# Ukraine - Russia Situation



## fixidixi (Mar 3, 2014)

Hy,

I would like to know what do you think about this whole situation. There are folks in the community from all over the world -as I've noticed I might be wrong  - so I tought it would be interesting to hear what do you think in different parts of the world (what are your ideas, what the media in your country says, what sources do you read while forming an opinion) etc.

Well I've got opcorn: so let's hear what you've got to say about this  .

Thanks for sharing! B)


----------



## GIANT_CRAB (Mar 3, 2014)

So when USA goes to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc, its legal?

So when USA breaks Geneva protocols, such as no chemical weapons for warfare, in Vietnam and Afghanistan, its legal too?

When Russia defends her rights by saving/protection its people (which abides by constitution), EU/NATO/UN/America comes in and SLAMS Russia for "breaking international laws" when they weren't even broken.

I am a tinfoiler but what I stated above are facts, judgment is to be made by yourself.

Also, vpsBoard shouldn't be used for political discussions, its just not nice.

EDIT:

PS, its only the southern and eastern part that are so called "occupied", where there are tons of Russian speaking people who even hung up Russian flags in protest against the fascists who were supported/backed by the USA and EU.

There were also 100k Ukraine people who applied for asylum to Russia in just the last 2 weeks.


----------



## MannDude (Mar 3, 2014)

John Kerry must have the memory of a goldfish... His statement is so ironic.

EDIT: Political discussion is fine so long as it's civil. Just realize this forum has a global audience and the views of someone somewhere else in the world may differ from someone on the opposite side. So no flaming, please.


----------



## MartinD (Mar 3, 2014)

That topic is misleading.

a small portion of Ukraine has seen an influx of Russian soldiers and they now have operational control of the area. I would agree with the acting pm of Ukraine that it is an act of war.

I do not, however, agree that "Ukraine occupied by Russia" is in any way accurate at all.


----------



## MartinD (Mar 3, 2014)

GIANT_CRAB said:


> When Russia defends her rights by saving/protection its people (which abides by constitution), EU/NATO/UN/America comes in and SLAMS Russia for "breaking international laws" when they weren't even broken.


First of all, this has nothing to do with the US - the topic is about Ukraine and Russia.

Secondly, I don't see how that is Russia's 'right'. It doesn't matter who you are (UK, US, whoever) you do not send your troops in to another country and you certainly don't take over military installations. That is a blatant act of war no matter how you slice it.


----------



## drmike (Mar 3, 2014)

Ahh this is Off Topic 

Seems like we have another this ethnic group vs. that ethnic group situation in Ukraine.  Both internally in Ukraine and the issue of Ukraine vs. Russia, even though quite a few Russians in Ukraine.

Where this is going on isn't far from Moscow, is it? 500 miles~.   So strategic on their part from having UN / US parked on their doorstop.  Kiev has been I believe a capitol of Russia in the past and storied history with such.

Ukraine suffered under Russian rule of the land oh less than 100 years back roughly. 

In 1932-34 "4 million deaths [were] attributed to starvation"...

Holodomor is the name of this event. Extermination by hunger.  Forced starvation of the Ukrainian people.

http://www.holodomorct.org/history.html

There have been three documented forced starvations of the Ukranians by the Russians:

http://www.ukrweekly.com/old/archive/1988/458814.shtml

Let's hope this matter doesn't result in a repeat of this history.


----------



## HaitiBrother (Mar 3, 2014)

This is for sure offtopic, but whatever.

Russia can invade Ukraine if they want, at one point Ukraine used to be apart of Russia under Russian control, so I don't see an issue with it?

However I smiled when I saw Obama threatening Russia to not invade Ukraine, I'm pretty sure if Russia and USA went to war, Russia would win.


----------



## fixidixi (Mar 3, 2014)

@MartinD:

Please feel free to change the title if you think its misleading:

may Ukrain-Russia situation would be better .

@GIANT_CRAB

"Also, vpsBoard shouldn't be used for political discussions, its just not nice."

I'm asking for opinions in the off topic section. I think talking about important in civil manner might be hard, but I trust the audiance of vpsboard that we are more than capable to do so . I'm sorry if I've offended you in any way, that was not my intention.

Howerver I've asked about Ukraine and Russia and what is happening there RIGHT NOW! (Not about the US and its previous operations...)

So am I right to understand that your opinion is that what Russia's acts are justified because its protecting its citizens? (and what about international law?) Russia signed over that territory in 1950(? or I might have just said something foolish? :/ )


----------



## GIANT_CRAB (Mar 3, 2014)

MartinD said:


> First of all, this has nothing to do with the US - the topic is about Ukraine and Russia.
> 
> Secondly, I don't see how that is Russia's 'right'. It doesn't matter who you are (UK, US, whoever) you do not send your troops in to another country and you certainly don't take over military installations. That is a blatant act of war no matter how you slice it.


When Russia made such a move, USA (John Kerry criticising) and the UN was involved.

Russian FM Sergey Lavrov at UN - "I reiterate, we are talking here about protection of our citizens and compatriots, about protection of the most fundamental of the human rights – the right to live, and nothing more.

Those who try to interpret the situation as an act of aggression, threaten us with sanctions and boycotts, are the same partners who have been consistently and vigorously encouraging the political powers close to them to declare ultimatums and renounce dialogue, to ignore the concerns of the south and east of Ukraine and consequently to the polarization of the Ukrainian society"

Politics is the grey area and never black/white straight, Russia's decision was debated in their Parliament.

Russia's government and people never liked war, therefore, they aren't warmongering people - why would they want to "invade Ukraine" when East and Southern Ukraine, and the President of Ukraine, asked for help from Russia.


----------



## blergh (Mar 3, 2014)

Let's hope it can end peacefully - Wouldn't want another Yugoslavia.


----------



## peterw (Mar 3, 2014)

Ukraine has a long history. And this conflict has a long history. In the 18th century Ukraine was devided between Austria/Hungary and the Russian Empire. Russia, fearing separatism, imposed strict limits on attempts to elevate the Ukrainian language and culture, banning its use.

Ukraine officially declared itself an independent state on August 24, 1991. But the Krim was a independend part of the Ukraine state because they know that most Russians live there. They have their own parlament too. There were conflicts between Russians and the Coptic Jews but even that was solved. And now Russia comes again to open old wounds and memories.



blergh said:


> Let's hope it can end peacefully - Wouldn't want another Yugoslavia.


I hope this too. This brings Yugoslavia in my mind too!


----------



## MartinD (Mar 3, 2014)

I can see where this is going so I'm just going to bow out. Can't argue with idiocy.


----------



## MartinD (Mar 3, 2014)

Topic title edited by OP's request.


----------



## fixidixi (Mar 3, 2014)

HaitiBrother said:


> Russia can invade Ukraine if they want, at one point Ukraine used to be apart of Russia under Russian control, so I don't see an issue with it?


I understand that the majority of the population is Russian, but theyve signed over that territory to another state. Moving in with army forces is not a resolution to the problems even if there are threats. Or is it just a question if you are "big enough" to do so? :%


----------



## rds100 (Mar 3, 2014)

After the recent riots in Ukraine their government is barely functional. The police is nowhere to be seen, the other government institutions barely function too, if at all. So there is chaos everywhere and nobody to stop the every day crimes happening there, from which the regular people suffer. I can kind of understand Russia going in that part of Ukraine that is full of russians to put some order there. I don't think it's a war since they didn't have to fight with anyone - the ukrainean army wasn't very functional either, and those who were functional probably didn't want to fight with the Russians, as they themselves are of russian origin, etc.


----------



## MartinD (Mar 3, 2014)

"BREAKING NEWS: Russia's Black Sea Fleet has given Ukrainian forces in Crimea until 03:00 GMT on Tuesday to surrender or face an all-out assault."

Yeah, Russia has a right.

Sounds like war to me.


----------



## rds100 (Mar 3, 2014)

I bet there will not be an actual fight.


----------



## DomainBop (Mar 3, 2014)

MartinD said:


> "BREAKING NEWS: Russia's Black Sea Fleet has given Ukrainian forces in Crimea until 03:00 GMT on Tuesday to surrender or face an all-out assault."
> 
> Yeah, Russia has a right.
> 
> Sounds like war to me.


RT is reporting that the Russian defense ministry issued a statement saying the ultimatum rumors are "total nonsense"

edited to add link to story: http://rt.com/news/russia-dismiss-ultimatum-ukraine-644/


----------



## drmike (Mar 3, 2014)

blergh said:


> Let's hope it can end peacefully - Wouldn't want another Yugoslavia.


Yes, Serbia was the first thing that came to mind.

Another large Orthodox population that gets chronically attacked by the super powers.


----------



## raidz (Mar 3, 2014)

HaitiBrother said:


> This is for sure offtopic, but whatever.
> 
> Russia can invade Ukraine if they want, at one point Ukraine used to be apart of Russia under Russian control, so I don't see an issue with it?
> 
> However I smiled when I saw Obama threatening Russia to not invade Ukraine, I'm pretty sure if Russia and USA went to war, Russia would win.


Nobody would win. MAD


----------



## mojeda (Mar 3, 2014)

> *Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances*
> According to the memorandum, Russia, the US, and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Ukraine becoming party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BeastVM_Aaron (Mar 3, 2014)

I saw this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvds2AIiWLA


----------



## fixidixi (Mar 3, 2014)

BeastVM_Aaron said:


> I saw this...
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvds2AIiWLA


Thats a true story. only one thing to notice: *Uploaded: 2014 febr. 10*

With the situation escalating fast every day changes things..


----------



## stim (Mar 3, 2014)

In 1994, the USA and UK and Russia promised Ukraine protection of it's border integrity in return for relinquishing it's nukes.

It's now obvious that this deal will be reneged-on, and Putin will be allowed his land-grab.

The saber-rattling is for public consumption, but it could still backfire. 

All it takes is one idiot.


----------



## tchen (Mar 3, 2014)

GIANT_CRAB said:


> Russia defends her rights by saving/protection its people (which abides by constitution), EU/NATO/UN/America comes in and SLAMS Russia for "breaking international laws" when they weren't even broken.


"It's people" does not extend to Ukrainians.


The US doesn't make it standard policy to issue passports and citizenry preemptively in soon to be occupied territories. Asylum is fair - and for that reason it's offered, but asylum without relocation is a loophole, whose pretext is currently frowned upon by those in foreign affairs.


Article 2 (4) though is unfortunately rather loose. But no attempt has even been made by Russia to rationalize it under said article. At least the US came up with one, no matter how flimsy it was. And no, liberating a ethnic majority who you share common ancestry isn't enough hence why the passports have been issued. They're waiting for the eventual military response from Kiev before declaring they're doing it for the protection of 'oppressed' Russians in Crimea under article 51 - never mind that they've been squatting in that territory for weeks relentlessly breathing air on any tiny ember they can spark into a civil war under various uses of unlawful combatants.


----------



## ChrisM (Mar 3, 2014)




----------



## fixidixi (Mar 3, 2014)

[joke]



[/joke]


----------



## raindog308 (Mar 3, 2014)

raidz said:


> Nobody would win. MAD


Actually we'd all win...I've been waiting for the New Middle Ages since the late 70s.  I'm starting to despair that a cool postapocalyptic world is ever going to come about.


----------



## raindog308 (Mar 3, 2014)

The US, UK, etc. actually did not "promise" anything regarding Ukrainian borders.

It's helpful to read the actual memorandum: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

Note that (a) it's a memorandum, not a treaty - in other words, a fancy diplomatic term for a press release, and (b) nowhere does it say that the US, UK, etc. are legally obligated to defend Ukrainian borders.  It merely says they "confirm" and "reaffirm" and such.

Of course, the UN charter, etc. are a different matter.  But then again, we're on the subject of international law, which is ultimately meaningless.  The only thing that matters in inter-sovereign relationships is force, be it military, economic, etc.  That's the reality and will be for the foreseeable future.  There is no global organization that is empowered to end conflicts and this is an excellent example.  The UN is powerless as long as Russia owns a Security Council veto.

The line about "protecting our ethnic nationals" is one of the oldest in the book and it's always nonsense.  As a point of reference, it was a favorite of Hitler's.


----------



## k0nsl (Mar 4, 2014)

Relevant:

*We are the 1%! Kiev gives oligarchs top jobs*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-uQh6kQ_Qs


----------



## Steve (Mar 4, 2014)

GIANT_CRAB said:


> So when USA goes to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc, its legal?


Libya was certainly legal and approved by the UN Security Council - Russia and China didn't veto it.

The removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan was a huge win for the people of Afghanistan who had an illegitimate government that would block aid movement, impose strict sharia law on women and generally be a bunch of assholes who didn't give the slightest crap about human rights. Last time I checked, Ukraine was a sovereign and had a decent human rights record. 'Humanitarian intervention in Afghanistan' does not at all compare to Russia's actions in Ukraine.



GIANT_CRAB said:


> So when USA breaks Geneva protocols, such as no chemical weapons for warfare, in Vietnam and Afghanistan, its legal too?


You're referring to Agent Orange/Napalm right? Defoliants aren't considered chemical weapons. It's not illegal to clear vegetation. They weren't used in Afghanistan either so I'm not sure what you're referring to.



GIANT_CRAB said:


> When Russia defends her rights by saving/protection its people (which abides by constitution), EU/NATO/UN/America comes in and SLAMS Russia for "breaking international laws" when they weren't even broken.


This is a decent article on it. It's pretty clearly in breach of international law.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116819/international-law-russias-ukraine-intervention

America hasn't been all good obviously, but mistakes by them don't and shouldn't really undermine their views and those of the overwhelming majority of the international community when a country like Russia completely and without justification invades a sovereign state.


----------



## wlanboy (Mar 4, 2014)

Is this a race to find the one country which did more mistakes?

Does country A owe someone something if it did less mistakes than country B?

I don't think that anybody here (including me) is in a position to weigt guilt against each other.

This is an old conflict and I am missing a lot of diplomacy from all sides including US, EU and RU - which might help to resolve this situation.

I was thinking that the times are over, that we won't fall back to the dark days where we first threaten someone and afterwards talk to each other.

Hopefully someone is able to tell them that it is 2014 and not 1964.


----------



## happel (Mar 4, 2014)

In my opinion Russia should be allowed to evacuate it's citizens from the conflict areas, but invading the Ukraine like they seem to be doing now shouldn't be without consequences. Unfortunately the EU needs Russian gas (and has less spine than a jellyfish) and the US also won't do anything else than threatening a bit with economic sanctions. The Russians know this and do as they please.


The whole situation reminds me a bit of Hitler and Nazi Germany annexating parts of Czechoslovakia and Austria. Only I think it's extremely unlikely a third world war is about to break out.


----------



## MartinD (Mar 4, 2014)

The EU has more power over Russia than Russia would like to admit. The EU holds all the cards here, far more than the US. They just won't do anything with that power.


----------



## tchen (Mar 4, 2014)

MartinD said:


> The EU has more power over Russia than Russia would like to admit. The EU holds all the cards here, far more than the US. They just won't do anything with that power.


Kinda more economically symbiotic.  Russia supplies about 30% of EU continental gas, a majority of which goes to Germany.    Sure the EU has power over Russia but ending bilateral trade would pretty much kill both.  Probably why no one is taking the US seriously when they rattle the trade sanction sabre.


----------



## fixidixi (Mar 4, 2014)

Two points I failed to understand is: "In my opinion Russia should be allowed to evacuate it's citizens from the conflict areas"

i have heared about unrest and bloody events from Kiev, but havent heared such things from the eastern part of the country.

Are there any reports,images etc out there about actual incidents there or its just the "could happen"?

the other point I'm not clear about is: are those russian-speaking ukranians ukranian and russian citizens at the same time?


----------



## texteditor (Mar 4, 2014)

Chris Miller said:


>


This was effectively a win-win situation for Putin from the outset, it's dumb that the Fox News crew is harping on Obama for not 'putting Putin in his place' or whatever dumb Cold War era tough-guy diplomacy mindset they are obsessed with.

If anything, they should criticize him for playing into Putin's game at all, not for his lack of "Now Listen Here, America Makes The Rules"-posturing.


----------



## texteditor (Mar 4, 2014)

fixidixi said:


> the other point I'm not clear about is: are those russian-speaking ukranians ukranian and russian citizens at the same time?


No, but seemingly Russia is ready to give them citizenship to win them over, since they are one of the targets of the recent growth of Ukranian nationalists


----------



## tchen (Mar 4, 2014)

fixidixi said:


> Two points I failed to understand is: ...
> 
> i have heared about unrest and bloody events from Kiev, but havent heared such things from the eastern part of the country.
> 
> Are there any reports,images etc out there about actual incidents there or its just the "could happen"?


Footballers only exist in the west.

/end purple


----------



## fixidixi (Mar 4, 2014)

"in his first public comments on the issue, Mr Putin denied the heavily armed troops were Russian. He said they were "local self-defence forces" loyal to Moscow, protecting the bases from "nationalists" and "anti-Semites"."

source:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26442381

If ^^ true *then why* the hell *did they go there*? If there are _"local self-defence forces"_ already despite there is nothing really to defend against, then why are that bunch of soliders and ammunition needed there?.

reasoning:bs..

also related:



source:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26367786


----------



## tchen (Mar 4, 2014)

fixidixi said:


> "in his first public comments on the issue, Mr Putin denied the heavily armed troops were Russian. He said they were "local self-defence forces" loyal to Moscow, protecting the bases from "nationalists" and "anti-Semites"."
> 
> source:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26442381
> 
> If ^^ true *then why* the hell *did they go there*? If there are _"local self-defence forces"_ already despite there is nothing really to defend against, then why are that bunch of soliders and ammunition needed there?.


Russia's Black Sea Fleet is stationed in Sevastopol - hence the reference to 'local self-defense forces'.  This is not referring to the paramilitary operations going on near the local parliament and near Simferopol.  Those are just extremely well-armed hobbyists who happen to drive vehicles with Moscow license plates. Absolutely no ties to the Russian Armed Forces.  *cough*


----------



## tchen (Mar 4, 2014)

I should probably point out that despite my sometimes cynicism in this matter with regards to the rumblings that go on in the rarefied air of politics, the servicemen stationed at the bases _*are not*_ sneaky Russian bastards that are bent on occupying Crimea.  They've been put in an awkward situation of having to do a base lock-down, even at the risk of having to fire upon their former Ukrainian base roommates and friends of several years.


----------



## happel (Mar 5, 2014)

fixidixi said:


> Two points I failed to understand is: "In my opinion Russia should be allowed to evacuate it's citizens from the conflict areas"
> 
> 
> i have heared about unrest and bloody events from Kiev, but havent heared such things from the eastern part of the country.
> ...


Well, Russia is 'creating' Russian citizens on the spot by handing out passports to any Ukrainian walking into the Russian consulate.


Unrest isn't that violent as it was in Kiev, but it's the excuse Moscow is using for this 'invasion'. So if that's the reason the Russians are there, they should evacuate their citizens and GTFO Ukrainian territory.


I don't get the western leaders, are they really that stupid? Threatening isn't going to work with the Russians, they will always walk up to the line and take a few steps over it. Putin is like a little child he needs instant and direct consequences for wrong behavior.


----------



## jarland (Mar 5, 2014)

As an American I honestly give up on this stuff. I hope everyone over there is well and safe, about all I can say. I've learned two things over the last decade. I cannot trust the media narrative of an event that I cannot see, no matter the outlet, and I cannot trust internet commentary. The only people who ever have something to say always seem to have an agenda, and their media of choice is always the one that reflects their opinions.


So to everyone on that side of the world, my prayers are with you always, and I haven't the damnedest clue what actually goes on anywhere. Mass media was supposed to connect us to the outside world to see truth more clearly. That outcome was easily averted by too many shouting idiots.


----------



## fixidixi (Mar 5, 2014)

@jarland: i agree with your opinion on mass media.

I'm in a country next-to-ukraine i hear all kinds of things, but tought that i would be really interesting to hear what gets out in the world. im mostly reading bbc,spiegel international(has a _few_ differences with the native language version ), occasionally times and of course media of my own language..

thanks everyone for sharing your toughts! looking forward to hear some more..


----------



## fixidixi (Jun 11, 2014)

Any updates on this in your country?


----------

