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.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Further, you're doing it while condemning alleged bias in the reporting of those news agencies, while blindly accepting the word of the pro-Russian side that what they said happened is true.

No, I'm not. I KNOW both sides are biased and I don't take either side at face value, unlike some in this thread.

And yet you're adamant that there's been a "massacre" (your own words) perpetrated by the Ukranian government when what happened is still unclear. "Unbiased" indeed.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Are you honestly arguing that Jobbik and Golden Dawn aren't true far-right parties just because ...

No, I'm not.

Please point out where I said "Jobbik and Golden Dawnare not true Far Right parties."

Fair enough, that was me getting people mixed up. Do you mind clarifying which parties you were talking about though (and don't take this as me implying you were unclear, I'm just being curious)?

I think he meant UKIP is not a true far right party.

 -Shrike- wrote:
I think he meant UKIP is not a true far right party.

Well, parties, in the plural, would seem to indicate that there's more than one party being discussed. I made the mistake of jumping to the conclusion that the parties in question were Jobbik and Golden Dawn, the two primary examples that show up in Swedish media the most, without considering whether those were the parties referred to. That said, there's still more than one party implied.

From the interim PM:

"Those who advocate self-determination do not understand that this will mean the total collapse of the economy, of social programmes, and of life in general for the majority of people in these regions," he said.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
I think he meant UKIP is not a true far right party.

Well, parties, in the plural, would seem to indicate that there's more than one party being discussed. I made the mistake of jumping to the conclusion that the parties in question were Jobbik and Golden Dawn, the two primary examples that show up in Swedish media the most, without considering whether those were the parties referred to. That said, there's still more than one party implied.

He's from the UK, and the only far-right party I ever hear about is UKIP. I'll agree that they're right wing, but not on the level of Jobbik, Golden Dawn or [whatever the far-right party is in Ukraine, I've forgotten what they're called]. However, they get a disproportionate amount of news coverage, simply because their policy of EU separation is disliked by our current government.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Further, you're doing it while condemning alleged bias in the reporting of those news agencies, while blindly accepting the word of the pro-Russian side that what they said happened is true.

No, I'm not. I KNOW both sides are biased and I don't take either side at face value, unlike some in this thread.

And yet you're adamant that there's been a "massacre" (your own words) perpetrated by the Ukranian government when what happened is still unclear. "Unbiased" indeed.

I was referring to the government building occupied by pro Russian protesters that was burned down by a mob throwing molotov cocktails, killing dozens of people inside. People here are referring to a new massacre, of Ukrainian troops firing into a crowd?. I have no idea what on earth they're talking about as I've been busy for the last couple days and not kept up with the news. So I was certainly not referring to that.

I didn't say I am unbiased. OF COURSE I am biased. So are you, clearly. All I'm talking about here are my own opinions. If I'm biased over the Ukraine crisis, its against groups who use violence to pursue their political agendas. So far, we've seen a lot of violence from the Kiev side, and they're on the offensive, sending the Ukraine military into east Ukraine to attack separatists and Army defectors.

What Ukraine needs is a truce, so the various parties can negotiate and sort out some sort of political compromise that will satisfy both sides and defuse the situation, maybe devolved government for eastern regions akin to the Good Friday Agreement in northern island.

What I do NOT think should be happening, is the Ukraine army being sent into East Ukraine to hunt down and start shooting up the cities that have rebelled.

quote=Shadow Captain Edithae 575622 6814335 e280ec8f055cb63340c9fa220820da81.jpg]

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Are you honestly arguing that Jobbik and Golden Dawn aren't true far-right parties just because ...

No, I'm not.

Please point out where I said "Jobbik and Golden Dawn are not true Far Right parties."

Fair enough, that was me getting people mixed up. Do you mind clarifying which parties you were talking about though (and don't take this as me implying you were unclear, I'm just being curious)?

I was specifically talking about the Ukrainian far right parties, Pravy Sektor, Svoboda etc.

In Britain, the media and our leaders are constantly banging on the dangers of right wing extremism. The EDL (English Defense League ) and BNP (British National Party ) - two parties or organisations that are genuinely racist and extremist, and, of all people, the UK Independence Party - a party of mostly middle aged middle class people with at least as much ethnic diversity as our three mainstream parties.

A year or so ago, when Greece's troubles were in the headlines, the media and our leaders also banged on about the rise of Greek far right parties. Golden Dawn etc.

And now, again, we see in Ukraine a LOT of social unrest, the rise of very violent and extremist far right parties that even have influence over government ministries and the army, and the country is on the verge of Civil War. And yet, all that dominates the UK's political agenda day in, day out, is Russia. Russia must be punished, Russia must be isolated, Russia must be sanctioned, Russia this Russia that. I've heard very little from the BBC (state broadcaster) and Sky News (2nd most popular British broadcaster AFAIK) on the worrying rise of Ukraine's far right parties and paramilitaries, who now have signifiant influence over the military and the government.

I obviously can't speak for other countries like Sweden, but that is what its like in the UK. The political agenda is very dominated by sanctions on Russia and supporting the Kiev government.


This is NOT a case of me swallowing Russian propaganda hook line and sinker. I KNOW Russian media is biased, and full of propaganda. Its a case of me seeing two very unpleasant groups of people, Ukrainian nationalists and Russian nationalists, stirring up ethnic tensions and engaging in violence (though it is the Kiev aligned Ukrainian nationalists who are on the offensive at the moment).

When both sides in a conflict are unpleasant and violent and guilty of much the same crimes, its not really wise to pick a side. And yet that is what the West is doing, and that is what I'm angry about. But that doesn't amount to a full declaration of support for the Russian side.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Shrike- wrote:
I think he meant UKIP is not a true far right party.

No, its certainly not. Its a right of centre, slightly libertarian party.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:
I think he meant UKIP is not a true far right party.

Well, parties, in the plural, would seem to indicate that there's more than one party being discussed. I made the mistake of jumping to the conclusion that the parties in question were Jobbik and Golden Dawn, the two primary examples that show up in Swedish media the most, without considering whether those were the parties referred to. That said, there's still more than one party implied.

He's from the UK, and the only far-right party I ever hear about is UKIP. I'll agree that they're right wing, but not on the level of Jobbik, Golden Dawn or [whatever the far-right party is in Ukraine, I've forgotten what they're called]. However, they get a disproportionate amount of news coverage, simply because their policy of EU separation is disliked by our current government.

Its not just disliked by our current coalition government, the Conservatives and "Liberal Democrats" (who IMO aren't very liberal and aren't very democratic). Its disliked by our entire political and media establishment. Labour, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, the BBC. All are in favour of British membership of the EU, and all try to portray UKIP as right wing racists and fascists.

Exactly. It makes no sense to favor Ukraine when Ukraine is as corrupt and thuggish as Russia. The don't belong in the EU or NATO, they're not with us on social or political issues. The conflict is originating from a conflict between two corrupt and nasty factions inside of Ukraine, the one which was just in power and the one in power now and was before the other one. The one which was illegally if justifiably overthrown has sought Russian support, his most ardent supporters in the Crimea seized the moment to declare independence and then used annexation by Russia to guarantee their independence (like Texas eventually did with the US to avoid retribution from Mexico). Russia has shown enormous restraint and now Ukraine is sending the army with live rounds against unarmed civilian "militants" because the local police support secession or at least are remaining neutral. There were legitimate attacks in other places previously by pro Russians which had fatalities and obviously needed to be dealt with harshly but Mariupol was not that situation and now Donetsk is in play as the next Oblast to join Russia.

If this doesn't have a resolution soon the insurrection will spread and the Russians will "have to" invade to protect their supporters in Eastern Ukraine. I would not be surprised if the regime in Kiev falls to Moscow with the entire country ending up dismantled into Russian Oblasts. Obviously Ukraine cannot defeat the Russians militarily or they would have tried to stop the annexation of Crimea. Western Europe and the US clearly has no intent to do anything about this, yet they posture to try to look important and in doing so hurt relations with Russia which while acting in its interests so far has not exactly done anything outrageous.

Ultimately Putin will win regardless (worst case scenario he's keeping Crimea and Sevastopol) and everyone will look like an ass.

 Col. Tartleton wrote:
Exactly. It makes no sense to favor Ukraine when Ukraine is as corrupt and thuggish as Russia.

It's a difference of scales. An aggressive Ukraine still can't seriously threaten any of its neighbours, an aggressive Russia absolutely can. Lesser of two evils, and even then the neo-Nazi or similar groups aren't in majority in the Ukranian government.

Though if Ukraine goes the route of Yugoslav then by all means Russia can deploy into eastern half of Ukraine and EU/NATO can deploy in western half. I rather not have a Bosnia and/or Kosovo happen again.

 Jihadin wrote:
Though if Ukraine goes the route of Yugoslav then by all means Russia can deploy into eastern half of Ukraine and EU/NATO can deploy in western half. I rather not have a Bosnia and/or Kosovo happen again.

On that we can agree. In my eyes the best (and completely unrealistic) scenario if it keeps getting worse would be a joint NATO-Russian effort to stem the tide of violence, but that's not going to happen.

NATO and Russia going into the same country would probably start WW III, but some co-operation would be nice, rather than the constant stream of propaganda from both sides.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/100000-yes-ballots-for-referendum-intercepted-2-347222.html

Business as usual in that part of the world.

 djones520 wrote:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/100000-yes-ballots-for-referendum-intercepted-2-347222.html

Business as usual in that part of the world.

Business as usual?
Care to clarify yourself?


In any case, it might as well be propaganda to contest the legitimacy of the referendum.
Not that it really matters much, the whole referendum is no more than a moral justification for whatever the seperatists are planning.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/100000-yes-ballots-for-referendum-intercepted-2-347222.html

Business as usual in that part of the world.

Business as usual?
Care to clarify yourself?


In any case, it might as well be propaganda to contest the legitimacy of the referendum.
Not that it really matters much, the whole referendum is no more than a moral justification for whatever the seperatists are planning.

Because we all know how fair and legitimate the elections in that part of the world are. Especially in those nations that Russia is leaning heavily on. You can refer to an earlier post in here I've made referencing my own experiences with that stuff.

Has anybody considered, how they are going to get out of Afghanistan, if they upset the Russians to much.
Quite a bit of stuff go's thru Russian space atm.

 loki old fart wrote:
Has anybody considered, how they are going to get out of Afghanistan, if they upset the Russians to much.
Quite a bit of stuff go's thru Russian space atm.

http://www.stripes.com/news/first-troops-move-through-new-us-transit-point-in-romania-1.265698

We're flying over the Black Sea, or through Pakistan.

 djones520 wrote:

 loki old fart wrote:
Has anybody considered, how they are going to get out of Afghanistan, if they upset the Russians to much.
Quite a bit of stuff go's thru Russian space atm.

http://www.stripes.com/news/first-troops-move-through-new-us-transit-point-in-romania-1.265698

We're flying over the Black Sea, or through Pakistan.

What about heavy equipment, your flying that out ?

 djones520 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/100000-yes-ballots-for-referendum-intercepted-2-347222.html

Business as usual in that part of the world.

Business as usual?
Care to clarify yourself?


In any case, it might as well be propaganda to contest the legitimacy of the referendum.
Not that it really matters much, the whole referendum is no more than a moral justification for whatever the seperatists are planning.

Because we all know how fair and legitimate the elections in that part of the world are. Especially in those nations that Russia is leaning heavily on. You can refer to an earlier post in here I've made referencing my own experiences with that stuff.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/08/AR2010020803583.html
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/what-the-recent-russian-elections-really-mean-6235
Elections in both Russia and Ukraine are generally fair. There are cases of fraud, but not on such a scale that they have a real impact on the results. Belarus is another matter, but that is also because of a lack of serious opposition rather than just electoral fraud.
That aside, electional fraud and irregularities are not specific to 'that part of the world'. They happen in the West and all other regions of the world as well. The notion of fair elections in general I find ridiculous. You can never have elections be completely 'fair'.

 loki old fart wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 loki old fart wrote:
Has anybody considered, how they are going to get out of Afghanistan, if they upset the Russians to much.
Quite a bit of stuff go's thru Russian space atm.

http://www.stripes.com/news/first-troops-move-through-new-us-transit-point-in-romania-1.265698

We're flying over the Black Sea, or through Pakistan.

What about heavy equipment, your flying that out ?

Funny thing about OPSEC... if you dig enough you can find what your looking for on open source, but even so, I can't really divulge what I know.

But, that being said, if Russia were to close it's air space off to us, it really wouldn't affect us all that much.

So no Saigon II then. not coming thru Pakistan tribal area, with Taliban in hot pursuit.

There's five exit points out of Afghanistan. Heavy equipment is being flown out same way as they were flown in.

 Jihadin wrote:
There's five exit points out of Afghanistan. Heavy equipment is being flown out same way as they were flown in.

None thru Russian airspace

Enough air routes leading out from Afghanistan not to involve the Russians but we are using formers Russian bases.

 loki old fart wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
There's five exit points out of Afghanistan. Heavy equipment is being flown out same way as they were flown in.

None thru Russian airspace

http://skyvector.com/

Head over to Afghanistan, then click on the "World Hi" button on the top right. That shows you all standard flight routes in and out of the country.

Keep in mind that is for civilian aircraft. We in the military like to stick to those as much as possible, but... given the nature of our jobs, we sometimes don't.

NATO isn't going to do anything that jeopardizes the uneasy peace in Europe. Obviously deterring the Russians from crossing into Estonia or anything like that is purely defensive, necessary, and legal. Ukraine is not in NATO or the EU it isn't our problem unless it becomes our problem. But obviously NATO has to oppose Russian actions because similar reasoning could lead to attacks on NATO states in Eastern Europe.

SG Rasmussen dropped some science on the Russians in Tallinn.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

That aside, electional fraud and irregularities are not specific to 'that part of the world'. They happen in the West and all other regions of the world as well. The notion of fair elections in general I find ridiculous. You can never have elections be completely 'fair'.

There's a difference in scale. You don't have people in the West sending 100,000 ballots pre-marked anywhere, and even if that story turns out to be a fraud it's not strictly about only the elections themselves. Ask Anna Politkovskaya what she thinks of the freedom of the press in Russia. Freedom of speech is important for a working democracy.

That and the supposed independence poll that occurred in Crimea's come out as being even less legitimate than the Russian were putting across. The BBC stated figures (taken from the Russian press, but quickly taken down) of a 40% turn out in the region, with only 51% of those voting to go against Ukraine, nowhere near the figures that were claimed. These same elections in the west of Ukraine are just going to be as illegitimate, though whether the Russians just walk in and take those parts based on that is up to them (they already have the bits they want).

At this rate what'll be left of Ukraine will be a bunch of old guys living about Chernobyl and a load of far right extremists turned anti-Russian terrorists (because Russia just loves creating partisan groups in all the countries they've screwed over these past twenty years). =P

Oh dear...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aNLvFKPvPc

This guys has a...unique perspective on the Crimea crisis.


Good for a laugh at least.

Wow, I thought Putin would have waited until July to start seizure of Eastern Ukraine. I'm impressed.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Oh dear...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aNLvFKPvPc

This guys has a...unique perspective on the Crimea crisis.


Good for a laugh at least.

Darn it! They found the HQ of our alien overlords! Now they will find out that Russia is only a cover for an alien conquest of Earth! We must prevent it! Crimea is Russian!

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/100000-yes-ballots-for-referendum-intercepted-2-347222.html

Business as usual in that part of the world.

Business as usual?
Care to clarify yourself?


In any case, it might as well be propaganda to contest the legitimacy of the referendum.
Not that it really matters much, the whole referendum is no more than a moral justification for whatever the seperatists are planning.

Because we all know how fair and legitimate the elections in that part of the world are. Especially in those nations that Russia is leaning heavily on. You can refer to an earlier post in here I've made referencing my own experiences with that stuff.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/08/AR2010020803583.html
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/what-the-recent-russian-elections-really-mean-6235
Elections in both Russia and Ukraine are generally fair. There are cases of fraud, but not on such a scale that they have a real impact on the results. Belarus is another matter, but that is also because of a lack of serious opposition rather than just electoral fraud.
That aside, electional fraud and irregularities are not specific to 'that part of the world'. They happen in the West and all other regions of the world as well. The notion of fair elections in general I find ridiculous. You can never have elections be completely 'fair'.

Any time you get results that are super one-sided with an almost total lack of opposition votes, like the 93% "yes" in Crimea or the 96% in Luhansk or the 89% in Donetsk, it's almost always indicative of election fraud or "controlled" elections (e.g. "Saddam Yes/Saddam No" and it's 99% Saddam Yes).

Just from a statistical standpoint, those numbers look too good to be true, and getting that many people to agree that much on any one thing in an election is tremendously rare, much less for something with such powerful consequences as this. Had it been something more like a 68% "yes", that would still have been an overridingly popular "yes" vote, but at least within the (extreme) bounds of statistical believability.