Ukraine Megathread: Crimea River Build a Bridge, Get Over It

[Farnhamia]

FIRST OFF:

Keep on topic. You are not the topic of this thread. Nor is any other player here. Don't try and make it about you, or them. This is about the conflict that's been ongoing in the Ukraine.

Nationalism - put a lid on it. We get it, there's a lot of strong feelings, but please. Time and place.

Personal attacks - don't do it. Been there, got the tshirt, it sucks.

Links to Sources - please do, please provide, please post your opinion on said piece of information. You know. Contribute meaningfully if possible. Shock, awe.

Political Nicknaming - Since it has been proven that some have had difficulty in knowing where to stop on this, perhaps its best to avoid using them. Some are not inflammatory. Others are very inflammatory. Using none results in no problems, however. This is not a rule for the thread, but it is a very strong suggestion to keep trouble from developing.

-----------------------------------------------------

Fact: The Ukraine has been in turmoil since the ousting of its previous leadership earlier this year, which was a result of decisions made concerning 'who to snuggle up with politically'.

Fact: The Crimean region has been absorbed by Russia following a vote to secede. Said voting has been questioned as to its legitimacy.

Fact: The Russians have been accused of meddling in Ukranian affairs, up to and including sending troops and military equipment to pro-Russian rebels.

Fact: Russia has vehemently denied these claims.

Fact: Everyone and their dog seems to have an opinion on all of this, and it has generally upset folks from all over the globe.

Fact: People posting in here simply to snark or cause trouble will be dealt with firmly. Testing this statement is not recommended.

-----------------------------------------------------

So there you are. Have at it, keep it civil, and kindly remember we aren't at war here on the forum. Don't make a warzone out of this thread.

[Calimera II]

Ohh I get the joke!

Crimea river = Cry me a River!

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Ohh I get the joke!

Crimea river = Cry me a River!

Bravo. I'd give you gold star or an internet, but ... no. Topic, please. Get on it, or get moving. Thanks.

[Calimera II]

Ohh I get the joke!

Crimea river = Cry me a River!

Bravo. I'd give you gold star or an internet, but ... no. Topic, please. Get on it, or get moving. Thanks.

Got it.

On topic. The truth is that there is no truth. All opinions here are pretty biased to one side. But the fact is that Russia violates international law and the sovereignity of the Ukrainian state by supporting the rebels. Sanctions are a good, but won't stop Russia nor Putin. Just take in mind that Putin wants to make Russia superpower number one, it would be a tragedy for him, his popularity and Russia to take a step back and recognize that 'they were wrong.' (Something Putin will never do.

[Malgrave]

I'll re-post some of the links I gave on the previous thread about the involvement of Russian troops and equipment in Eastern Ukraine.

Russian special forces
Russian troops/airborne units
NATO satellite images of Russian equipment operating inside Ukraine

[The balkens]

nice one with the bridge layer, nathi.

anyway, does anyone actually believe the Russian denial that there aren't any Russian forces in Ukraine? i for one, don't.

[DEC-LAND]

nice one with the bridge layer, nathi.

anyway, does anyone actually believe the Russian denial that there are Russian forces in Ukraine? i for one, don't.

The separatist forces(who may or may not be funded and supplied by Russia) are claiming allegiance to Moscow which gives Russia the 'fact-on-the-ground' that there are pro-Russian militants in the Ukraine.

Also, I think that Kiev's policies may have been a cause of this conflict, namely their decision to give Russia their nukes.

[Calimera II]

nice one with the bridge layer, nathi.

anyway, does anyone actually believe the Russian denial that there are Russian forces in Ukraine? i for one, don't.

No, I don't. There is enough evidence Russian troops are operating in Eastern Ukraine. Furthermore, border control between both countries is practically non-existent. This means weapons can enter freely. And even if there weren't Russian troops (hypothetically, of course there are), leaving the borders just open like it is nothing is a reason to increase sanctions on Russia on its own.

[DEC-LAND]

Topic name is pro-Russian.

And the nationstates community is quite pro-Ukraine.

not necessarily.


I think it would be interesting to discuss Kiev's logic in giving up their nuclear weapons.

[Malgrave]

nice one with the bridge layer, nathi.

anyway, does anyone actually believe the Russian denial that there are Russian forces in Ukraine? i for one, don't.

No, I don't. There is enough evidence Russian troops are operating in Eastern Ukraine. Furthermore, border control between both countries is practically non-existent. This means weapons can enter freely. And even if there weren't Russian troops (hypothetically, of course there are), leaving the borders just open like it is nothing is a reason to increase sanctions on Russia on its own.

Russian troops are responsible for the recent successful rebel counter-offensives, so they are directly involved in propping up the rebellion.

[Murkwood]

Hey, bad puns in thread names are my thing!

[Calimera II]

And the nationstates community is quite pro-Ukraine.

not necessarily.


I think it would be interesting to discuss Kiev's logic in giving up their nuclear weapons.

Kiev gave up its nuclear weapons, and in return the US, Britain, Russia and some other countries promised to protect Ukraine and it's sovereignity.

[The Lone Alliance]

Also, I think that Kiev's policies may have been a cause of this conflict, namely their decision to give Russia their nukes.

In a way it's a lot of people's fault, Kiev got rid of their nukes because they believed that there was a treaty where other nations would defend them instead, instead it was merely an agreement that the west had no need to honor.

This could be a bad thing for future attempts to cause nations to give up their weapons of mass destruction.

[Washington Resistance Army]

not necessarily.


I think it would be interesting to discuss Kiev's logic in giving up their nuclear weapons.

Kiev gave up its nuclear weapons, and in return the US, Britain, Russia and some other countries promised to protect Ukraine and it's sovereignity.

Turns out no one respected that.

[The Lone Alliance]

Turns out no one respected that.

Exactly, and if they're not going to respect Ukraine's agreement, how do other nations know they'll respect theirs?

Europe didn't do anything because Europe is currently dependent on Russia through trade agreements.

Will the west abandon other allies out of fear of ruining their own economies because of trade relations?

If China goes after someone will the US just sit on the side lines out of fear of China crashing the economy?

NATO's reputation and the west's reputation has taken a large hit from this that will be hard to recover. Several Eastern European NATO members are demanding more troops and even long term bases.

Most likely it's because they want assurance that NATO is actually going to defend them.

[Lyttenburg]

According to (yet unconfirmed) information, leader of the "Right Sector" Dmitro Yarosh was killed.

This Twitter would no longer inflame hatred to Russians. That scum was killed at Ilovaysk

Or, possibly, his account was hacked by the "CyberBarkut" anti-Kiev hacktivists.

The separatist forces(who may or may not be funded and supplied by Russia) are claiming allegiance to Moscow which gives Russia the 'fact-on-the-ground' that there are pro-Russian militants in the Ukraine.

Also, I think that Kiev's policies may have been a cause of this conflict, namely their decision to give Russia their nukes.

Source for "separatist forces claiming allegiance to Moscow"

Got it.

On topic. The truth is that there is no truth. All opinions here are pretty biased to one side. But the fact is that Russia violates international law and the sovereignity of the Ukrainian state by supporting the rebels. Sanctions are a good, but won't stop Russia nor Putin. Just take in mind that Putin wants to make Russia superpower number one, it would be a tragedy for him, his popularity and Russia to take a step back and recognize that 'they were wrong.' (Something Putin will never do.

Source for "Putin wants to make Russia superpower number one"

[Lyttenburg]

Also, I think that Kiev's policies may have been a cause of this conflict, namely their decision to give Russia their nukes.

In a way it's a lot of people's fault, Kiev got rid of their nukes because they believed that there was a treaty where other nations would defend them instead, instead it was merely an agreement that the west had no need to honor.

This could be a bad thing for future attempts to cause nations to give up their weapons of mass destruction.

Do you have a slightest idea in what shape was the Ukraine in the 90s? Poor, disgrunted Ukrainian officers selling entire arsenals of Soviet era weapons - this is not a fantasy out of "Lord of War", it was a reality.

What, you would preferred for Ukraine to illegaly sell (or "lose") its nukes?

First and foremost, Ukraine has been parted from its nukes (not for free - there were lots of money involved) precisely in the name of the World Peace.

[Geilinor]

In a way it's a lot of people's fault, Kiev got rid of their nukes because they believed that there was a treaty where other nations would defend them instead, instead it was merely an agreement that the west had no need to honor.

This could be a bad thing for future attempts to cause nations to give up their weapons of mass destruction.

Do you have a slightest idea in what shape was the Ukraine in the 90s? Poor, disgrunted Ukrainian officers selling entire arsenals of Soviet era weapons - this is not a fantasy out of "Lord of War", it was a reality.

What, you would preferred for Ukraine to illegaly sell (or "lose") its nukes?

The problem is that one of the countries which signed a treaty to defend Ukraine is invading - the opposite of what it pledged to do 20 years ago.

[Tahar Joblis]

No, I don't. There is enough evidence Russian troops are operating in Eastern Ukraine. Furthermore, border control between both countries is practically non-existent. This means weapons can enter freely. And even if there weren't Russian troops (hypothetically, of course there are), leaving the borders just open like it is nothing is a reason to increase sanctions on Russia on its own.

Russian troops are responsible for the recent successful rebel counter-offensives, so they are directly involved in propping up the rebellion.

Russians from Russia with ties to the FSB et cetera have already been involved. Russian military hardware has already been crossing the border in support of separatists. Russian artillery has already been firing across the border in support of the separatists.

What has changed is the quantity of troops and hardware, and also the type of troops. Now regular Russian conscripts are showing up. Now large numbers of Russian tanks are showing up, not just a handful. This is more costly, both politically and financially, but Putin seems willing to pay any price if the end of the story is that Russia has more territory (or a satellite state that can be kept reliably under Russian control).

[Lyttenburg]

The problem is that one of the countries which signed a treaty to defend Ukraine is invading - the opposite of what it pledged to do 20 years ago.

I can't remember of any country that signed anything covering the "defense" of the Ukraine.

[Washington Resistance Army]

The problem is that one of the countries which signed a treaty to defend Ukraine is invading - the opposite of what it pledged to do 20 years ago.

I can't remember of any country that signed anything covering the "defense" of the Ukraine.

On December 5, 1994 the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Britain and the United States signed a memorandum to remove nuclear weapons in Ukraine. They all signed six agreements for Ukraine, the agreements are:[2]

The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine;
The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;
The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind;
The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of[2] an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used;
The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclearweapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State;
Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_M ... Assurances

[Geilinor]

The problem is that one of the countries which signed a treaty to defend Ukraine is invading - the opposite of what it pledged to do 20 years ago.

I can't remember of any country that signed anything covering the "defense" of the Ukraine.

Russia, the US, and Britain signed an agreement pledging to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and borders. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

[Tahar Joblis]

In a way it's a lot of people's fault, Kiev got rid of their nukes because they believed that there was a treaty where other nations would defend them instead, instead it was merely an agreement that the west had no need to honor.

This could be a bad thing for future attempts to cause nations to give up their weapons of mass destruction.

Do you have a slightest idea in what shape was the Ukraine in the 90s? Poor, disgrunted Ukrainian officers selling entire arsenals of Soviet era weapons - this is not a fantasy out of "Lord of War", it was a reality.

What, you would preferred for Ukraine to illegaly sell (or "lose") its nukes?

First and foremost, Ukraine has been parted from its nukes (not for free - there were lots of money involved) precisely in the name of the World Peace.

Why are random loose nukes a threat to world peace? Well, because if one goes off in the wrong place at the wrong time, someone might respond with more nukes, and then the cycle of retaliation goes bad places.

Basically the same reason why the UN doesn't endorse wars of imperial aggression. Like the one Russia is waging on the Ukraine right now.

[Lyttenburg]

snip

"Respecting borders" in not the same as "defense".

[Washington Resistance Army]

snip

"Respecting borders" in not the same as "defense".

No it isn't the same, but Russia has still violated two points of said treaty.