What does everybody think about the Ukrainian crisis?

I don’t think that the various sanctions applied by the Americans and the Europeans are going to have much effect. Even worse I can not see any reason why the Russians would stop their aggression and land grab unless firm action is taken to deter them.

The situation smacks to me of appraisement by the Europeans, I suspect the best thing Nato could do, would be to supply the Ukrainians with the necessary weapons, to give the Russians a hard time, and perhaps convince the Russians it is not a good idea to carve off bits of their neighbours.

Dear Warmair,

President Obama is considering providing weapons to
the Ukraine - keep in mind that Russia has been
supplying weapons and manpower to the Russian
separatists in the Ukraine. The whole conflict could
be solved if Putin put a stop to it. But territory
grabs is nothing new with Russians as history has shown.

I suppose the Ukraine could sacrifice a portion of the
Eastern region to put a stop to the conflict - but
that might open the door for the Russians to grab more.

They've already stolen the Kalingrad region from the Baltic
States, Crimea from Ukraine, they're stealing Eastern Ukraine
at present - and NATO's concerned that they will invade
the Baltic States. Where will it all end?
World Wars have started with less.

Warmair without Russian gas, particularly in this very cold winter, Europe freezes. They would be freezing in the dark too, as they have followed this hysterical global warming garbage, & must have Russian gas to keep the lights on.

There is no way they are going to challenge Russia seriously, & the yanks can't go too far either, as they would bring Russian retaliation in shutting off the gas.

This is a pity, as Europe being dark & cold just might bring the Global warming scam to a halt. It would at least kill the renewable energy rubbish stone dead, & perhaps save us from similar stupidity.

So don't expect much more than posturing from Europe or the US, particularly with a dill like Obama in the Whitehouse.

I wonder if this Russian domination of the EU countries will bring them to their senses, & start them fracking their own gas. That would put the greenies back in their place, & slow the UN grab for control of all energy. I'm not holding my breath, but it is a nice thought.

Foxy, regrettably you are a victim of the Main Stream Media which is the propaganda arm of Western Elitists and Governments.

If you look for the truth or closer to what is true than what is in the MSM you may have a different view.

Try doing a search on Victoria Nuland phone call transcripts.

The MSM made a big thing of Russian troops invading the Ukraine, meanwhile that fact was being denied by Ukrainian Generals, MSM just ignored them.

There are lots of inconsistencies coming from MSM and various Governments.

Quote "They've already stolen the Kalingrad region from the Baltic
States, Crimea from Ukraine" Crimea was part of Russia.

Dear Philip S.,

Crimea was part of Russia?

Really?

Just like the Baltic States?

Check your history on what Russia has been
doing for centuries.

And then we can have a discussion.

Dear Foxy,

Kaliningrad was not part of the Baltic states. It was part of East Prussia. Prussia was the stronghold of the German Junkers. However, the population of Prussia consists of Germanised Slavs. The area has gone back and forth between Slavic and Germanic control. To say an area is Slavic or Germanic depends when in history one is looking.

Nietzsche is thought of as a German philosopher. However, the name Nietzsche is a Germanised form of the Slavic Nitsky which was the name of his ancestors.

Karl Deutsch: A Nation ... is a group of persons united by a common error about their ancestry and a common dislike of their neighbors.

National borders are arbitrary. They may mark the bounds of colonial districts. They may mark the disposition of the armies when the peace treaty was signed. An example of that is the dangling bit of the southeast Netherlands when the Treaty of Westphalia was signed in 1648. Kaliningrad became part of the USSR as a result of WW2.

Perhaps someday we may recognise that people are equally human on both sides of a national boundary. Perhaps someday we may either dispense with national boundaries or define them by ecosystems such as the Nile watershed. Rather than fighting over the Nile the people can then consider how the benefits of living in that watershed can be distributed fairly.

Dear David F.,

Historically the lands between SW border of Lithuania
and the Vistula River in Poland were the tribal lands
of Lithuania called Prussia. In the 12th/13th century
the Germanic Knights of the Sword invaded the region
resulting in decades of war between Lithuania and the
invaders. As late as the WWII - Lithuania descendents
still lived in the region. We know several Lithuanian
families from that region that claim ancestry dating
back to the 16th century.

As late as the 1990s reclaiming of Independence by Lithuania
the Kalingrad region was considered to be part of Lithuania
but the Russians insisted the region to be a trade of
for Lithuania's Independence. Admittedly the entire region
today is full of Russians. Who, by the way, want to break
away from Russia.

Russian has been stealing land for centuries. It originally
started off as a small Principality of Moscow and expanded
from there. To the East, to the South, to the West. A large
region of Eastern Finland was stolen by the Russians in
the previous century. The Russians have always taken what
they wanted with no considerations for international
consequences.

Koenigsberg (now Kaliningrad) was Immanuel Kant’s native city that he allegedly never left. Historically it used to be a German, East Prussian, city before 1945.

Crimea was seceded to Ukraine by Khruschchov (a Ukrainian) in 1954 as an internal reorganisation within the Soviet Union. Its population is mainly Russian with a Tatar minority, although originally it belonged mainly to the latter. Putin did not grab Crimea solely for some historical or nationalistic reasons but because of the Russian military naval base Sevastopol - their only access to the Black Sea - having got in danger of falling into American hands after the pro -American (formally pro-EU) Maidan coup on 22.2.2015, symbolised by the Victoria Nuland’s entry onto the scene with her famously hacked “f..k the EU” phone call to the US ambassador in Ukraine. Russia with no access to the Black Sea is almost like the US with no access to the Carribean. Until 22.2.2014 Russia was happy with its base being on the Ukrainian territory which they trusted more than the new, aggressively pro-American and anti-Russian government.

The sanctions are of US doing; according to Biden they had to be forced onto the EU states, since it is the EU who will eventually suffer, of course besides Russia, which is hit badly also by the fall in oil prices. There are more EU states under direct US infliuence/pressure than the one-two under Russian.

Economic cooperation on the large scale between Russia's Eurasian Union and the EU, where Ukraine could have played an important mediating role - a "hegemon" that the US was apparently afraid of - is now definitely out of question. Whether at long run Ukraine will be happier with their role of an Amrican protectorate, as a wedge driven, rather than a mediator, between the two Unions is not at all clear

Putin feels cornered and scared that the chain of destabilisations - Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya , Syria, Ukraine - is now going to be exported to Russia because of its enormous natural resources, although it is China rather than America that is going to gain if Russia is weakened too much. So, it seems, the last thing Putin has in mind is to attack NATO countries.

All his activities are about making sure that Crimea is not going to be taken away from Russia. Should the war escalate, e.g. through a shipment of American arms including specialist crew, things could get completely out of hand because Russia will defend their home like they did against Napoleaon and Hitler, both fights deeply in their memories. Americans who might feel victorious (for having prevented the economic joint venture EU-Eurasian Union) should remember that also the other two major Western invasion of Russia started with first conquering Ukraine.

This last escalation - even if it does not lead to a nuclear Armageddon - is what Europe (not the US nor Australia) is afraid of. Should it happen it will not be on a Russian iniciative, Russia is two weak (erxcept for nuclear) to confront the USA directly militarily. It will rather copy US by trying to influnce some EU countries one way or another (Hungary, France, Greece?) while America is holding sway over UK, Poland and the Baltics as far as their anti-Russian interests are concerned. Both having the same effect - to destabilise EU, to make it less dangerous as an American or Russian ally respectively

hypocritical west
this is all about security and national defense
this crisis was created by the folly of Gorbachev
USA loves to loiter on other people's corridor
why do you think they got their stupid little aussie brother to sing hymns of praise to the visiting Abe ( a supporter of WW2 attrocities committed in china and SEA)?... it is all about maintaining their influence in this region, a hold which they are fast losing to China.

for this instance, i agree with Putin, USA is the culprit for the escalation of conflict in ukraine

shame on the americans and to the aussies who does the bidding of big brother

time we grow up and start thinking for ourselves

Dear George,

The following link may be of interest:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/20/uk-guilty-of-catastrophic-misreading-of-ukraine-crisis-lords-report-claims

Foxy - The Guardian has as much readable credibility in this instance as toilet paper.

Dear Foxy,

Thanks for the link. It is the official position explaining away the Nuland coup of 22.2.2014 - the “kidnapping” of the genuinely popular Maidan uprising to serve foreign geopolitical purposes - and what followed. I think J. Kornblum, the former US Ambassador to Germany, summarised succinctly these views at a German talk show at that time: “Our (American and apparently also British) mistake was that we thought we had Russia under control”.

Putin wrote in a NYT article (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) as if in anticipation of these positions, well before Maidan:

“I would rather disagree with a case (Obama) made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is ‘what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.’ It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy.”

As for Ukraine, in http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-03-03/bush-s-chicken-kiev-comes-home-to-roost one reads:

“History buffs may recall that (“Chicken Kiev”) was how New York Times columnist William Safire characterized a speech that President George H.W. Bush gave to the Ukrainian parliament on Aug. 1, 1991, when, as Safire put it, “he lectured Ukrainians against self-determination.” [The author seems to be referring to this part of the speech: ‘Americans will not support those who seek independence in order to replace a far-off tyranny with a local despotism. They will not aid those who promote a suicidal nationalism based upon ethnic hatred.’]

Indeed, Bush senior seems to have been more reasonable and realistic (about laying fire on Russia’s doorstep) than Obama - more precisely, those who pushed him into an anti-Russian (implicitly also anti-European) position. And - comparing the two Iraq wars and their consequences - also than his son.

Thanks everybody for your interesting comments.
I agree with much of what is said here, and I have to give Hasbeen a an award for bringing climate change into it, but it is valid point that the gas issue is a factor. At the moment fossil fuel prices have have plummeted so much that it is having a severe impact on the Russian economy. Now what was that other country that relied so heavily on resources that they found them selves with a major shortfall of revenue ?

It is clear that since the break up of the Soviet Union the Russians have been losing influence rapidly, when combined with a corrupt system, and what is virtually a dictator ship under Putin the outlook in that part of the world looks quite scary.
http://amymantravadi.com/2014/03/06/ukraine-crisis-explained-series-maps/

Interestingly Margaret Thatcher was not at all keen on East and West Germany to reuniting as she felt it might be a bit much for the Russians to accept. Things have certainly moved on a long way since then.

Dear George,

Thank You for your input.

As always - well reasoned and greatly
appreciated.

I keep on learning from you.

Dear Foxy,

Thanks, but I also keep on learning from you.

Top Ukrainian General Admits: Russian Forces Not in His Nation

Top Ukrainian General Viktor Muzhenko admitted on Ukrainian television that the Ukrainian army is not fighting Russian troops in Ukraine, thereby proving that the reason given by the Obama administration for imposing sanctions against Russia is a complete lie.

During a January 29 briefing for foreign military attaches aired on Ukraine’s Channel 5 television, Muzhenko, the chief of the armed forces of Ukraine, officially acknowledged, “the Ukrainian army is not engaged in combat operations against Russian units.”

Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov pointed out in a news conference that Muzhenko directly supervises military operations in the southeast and that “his statement is a legal fact, which thwarts numerous accusations made by NATO and Western states” concerning Russia’s alleged “military invasion” in Ukraine. Muzhenko’s statement carries even more weight considering Ukraine’s Channel 5 television is ironically owned by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.

Muzhenko added that he had information about Russian individuals fighting in the country’s east, but that has nothing to do with the Russian military being involved. The vast majority of eastern Ukraine is Russian speaking and volunteers have come to support the ethnic Russian Ukrainian rebels not only from Russia but also from other countries, bringing humanitarian aid as well as fighting alongside them. American mercenaries have already been identified fighting on the Ukrainian government’s side.

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=22777

Foxy wrote: “Russian has been stealing land for centuries. It originally started off as a small Principality of Moscow and expanded
from there. To the East, to the South, to the West. A large region of Eastern Finland was stolen by the Russians in the previous century. The Russians have always taken what they wanted with no considerations for international consequences.”

Quite true. That is the way most countries have operated. That is also true for Lithuania.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=borders+of+lithuania&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=LB3sVNeRGorp8gXChICIAw&ved=0CB4QsAQ&biw=1048&bih=544 shows the borders of Lithuania at its greatest extent. Lithuania has also expanded and contracted throughout its history. My grandmother’s hometown, Ejsjyszki, has been part of Lithuania, Poland and Russia as the borders shifted. As you can see from the maps Lithuania once reached to the Black Sea.

Irredentism is the nationalist belief that a territory belonging to another country should be annexed for ethnic or historical reasons. Irredentism has led to war as a country seeks to expand to previous borders.

My reading of history is that Lithuania was once a multicultural paradise compared to many countries during the Christian Dark Ages. It was a stronghold of a pagan ruled kingdom in a largely Christian Europe. Richard Fletcher’s “ The Conversion of Europe from Paganism to Christianity: 371-1386” tells how Europe was converted to Christianity, largely by violence, from the adoption of Christianity by the Roman Empire until the ruling house of Lithuania became Christian.

Frequent attacks from Livonian and Teutonic knights united the Lithuanian tribes. The attacks were crusades to get Lithuania to become Christian. In Lithuania people were free to practice whatever religion they wished. Catholics, Russian Orthodox, Muslims and Jews lived within the borders of Lithuania and appreciated the freedom they found there. Jews from Bohemia, Crimea, France, Germany, Italy and Spain fled or were expelled and came to Lithuania. Followers of the Czech Christian reformer Jan Hus (1369-1415) also found a haven under Grand Duke Witold after years of German persecution.

Well into the fourteenth century the Grand Duke of Lithuania, Prince Gediminas still put his faith in Perkunas, the god of thunder and forests, who ruled over many other gods and goddesses in the Lithuanian pantheon. When emissaries of the pope attempted to convert the prince to Christianity, the prince told him he would like to be treated by them as he treated those within his domains. He did not interfere with the Christians who worshipped their God according to their laws, and he hoped that he and his subjects would be left to worship God in their own way.

In 1386 the dominion of the pagan gods came to an end. The Lithuanian ruler Jogaila (1351-1434) married the Polish princess Jadwiga. He was three times her age, and it was a political marriage. Jogaila became Catholic, and Lithuania and Poland were united. The new country was not as tolerant as in pagan times, but it was still a refuge for dissenters and the persecuted and freer than the surrounding countries.

Skip a few centuries.

Stanislaw Poniatowski, the last king of Poland, had magnificent goals. He wanted all children including children of the peasantry to have an education, to abolish serfdom and convert Poland into a democracy. He was inspired by the French and American Revolutions. Unfortunately the surrounding countries Prussia, Russia and Austria didn’t want this. In 1792, 1793 and 1795 three partitions made Poland disappear from the map. Most of Poland/Lithuania became part of Russia. That part of Russia was called the Pale. Jews were generally forbidden to live outside the Pale.

My grandfather was born in Riga, Latvia and my Uncle Harry wrote the story of his life titled ‘From Riga to Lake Placid’. According to my uncle’s research life became much harder for Latvians under Russian rule. Under the czarist occupation they changed from an easy-going, tolerant people to a suspicious, intolerant crowd.

At the end of WW1 Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland all became independent states. As a result of the Nazi-Soviet pact of 1939 Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were occupied by the Soviet Union. In September 1939 the Nazis invaded Poland from the west, and the Soviets from the east and divided Poland between them. On 22 June, 1941 the Nazis invaded the Soviet.

At first the Nazi advance went rapidly. In September 1941 the Nazis took Ejsjyszki and murdered the 80% of the population that was Jewish. Many others in their hatred of the Russians and the Soviet occupation joined up with the Nazis. It was a horrible war, and Soviet resistance became more effective as the population became aware of the Nazi brutality. After WW2 Poland regained independence, and the Baltic states remained part of the Soviet until the Soviet imploded in 1989. During the Soviet occupation many of the Baltic peoples were relocated to Siberia.

Eastern Europe has had a horrible history. Peoples have been suppressed, and Russia has the historic memory of invasions from the west. Not only Napoleon and the Nazis but also Wilhelmine Germany, the Teutonic Knights, Poland and others. I think it is quite reasonable for them to be frightened of another invasion and to be concerned that Ukraine might be the staging ground for an invasion.

One can remember past injustices and past glories. The past glories were generally accompanied by injustices. To try to regain those past glories is a recipe for war.

As I always say, the human animal,species, is as territorial as any other species on the planet, history shows this clearly.

We also, need access to land, water and resources the land provides, to survive. That's the law of nature and we are not exempt.

As for sharing it, equally, fine, as long as the cake in a particular territory, will stretch to the grossly overpopulated people.
A big case there for mandatory world-wide contraception being allowed for women. One way, to assauge one reason for war.
If not, the warlords will simpily rise up and take want they want.WAR.

Another reason we don't like sharing when survival is at stake, is
because we are biologically programmed like every other species, to
provide and ensure the survival of those genetically closest to us.

Our children, our extended family and our tribe.

When there is plenty to go around, we are reasonably tolerant and willing to share, but it is a shaky territorial truce at the best of times, as can be seen by our territorial war now being waged with Isis.

Don't look to the emotional reasons for war, hatred , intolerance etc.

Look to the biological. Hatred comes from fear, and the fear is
the Fear of non-survival of oneself and our biologically closest.
Plus, some people are cruel, physcopaths on top of this, as well.

I suspect there are such physcopaths attracted to the territorial
Sunni war, They lead because, they win, and this is because they will stop at nothing to bring opposition under control.

Nevertheless, it is, at it's core a territorial war caused by the
Sunnis being made stateless by the American War on Suddam Hussein. In regard to sharing, to stop war, who is going to give
the Sunnis back all the terrritory that has been given away.

Nobody, they have to fight a territorial fight for land and resources control

I realise I have not commented on the Ukrainian Civil War
as such in the above, but it also, is a territorial war.

As stated in historical readings above, some of these wars
are precipitated by ethnic, territorial wars going back centuries.

Both sides usually end up believing the land and territory is theirs
over time.

Ireland and the IRA demonstrates this clearly, given that the
British invaded Ireland in the 1600's. they were followed
by hundreds and thousands of British settlers who built homes and
established towns there.

Now, those same previously British settlers, claimed sovereignty over the land of Ireland, in the Parliament. After four centuries and being born there, they felt they had A territorial right to do so.
Not surprisingly the IRA even after 4centuries didn't see it that way.

This mirrors what is happening in Ukraine.

It was also the reason Germany felt Poland rightly belonged to them
because it did, in previous centuries before war changed things.