Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Jihadin wrote:

How is that Ukraine breaking the deal with Russia though?

Because they screamed "We're being invaded by Putin" when they should have asked him or better yet reassure him that his deal will be honored. No one bothered to ask Putin in political field at all. Not New Kiev nor the West. It took him a couple of days of waiting before he initiated operations to maintain operational control on the base. Still no one ask him why nor look at a map to see where exactly his units from Sevestopol deployed.

Edit

They need to break away from manning their units from individuals from the same area the unit is station in. Move western units into eastern Ukraine but that be dicey as heck.

Wait, Russia moves their garrison into occupation mode and UKRAINE is the one breaking the deal?! Surely the Russians could've asked first just as easy as the Ukrainians, the difference being that the latter didn't say anything at all about the base?

EDIT: Since we're competing in banner-waving parade pictures:

The Pentagon cannot find a replacement for the Russian rocket engines it buys anytime soon, a senior official has revealed. The import of the engines has for now been banned via a court order lobbied by SpaceX and based on sanctions against Russia.

OH NO, NOW THE US CAN NOT INTO SPACE

Supposedly the "pro Russian" side has magically shot down several Ukrainian military helicopters.

What was that Star Wars line about shots being far too accurate for Sandmen...

 Frazzled wrote:
Supposedly the "pro Russian" side has magically shot down several Ukrainian military helicopters.

What was that Star Wars line about shots being far too accurate for Sandmen...

http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-strikes-east-2-helicopters-shot-down-122810701.html

Yeah, I was just about to post that the militants shot down two helicopters using mobile antiaircraft stations. Remember there are an awful lot of trained Ukrainian soldiers on the Pro-Russian side that sided with their hometowns and have training on how to use that equipment.

The US was able to train Afghanistani tribesmen in the use of the stinger missile, its not hard to assume that there are some Pro Russian Ex Ukrainian military there that know how to use their systems.

The Ukraine military is really starting to attack, this is getting bad, quickly.

Yeah, shooting down helicopters isn't that surprising. You have to remember that the acting president (IIRC) of Ukraine said a couple of days ago that units from the military had sided with the separatists. If parts of your military secede, starting an offensive was never going to end well.

In other news, Ukraine has reinstated conscription for all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 25, and Russia has called for an emergency meeting of the UN security council. I can't say I blame them, this offensive combined with conscription has the potential for a full-blown civil war.

 -Shrike- wrote:
Yeah, shooting down helicopters isn't that surprising. You have to remember that the acting president (IIRC) of Ukraine said a couple of days ago that units from the military had sided with the separatists. If parts of your military secede, starting an offensive was never going to end well.

In other news, Ukraine has reinstated conscription for all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 25, and Russia has called for an emergency meeting of the UN security council. I can't say I blame them, this offensive combined with conscription has the potential for a full-blown civil war.

Which has nothing t do with Russia, except of course for all the Russian troops in Ukraine.

While the US should not be involved and I don't really care, the Russia defenders are really having to stretch now.

 Frazzled wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
Yeah, shooting down helicopters isn't that surprising. You have to remember that the acting president (IIRC) of Ukraine said a couple of days ago that units from the military had sided with the separatists. If parts of your military secede, starting an offensive was never going to end well.

In other news, Ukraine has reinstated conscription for all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 25, and Russia has called for an emergency meeting of the UN security council. I can't say I blame them, this offensive combined with conscription has the potential for a full-blown civil war.

Which has nothing t do with Russia, except of course for all the Russian troops in Ukraine.

While the US should not be involved and I don't really care, the Russia defenders are really having to stretch now.

It will be interesting to see if the New Ukrainian government has the political clout to actually enforce conscription on its people. I can see a new wave of rebellion against the government if they actually try to enforce it, especially in areas of east Ukraine.

Ukraimne has been in shadow of Russia for centuries, your kidding your self if you think they will give up the historical buffer zones which defend the core Russia motherland.,

Russia's strength is its deapth. And there not likely to want NATO right at there border, however much the times have changed they won,t let people get too close to borders who are not pro Russian.

+ they speak Russian in east, it has strong links to Russia as seen by the flags and such

Does that mean Spain can go one a crusade to take back all Spanish speaking regions? Britain?

There are some Japanese speaking people in the US. Should Japan attempt to take California?

jhe90 wrote:
Ukraimne has been in shadow of Russia for centuries, your kidding your self if you think they will give up the historical buffer zones which defend the core Russia motherland.,

Russia's strength is its deapth. And there not likely to want NATO right at there border, however much the times have changed they won,t let people get too close to borders who are not pro Russian.

+ they speak Russian in east, it has strong links to Russia as seen by the flags and such

They are Russian, so not surprising really. If you watched that last video I posted, it explains a lot.

The Slavyansk self-defense leader said that helicopters were firing on the city with missiles, but that there have been no reports of damage, Interfax stated.

Slavyansk self-defense forces told RIA Novosti that the Ukrainian military had attacked several positions.

“The attack is targeting a few checkpoints at the same time. A few armored vehicles and airborne combat vehicles arrived and airborne troops descended from the helicopters and attacked the checkpoints. Some forces were dropped off around the train station, where we didn’t have anyone,” RIA Novosti quoted the press secretary of the Slavyansk self-defense units as saying.

Meanwhile, the OSCE is trying to reach the Ukrainian authorities in attempt to stop the military operation in the country’s southeast, after a request from Russia.

“We’ve demanded that all that be stopped, and that humanitarian corridors be created for the civilian population, and all air forces flights halted,” the Russian permanent representative to the organization, Andrey Kelin, told RIA Novosti news agency.

 Andrew1975 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
Yeah, shooting down helicopters isn't that surprising. You have to remember that the acting president (IIRC) of Ukraine said a couple of days ago that units from the military had sided with the separatists. If parts of your military secede, starting an offensive was never going to end well.

In other news, Ukraine has reinstated conscription for all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 25, and Russia has called for an emergency meeting of the UN security council. I can't say I blame them, this offensive combined with conscription has the potential for a full-blown civil war.

Which has nothing t do with Russia, except of course for all the Russian troops in Ukraine.

While the US should not be involved and I don't really care, the Russia defenders are really having to stretch now.

It will be interesting to see if the New Ukrainian government has the political clout to actually enforce conscription on its people. I can see a new wave of rebellion against the government if they actually try to enforce it, especially in areas of east Ukraine.

They don't have the money or public support for it. Heck, professional analysis that I've read indicated that half the standard Ukrainian Army was undertrained and badly equipped. There's absolutely no way a administration with such a tenuous grip on the armed forces as things stand has any way of enacting this conscription decree on top of that.

It makes me life quite frankly. It reminds me of when Kitchener announced that Britain was raising an extra 700,000 men at the start of WW1, and the German Parliament went into paroxysms of laughter. IIRC, their quoted response was something along the lines of, 'And how precisely does Lord Kitchener plant o arm and train that many men in a few months?'

not to mention almost half the armed forces are siding with eastern ukrainians....

there is also the:

"hey you, we are drafting you to go fight yourself"

bit that might cause some issues.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

Which has nothing t do with Russia, except of course for all the Russian troops in Ukraine.

aside from crimea, where soildiers already were stationed, legally, prior to this whole thing, and which is now part of russia, there are no russian forces in ukraine (at least, no more then there are US forces in ukraine, advisors like the CIA head are well documented as visiting, while we have no hard evidence of russian intellegence/military operatives.)

keep in mind, when ukraine stated as a "fact" that russian troops were in east ukraine, it was proven to be unmitigated BS and the stories were retracted on the back page after the un-vetted hearsay was put on the front page.

Are you honestly suggesting the head of the CIA's been acting as a covert intelligence operative in Ukraine?

 Seaward wrote:
Are you honestly suggesting the head of the CIA's been acting as a covert intelligence operative in Ukraine?

Well the Ukrainians are losing pretty badly. Isn't that their hallmark?

no... I never said anything like that seaward, not sure why you get that impression.

Are you honestly under the impression they sent the head of the CIA just to give hugs and thumbs up?

I just said that he is there in a support role... he is an overt operative, by definition... thats his job.

If they just wanted to give moral support, and not intelligence support, why not stop at sending kerry? or just send them a non head of the CIA.


as it is, we have verifiable, namable people from the US government on record as visiting and backing the western ukraininans. we have no names or verifiable members of the russian government (though its safe to assume they have some advisors there too, despite there being no solid evidence)

Isn't the IA in cia, an oxymoron.

 easysauce wrote:
no... I never said anything like that seaward, not sure why you get that impression.

When you're accusing every NGO in the country over the past ten years of being a front for covert US operations, it gets a little tough to separate the rational wheat from the crazy chaff.

Are you honestly under the impression they sent the head of the CIA just to give hugs and thumbs up?

No. I think he probably went for the same reasons his predecessor went to Saigon in the '60s.

I just said that he is there in a support role... he is an overt operative, by definition... thats his job.

He's a manager, not an agent.

If they just wanted to give moral support, and not intelligence support, why not stop at sending kerry? or just send them a non head of the CIA.

Why would we not want to give intelligence support? We generally don't like seeing friendly governments fall to foreign invaders.

as it is, we have verifiable, namable people from the US government on record as visiting and backing the western ukraininans. we have no names or verifiable members of the russian government (though its safe to assume they have some advisors there too, despite there being no solid evidence)

You mean other than Putin, right? Putin backs the separatists.

Why would we not want to give intelligence support? We generally don't like seeing friendly governments fall to foreign invaders.

Especially when you staged a revolution to get said friendly government.

When you're accusing every NGO in the country over the past ten years of being a front for covert US operations, it gets a little tough to separate the rational wheat from the crazy chaff.

Actually, I blamed the NGOs, and not all of them, just the ones that are heavily funded by the government and just so happen to also show up whenever a country is being destabilized. I'm sure it could just be coincidence the CANVAS among others, always seams to be lurking around these revolutions and civil wars.

 Seaward wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
no... I never said anything like that seaward, not sure why you get that impression.

When you're accusing every NGO in the country over the past ten years of being a front for covert US operations, it gets a little tough to separate the rational wheat from the crazy chaff. I never claimed this.. why do you think it? seriously, talk about "crazy chaff"... I said NOTHING about the last 10 years of NGO's, not a single word. Yet you are putting words in my mouth here seaward, all I said was that he was there in an overt advisor/operative (managers are still operatives, and agents, the term is not synonomous with feild agents alone).

Are you honestly under the impression they sent the head of the CIA just to give hugs and thumbs up?

No. I think he probably went for the same reasons his predecessor went to Saigon in the '60s. right, this is exactly what I said... he is there for an advisory role, and its an overt advisory role. not sure why you are argueing with me when we are both saying the CIA is there to help advise.plan ect. Just like saigon, this is indicative of the states support for the west ukraine government.

and While you claim putin backs the separatists, he hasnt visited, nor has his top advisors. OBS he does back them to a degree, but he has yet to go so far as to send any prominent members of his government in to do anything.

This thread is full of people denying and yelling about how the states is NOT backing the east ukrainian government when that is catagorically proven to be untrue. The states is very much supporting them, and has been for some time.

 sebster wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Ukraine is responsible for escalating the situation.

Is Russia responsible for escalating the situation in the Crimea when they activated their troops in the region and claimed control of the region?

Yes, of course. But I referring only to the cutting off/potential cutting off of water and gas utilities, not the wider context of the Ukraine Crisis.

Whatever threats Russia may have made, it was Ukraine that acted first by cutting off Crimea's water. That pre-emptive action escalated the situation over gas and water Utilities, and Russia may now feel it has no choice but to cut off Ukraine's gas in response.

So your point is irrelevant, because we're talking about different things.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Russia may now feel it has no choice but to cut off Ukraine's gas in response.

Can Russia do that while still supplying their customers gas in Europe? I thought the pipeline prevented Russia from selectively cutting off Ukraine if they still desired delivering product to Europe.

 Seaward wrote:

If they just wanted to give moral support, and not intelligence support, why not stop at sending kerry? or just send them a non head of the CIA.

Why would we not want to give intelligence support? We generally don't like seeing friendly governments fall to foreign invaders.

And nor does Russia like to see a friendly government in a nation that shares a border with Russia overthrown in a putsch encouraged and supported by Western governments.

as it is, we have verifiable, namable people from the US government on record as visiting and backing the western ukraininans. we have no names or verifiable members of the russian government (though its safe to assume they have some advisors there too, despite there being no solid evidence)

You mean other than Putin, right? Putin backs the separatists.

And we back the violent revolutionaries. Go figure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Russia may now feel it has no choice but to cut off Ukraine's gas in response.

Can Russia do that while still supplying their customers gas in Europe? I thought the pipeline prevented Russia from selectively cutting off Ukraine if they still desired delivering product to Europe.

I'm not a Natural Gas engineer. Probably not best to ask me.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Ukraine is responsible for escalating the situation.

Is Russia responsible for escalating the situation in the Crimea when they activated their troops in the region and claimed control of the region?

Yes, of course. But I referring only to the cutting off/potential cutting off of water and gas utilities, not the wider context of the Ukraine Crisis.

Whatever threats Russia may have made, it was Ukraine that acted first by cutting off Crimea's water. That pre-emptive action escalated the situation over gas and water Utilities, and Russia may now feel it has no choice but to cut off Ukraine's gas in response.

So your point is irrelevant, because we're talking about different things.

Uhm...Crimea was decided to split off from Ukraine so I don't see what's wrong with cutting off supplies. Why doesn't Russia supply them now? It's their country, according to them, after all. Go take care of it. And in general, Russia acted first by invading a foreign country.

the pipes run through ukraine, russia cant shut off the taps to ukraine without also shutting out europe, as ukraine can and will just tap the lines again.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Russia may now feel it has no choice but to cut off Ukraine's gas in response.

Can Russia do that while still supplying their customers gas in Europe? I thought the pipeline prevented Russia from selectively cutting off Ukraine if they still desired delivering product to Europe.

I'm not a Natural Gas engineer. Probably not best to ask me.

Haha, sorry! I meant to open it up as a general question while using your quote as the context.

 easysauce wrote:
the pipes run through ukraine, russia cant shut off the taps to ukraine without also shutting out europe, as ukraine can and will just tap the lines again.

Thanks, easysauce, I thought that was the case.

So Russia can't really retaliate with pulling their gas unless they want to spite their much needed European customers. Talk about rock and a hard place.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Uhm...Crimea was decided to split off from Ukraine so I don't see what's wrong with cutting off supplies. Why doesn't Russia supply them now? It's their country, according to them, after all. Go take care of it. And in general, Russia acted first by invading a foreign country.

so now crimea is part of russia? Because I swear western ukraine, and lots of anti east ukrainians in this thread, keep claiming its still part of ukraine.

ok glad thats settled though, its part of russia officially, both sides recognize that if ukraine is now treating crimea as an enemy country.

also, for the millionth time, crimea was not invaded, that is factually false. Crimea had a vote, and choose to separate. Invasions involve unwilling parties being taken by force, not democratic processes that reflect the majority of the peoples desires.


in one breath you claim "Crimea was decided to split off from Ukraine " then the next you claim russia invaded them guns blazing... pick a story and stick to it jeese

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Ukraine is responsible for escalating the situation.

Is Russia responsible for escalating the situation in the Crimea when they activated their troops in the region and claimed control of the region?

Yes, of course. But I referring only to the cutting off/potential cutting off of water and gas utilities, not the wider context of the Ukraine Crisis.

Whatever threats Russia may have made, it was Ukraine that acted first by cutting off Crimea's water. That pre-emptive action escalated the situation over gas and water Utilities, and Russia may now feel it has no choice but to cut off Ukraine's gas in response.

So your point is irrelevant, because we're talking about different things.

Uhm...Crimea was decided to split off from Ukraine so I don't see what's wrong with cutting off supplies. Why doesn't Russia supply them now? It's their country, according to them, after all. Go take care of it. And in general, Russia acted first by invading a foreign country.

1. Because it creates a humanitarian crisis.
2. Because the infrastructure (i.e. pipes) to pump drinking and agricultural water across the Sea of Azov / Black Sea from Russia to Crimea probably does not exist.
3. Because the Kiev Regime claims that Crimea was occupied against the will of the Crimean people.
a) if that is true, then they are forcing even more suffering onto their own people for the crime of being occupied.
b) if it not true, and the people of Crimea really do want to be part of Russia then they are being punished for exercising their democratic right to self determination.
4. Because civilized governments don't just arbitrarily cut off drinking water without warning for 2.4 million people.
5. Because its fething petty.

That's a pretty good summary, Shadow Captain Edithae! Have an exalt on me!

update, pro west rioters burn out and kill dozens of pro east rioters.
This has been confirmed by multiple sources, 2 of which i have below.


More than 30 people were reported to have been killed in violent and chaotic clashes in the southern Ukrainian city of Odessa on Friday as pro-Ukrainian activists stormed a building defended by protesters opposed to the current government in Kiev and in favour of closer ties with Russia.
from
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/02/ukraine-dead-odessa-building-fire


"At least 31 anti-government activists died in fire at Odessa’s Trade Unions House after suffocating with smoke or jumping out of windows of the burning building, Ukrainian Interior Ministry reported. The building was set ablaze by the pro-Kiev radicals.

from RT


Im just amazed at how all the pro west people here are just hand waiving away kievs use of the military on its own people, the abhorrent body count that is being racked up... for some reason its ok for kiev to use the military on protestors, but if yanokovich had sent in the tanks and helios against maiden, that of course is wrong.

2 Mar 14

Hold one. I'm under the impression its Russian Marines from Sevastapol Naval Station being used. Took control of both airports and a comm center. One airport is near Sevastopol Naval Station itself and the other airport located near the intersection of two major highways of M17and M18 located at Simferpol. Pretty much keeping a logistical lifeline from both Airport to the Naval Station by Air. Under 50 miles. If so then that's pretty much it. Unless they roll across the Russian border into Crimea and literally drive down M17.

Those two battalions pretty much took all of Crimea at gun point. Now that's a freaking huge operational "Foot Print"

So for 20 days those two Battalions secured the airport, the highway and the entire region thereby forcing Crimea to vote "Putin"

How in Gawds name they lose Afghanistan

Never mind. We're also pulling out hopefully beating Karzai to get across the border

Edit

Russia moved in force on the 22nd I believe