The Ukraine

[Ke1t]

Could be rumbling towards a civil war, or worse.

 

Apparently there's about 25,000 Russian soldiers in Sevastopol already, and Russia has already shown it's ready to send the heavies in to calm the tits of restless natives, as in the Georgian incident a few years back.

 

Just takes one bad decision to trigger a scuffle that gets out of control, but the Ukraine is a different kettle of Slavic fish to the Georgians in terms of military capability.

 

 

 

 

[E-P-K]

Interestingly some pro Russian chaps stormed the local government building in the Crimea today, and raised the Russian flag.

 

Always thought that once the winter Olympics was finished, then they would be far far more "vocal" regarding the Ukraine.

 

 

The IMF are sending a delegation to Kiev in the coming days regarding funding, so fully expect the rhetoric to be increased.

[granite sheep]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Ukraine has a stockpile of Russian nukes do they?

[Ke1t]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Ukraine has a stockpile of Russian nukes do they?

 

They used to have about 4000 strategic and tactical nukes, most of which were sent back to Russia or disassembled, I believe.

 

A few dozen went 'missing', and I think the Iranians might have a dozen or so... fuck knows where the rest of them are.

 

The Ukranians have a tank force of about 4000+ according to Global Firepower, and a decent sized standing army, though... if the Russians get antzy and send their own tanks in then it could get fairly messy.

[E-P-K]

Lots of game being played out, and will continue to be, with Russia jets being in combat mode, and the US defence secretary not answering questions on sending forces near by.

 

With Russia losing the naval base in Tartus Syria, Sevastoplo in the Ukraine is now even more vital to Russia.

[Ke1t]

Interestingly some pro Russian chaps stormed the local government building in the Crimea today, and raised the Russian flag.

 

Always thought that once the winter Olympics was finished, then they would be far far more "vocal" regarding the Ukraine.

 

 

The IMF are sending a delegation to Kiev in the coming days regarding funding, so fully expect the rhetoric to be increased.

 

I read about the raising of the Russian flag over the government buildings. Wouldn't surprise me if the guys responsible were Russian military acting on orders from Moscow.

[E-P-K]

Totally unrelated, but have you seen the video of Putin's inauguration from 2012 ?

 

We dont get a prime minister with that swagger

 

 

 

Also, yesterday Putin's approval rating was the highest it has ever been. fixed or not.

[Scrumpy]

Here we go again - Russian expansionism. Pray to God the West don't get involved.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

I read about the raising of the Russian flag over the government buildings. Wouldn't surprise me if the guys responsible were Russian military acting on orders from Moscow.

 

More than likely I would say.

 

I wouldnt be surprised if another load of Russian military types arrived - but dressed as Ukrainian Troops or Police - and behave in a fashion designed to give Russia a Casus Belli on a sliver platter. An old, but effective, trick.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Totally unrelated, but have you seen the video of Putin's inauguration from 2012 ?

 

We dont get a prime minister with that swagger

 

A shame, no?

 

They get ex-KGB* Colonel Vladimir Putin, we get limp-writed Eton boy David Cameron.

 

In the UK, you get power by being rich; in Russia, you get it by being a ruthless, hard, patriotic bastard.

 

I like the Russians.

 

(* "theres no such thing as an ex-KGB man" - Vladimir Putin)

 

I like strong leaders. Thatcher was strong, and ruthless, and the Russians rightly respected her for it (it was they who coined the term "Iron Lady").

EDIT - Thatcher wasnt from a rich background, (her dad was a greengrocer), and was self-made before politics, via earning a degree in Chemistry; perhaps another reason the Russians respected her.

[E-P-K]

 

A shame, no?

 

They get ex-KGB* Colonel Vladimir Putin, we get limp-writed Eton boy David Cameron.

 

In the UK, you get power by being rich; in Russia, you get it by being a ruthless, hard, patriotic bastard.

 

I like the Russians.

 

(* "theres no such thing as an ex-KGB man" - Vladimir Putin)

 

I like strong leaders. Thatcher was strong, and ruthless, and the Russians rightly respected her for it (it was they who coined the term "Iron Lady").

EDIT - Thatcher wasnt from a rich background, (her dad was a greengrocer), and was self-made before politics, via earning a degree in Chemistry; perhaps another reason the Russians respected her.

I like him also, Medvedev is/was a nobody compared to Putin. Putin is the epitome of power.

[Ke1t]

 

A shame, no?

 

They get ex-KGB* Colonel Vladimir Putin, we get limp-writed Eton boy David Cameron.

 

In the UK, you get power by being rich; in Russia, you get it by being a ruthless, hard, patriotic bastard.

 

I like the Russians.

 

(* "theres no such thing as an ex-KGB man" - Vladimir Putin)

 

I like strong leaders. Thatcher was strong, and ruthless, and the Russians rightly respected her for it (it was they who coined the term "Iron Lady").

EDIT - Thatcher wasnt from a rich background, (her dad was a greengrocer), and was self-made before politics, via earning a degree in Chemistry; perhaps another reason the Russians respected her.

 

You would prefer a ruthless ex-KGB leader... so long as the person said ex-KGB leader was being ruthless towards wasn't you.

 

That's the problem with 'ruthless' leaders... there's an element within society that becomes the subject of that ruthlessness, often through no fault of their own.

 

I think a 'ruthless, ex-KGB' leader is probably the very last thing I would want.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Here we go again - Russian expansionism. Pray to God the West don't get involved.

 

We wont.

 

Both Call-me-Dave and Obama would sh*te it from Putin, (even 2 on 1), both in a conventional war and mano-a-mano. So lots of condemnation and tutting, but no western action. (As with Georgia and Syria.)

 

Despite the wests likely technological advantage, I doubt we the west could beat the Russians without recourse to a nuclear war. Nothing has changed since the cold war in that regard.

 

The west has been succesful at preventing russian (formerly communist) expansion and has managed to roll NATO right up to near Russias own borders.

 

But I still think they would have us, in a conventional european war.

 

Formerly America and Russia (well, USSR) were ideological enemies, now its just about who is Boss. And yet the Chinese will soon eclipse them both.

 

I think personally think it would be refreshing and interesting, if China - as opposed to the US - was the dominant power. I'd much rather the world be informed and influenced by Chinese culture, (ancient and noble), than by American culture (modern and tacky).

[Scrumpy]

I think personally think it would be refreshing and interesting, if China - as opposed to the US - was the dominant power. I'd much rather the world be informed and influenced by Chinese culture, (ancient and noble)...

 

And Communist?

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

And Communist?

 

They are not communist any more, economically anyway, they are capitalist pigs like the rest of us. They realised they can beat the westerners at their own game and dominate financially, instead of having to send a load of farm boys to die (not that they are short of expendable farm boys).

 

I know - I used to work in a place put out of business by cheaper chinese rivals, the hoors (I liked that job too - the pay was only moderate, but it was pretty cushy).

 

They are selling cars here now and everything, ("Great Wall" pick-ups etc), and they rule ebay eletcronics etc.

 

Need a pH probe, with temperature gauge, built-in AM/FM radio, which speaks the time and includes an integral sunglasses holder? 4 USB sockets and free buffer solutions? Go see the Chinese. Ok it might last half the time of a Japanese equivalent, but it will be only 40% of the cost.

 

They are a major arnaments exporter and increasingly improving in every market. The fleet of ships Ineos will build, to bring the liquid ethane from the USA to Grangemouth, will be built in China. (Imagine if we built those ships in Scotland.)

 

They dont really like to talk about their necessary change of ideology, as "loss of face" is traditionally a major disgrace in Chinese Culture. Thats one area, funnily enough, where our culture is superior - we are not scared to make mistakes. We feel we learn from our mistakes, but the Chinese feel they make an irreparable c*nt of themselves from their mistakes.

 

But with influential culture I am mostly looking for beauty and intellectual capacity - both of which drip from Chinese culture, in stark conrast to that of our American friends.

[Ke1t]

 

We wont.

 

Both Call-me-Dave and Obama would sh*te it from Putin, (even 2 on 1), both in a conventional war and mano-a-mano. So lots of condemnation and tutting, but no western action. (As with Georgia and Syria.)

 

Despite the wests likely technological advantage, I doubt we the west could beat the Russians without recourse to a nuclear war. Nothing has changed since the cold war in that regard.

 

The west has been succesful at preventing russian (formerly communist) expansion and has managed to roll NATO right up to near Russias own borders.

 

But I still think they would have us, in a conventional european war.

 

Formerly America and Russia (well, USSR) were ideological enemies, now its just about who is Boss. And yet the Chinese will soon eclipse them both.

 

I think personally think it would be refreshing and interesting, if China - as opposed to the US - was the dominant power. I'd much rather the world be informed and influenced by Chinese culture, (ancient and noble), than by American culture (modern and tacky).

 

A massive amount has changed since the Cold War.

 

Personally I think the French and Germans alone could deal with the Russians, let alone a combined EU force.

[tup]

Potential for World War 3.

[dave_min]

This better not fuck up my trip to Lviv in June.

 

Fucking commies.

 

[Scrumpy]

 

They are not communist any more, economically anyway, they are capitalist pigs like the rest of us. They realised they can beat the westerners at their own game and dominate financially, instead of having to send a load of farm boys to die (not that they are short of expendable farm boys).

 

 

They are still Communist. Not making a judgement on Communism but they are still Communist - 'Communist Light' if you like - the total opposite of how we live in the West.

[granite sheep]

I like him also, Medvedev is/was a nobody compared to Putin. Putin is the epitome of power.

I dinna ken why he hasn't declared himself Tsar yet. He pretty much is, in all but name.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

You would prefer a ruthless ex-KGB leader... so long as the person said ex-KGB leader was being ruthless towards wasn't you.

 

That's the problem with 'ruthless' leaders... there's an element within society that becomes the subject of that ruthlessness, often through no fault of their own.

 

I think a 'ruthless, ex-KGB' leader is probably the very last thing I would want.

 

I mean ruthless as regards his general efficacy in all things, not towards anyone or anything.

 

Someone who is a strong leader, popular (in at least his own constituency), determined and single-minded can achieve much. Look at Derek McInnes.

 

I dont think "KGB" carries any more inherent menace than does "MI6" or "CIA".

 

I think what we see of Putin in the west is a villanous caricature. His career was in the murk-industry, so no doubt there may be murky incidents in his past. For all his faults he is a genuine Russian patriot, who is serious about reversing the serious negative demographic and social issues his nation faces. I think this larely explains his building bridges with the Orthodox Church. Russias natural aspirations demand a higher birth-rate, increasing not declining population, more social order and a good deal of hope - in place of widespread alcoholism and atheistic-communist nihilism.

 

What do we in the west really know of Russian, beyond this apparent "anti-gay" law? Nothing. (We had a similar law ourselves, until very recently - talk about hypocrisy).

 

What do we know of the ukraine, bar the Klitschkos, riots and "FEMEN"? Nothing.

 

The little we do see reeks of staged, mock-up bullshit in my opinion, designed to have a specific, on-cue impact on modern western secular sensibilities.

 

I know about the modern seafarers who come to the UK ports on cargo vessels. The crews are always a mix of filipinos and eastern europeans. Sometimes a few central europeans (poles and germans). There is always a russian-ukrainian contingent in the eastern bloc. As far as I can see they are really tight together, inseperable and identical beyond accents. They remind me of the Scots and English together. They say each other are a bunch of c*nts, but they like each other really, because they are the same. The Ukrainians scold me, if I mistake them for Russians, as i would scold someone who described me as English. I do not see any resentment between or major difference or divide between the two.

 

Maybe that personal experience doesnt mean much in the grand scheme, but I do wonder sometimes how widespread the EU-love really is in Ukraine - I suspect its a good deal less so than our media suggest - and at times I cannot help but liken the EU-bloc to a kind of USSR, which is keen to impose its views on others.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

They are still Communist. Not making a judgement on Communism but they are still Communist - 'Communist Light' if you like - the total opposite of how we live in the West.

 

I agree they are certainly still communist - authoritarian - in how they rule and go about their general business.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

A massive amount has changed since the Cold War.

 

What like, as regards a conventional european war?

 

Still loads of russkies eager to fight, with the same kalashkinovs and the same cheap boots.

 

The mutual dispositions of conventional weaponry are largely the same as they were at the end of the cold war.

 

The post-USSR disorder and shambles of the Russian military has largely been rectified, meanwhile EU armies have become even more immasculated in the face of the financial crisis. I wonder how long it will be before the British Army starts listing "stone throwers" among its equipment again, like something out of "Warhammer Fantasy Battle".

 

Personally I think the French and Germans alone could deal with the Russians, let alone a combined EU force.

 

Pfft the french are worse than a man less, shite bags. Too concerned about their looks and about their architechture - ask my grandad (from Bargeddie / Bar-G #1) lol. Im surprised they sill have the neck to show their face on a battlefield.

 

NATO / EU is handicapped by too many languages, too many different types of equipment and stuff (despite STANAG), too many command structures, too many petty rivalries etc.

 

And Britain is withdrawing militarily from the continent entirely, such is the cost cutting. The Russian Bear would be sniffing around croissant counters in Paris, before we had even begun to get our shit together.

[Ke1t]

 

I mean ruthless as regards his general efficacy in all things, not towards anyone or anything.

 

Someone who is a strong leader, popular (in at least his own constituency), determined and single-minded can achieve much. Look at Derek McInnes.

 

I dont think "KGB" carries any more inherent menace than does "MI6" or "CIA".

 

I think what we see of Putin in the west is a villanous caricature. His career was in the murk-industry, so no doubt there may be murky incidents in his past. For all his faults he is a genuine Russian patriot, who is serious about reversing the serious negative demographic and social issues his nation faces. I think this larely explains his building bridges with the Orthodox Church. Russias natural aspirations demand a higher birth-rate, increasing not declining population, more social order and a good deal of hope - in place of widespread alcoholism and atheistic-communist nihilism.

 

What do we in the west really know of Russian, beyond this apparent "anti-gay" law? Nothing. (We had a similar law ourselves, until very recently - talk about hypocrisy).

 

What do we know of the ukraine, bar the Klitschkos, riots and "FEMEN"? Nothing.

 

The little we do see reeks of staged, mock-up bullshit in my opinion, designed to have a specific, on-cue impact on modern western secular sensibilities.

 

I know about the modern seafarers who come to the UK ports on cargo vessels. The crews are always a mix of filipinos and eastern europeans. Sometimes a few central europeans (poles and germans). There is always a russian-ukrainian contingent in the eastern bloc. As far as I can see they are really tight together, inseperable and identical beyond accents. They remind me of the Scots and English together. They say each other are a bunch of c*nts, but they like each other really, because they are the same. The Ukrainians scold me, if I mistake them for Russians, as i would scold someone who described me as English. I do not see any resentment between or major difference or divide between the two.

 

Maybe that personal experience doesnt mean much in the grand scheme, but I do wonder sometimes how widespread the EU-love really is in Ukraine - I suspect its a good deal less so than our media suggest - and at times I cannot help but liken the EU-bloc to a kind of USSR, which is keen to impose its views on others.

 

I don't know if you can compare the CIA or MI6 to the KGB.... mainly because the KGB was an internal police apparatus, whereas CIA and MI6 are tasked with foreign intelligence. I think you would be more correct in correlating the GRU to the CIA or MI6.

 

The KGB could probably be more closely related to the Gestapo, a paramilitary internal police force tasked with maintaining social order and dealing with 'subversive elements'. I'd hesitate to compare the KGB to the FBI or MI5, but that's probably the western equivalent, I suppose. The difference there being that the FBI or MI5 wouldn't send you to one of a network of deathcamps if it turned out you had, say, written something unflattering about the leader of the country, had 'unpatriotic thoughts', or any manner of half-arsed reasoning that saw millions of Russians sent to the Gulags.

 

My opinion on the KGB, from what I';ve read (such as Sword and Shield, and The World Was Going Our Way) the KGB was a vicious ideological organization that had no qualms about sending huge numbers of people to their deaths, or to Siberian camps for the better part of their lives.

 

Even the reactionary, idiotic Homeland Security isn't based upon belligerent monolithic political dialectic, but rather fear, ignorance and stupidity.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

@ Kelt - good thread btw.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

I don't know if you can compare the CIA or MI6 to the KGB.... mainly because the KGB was an internal police apparatus, whereas CIA and MI6 are tasked with foreign intelligence. I think you would be more correct in correlating the GRU to the CIA or MI6.

Good point - I think there is large overlap with the KGB intelligence/security function, but its true that the MI6/CIA had no equivalent of internal "KGB troops", the successor I suppose of the NKVD and their battlefield representation.

The difference there being that the FBI or MI5 wouldn't send you to one of a network of deathcamps

But their governments will inject you with fatal poison in front of a crowd, or condemn you to rot for decades until death in a cell.

 

Who is to say that any of these particular cruelties is worse, if there is no natural authority?

Even the reactionary, idiotic Homeland Security isn't based upon belligerent monolithic political dialectic, but rather fear, ignorance and stupidity.

I guess these types of organisations tend to have (or cause) the same results, regardless of their driving force.

 

If you start up an anti-partisan squad, chances are they will find and shoot some partisans - even if only to justify their own existence.

[Ke1t]

Good point - I think there is large overlap with the KGB intelligence/security function, but its true that the MI6/CIA had no equivalent of internal "KGB troops", the successor I suppose of the NKVD and their battlefield representation.

But their governments will inject you with fatal poison in front of a crowd, or condemn you to rot for decades until death in a cell.

 

Who is to say that any of these particular cruelties is worse, if there is no natural authority?I guess these types of organisations tend to have (or cause) the same results, regardless of their driving force.

 

If you start up an anti-partisan squad, chances are they will find and shoot some partisans - even if only to justify their own existence.

 

Well, I'm not sure which government you mean by injecting people with poison, because I can think of instances involving state-ordered murder on both sides, , but I think it's fairly clear that the governments of the west are enormously more moderate than the Russians were/are, and the numbers of ideological/political/innocent victims involved bear no comparison. We in the west haven't operated labour/death camps and systematically imprisoned men, women and children on an ideological whim.. at least not for the last few centuries. Calling the Soviet system, and the apparatus that supported it (NKVD, GRU, KGB) an 'Evil Empire' was probably the truest thing to come out of Regan's mouth.

 

I think it's fair to say that if you start up an organisation whose sole purpose is to find counter-revolutionaries, spies, terrorists, witches, or uppity niggers then that organisation will absolutely find themselves some counter-revolutionaries, spies, terrorists, witches and uppity niggers.

 

Those accused of aforementioned activities might not even have been aware that they were counter-revolutionaries, spies, terrorists, witches, or uppity niggers until the Department of Counter-Revolutionaries, Spies, Terrorists, Witches, or Uppity Niggers kicked in their door, but they would be whatever they found themselves accused of being as sure as bears shit in the woods.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Not Polar Bears, though.

[BrianFaePerth]

Just think of all the hot Ukrainian women who might get caught up in all this

[elephantstone78]

 

A shame, no?

 

They get ex-KGB* Colonel Vladimir Putin, we get limp-writed Eton boy David Cameron.

 

In the UK, you get power by being rich; in Russia, you get it by being a ruthless, hard, patriotic bastard.

 

I like the Russians.

 

(* "theres no such thing as an ex-KGB man" - Vladimir Putin)

 

I like strong leaders. Thatcher was strong, and ruthless, and the Russians rightly respected her for it (it was they who coined the term "Iron Lady").

 

EDIT - Thatcher wasnt from a rich background, (her dad was a greengrocer), and was self-made before politics, via earning a degree in Chemistry; perhaps another reason the Russians respected her.

Cs the term Iron Lady was not meant as a compliment when coined by the ruskies. And, no I would not want a cold power crazed despot that tramples all over democratic rights and free speech as my leader. Surely there must be a third choice to army dictator and public school toff?

An Obama type for example he seems a good egg

[Robbie Winters]

Just think of all the hot Ukrainian women who might get caught up in all this

I'll volunteer to take any refugees in