Ukraine Megathread: Crimea River Part Deux

[Geilinor]

And in even more hilarious news, Ukraine sanctions Russia!

https://www.rt.com/business/315693-ukra ... sanctions/

Ukraine sanctions 25 Russian airlines, including 2 which don't exist

As long as we're sanctioning non existent things, I hereby sanction all Por-por-poros-poproshayka-poroshenko products from California. Feel the might!

Ukrainian sanctions also affect 28 Russian banks, including Gazprombank and Rosselkhozbank, but do not affect Sberbank, VTB and Vnesheconombank which have subsidiaries in Ukraine. The black list also includes four banks that have lost their licenses to operate in Russia.

Interestingly enough, Ukraine did not sanction GazProm. That's disappointing. Although Saakashvili cheered up his fellow Ukrainians, but comparing Ukraine's economy to Gabon. Well, we certainly live in an age of Globalization, an African country is just as wealthy as a European one! Fun times ahead!

Also, how'd the Russian military get all the way to Syria? I thought the Russian military was being slaughtered in Ukraine by thousands, the Western Press said so! And now they're in Syria? Ahhh, the power of believing in your own propaganda, although that might be a bummer, occasionally.

African countries can be richer than European ones. Moldova and Ukraine are poorer than several African countries.

[Shofercia]

And in even more hilarious news, Ukraine sanctions Russia!

https://www.rt.com/business/315693-ukra ... sanctions/



As long as we're sanctioning non existent things, I hereby sanction all Por-por-poros-poproshayka-poroshenko products from California. Feel the might!



Interestingly enough, Ukraine did not sanction GazProm. That's disappointing. Although Saakashvili cheered up his fellow Ukrainians, but comparing Ukraine's economy to Gabon. Well, we certainly live in an age of Globalization, an African country is just as wealthy as a European one! Fun times ahead!

Also, how'd the Russian military get all the way to Syria? I thought the Russian military was being slaughtered in Ukraine by thousands, the Western Press said so! And now they're in Syria? Ahhh, the power of believing in your own propaganda, although that might be a bummer, occasionally.

African countries can be richer than European ones. Moldova and Ukraine are poorer than several African countries.

I know that. Gabon's economy is actually decent, I'd be surprised if Ukraine's economy was just as good.

[Estruia]

And in even more hilarious news, Ukraine sanctions Russia!

https://www.rt.com/business/315693-ukra ... sanctions/



As long as we're sanctioning non existent things, I hereby sanction all Por-por-poros-poproshayka-poroshenko products from California. Feel the might!



Interestingly enough, Ukraine did not sanction GazProm. That's disappointing. Although Saakashvili cheered up his fellow Ukrainians, but comparing Ukraine's economy to Gabon. Well, we certainly live in an age of Globalization, an African country is just as wealthy as a European one! Fun times ahead!

Also, how'd the Russian military get all the way to Syria? I thought the Russian military was being slaughtered in Ukraine by thousands, the Western Press said so! And now they're in Syria? Ahhh, the power of believing in your own propaganda, although that might be a bummer, occasionally.

African countries can be richer than European ones. Moldova and Ukraine are poorer than several African countries.

I don't understand why Shof thinks it is a bad thing that a few African countries are doing better than Ukraine.

[Constantinopolis]

You know what's detrimental to the Ukrainian people?

The brutal austerity pushed by the EU and pro-EU forces within Ukraine. That's what's detrimental to the Ukrainian people.

So is taking Crimea and promoting war.

Note: The brutal austerity would have happened no matter what Russia did. The new Kiev government ushered in by the Euromaidan movement was in favour of extreme austerity from the start.

(the link is to a news report from 27 February 2014 - before Russia did anything in Crimea, and months before the uprisings in Donbass)

[United Marxist Nations]

African countries can be richer than European ones. Moldova and Ukraine are poorer than several African countries.

I don't understand why Shof thinks it is a bad thing that a few African countries are doing better than Ukraine.

Because Africa isn't exactly known for its economic wealth.

[Shofercia]

African countries can be richer than European ones. Moldova and Ukraine are poorer than several African countries.

I don't understand why Shof thinks it is a bad thing that a few African countries are doing better than Ukraine.

Where did I say that it was bad? I said that Saakashvili was cheering people up! His originally prognosis said that Ukraine needed 20 years to come back to what it was, economically, under Yanukovich. Now it's just 15 years! And that's an improvement!

[West Aurelia]

Trial opens for the two Russian soldiers captured in Ukraine.

[New Werpland]

I don't understand why Shof thinks it is a bad thing that a few African countries are doing better than Ukraine.

Where did I say that it was bad? I said that Saakashvili was cheering people up! His originally prognosis said that Ukraine needed 20 years to come back to what it was, economically, under Yanukovich. Now it's just 15 years! And that's an improvement!

What's wrong with being realistic?

[The balkens]

Where did I say that it was bad? I said that Saakashvili was cheering people up! His originally prognosis said that Ukraine needed 20 years to come back to what it was, economically, under Yanukovich. Now it's just 15 years! And that's an improvement!

What's wrong with being realistic?

Doesnt apply to Russia.

[New Werpland]

So is taking Crimea and promoting war.

The new Kiev government ushered in by the Euromaidan movement was in favour of extreme austerity from the start.

Then why does Yatsenyuk want to increase pensions?

[Novus America]

So is taking Crimea and promoting war.

Note: The brutal austerity would have happened no matter what Russia did. The new Kiev government ushered in by the Euromaidan movement was in favour of extreme austerity from the start.

(the link is to a news report from 27 February 2014 - before Russia did anything in Crimea, and months before the uprisings in Donbass)

Umm Russia is also implementing austerity. Austerity is a neccesary evil in some circumstances. You have no choice when you simply cannot afford to maintain current spending.

Austerity was inevitable, the war made it even harsher.

[Shofercia]

Trial opens for the two Russian soldiers captured in Ukraine.

Let the show trials begin!

Where did I say that it was bad? I said that Saakashvili was cheering people up! His originally prognosis said that Ukraine needed 20 years to come back to what it was, economically, under Yanukovich. Now it's just 15 years! And that's an improvement!

What's wrong with being realistic?

How the fuck is that related to what I said? There's nothing wrong with being realistic.

What's wrong with being realistic?

Doesnt apply to Russia.

Russia's the only country that has a realistic proposal on how to handle the Syrian Crisis, but you're more than welcome to continue with posts straight out of fantasyland.

The new Kiev government ushered in by the Euromaidan movement was in favour of extreme austerity from the start.

Then why does Yatsenyuk want to increase pensions?

Probably because, much like he predecessor's Yushenko's, this "Great Western Promoted Reformer" (TM) managed to get his approval ratings to single digits and will say anything to up his approval ratings. It's quite remarkable that every time someone who acts like America's favorite dog gets elected to lead Ukraine, his approval ratings drop to single digits. Hey, maybe single digit approval ratings mean "Democracy for Ukraine" in Obama's and Bush's lingo?

Note: The brutal austerity would have happened no matter what Russia did. The new Kiev government ushered in by the Euromaidan movement was in favour of extreme austerity from the start.

(the link is to a news report from 27 February 2014 - before Russia did anything in Crimea, and months before the uprisings in Donbass)

Umm Russia is also implementing austerity. Austerity is a neccesary evil in some circumstances. You have no choice when you simply cannot afford to maintain current spending.

Austerity was inevitable, the war made it even harsher.

Austerity is rarely inevitable, and to be frank, one of the reasons that Yanukovich signed on with Russia, was to avoid austerity. By couping Ukraine's Democratically Elected President, the idiots currently in charge in Kiev set in motion events that made austerity a necessity. What Const is saying is that these idiots were pro-austerity, irrespective of whether it was needed or not.

Furthermore, if you were to actually study Russia's current economic policy, it's more of a reorientation of the economy, rather than austerity, meaning that while some sectors will experience austerity like symptoms, (the ones that Russia is moving away from,) other sectors experience growth due to government funding, such as the farm acre subsidy program. Compare that with Greek austerity, which is hitting all sectors of the Greek economy. So while "sectoral austerity" might be a necessity, countrywide austerity most certainly shouldn't be a necessity, ever.

[Novus America]

Trial opens for the two Russian soldiers captured in Ukraine.

Let the show trials begin!

What's wrong with being realistic?

How the fuck is that related to what I said? There's nothing wrong with being realistic.

Doesnt apply to Russia.

Russia's the only country that has a realistic proposal on how to handle the Syrian Crisis, but you're more than welcome to continue with posts straight out of fantasyland.

Then why does Yatsenyuk want to increase pensions?

Probably because, much like he predecessor's Yushenko's, this "Great Western Promoted Reformer" (TM) managed to get his approval ratings to single digits and will say anything to up his approval ratings. It's quite remarkable that every time someone who acts like America's favorite dog gets elected to lead Ukraine, his approval ratings drop to single digits. Hey, maybe single digit approval ratings mean "Democracy for Ukraine" in Obama's and Bush's lingo?

Umm Russia is also implementing austerity. Austerity is a neccesary evil in some circumstances. You have no choice when you simply cannot afford to maintain current spending.

Austerity was inevitable, the war made it even harsher.

Austerity is rarely inevitable, and to be frank, one of the reasons that Yanukovich signed on with Russia, was to avoid austerity. By couping Ukraine's Democratically Elected President, the idiots currently in charge in Kiev set in motion events that made austerity a necessity. What Const is saying is that these idiots were pro-austerity, irrespective of whether it was needed or not.

Furthermore, if you were to actually study Russia's current economic policy, it's more of a reorientation of the economy, rather than austerity, meaning that while some sectors will experience austerity like symptoms, (the ones that Russia is moving away from,) other sectors experience growth due to government funding, such as the farm acre subsidy program. Compare that with Greek austerity, which is hitting all sectors of the Greek economy. So while "sectoral austerity" might be a necessity, countrywide austerity most certainly shouldn't be a necessity, ever.

Yanukovich was just trying to buy a little more time, so he could steal more. He never had any long term plan. Austerity was coming no matter what. The Ukrainian economy has never modernized, and was a disaster under him as well. So more of the same (endless corruption, cronyism and poverty) as advocated by Yanukovich was clearly no solution. Ukraine could never maintain its spending, even with Russian bail outs (which Russia can ill afford now).

Besides Russians have said they are willing to accept suffering in the name of patriotism, so why should the Ukrainians not as well? Sure being a Russian satellite would be easier in the short term, but it is not surprising Ukraine is willing to make sacrifices in exchange for sovereignty and the possibility of a future. Sure Russia attacked Ukraine as a result, but not everybody surrenders in the face of threats. Sure surrender is easier than fighting for sovereignty. But people still fight.

Just as Russia has learned, you sometimes have to accept short term pain for long term gain. Modernizing Ukraine's economy was going to be painful no matter what. Of course having to fight a Russian invasion has made it harder.

Anyway "sectoral" austerity is still austerity. And it is what Ukraine is doing, they are not cutting everywhere, or everywhere equally.

I have read about Russia's economic policy. You can call what Ukraine is doing a reorientation as well. Calling Putin's austerity a reorientation does not make it not austerity. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. In fact what both Russia and Ukraine are doing is not so different, as both are cutting many places while still expanding military spending, and trying to support certain areas such as agriculture and pensions.

And both are very painful.

Austerity is nearly always selective, "austerity-like symptoms in certain sectors" IS austerity. That is how austerity works. That is what austerity is.

Now on Syria, Putin has no plan and ZERO intention on solving anything. He is seeking to prolong the Syria war indefinitely. Come on, an old dog does not learn new tricks an we have seen this "frozen conflict" as Russia's number one strategy.

1) Russia is NOT BOMBING ISIS, it is bombing moderate rebels instead, which will only increase extremism.
2) Russia will not use ground troops, and a little extra bombing (of not ISIS) is not going to defeat ISIS. Bombing is never a long term solution.
3) Assad is not the solution, as his corruption, sectarianism and brutality turned the Sunni population against him, and towards the rebels and ISIS. Many in Syria prefer ISIS to Assad. Contrary to Russian claims, dictatorship and autocracy is not the cure for the worlds ills.
4) The refugees are fleeing Assad just as much as ISIS. So if Assad gains ground more will flee.
5) Russia does not need to end the crisis to keep its bases. It simply needs to hold the West, which is all it is trying to do.
6) Many members of ISIS are from Russia, if the war ends, they return to cause havoc. So ending the war is not in Russia's interest.
7) The refugee crisis is hurting the EU, which Putin also wants. So ending the war is not in Putin's interest.
The war and refugee crisis is also a good way to distract the Russian people from the economy.
9) Plus war supports Russia's military industrial complex.

So it is in Putin's best interest to prolong the Syrian conflict. He does not care how many Syrians die of course. Which is explains his "solution". His "solution" is forever war.

Not that I blame him, it makes sense from his prospective, but do not try to sell me that "Russia has a plan to solve the Syrian crisis". Because both you and I know that is BS.

[United Marxist Nations]

AFAIK, there is no plan to solve the Syrian crisis at all.

[Geilinor]

Austerity is rarely inevitable, and to be frank, one of the reasons that Yanukovich signed on with Russia, was to avoid austerity. By couping Ukraine's Democratically Elected President, the idiots currently in charge in Kiev set in motion events that made austerity a necessity. What Const is saying is that these idiots were pro-austerity, irrespective of whether it was needed or not.

Furthermore, if you were to actually study Russia's current economic policy, it's more of a reorientation of the economy, rather than austerity, meaning that while some sectors will experience austerity like symptoms, (the ones that Russia is moving away from,) other sectors experience growth due to government funding, such as the farm acre subsidy program. Compare that with Greek austerity, which is hitting all sectors of the Greek economy. So while "sectoral austerity" might be a necessity, countrywide austerity most certainly shouldn't be a necessity, ever.

Keeping Ukraine's economy the same was not an option. When your economy is struggling and people are poor you have to get the growth somehow - Yanukovych would have to do it eventually.

[Shofercia]

Yanukovich was just trying to buy a little more time, so he could steal more. He never had any long term plan. Austerity was coming no matter what. The Ukrainian economy has never modernized, and was a disaster under him as well. So more of the same (endless corruption, cronyism and poverty) as advocated by Yanukovich was clearly no solution. Ukraine could never maintain its spending, even with Russian bail outs (which Russia can ill afford now).

Besides Russians have said they are willing to accept suffering in the name of patriotism, so why should the Ukrainians not as well? Sure being a Russian satellite would be easier in the short term, but it is not surprising Ukraine is willing to make sacrifices in exchange for sovereignty and the possibility of a future. Sure Russia attacked Ukraine as a result, but not everybody surrenders in the face of threats. Sure surrender is easier than fighting for sovereignty. But people still fight.

Just as Russia has learned, you sometimes have to accept short term pain for long term gain. Modernizing Ukraine's economy was going to be painful no matter what. Of course having to fight a Russian invasion has made it harder.

Anyway "sectoral" austerity is still austerity. And it is what Ukraine is doing, they are not cutting everywhere, or everywhere equally.

I have read about Russia's economic policy. You can call what Ukraine is doing a reorientation as well. Calling Putin's austerity a reorientation does not make it not austerity. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. In fact what both Russia and Ukraine are doing is not so different, as both are cutting many places while still expanding military spending, and trying to support certain areas such as agriculture and pensions.

And both are very painful.

Austerity is nearly always selective, "austerity-like symptoms in certain sectors" IS austerity. That is how austerity works. That is what austerity is.

Now on Syria, Putin has no plan and ZERO intention on solving anything. He is seeking to prolong the Syria war indefinitely. Come on, an old dog does not learn new tricks an we have seen this "frozen conflict" as Russia's number one strategy.

1) Russia is NOT BOMBING ISIS, it is bombing moderate rebels instead, which will only increase extremism.
2) Russia will not use ground troops, and a little extra bombing (of not ISIS) is not going to defeat ISIS. Bombing is never a long term solution.
3) Assad is not the solution, as his corruption, sectarianism and brutality turned the Sunni population against him, and towards the rebels and ISIS. Many in Syria prefer ISIS to Assad. Contrary to Russian claims, dictatorship and autocracy is not the cure for the worlds ills.
4) The refugees are fleeing Assad just as much as ISIS. So if Assad gains ground more will flee.
5) Russia does not need to end the crisis to keep its bases. It simply needs to hold the West, which is all it is trying to do.
6) Many members of ISIS are from Russia, if the war ends, they return to cause havoc. So ending the war is not in Russia's interest.
7) The refugee crisis is hurting the EU, which Putin also wants. So ending the war is not in Putin's interest.
The war and refugee crisis is also a good way to distract the Russian people from the economy.
9) Plus war supports Russia's military industrial complex.

So it is in Putin's best interest to prolong the Syrian conflict. He does not care how many Syrians die of course. Which is explains his "solution". His "solution" is forever war.

Not that I blame him, it makes sense from his prospective, but do not try to sell me that "Russia has a plan to solve the Syrian crisis". Because both you and I know that is BS.

I spoilered the part that I'll requote later on, as I respond to it point by point. No need to requote it in full format twice. That said, wow, just wow. Congratulations Novus America - you fell victim to Putin's Propaganda. Ahhh, hang on, this is a moment of hilarity that I want to savor. *gets out popcorn, cola and cigar* ahhh. Ok, I'm good.

Please don't put words in my mouth. Don't put words in my head. This part, both you and I know that is BS, is stupid! I know that Russia's got a plan, and I even know that it involves the Kurds. I was going to do a thread on it, but my time is limited right now, so I'll do it when I can. I know that Putin has a plan for Syria, and that's most certainly not B/S. Ending a war in a complete victory is much better than keeping the war going. Putin ended the War in Dagestan rather fast - complete victory. Same thing about the Ossetian War. The reason that the war in Ukraine is going, is because Putin cannot score a complete victory from Russia's perspective, unless he openly intervenes, he cannot take Kiev. Hence that war is ongoing. And complete victory need not be occupying the enemy's capital. It simply needs to be complete achievements of all objects. And complete victory is always better than a prolonged war. Now, here's the part where you fell for Putin's Propaganda:

Many members of ISIS are from Russia, if the war ends, they return to cause havoc. So ending the war is not in Russia's interest.

Western Press sucks major balls at analyzing Russia, and it's funny that Putin's taking advantage of it. Quick - tell me of a major successful anti-Russian operation by the IIPB, or any other punks wanting to rape women, while claiming it's for religion or some such bullshit. Fact is, you cannot. They're able to conduct small time operations, and then get slaughtered by the Russian Armed Forces. Putin's whole "they'll cause havoc" speech is propaganda, aimed at those who actually believe that crap. What suddenly changed that they'll cause havoc? Did Red Bull give them wings? Oh, and another thing.

Yes, I know Putin claimed thousands, (or someone did,) and I'm surprised why they didn't say "it's over 9,000!!!" Gullible Western Press would've ran with it. After all, some idiot Forbes blogger actually thought that thousands of Russian special forces died in Ukraine, and the mass media ran with that for a bit. Was kind of funny. The real number is more likely less than 1,000, and you know what the Russian Military can do to prevent them from coming to Russia, while ending the war? Kill them in Syria, because, unless Baghdadi picked up necromancy, that should be a safe bet that they won't come and cause havoc in Russia. A SpetzNaz company is able to wipe that number out in a year. And Putin deployed at least one battalion.

Let's see, what else was there, oh yeah: Russia will not use ground troops, and a little extra bombing (of not ISIS) is not going to defeat ISIS. Bombing is never a long term solution.

Sure, if you don't consider Special Forces allied with actual armed forces of Syria, Iran and Iraq as ground troops. However, since they're soldiers, on the ground, I would, weirdly enough, call them soldiers on the ground. When Putin says "no boots on the ground", he means no regular forces. That goes for any other permanent UNSC country leader.

Russia is NOT BOMBING ISIS, it is bombing moderate rebels instead, which will only increase extremism.

According to the Western Press. The same ones that bought the propaganda I showed earlier. I guess if you're buying propaganda, go big. Would it be ok for me to quote an actual military report: http://top.rbc.ru/politics/30/09/2015/5 ... d619676494

Минобороны опубликовало на своем сайте сообщение о том, что российская авиационная группа, размещенная на сирийском аэродроме Хмеймим, нанесла первые точечные удары по восьми объектам ИГИЛ. «Это склады оружия и боеприпасов, горюче-смазочных материалов, боевая техника, пункты управления, узлы связи, транспортные средства боевиков ИГИЛ. Все цели поражены», — говорится в заявлении. Ведомство также уточнило, что полностью уничтожены командный пункт боевиков и штаб управления террористическими формированиями в горах.

Russia attacked 8 locations, specifically targeting supply depots, oil depots, storage depots, communication hubs, transport depots and headquarters of ISIS. Looks like they hit ISIS to me. But hey, who knows more about the Russian Armed Forces, the Russian Ministry of Defense, or uninformed journalists buying propaganda? And there's the plan, cut of ISIS' supplies, take out their regional HQs, and see how effective undersupplied, thinly stretched fighters can be. Looks like a solid tactic to me. Oh, and they didn't target people at all, except for those in the HQs and Comms, so your statement about them targeting the moderates seems a bit... laughable.

Assad is not the solution, as his corruption, sectarianism and brutality turned the Sunni population against him, and towards the rebels and ISIS. Many in Syria prefer ISIS to Assad. Contrary to Russian claims, dictatorship and autocracy is not the cure for the worlds ills.

And who said that Assad will be there for life? Assad won't last past one or two election cycles. He'll be gone within a decade after ISIS is gone. Maybe sooner. Assad is only there as a unifying figure, and once someone else can play that role, Assad can retire.

Russia does not need to end the crisis to keep its bases. It simply needs to hold the West, which is all it is trying to do.

The West wasn't attacked Assad. The West was/is attacking ISIS. Russian basis aren't really threatened, unless you believe Putin's Propaganda. Then they totally are. We should send over 9000 SpetzNaz Brigades to hold them stat! Halp! In reality, this isn't Ukraine. Russia and the West are on the same, anti-ISIS side. Feel free to stop pretending otherwise at your earliest convenience.

The refugee crisis is hurting the EU, which Putin also wants. So ending the war is not in Putin's interest.

Have you seen the refugee map? You do know that there are millions in Jordan and Turkey who will keep on fleeing to Europe. Putin doesn't need to keep the war going. He could just empower the PKK, and that'll keep the refugees flooding into Europe. Of course, that's if you're poorly assuming that Putin wants the refugee crisis, which he doesn't, since it's also hitting Armenia, Russia's ally. And something tells me that you didn't know that either.

The war and refugee crisis is also a good way to distract the Russian people from the economy.

Like the War in Iraq distracted the American People from the piss poor economy? Good one! War distracts you from the bubble. The bubble burst. Once the bubble bursts, war's not that good of a distraction. And Putin doesn't even need the distraction.

Plus war supports Russia's military industrial complex.

As does a powerful lobby which was doing fine before the war. As does Russia's deal with India. And Pakistan. And China. Do I need to keep going here? Now, for the other stuff:

Yanukovich was just trying to buy a little more time, so he could steal more. He never had any long term plan. Austerity was coming no matter what. The Ukrainian economy has never modernized, and was a disaster under him as well. So more of the same (endless corruption, cronyism and poverty) as advocated by Yanukovich was clearly no solution. Ukraine could never maintain its spending, even with Russian bail outs (which Russia can ill afford now).

The deal that Yanukovich and Putin signed provided a long term solution, even if Yanukovich didn't intended for it to do so. Furthermore, Russia could've expanded the subsidies, easing the pain.

Besides Russians have said they are willing to accept suffering in the name of patriotism, so why should the Ukrainians not as well? Sure being a Russian satellite would be easier in the short term, but it is not surprising Ukraine is willing to make sacrifices in exchange for sovereignty and the possibility of a future. Sure Russia attacked Ukraine as a result, but not everybody surrenders in the face of threats. Sure surrender is easier than fighting for sovereignty. But people still fight.

What sovereignty? The same one that Greece currently has? Furthermore, take a look at who's on top: millionaires and billionaires supported by the West. That'd be like electing Abramovich President of the US and Chubais being the Speaker of the House. Sovereignty my ass. Furthermore, what Const said was that the current inept idiots in Kiev wanted to roll with austerity from the get go.

On top of that, Russians are experiencing hardships after nearly unstoppable economic growth, meaning that quite a few, (the extreme majority,) have nice safety nets. Ukrainians don't. There's a difference between having to drive a 10 year old car and not having water for weeks. And yes, those are made up examples, but they do a damn good job of showing the sheer disparity.

Just as Russia has learned, you sometimes have to accept short term pain for long term gain. Modernizing Ukraine's economy was going to be painful no matter what. Of course having to fight a Russian invasion has made it harder.

Anyway "sectoral" austerity is still austerity. And it is what Ukraine is doing, they are not cutting everywhere, or everywhere equally.

I have read about Russia's economic policy. You can call what Ukraine is doing a reorientation as well. Calling Putin's austerity a reorientation does not make it not austerity. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. In fact what both Russia and Ukraine are doing is not so different, as both are cutting many places while still expanding military spending, and trying to support certain areas such as agriculture and pensions.

And both are very painful.

Austerity is nearly always selective, "austerity-like symptoms in certain sectors" IS austerity. That is how austerity works. That is what austerity is.

That's the thing, Ukraine's austerity isn't going to be short term. Russia's is. Additionally, there's a difference between sectoral austerity and massive austerity, and it's quite simple. Under sectoral austerity, I can retrain and get a job in another sector within a few months. What's Greece's youth unemployment rate? 50% or more? See the difference? So no, one is slightly inconvenient to the population as a whole, the other can be quite deadly, especially if it spirals the country into a massive demographic decline, followed by a huge brain drain.

[Shofercia]

AFAIK, there is no plan to solve the Syrian crisis at all.

AFAYK

Austerity is rarely inevitable, and to be frank, one of the reasons that Yanukovich signed on with Russia, was to avoid austerity. By couping Ukraine's Democratically Elected President, the idiots currently in charge in Kiev set in motion events that made austerity a necessity. What Const is saying is that these idiots were pro-austerity, irrespective of whether it was needed or not.

Furthermore, if you were to actually study Russia's current economic policy, it's more of a reorientation of the economy, rather than austerity, meaning that while some sectors will experience austerity like symptoms, (the ones that Russia is moving away from,) other sectors experience growth due to government funding, such as the farm acre subsidy program. Compare that with Greek austerity, which is hitting all sectors of the Greek economy. So while "sectoral austerity" might be a necessity, countrywide austerity most certainly shouldn't be a necessity, ever.

Keeping Ukraine's economy the same was not an option. When your economy is struggling and people are poor you have to get the growth somehow - Yanukovych would have to do it eventually.

Russia's economy grew massively between 2004 and 2008. Austerity wasn't implemented.

[Geilinor]

Russia's economy grew massively between 2004 and 2008. Austerity wasn't implemented.

Russia has been implementing cuts since the price of oil collapsed.

[Shofercia]

Russia's economy grew massively between 2004 and 2008. Austerity wasn't implemented.

Russia has been implementing cuts since the price of oil collapsed.

Right. That's because the Russian Government erred by tying oil too closely to the budget. If they didn't err, that wouldn't be happening. Ergo my point stands - you shouldn't need austerity to grow your economy.

[Vassenor]

AFAYK

So I take it you're privy to a large amount of classified information that proves Russia is going to be the saviour of all mankind or something?

(Yes I know the sarcasm is poor. I'm still half asleep.)

[Estruia]

AFAYK

So I take it you're privy to a large amount of classified information that proves Russia is going to be the saviour of all mankind or something?

(Yes I know the sarcasm is poor. I'm still half asleep.)

Didn't you know? Shof is actually Putin.

[Chossudovsky]

AFAYK

So I take it you're privy to a large amount of classified information that proves Russia is going to be the saviour of all mankind or something?

(Yes I know the sarcasm is poor. I'm still half asleep.)

Common sense and past experience dictate that Russia's intervention will bring about a swift resolution to the Syrian civil war.

[West Aurelia]

The OSCE has spotted a Russian MLRS that is not used by the Ukrainian military.

[Conserative Morality]

The OSCE has spotted a Russian MLRS that is not used by the Ukrainian military.

Military surplus store.

[BK117B2]

So I take it you're privy to a large amount of classified information that proves Russia is going to be the saviour of all mankind or something?

(Yes I know the sarcasm is poor. I'm still half asleep.)

Common sense and past experience dictate that Russia's intervention will bring about a swift resolution to the Syrian civil war.

Exactly....just like how all the fighting in the Caucasus ended over twenty years ago