UK Sec. of Defense Will Commit Royal Marines to Protect Odessa, Ukraine From Naval Blockade

a reply to: paraphi

Crimea had been a part of the Russian empire since 1783. That Soros and other corrupt actors pulled off a color revolution in Ukraine does not change that fact. Crimeans did not want to have their region turned into a neo-nazi hellhole like the greater part of Ukraine was.

There was much "Bi-partisan" support for raping Ukraine of it's wealth from the usual deepstate warmongers:
www.texemarrs.com...
theduran.com...

Lesson of Crimea was, don't expect to go to Russia's front door and take away a critical port from them.

Funny how a certain segment of our society continues to wear blinders and ignore the fact presented that U.S. supports nazis and terrorists to attack governments that don't follow their corrupt agenda.

a reply to: Strate8

The amount of political power the far Right parties have in Ukraine is pretty much nonexistent. Russia on the other hand...

a reply to: Strate8

You have an unusual sense of right and wrong. Russia invades a country and you make excuses for them. Think of all the people that died because thr Russians chose to overthrow an elected government.

We see it over and over they did it before they invaded a neighbor and took their land. Started with Georgia than they used the same exact technic on Ukraine. Trying to make the Russians out to be the good guys in this is tough since this is the second time they invaded a country and kept property.

a reply to: Strate8

You have things backwards it has been Russia that has supported fascism. Anything which can damage the running states in Europe is good for Russia and since far-right movements are fighting against EU and a European common politics they support them.

www.google.com...

a reply to: dragonridr

My sense of right and wrong suits me just fine. I grew up during the cold war with the Soviet Union, it was them I expected to fight when I joined the Marines. A valuable lesson good leaders in the Marines taught me was to stay well informed on both history and current events. I adapt my views based on information. Based on that, China is the biggest threat to us. During Clinton, Bush, Obama years we have fed them everything they needed to become the challenge they are today.

Back to the evil boogeyman that is Russia:
You do not try to take Crimea from the Russians as it is a major port for them in the Black sea and not expect a fight. Same as we would not let the Soviet Union put nukes in Cuba, there are redline interests of countries they will go to war for. That is the way it is.

Just like you do not try to destroy a country which Russians have their only warm water port in (Syria/Tartus) and do not expect a fight.

You speak of how many died because of Russia? It was Soros, Nuland, McCaine, CIA that threw Ukraine into turmoil blood is on their hands. How many Syrians have been killed because the west tried to overthrow an elected government in Syria by using head chopping, cannibal, mercenary scum of the earth to destroy the country through proxy? Again, both my knowledge and sense of right and wrong suit me fine.

Georgia, that's rich. Again you are off on your history:
www.theguardian.com...
www.cnn.com...

This is a really informative/well balanced piece I would highly recommend reading:
warontherocks.com...

There is blame on both sides but mostly on Saakashvili, he was an arrogant *ss that brought more trouble on his troubled nation. Again, I would say Russia has made it's redlines clear and we keep trying to cross them.

originally posted by: Strate8
a reply to: dragonridr
My sense of right and wrong suits me just fine. I grew up during the cold war with the Soviet Union, it was them I expected to fight when I joined the Marines.

You do not appear to be a native English speaker. This smells like the Internet Research Agency.

a reply to: Strate8
Saakashvili was for sure a bit dense to challenge Russia like that. Maybe he will get booted from Ukraine for a third time ROFL.

a reply to: Strate8

You do not try to take Crimea from the Russians as it is a major port for them in the Black sea and not expect a fight.

the russians managed without it - for 25 years

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
the russians managed without it - for 25 years

It's the mantra of the bonkers to say Crimea was a part of Russia when it patently was not. Some people have fallen so far into the RT.com propaganda plot that they'll probably believe anything.

You cannot undo history by pretending that the past did not exist. Crimea became part of Ukraine many decades ago, right after the Russians had done the usual genocide of the people who lived there (Tartars) and transplanting a new population. It also belonged to Nazi Germany for a bit, so I guess they have a current claim as a "historical owner".

Fact is that Russia is the belligerent here and their continued meddling is an attempt to stifle and disrupt Ukraine as a nation.

Don't support this and don't agree with it. I don't want British cash going to Ukraine and I don't want our troops anywhere near it. They made thier own bed, let them lie in it.

a reply to: paraphi

I always wonder how many of the people that argue Russia did nothing wrong annexing Crimea because they owned it in the past would be making the same argument if China did the same thing to Russia and took back land they had owned for centuries.

Maybe Mother Russia should have had the ability of applying flexibility in its former states.

The fact that is has to fight Ukraine to keep a port has a lot to say about the regime.

Or Strate8 do you think that the West's seduction (which did not include a war in Crimea) was too much for the Ukranian sheeple?

Poverty, corruption, a secret state and dictatorship are not a pretty alternative, I would switch sides for a mars bar.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

As sad as I feel to say it, there will come a point when Russia will need to be dealt with head on. They're pushing very hard and killing the prospects of diplomacy. The only reason I can think of is Putin is sandbagging his reign and ensuring he'll never face a court for his deeds. They're a great and powerful nation who surely don't need all this propaganda BS and international provocations.

Putin might remove the reason for a UK presence by holding one of those referendums again. "95% want to be Russian." :/


Sending the Marines is symbolic as well as being diplomatic chess. They're unlikely to engage with Russian troops, but it could trigger retaliations under UN approval and with US support if Russia becomes hostile. However I think it's more likely for Putin to use the same tactics as before by having Russian troops in the role, and uniforms, of militias. This way they can shoot down aircraft again and act as cat's paws for Russian interests without being held accountable - plausible deniability.

7000 Marines won't be holding off Russia so I suspect it's a short-term tactic in a longer term strategy. I see Ukraine are likely to vote to join the EU next year so keeping the place free of Russian opposition until then could be a big factor.

One final piece of waffle...it'll be interesting to see how the social media situation changes. Will Ukrainian social media be flooded with 2-3 year old accounts pushing strong pro-Russian narratives and trash talking the US, UK and EU?

Ignorance is bliss:

The West armed terrorists in Syria = fact
The West has conducted illegal air strikes on Syria = fact
The West has troops in Syria illegally = fact
The West has created a sphere of influence through military bases all over Eastern Europe = fact

However to some folks on here, there's just no way that the West has been interfering in Ukraine, yeah of course, reading the words of people in denial is just cringe worthy

If however, you appreciate that the above points are true, then how can you possibly justify the actions of countries which claim to be democratic and yet, think it's ok to interfere in the processes of other countries?

It's disgusting

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

You do not appear to be a native English speaker. This smells like the Internet Research Agency.

You counter nothing in the statements of fact I provided along with the resources I linked to back them up.

Again I would recommend reading this article as it is very in depth and balanced:
warontherocks.com...

I will tell you exactly what I am. I am a person who served and fought during Gulf War, Somlia and Haiti. I had skin in the game and I stand up for my brothers in arms who I don't like to see get thrown into stupid wars for Soros and corrupt deep state.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
the russians managed without it - for 25 years

It's the mantra of the bonkers to say Crimea was a part of Russia when it patently was not. Some people have fallen so far into the RT.com propaganda plot that they'll probably believe anything........

.........
Fact is that Russia is the belligerent here and their continued meddling is an attempt to stifle and disrupt Ukraine as a nation.

All sources I provide are western media sources at that is only what most will believe. Not a single source I quote/link is RT.

How is life in Crimea 10 years after becoming a part of evil Russia?:
www.rbth.com...

www.quora.com...
Read comments below the article also.

Also:
www.quora.com... -a-part-of-Russia-but-do-they-actually-feel-better-Has-their-quality-of-life-improved

Quotes from comments:

Greetings from Crimea. To be honest, there are some problems but none of them are neo nazi battalions 20 km outside of town launching rocket launcher systems into civilian houses.

Russia has invested heavily, probably more in the first 2 years than Ukraine had in the previous 20. They’ve really done a lot of the way of public transport, they’re building a republic wide autobahn, just finished a new international airport, have built 2 new multi megawatt state of the art electrical powerplants, repaved a lot of roads and other community programs like parks and courtyards.

Energy supply issues were resolved by the Energy Bridge from mainland Russia and I cannot remember any serious blackouts last years. Some power plants is being built now as well.

They get access to Russian capital and mother’ capital now, Crimea is Russian speaking and Tatar speaking, Ukrainian was never domineering language there. For the people they prefer it, however life in Russia or in Ukraine is not splendid.

Even when Crimea was in Ukraine, there were not much anti-Russian people there. You don’t want to be anti-Russian in the region where 55% of people identify their culture as Russian and 15% more as Soviet.

In elections of 2012 the most anti-Russian party of Ukraine by the time, neo-Nazi VO Svoboda, got 1.04% of votes in Crimea. And turnout was 49.45%, that is they got like 0.5% support of Crimean people.

Russia has invested Billions in Crimea while the Ukraine was basically robbing them. Infrastructure was garbage in Crimea under Ukraine and corruption was rampant. Russia improved infrastructure and now it not a corrupt lawless free for all like it was under Ukrainian leadership. For the average citizen who doesn't care about the world politic life got much better being in the Russian Federation.

People here who know nothing of the situation in Crimea for the average citizen think we need to go save them or something when they would much rather be left go to on about their daily lives without a war devastating their world.

Think about that on the human level before making a decision to go and try to "save" people that do not want to be saved by having your armies come into their country and destroy it.

also reply to: Zcustosmorum


You seem to have a contrasting opinion to many officials involved. I would like to understand your perspective on the matter a bit more in depth. Could you elaborate on what you feel could be some compromise to this stalemate going g forward from here???

Ukraine seems on the surface to insist on joining the European Union. Is there a scenario where this can be possible without being g at odds with Russia?

a reply to: Strate8

Corruption was a motivator to the anti-Russian Euromidan protests back in 2013. There's no disagreement that Ukraine is a corrupt place, but at least they are trying to get their house in order. In Transparency International's Corruption Index Russia still scores worse than Ukraine.

The fact is that Russia annexed Crimea. If their "claim" was so righteous and correct, then why the invasion? Why the belligerence and meddling? Russia had no legal claim, or legal right to march into Crimea.

The other side of the coin. Since the Russians moved in human rights in Crimea have deteriorated.

UN report

The human rights situation in Crimea* has significantly deteriorated under Russian occupation, with “multiple and grave violations” committed by Russian state agents,

HRW report
Amnesty

a reply to: paraphi

Could be some justifiable claims in the UN report but hard to take anything they say as credible when they turn a blind eye to the savagery in Saudia Arabia and numerous other western allies.

If there was tortures, that is something I would never defend even when my own government legalizes it for themselves to do.

As far as "no legal right to march into Crimea"
How about no legal right for the US, Britain, France, etc marching into Syria?

How about the west having no legal right to arm and support terrorists trying to overthrow the legitimate government of a sovereign nation? Yeah, Syria. Maybe we are gearing up to save Venezuela from themselves by killing a bunch of them too.

And Iran, those peeps need some saving. Please send freedom missiles their way too!!

a reply to: Strate8

You need to keep this on Ukraine and Crimea. Attempting to draw it out to include Saudi, Venezuela, Syria and anything else is just a distraction. Keep to the facts.

By all interpretation of international norms and basic common sense, the Russians invaded and annexed Crimea. If you accept that belligerent behaviour as being OK, then you have learnt nothing from history.