OT: Ukrainian crisis

[danlongman]

Had the Russian Federation been stronger in the immediate collapse of the Soviet Union I doubt they would have allowed Ukraine
to claim the Crimean peninsula with Sevastopol or even those parts of Eastern Ukraine with large Russian minorities. Ukrainian
politics have been pretty chaotic from the start and it is not too hard to see Russia losing patience with this. This is their
backyard. The Russian aggression is not justified but it is understandable.

[panzer cat]

very true

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Strategy wise, I am surprised the invasion had so far been focused only on the "Autonomous Republic of Crimea" as it is now called. Ukraine had started mobilization, thus the sooner Russia "fully invades" the easier it will become.

As per their final aim. I believe they won't go full annexation. Putin strategy so far had been to build "independent republics" whenever there is a Russian majority, so likely Crimea and east Ukraine will follow the steps of the republics of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transnistria; recognized only by Russia and under its military, diplomatic and economic control.

As per the treaty signed guaranteeing Ukraine's borders; Russia can cleverly say that they are not at fault about Ukraine's provinces desire to breakaway and go independent.


EDIT: We have one of the biggest crises of the decade and all I can see in the news is what movie star "X" is wearing at the Oscar's gala

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: MrKane

BTW: Does anyone notice that Putin is coping exactly scenario used by Adolf Hitler in 1938/39 to take over Czechoslovak ?
- Phase one: He sent saboteurs & troops wearing uniforms without marking to simulate riot in place.
- Phase two: He has used a few unhappy Ukraine politics(with Russian citizenship) to cry that Russian citizen are suffer from very bad Ukrainian's nationalists.
- Phase three: He has sent military forces to invade Crimea to protect Russian citizens.
- Phase four: Western Europe & USA will do nothing, nobody in EU and USA want to die for Crimea.
- Phase five: (I really hope we will not see it) He will takeover remnant parts of demoralized country without any resistant after a few months.

Maybe, and then I start to think...
Manchuria '31
Ethiopia '35
Austria '38
Albania '39
So, if the above (quoted) scenario turns out to be true can we afford to do nothing? OTOH can we afford to do something?[&:]

[Feltan]

ORIGINAL: offenseman

This is very unsettling to me. I sense great evil coming and fear danger is around the corner for more than just the people of Ukraine. No facts to back it up of course, but something just feels terribly wrong about this series of events and the players involved.

+1

I can't help but think of 1914 <--> 2014. I wonder what all those talking-head people were saying when the Archduke got whacked --- I be the safe money was, "oh, it will blow over in time."

I don't think this Ukrainian situation will escalate out of control. But, it could. And that isn't something we have had to face in a long time. Almost a whole generation has grown up after the Berlin wall came down, and they don't know what it is like to live under the threat of nuclear conflict.

Regards,
Feltan

[danlongman]

Maybe Mr Putin is just trying to help his friends in the USA who are alarmed
at the proposed reductions to US military strength? Globalisation and all that.
I dunno. I share with Feltan a lot of bad feelings about this and I hope I am
just worrying for nothing but it has been bothering me more than most recent
international misbehaviours. Can't see a lot of good coming from it.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58



What's it to you?

warspite1

What a surprise [8|] Typical response from you - mind you I expected nothing else.

On the General Discussion forum political threads - and yes someone tried to start one on this very subject a few days ago - are stamped on and locked. What makes you think you are so special?

Of course its do as I say, not as I do, with the likes of you.

I read that thread. It looked nothing like this one. The one political post here has been ignored. This thread is about economics and military strategy. It could go political, but it hasn't. We AE players are, for the most part, much more mature than that howling bunch of yokels in the general forum.

For that matter, it's a long, loooooong time since you made a post about AE. Why do you hang out here so much? Is it to see a game with both an AI and PBEM, which works, which doesn't cost $200 and was shipped broken, and which was put together by a dev team with utter professionalism?

warspite1

- It looked nothing like this one? It was 6 posts long and absolutely nothing was stated of a contentious nature.

- This thread is about economics and military strategy? Even you are not stupid enough to believe what you have just written.

- We AE players are for the most part much more mature than that howling bunch of yokels in the general forum? Please read, then re-read what you have written. Then, please extract your head from your bottom. Thank-you. Your superior, holier-than-thou, self righteousness is as sick-making as it is pathetic.

- This was, last time I looked, a free forum where one can look at, and participate in, any thread on any forum they so choose. I hang around here because there are some posters here who are worth listening to, who have interesting things to say on matters naval and historical.

- The childish rant against MWIF says everything anyone needs to know about you. What, am I supposed to be all upset by that remark- a question that would have done a 7-year old proud?

Edit: Spelling

[AW1Steve]

everybody keeps mentioning 1914, 1931 and 1939. What out 1956 (Hungry) and 1968 (Prague spring)? Does anyone else see similarities? [&:]

[rustysi]

What out 1956 (Hungry) and 1968 (Prague spring)? Does anyone else see similarities?

Oh, great wasn't thinking about those. I wonder how I'm gonna sleep tonight???[:(]

[koniu]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: MrKane

BTW: Does anyone notice that Putin is coping exactly scenario used by Adolf Hitler in 1938/39 to take over Czechoslovak ?
- Phase one: He sent saboteurs & troops wearing uniforms without marking to simulate riot in place.
- Phase two: He has used a few unhappy Ukraine politics(with Russian citizenship) to cry that Russian citizen are suffer from very bad Ukrainian's nationalists.
- Phase three: He has sent military forces to invade Crimea to protect Russian citizens.
- Phase four: Western Europe & USA will do nothing, nobody in EU and USA want to die for Crimea.
- Phase five: (I really hope we will not see it) He will takeover remnant parts of demoralized country without any resistant after a few months.

Maybe, and then I start to think...
Manchuria '31
Ethiopia '35
Austria '38
Albania '39
So, if the above (quoted) scenario turns out to be true can we afford to do nothing? OTOH can we afford to do something?[&:]

Next was Poland.
It not end well for world

What history learn my country is never ever trust Russia government. Never.

[JamesM]

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Question is, what will the rest of the world do? will they sit on there hands or do something? I think the new government will need to ask for some kind of help. but what kind?[:(]
GP

Good Question, if 9-11 had not happened the response may have been very different. The countries involved in Iraq and Afghanistan are war weary and have to pay the cost of fighting the wars. So I do not believe there is currently not the will for a major confrontation.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Well, I will not take sides on this nor am I saying any of it is right as far as Russia goes. However, I remind everyone here of the Monroe Doctrine and US policy about intervention with our immediate neighbors. I am not happy about the course that Russia is steering but to say that they have no right to be concerned about a bordering country with a large ethnic Russian population is just naive. The US has taken military, political and economic action to pressure neighboring countries to reflect out interests and protect our citizens. This includes direct military interventions in Cuba,Nicaragua,Panama,Grenada,Haiti,Mexico,Costa Rica,El Salvador and others, and we have helped engineer political coups in many other countries. I am not saying that this policy is right or wrong. Sometimes it has been justified-sometimes not. But what I am saying is that the Ukraine is definitely in the Russian sphere of influence, and although we can get mad and blow a lot of hot air, save for going to war, there is very little we (the US) can do in this region. Russia has been many times the brute in this region but the face of Ukrainian nationalism has been very ugly at times. Lots of Jews and Poles can attest to that.

I think it is time to take a step back and look at the whole situation rather than be so hasty with our opinions. The history of this area is complex and tragic. Don't allow yourself to be fooled by the media. This situation has a lot more to do with a serious and dangerous ethnic conflict than it has to do with a fight to embrace democracy.

Very thoughful post crsutton!



In general I do recommend to stop any WWII or cold war comparisions here. None apply, noone benefits from such posts, and it is the best way to get an interesting thread closed. Thanks.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

From what I've read, the people of Crimea want to leave the Ukraine and join Russia. Solution - let them. Self-determination and all that stuff.

Think of it his way. Suppose that Maine wanted to leave the US and join Canada. As long as the Canadians are willing to take them, they should be allowed to go. No need for military action. Just a simple vote by the people involved. Isn't that the whole principle behind democracy?

Think of it this way. What if Texas wanted to become a republic again, go it alone? Do you think the US would allow that? With the resources, positioning and size of Texas?

Could the Ukraine exist economically without the Crimea? I don't know, but that area is both strategically and economically important to it, and the area that they're showing on the news that's more Russian speaking and aligned politically with Russia is about 1/3 or more of the country, not just Crimea. Pretty tough to just let that go for the Ukraine.

I'd say if the Texans want to separate, then they should be allowed to do so. I've never met a separatist movement I would not support. I guess that's because my country was founded on a separatist movement. Americans would have to be complete hypocrites to not be supportive of people trying to free themselves from governments they don't accept.

As an Englishman though, I bet you see things a bit differently. For a couple hundred years or so, your nation fought freedom movements tooth and nail (and it looks like you've got another one in the works with the Scots at it again).

warspite1

Based on your last comment, could I politely suggest you read the thread below as you have the wrong idea about the whole England/Scotland thing? The Scots aren't "at it again". We are in a Union. The Scottish are being given a vote to decide whether that Union will continue or they will become a separate nation. No one is fighting anybody….



tm.asp?m=3545992

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

From what I've read, the people of Crimea want to leave the Ukraine and join Russia. Solution - let them. Self-determination and all that stuff.

Think of it his way. Suppose that Maine wanted to leave the US and join Canada. As long as the Canadians are willing to take them, they should be allowed to go. No need for military action. Just a simple vote by the people involved. Isn't that the whole principle behind democracy?

Think of it this way. What if Texas wanted to become a republic again, go it alone? Do you think the US would allow that? With the resources, positioning and size of Texas?

Could the Ukraine exist economically without the Crimea? I don't know, but that area is both strategically and economically important to it, and the area that they're showing on the news that's more Russian speaking and aligned politically with Russia is about 1/3 or more of the country, not just Crimea. Pretty tough to just let that go for the Ukraine.

I'd say if the Texans want to separate, then they should be allowed to do so. I've never met a separatist movement I would not support. I guess that's because my country was founded on a separatist movement. Americans would have to be complete hypocrites to not be supportive of people trying to free themselves from governments they don't accept.

As an Englishman though, I bet you see things a bit differently. For a couple hundred years or so, your nation fought freedom movements tooth and nail (and it looks like you've got another one in the works with the Scots at it again).

warspite1

That is your view fair enough. But I think the idea that any US government would allow Texas (or any state) to walk away from the United States is fanciful. Isn't there a precedent for what would happen if anyone tried? [;)]

Edit: Spelling again [&:]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Well, I will not take sides on this nor am I saying any of it is right as far as Russia goes. However, I remind everyone here of the Monroe Doctrine and US policy about intervention with our immediate neighbors. I am not happy about the course that Russia is steering but to say that they have no right to be concerned about a bordering country with a large ethnic Russian population is just naive. The US has taken military, political and economic action to pressure neighboring countries to reflect out interests and protect our citizens. This includes direct military interventions in Cuba,Nicaragua,Panama,Grenada,Haiti,Mexico,Costa Rica,El Salvador and others, and we have helped engineer political coups in many other countries. I am not saying that this policy is right or wrong. Sometimes it has been justified-sometimes not. But what I am saying is that the Ukraine is definitely in the Russian sphere of influence, and although we can get mad and blow a lot of hot air, save for going to war, there is very little we (the US) can do in this region. Russia has been many times the brute in this region but the face of Ukrainian nationalism has been very ugly at times. Lots of Jews and Poles can attest to that.

I think it is time to take a step back and look at the whole situation rather than be so hasty with our opinions. The history of this area is complex and tragic. Don't allow yourself to be fooled by the media. This situation has a lot more to do with a serious and dangerous ethnic conflict than it has to do with a fight to embrace democracy.

Very thoughful post crsutton!



In general I do recommend to stop any WWII or cold war comparisions here. None apply, noone benefits from such posts, and it is the best way to get an interesting thread closed. Thanks.

warspite1

There have been some very good posts here, but I do not see what difference that makes. Re the above I think quite the reverse is true.

Discussing WWII or the Cold War is historical and thus allowed. The problem is, this thread is political as it is about the Ukrainian crisis NOW. Discussing what each "side" will do, what their options are etc is political - and thus not allowed….not in the General Discussion forum in any case…...

[rustysi]

But I think the idea that any US government would allow Texas (or any state) to walk away from the United States is fanciful. Isn't there a precedent for what would happen if anyone tried?

Yeh, I believe so.[:D]

[JocMeister]

For those interested I had a good chat over IRC last night with an old BF42 friend. He is Russian currently living somewhere outside Moscow. He said that the Russian population see the situation in a bit of a different light than the west does and that this view is enhanced by the media coverage in Russia.

Basically what the media (and to a large extent the public opinion) says is that the Ukrainian Prime minister Janukovyt was democratically elected. He was then overthrown in a coup and Russia should help restore him to power as the democratically elected leader. Crimea has not "broken free" of Ukraine but rather denounced the leaders of the coup and the "new Ukrainian government".

He also said that the Russian view of the "West" and USA in particular is that they are all a bunch of hypocrites that will let anything slide as long as its in their interest to let it do so. But if something goes against their interest they will immediately start banging the "drums of democracy". This is just the words of one guy but he is decent fellow and I known him for 10 years or so. Well educated and with a good job. He is not very interested in politics and doesn´t care very much. So I believe he was just sharing what the Russian people in general feel about the situation.

Always interesting to hear the other side of the fence.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

For those interested I had a good chat over IRC last night with an old BF42 friend. He is Russian currently living somewhere outside Moscow. He said that the Russian population see the situation in a bit of a different light than the west does and that this view is enhanced by the media coverage in Russia.

Basically what the media (and to a large extent the public opinion) says is that the Ukrainian Prime minister Janukovyt was democratically elected. He was then overthrown in a coup and Russia should help restore him to power as the democratically elected leader. Crimea has not "broken free" of Ukraine but rather denounced the leaders of the coup and the "new Ukrainian government".

He also said that the Russian view of the "West" and USA in particular is that they are all a bunch of hypocrites that will let anything slide as long as its in their interest to let it do so. But if something goes against their interest they will immediately start banging the "drums of democracy". This is just the words of one guy but he is decent fellow and I known him for 10 years or so. Well educated and with a good job. He is not very interested in politics and doesn´t care very much. So I believe he was just sharing what the Russian people in general feel about the situation.

Always interesting to hear the other side of the fence.

warspite1

Of course - but no country is any different. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist and all that.

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I´m quite sure the moderators will close down this thread if they deem it to break the rules or get out of hand. So far there has been only one useless/silly/troll comment which was ignored by all.

I´m glad the moderators have left this open and it would be a shame if you managed to get it closed just because of envy or whatever your motivations are. There is no need for an "outside police" or a crusade just because a similar thread was closed in "your" forum.

Just leave it to the moderators. Okay?

[Kull]

I think the real lesson here is that might DOES make right, and that if you are a large enough country, you can do whatever you want (see "Melian Dialogue"). So the US entered Iraq and Afghanistan and Russia took half of Georgia (and will take half of Ukraine) and the next domino will fall in the Far East when China starts actually occupying all those little islands they have claimed (and perhaps Taiwan in the maybe not so distant future). Except there the US has actual treaty obligations, so there's a much greater chance of things getting very nasty.

As for the Ukraine situation, odds are that if Putin pulls it off successfully (and I don't any reason why it won't work out so long as he doesn't try for the whole country) Putin will start looking around for the next Sudetenland opportunity. Which is probably Estonia, so that's when we'll see how weak NATO truly is.