Ketara wrote:

Spoiler:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Thanks for your kind words, it is good to hear them, and to be honest, I did not realise I was coming across as such.

I didn't think you did, which was why I wanted to try and get across to you in a non-hostile fashion the type of miscommunication that was going on between you and other posters here. I could see you and a number of other people getting fustrated, and was starting to discount you in the same way, and then realised it probably wasn't entirely fair and nice. We're all just normal blokes here to chat about toy soldiers, and occasionally something on the side. Life's too short for us to get upset over stuff on the internet.

not everyone else here makes such well substantiated posts as you do. Some other people also just shout their opinion without really substantiating. In any case, I want to try to substantiate my posts as well as possible, but I sometimes find it hard to put my thoughts into words. Language is also a barrier here, and I do not always understand what people mean when they write something. I really like your posts, they are unbiased, knowledgable and mostly well sourced. I wish I could say things as well as you can say them.

As someone who's currently striving their best to make it as a military historian, impartiality and thoroughness are part of the crucial main tools of my trade if I want to succeed. As you say, you won't always get people posting eighty five sources in support of their opinion, but most people don't need/want to write huge essays on Dakka as I'm sometimes inclined to do. Which is fair enough, and on most points, it's not always necessary.

I'll gladly concede my arguments about Russia's military to anyone with superior military knowledge and good sources. I also try to get good sources, like NATO's former secretary-general, who said that the EU was a military dwarf compared to Russia and who I quoted earlier in this thread.
I do put thought into my posts, but my opinions may be too strongly worded at times. Maybe you could give me some tips as how to better substantiate my opinions?

A few good tips:-

1) Try not to make broad assertions like, 'The EU is a military dwarf compared to Russia', unless they are manifestly self-evident, and specialist knowledge is not required. To make that statement means you need to have at least basic grasp of the economics behind each countries input into defence, the level of manpower they draw upon, and the comparative levels of technology. If you don't have those things, all you know is that someone said it, and you're repeating it. Which is fine if that other person was knowledgeable, but if they weren't, you'll suffer the same response they did. Which leads to:

2) Before you quote a source as a fact, or even accept as truth anything you read or write, question it. Who wrote it? What was their agenda? What other beliefs do they have, and what motivations? NATO's former Secretary General? What are his interests? Does he work for a prominent defence firm? Does he possibly have interests in exaggerating the Russian menace, in order to boost the 'need' for NATO, and the funding it receives? Is he trained in economics, or was he just a diplomat who got shuffled sideways? You're not always going to have the answers to these questions, but if you ask yourself what motivations a person could have to believe something, or to try and make you believe something, it'll make you harder to fool, more critical, and more impartial.


"What if I told you....that you could save hundreds on car insurance by switching to Geico?"

3) Distrust the media. Seriously. Everyone has an agenda to push. That sparkling review of Krzygstan by their Travel Editor? He got paid to write it. The article slagging off the British prime Minister? The owner of the paper just had a spat with him over a new restrictive law and wants to make him look bad. The 'survey' on how bad immigrants are? Odds are it was manipulated figures in some way, or all the other papers would be running it too.

If you know what influences and pressures a newspaper or website is under, you can spot the gaps in their reporting, and the spin they employ. You can, in other words, read between the lines and deduce the actual facts, or which ones are missing. If you get all your information from one or two media sources, and you don't know what their angle is, they're effectively directing your perception of events. It's a trap a lot of people get sucked into.


"I'll show that son of a gun Spiderman who really controls public opinion round here!"

4) Accept that opinion is not fact, and be able to separate the two in yourself when discussing something. Sebster and me had a slight disagreement a few pages back over Putin's motivations. We both made our predictions/reasoning plain, discussed them briefly, and then politely agreed to disagree. Very gentlemanly, very polite, educated on both sides. But you might remember him saying

 sebster wrote:
People who are confident that they know how this is going to turn out don't know enough to know how little they know, if you get my meaning.

Excellent advice. We both made our predictions and educated guesses, but we are both aware that we may not be in possession of all the facts, It is possible for two people to logically work off the same data and come to a different conclusion. As none of us have a truly defining piece of evidence to convince the other one or to prove our viewpoints, we are both aware that we're ultimately just guessing. If we tried to pass our opinions off as facts and dismiss all alternative views, we'd be being intellectually dishonest.

5) Try and be friendly. When you can feel yourself getting annoyed, try and tone your own posts down a little. I had an argument with another chap earlier on in this thread. I tried to tone my own posts down whilst trying to imply something of a ceasefire, but my own posts still had enough bite in them he didn't believe I was being genuine. Which is fair enough. We took it to PM, and now we're good. Too many people forget this is a wargaming site about toy soldiers, and being able to accept you are wrong, or even just saying, 'Yeah, we're getting overheated over this' makes it that much more fun for everyone. Also lowers your heart pressure.


"Mustn't....Blame...the victim!!!"

MGS wrote:No sir, I heard all you wiff-waff were coming over here so I'm taking Mrs S back to Blighty for two weeks...two... weeks.... two... w.....

Poor show old chap, poor show!

...warned that the Russia would not stand by passively while Russophobic and neo-Nazi gangs hold the people of Crimea, Kharkiv and Donetsk at their mercy.
...

 -Shrike- wrote:
Seriously? Short of a declaration of war, what would you do against Russia in this situation?

 -Shrike- wrote:
Seriously? Short of a declaration of war, what would you do against Russia in this situation?

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
Seriously? Short of a declaration of war, what would you do against Russia in this situation?

Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

Let Putin weigh the size of his balls after that.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
Seriously? Short of a declaration of war, what would you do against Russia in this situation?

Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

Let Putin weigh the size of his balls after that.

Jeez. And we call Russia the aggressor...

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
Seriously? Short of a declaration of war, what would you do against Russia in this situation?

Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

Let Putin weigh the size of his balls after that.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
Seriously? Short of a declaration of war, what would you do against Russia in this situation?

Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

Let Putin weigh the size of his balls after that.

Jeez. And we call Russia the aggressor...

Yes we do.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26499328#FBM347243

Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Massing troops on Russia's border strikes me as particulary aggressive.

 Jihadin wrote:

Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

They cannot join NATO. The Sevastopol Russian Naval Station in Crimea prevented that unless Crimea separates from Ukraine then they can join the NATO Alliance. Then NATO holding a mix bag of dog crap because eastern Ukraine might go way to Putin/Russia. That puts US/EU in a huge jam being the majority of heavy industries is located in eastern Ukraine

 whembly wrote:

Voting “no” is not an option.

O.o

 Jape wrote:
Not sure if this has come up but the UK Stop the War Coalition formed during the invasion of Afghanistan made a statement regarding the current crisis.
[url]
http://stopwar.org.uk/statements/the-crisis-in-ukraine-and-crimea-statement-by-stop-the-war-coalition[/url]

I now want to punch SWC right in its gestalt face.

For those not wanting to read the article it basically says the invasion of Crimea does suck but EU expansion eastwards, historical Russian paranoia of encirclement and the West's dubious wars elsewhere make it not so bad. Its relativistic crap in my opinion, the fact such a 'moral' organisation is willing to endorse the "one for me, one for you" supposedly realist interpretation of geopolitics is baffling but far from surprising. Sadly, particularly for myself as a left-libertarian, the "liberal-left" is awash with an anti-American/anti-West fetish. If the West touches it they simply back the other side.

What is happening in Crimea is in my opinion effectively Anschluss. A referendum for joining Russia following an armed coup, with no build-up to allow foreign observers in (according to the BBC, EU officials have tried several times to enter the region only to be barred by armed militia) or opposition groups to organise while Russian soldiers occupy the area is a white wash.

I have no doubt the intervention by Russia is popular with many, possibly the majority in Crimea but 42% of the population are Ukrainian and Tatar. The Ukrainians have just seen their corrupt president, a puppet of Moscow, removed after popular demonstration only to see Russian troops march into their country. The Tatars meanwhile (plus the former reason) have excellent reason to be wary of a Russian takeover, seeing as they've been ethnically cleansed from the area before.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Massing troops on Russia's border strikes me as particulary aggressive.

And yet marching troops into another nation and seizing military bases and firing at international observers is totally cool with you.

I think you might be bias here.

IN CRIMEA
SIMFEROPOL, Ukraine (AP) — Armed men in Crimea's capital city have confiscated equipment from Associated Press employees and contractors working there.

AP's Global Media Services, a division of the news cooperative that provides services to broadcasters, said a crew was setting up a satellite uplink for a live camera position above a Simferopol restaurant Thursday. They were approached by unarmed men who asked them to turn off their broadcast lights and prevented them from leaving the building.

Two other men then came and took photos of AP's equipment, including protective jackets, and accused the crew of being spies.

Later, armed men showed up and ordered the crew to put their hands against the wall while they cut cables and took the equipment away. Some of the equipment has been recovered, but much is still missing. The contractors and employees were kept at the building for about two hours before being released unharmed.

AP condemned the mishandling of its personnel and the taking of its equipment. Although the armed men weren't identified, AP planned to vigorously protest the incident to the Crimean government.

"Any suggestion that these individuals were anything but journalists is ludicrous. They were professionals doing a job on a story that has generated keen interest among news audiences worldwide," said John Daniszewski, AP senior managing editor for international news in New York.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

Let Putin weigh the size of his balls after that.

 whembly wrote:
Also...

ARMED MEN CONFISCATE AP EQUIPMENT

IN CRIMEA
SIMFEROPOL, Ukraine (AP) — Armed men in Crimea's capital city have confiscated equipment from Associated Press employees and contractors working there.

AP's Global Media Services, a division of the news cooperative that provides services to broadcasters, said a crew was setting up a satellite uplink for a live camera position above a Simferopol restaurant Thursday. They were approached by unarmed men who asked them to turn off their broadcast lights and prevented them from leaving the building.

Two other men then came and took photos of AP's equipment, including protective jackets, and accused the crew of being spies.

Later, armed men showed up and ordered the crew to put their hands against the wall while they cut cables and took the equipment away. Some of the equipment has been recovered, but much is still missing. The contractors and employees were kept at the building for about two hours before being released unharmed.

AP condemned the mishandling of its personnel and the taking of its equipment. Although the armed men weren't identified, AP planned to vigorously protest the incident to the Crimean government.

"Any suggestion that these individuals were anything but journalists is ludicrous. They were professionals doing a job on a story that has generated keen interest among news audiences worldwide," said John Daniszewski, AP senior managing editor for international news in New York.

Russia: No one’s allowed to monitor what we are doing, even though we’re not really there.

 whembly wrote:


Essentially it's...

So the choices are “yes, now” or “yes, later.”

Voting “no” is not an option.

O.o

 Jihadin wrote:
MGS..who was NATO aimed against

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:


Essentially it's...

So the choices are “yes, now” or “yes, later.”

Voting “no” is not an option.

O.o

I didn't know you could read Ukrainian.

In fact, I'm guessing you can't, so could you please provide a link to the article "your" interpretation came from?

Voters in Ukraine’s Russian-occupied Crimea who vote in the March 16 referendum have two choices – join Russia immediately or declare independence and then join Russia.

So the choices are “yes, now” or “yes, later.”

Voting “no” is not an option.

The lack of choice wouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with how Soviet or Russian elections are run.

The Crimean parliament released the design of the ballot that will be used for the referendum, which will be taking place as thousands of Russian soldiers are in control and – it appears – Russian President Vladimir Putin is calling the shots..

Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov has annulled the referendum as illegal and unconstitutional, but the pro-Kremlin Crimean authorities who took power on Feb. 27 do not recognize the legitimacy of central government and have said they will proceed with the vote.

The ballot asks two questions and leaves no option for a “no” vote. Voters are simply asked to check one of two boxes:

Do you support joining Crimea with the Russian Federation as a subject of Russian Federation?

And:

Do you support restoration of 1992 Crimean Constitution and Crimea's status as a part of Ukraine?

That Constitution declares that Crimea is an independent state.

The questions are written in Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar, the three most widely spoken languages on the peninsula, and the paper carries a warning in all three languages that marking both options will invalidate the ballot.

Volodymyr Yavorkiy, a member of the Kharkiv Human Rights Group, says that not only is the referendum completely illegal, the ballot for it doesn't stand up to any criticism.

“There is no option for ‘no,’ they are not counting the number of votes, but rather which one of the options gets more votes,” says Yavorskiy. “Moreover, the first question is about Crimea joining Russia, the second – about it declaring independence and joining Russia. In other words, there is no difference.”

He says with no choice available, “it's clear what the result will be.”

Mykhailo Malyshev, head of the Crimean parliament's commission on referendum, said the election will have 1,250 polling stations equipped with web cameras for the vote.

“We have a desire and preparations for installing web cameras at polling stations. They can play a great role during the vote, and if technically it is possible, the web cameras will be installed,” UNIAN news agency quoted him as saying.

Malyshev also said that 2.5 million ballots will be printed. However, according to the Central Election Commission data, as of Feb. 28, 2014 there were only just over 1.5 million voters in Crimea.

The Central Election Commission, which has also said that the Crimean referendum is illegitimate, took an emergency decision on March 6 to close off the state register to all authorities of the autonomy. In its ruling, the commission said it was doing it “to protect the database of the State register of voters from unsanctioned use of personal data and unsanctioned access and abuse of access.”

 Jihadin wrote:
MGS..who was NATO aimed against

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Emergency sign Ukraine into NATO, move well equipped and well trained Western troops into Ukrainian bases as part of 'shared training exercise'. Move Western fighters and bombers onto Ukrainian airfields and have them fly over Ukrainian sovereign airspace with the understanding that unmarked military units not identifying themselves are international terrorists and can be actively targeted.

Let Putin weigh the size of his balls after that.

That would make for some interesting maneuvering given that it is almost exactly what Putin did.

 whembly wrote:

Як ти смієш припускати, що я не знаю, як читати по-українськи!

 whembly wrote:

Seriously... my twittah feed:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Indeed, let's match him, move for move and see if his bullying and murdering tactics will work as well with a military between 10 to 30 years in advance of his own, recently combat proven, as it has against tiny disorganized nations.

I am fairly solidly of the mindset he'd retreat back behind his borders in short order, and he's welcome to stay there, trade gas and not get any expansionist ideas in the future.

 Jihadin wrote:
Stop sending me PM's about it....