Roots and consequences of Ukraine's violence

[Stavros]

History repeats itself. In 1979 , USSR invades Afghanistan under the watch of peanuts farmer Carter. Fast forward to 2014 , when Russia invades Ukraine under the watch of Kenyan superboy Obummer. Morale of story.... Nobody in the world respects the US when you have a liberal castrated idiot running the show.

On the other hand, when Saddam invaded Kuwait on 08/02/ 1990, GH Bush steadfastly issued a stern warning the same night: 'This invasion will NOT stand'. The guy followed his words by actions. The world was a safe place until Bubba Clinton came to town.

p.s.: This thread is overpopulated by Kremlin apologists... probably doped up A -hole elitists from the liberal Northeast.

If only politics was this simple -it isn't. You have not considered Zbigniew Brzezinski's claims that the Carter administration -advised by him of course- deliberately provoked the USSR to intervene in 1979 in order to drag it into an expensive military commitment -I recall seeing a photo in the press of Brzezinski firing a gun across the border from Pakistan- and though you think Carter was a weak President, you cannot deny that he maintained the primacy of the USA as a crucial intermediary in the negotiations between Egypt and Israel which led to the 1979 Peace Treaty which has remained in place and is an example of what diplomacy, rather than war can achieve. You may also be aware that after the onset of secret negotiations between Israeli and Palestinians representatives in Oslo, it was another Democrat -Bill Clinton- who in 1993 presided over the concluding stages of the only formal treaty so far between Israel and the Palestinians, another example of diplomacy achieving something war could not.

Strictly speaking, Russia has not invaded the Crimea -it has one of its largest naval bases there, but it is clear that sending troops to patrol the streets and occupy government buildings is a violation of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, but it is hardly 'an invasion' grim though the situation is, with signs it is getting worse.

If you think a virile response of a virile President would be to send in the marines, are you suggesting the US marines are going to land in the vicinity of the nuclear-armed Black Sea fleet, one of the largest and strategically most important components of the Russian military, and what -'throw the Russians out'? 'Restore' Crimea to the sovereignty of a government in Kiev whose own authenticity is in doubt? This beggars belief -you don't have a casus belli, you don't have an exit strategy, in fact you don't have anything that makes sense other than rage and an evident dislike of President Obama.

Yes, there are times when a military solution seems the only option, and even when it works -except that in the case of Desert Storm Saddam Hussein had already pledged to King Hussein of Jordan to evacuate Kuwait but not at the point of a gun -the US and the Saudis wanted it done their way and the war followed, a war in which the Iraq, militarily exhausted after 8 years of war with Iran, and bankrupt, could not hope to win.

Diplomacy may fail, and war take over, but sometimes it works, and as I suggested in another post it may not look like a virile response, but it takes courage and does yield preferable results to a dismal relay of dead bodies being transported from the battlefield back home.

[broncofan]

You have not considered Zbigniew Brzezinski's claims that the Carter administration deliberately provoked the USSR to intervene in 1979 in order to drag it into an expensive military commitment.

If only that were the only thing he hadn't considered. He's been a member since 2007 and can't place a single person in this thread. He's looking at the name Zbigniew Brzezinski and probably thinks it's a KGB code that triggers a sleeper cell in the U.S.

[Prospero]

Stavros and Broncofn... have you chaps decided to major in Neanderthal politics ? I admire your determination to consider the serious issues raised by this fellow..

[Stavros]

Stavros and Broncofn... have you chaps decided to major in Neanderthal politics ? I admire your determination to consider the serious issues raised by this fellow..

Arguments are made, and responded to. All part of the chase. Talk now is of sanctions, which I think would be a mistake. Russia is already talking about changing the tariffs for gas exports to Ukraine (notwithstanding, or maybe because of unpaid bills) but any serious moves against Russia would make it less likely to get any positive movement on diplomacy in Syria as long as Russia is seen as being a key player in that conflict. I wonder if it is inconceivable to think of Ukraine separating into two states -? Although Czechoslovakia did it, the separation was amicable, and although Slovakia initially suffered more economically, there are claims their economy is beginning to improve. Yugoslavia dissolved into most of its constituent parts; Sudan has divided into two states; Scotland may become an independent state....it can happen, even where the population are so closely related. I think potential membership of the EU and NATO should be off the table for the time being whichever way this goes.

[Dino Velvet]

[Prospero]

I admire her guts. She has now been sent to the Crimea to "see the reality on the ground." lol

[Dino Velvet]

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldno...,4657644.story

CIA reportedly says Russia sees treaty as justifying Ukraine moves




By Ken Dilanian This post has been updated, as indicated below. March 3, 2014, 8:19 p.m.

[Updated, 8 p.m., March 3: WASHINGTON — CIA director John Brennan told a senior lawmaker Monday that a 1997 treaty between Russia and Ukraine allows up to 25,000 Russia troops in the vital Crimea region, so Russia may not consider its recent troop movements to be an invasion, U.S. officials said.
The number of Russian troops that have surged into Ukraine in recent days remains well below that threshold, Brennan said, according to U.S. officials who declined to be named in describing private discussions and declined to name the legislator.
Though Brennan disagrees that the treaty justifies Russia’s incursion, he urged a cautious approach, the officials said. Administration officials have said Moscow violated the treaty, which requires the Russian navy, which bases its Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol, to coordinate all military movements on the Crimean peninsula with Ukraine.]
The next day, Russian troops took up positions around key facilities in Crimea, and by nightfall the CIA assessed that Russia was in control of the region, officials said.
“This was not predicted,” said a U.S. official, who asked not to be named in discussing the classified briefings.
The intelligence officials defended their analysis, however, saying Putin may have made a spur of the moment decision to take military action.
U.S. intelligence agencies have “provided timely and valuable information that has helped policymakers understand the situation on the ground and make informed decisions,” said Shawn Turner, a spokesman for the director of national intelligence. “That continues to be the case. Any suggestion that there were intelligence shortcomings related to the situation in Ukraine are uninformed and misleading.”
The difficulty in predicting the Russian military moves echoed a similar intelligence gap in August 2008 when Russian troops backed separatist forces in South Ossetia against the republic of Georgia in a five-day war. The CIA was caught off guard at the time, officials said later.
A former CIA case officer, who also declined to be named in discussing sensitive issues, said that the agency’s focus on counter-terrorism over the last 13 years has undermined its ability to conduct traditional espionage against key adversaries, including Russia.
The CIA station in Kiev, Ukraine, “cannot be larger than two or three case officers,” the former official said. “Did they have sources that could have forecast Russian intentions? Almost certainly not.”
Another former senior intelligence officer with experience in the region said the CIA doesn’t have sources that could have forecast Putin’s plans in Crimea. But, he said, it shouldn’t be viewed as an intelligence failure if analysts didn’t anticipate the actions of Russian troops operating out of bases there.
“The presence of Russian troops there is a fait accompli, so nobody is going to be watching what’s happening in those bases,” he said.
A CIA spokesman rebuffed the notion that the agency’s espionage muscles had atrophied.
“Although we do not talk about our specific intelligence efforts, the agency is a versatile global organization that is more than capable of addressing a range of national security threats simultaneously and it does so every day," said spokesman Dean Boyd. "Anyone suggesting otherwise is seriously misinformed.”

[Dino Velvet]

http://rt.com/news/russian-troops-crimea-ukraine-816/

Russia is allowed to have 25,000 troops in Crimea...and other facts you didn’t know

Published time: March 04, 2014 20:07


Ukraine’s statement at the UN that 16,000 Russian soldiers have been deployed to Crimea has caused a frenzy among Western media which chooses to ignore that those troops have been there since the late 1990s in accordance with a Kiev-Moscow agreement.
Western media describes the situation in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as if a full-scale Russian invasion were under way, with headlines like: “Ukraine says Russia sent 16,000 troops to Crimea” and “Ukraine crisis deepens as Russia sends more troops into Crimea,” as well as “What can Obama do about Russia's invasion of Crimea?”

It seems they have chosen to simply ignore the fact that those Russian troops have been stationed in Crimea for over a decade.

Russia’s representative to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, reminded on Tuesday that the deal surrounding the Black Sea Fleet allows Russia to station a contingent of up to 25,000 troops in Ukraine. However, US and British media have mostly chosen to turn a deaf ear.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov underlined that the country’s military “strictly executes the agreements, which stipulate the Russian fleet’s presence in Ukraine, and follows the stance and claims coming from the legitimate authority in Ukraine and in this case the legitimate authority of the Autonomous Republic Crimea as well.”

The Black Sea Fleet has been disputed between Russia and Ukraine since the collapse of the Soviet Union back in 1991.

In 1997, the sides finally managed to find common ground and signed three agreements determining the fate of the military bases and vessels in Crimea.

Russia has received 81.7 per cent of the fleet’s ships after paying the Ukrainian government a compensation of US$526.5 million.

Moscow also annually writes off $97.75 million of Kiev’s debt for the right to use Ukrainian waters and radio frequency resources, and for the environmental impact caused by the Black Sea Fleet’s operations.

According to the initial agreement, the Russian Black Sea Fleet was to stay in Crimea until 2017, but the deal was later prolonged for another 25 years.



The 1997 deal allows the Russian navy to have up to 25,000 troops, 24 artillery systems with a caliber smaller than 100 mm, 132 armored vehicles, and 22 military planes on Ukrainian territory.

In compliance with those accords, there are currently five Russian naval units stationed in the port city of Sevastopol in the Crimean peninsula:

The 30th Surface Ship Division formed by the 11th Antisubmarine Ship Brigade, which includes the Black Sea Fleet’s flagship guard missile cruiser Moskva as well as Kerch, Ochakov, Smetlivy, Ladny, and Pytlivy vessels, and the 197th Landing Ship Brigade, consisting of seven large amphibious vessels;

The 41st Missile Boat Brigade, which includes the 166th Fast Attack Craft Division, consisting of Bora and Samum hovercrafts as well as small missile ships Mirazh and Shtil, and 295th missile Boat Division;

The 247th Separate Submarine Division, consisting of two diesel submarines – B-871 Alrosa and B-380 Svyatoy Knyaz Georgy;

The 68th Harbor Defense Ship Brigade formed by the 400th Antisubmarine Ship Battalion of four vessels and 418 Mine Hunting Ship Division, which consist of four ships as well;

The 422nd Separate Hydrographic Ship Division, which includes Cheleken, Stvor, Donuzlav and GS-402 survey vessels as well as a group of hydrographic boats.

Besides the naval units, Moscow also has two airbases in Crimea, which are situated in the towns of Kacha and Gvardeysky.

The Russian coastal forces in Ukraine consist of the 1096th Separate Anti-Aircraft Missile Regiment in Sevastopol and the 810th Marine Brigade, which hosts around 2,000 marines.

Several other coastal units of the Black Sea Fleet are located in Russia’s Krasnodar Region, including the 11th Separate Coastal Missile Brigade in Anapa, the 382th Separate Marine Battalion, and a naval reconnaissance station in Temryuk.

Last week, Russia’s Federation Council unanimously approved President Vladimir Putin’s request to send the country’s military forces to Ukraine to ensure peace and order in the region “until the socio-political situation in the country is stabilized.”

However, the final say about deploying troops lies with Putin, who hasn’t yet made such a decision, stressing that deploying military force would be a last resort.

Authorities in the Ukrainian Autonomous Republic of Crimea – where more than half the population is Russian – requested Moscow’s assistance after the self-proclaimed government in Kiev introduced a law abolishing the use of languages other than Ukrainian in official circumstances.

[Dino Velvet]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26415508

[Dino Velvet]

Now your Larry King defect. Ah-Ha-Ha-Ha!