Ukraine/Crimea

More stuff that helps explain why she quit.
Ya I figured RT would do it's best to save face with it's own fanatical base, and what better way than to drag out the neocons. Here's a slightly condensed version: Your Guide to the Developing and Hilarious War Between RT and Neocons

Wahl's resignation was spectacular in ways, but she wasn't the first to resign from the network: Who Wants to Work for Russia Today?

Staci Bivens knew something was seriously wrong when her bosses at Russia Today asked her to put together a story alleging that Germany — Europe’s economic powerhouse — was a failed state.

“It was me and two managers and they had already discussed what they wanted,” Bivens, an American who worked in RT’s Moscow headquarters from 2009 through 2011, said of a meeting she’d had to discuss the segment before a planned reporting trip to Germany. “They called me in and it was really surreal. One of the managers said, ‘The story is that the West is failing, Germany is a failed state.’”

You can go on and continue linking your credibility to RT.com's. It only makes my life easier.
 
The Western media immediately went apesh!t over this intolerant act to the extent that I only needed to go four pages deep into google news before I found a non-RT source for the story.
The explanation for that is that it actually didn't happen. The president vetoed it and that was the end of that. Lucky for me I have a brain and Question More(tm).
 
Obama-bracket.jpg
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26787051

Mr Obama said the US has "no interest in circling Russia" and "no interest in Ukraine beyond letting Ukrainian people make their own decisions about their own lives."


See, this is exactly the type of transparent kiech that illustrates why no one (including Putin, I dare say) is really taking anything Obama says seriously any more. Viewed from this perspective it's not that difficult to see why Putin has acted the way he has.
 
Holy crap. NBC News pulls a modern day St. Petersburg Times.

Back in the days of the first Gulf War (reminder to Saddam who his daddy is) the US made loud claims that Saddam was massing his troops along the border with Saudi Arabia. Not being able to actually get the confirmatory information out of the US military the St Petersburg Times decided to pay for commercial satellite time and found ... nothing. It was a lie designed to heighten tension and swing the nays toward supporting war.

The reportage of Russian troops massing on the Ukraine border sounded similar and made similarly little sense. Reports I follow said that there was nothing in it but there is no point bringing up info from the reports I follow because anything, ANYTHING that doesn't agree with the neo-con narrative that is being pushed through our media and our governments (hello Stephen "I meet with Roger Ailes" , "I give speeches at the CFR", Harper) - OK, rant over. There are serious webs of interest and influence running through everything but if I continue to bash the loonies running the show on the North American continent someone will doubtless pipe up that I have homoerotic fantasies about being Putin's love slave because whenever anyone points out the evils of those who rule us the attack is made that we therefore are working for other people's ruling classes and must love them more.

However, back to the point.

So, the US government and press and the Canadian government (I have heard the gormless Baird claim this repeatedly) have been repeating that Russia is massing troops along the Ukraine border. NBC decided to check. It turns out - they are not there.

But, oh they are so cunningly disguised that they cannot be detected - and only a fool cannot see these rich and fine clothes. The "they are so well hidden that proves they have amazing capabilities" ploy was also an old neo-con line back in the old cold war. Because they couldn't find Russian weapons it meant that they were cunningly hidden so the US had to build up its weapons pronto. The same guys claimed that failing to detect any weapons on mass destruction before the second Gulf War just proved how cunning Saddam was. I expect kids to fall for this stuff, they still trust in authority, but isn't the crowd around here old enough to have seen this a few times before?
 
See, this is exactly the type of transparent kiech that illustrates why no one (including Putin, I dare say) is really taking anything Obama says seriously any more. Viewed from this perspective it's not that difficult to see why Putin has acted the way he has.
That's not why Putin did what he did.

You know the EU and NATO could have done a lot more to fast track both Georgia and Ukraine but they didn't. NATO is not necessarily anti-Russian and Russia itself has claimed that it hasn't ruled out joining the alliance as recently as 2009[/ur]. Putin is the one that wants to draw lines of division and raise the tensions for his own political reasons. It's really more a case of a belligerent Russia under Putin that is driving nations like Ukraine and Georgia away from Russia than the EU or the US trying to steal them away.
 
Robert, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the BBC is closer to the truth on this? Or more accurately that comrade Fluffy is full of shit?

The BBC has been shown to be "full of shit" on more occasions than I care to remember.

And from the link you posted:

"Russia has repeatedly stated that it does not conduct unusual or unplanned activities which are militarily significant on its territory near the border with Ukraine," the Foreign Ministry said in a prepared statement.

It added that accusations that Russia was building up its armed forces were "groundless."

Not quite the the type of "admission" that your post implies.
 
Not quite the the type of "admission" that your post implies.
Sorry, but it's sounding like they're changing their story. At first we were told they had no troops on the border at all. That's what Fluffy's article was about. No troops to be found. It was a questionable article right from the start because troops don't usually gather in places easily accessed by foreign reporters, but that's beside the point. Now they admit, the troops are there, but they're not massing. No, they're just doing exercises. You know, jumping jacks, push ups, that sort of thing. Nothing at all to be concerned with.
 
This just in: NATO releases satellite images of Russian troops... massing.

Satellite images reveal Russian military buildup on Ukraine's border

Here's how the Buturlinovka airbase looks like in Google Maps. Pretty empty.

I can't wait for RT.com's rebuttal.




From an opinion piece in Today's Guardian:
The latest Nato report has to be seen against this background. Its images purport to show Russian troops and hardware massing on the borders of eastern Ukraine. But there is one detail worth noting. Nato gives a date range for these pictures which makes them, essentially, historical. It is not at all clear that this situation pertains today.
Several more points could be made. The first is that several journalists have recently traversed the length of the eastern sector of the Russian-Ukrainian border, on the Russian side, and found nothing that would not correspond to the previously conducted exercises being wound down. They reported that the atmosphere seemed to be relatively relaxed; not the level of alert that might be expected of an army about to be aggressively deployed.
The second is that the US secretary of state, John Kerry, stated after his talks with Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, that Russia had withdrawn a battalion from the area near the border with Ukraine. In other words, the trend was for de-escalation – to use western diplomats' term of the moment – rather than the opposite.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...sian-arms-buildup-ukraine-propaganda-war-nato
 
The claim is that the photos were taken by a commercial company on March 26th, March 27th and April 2nd. Sure, much can change in two or three weeks, but the NBC article was posted March 30th meaning the guy drove around at least a day or two before. The exercises apparently involved around 150,000 troops, that's a lot of stuff to just exit the area without anyone noticing. Also, the article fluffy posted didn't provide a complete list of all the bases they went to, or if it did, it was a very short list. None of the bases in the satellite photos match with the bases they claimed to visit. And the Buturlinovka airbase is around 150km from the border so it's very unlikely they did a thorough search. Simply driving along the border is just stupid. And last but not least, they didn't really think much of the FSB agents turning them away from an area. Like, I'm sure there was nothing to see there. But at least they were polite, that should have been the headline. :rolleyes:

Robert and Fluffy, I hope you guys are right. I hope there is no troop buildup and no invasion because it will only bring more pain and suffering. But my gut feeling is that the Russians are up to something and it isn't something good.
 
I hope you guys are right. I hope there is no troop buildup...

I'm not convinced either way; there may be a troop build up and there may not but I'm just as wary of Western propaganda as Russian propaganda. Both are lying to you, almost all of the time.
 
Robert, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the BBC is closer to the truth on this? Or more accurately that comrade Fluffy is full of shit? The Russians just came out and admitted their troops are on the border, but not to worry though, as they pose "no reason for concern".
The BBC were pretty keen on the Iraq war. British policy generally dictates that if the Americans are doing it, the UK wants in on it. Do you not remember how generally complicit the Beeb was?

By the way, just to clarify because someone might mention it, just because opposing views are mentioned doesn't mean a media outlet is balanced, except in the sense that it might be "Fair and Balanced". I watched a reporter in Crimea do two streeters with one person each (at different times) one person said they thought Crimea should join Russia and the other said no way. Isn't that brilliant? It looks so fair and balanced, and yet the outcome was quite unbalanced. It's the same way some networks will have a Global Warming expert and an Anti Global Warming spokesperson and call the broadcast balanced therefore. Basically you just HAVE to trust anyone who is being so FAIR. Even Fox would have lefties on from time to time just so they could say they did, but not often enough for them to actually have a voice.
 
Robert and Fluffy, I hope you guys are right. I hope there is no troop buildup and no invasion because it will only bring more pain and suffering. But my gut feeling is that the Russians are up to something and it isn't something good.

If there isn't a troop build up yet it is something that the Russians will have to consider at some point. The US are moving forces into the area to capitalize on the change of allegiance of the newly installed government in Kiev. Remember, the people didn't have a chance to vote for the new government and people died in this takeover which, no matter how much you might like it, was not democratic. On the other hand, Crimea voted and no-one died. But if Kiev want to try to take it back by force it may get nasty. Further we have the developing secessionists in the east but first:

I was going to write this last week but it's been a busy one. The next week will be busy too, but here's how I saw it/ see it going.

Russia does not want a war in Europe. Russia especially does not want a war in Ukraine. Russia wants stability in Ukraine one way or another because Russia has a lot of business conducted through Ukraine. If Ukraine blows up then the pipelines are unsecured and every hundred yards along the pipe there'll be a gang demanding a few bucks to "make sure nothing happens". Europe is a big market and Russia doesn't have a buyer that can replace it.

Germany and most of Europe doesn't want a war in their back yards. Like Russia they have seen a war in Europe and know how costly it is. It also kills people too but mostly it's really costly. Like Russia, Germany doesn't want to see the pipelines disrupted and the trade curtailed. Germany has done well in Europe and made out like a bandit from the Euro.

There is a country that made a lot of money and lost almost nothing of any real value in the last two wars in Europe. If they could get European powers to fight each other again it would fill their coffers and remove everyone in Europe from the status of potential rival. Would the European players be so stupid? It's hard to imagine. However, even just chaos in Ukraine would threaten that East to West gas flow and that would debilitate both Russia's ability to gain other currencies and Germany's ability to be competitive. It would also have the added bonus of making Germany dependant on someone else's gas and guess who's got gas.

Ukraine is broke, and has been for years. Russia has been keeping them afloat. The people wanted to get rid of the corruption in their government and now they have a new corrupt government and they have been counted out of governing. Why did we not just wait until the next election to get a new government in Ukraine, an elected one like the one that just got overthrown. It was just a year away but we had to rush it for some reason. Why did we need to lay down the ultimatum to Ukraine to choose between EU and Russia? Russia said they would work with the EU - why force Ukraine to make a choice? And why did Ukraine back out of the deal with Europe and take the Russian deal instead? Because the Russian deal was better. Russia was willing to pay more, forgive more and keep the place afloat.

Putin believes you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. He doesn't need to go to war. He can just wait. Now the unelected government of Ukraine has signed up with the IMF and the country is going under austerity. The people can riot like Greeks from now on and the new government can shoot them as terrorists and we will no longer care. In fact, the defence brigades taking over the government buildings in the East have already been labelled and lethal force is authorised. Goodbye democracy, hello hypocrisy. We helped the putsch so that we could thwart a deal between Ukraine and Russia to try to fix the economy. Instead we installed the usual bunch of clowns, some guys who were willing to trade their country's wealth for a bit of power. Once the IMF made the loan, fired the debt dart, Ukraine is going to have to pay and pay and pay just like the other places this has been done to. The fact that it was an unelected government that brought in this travesty will help them as little as it helps Italy and as little as it helps Greece.

The (neo) nazis (with their "neo" swastikas etc) were very helpful in toppling the government. A little thug muscle does wanders to keep politicians away from parliament so you can pass the bills you want. But they were a bit embarrassing so there's already been a bit of clean-up. Alexander Muzychko has become dead already. That's the thanks you get for lending a helping hand.

All Putin needs to do (unless someone brings a war to him) is sit tight. Everyone knew they weren't just going to be able to take the big naval base from Russia. They've had it for more than two centuries.The US would really have like to install their navy in that port and have the sailors line up on deck to moon the Russians twice a day. The poor babies didn't manage to get it so they are left to pout. The US, chiefly, and its sycophants will continue to say that the referendum was illegitimate because Crimea was under Russian occupation. This is simply not true. Crimea had an agreement with Russia to allow up to 25000 troops. If having other people's bases in your country means you are under occupation then we all are. Furthermore, the German constitution was written under US occupation. How can we call the German government legitimate? The Iraq constitution was basically written by America and given to Iraq under occupation including such lovely articles like those prohibiting farmers from saving their seed from year to year. Completely legitimate, though, apparently.

The referendum is something the Russians have probably had in their back pocket for just such an occasion, but now they have something that the rest of Ukraine can look at as a comparator. Russia is willing to buy Ukraine back. While the new government was busy carrying out the IMF instructions to cut what little social safety net there is and start selling off public assets, Putin ordered that pensions in Crimea be brought up to Russian levels since Crimea is now part of Russia. That means doubling the pensions. Imagine the rest of Ukraine looking at that and wondering what choice they should have made.

And what Putin is going to do is what he always does. He's going to get on the phone to everyone and he's going to talk business. And he isn't going to fire first - he needs to be the reasonable one. Of course, we've seen how that plays out before. Saddam let the inspectors into his palace and the Bush administration and media said that Saddam was the one who kicked the inspectors out. Russia has something that Saddam never had - nukes. Russia may be able to run out the clock on this one. Meanwhile watch China. Like Russia they are under threat from the US. There is a common interest. Russia has oil and gas and a border with China. China has all of America's money ... and most of their manufacturing.

It will be interesting to see which way Afghanistan (also having elections under US occupation but that's fine) swings in the next few years. Will they turn once again to Russia? Well, I suppose that really depends on whether the Unocal trans-Afghanistan pipeline completes as scheduled in 2017 and whether the US has the Caspian basin locked up by then and whether Pakistan will still be our friend. Man, wouldn't Iran's oil just plug into the Unocal pipe just great if only Iran belonged to the US.

Russia will work with whatever corrupt government runs Ukraine. It's important to keep the pipelines open. The US would not suffer at home if there was a war in Ukraine (except the usual poor slobs, kids of the poverty stricken) and would be up on energy contracts, weapons sales and loans. The US is building its forces in the region but it really needs an excuse to use them. Russia will try to ignore them and not give an excuse no matter how much the Americans try to anger them. America will encourage the Ukraine government to act violently against the protesters in the East (ironic again since the protesters in Kiev were generally treated better than the Occupy guys, if you ignore the sniper who were gunning down protesters and police alike - because that's what governments do to diffuse a situation, right?) I'm afraid that Putin will most likely have to abandon them to their fate so as not to give a cassus belli, but the IMF treatment will make things bad there.

If there are Greek style protests in Ukraine I'm sure we'll hear even less about them than we hear about Greece, and if we do hear about them they will be downplayed and blamed on a small band of trouble makers, and probably on Putin.
 
Putin believes you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
I stopped reading after that and the fact that I read that far proves I'm rather open minded. To quote Merkel, "you're in another world".
 
To quote Merkel, "you're in another world".
You and I are certainly in other worlds. Perhaps you should check under your bed for Reds. You fear Putin and I don't. I'm much more concerned with the crooks that run my country and every time they do something crooked they point and yell - "Look at what evil Putin is doing" and usually he isn't doing it, but while we look at Putin, our guys are doing it to us. Have you noticed the spate of rather nasty bills that are before the house these days. A little Red Scare will keep us all distracted I guess.
By the way, will you cheer if the US nukes Russia? Will that finally put your fears to rest? Or should we nuke China too. Once there is no-one left to resist our soldiers, that will make us safe and our lives better, yes? And those that die? I guess it's their own fault for living in enemy countries.
 
I stopped reading after that and the fact that I read that far proves I'm rather open minded.
Perhaps at least it makes you honest, that you admit you respond without giving an opposing view a fair reading. Or maybe you are just trying to discourage me from spending the effort of typing long replies :)
 
Back
Top