Jump to content

Russia invades The Ukraine


Jamie_B

Recommended Posts

_73440710_ukraine_gas_pipelines_624_v2.g

 

Seen that.  Here is an article that includes a better representation of the pipelines in and out of the Ukraine.  The article also includes satellite photos of Russian naval bases, historical liens of the Ukraine, etc....

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/ukraine-divisions-crimea.html

 

Ukraine Crisis in Maps

 

gas-720.jpg

Gas Pipelines

 

About 53 percent of Russian gas exports to Europe pass through Ukraine. Europe, in turn, depends on Russia for 40 percent of its imported fuel. According to Mikhail Korchemkin, head of East European Gas Analysis, a consulting firm in Pennsylvania, the most important pipelines that run through Ukraine are the ones leading to Slovakia. They will eventually take gas to Germany, Austria and Italy.

 

Russia is currently massing troops on the border of the Ukraine.  Interesting developments.  Will watch closely to determine who and how the international community responds.

 

Note:  The seizure of points in Crimea and Ukraine coincide directly with major junctions on the pipeline.  See article for visual listings of seizures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-strategy/201025-obama-putin-at-breaking-point

 

While the Obama administration has focused on diplomatic efforts, the U.S. military has also bolstered its presence in Eastern Europe to send a message to both Russia and worried allies in Europe.

 

"Our actions in the region serve to demonstrate our commitment to our collective defense responsibilities and provide reassurance to our NATO allies," Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said Monday. "We continue to support the diplomatic approach to the resolution of the crisis in Ukraine.”

 

So far, about 200 U.S. airmen and the additional 12 F-16s have arrived at Lask Air Base in Poland, according to European Command spokesman Navy Capt. Gregory Hicks. Flight operations were set to start Monday, but were postponed due to weather.

 

NATO officials don’t expect to see near-term military “stand offs” with Russia, but are planning to bolster Ukrainian forces in the long-term, a NATO official told the Hill.

 

NATO plans to help Ukrainian forces build capacity via joint exercises, advice and other unspecified things, the official said.

 

...and so it begins...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/17/crimean-pm-mocks-obama-in-faked-russian-uniform-on/#.UyczU-jx-dg.twitter

 

Crimean P.M. mocks Obama in faked Russian uniform on Twitter

 

obama_twitter_s640x725.jpg

 

The US will probably respond with another photo of Obama to counter this heinous Russian act worthy of war...

 

The following deserves a caption but can't come up with anything catchy...

 

121107_Obama.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Opa, Gangnam Style!

 

 

Yes that is good.  Perhaps a little time travel for those older folks on here but ( as someone pointed out to me earlier today ) that picture reminds me of a younger version of Chubby Checkers...

 

0001176012_500.jpg

 

So, my caption is "Let's twist again"...  In not so many words, the government will apply a certain twist on this mess that makes a shit sandwich look like a gourmet 4 star dinner.

 

If one was to look at Gangnam Style you could see similarities between it and what Chubby Checkers did quite some time ago with the Twist or the Pony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly do you want Obama to do about Russia annexing Crimea? Start WW3? Wave his magic hooha? Are you aware that he is an elected official and only one branch of the US government and not actually Emperor of the Universe?

There are plenty of legit reasons to gripe about the guy, but really.. WTF do you suggest?


1IZH7up.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly do you want Obama to do about Russia annexing Crimea? Start WW3? Wave his magic hooha? Are you aware that he is an elected official and only one branch of the US government and not actually Emperor of the Universe?

There are plenty of legit reasons to gripe about the guy, but really.. WTF do you suggest?

1IZH7up.gif


I am only asking that he re-examine what he is saying and authorizing right now. His magic hooha has already deployed US troops and planes to the vicinity and has been issuing " deadlines " to Putin. ...and still expects Russian help with the Syrian issue. No, I don't want WW3 and I don't want someone carelessly throwing troops around as part of a path that is sometimes irreversible.

Sending Biden to Poland with assurances, etc... All of which adds up to one of a few things and none of them should be agreeable to any of us. If it is agreeable to you please explain.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also can someone please explain to me how what Russia is doing now in the Ukraine any different from what the US did in Iraq or Granada or Panama or any of the sovereign nations we have invaded in the past 40 years.

 

 

 

We didn't invade any of them and take part of their Country and make it part of the U.S.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Well we invaded, it's just our goals were less statecraft and more neoliberal.

 

I almost responded with a question.  Define part ?  We have bases, we have a certain amount of oil allocated for us, we're still there, etc...  However, I also understand what Old is saying to a point.  The difference is we have satellites that give us everything that a state or territory attached to the US would give us with a few minor exceptions (right to vote, etc...).  We support their defense, we give them aid, we take their oil ( not all of it ), buy off their products ( to include military hardware and weapons ), etc...  Only difference is that Iraq is not the 51st state, the US does not have 51 stars on its flag, etc...  Russia just added another star to their flag so to speak and not much difference other than that...

 

Standing by in my asbestos fire suit for the flames that will surely follow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Well we invaded, it's just our goals were less statecraft and more neoliberal.

 

 

The only comparisons are we invaded. He asked what's the "difference". 

I don't feel like getting into a was the wars justified debate. Been there.

Done that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I almost responded with a question.  Define part ?  We have bases, we have a certain amount of oil allocated for us, we're still there, etc...  However, I also understand what Old is saying to a point.  The difference is we have satellites that give us everything that a state or territory attached to the US would give us with a few minor exceptions (right to vote, etc...).  We support their defense, we give them aid, we take their oil ( not all of it ), buy off their products ( to include military hardware and weapons ), etc...  Only difference is that Iraq is not the 51st state, the US does not have 51 stars on its flag, etc...  Russia just added another star to their flag so to speak and not much difference other than that...

 

Standing by in my asbestos fire suit for the flames that will surely follow.

 

 

No need to flame I agree with all of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I almost responded with a question.  Define part ?  We have bases, we have a certain amount of oil allocated for us, we're still there, etc...  However, I also understand what Old is saying to a point.  The difference is we have satellites that give us everything that a state or territory attached to the US would give us with a few minor exceptions (right to vote, etc...).  We support their defense, we give them aid, we take their oil ( not all of it ), buy off their products ( to include military hardware and weapons ), etc...  Only difference is that Iraq is not the 51st state, the US does not have 51 stars on its flag, etc...  Russia just added another star to their flag so to speak and not much difference other than that...

 

Standing by in my asbestos fire suit for the flames that will surely follow.

 

 

 

 

We went to war with one Country and they had conditions to their surrender that

they never abidded by in over 10 years. And had another harbor terrorists that perpetrated

the worst attack on our soil in our history. We didn't just invade them because we

wanted shit. Or wanted land, or bases or whatever. In my opinion, both wars were

justified. Just poorly executed. And other than the fact we invaded them, what

we did and what Russia is doing has no other comparisons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old, we went into Iraq for the oil...Hell the invasion was called Operation Iraqi Liberation...or OIL...

 

I'm not saying what Putin is doing in Ukraine is right, but people who live in glass houses....

 

In my opinion this is a EU, NATO, and UN issue and they should be the one's to step up to Putin and handle him but they are scared of the school yard bully that is Vladimir Putin's Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old, we went into Iraq for the oil...Hell the invasion was called Operation Iraqi Liberation...or OIL...

 

I'm not saying what Putin is doing in Ukraine is right, but people who live in glass houses....

 

In my opinion this is a EU, NATO, and UN issue and they should be the one's to step up to Putin and handle him but they are scared of the school yard bully that is Vladimir Putin's Russia.

 

 

I don't think we went there for oil. We gave a shit in the first place because they have oil,

no doubt. But we went there in 1991 for a reason. Saddam had terms to his surrender.

He never abidded by them for over 10 years. He shot at our pilots that were patrolling 

"No Fly Zones", he used chemicals on his own people, he thumbed his nose at weapons

inspectors. He wanted the World to think he had WMDs. And after 9/11, we couldn't let

him do that shit anymore. He could have stopped the invasion. He chose not to. 

Anyway, that's old news. Like I said, I have debated it here numerous times. 

 

Anyway I totally agree with you about Putin and letting groups of Nations try and be World Police. 

Just touching on the differences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good read:
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/20/opinion/how-to-punish-putin.html?_r=1


The author is correct that the targets are incorrectly identified by the west. I've mentioned Gazprom as part of the problem but the author incorrectly identifies only one person associated with Gaxprom. There are numerous people in government with multiple ties. For an interesting glimpse, try to put together a genealogical perspective of Gazprom. Then it will be clear where a majority of the issues stem from. IMHO...

How does this person have access to the internet if they are on house arrest ? Pretty low form of arrest for a person labeled as an extremist. I have to ask questions because of this. Is the author a real person or a made up person to stir the pot ? Why would any country that arrests a person for extremism, allow that person access to spread further extremist views ?

Thank you for sharing a thought provoking link.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to OIL and OIF. One person is known to have used Operation Iraqi Liberation, Ari Flescher in 2003. Most officials referred to it as Operation Iraqi Freedom. Perhaps it was pulled after some kid pointed out that the acronym he used spelled oil, don't know.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x497331
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't find that op-ed all that impressive. Glosses over way too much.

 

--Only go after the pro-Putin oligarchs? Implies leaving the ones who own all the property in London alone.

--Pretty dismissive of the roots of the Ukrainian "revolt" against Russia. Very complicated story which has a lot to do with western provocations.

 

But, it is a p.o.v. to take into account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole Ukraine mess is an ongoing case study in classical geopolitics. Pure pre-WWI stuff. Which ought to scare folks a little.
 
Halford Mackinder --> Karl Houshofer --> Cold War --> American neo-imperialism post Soviet breakdown--> Now.
 
There are no good guys.


Who or what is going to be the modern day archduke ? The spark so to speak.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who or what is going to be the modern day archduke ? The spark so to speak.

 

The problem with us plebeians is that we tend to focus on the sensational and dramatic. It's akin to being fascinated with the precise moment a lobster dies when it is dropped into a boiling pot. I would suggest that the real action lies within the conditions which make lobster-poaching possible.

 

For example, Gavrilo Princip was not the only fellow with bad intent that day in 1914.

 

Personally, I don't think this develops into a war at all. I want to believe that there are still enough sane minds around that situation to prevent such stupidity. China has a huge stake in this and would be a good mediator, imo.

 

The things to watch for are less explosive but more important aspects of the near future:

--Will the Ukraine get the IMF looting treatment?

--Will there be a continuation of NATO out of area deployment strategy or will the original "agreement" with Gorbachov become important again?

--Will corporate proto-fascist doctrine continue to strongly influence the foreign policy of some nations or will some sort of Westphalian compromise be attained?

 

I don't think we're at this point yet:

 

MAfphSR.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...