin’s Kremlin power bloc

a reply to: Xcathdra

Give me the source of this claim, because I don't recall hearing anything about this.

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Xcathdra

Give me the source of this claim, because I don't recall hearing anything about this.

Sure - here ya go.

2 things to note -

RT - Putin acknowledges Russian military serviceman were in Crimea

Russian President Vladimir Putin has acknowledged that Russian troops were present in Crimea before the referendum and argued that was necessary to let Crimeans make the choice on the future of the region.

This part above = armed invasion.

Before the referendum = part of Ukraine.



No insignia

The armed men in military uniform without insignia, dubbed “the little green men” or “the polite people,” who were present in Crimea before and during the referendum there, were Russian troops, Vladimir Putin acknowledged speaking at a Q&A session with on Thursday. The president said he never concealed the fact from his foreign counterparts, and explained to them that it was the only way to ensure the referendum on the region’s status would be carried out peacefully.

“Crimean self-defense forces were of course backed by Russian servicemen,” Putin said. “They acted very appropriately, but as I’ve already said decisively and professionally.”

Putin had to touch upon the Crimea topic multiple times throughout his Q&A session. He emphasized that Russia did not acquire Crimea by force, but created, with the help of its special forces, conditions for Crimeans to decide upon their own future.

The agreement between Russia and Ukraine on Crimea specifically spells out what Russia is allowed to have and spells out what Russia must do if they wish to change those allowances.

Step 1 is requesting Ukraine accept the changes - Russia didn't bother.
Russia is prohibited from sending armed units in the Crimean area outside their base unless they are going to Russia, or coming from Russia. They cannot fan out across the countryside and surround bases and government buildings.

The actions / troop deployments were not covered under the treaty = armed invasion.

Putin has done a good job of removing most opposition. Its is very rare to find any form of media that still operates that can post a semi negative story about the guy and still be around by the end of the week. However Putin has an agenda that Russia is simply not capable of doing. I wonder sometimes how much the information he is given is filtered by yes men who try and paint a positive picture of everything or if gets the real information and just deludes himself into thinking things are better than they are.

As is he still has very powerful security apperatus to keep him in power. The Russian military as a whole may be a mess and more likely to just go home then get involved in a coup in either support or opposition to Putin. Putin does however have Russia's elite forces which he has kept well funded and free from the corruption that has plauged the rest of the military. I they were to remain loyal and be pulled out of Crimea they would be a hard nut to crack for whatever opposition forces could be called on if it came to that. Of course in such a case we may see even parts of Russia break off and become new nations.

Then again so many people are making so much money through corruption that it is hard to them turning on Putin on the off chance a new leader comes into power that has more convern for the Russian people and military being ripped off on a regular basis and cracks down on corruption.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks.

But, calling it invasion is pretty big. Military troops were present to protect their citizens from raging Ukraine army. I don't recall a single military attack was done by them during that time. I understand why Russia felt no one was going to take care of their citizens in Ukraine, so I think it was a reasonable move by Putin.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Is this the beginning of Russia following suit with all the other corporate owned governments?

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks.

But, calling it invasion is pretty big. Military troops were present to protect their citizens from raging Ukraine army. I don't recall a single military attack was done by them during that time. I understand why Russia felt no one was going to take care of their citizens in Ukraine, so I think it was a reasonable move by Putin.

It was an invasion.. This is another one of those Putin issues where his justifications changed every other day. He started with the ethnic russian issue. The UN asked several times for Russia to provide evidence to support their claim and Russia never did.

Then its the "right to self determination" justification.

Then it was Ukraine is joining NATO and Russia cant loose the Crimean ports.

Trying to dismiss / diminish / spin the info is not going to work - Russia invaded Ukraine. Putin's own admissions supports that position.

originally posted by: chrismarco
a reply to: Xcathdra

Is this the beginning of Russia following suit with all the other corporate owned governments?

No idea.. I think Russia is somewhere in the middle of the corporate owned and absolute ruler.

a reply to: Blister
????? Rights and freedoms of the people? Under Putin?

You're kidding right?

a reply to: Xcathdra

I will say it again. Calling it an invasion is a strong word and might give away false impression of what actually happened. None military action against Ukraine was taken by Russia. Since Ukraine at that time didn't had neither a president nor government, Russia felt sending some of their troops to Ukraine to protect their citizens is needed. It makes no difference then when UN sends their peace keepers to protect citizens. So invasion? I don't agree with you in this one.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: chrismarco
a reply to: Xcathdra

Is this the beginning of Russia following suit with all the other corporate owned governments?

No idea.. I think Russia is somewhere in the middle of the corporate owned and absolute ruler.

it's plutocracy cloaked as an autocracy, as opposed to a democracy. you've gotta adapt to the locals, some want a president, others want a dictator.

smart move by the west, a lot of russians no longer want to be dick-tated to. appeal to them by legitimizing their grievances, and chip a few stones out of the current powerbase.

originally posted by: Nikola014


I will say it again. Calling it an invasion is a strong word and might give away false impression of what actually happened.

Well they were not there on shore leave... An army from one nation enters the territory of another nation without consent is an armed invasion. The UN Charter says as much as well under chapter VII.

originally posted by: Nikola014
None military action against Ukraine was taken by Russia.

Surrounding bases, seizing military aircraft, seizing Ukrainian naval vessels, etc etc etc is in fact military action.

originally posted by: Nikola014
Since Ukraine at that time didn't had neither a president nor government, Russia felt sending some of their troops to Ukraine to protect their citizens is needed.

The parliament in Ukraine, the one who impeached Yanukovych were in fact elected in Dec 2012. The outcome of those elections was accepted by Russia. Those same elected officials impeached Yanukovych.

Ukraine did have a government - People ignore that info because it undermines Putins justifications for invading Ukraine.

Secondly, check Putins comments from the start. He stated time and again that there were no Russian troops in Crimea. There was no protection needed because the claims Russia made about ethnic Russians was non existent.

originally posted by: Nikola014
It makes no difference then when UN sends their peace keepers to protect citizens. So invasion? I don't agree with you in this one.

The UN does not have a military. A nation must agree to accept peacekeepers. Sending russian armed military units into Ukraine without Ukraines consent, and then seizing Ukraine territory, is an invasion.

How do you think Russia would act if Turkey invaded Crimea in order to protect ethnic tartars from Russia? My money is Putin would scream bloody murder and respond with the Russian military.

Why?

because his argument will be Turkey is invading Russian territory.

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Were not talking about Texas or the US. were talking about Russia and Putin

Please stay in topic

remove the sanctions on putin is what we should be saying ,i can not believe how any one could be saying this is right,,the only few left standing against the imf and there being attacked,for true freedom we need a alternative to our banking system to bring fairness and equality to the world,please my fellow mankind wake up and see the real issue here and the agenda,please before its to late

a reply to: stuthealien

Remove the sanctions on Putin - ok

Just as soon as he withdraws his military forces in the occupied territory of Crimea Ukraine, stops sending russian special forces into Ukraine to run the insurgency etc etc etc.

If Putin decides to ignore the west and refuse to leave Ukraine the remainder of the world is free to stop doing business with Russia.

Its a 2 way road.


It is as simple as that.

a reply to: Xcathdrai still think the ukraine uprising was a coup de tat instigated by u.s.a and e.u ,so in that case can you tell me why he should do that ?????or prove it wasnt

originally posted by: stuthealien
a reply to: Xcathdrai still think the ukraine uprising was a coup de tat instigated by u.s.a and e.u ,so in that case can you tell me why he should do that ?????or prove it wasnt

From my post a few posts up =

The parliament in Ukraine, the one who impeached Yanukovych were in fact elected in Dec 2012. The outcome of those elections was accepted by Russia. Those same elected officials impeached Yanukovych.

Ukraine did have a government - People ignore that info because it undermines Putins justifications for invading Ukraine.

Part of me is wondering if the reason for all of these contradictory excuses / justifications coming from Putin is to placate the various elements in his government. He says one thing to make one group happy, only to say something else to make another group that was pissed off about his first comments happy.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Are you aware of just how many Russian citizens got killed in Ukraine? How many will get killed because west is not doing anything to protect those people? Why don't people here demand that those killings stop and ask for justice just like they do for Palestine? Why do people have double standards? Why are you trying to make Russia look bad, when it's quite the opposite? You are accusing them on invading a country, while that same country keeps killing Russians? I'm pretty sure bombing unarmed people is a war-crime, so why are you defending it?

For the last time. It is not an invasion, it's just a bad way of protecting their citizens. The good way of doing that would be sending their whole army there and dealing with war-crimes in Ukraine. I'm out.

hey there, I was born here in Minnesota, both of my parents and all their ancestors were born in Ukraine, so I'm a first generation child here. What people here in the US dont understand is how people adore Putin in Russia. Sure there are some who don't agree with him, but a LARGE majority of people really like Putin and what he is doing. I just recently came back from a trip to Russia, and the amount of anti Obama posters an billboards is astounding! Also, I am on the side of the separatists, as my uncles family was killed 2 months ago from shelling in Lugansk. Almost half a million Ukrainians have fled to Russia, and there are no signs of stopping. Another thing, it irks me that people automatically accuse you of being a Russian paid shill if you don't agree with the official story, as if I can't disagree with the lies that our media puts out on a daily basis. sorry for the rant this is like my 4th post on ATS and it's just a bunch of anger that's been brewing in my head for a while. Peace.

a reply to: Xcathdraim affraid i must disagree with your opinions ,and i dont hold much faith in the electronic voting systems and i believe that these can be tampered with,or manipulated to swing certain ways,when even infrostructure like power stations can be hacked it would be naive to think a voting system can not be,sorry but for me the thing that sticks out is the timing of this with relations to the bric bank,and to be honest the u.s.a has invaded other countries that tried leaving the petrodollar so www.youtube.com... is my comment