April 25, 2024, 09:21:39 PM

Author Topic: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin  (Read 57179 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #30 on: March 08, 2014, 11:18:42 PM »
Are you unaware of the fact that the west spent 5 billion dollars to  undermine the legitimate elected govt of Ukraine by hiring these neo Nazis fascists thugs in  Kiev . ?
 I suggest that you should listen to the Nuland tapes again .

I suggest you stop reading conspiracy theory websites... and try to make some kind of sense while you're at it.

Offline Pointman

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4700
  • T&T football: win or lose, we still fetein'
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #31 on: March 09, 2014, 12:15:44 AM »
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26415508

Ukraine crisis: Does Russia have a case?

Russia says it is acting in Ukraine to protect the human rights of its citizens. But what justification does it have for taking de facto control of Crimea?

What is Russia's claim to Crimea?
 
Its historical links with the peninsula go back to Catherine the Great in the 18th Century, when Russia conquered southern Ukraine and Crimea, taking them from the Ottoman Empire. In 1954, Crimea was handed to Ukraine as a gift by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, who was himself half-Ukrainian. Only 10 years earlier, Joseph Stalin had deported Crimea's entire Tatar population, some 300,000 people, allegedly for co-operating with Hitler's Germany.

When Ukraine became independent in 1991, Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed that Crimea could remain in Ukraine, with Russia's Black Sea fleet remaining at Sevastopol under lease. That lease was in recent years extended to 2042.

Is there a legal basis for Russia's actions?

Under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the US, Russia, Ukraine and the UK agreed not to threaten or use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine. They also pledged never to use economic coercion to subordinate Ukraine to their own interest.

Russia says its decision to send troops into Ukraine is necessary to protect Russian citizens.

There is an ethnic Russian majority in Ukraine's autonomous republic of Crimea. Russia's Black Sea fleet is based at Sevastopol, where much of the population have Russian passports. But the US insists there is no legal basis for the Russian move, accusing Moscow of acting unilaterally in violation of its commitment to Ukraine's sovereignty. The G7 group of leading economies agrees.

Under the terms of its agreement with Ukraine, Russia is entitled to have 25,000 troops on the peninsula and currently has an estimated 16,000 deployed there. But these troops have to remain on base. Pro-Russian troops have been deployed across Crimea. Moscow insists they are local self-defence forces, but there are widespread reports that they are from Russia.

So what is Russia's response?
 
Initially, Russia denied breaching the Budapest Memo. But Moscow now says the situation is continuing to worsen in Ukraine after the seizure of power by "radical extremists", threatening the lives and safety of residents in Crimea and other south-eastern regions. It also points to the new government's "trampling" on the 21 February agreement signed by ousted President Viktor Yanukovych.

What happened to the 21 February agreement?

When the president fled Kiev, the opposition moved in to fill the power vacuum. But earlier that week, in a bid to calm the crisis, both sides had agreed a deal to restore the 2004 constitution and reduce the president's powers. That deal was signed by Mr Yanukovych and opposition leaders as well as by three EU foreign ministers - but fast-moving events soon rendered it out of date. It was not signed by the Russian official present.

What about the role of 'radical extremists'?
 
Moscow has regularly complained that the protests in Kiev's Independence Square were hijacked by the far right, who have since gone on to take power in a new government that includes "undisguised Nazis". Two groups, Right Sector and Svoboda (Freedom), are frequently mentioned and there are regular references to wartime nationalist Stepan Bandera, seen as a hero to some but accused by others of being a Nazi collaborator linked to massacres of Jews and Poles.


The far right was a minority element in the protests that attracted a wide cross-section of support from Kiev and other cities. They were, however, often involved in the most violent confrontations and nationalist symbols were frequently visible in the square.

The nationalist Svoboda (Freedom) party has four posts in the government. Oleksandr Sych is deputy prime minister and Oleh Makhnitsky becomes acting chief prosecutor. It also runs the agriculture and ecology portfolios but its leader, who has been accused of anti-Semitism, is not in the government.

Protest leader Andriy Parubiy has become chairman of the National Security Council (NSC). A co-founder of Svoboda and labelled an extremist by the ousted president, one of Mr Parubiy's deputies at the NSC is Dmytro Yarosh, the head of far-right paramilitary group Right Sector.

Is the government anti-Russian?
 
Part of the problem is that the government sworn in last week had little connection to Ukraine's more Russophile east. One of its first actions was to repeal a 2012 law recognising Russian as an official regional language. The decision was widely criticised across Ukraine.


Were Russian citizens in danger in Crimea?

Last week, there were disturbances in the Crimean capital, Simferopol, when pro-Moscow protesters and supporters of Ukraine's new leaders confronted each other outside the parliament building. After reports had emerged of Russian troops taking up positions across Crimea, Moscow accused Kiev of sending armed men to destabilise the peninsula. It was already in Russian hands.

 
Does Crimea create a precedent for other Ukrainian cities?
 
The circumstances in the eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk and Kharkiv are comparable to the situation in Crimea. There have been pro-Russian protests in both predominantly Russian-speaking cities. In Donetsk, some 100 demonstrators stormed the regional administration building on Monday and a businessman, Pavel Gubarev, declared himself people's governor.


Correspondents described how the protesters in Donetsk chanted, "Putin, come". Russian troops have taken part in exercises over the border and President Vladimir Putin has spoken of sending the military onto "the territory of Ukraine" without specifying where. However, he has since said Russia will use force in Ukraine only as as last resort.

So what does Russia want?
 
In Crimea, Moscow appears keen to strengthen its grip, with a package of financial aid to the peninsula in the form of pensions and salaries. It has also promised that a $3bn (£1.8bn) bridge will be built, linking the Russian mainland to Crimea over the Kerch Strait, a distance of some 4.5km (2.8 miles).


Across Ukraine, Moscow is calling for the 21 February agreement to be implemented. Vladimir Putin accepts there is no return for the ousted president but Moscow is stressing the need for a government of national unity. Russia sees the current government as anti-constitutional and not representative of the native Russian-speaking population. It also wants "extremist gangs" to disband.


Just as a side note: If this article were written about a conflict in Africa, the word "ethnic" would not feature anywhere in it. The word "tribe" would be substituted. What makes these Europeans "ethnic groups" and Africans "tribes"? Just an observation.
Trini to de bone; Pointman to de bone.

Offline Ramgoat

  • Full Warrior
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #32 on: March 09, 2014, 12:31:59 AM »
Are you unaware of the fact that the west spent 5 billion dollars to  undermine the legitimate elected govt of Ukraine by hiring these neo Nazis fascists thugs in  Kiev . ?
 I suggest that you should listen to the Nuland tapes again .

I suggest you stop reading conspiracy theory websites... and try to make some kind of sense while you're at it.
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .
« Last Edit: March 09, 2014, 12:40:02 AM by Ramgoat »

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2818
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #33 on: March 09, 2014, 03:18:12 AM »
Europe and the US have been supporting pro-democracy groups in both Ukraine and Russia for a number of years now (didn't that come out in Wikileaks?), but not the Neo-Nazis, who are often trotted out. Their role in governance is minor if anything as far as I know - don't believe everything Putin puts out.

Offline kounty

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
  • Truthfulness is brighter than the light of the sun
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #34 on: March 09, 2014, 04:28:36 AM »

On the first... that link supports your position, how?  Caribbean nations asking for reparations are blaming Cameron for colonialization?  The notion that the UK benefited from its past colonialization of these nations and thus must compensate them, is noble and supported to a certain degree by logic.  That however is hardly the same as suggesting that the Obama administration are hypocrites for criticizing an act arguably the same as that committed by Bush.

On the second, it actually proves my point.  The Cameron administration is clearly distancing itself and disavowing the mistakes made by Blair.  So... this helps your argument, how?

I think you're trying to insinuate that my statement is about the people who hold the office as opposed to the office (which I was careful to distinguish in my response on kerry's statement). In all instances, the office (gov't / administration etc) cannot pretend that they are totally isolated from (and not accountable for) decisions made by the office (administrative personnel etc.) in the past. This means that the current administration must bear some shame if they are not proud of some decisions made by their predecessors.
Is like if a german gone and get imprisoned in Israel on some false charge. I'm sure merkel will have to temper her response based on their history - even after decades of responses from her and predecessors.

Offline ribbit

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4294
  • T & T We Want A Goal !
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #35 on: March 09, 2014, 11:15:36 AM »
A Lot of propaganda from Ukraine. I don't think the media really know where these neo-nazis came from.

Russia definitely want to keep Sevastopol.

Putin's strategy has actually been refuted with this move. He wanted a Eurasian pact not a European one.

Nice post Deeks, didn't realize Ukraine was in debt to Russia in particular. Like Putin want to play Repo man one time!

It's frankly shameful the attention this move generate relative to the human cost. How many dead in the streets in Ukraine? Hundreds? Compare to Syria or CAF. Oh well.

Offline Deeks

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18649
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #36 on: March 09, 2014, 01:11:33 PM »
Are you unaware of the fact that the west spent 5 billion dollars to  undermine the legitimate elected govt of Ukraine by hiring these neo Nazis fascists thugs in  Kiev . ?
 I suggest that you should listen to the Nuland tapes again .

I suggest you stop reading conspiracy theory websites... and try to make some kind of sense while you're at it.
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .

Ramgoat, I work with a IT manager from Moldova in DC. He said the Russian are ruthless. He said Moldova has to thread carefully. The same goes for Lithuania. The reason for these countries having NATO bases was to protect them from Russian naked aggression. They have felt the naked brutality of the Soviets/Russian for over 40 years. Now is it right for the Russians to strike back now. It depends on which side of the coin you are. For Communist and anti-West, Yes. For Westerners and those who know the Russians. No. The Russians have the advantage of this crisis. They have a huge border with Ukraine. Can move in anytime. Also can use or will use Ukrainian of Russian descent to side with them. The Euros are weary of war. They still shell-shocked from WW2. The country can split further.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #37 on: March 09, 2014, 02:11:55 PM »
Ukraine: Are oligarch appointments at odds with new sense of fairness?
Appointment of super wealthy to positions of political power upsets protesters who hoped for new era

After losing control of Crimea, the embattled new Ukrainian government in Kiev has turned to the nation's oligarchs in a bid to calm secessionist sentiment in the pro-Russian east. But the appointment of oligarchs to positions of political power has not been welcomed in all quarters, and certainly not by the protesters who hoped last month's ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych heralded a new era.

Following days of unrest, including pro-Russia rallies and the storming of the parliament building in Donetsk by Moscow's supporters, the region now seems to be slowly calming down. Pro-Russia squatters have now been removed from the administration building, and on the orders of the newly appointed regional governor and Ukraine's 16th-richest man, Serhiy Taruta, the pro-Kremlin activists' leader, Pavel Gubarev, has been arrested.

In a further sign that the environment in the east is stabilising, boxing heavyweight turned politician Vitali Klitschko has a visit to Donetsk scheduled for Sunday. "People here respect power, the oligarchs are wealthy, well known and well respected. They are seen as guarantors of stability," says local journalist Denis Tkachenko.

But for those active in Kiev's Euromaidan, or Independence Square, protests, putting businessmen into positions of power may not have been what they dreamed of. "This is the most controversial step of the new government – it is a risky gamble," says Serhiy Leshchenko, deputy chief editor of Ukrainian newspaper Pravda, and an investigative journalist who has spent decades analysing Ukraine's business and political elite.

Political analysts say the vulnerable fledgling government, under attack from Moscow, may have had no other option open to it. "Those who think there was an alternative are not being realistic. Now the Party of the Regions [the pro-Russian party led by Yanukovych] has effectively gone, the oligarchs are the only actors with potential to stabilise this region," says Adam Swain, economic geographer at the University of Nottingham and a field researcher in Donetsk for more than 20 years.

Many of Ukraine's oligarchs, an elite club of around a dozen billionaires, amassed their wealth following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Rich in natural resources, Ukraine's east became a battleground for influence as a new generation of entrepreneurs vied for ownership of lucrative factories and coal and steel mines.

A lot has changed since then. The oligarchs' investments have bolstered the region's economy substantially. "Donetsk today is almost unrecognisable to the place I first visited in the 90s," says Swain. "The infrastructure and standard of living have improved immensely. The oligarchs have won respect here for their role in this."

And while the oligarchs may have benefited from the political chaos in Ukraine over the last two decades, they now have a vested interest in ensuring stability. Swain says: "It's not the same situation as the 90s. They want a more ordered system. Smoothly operating structures governed by a fixed set of rules help them to protect their wealth."

Tkachenko agrees: "It's a smart move to bring in the oligarchs – their business interests are here and they will fight to protect the region because of this."

Although most of Ukraine's business elite have strong ties with Moscow, if the east of the country were to fall under the influence of the Kremlin then Ukraine's billionaires would quickly be overrun by their wealthier and better connected Russian counterparts. "The Ukrainian oligarchs have no political influence over Putin," says Leshchenko. "If the east were to secede, their businesses would be snatched. They would become the small businessmen of a Russian province".

But perhaps no one is more admired in Ukraine's east than the country's number one oligarch, Rinat Akhmetov. Worth an estimated $15.4bn, according to Forbes, Akhmetov has not become politically involved, although he has entered the debate about the country's future. He is the owner of one of Ukraine's top two football clubs, Shakhtar Donetsk, and the biggest player in the Donbas region mining industry. In 2011 he paid a whopping £136.4m for a penthouse at One Hyde Park in London.

While he has been vocal in his support for a unified Ukraine, the tycoon has said he will not take any active role in government for the time being. But with presidential elections around the corner, and a parliamentary election to follow shortly after, that may change.

Akhmetov has said: "The future of our country has been put under threat. The use of force and lawless actions from outside are unacceptable. I believe that the crisis must only have a peaceful solution. I call upon all fellow citizens to unite for the sake of the unity and integrity of Ukraine."

One question on everyone's lips is what, if anything, do Ukraine's businessmen want in return for their support? Akhmetov does not want a repeat of the situation that followed the Orange Revolution; "this should be about finding ways to co-operate with business leaders not to overhaul the system in a damaging way," says a source close to the tycoon.

Following Ukraine's last revolution in 2004, the government led by Yulia Tymoshenko, herself an oligarch who amassed wealth from dealing in natural resources in the early 2000s, oversaw a controversial reprivatisation drive which stung some of Ukraine's most influential businessmen.

Speaking at a recent forum in Kiev, the bespectacled leader of Fatherland and Ukraine's interim prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk made clear that he would not support the reprivatisation agenda advocated by some Maidan politicians.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/08/ukraine-oligarchs-appointments-new-fairness
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #38 on: March 09, 2014, 02:35:25 PM »
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .

Gorbachev cannot preemptively proscribe the rights of sovereign nations to protect themselves. The only "agreement" signed between NATO and Gorbachev-led Russia was the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (later called the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council). .  Nothing in that cooperation agreement prevents NATO from establishing bases in a neutral country If you want name these alleged "agreements" that were signed and present some substantiation for this wild-ass claim, then feel free.  Honestly, I'm not even sure why I even bothering responding to this bullshit... that you could state with a straight face that this is about Russia being afraid of a NATO base in the Ukraine, tells me you don't know what the ass yuh talking about.  That is further underscored by the assertion that the West funded the presence and involvement of the neo-Nazis in the street protests... nothing in the so-called Nuland tapes supports that, it is patent nonsense.

Offline kounty

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
  • Truthfulness is brighter than the light of the sun
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #39 on: March 09, 2014, 06:06:53 PM »
<a href="http://www.npr.org/v2/?i=286900628&#38;#38;m=287449903&#38;#38" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.npr.org/v2/?i=286900628&#38;#38;m=287449903&#38;#38</a>

When I heard it last week I thought this was interesting.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2014, 06:10:15 PM by kounty »

Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #40 on: March 10, 2014, 12:49:12 PM »
Ted Cruz vs. Rand Paul on Foreign Policy: Quién Es Más Reagan?




The long-interesting Wacko Birds vs. Angry Birds split in today's tumultuous GOP has tended to distract from the split-within-the-split when it comes to Tea Party types and foreign policy.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), representing the anti-interventionist strain, has insisted from the get-go that the Tea Party is an explicit rejection of neoconservative belligerence. While that seemed like wishful thinking in 2011, the notion gained more plausibility by September 2003, when many TP groups and politicians went all-in against the Obama administration's neocon-backed attempts to use force in Syria. When Paul's ambitious and considerably more hawkish Wacko Bird Senate colleagues Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Marco Rubio (R-Florida) joined the doves on Syria, it was a telltale sign that the intervention was doomed.

Well, that was then. Vladimir Putin's thuggish takeover of Crimea and menacing gestures toward Eastern Ukraine are generating a lot of hawk-talk about the alleged consequences of American "weakness," and its possible embodiment in anti-interventionists like Paul. On ABC News yesterday, O.G. Wacko Bird Ted Cruz made it explicit:



"I'm a big fan of Rand Paul. He and I are good friends. But I don't agree with him on foreign policy," Cruz said. "I think U.S. leadership is critical in the world. And I agree with him that we should be very reluctant to deploy military force abroad. But I think there is a vital role, just as Ronald Reagan did… The United States has a responsibility to defend our values." [...]

"A critical reason for Putin's aggression has been President Obama's weakness," Cruz told Karl on "This Week." "That Putin fears no retribution… [Obama's] policy has been to alienate and abandon our friends and to coddle and appease our enemies."

"You'd better believe Putin sees in Benghazi four Americans are murdered, the first ambassador killed in service since 1979, and nothing happens," Cruz added, echoing comments  by other Republicans like Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "You'd better believe that Putin sees that in Syria, Obama draws a red line and ignores the red line. You'd better believe that Putin sees all over the world."

When asked about Russia's record of aggression before Obama became president, including its invasion of Georgia during the presidency of George W. Bush, Cruz instead slammed Obama




Rand Paul, who one year ago went to the Heritage Foundation to unveil what he portrayed as his Reaganesque vision for foreign policy, did not take kindly to Cruz's co-opting of the Gipper, writing a Breitbart.com column titled "Stop Warping Reagan’s Foreign Policy." Excerpt:



Reagan clearly believed in a strong national defense and in "Peace through Strength." He stood up to the Soviet Union, and he led a world that pushed back against Communism.

But Reagan also believed in diplomacy and demonstrated a reasoned approach to our nuclear negotiations with the Soviets. Reagan’s shrewd diplomacy would eventually lessen the nuclear arsenals of both countries.

Many forget today that Reagan’s decision to meet with Mikhail Gorbachev was harshly criticized by the Republican hawks of his time, some of whom would even call Reagan anappeaser. In the Middle East, Reagan strategically pulled back our forces after the tragedy in Lebanon in 1983 that killed 241 Marines, realizing the cost of American lives was too great for the mission.

Without a clearly defined mission, exit strategy or acceptable rationale for risking soldiers lives, Reagan possessed the leadership to reassess and readjust.

Today, we forget that some of the Republican hawks of his time criticized Reagan harshly for this too, again, calling him an appeaser. [...]

I also greatly admire that Reagan was not rash or reckless with regard to war. Reagan advised potential foreign adversaries not to mistake our reluctance for war for a lack of resolve.

What America needs today is a Commander-in-Chief who will defend the country and project strength, but who is also not eager for war.

Regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, for example, there is little difference among most Republicans on what to do. All of us believe we should stand up to Putin's aggression. Virtually no one believes we should intervene militarily.

So we are then faced with a finite menu of diplomatic measures to isolate Russia, on most of which we all agree, such as sanctions and increased economic pressure.

Yet, some politicians have used this time to beat their chest. What we don't need right now is politicians who have never seen war talking tough for the sake of their political careers.



Tart, substantive exchanges like that are one of the reasons I lament the GOP's decision to condense its 2016 presidential nominating schedule. The Republican Party's approach toward foreign policy is up for grabs, and with it the party's potential popularity. Surely on questions of life and death, more debate is better than less.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2014, 12:51:45 PM by elan »
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

Offline fishs

  • I believe in the stars in the dark night.
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #41 on: March 10, 2014, 05:04:33 PM »

 Putin will do what Putin wants and all this theorizing is BS.

 Nobody can stop Putin from annexing the Crimea the same way he has done with Ossetia and Abkhazia, next could  be Dagestan.
Ah want de woman on de bass

Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #42 on: March 10, 2014, 10:54:30 PM »

 Putin will do what Putin wants and all this theorizing is BS.

 Nobody can stop Putin from annexing the Crimea the same way he has done with Ossetia and Abkhazia, next could  be Dagestan.

And that's it right there. There is no one who can tell him what to do. He will do whatever he wants when he wants.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

Offline Ramgoat

  • Full Warrior
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #43 on: March 10, 2014, 11:54:31 PM »
Are you unaware of the fact that the west spent 5 billion dollars to  undermine the legitimate elected govt of Ukraine by hiring these neo Nazis fascists thugs in  Kiev . ?
 I suggest that you should listen to the Nuland tapes again .

I suggest you stop reading conspiracy theory websites... and try to make some kind of sense while you're at it.
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .

Ramgoat, I work with a IT manager from Moldova in DC. He said the Russian are ruthless. He said Moldova has to thread carefully. The same goes for Lithuania. The reason for these countries having NATO bases was to protect them from Russian naked aggression. They have felt the naked brutality of the Soviets/Russian for over 40 years. Now is it right for the Russians to strike back now. It depends on which side of the coin you are. For Communist and anti-West, Yes. For Westerners and those who know the Russians. No. The Russians have the advantage of this crisis. They have a huge border with Ukraine. Can move in anytime. Also can use or will use Ukrainian of Russian descent to side with them. The Euros are weary of war. They still shell-shocked from WW2. The country can split further.
My friend , don't believe all that you read from the mainstream press , look for alternative media sources. Moldova is a divided country and the present pro western govt there has only a 3 seat majority in Parliament .
 The Tranistria region in the Eastern part of Moldova had semi autonomy just like the Crimea and they are Pro  Russian . The next Election in Moldova will see a pro Russian  govt being elected and I am sure that your Moldovan friend didn't tell you that

Offline asylumseeker

  • Moderator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18076
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #44 on: March 11, 2014, 02:46:24 AM »

 Putin will do what Putin wants and all this theorizing is BS.

 Nobody can stop Putin from annexing the Crimea the same way he has done with Ossetia and Abkhazia, next could  be Dagestan.

I accept that Putin will do/attempt to do what he wishes. None of his actions occur in a vacuum. I know you have experience on the ground in Georgia. Context in experience is key ... so too are contextual facts. The fact is Dagestan is part of Russia. So annexation, no. He "owns" Dagestan already.

As far as Ossetia (really you mean South Ossetia) and Abkhazia, there are nuanced differences between the situations. Where there is nuance, you can't sweep it away with generalized assertion.

Offline asylumseeker

  • Moderator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18076
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #45 on: March 11, 2014, 04:10:25 AM »
...
...
...

Ramgoat, I work with a IT manager from Moldova in DC. He said the Russian are ruthless. He said Moldova has to thread carefully. The same goes for Lithuania. The reason for these countries having NATO bases was to protect them from Russian naked aggression. They have felt the naked brutality of the Soviets/Russian for over 40 years. Now is it right for the Russians to strike back now. It depends on which side of the coin you are. For Communist and anti-West, Yes. For Westerners and those who know the Russians. No. The Russians have the advantage of this crisis. They have a huge border with Ukraine. Can move in anytime. Also can use or will use Ukrainian of Russian descent to side with them. The Euros are weary of war. They still shell-shocked from WW2. The country can split further.
My friend , don't believe all that you read from the mainstream press , look for alternative media sources. Moldova is a divided country and the present pro western govt there has only a 3 seat majority in Parliament .
 The Tranistria region in the Eastern part of Moldova had semi autonomy just like the Crimea and they are Pro  Russian . The next Election in Moldova will see a pro Russian  govt being elected and I am sure that your Moldovan friend didn't tell you that

We tend to view these countries as homogenous places, but they are complex in terms of ethnic/tribal (Pointman!!! :applause:) diversity, long historical memories and animosities etc., and interests. Our political reality in T&T has some of the elements that challenge a place like Moldova (corruption?! definitely being one), but we ... even in our infancy ... have a longer legacy of state development, absent the geopolitical jigsaw puzzle.

Moldova is a young nation cobbled together trying to find its way. It has a very porous infrastructure and it's trying to survive in the midst of contending bigger interests. VP is acting as a predator within this weak infrastructure. $$$ is playing a role in securing pro-Russian allegiances. The transition from a controlled economy to open markets has not been an easy transition for everyone. People just want to live and get on with their lives, and they want to do so via the path of minimal resistance. VP offers that option through inducements.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2014, 04:39:16 AM by asylumseeker »

Offline Deeks

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18649
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #46 on: March 11, 2014, 07:47:38 AM »
He said Moldova has to thread carefully. The same goes for Lithuania.

Well Ramgoat, like he always insisted that they had to thread carefully. The Russians moved a lot of their people there during the Soviet era. That is why Putin could use the "protection" of Russian "citizens" to make his invasion valid.

Offline Bitter

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 9689
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #47 on: March 11, 2014, 08:27:42 AM »
Bitter is a supercalifragilistic tic-tac-pro

Offline Controversial

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6878
    • View Profile
    • Gino McKoy
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #48 on: March 11, 2014, 01:29:45 PM »
this is about Russia's gas supplies to europe and the gas lines that run through the ukraine, the revolution was a way to put an end to a proposed pact by putin and the former pm and Russia's monoploy on europe because reserves were found in western ukraine. so a pact with the eu instead of Russia is the beginning of the end  of the monopoly... also cuts revenue to the govt for their defense budget... 

Ukraine is a major gas CONSUMER... in case you didn't know.  They are in no position to threaten Russia's monopoly in Europe, even if they discovered these "reserves" that you claim.  This is about Russia trying to stem the tide of Western influence in the region.  The Ukraine was being considered for membership in the EU.  Where there is a border dispute, or a dispute over the legitimacy of the leadership of a country, membership would be delayed.  This delay is precisely what Putin has in mind, as it buys him time to influence the leadership of the Ukraine, either thru diplomatic channels, or by actively supporting sympathetic candidates.

read properly next time, where did I state they were threatening Russia's monopoly? a pact with the EU and nato on russia's doorstep and a step away from dependence on russia for their supply is the threat... you're basically paraphrasing what I stated in your third sentence..
Putin wants alignment and not sympathy.. the major lines for Gazpron that supply the EU are running thru Ukraine..

spend some time re-reading and comprehending instead of assuming and trying to be critical and trying to sound intelligent about an issue you know little about...
« Last Edit: March 11, 2014, 01:45:14 PM by Controversial »

Offline Controversial

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6878
    • View Profile
    • Gino McKoy
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #49 on: March 11, 2014, 01:44:40 PM »
Are you unaware of the fact that the west spent 5 billion dollars to  undermine the legitimate elected govt of Ukraine by hiring these neo Nazis fascists thugs in  Kiev . ?
 I suggest that you should listen to the Nuland tapes again .

I suggest you stop reading conspiracy theory websites... and try to make some kind of sense while you're at it.
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .

you have time for that pseudo -intellectual, he feels because he is a liar (lawyer) he knows about every topic, when he doesn't know fully about a topic, he tries to discredit your knowledge and pigeon hole it as hearsay, conspiracy theories or talking off the top of your head, to elevate himself and his opinion.

if you get a chance, ask him to disprove your opinion with facts, historical or otherwise.. history, economics and geopolitics dictate a lot of what is going on here, some with in dept knowledge of history and politics could weigh in on this, guys like bakes are outsiders and have limited knowledge with how world politics really work...

i remember my professor back in uni who became a friend as well, was advisor to 3 British pms and also the british govt over a course of 35 years... he agreed fully with my statement,  they have those who read the lines and those who read between the lines.. i think you know what category bakes falls into...
« Last Edit: March 11, 2014, 01:52:00 PM by Controversial »

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #50 on: March 11, 2014, 04:29:12 PM »
read properly next time, where did I state they were threatening Russia's monopoly? a pact with the EU and nato on russia's doorstep and a step away from dependence on russia for their supply is the threat... you're basically paraphrasing what I stated in your third sentence..
Putin wants alignment and not sympathy.. the major lines for Gazpron that supply the EU are running thru Ukraine..

spend some time re-reading and comprehending instead of assuming and trying to be critical and trying to sound intelligent about an issue you know little about...

Right here yuh f**king dunce...

Quote
the revolution was a way to put an end to... Russia's monoploy on europe because reserves were found in western ukraine. so a pact with the eu instead of Russia is the beginning of the end  of the monopoly.

Offline Controversial

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6878
    • View Profile
    • Gino McKoy
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #51 on: March 11, 2014, 06:22:46 PM »
read properly next time, where did I state they were threatening Russia's monopoly? a pact with the EU and nato on russia's doorstep and a step away from dependence on russia for their supply is the threat... you're basically paraphrasing what I stated in your third sentence..
Putin wants alignment and not sympathy.. the major lines for Gazpron that supply the EU are running thru Ukraine..

spend some time re-reading and comprehending instead of assuming and trying to be critical and trying to sound intelligent about an issue you know little about...

Right here yuh f**king dunce...

Quote
the revolution was a way to put an end to... Russia's monoploy on europe because reserves were found in western ukraine. so a pact with the eu instead of Russia is the beginning of the end  of the monopoly.


dunce the alignment with the eu and nato threatens Russia's power situation.. the above does not state Ukraine is the sole reason for the fall of Russia's monopoly... cutting off their gas lines and reducing dependence is the first step to ending their monopoly by having a govt aligned to the eu and nato... i guess i have to spell out everything to someone like yourself in order for you to comprehend... ukraine is not the driving force behind this initiative...

these are the first steps in destabilizing the foothold Russia has, it relates to nato and the EU controlling the ukraine situation, once again you demonstrate your lack of comprehension.. read again... .. the gas finds in western ukraine can effectively cut down on dependence on Russia, hence the reason it is the beginning of the end... you selectively read and comment without grasping the whole paragraph...


Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #52 on: March 11, 2014, 06:51:41 PM »
dunce the alignment with the eu and nato threatens Russia's power situation.. the above does not state Ukraine is the sole reason for the fall of Russia's monopoly... cutting off their gas lines and reducing dependence is the first step to ending their monopoly by having a govt aligned to the eu and nato... i guess i have to spell out everything to someone like yourself in order for you to comprehend... ukraine is not the driving force behind this initiative...

these are the first steps in destabilizing the foothold Russia has, it relates to nato and the EU controlling the ukraine situation, once again you demonstrate your lack of comprehension.. read again... .. the gas finds in western ukraine can effectively cut down on dependence on Russia, hence the reason it is the beginning of the end... you selectively read and comment without grasping the whole paragraph...



Idiot... my comment wasn't about Russia's geopolitical influence, I addressed your assertion vis-a-vis Russia's "monopoly"... which could ONLY mean it's fuel monopoly in Europe.  All that smoke and mirror talk about EU and NATO trying to control the Ukraine or being the secret agitators behind the uprising has f**k all to do with Russia's fuel monopoly.

The bolded refers to what... not the Ukraine being a producer of natural gas and a competing supplier to the EU therefore undermining Russia's monopoly? Even if your assertion is that the EU and NATO are trying to control the Ukraine's reserves... the alleged reserves are no threat to Russia's monopoly since most of the natural gas would be exhausted by domestic consumption.  Whatever other point you thought you were making, I read English not minds, yuh overgrown tun tun.  Not that I would waste my time trying to read your vacuous mind... there is only so much one can seek a spark in an abyss before one realizes the futility of the pursuit.

Offline Ramgoat

  • Full Warrior
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #53 on: March 12, 2014, 12:18:18 AM »
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .

Gorbachev cannot preemptively proscribe the rights of sovereign nations to protect themselves. The only "agreement" signed between NATO and Gorbachev-led Russia was the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (later called the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council). .  Nothing in that cooperation agreement prevents NATO from establishing bases in a neutral country If you want name these alleged "agreements" that were signed and present some substantiation for this wild-ass claim, then feel free.  Honestly, I'm not even sure why I even bothering responding to this bullshit... that you could state with a straight face that this is about Russia being afraid of a NATO base in the Ukraine, tells me you don't know what the ass yuh talking about.  That is further underscored by the assertion that the West funded the presence and involvement of the neo-Nazis in the street protests... nothing in the so-called Nuland tapes supports that, it is patent nonsense.
I vividly remember in 1990 when the foreign minister of the USSR ,   Germany and the USA ..  Eduard Shevardnadze , Hans Schroeder  and Howard Baker is a joint News conference stated that there would be no expansion in the former Warsaw pact countries .
 Whether there  was a signed agreement , I   do not  know . I also never stated that Russia is afraid of a base in the Ukraine but the Russians will never allow it as it is a matter of their national security.  Same for Georgia . Russia consider these countries as their spheres of influence .
 If you do not know  that the west and  the USA in  particular financed these       Maidan    Neo Nazis  fascist thugs who staged a violent  coup against a democratic govt  in Ukraine then you must have been asleep for these past six months .
 You comes across as being badassed   in your knowledge of Geo politics but somehow I  aint  impressed but like you  stated dont waste your time with an idiot like myself
 

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2818
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #54 on: March 12, 2014, 01:11:42 AM »
Don';t make general statements , Go and read some history
  read   about when the Soviet union fell when Gorbachev signed agreements with NATO whereas they will not encroach on   Russia with military bases .
 Everyone of these agreements were violated by the west where right now NATO in encircling  Russia with bases in Poland ,Latvia , Estonia , Lithuania and they thought that Ukraine was next but Putin is pushing back and he is  pushing back hard ,
 Putin drew the line on Ukraine and Georgia  .
 For the record I don't  read conspiracy theory bullshit  , I read history .

Gorbachev cannot preemptively proscribe the rights of sovereign nations to protect themselves. The only "agreement" signed between NATO and Gorbachev-led Russia was the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (later called the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council). .  Nothing in that cooperation agreement prevents NATO from establishing bases in a neutral country If you want name these alleged "agreements" that were signed and present some substantiation for this wild-ass claim, then feel free.  Honestly, I'm not even sure why I even bothering responding to this bullshit... that you could state with a straight face that this is about Russia being afraid of a NATO base in the Ukraine, tells me you don't know what the ass yuh talking about.  That is further underscored by the assertion that the West funded the presence and involvement of the neo-Nazis in the street protests... nothing in the so-called Nuland tapes supports that, it is patent nonsense.
I vividly remember in 1990 when the foreign minister of the USSR ,   Germany and the USA ..  Eduard Shevardnadze , Hans Schroeder  and Howard Baker is a joint News conference stated that there would be no expansion in the former Warsaw pact countries .
 Whether there  was a signed agreement , I   do not  know . I also never stated that Russia is afraid of a base in the Ukraine but the Russians will never allow it as it is a matter of their national security.  Same for Georgia . Russia consider these countries as their spheres of influence .
 If you do not know  that the west and  the USA in  particular financed these       Maidan    Neo Nazis  fascist thugs who staged a violent  coup against a democratic govt  in Ukraine then you must have been asleep for these past six months .
 You comes across as being badassed   in your knowledge of Geo politics but somehow I  aint  impressed but like you  stated dont waste your time with an idiot like myself

Out of interest, why do you think the Ukrainian revolution is headed by Neo-Nazis? The only people accusing them of that are the Russians, who have a clear vested interest in discrediting the new government.

Offline fishs

  • I believe in the stars in the dark night.
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #55 on: March 12, 2014, 06:15:01 AM »


Out of interest, why do you think the Ukrainian revolution is headed by Neo-Nazis? The only people accusing them of that are the Russians, who have a clear vested interest in discrediting the new government.
[/quote]

Where you get confirmation that it is " Neo Nazis" that headed this revolution or coup?
So far to me is only Moscow calling them that. The same Moscow that called Pussy Riot terrorists.

Yuh allyuh like nonsense yes
Ah want de woman on de bass

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #56 on: March 13, 2014, 06:39:10 PM »
Actually the Neo-Nazi component to the protests and newly formed government is well documented. The bbc has a series of articles as well as other news outlets.
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

socafighter

  • Guest
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #57 on: March 13, 2014, 08:15:31 PM »

US drafted Ukraine coup scenario for 2015 presidential vote – ex-Ukrainian security chief


Ukraine's former National Security Chief Alexander Yakimenko has said that the scenario we saw play out in Ukraine had been brought out of mothballs by Washington that planned to use it during the presidential election in 2015.

Mr. Yakimenko said in an interview with the Rossia 24 channel that the Ukrainian coup had unfolded according to a US scenario laid out ahead of the 2015 vote. "The West wasn’t happy with President Yanukovych. So they did everything to convince him of their loyalty. They assured [Yanukovych] that Europe would stand by his side, while at the same time preparing for a regime change in 2015".

The ex-SBU chief said the West had been stalling for time in talks with the EU to give Yanukovych and Putin a chance to strike all necessary deals that would allow Russia to prop-up Ukraine socially, politically and economically and then bring Ukraine into the EU fold at Russia’s expense.
He noted that the President’s decision to put the EU association agreement on hold came as a shock to the US. "Europe was ready to amend some articles of the deal during negotiations and even considered Ukraine’s role as a mediator between Russia and the European Union, a move the United States strongly objected to".
"So, of course, they were forced to enact this protest scenario [earlier than planned]," Yakimenko concluded.

Ukraine’s ex-security chief accuses US, Poland of nipping peace effort in the bud
The United States and Poland have played a force multiplier role in the Ukrainian coup, where Washington was reluctant to let the conflict de-escalate into a peaceful settlement. This is according to Ukraine’s former Security Chief, Alexander Yakimenko.
"At Maidan, there were several political parties and movements who then joined forces to build the Right Sector, plus Western patrons, of course," the former head of Ukraine’s National Security Service said in an interview with the Rossia 24 TV channel.

"Poland and the United States played a special role in it. Poland was represented by the EU’s envoy in Ukraine [Jan Tadeusz] Tombiński. He is a Polish national, which regards its participation in the EU, NATO and all manner of blocs and organizations as a means to boost its leverage."
Mr. Yakimenko said Poland “pulled every string,” using the EU and NATO as its vehicles to "subjugate Ukraine".
According to the disgraced security chief, Washington wasn’t content with the EU's peace initiative in Ukraine. "They weren’t too happy about EU’s intent to go ahead with peace negotiations and peace policy [in Ukraine]. They weren’t happy about the attitude of EU leaders or of [EU’s High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy] Catherine Ashton, who held talks with Yanukovych as the country’s legitimate president".

Snipers shot people from buildings, controlled by Maidan protestors - Ukraine's ex-security chief
Snipers, who were killing people during the Euromaidan, were positioned in the philharmonic society building. For a time, the building was controlled by Andrey Parubiy, commandant of the Euromaidan, Alexander Yakimenko, former Head of the Security Service of Ukraine, told Rossiya 1 Russian TV channel. He thinks that Parubiy made contact with the US intelligence representatives.
"Snipers shot people from the philharmonic society building, which was controlled by commandant Andrey Parubiy. These people attacked Ukrainian law enforcers, who were demoralized and fled, because snipers were shooting them," Alexander Yakimenko said.

"The law enforcers were chased by people armed with different types of weapon. At the very moment, snipers began to shoot the pursuers when the first wave of shootings ended, witnesses saw 20 people, leaving the philharmonic building. These people wore a special uniform, cases for sniper rifles and AKMs rifles. The fact is that is was not only law enforcers who saw these people, but Maidan protestors, including representative of Svoboda, Right Sector, Batkivshchyna and UDAR parties as well.
According to Yakimenko, during the massacre the opposition leaders contacted him and asked him to deploy a special force unit to scoop out the snipers from buildings in central Kiev, but Parubiy made sure that didn't happen.

"The Right Sector and Freedom Party have requested that I use the Alpha group to cleanse these buildings, stripping them of snipers," Yakimenko said. According to him Ukrainian troops were ready to move in and eliminate the shooters.
"I was ready to do it, but in order to go inside Maidan I had to get the sanction from Parubiy. Otherwise the 'self-defense' would attack me from behind. Parubiy did not give such consent," Yakimenko said noting that the Maidan leader had full authority over access to weapons on Maidan, and not a single gun, including a sniper rifle, could get in or out of the square.
The latest developments in Ukraine were the result of an accelerated implementation by external forces, first of all, the United States, of a scenario that was to be used in the country in 2015 during presidential elections, the former head of the Ukrainian Security Service, Alexander Yakimenko, said in interview with Rossiya 24 Russian TV station.

He said Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich was out of favor in the West, adding that a number of countries were conducting work aimed at bringing to power representatives of other political forces at the 2015 presidential elections.
He said Western countries "flirted" with Yanukovich saying Europe was supporting him, and planned "to protract the negotiating process" for Kiev to sign an association agreement with the European Union "for Russia to help reinforce the social and political structure in Ukraine".
According to Yakimenko, this was "to bring Ukraine to Europe for Russian money" later by replacing the Ukrainian president.
Ukrainian President Yanukovich left Ukraine in February after a coup in his country. He told reporters in southern Russia on Tuesday that he remained the legitimate Ukrainian leader despite "an anti-constitutional seizure of power by armed radicals." Russia considers Yanukovich the legitimate Ukrainian president.

The coup came on the wave of mass anti-government protests in Ukraine that started in November 2013 when the country's authorities refused to sign an association agreement with the EU at a Vilnius summit, opting for closer ties with Russia instead.
Yakimenko also said some representatives of the new Kiev authorities are now still actively implementing the will of their American patrons who "need a Ukraine that would fulfill what they believe necessary".
He said he believes the West will continue its policy aimed at destabilizing the situation in Ukraine's southeastern regions and then in Belarus and Kazakhstan.


Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #58 on: March 13, 2014, 08:55:51 PM »
Actually the Neo-Nazi component to the protests and newly formed government is well documented. The bbc has a series of articles as well as other news outlets.

We're not talking participation, we're talking leadership roles... in fact the accusation presently being debated is that the US funded the revolution by having these neo-Nazis stir up trouble.  Calling such a charge nonsense would be charitable.

Quote
Olexiy Haran, a politics professor and a member of the Maidan's organising committee, expressed exasperation at the way the Kremlin's "fascist" trope had taken root in some western minds. "I've had liberal Harvard professors asking me about this. We are talking traditional Russian propaganda," he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/13/ukraine-uprising-fascist-coup-grassroots-movement


Offline Ramgoat

  • Full Warrior
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #59 on: March 13, 2014, 11:41:23 PM »

[/t][/t]
Home
 
Sign up for our FREE Daily Email Newsletter
[/t]
Regime Change in Kiev
Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"

Video

International Business Conference at Ukraine in Washington - National Press Club - December 13, 2013
Victoria Nuland - Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs

US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, Nuland said: “Since the declaration of Ukrainian independence in 1991, the United States supported the Ukrainians in the development of democratic institutions and skills in promoting civil society and a good form of government - all that is necessary to achieve the objectives of Ukraine’s European. We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to achieve these and other goals. ” Nuland said the United States will continue to “promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”

Posted February 09, 2014[/t][/t]

 

1]; } ?>