Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!

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.

**Asadjud**

BaronIveagh wrote:

Both sides were to withdraw heavy weapons in a buffer zone around the front, which neither has done. The part that made it work there was the clause that says both sides will withdraw to their Sept 2014 positions. So far, pretty much no one has paid attention to that one. Supposedly the rebels offered a withdrawal corridor, but then promptly captured the government forces that tried to use it.

For yesterday, DPR goverment has officially declared that there was no negotiations on the corridor. Don't know about today.
By other hand, Ukrainian officials continue to declare that there is no encirclement so nobody needs no corridor.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Five that could be verified.

Where from information? Who counted?
I'm sorry, it's hard to read all 130 pages, but was there a discussion of the daily shelling of Donetsk by Ukrainian forces during the previous truce (september-december 2014)? Or only rebels violated than too?

**PhantomViper**

Asadjud wrote:

I'm sorry, it's hard to read all 130 pages, but was there a discussion of the daily shelling of Donetsk by Ukrainian forces during the previous truce (september-december 2014)? Or only rebels violated than too?

That is called "moving the goalposts" and is considered a pretty big no-no when you are interested in a civilized discussion.

**loki old fart**

Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

**Frazzled**

Stormrider wrote:
Redcruisair wrote:
No, I’m agreeing with Malus on the fact that Mr. Putin desires to erect a new Soviet Union.

I'm pretty sure Putin has made it a known secret that the Soviet Union collapsing was a complete tragedy in his eyes. He wants it back and the majority of the "Russian Racial Minorities" in the rest of the Eastern Bloc are his to rescue from their other Slavic overlords. His tactics and purpose isn't all that different than the Anschluss, Sudetenland Occupation the eventual Czech annexation and Memelland Annexation by the Germans prior to WWII, just a different part of Europe. Sham elections, thuggery, threats of invasion, open and armed rebellion by "oppressed racial minorities" and a host of other hallmarks are all too obvious for those with eyes.

There's even a border strife much like the Selisian Uprisings of 1919-1921 based on racial and ethnic ties.

Why the hell does history have to keep repeating itself?

Why not? Hey if the plan works twice, its tradition.

**Asadjud**

PhantomViper wrote:
That is called "moving the goalposts" and is considered a pretty big no-no when you are interested in a civilized discussion.

I really don't want to look like a bully, and I am sorry if it looks so.
But it feels to me that it is the same situation as last autumn. Almost every day Ukrainian artillery fired at city Donetsk and Gorlovka, almost every day died civilians, there was billions videos and reports in internet, but whole world was silent. And the funny thing: Kiev always say that rebels in all these cases are shooting to themselves. Like masochists...

**Minx**

loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

**CptJake**

Decent article in the Economist:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21643189-ukraine-suffers-it-time-recognise-gravity-russian-threatand-counter?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709

**Iron_Captain**

Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

**loki old fart**

CptJake wrote:
Decent article in the Economist:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21643189-ukraine-suffers-it-time-recognise-gravity-russian-threatand-counter?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709

Read that a couple of days ago.
Absolutely no bias there.

**Frazzled**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

So clarify. Does Putin want all of Ukraine or half of it?

If half, isn't he getting to that point now?
If whole, finish it already.
I don't see why whole personally. Wouldn't he want a buffer between Greater Russia (TM) and the West? Isn't Western Ukraine substanaitlaly more pro-Western, and would create conflict, maybe even another [u]ongoing guerilla war for him (is that 2 or 3 now?)?

**Howard A Treesong**

Putin wants at least as much of Ukraine as needed to reach around and secure passage to Crimea so that it can be reached across land. The constant lies about not supplying the rebels are tiresome, it's clear what's going on.

**KiloFiX**

What I want to know is, we're the folks that were pushing for a peace agreement (aside from Russia) really that idealistic to think it would work?

**PhantomViper**

KiloFiX wrote:
What I want to know is, we're the folks that were pushing for a peace agreement (aside from Russia) really that idealistic to think it would work?

This wasn't a peace agreement, it was just a cease fire.

And no, no one really thought that it would actually work, on every single press conference about it the fragility of the agreement was emphasized.

But until someone puts some actual boots on the ground to oversee a future cease fire (something that Putin will never agree to), this whole "he said, she bombed" will just keep going on.

So the rest of the world will just have to deal with this war for another year or two until the Russian economy finishes its collapse, and maybe then something can be salvaged from whatever is left of Ukraine.

**Prestor Jon**

PhantomViper wrote:
KiloFiX wrote:
What I want to know is, we're the folks that were pushing for a peace agreement (aside from Russia) really that idealistic to think it would work?

This wasn't a peace agreement, it was just a cease fire.

And no, no one really thought that it would actually work, on every single press conference about it the fragility of the agreement was emphasized.

But until someone puts some actual boots on the ground to oversee a future cease fire (something that Putin will never agree to), this whole "he said, she bombed" will just keep going on.

So the rest of the world will just have to deal with this war for another year or two until the Russian economy finishes its collapse, and maybe then something can be salvaged from whatever is left of Ukraine.

True. The UN can't send in a peace keeping force without an invitation from the host country and NATO nations aren't going to send in troops that would have to combat what are effectively Russian troops and set off an actual shooting war with Russia. I don't think the lack of desire from NATO to confront Russia directly with armed force in the Ukraine stems from Russia possessing nuclear weapons I think it has more to do with a general reluctance to get involved in a long, complicated conflict and eventual rebuilding/peace process. The EU doesn't want to get embroiled in a large scale multinational conflict in their backyard and the US doesn't want to do the majority of the work and bear a majority of the cost of fighting another conflict halfway across the world.

**loki old fart**

PhantomViper wrote:
KiloFiX wrote:
What I want to know is, we're the folks that were pushing for a peace agreement (aside from Russia) really that idealistic to think it would work?

This wasn't a peace agreement, it was just a cease fire.

And no, no one really thought that it would actually work, on every single press conference about it the fragility of the agreement was emphasized.

But until someone puts some actual boots on the ground to oversee a future cease fire (something that Putin will never agree to), this whole "he said, she bombed" will just keep going on.

So the rest of the world will just have to deal with this war for another year or two until the Russian economy finishes its collapse, and maybe then something can be salvaged from whatever is left of Ukraine.

Ahem

The resolution was submitted to the UNSC by Russia on February 13, a day after the Minsk deal was agreed on. It is aimed at endorsing and executing the Minsk agreements. The document also expresses concern over the continuing violence in eastern Ukraine, and stresses the importance of resolving the conflict peacefully.

Churkin urged the warring parties in Ukraine to create proper security conditions for the OSCE monitoring mission in the conflict zone and Debaltsevo, in particular.

“It is because of the continued shelling of cities, that the Minsk Agreement of September did not last as originally planned. Indeed, the OSCE observers should work including in the area of Debaltsevo, but in order to do so, they must be provided with security. We all have to remember that these are unarmed people, although in armored vehicles, but still without certain security conditions, it is difficult to expect that they will be able to effectively control something there,” said Churkin.

**Iron_Captain**

Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

So clarify. Does Putin want all of Ukraine or half of it?

If half, isn't he getting to that point now?
If whole, finish it already.
I don't see why whole personally. Wouldn't he want a buffer between Greater Russia (TM) and the West? Isn't Western Ukraine substanaitlaly more pro-Western, and would create conflict, maybe even another [u]ongoing guerilla war for him (is that 2 or 3 now?)?

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

**whembly**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

So clarify. Does Putin want all of Ukraine or half of it?

If half, isn't he getting to that point now?
If whole, finish it already.
I don't see why whole personally. Wouldn't he want a buffer between Greater Russia (TM) and the West? Isn't Western Ukraine substanaitlaly more pro-Western, and would create conflict, maybe even another [u]ongoing guerilla war for him (is that 2 or 3 now?)?

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

Crimea is Ukraine... right?

**Prestor Jon**

whembly wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

So clarify. Does Putin want all of Ukraine or half of it?

If half, isn't he getting to that point now?
If whole, finish it already.
I don't see why whole personally. Wouldn't he want a buffer between Greater Russia (TM) and the West? Isn't Western Ukraine substanaitlaly more pro-Western, and would create conflict, maybe even another [u]ongoing guerilla war for him (is that 2 or 3 now?)?

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

Crimea is Ukraine... right?

Well, it was.

**Frazzled**

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

You are clearly in error as there are Russian troops in East Ukraine.

**whembly**

Prestor Jon wrote:
whembly wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

So clarify. Does Putin want all of Ukraine or half of it?

If half, isn't he getting to that point now?
If whole, finish it already.
I don't see why whole personally. Wouldn't he want a buffer between Greater Russia (TM) and the West? Isn't Western Ukraine substanaitlaly more pro-Western, and would create conflict, maybe even another [u]ongoing guerilla war for him (is that 2 or 3 now?)?

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

Crimea is Ukraine... right?

Well, it was.

Oh... I thought it was still in dispute.

So we still giving Russia/Putin a pass on this? (we as in the International Community).

*shrug*

I hadn't paid too much attention.

**Prestor Jon**

whembly wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
whembly wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Minx wrote:
loki old fart wrote:
Seems fair enough to me. I'd like to hear the opinion of somebody who lives there.
It would make a nice change, from the media fed bovine scatterings, regurgitated here.

Unfortunately all we are going to hear from him is regurgitated russian propaganda :(

Yes, great idea! Let's dismiss things I disagree with as Russian propaganda! I have news for you. Everything in the world is propaganda. It is just a matter of which side's propaganda you choose to believe in. Alternatively, you could go there yourself and try to seperate fact from fiction, but unless you do that, all you have is propaganda.

Also, people who say Putin wants the Soviet Union back are ignorant. Putin does not want the Soviet Union back, no Russian in his right mind wants to. Even Zyuganov, leader of KPRF wants a new "Soviet Russia" not the old Soviet Union. Putin as never said anything about wanting to back to Soviet Union. He called Fall of Soviet Union a great tragedy, because it was. All of society broke down, look at the facts.

So clarify. Does Putin want all of Ukraine or half of it?

If half, isn't he getting to that point now?
If whole, finish it already.
I don't see why whole personally. Wouldn't he want a buffer between Greater Russia (TM) and the West? Isn't Western Ukraine substanaitlaly more pro-Western, and would create conflict, maybe even another [u]ongoing guerilla war for him (is that 2 or 3 now?)?

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

Crimea is Ukraine... right?

Well, it was.

Oh... I thought it was still in dispute.

So we still giving Russia/Putin a pass on this? (we as in the International Community).

*shrug*

I hadn't paid too much attention.

Well aside from economic sanctions I don't see anyone suggesting or doing anything more direct. People are fighting and killing each other in the Ukraine and I don't any other nation is concerned enough to send in troops and take responsibilty for effecting a cease fire and moderating a solution to the conflict.

**Howard A Treesong**

No one wants to start a major war by directly opposing Russian forces. Despite all the aggression from their side, Russia/Putin is paranoid enough to take it as a direct attack if any other country starts supporting Ukraine. How far Putin will be allowed to go before he is directly opposed is anyone's guess. Maybe he'll want the Baltic states next. Will he be allowed to 'encourage' their annexation in a similar manner?

**Frazzled**

Wake me when I care.

**Iron_Captain**

whembly wrote:

Oh... I thought it was still in dispute.

So we still giving Russia/Putin a pass on this? (we as in the International Community).

*shrug*

I hadn't paid too much attention.

Crimea is a very clear de facto part of Russia. De jure? Well, that depends on whose laws you go by. The international community is going to stay divided as it always is. Some countries will eventually recognise Crimea as part of Russia, others won't.

**BaronIveagh**

Asadjud wrote:

For yesterday, DPR goverment has officially declared that there was no negotiations on the corridor. Don't know about today.
By other hand, Ukrainian officials continue to declare that there is no encirclement so nobody needs no corridor.

Well, as of today, either there was no encirclement or the Ukrainian troops broke through and withdrew toward government lines. 300 men were captured in the withdrawal according to DPR, Kiev admits that some were captured but did not specify a number.

Asadjud wrote:

Where from information? Who counted?
I'm sorry, it's hard to read all 130 pages, but was there a discussion of the daily shelling of Donetsk by Ukrainian forces during the previous truce (september-december 2014)? Or only rebels violated than too?

No, this was just looking at the current truce. I'd have to look them up as to what exactly they were, was mentioned by OSCE SMM. We're aware that the previous truce was followed by no one.

Iron_Captain wrote:
Crimea is a very clear de facto part of Russia. De jure? Well, that depends on whose laws you go by. The international community is going to stay divided as it always is. Some countries will eventually recognise Crimea as part of Russia, others won't.

Odds are any of them signatory to the Geneva Conventions probably won't, officially. De facto, again, is a possibility.. A good deal of it will probably hinge on Russia's behavior and conditions inside Crimea. If they continue to deteriorate, then you're looking at a less likely scenario, as the possibility of a revolt/insugency goes up the longer conditions remain poor.

**Tyran**

PhantomViper wrote:
KiloFiX wrote:
What I want to know is, we're the folks that were pushing for a peace agreement (aside from Russia) really that idealistic to think it would work?

This wasn't a peace agreement, it was just a cease fire.

And no, no one really thought that it would actually work, on every single press conference about it the fragility of the agreement was emphasized.

But until someone puts some actual boots on the ground to oversee a future cease fire (something that Putin will never agree to), this whole "he said, she bombed" will just keep going on.

So the rest of the world will just have to deal with this war for another year or two until the Russian economy finishes its collapse, and maybe then something can be salvaged from whatever is left of Ukraine.

Ukraine will be dead by then.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

Putin wants to annex nothing of Ukraine. He wanted Crimea, which is strategically valuable. The rest of the Ukraine has nothing that Putin wants. Russia has enough natural resources of its own, and Ukrainian heavy industry is outdated and badly in need of expensive renovations. Annexations are expensive. Why would Putin want to annex a lot of worthless territory that is going to cost ridiculously huge amounts of money to patch up and integrate in Russia? The annexation of Crimea alone is already a strain on the Russian economy, let alone the annexation of the whole Donbass! Why would he spend such unimaginable sums of money to connect Crimea to the Russian mainland when it is so much cheaper to just build a bridge over the narrow strait of Kerch? It would even be more feasible to keep Crimea supplied by ship like Kaliningrad.

You are clearly in error as there are Russian troops in East Ukraine.

Not really, I doubt Putin wants to annex more of Ukraine, but he doesn't wants Ukraine to join NATO, so he probably wants to keep Ukraine occupied in a long war.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BaronIveagh wrote:

Iron_Captain wrote:
Crimea is a very clear de facto part of Russia. De jure? Well, that depends on whose laws you go by. The international community is going to stay divided as it always is. Some countries will eventually recognise Crimea as part of Russia, others won't.

Odds are any of them signatory to the Geneva Conventions probably won't, officially. De facto, again, is a possibility.. A good deal of it will probably hinge on Russia's behavior and conditions inside Crimea. If they continue to deteriorate, then you're looking at a less likely scenario, as the possibility of a revolt/insugency goes up the longer conditions remain poor.

The problem here is where Crimea can go? They will never return to Ukraine, but an independent Crimea seems unlikely.

**BaronIveagh**

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31530252

Oh, that Crazy Putin. How DARE the Ukraine ask the UN to send peacekeepers to guarantee the ceasefire

**Howard A Treesong**

Now Russia is buzzing around our airspace. Just more sabre rattling and provoking us to make himself look big.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31530840

**PhantomViper**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Now Russia is buzzing around our airspace. Just more sabre rattling and provoking us to make himself look big.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31530840

They did the same thing to us a couple of months ago.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/31/uk-nato-portugal-russia-idUKKBN0IK1TD20141031

Well, at least that sort of justifies the unholy amount of money that we spend on the damn planes.

And it also makes for some pretty decent photo ops!

Spoiler:

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

PhantomViper wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
Now Russia is buzzing around our airspace. Just more sabre rattling and provoking us to make himself look big.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31530840

They did the same thing to us a couple of months ago.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/31/uk-nato-portugal-russia-idUKKBN0IK1TD20141031

Well, at least that sort of justifies the unholy amount of money that we spend on the damn planes.

And it also makes for some pretty decent photo ops!

Spoiler:

So what? Russia has done it almost non stop ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. And I'm sure we reciprocate on occasion. The headline "Russian bombers seen off the Cornwall coast" is just sensationalism. They're in international airspace, so they're doing nothing illegal.

Its saber rattling yes, but its nothing new.

I remember hearing news reports of this kind a decade ago, when relations with Russia were fantastic by comparison to today.

A comment by Peter Hitchens of the Mail on Sunday.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/02/a-plea-for-considered-coverage-lest-fear-and-panic-drive-us-into-the-pit-of-war-.html

Then there’s that story about Russian ‘Bear’ bomber planes, described in one headline as having flown ‘over Bournemouth’. They didn’t. In fact, though readers might easily have formed a different impression, they didn’t enter UK airspace. The phrase ‘the English Channel’ was used in descriptions of their flight route, but ‘the Channel ‘ would be more correct. They stayed clearly outside UK territorial waters and airspace. Flights of this kind happen about three or four times a month, and were taking place long before the current confrontation in Ukraine. I followed up the story by talking to informed defence sources, and the only new thing about the most recent flight was that it came right round the West of the British isles and eastwards along the Channel, rather than ( as more usually) towards the north-eastern coast of our islands.

The Russians do behave badly on these flights, by not using their ‘Identify Friend or Foe’ transponders and always have, but the risk to civil aircraft is very small. Civil air traffic control immediately picks them up and reports their position, speed, height and course to other traffic in plenty of time to avoid danger of collisions. Western aircraft do not behave in this fashion on the edges of Russian airspace (though western submarines certainly *used* to make forays very close to the Russian naval bases on the Kola peninsula, I do not know if they still do) . But we have recently begun to station troops, and hold exercises, quite close to the Russian border. Russia, having long ago (peacefully) ceded the Warsaw Pact countries and the Baltic States to Western control, cannot respond in the same way. The Warsaw Pact is gone and they cannot move troops around it to make a point. Perhaps these flights by these ancient aircraft are a substitute.

In the light of these notes, the tone of much that is broadcast and written seems to me to be overblown. I do wish my trade would learn from Iraq, and try harder not to promote an atmosphere in which people are scared out of being reasonable.