Tango01 | 24 Aug 2016 10:49 p.m. PST |
" It began with the Kremlin's accusation that Ukrainian leaders had "chosen terror over peace," despite the fact Russia has not been able to produce any credible evidence of the alleged "sabotage plot" in Crimea. Additionally, neither the OSCE's monitors, witnesses on the ground, nor any independent media have confirmed Russia's claims of an armed confrontation or bombardment by Ukrainian forces. Andriy Yanitsky, the Ukrainian watchdog that monitors Russian propaganda, has reported that the photograph of a tent that Russian authorities claimed had been used by the saboteurs was in fact a stock photograph lifted from the Internet. As the Crimean journalist Andriy Yanitsky argues, the very idea of sabotage in Crimea is ridiculous. Why would the alleged saboteurs sneak into Crimea, as Moscow claims, when anyone can easily get into the peninsula through either the Kherson checkpoint or Russia itself? …" More here link Amicalement Armand |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 1:23 a.m. PST |
Russia has not been able to produce any credible evidence of the alleged "sabotage plot" in Crimea. Additionally, neither the OSCE's monitors, witnesses on the ground, nor any independent media have confirmed Russia's claims of an armed confrontation or bombardment by Ukrainian forces Again, these claims are not intended for international consumption, but for the domestic Russian market to 'prove' that Russia is constantly under attack, justify action in Ukraine and Crimea and support the current political atmosphere needed to keep certain people in power. …the photograph of a tent that Russian authorities claimed had been used by the saboteurs was in fact a stock photograph lifted from the Internet Not for the first time. Both RT and Vesti ran photos in 2014 showing rioting in Simferapol as justification for the original intervention… despite the footage actually being of Maidan in Kyiv:
And of course we cant forget the convenient satellite photo of the moment a Ukrainian SU-25 (Russian claim) shoots a missile at MH-17, a photo that Russian government claimed to be genuine:
Despite the fact that: > The background was proven to be a Google maps image. > The fighter shown is a MiG29, not an SU-25. > Russia claimed the aircraft was raked with gunfire by two aircraft. > MIT 'expert' George Bilt was cited as saying the Boeing was shot out of the sky in 'a classic fighter jet attack from the rear'. > The airliner in the photo has been identified as an Airbus, not a B777 > Russia also claimed it was shot by a BUK SAM, fired from Ukraine. The problem with wild, contradictory and inaccurate accusations like these is that they undermine credibility not only for this incident, but for every other claim from that point onward. But then they are intended for a limited internal market to justify the need for ongoing military action. |
AUXILIAPAL | 25 Aug 2016 1:31 a.m. PST |
Yes, the war is going on… On the German television,you can see a lot of it but here in France you have nothing else than the burkini problem and Sarkozy! Putin you can go along and sleep on both ears! |
Chokidar | 25 Aug 2016 2:24 a.m. PST |
Yes, with the BBC mentioning the situation once every two months and still pussy footing about "possible Russian involvement that Moscow denies" - |
Mako11 | 25 Aug 2016 2:35 a.m. PST |
To be fair to Putin, he and his cronies aren't the only ones that lie badly, but I do think all should try a little harder, since without a decent, somewhat plausible lie, its just embarrassing for all involved. The only saving grace is that the media sometimes chooses to totally ignore the really bad lies, at least for a while, no doubt out of sympathy for the incompetent people. |
Badgers | 25 Aug 2016 4:18 a.m. PST |
Ukraine is not part of NATO, so why should "the West" have anything to do with it? |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 4:23 a.m. PST |
It's not part of the Soviet Union either, and has closer links and cooperation with NATO since independence in 1991 than it has with the former Warsaw Pact. ;-) |
VVV reply | 25 Aug 2016 4:50 a.m. PST |
Why should we be pals with Ukraine? Ukraine has long been a global breadbasket because of its extensive, fertile farmlands, and it remains one of the world's largest grain exporters |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 5:12 a.m. PST |
Thirty percent of the world's black soil is in Ukraine, and 42 million of the country's 60 million hectares is agricultural land where "wheat, barley, rapeseed and sunflowers grow in abundance". The crops constitute about 55% of the total agricultural output. According to worldgrain.com, "Ukraine exported 39.41 million tonnes of grain, up 14% from 34.8 million tonnes in the same period of last year. Ukraine exported 17.35 million tonnes of wheat, 17.396 million tonnes of corn, 4.4 million tonnes of barley and 256,000 tonnes of other grains." In 2015 Ukraine secured following leading positions worldwide: 1st exporter of sunflower oil 3rd exporter of barley – top was Australia 4th exporter of maize – top was USA 6th exporter of wheat – top was Canada 7th exporter of soybean – top was Argentina China was a major importer from Ukraine. |
Chokidar | 25 Aug 2016 6:26 a.m. PST |
They have also served (not without distinction) as allies in Iraq and under Nato command in Afghanistan. There are quite a few "allies" Nota and otherwise who cannot say as much – or who ed off as soon as a few shots were fired… |
kiltboy | 25 Aug 2016 7:01 a.m. PST |
Not to mention that the 1994 Budapest agreement holds that the US, UK and Russia will guarantee Ukraine's borders which at the time included Crimea as part of Ukraine. Russia has now broken that by invading and annexing Crimea. There is an argument that Putin wants to keep Ukraine compliant and this and the need to supply Crimea were the drivers to invade Eastern Ukraine with hopes of a land bridge to Crimea. Now he's stuck and will remain stuck while Ukraine rebuilds. The West has sanctioned Russia and that is having an impact, Crimea is now no longer it's own region in Russia and the standards of living are decreasing there. I would say give it time as economics are not in Russia's favor. |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 7:03 a.m. PST |
Ukraine has taken part in IFOR (Bosnia), UNPROFOR (Croatia), UNTAES (Croatia) and Ukrainian troops were deployed as part of the Ukrainian-Polish Battalion (UKRPOLBAT) in Kosovo, as well as being present in Afghanistan Lebanon, Kuwait, Angola, Moldova, Sudan, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Their performance was noted when attacked at Kut in Iraq and held the objectives they had been assigned to secure over several hours. Ukrainian naval units have also participated in anti piracy operations off the coast of Somalia. On 19 January 2015 Ukraine's 18th separate helicopter detachment along with other MONUSCO troops carried out a successful operation eliminating 2 camps belonging to illegal armed groups in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. "Ukraine received about 30% of the Soviet military industry, which included between 50 and 60 percent of all Ukrainian enterprises, employing 40% of its working population. Ukraine was, and still remains, a leader in missile-related technology, navigation electronics for combat vessels and submarines, guidance systems, and radar for military jets."… perhaps the real reason why Russia is so loathe to let them live the independence they have had since 1991? |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 7:47 a.m. PST |
Not to mention that the 1994 Budapest agreement holds that the US, UK and Russia will guarantee Ukraine's borders which at the time included Crimea as part of Ukraine. The agreement was a bit flawed, in that it said they would be respected (in return for Ukraine giving up her nuclear missiles) but failed to include any details of what would occur in the event of a breach. There is an argument that Putin wants to keep Ukraine compliant and this and the need to supply Crimea were the drivers to invade Eastern Ukraine with hopes of a land bridge to Crimea. There have been rumours of a land bridge for the last couple of years, but while Crimea is a relatively narrow isthmus to block, holding over 350km of border from Rostov to Armyansk may prove very vulnerable – that's a long old supply chain. It would need to be secured over 100km deep, to the Dneiper river. Possibly feasible in WW2, but modern technology would leave them open to constant threat. Mariupol made it very clear that they want to be in Ukraine, so claiming that they are defending ethnic Russians may fall very thin, not to mention that positive military annexation in the current climate could finish Russia off diplomatically. Now he's stuck and will remain stuck while Ukraine rebuilds. The West has sanctioned Russia and that is having an impact, Crimea is now no longer it's own region in Russia and the standards of living are decreasing there. I would say give it time as economics are not in Russia's favor. Crimea is the proverbial white elephant. Claiming it plays into the romantic memories of days gone by, especially with a much older and mainly retired population who carried out the voting. But Crimea has always been very dependent on the mainland for supplies, especially fresh water, and Ukraine simply has no cause to supply it. The ruble was significantly devalued such that their pensions are worth now, in real buying terms, then they were in Hyrvna. |
Legion 4 | 25 Aug 2016 7:58 a.m. PST |
I think NATO has been significantly reduced thru use in A'stan and Iraq. And more importantly many old NATO members have had huge cutbacks in their militaries. So if only for those 2 reasons. NATO just does not have the assets or in some case the will to do anything. And Putin knows it … |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 8:41 a.m. PST |
Part of the problem may be that NATO was established in 1949 to counter the threat of the Soviet Union (and particularly after the Korean War). It was particularly important to the smaller countries of Europe who felt vulnerable after having struggled against one military force and now felt they could be under threat of another, hence the concept of a mutual defence to try and negate the threat. However since 1989 that threat was severely diminished, which drew into question NATO's purpose in the current political and diplomatic environment. But as with all thing military, they are despised as aggressive wastes of money until the balloon goes up… …and you bet that Tommy sees. |
VVV reply | 25 Aug 2016 8:50 a.m. PST |
And more importantly many old NATO members have had huge cutbacks in their militaries. Yes that was supposed to be the peace dividend, the benefit of peace with Russia. Now that Putin has scrapped peace, the West will rearm. |
kiltboy | 25 Aug 2016 9:06 a.m. PST |
Hi Geoff, I don't disagree with you which is why I think Putin is stuck. |
Weasel | 25 Aug 2016 11:46 a.m. PST |
To answer the original question, the West is located West of the East and North of the South. |
GeoffQRF | 25 Aug 2016 12:07 p.m. PST |
…and that is why we need a like button :-) |
Legion 4 | 25 Aug 2016 3:34 p.m. PST |
Now that Putin has scrapped peace, the West will rearm. But where will the West get the ? But as with all thing military, they are despised as aggressive wastes of money until the balloon goes up… And by then it may be too late … |
Mako11 | 25 Aug 2016 4:13 p.m. PST |
I suspect the printers will just have to run overtime, assuming we can afford the ink and paper. Saw yesterday that the XM-25 may be nixed, even though it apparently worked superbly in Afghanistan, due to budget issues. I can think of a lot of places to cut, in order to come up with the funding for that weapons system. |
VVV reply | 25 Aug 2016 11:57 p.m. PST |
Where do you get the money, well just imagine it. Remember if you are the government, you get the 'money' you spend, back in taxes. WW2 was excellent for the US economy. |
GarrisonMiniatures | 26 Aug 2016 1:38 a.m. PST |
The West has got a lot moremoney than Russia. That isn't the problem. Spending that money wisely may be. |
Legion 4 | 26 Aug 2016 7:40 a.m. PST |
I can think of a lot of places to cut, in order to come up with the funding for that weapons system.
Remember if you are the government, you get the 'money' you spend, back in taxes Neither of which are in the current USA's political/economic agenda, etc., … The US Debt is about at 20 Trillion $$$$. Agree with that GM … The West has more available cash than the Russians. That is literally the "bottom line". But the rub is how to spend it wisely and effectively … And Putin probably knows this …
|
Jcfrog | 26 Aug 2016 9:59 a.m. PST |
They are only surrounded from one side. Probably again the Sevastopol syndrome. |