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.
2016/04/24 06:40:06
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
That's a...generous estimating of the CIA's capabilities and competence.
CIA made BinLaden (9/11 attack), made Akhmad Shakh Maksud (withdraval Soviets from Afghanistan, falling of Surav government), helped to made Taliban (almost defeating Maksud in Afghanistan), made Al Quaeda, made a lot to ruin USSR. I think, a lot of crap things we have was CIA work.
CIA did not make Bin Laden, they merely supported him in the same manner they supported the Lion of Panjshir (Maksud), they helped the Mujahadeen not the Taliban, that is completely false. The Mujahadeen are completely different from the Taliban. The CIA sure as hell didn't make Al-Qaeda but please, please give me your conspiracy theories on these nonsense things you just posted.
That's a...generous estimating of the CIA's capabilities and competence.
CIA made BinLaden (9/11 attack), made Akhmad Shakh Maksud (withdraval Soviets from Afghanistan, falling of Surav government), helped to made Taliban (almost defeating Maksud in Afghanistan), made Al Quaeda, made a lot to ruin USSR. I think, a lot of crap things we have was CIA work.
CIA did not make Bin Laden, they merely supported him in the same manner they supported the Lion of Panjshir (Maksud), they helped the Mujahadeen not the Taliban, that is completely false. The Mujahadeen are completely different from the Taliban. The CIA sure as hell didn't make Al-Qaeda but please, please give me your conspiracy theories on these nonsense things you just posted.
This is totally off-topic, but the Taliban are mujahideen, and the group evolved from the Afghan fighters that were supported by the US. Al-Qaeda evolved out of the same group of US-backed fighters. Bin Laden was actually quite pro-US until the US started stationing troops in Saudi-Arabia and fighting Muslim countries as part of the Gulf War.
Don't pretend that the CIA is not involving itself with a lot of shady "allies" as part of its war against Russia and that sometimes those "allies" backfired on them.
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
2016/04/24 14:47:50
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
That's a...generous estimating of the CIA's capabilities and competence.
CIA made BinLaden (9/11 attack), made Akhmad Shakh Maksud (withdraval Soviets from Afghanistan, falling of Surav government), helped to made Taliban (almost defeating Maksud in Afghanistan), made Al Quaeda, made a lot to ruin USSR. I think, a lot of crap things we have was CIA work.
CIA did not make Bin Laden, they merely supported him in the same manner they supported the Lion of Panjshir (Maksud), they helped the Mujahadeen not the Taliban, that is completely false. The Mujahadeen are completely different from the Taliban. The CIA sure as hell didn't make Al-Qaeda but please, please give me your conspiracy theories on these nonsense things you just posted.
This is totally off-topic, but the Taliban are mujahideen, and the group evolved from the Afghan fighters that were supported by the US. Al-Qaeda evolved out of the same group of US-backed fighters. Bin Laden was actually quite pro-US until the US started stationing troops in Saudi-Arabia and fighting Muslim countries as part of the Gulf War. Don't pretend that the CIA is not involving itself with a lot of shady "allies" as part of its war against Russia and that sometimes those "allies" backfired on them.
Well, the Taliban wasn't technically formed during the soviet occupation, which was when the USA was supporting the groups. They formed after the departure of the Soviets in the midst of the infighting between the different mujahadeen groups and were financed by Pakistan, whilst being versed in orthodox Islam from Saudi Arabia.
Although Bin-Laden and what would become Al-Qaeda were active during the war, but only as a small group. They weren't really the major players that Bin-Laden liked to portray them as afterwards in order to gain support and recruits.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/24 14:50:26
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2016/04/24 15:44:36
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
I don't think anyone would deny that the CIA was involved in lots of shady stuff and that it backfired more than once. That said, the CIA didn't make these groups or people what they are (they simply provided varying levels of logistical & intelligence support to them), and the fact that they turned around and bit the US is pretty good proof that the CIA is not the ultra-capable, all-seeing organization it's sometimes portrayed as being.
With regards to Ukraine and Russia, if the CIA really is the cause of all these ills, it'd be a step up in their game for sure...but aside from just causing misery for it's own sake...what purpose is served? Especially in an organization where very few remain from the Cold War era?
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2016/04/24 17:53:09
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
This is totally off-topic, but the Taliban are mujahideen, and the group evolved from the Afghan fighters that were supported by the US. Al-Qaeda evolved out of the same group of US-backed fighters. Bin Laden was actually quite pro-US until the US started stationing troops in Saudi-Arabia and fighting Muslim countries as part of the Gulf War.
Don't pretend that the CIA is not involving itself with a lot of shady "allies" as part of its war against Russia and that sometimes those "allies" backfired on them.
The term 'mujahideen' is just a plural of mujahid, or one who is practicing jihad.
Taliban are mujahideen (small 'm') as opposed to the Mujahideen Alliance of Afghanistan (large 'm') which was backed by the US during the Soviet-Afghan war.
While there was some overlap in membership, the Taliban actually fought against the US backed 'victors' of the Soviet-Afghan War, including assassinating Ahmad Shah Massoud, the erstwhile head of the US backed forces, on September 9th, 2001, three days before the 9/11 attacks.
The Taliban are largely the creation of Pakistani ISI (who are pretty open about this), not the American CIA. Please blame the correct intelligence agency.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2016/04/25 02:25:12
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
This is totally off-topic, but the Taliban are mujahideen, and the group evolved from the Afghan fighters that were supported by the US. Al-Qaeda evolved out of the same group of US-backed fighters. Bin Laden was actually quite pro-US until the US started stationing troops in Saudi-Arabia and fighting Muslim countries as part of the Gulf War.
Don't pretend that the CIA is not involving itself with a lot of shady "allies" as part of its war against Russia and that sometimes those "allies" backfired on them.
The term 'mujahideen' is just a plural of mujahid, or one who is practicing jihad.
Taliban are mujahideen (small 'm') as opposed to the Mujahideen Alliance of Afghanistan (large 'm') which was backed by the US during the Soviet-Afghan war.
While there was some overlap in membership, the Taliban actually fought against the US backed 'victors' of the Soviet-Afghan War, including assassinating Ahmad Shah Massoud, the erstwhile head of the US backed forces, on September 9th, 2001, three days before the 9/11 attacks.
The Taliban are largely the creation of Pakistani ISI (who are pretty open about this), not the American CIA. Please blame the correct intelligence agency.
Not to mention the ISI are still to this day backing, funding and training the Taliban. On more then one occasion we "accidentally" killed Pakistani ISI operating with Taliban forces. One memorable occasion was after a member of our battalion was shot in the head by a sniper, turned out the sniper was an ISI agent. Ironically the guy he shot lived, Sgt Boothroyd USMC lucky bugger took one to the dome and lived. The ISI agent? not so much, we hit him with a JDAM, killed him and all his little buddies.
The Supreme Court of the Crimean Republic has outlawed the ‘Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People’ as an extremist group and has banned its activities on the whole territory of the Russian Federation.
The decision was passed on Tuesday, RIA Novosti reports. The court ruling was not final, however, as it can be appealed in one month’s time.
The Mejlis is the top legislative body of the Crimean Tatars between major congresses that are called Kurultais. Founded in 1991, it has a fairly long history, but is still mainly seen as an informal group because its orders only regulate the life of ethnic Crimean Tatars – who account for about 12.5 percent of the peninsula’s population.
The relations between the Crimean authorities and the Mejlis have been strained ever since the republic’s accession into the Russian Federation, but a full-scale conflict developed only in September 2015, after Mejlis leaders Refat Chubarov, Lenur Islyamov and Mustafa Djemilev used the Ukrainian ultranationalist association Right Sector to organize the “food and energy blockade of Crimea.” The radicals stopped trucks carrying food to the Russian exclave from Ukraine and blew up several pylons of the power mains that supplied electricity to the peninsula.
In mid-February top Crimean prosecutor Natalya Poklonskaya asked the Supreme Court of the republic to ban the Mejlis, claiming that law enforcers had collected sufficient proof of the group’s extremist activities. In particular, she mentioned the ties discovered between the Mejlis and terrorist groups such as the Turkish Grey Wolves (Bozkurt).
Poklonskaya also called the Tuesday court ruling well-founded, adding that it was aimed at securing stability, peace and order in the Russian Federation. She also noted that after the court decision comes into force, any actions by Mejlis members or their representatives on Russian territory would be considered unlawful, and such people would be brought to justice.
Defense attorney Djemil Temishev, who represented the Mejlis in the Crimean court, told reporters on Tuesday that he planned to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
In mid-April the prosecutor ordered the suspension of all Mejlis activities on Crimean territory, pending the court decision.
On Tuesday Poklonskaya described the members and leaders of the Mejlis as “puppets in the hands of big Western puppeteers who used the Crimean Tatar people as pawns in their game.” She added that everyone, including the members of the Mejlis, acknowledged this sad truth.
It is sad it has come to this, but given their recent actions, I feel it is justified.
Natalya Poklonskaya has already vowed that she will deport anyone who does not fully agree with and support Crimea's new place in Russia. Expect mass relocations of Tartars inside Russia and Crimea, and imprisonment on spurious charges next, 'for the good of the people'.
I hope you'll feel they're as justified.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2016/04/26 22:57:58
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
By activism I mean all the picketing and attempts to push things through with the councils. Terrorism perhaps, in terms of blockading roads, is perhaps not the best wording considering it is a warzone ...and the Russian's shot down a damn passenger jet. A few groups in the area happen to be associating with terrorists lately, so I need to see more than association instead of painting them with the same brush.
2016/04/26 23:02:17
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
The incidents in question contained significantly less violence than you might see after a Manchester United win. Mostly they obstructed a road and wouldn't let people through.
The other issue is that this paves the way for all Tartar organizations to be painted the same way, regardless of actual actions. It's an old cycle in Russian politics.
And this is being pushed through by a woman herself wanted for a impressive variety of crimes (treason is my favorite, not because she betrayed her country in time of war, but because she was a government attorney sworn to uphold the law, on top that), and banned from entering the UK and Canada.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/26 23:07:50
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2016/04/26 23:52:41
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
Well, to be technically, terrorism is what you get when someone doesn't think peaceful forms of activism will have an effect and simultaneously isn't stupid enough (or unwilling) to engage in more traditional forms of violent politics i.e. war
Wyrmalla wrote: By activism I mean all the picketing and attempts to push things through with the councils. Terrorism perhaps, in terms of blockading roads, is perhaps not the best wording considering it is a warzone ...and the Russian's shot down a damn passenger jet. A few groups in the area happen to be associating with terrorists lately, so I need to see more than association instead of painting them with the same brush.
They were doing more than just blocking roads. They were destroying electricity lines and preventing repair crews from making repairs. If a group of muslims had done that in the US everyone would have immediately yelled about terrorism. They are also associating with Right Sector, which is more than enough reason on its own for an organisation to be banned imo. And last I looked the area was not a warzone... The warzone is a few hundred miles to the east actually.
Also, "the Russians" did not shoot down anyone. If we assume the SBU taps were genuine (how convenient that would be), it was shot down by a bunch of Cossacks.
The incidents in question contained significantly less violence than you might see after a Manchester United win. Mostly they obstructed a road and wouldn't let people through.
Funny. I have never seen Manchester United fans destroy critical infrastructure and to deprive 2.3 million people (including hospitals and such) without electricity.
The other issue is that this paves the way for all Tartar organizations to be painted the same way, regardless of actual actions. It's an old cycle in Russian politics.
Yes, but that does not make this ban any less justified. They also did not really need this to paint Tatars and their organisations in a negative way. Tatars have always been hated, it goes back centuries. And while everyone knows it is wrong to blame the present-day Tatars for the crimes of their ancestors, it is still something that clings to them. Them being muslims also doesn't really help...
BaronIveagh wrote: And this is being pushed through by a woman herself wanted for a impressive variety of crimes (treason is my favorite, not because she betrayed her country in time of war, but because she was a government attorney sworn to uphold the law, on top that), and banned from entering the UK and Canada.
Defending your homeland is not treason. Ukraine is nor her country, nor mine or any Crimean's. Any oath to Ukraine was invalidated the moment Ukraine's only legitimate, democratically elected government was overthrown.
It is sad it has come to this, but given their recent actions, I feel it is justified.
Natalya Poklonskaya has already vowed that she will deport anyone who does not fully agree with and support Crimea's new place in Russia. Expect mass relocations of Tartars inside Russia and Crimea, and imprisonment on spurious charges next, 'for the good of the people'.
I hope you'll feel they're as justified.
We'll talk about that when that actually happens. I don't believe in it.
Also, as long as Natalya says it, I think I am going to support it. She's cute.
(for those who don't understand Russian, the song is about a guy who wants to commit a crime just so he can be prosecuted by Natalya Poklonskaya)
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/04/27 00:23:25
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
2016/04/27 01:46:28
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
Iron_Captain wrote: They also did not really need this to paint Tatars and their organisations in a negative way. Tatars have always been hated, it goes back centuries. And while everyone knows it is wrong to blame the present-day Tatars for the crimes of their ancestors, it is still something that clings to them. Them being muslims also doesn't really help...
I was talking about legally. It paves the way to commit all sorts of fun like seizing peoples property 'because they're kulaks/tartars/etc'
Iron_Captain wrote: Any oath to Ukraine was invalidated the moment Ukraine's only legitimate, democratically elected government was overthrown.
I still must have missed that at some point. Because all I saw was a corrupt Ukrainian politician who had already committed treason and then fled the country in a middle of a crisis to commit more treason elsewhere (made extra hilarious after his vows not to resign or leave the country). The Ukrainian government then did the best it could with what it had. Calling it an ''overthrow' is disingenuous at best, since the bulk of the government remained. The situation that arose was not dealt with in the Constitution, so people improvised. HIlariously I've heard it called everything from a Nazi plot to a Zionist coup.
Iron_Captain wrote: They also did not really need this to paint Tatars and their organisations in a negative way. Tatars have always been hated, it goes back centuries. And while everyone knows it is wrong to blame the present-day Tatars for the crimes of their ancestors, it is still something that clings to them. Them being muslims also doesn't really help...
I was talking about legally. It paves the way to commit all sorts of fun like seizing peoples property 'because they're kulaks/tartars/etc'
I fail to see banning an organisation that participates in terrorist activities and has terrorist connections paves the way for seizing people's property because they are Tatars.
Iron_Captain wrote: Any oath to Ukraine was invalidated the moment Ukraine's only legitimate, democratically elected government was overthrown.
I still must have missed that at some point. Because all I saw was a corrupt Ukrainian politician who had already committed treason and then fled the country in a middle of a crisis to commit more treason elsewhere (made extra hilarious after his vows not to resign or leave the country). The Ukrainian government then did the best it could with what it had. Calling it an ''overthrow' is disingenuous at best, since the bulk of the government remained. The situation that arose was not dealt with in the Constitution, so people improvised. HIlariously I've heard it called everything from a Nazi plot to a Zionist coup.
I must have missed that. The Ukrainian Constitution was pretty clear about this: "No one shall usurp state power". Yanukovych was corrupt, but he arguably was less corrupt than the people who came in power after him, and regardless of corruption he was the democratically elected leader of Ukraine. The Constitution provides legal means to impeach a president if his behaviour is undesirable, but these were not followed. Using force rather than elections or constitutional means to change a democratically elected government is illegal. What happened in Kiev was unconstitutional and meats every possible definition of a 'coup d'état' and you can't blame Yanukovych for fleeing the capital when a thousand guys with AK-47s and guns were coming to hang him.
You definitely have your facts wrong. The entire government was dismissed, and virtually anyone in parliament disagreeing with the new people in power or showing support for Ukraine's legitimate leaders was forced to resign or suffered "accidents". The coup leaders also got rid of the Constitutional Court and any judge that disagreed with them, as well as releasing prisoners and generally interfering with the business of the judiciary, which is not allowed by the Ukrainian Constitution. There is no possible way you can claim the coup was legitimate, it directly violated the constitution and all the basic principles of democracy.
We'll talk about that when that actually happens. I don't believe in it.
When it's actually happening, it's already too late. God help you, my friend, because once this sort of thing starts, it never ends well.
"When it happens" means never, because this is never going to start. There is no rational reason to assume any kind of deportation or ethnic cleansing is being planned. Why do you think this?
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
2016/04/27 14:23:40
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
Sure we got a history of it, but no where on the scale that russia does. Its like comparing a professional league player (russia) to a high school senior (US) in the great sport of ethnic cleansing.
Ustrello wrote: Sure we got a history of it, but no where on the scale that russia does. Its like comparing a professional league player (russia) to a high school senior (US) in the great sport of ethnic cleansing.
I dislike the fact that you are turning this into a competition about which country has the bloodiest history, but I certainly wonder what happened to the tens of millions of people whose land you now occupy? I don't recall anything on that scale in Russia's thousand year history... Even leaving the murders aside, I certainly find it very curious that the many peoples under Russian dominance have been able to preserve their cultures in most cases, whereas those that came under US dominance were not.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/27 14:57:18
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
2016/04/27 15:07:41
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
Ustrello wrote: Sure we got a history of it, but no where on the scale that russia does. Its like comparing a professional league player (russia) to a high school senior (US) in the great sport of ethnic cleansing.
I dislike the fact that you are turning this into a competition about which country has the bloodiest history, but I certainly wonder what happened to the tens of millions of people whose land you now occupy? I don't recall anything on that scale in Russia's thousand year history... Even leaving the murders aside, I certainly find it very curious that the many peoples under Russian dominance have been able to preserve their cultures, whereas those that came under US dominance were not.
Well, mostly they died of disease. I think the number is something like 100m in North and South America died of just disease. After that, it was a matter of every European and European decedent in the Americas fething them over for the next few hundred years. Although I think forced assimilation did more to wipe out native culture than any other way.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2016/04/27 15:25:25
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
Ustrello wrote: Sure we got a history of it, but no where on the scale that russia does. Its like comparing a professional league player (russia) to a high school senior (US) in the great sport of ethnic cleansing.
I dislike the fact that you are turning this into a competition about which country has the bloodiest history, but I certainly wonder what happened to the tens of millions of people whose land you now occupy? I don't recall anything on that scale in Russia's thousand year history... Even leaving the murders aside, I certainly find it very curious that the many peoples under Russian dominance have been able to preserve their cultures in most cases, whereas those that came under US dominance were not.
Seeing how you started it by claiming what you did about the tartars yeah its fair play.
As for the culture that is interesting since we have buryats named Svetlana and igor who are also eastern orthodox.
Ustrello wrote: Sure we got a history of it, but no where on the scale that russia does. Its like comparing a professional league player (russia) to a high school senior (US) in the great sport of ethnic cleansing.
I dislike the fact that you are turning this into a competition about which country has the bloodiest history, but I certainly wonder what happened to the tens of millions of people whose land you now occupy? I don't recall anything on that scale in Russia's thousand year history... Even leaving the murders aside, I certainly find it very curious that the many peoples under Russian dominance have been able to preserve their cultures in most cases, whereas those that came under US dominance were not.
Seeing how you started it by claiming what you did about the tartars yeah its fair play.
As for the culture that is interesting since we have buryats named Svetlana and igor who are also eastern orthodox.
So? It is not like Buryats are restricted to one language or religion. There are also muslim Buryats named Said. What matters is that many Buryats still speak their own language and that Buryats as a group still have a culture that is clearly distinct from other cultures in Russia. Buryat language still has more speakers than Najavo language, the largest indigenous language of the US. And Najavo language speakers are over 50% of all native American language speakers in the US... While far from perfect, you can not deny that the position of native ethnic minorities in the Russian Federation is far better than in the United States.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/27 15:50:36
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
2016/04/27 15:55:55
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!
lucky bugger took one to the dome and lived. The ISI agent? not so much, we hit him with a JDAM, killed him and all his little buddies.
