Still in the thick of the action. (As of this minute, I'm to the WEST of Mariupol, but don't tell anyone... leading from the front.) I'm sure you guys probably already heard about the taking out of the coastal patrol gunboat by us bad guys (hey yo)... yeah, I had a hand in it.

Told you my submarine warfare training (holding my breath under water) would help out. Can't get into specifics, sorry. But, I didn't tell you about all the M-80's I smuggled out of the good ol' USA. Boom goes the gunboat.

I've upgraded to a special forces dune buggy to patrol the coast. Here's me celebrating the successful naval operation...

^^Did you give the speech yet?

"we are all NovoRussians"

(09-01-2014 04:34 PM)Lucky Luke Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 04:24 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  Hopefully, yes. Still, compared to what the situation was only a year ago it's not going in the right direction. Putin has recently mentioned his nuclear weapons. If Ukraine would gain entry into Nato there would be a war between heavy members of Nato and Russia. I don't know what the exact definition of a world war is but it would still be a nasty war unless Russia would just give up if Ukraine gains entry into Nato.

This is not the right thread for this, so let's stop here. Let's just say that NATO can't accept Ukraine under it's present rules and that the west has been understandably slow to help Ukraine as they, precisely don't want an open confrontation with Russia. But this discussion belongs elsewhere.

If there's a will, there's a way. If sanctions against Russia don't work then having Ukraine as a Nato member might work. Now, as you mention, many countries are reluctant to do anything about it and Putin knows that. If Ukraine would become a member of Nato then Putin knows that Nato has to act, which might be enough for Russia to calm down. Current Nato members might see it as a way to help Ukraine by hopefully only having to grant them membership expeditiously and then things would calm down. I don't say that an urgent Nato membership will happen but it could potentially.

I'm just saying that a WW3 situation _could_ be on the verge and is more likely than for I don't know how long. Still, I think and hope that it won't be the case.

"Mr Putin told Jose Manuel Barroso: “If I want to, I can take Kiev in two weeks,” Italy’s La Repubblica newspaper reported, implying this could be the result if the EU stepped up sanctions against Russia"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...aders.html

(09-01-2014 05:14 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 04:34 PM)Lucky Luke Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 04:24 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  Hopefully, yes. Still, compared to what the situation was only a year ago it's not going in the right direction. Putin has recently mentioned his nuclear weapons. If Ukraine would gain entry into Nato there would be a war between heavy members of Nato and Russia. I don't know what the exact definition of a world war is but it would still be a nasty war unless Russia would just give up if Ukraine gains entry into Nato.

This is not the right thread for this, so let's stop here. Let's just say that NATO can't accept Ukraine under it's present rules and that the west has been understandably slow to help Ukraine as they, precisely don't want an open confrontation with Russia. But this discussion belongs elsewhere.

If there's a will, there's a way. If sanctions against Russia don't work then having Ukraine as a Nato member might work. Now, as you mention, many countries are reluctant to do anything about it and Putin knows that. If Ukraine would become a member of Nato then Putin knows that Nato has to act, which might be enough for Russia to calm down. Current Nato members might see it as a way to help Ukraine by hopefully only having to grant them membership expeditiously and then things would calm down. I don't say that an urgent Nato membership will happen but it could potentially.

I'm just saying that a WW3 situation _could_ be on the verge and is more likely than for I don't know how long. Still, I think and hope that it won't be the case.

Surely maybe a lot of us are speculating with whatever knowledge that we have, and even predicting plausible directions that we believe may be effective.

And, some of our predictions may come about because of our putting credence into the descriptions of the dire circumstances.

Personally, I believe the West has stepped into something that is way bigger than they can handle at the moment, and also the nearly inability to figure out a course of action regarding the ISIS matter will also contribute to the West's inability to meaningfully step in to stop Russia.

It seems to me that Ukraine joining NATO would be a really stupid-ass card for the West to play or attempt to play because the West remains unable to really meaningfully intervene to stop Russia, and Russia has national border interests in Ukraine NOT becoming a part of NATO.

In other words, I speculate that the odds of Ukraine becoming part of NATO as being very, very, very low... much less than 1%.... But then, again, what the Fuck do I know, currently, I am in California.


Regarding Lucky Luke's comment that any discussion of Ukraine joining NATO belongs elsewhere, I do NOT understand such a comment. This seems to be the main RVF Ukraine conflict thread, at the moment, and if guy's believe that Ukraine joining NATO is a solution (even though that seems implausible to me), then here seems as good a place as any to delve into these kinds of discussions.

(09-01-2014 05:14 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 04:34 PM)Lucky Luke Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 04:24 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  Hopefully, yes. Still, compared to what the situation was only a year ago it's not going in the right direction. Putin has recently mentioned his nuclear weapons. If Ukraine would gain entry into Nato there would be a war between heavy members of Nato and Russia. I don't know what the exact definition of a world war is but it would still be a nasty war unless Russia would just give up if Ukraine gains entry into Nato.

This is not the right thread for this, so let's stop here. Let's just say that NATO can't accept Ukraine under it's present rules and that the west has been understandably slow to help Ukraine as they, precisely don't want an open confrontation with Russia. But this discussion belongs elsewhere.

If there's a will, there's a way. If sanctions against Russia don't work then having Ukraine as a Nato member might work. Now, as you mention, many countries are reluctant to do anything about it and Putin knows that. If Ukraine would become a member of Nato then Putin knows that Nato has to act, which might be enough for Russia to calm down. Current Nato members might see it as a way to help Ukraine by hopefully only having to grant them membership expeditiously and then things would calm down. I don't say that an urgent Nato membership will happen but it could potentially.

I'm just saying that a WW3 situation _could_ be on the verge and is more likely than for I don't know how long. Still, I think and hope that it won't be the case.

Most silly idea I EVER HEARD! For someone who wants to avoid WW3, your ideas just started it. A country (RU) just doesn't change 500 plus years of foreign policy because of a on paper military alliance.

The RU believes war will come and that it is better sooner than later. If UA joined NATO even Crimea would be threatened...RU will nuke each gay city in EU before it would allow that.
Why don't you tell your leaders to stop supporting a crusade against the Donbass? Much more likely or easy.
That being said.. inviting UA into NATO is actually wrong from an American point of view. As a country we traditionally form military alliances that give our own citizens better security(ex..warsaw pact vs Nato). In the last 2 decades without asking us they expanded. The closer you get to an enemy without a buffer zone..the more dangerous ones own security gets. Should anyone die in USA thus having less security just to give others more security?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-31...ing-us-war

Quote:“Ukraine is fighting a war on behalf of all Europe”, according Lithuanian leader Dalia Grybauskaite.

Which is where I think: really, Ukraine has killed over 2000 of its own citizens ‘on behalf of Europe’?

Quote:Regarding Lucky Luke's comment that any discussion of Ukraine joining NATO belongs elsewhere, I do NOT understand such a comment. This seems to be the main RVF Ukraine conflict thread, at the moment, and if guy's believe that Ukraine joining NATO is a solution (even though that seems implausible to me), then here seems as good a place as any to delve into these kinds of discussions.

LOL... he said that because he posted this in the Ukraine travel thread. So Roosh moved it to the Jimukr104 Conflict thread. Well might as well be called that with all the conflict I have received here lol j/k.

Or Big Nilla war thread..he volunteered I hear.

Quote:It seems to me that Ukraine joining NATO would be a really stupid-ass card for the West to play or attempt to play because the West remains unable to really meaningfully intervene to stop Russia, and Russia has national border interests in Ukraine NOT becoming a part of NATO.

Indeed..true. Wars are usually won by the side that puts the most heart into it and has more to lose and has the most natural resources.

Quote:"Mr Putin told Jose Manuel Barroso: “If I want to, I can take Kiev in two weeks,” Italy’s La Repubblica newspaper reported, implying this could be the result if the EU stepped up sanctions against Russia"

Back in March Putin could have taken 90% of Ukraine in about that time. S 4oo systems in Belarus or Russian border can pretty much ground Kiev.

JayJuanGee

^^^^

Shall the rest of the world just watch when a part of Europe just disappears into the hands of Russia?

There will be a Nato summit in Wales in a few days where they will discuss Ukraine and its possible Nato membership. The odds might be against it but as low as 1 percent is probably not realistic. No betting agency would give you 100 times your money if Ukraine don't join Nato within a year I guess.

Lucky Luke's comment was written in another thread but replied to here.

(09-01-2014 06:39 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  ^^^^^

Shall the rest of the world just watch when a part of Europe just disappears into the hands of Russia?

There will be a Nato summit in Wales in a few days where they will discuss Ukraine and its possible Nato membership. The odds might be against it but as low as 1 percent is probably not realistic. No betting agency would give you 100 times your money if Ukraine don't join Nato within a year I guess.

Lucky Luke's comment was written in another thread but replied to here.

Who a part of Europe? Donbass region? Ukraine?
That area has been connected at the hip of RU for 1 thousand years with like only 25 years as an independent nation. And even fighting a west vs east battle for those 25 years(including the 1917-1920 year period). They aren't as a whole anymore European than Mexico is part of USA.

In fact the only part that has ever had western influence is Western Ukraine. Donbass was actually even part of RU 1 hundred years ago. The area was put into UA republic to balance the electorate.

Quote:There will be a Nato summit in Wales in a few days where they will discuss Ukraine and its possible Nato membership. The odds might be against it but as low as 1 percent is probably not realistic. No betting agency would give you 100 times your money if Ukraine don't join Nato within a year I guess.

Next week at the NATO Summit the UK will announce a Joint Expeditionary Force made up of the UK, the Baltics, Poland, Holland, Norway, Denmark and Canada - no USA - which would give the appearance of a "European theatre" coalition of the willing NATO group within NATO. However, while that may seem to be its orientation within the context of Baltic fears and the Ukrainian war, it has a distinctly "Arctic" look about it too - where Russia is becoming aggressive due to oil and gas claims. Clearly the UK and Holland are involved for their BP and Shell interests and others have direct claims on the Arctic.
That list is clearly definitive as to the NATO JEF purposes - and Ukraine isn't one of them.

1. To give the Baltic nations a NATO presence.

2. The others are the nations with claims and interests (BP, Shell) in the Arctic where Russia is also aggressively maneuvering.

Quote:shall the rest of the world just watch when a part of Europe just disappears into the hands of Russia?

Re phrased--shall the rest of the CIS just watch as one of their members has an armed coup funded against it and a gov't put in power that doesn't represent a large part of the country?


*seems like you don't realize Ukraine isn't a country that was in the EU being bought east, it is a country that was in the CIS being taken west.

(09-01-2014 06:39 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  Shall the rest of the world just watch when a part of Europe just disappears into the hands of Russia?

Cheetah, it seems you've been educated on this conflict by Fox News, CNN and their likes.

Here we're having a discussion on a different level than the CNN comment section.

If nothing else, please read this thread going back at least a month or two.

^^Like to add Cheetah based on present NATO rules countries can't join that:
1. Cant fund a military
2. Don't have certain democratic institutions set up and a military that answers to civilians
3. Has disputed territory
4. Has a conflict on going
5. Has foreign troops on its territory (Junta claims RU is on their territory)

Does UA fulfill even 1 of these conditions? I dear say NOT

(09-01-2014 06:29 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  LOL... he said that because he posted this in the Ukraine travel thread. So Roosh moved it to the Jimukr104 Conflict thread. Well might as well be called that with all the conflict I have received here lol j/k.

Or Big Nilla war thread..he volunteered I hear.

We could call it the "keeping up with Big Nilla's various hobbies" thread?

Quote:They aren't as a whole anymore European than Mexico is part of USA.

True, they aren't European, Ukraine is a part of Africa?!

Quote:*seems like you don't realize Ukraine isn't a country that was in the EU being bought east, it is a country that was in the CIS being taken west.

Just because it's a country that historically was inclined to the east means that you just want to stand there watching them get hurt?

Quote:(Today 01:39 AM)Cheetah Wrote:
Shall the rest of the world just watch when a part of Europe just disappears into the hands of Russia?

Cheetah, it seems you've been educated on this conflict by Fox News, CNN and their likes.

Here we're having a discussion on a different level than the CNN comment section.

If nothing else, please read this thread going back at least a month or two.

Not really. I haven't read this whole thread so I might repeat a discussion that has already been discussed though.

(09-01-2014 07:05 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  ^^Like to add Cheetah based on present NATO rules countries can't join that:
1. Cant fund a military
2. Don't have certain democratic institutions set up and a military that answers to civilians
3. Has disputed territory
4. Has a conflict on going
5. Has foreign troops on its territory (Junta claims RU is on their territory)

Does UA fulfill even 1 of these conditions? I dear say NOT

No NATO yet but there is a bill in US Senate that would pretty much bypass all current NATO requirements and make Ukraine a US military partner directly:

Quote:Unprecedented “major non-NATO ally status” is to be accorded to Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia. Military aid is promised to Ukraine, and cryptic verbiage about providing “defense articles or defense services” leaves open the possibility of doing the same for the other two former Soviet republics.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international..._page=true

Deleted: duplicate.

Quote:True, they aren't European, Ukraine is a part of Africa?!

They were part of an empire that spans EURASIA. There history and culture isn't completely European( most of UA was under the Mongols).
Point is they should be treated no difference than if they were in Africa or Asia. They aren't important to EU security considering they never was a part of it.

Quote:Just because it's a country that historically was inclined to the east means that you just want to stand there watching them get hurt?

Well you assume to much with that question. I think most of us on this thread don't think USA should put its nose into any countries affairs regardless of orientation.
But who is hurting them? They West is fighting the east and both sides are being funded and supported by outsiders... that is all. But a junta was installed to pull them west, against the desire of the majority in the east.

(09-01-2014 07:15 PM)rover Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 07:05 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  ^^Like to add Cheetah based on present NATO rules countries can't join that:
1. Cant fund a military
2. Don't have certain democratic institutions set up and a military that answers to civilians
3. Has disputed territory
4. Has a conflict on going
5. Has foreign troops on its territory (Junta claims RU is on their territory)

Does UA fulfill even 1 of these conditions? I dear say NOT

No NATO yet but there is a bill in US Senate that would pretty much bypass all current NATO requirements and make Ukraine a US military partner directly:

Quote:Unprecedented “major non-NATO ally status” is to be accorded to Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia. Military aid is promised to Ukraine, and cryptic verbiage about providing “defense articles or defense services” leaves open the possibility of doing the same for the other two former Soviet republics.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international..._page=true

That bill doesn't protect UA..just allows them to buy our stuff. Israel and other countries already have a similar status.

As long as it lacks article 5...they are by themselves.

(09-01-2014 06:39 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  JayJuanGee

^^^^

Shall the rest of the world just watch when a part of Europe just disappears into the hands of Russia?

Such drama in your description, here. From my understanding Russia has much more symbiosis with the whole of Ukraine than does the West, and if anything the USA seems to frequently attempt to put its claws in a lot of areas of the world without understanding or carrying about local culture and values.. .and a large majority of Americans do NOT even understand that frequently only a narrow set of American interests are being served by such interventionism practices.

(09-01-2014 06:39 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  There will be a Nato summit in Wales in a few days where they will discuss Ukraine and its possible Nato membership. The odds might be against it but as low as 1 percent is probably not realistic. No betting agency would give you 100 times your money if Ukraine don't join Nato within a year I guess.

Well, I am going based on my overall understanding of the situation, and yes, I could be wrong about the odds, but that was my best estimation based on what I understand to be the dynamics.

By the way, I do get things wrong frequently, and frequently governmental actions fall into the category of my getting things wrong because there are politics involved and sometimes, as we may agree, in the name of politics, some stupid-ass decisions are implemented. Though I recognize that even here, we may NOT agree about what is a "stupid-ass decision."

(09-01-2014 06:39 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  Lucky Luke's comment was written in another thread but replied to here.

o.k. My bbbbbaaaaaaddd.

Quote:That bill doesn't protect UA..just allows them to buy our stuff. Israel and other countries already have a similar status.

As long as it lacks article 5...they are by themselves.

^Wasn't Georgia a "major non-NATO ally"? Didn't work out too well for them in 2008. Jim is right. All that bill would do is allow weapons sales and call for anti-ballistic missile defense systems to be set up in Poland and the Baltic States (which is already happening anyway).

As for the NATO summit: It is not to discuss NATO membership for Ukraine, it is to discuss putting bases in Romania, Poland, and the Baltic States and also to discuss the response to ISIS in Iraq/Syria.

The only reason NATO doesn't go out and say that NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia is off the table is because they don't want to look weak at a time when Russia is flexing its muscles. However, everyone already knows how weak the NATO really is. Even if they put 5,000-10,000 troops in Eastern Euro nations like they are planning to, that is nothing compared to what Russia can muster. Russia could easily put 50,000 troops permanently along their Western border along with tanks, helicopters, jets, air-defense systems, etc.

The main reason for this increase in bases is to hold the hands of scared countries like Poland and the Baltic States who worry about the NATO commitment to protect their countries if attacked by Russia.

Quote:Such drama in your description, here.

I wouldn't call it drama but for sure, it gets to you more if it happens to you geographically and culturally closer than for those of you much further away. To me, Ukraine is as European as it can be. The whole country is geographically a part of Europe as well. The same can't be said about France and Spain actually.

(09-01-2014 07:32 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  ^Wasn't Georgia a "major non-NATO ally"?

No, it was not, and still is not.

(09-01-2014 07:20 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  That bill doesn't protect UA..just allows them to buy our stuff. Israel and other countries already have a similar status.

The status doesn't automatically protect Ukraine by NATO forces, but it certainly goes a long way towards being able to do so. Same status as Israel? - I have no doubt whatsoever that USA won't hesitate to nuke a dozen countries in case Israel is attacked.

(09-01-2014 07:35 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

Quote:Such drama in your description, here.

I wouldn't call it drama but for sure, it gets to you more if it happens to you geographically and culturally closer than for those of you much further away. To me, Ukraine is as European as it can be. The whole country is geographically a part of Europe as well. The same can't be said about France and Spain actually.

It is possible that I do NOT understand some of these kinds of feelings of whether people of a FSU country would feel or identify more European than Russian.. .. and in my thinking there are likely considerations that do NOT cause black and white thinking when black and white thinking may NOT be appropriate.

War and conflict frequently increases black and white thinking, though especially the more personally affected people become, including damage to property, persons, integrity and a variety of other personal impacts.

(09-01-2014 07:12 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

Quote:If nothing else, please read this thread going back at least a month or two.

Not really. I haven't read this whole thread so I might repeat a discussion that has already been discussed though.

I'm telling you so that you don't repeat a Ban, not a discussion. Just see what happened to MaxRitter in this thread.

(09-01-2014 07:54 PM)rover Wrote:  

(09-01-2014 07:32 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  ^Wasn't Georgia a "major non-NATO ally"?

No, it was not, and still is not.

Your are right. Thought it was definitely on track to becoming a NATO member before the 2008 war with Russia.

(09-01-2014 07:54 PM)rover Wrote:  The status doesn't automatically protect Ukraine by NATO forces, but it certainly goes a long way towards being able to do so. Same status as Israel? - I have no doubt whatsoever that USA won't hesitate to nuke a dozen countries in case Israel is attacked.

The way the bill is written it looks like it only would provide them with weapons. The thing with non-NATO allies is there are different levels of protection. Israel is essentially like a NATO ally for the USA. There would be no support in the USA for protecting Ukraine from Russia with US troops, so the level of support would obviously be much lower.

As for the possibility of the bill passing, I suspect it is low since the Republicans are the main ones chomping at the bit to pass this bill, and they don't control the Senate.

Not sure how many of you guys understand Putin's actions but let me throw a carrot in the pot. Putin standing up to western interference can be understood by some of the recent history that has happened where Russia has been marginalized and the west has interfered in the affairs of other countries without listening to Russia's voice.

One great example is the case with Lybia. The west is a total hypocrite, they say one thing and do another unlike Putin who stands by his promises and followup actions (whether good or bad). I do not fully support Russia's stance but I understand their actions.
Take a recent historical example where Russia was totally marginalized by the west. Gaddafi in 2011 donated over $20Million to Sarkozy's election campaign. Sure enough, next year during the Libya uprising Sarkozy turns his back on Gaddafi and France is the first country to send fighter jets into Libya and bomb Gaddafi's army. At that time Russia-Putin are strongly opposed to this and try to tell the west (French, British, US) at the UN to reign in their military aggressiveness and seek a diplomatic solution but as always the west does not listen and sends their whole air force armada into Libya to help the rebels. In the process Russian companies such as Gazprom end up loosing billions of dollars in sure oil & gas contracts and their facilities are taken over. This my friends has been happening for a decade. Putin has had enough of the western colonialism and interference and has finally stood up.
Eastern Ukraine as we all know hold's pretty much the richest natural gas deposits in Europe and they are just waiting to be exploited. As always, this is not a war for national identity, this is strictly a war over resources.