Post: #151

This politician talking about how Ukraine may have to go nuclear, lol...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world...r/6250815/

Post: #152

Treaty > Memorandum

It's Ukraine's fault for giving up it's nukes for as little as a post-it-note with some signatures. If they wanted it binding they should of did treaties with the US and UK. "Memorandums" are bogus in the political sense ad get broken all the time. Russia is in violation of that agreement but either legal right via treat signed between the two, Klith is stupid for not seeing that.

Those nukes probably went to the black market as made some good cash to the UK, US, and Russia. They are probably chilling in North Korea or some shit.

Post: #153

Henry Kissinger's recent article on Ukraine on the Washington Post:

To settle the Ukraine crisis, start at the end (2014)

Henry Kissinger Wrote:Ukraine has been independent for only 23 years; it had previously been under some kind of foreign rule since the 14th century. Not surprisingly, its leaders have not learned the art of compromise, even less of historical perspective. The politics of post-independence Ukraine clearly demonstrates that the root of the problem lies in efforts by Ukrainian politicians to impose their will on recalcitrant parts of the country, first by one faction, then by the other. That is the essence of the conflict between Viktor Yanu­kovych and his principal political rival, Yulia Tymo­shenko. They represent the two wings of Ukraine and have not been willing to share power. A wise U.S. policy toward Ukraine would seek a way for the two parts of the country to cooperate with each other. We should seek reconciliation, not the domination of a faction.

Post: #154

(03-11-2014 09:59 AM)kosko Wrote:  Treaty > Memorandum

It's Ukraine's fault for giving up it's nukes for as little as a post-it-note with some signatures. If they wanted it binding they should of did treaties with the US and UK. "Memorandums" are bogus in the political sense ad get broken all the time. Russia is in violation of that agreement but either legal right via treat signed between the two, Klith is stupid for not seeing that.

Those nukes probably went to the black market as made some good cash to the UK, US, and Russia. They are probably chilling in North Korea or some shit.

According to Russia US broke the agreement when they funded and supported a violent coup e tat.
But Ukraine isn't using logic...if Russian troops take Crimea it is implying that it will Nuke Russia.That of course means they will be nuked first. It shows the Ukraine is irresponsible basket-case that should be issued water guns at best.
Ukraine also broke the agreement by not having a good military. It stated that Ukraine had to have a sufficient military.

Post: #155

Ukraine forms new defense force, seeks Western help:

http://news.yahoo.com/confrontation-ukra...14222.html

Post: #156

Post: #157

More footage from VICE News, this time from the Ukrainian and Russian frontlines in the Kherson region of mainland Ukraine:

Post: #158

Good recap of latest events:

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/0...t-and.html

Post: #159

Not wishing it...but just 1 tactical nuke against a large US fleet. .would be enough to make the American people afraid and demand US forces return home and become isolated.Fortress America...

Post: #160

(03-07-2014 06:36 AM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 01:21 PM)ASOT Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:17 AM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  Haven't been following the Ukraine threads till now. Has anyone discussed the possible involvement of George Soros and his foundations? Obviously they have been active in ex-Soviet and Soviet block countries over the years, including the installation of a previous Ukrainian Prime Minister, the blonde chick. I really don't know what their interests are, but maybe other members can enlighten me.

Who wrote John Kerry's "19th century" speech? And how could he keep a straight face when delivering it? I foresee rappers and other musicians sampling that speech just like they did "Comical Ali's" after the invasion of Iraq. It's pretty much at the same level of ridiculousness. Kerry must think people are very, very stupid indeed.

Hear from the satanic man himself about his views and actions in Ukraine:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-26...eakthrough

WND - pretty garden variety coverage of the Soros factor. Mention a total of $100 million poured into Ukraine 'NGOs' by Soros:
http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/soros-heavily...ne-crisis/

Infowars - quotes 'Aleksandr Yefremov' who suggest Soros is funding training of armed revolutionaries as in Libya:
http://www.infowars.com/soros-funded-lib...n-ukraine/



On a macro level it's a genius scheme that Soros and his ilk has enacted.
1. Fund dissent in anywhere that poses a threat to the US or that can be used as a splinter under the nail of a threat.
2. Bring that dissent to a boiling point when needed.
3. Wait for the predictable reactions of the incumbent governments/kings/dictators.
4. Create a load of bull shit called the 'doctrine to protect' that billions of liberals will mindlessly embrace.
5. Totally co-opt the media into pushing this doctrine. Even American RT hosts will be infected by it.
6. By now the unrest is so strong point 4 has created a pretext to invade, or they can simply sit back and fan it from the sidelines as in Syria.

Even as far back as the Gulf War this was the game plan. But now they've refined it so much they needn't even create a perceived threat against the US to win support amongst Americans for whatever the latest expedition is. Just start up the Two Minutes Hate (e.g. anti Russian gay rights b.s., poor Sochi coverage) and you're good to go.

OK. But on your points 1-6: Why, or how, is it that Soros' interests are aligned with American interests? I know he has taken US citizenship, but I doubt whether anyone seriously believes he has any loyalty to America or it's people. Neither any loyalty to Hungary or it's people. He obviously identifies as a "Global Citizen" (As do I incidentally). So what's in it for him? As you mention all these revolutions cost a lot of money (Mercenaries aren't cheap, and they are just one of the last pieces of the puzzle...). Not that I've looked in detail, but has he personally benefited, economically, from any of the "Colour" revolutions? Is he poised to benefit in any way in the current Ukrainian crisis?

Is he genuinely trying to do good, as he sees it, in ex-Soviet/Soviet Block countries? (I understand Hungary itself is not doing too badly), or is there something more sinister? When you have unidentified snipers involved shooting people from rooftops, it is reason for concern.

Not sure. My thoughts as to his motives with all of the areas he funds would be a dynamic mix of:

1. financial opportunities - No explanation needed given he is a macro trader.

2. corporatism/fascism - he agitates for the geopolitical goals of the US government and gets the high level access and immunity needed to be a successful hedge funder for so long without facing prosecution and jail.

3. desire for power - when you have enough money to buy everything material on earth you could ever want, the next step is to control the political outcomes of countries and ultimately peoples lives. If you have control of a 500ft yacht like the Russian oligarchs thats just garish nouveau richness on display. But if you have control of an entire country well congratulations, you're now on the status of emperors and popes lol. Whereas your oligarch peers are either exiled or stuck playing the courtier.

Some say he is influenced by Karl Popper, the 'open society' idea of liberal democracy which he has named his foundations after. But what relation does the channeling of billions of dollars of money to murky NGOs worldwide have to a liberal democratic society espoused by Popper? What relation does the worldwide purchase of influence by a billionaire and the controlling of political affairs which he has no legitimate interest (e.g. patriotic or religious interest) have to democracy? Clearly none. I'd say that simply greed and a huge ego as I summed up in those 3 points is a better explanation for what drives him.

And you're right. He is not the type to consider himself a patriot, but rather a global citizen. No doubt if he had the same connections entrenched in China or elsewhere he'd feign the same loyalty and cooperation with China too.

(03-07-2014 07:37 AM)DaveR Wrote:  Soros barely escaped alive from a dictatorship, so I can understand him feeling a responsibility to help others out of the same situation. I can't see how he could gain a lot from it personally. As a trader it may give him a few more events to trade, but it's an expensive way to do that.

I could understand if the promotion of colour revolutions actually lead to helping people out.

Post: #161

I just got a mail from one of my cousins (5th, 6th grade cousin, i dont know), who has some friends in Crimea. Things are not so "nice" like some russian supporters belive. As far as he told me, these next elections in Crimea will be very fake, just a show.

Post: #162

The calm before the storm.

Post: #163

(03-12-2014 04:09 PM)Mekorig Wrote:  these next elections in Crimea will be very fake, just a show.

Just like we have here in the United States every 4 yrs.

Post: #164

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-265..._118910077

Quote:"Votes taken when occupied by foreign troops are illegal " - John Kerry

You couldn't make this up.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-12...nt-4539187

Quote:Anyone else get the mental image of Putin doing the whole "yeah yeah, whatever you say" with the US diplomatic team on the phone like the US is a nagging wife? Or is it just me? It seems like our rhetoric is getting more and more out of hand because our fearless (reckless) leaders seem to realize they're being ignored and are getting increasingly bitchy (like an ignored nagging wife).

Post: #165

After Annexing Crimea, Russian Troops Are Piling Up By The East Ukraine Border:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-12...ine-border

Post: #166

(03-12-2014 10:28 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  After Annexing Crimea, Russian Troops Are Piling Up By The East Ukraine Border:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-12...ine-border

Tyler Durden???
I don't see any other news sites with that info YET....I think some of us will want someone other than "Tyler Durden " reporting lol.
Makes sense since across the border Red sector sent fighters to suppress Kharkovs pro Russian politicians.

Post: #167

(03-12-2014 11:12 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  

(03-12-2014 10:28 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  After Annexing Crimea, Russian Troops Are Piling Up By The East Ukraine Border:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-12...ine-border

Tyler Durden???
I don't see any other news sites with that info YET....I think some of us will want someone other than "Tyler Durden " reporting lol.
Makes sense since across the border Red sector sent fighters to suppress Kharkovs pro Russian politicians.

Yeah, it is not exactly the best source, but Zero Hedge has been covering the conflict pretty well. The mainstream media (in the USA at least) has pretty much dropped coverage of the conflict other than a few blurbs here and there. Not sure why.

Post: #168

Post: #169

Yet another VICE News dispatch from Crimea, this time on the pro-Russia and pro-Ukraine protests in Simferopol:

Post: #170

For those thinking NATO can help:
stop overestimating even NATO capabilities. I heard all about NATO 79 day bombing runs in Serbia. It was probably the most ineffective air campaign ever. That didn't stop the Serbs.
A war in Ukraine against Russia would be a combination of Yugoslavia and Stalingrad. Russia has the clear advantage logistically and geographically.More important they are more determined..determination counts for A LOT.
Most of the technological pros of the Abrams tank would even be loss in the geographic environment.Another advantage night vision might work against an enemy like Iraq that doesn't have them.. Russians have them.
Serbia if I remember even shot down a stealth bomber..the Russians have thousands of anti aircraft that are much better. No air superiority and there goes NATO advantage.Russians can even get nasty and knock out our satellites.
Fleets are worthless due to subs and the mach 5 missiles that Russia has that can take down super carriers(untested of course).
Even the fact that we have 1.4 and Russia has about 800k..is not accurate. Out of our 1.4 how many are actually going to be on the ground soldiers?
Minus the Navy, Airforce, coast guard and transgenders, religious who won't fight, women on desk duty the forces probably even out.. then add the 2.4 million reserves Russia has and they outnumber us(we have 700k).
Add in NATO and Russia has right to bomb NATO bases.
Long term war we lose because like japan and Hitler, we use more oil than we produce. Russia is the opposite. They can sink oil tankers and its endgame.
Lets not forget tactical nukes..which is in the 2010 Russian military doctrine.
Anyone talking in the media of NATO helping is basically saying they want WW3.
Did I mention that EU/US should never tried to move into Russia's backyard and threaten expand NATO?
I bet anyone here that the Pentagon is THANKING GOD that they never invited Ukraine into NATO. Expansion of NATO is believed by experts to actually decrease US security the closer it gets to Russia. You can google and read many of these opinions.
Ukraine is a victim of geopolitics... nothing that can be done about that.
If you observe the world you will see that MOST nations that are of strategic importance don't ever get to choose their future. Regardless if in USA or Russian sphere of influence. Why isn't the Congo getting 15 billion aid? See my point!

Post: #171

Kerry gives a "red line." http://washingtonexaminer.com/john-kerry...le/2545610

Seems the US/West are going to push this issue and escalate it right now and force Russia's hand... invading Ukraine... instead of letting things simmer for a while with pointless elections/etc. If Russia does invade, I wonder if Israel will use it as an opportunity to attack Syria/Iran.

More info on Russian troops massing on the Ukrainian border. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/world/...raine.html

Post: #172

The US depends on Russia to send our astronauts up to the ISS, and they depend on the money the US pays for that. So I don't think it will come to that, but...

If they invade eastern Ukraine, the Baltics will really freak out.

The lesson is becoming clear for Russia's neighbors: if you have a significant population of Russians, you are in danger.

Post: #173

The lesson is becoming clear for the US/West: Putin/Russia has had enough provocation and they're taking their stand and don't care how the West reacts with sanctions and covert/overt military support for Ukraine. The West has dealt Putin a crappy hand but he will play with it.

Nothing will happen in the Baltics. No way NATO would be stupid enough to attack actual Russian territory or Russia attacking a NATO country... too big of an escalation. At best Russia can turn the tactics around and use Russian protesters to cause problems.

I guess the West thinks that if they put enough pain on the Russian people with sanctions they'll rise up against Putin and put a dumbfuck like Yeltsin in power who will let Russia get eaten up by the Western elites. Russians are better able to deal with suffering than Westerners. The USA and Europe are already at the brink economically. May not take much from Russia and possibly (doubtful) China to push things over the edge. Then what happens when soft Americans and Europeans start really suffering?

Post: #174

(03-13-2014 02:26 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  The US depends on Russia to send our astronauts up to the ISS, and they depend on the money the US pays for that. So I don't think it will come to that, but...

If they invade eastern Ukraine, the Baltics will really freak out.

The lesson is becoming clear for Russia's neighbors: if you have a significant population of Russians, you are in danger.

They should have given the astronaut the scenic route back to earth!
Although Putin is a bit mad... the fact that the west is so against Crimea becoming free shows me that the west has a greedy plan for it. They had no problem with other states splitting up.

Post: #175

Wise words from the old army guy on the end of the VICE video. In other things, to be so well funded, the pro-russian manifestation seems rather anemic compared to the pro-ukranian one.