• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1100
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:08 am

Dutchy wrote:
How to handle Russia whom is bullying his neighbor? Don't do anything which you aren't prepared to finish. And on the other hand, Russia must be stopped from just doing anything it likes to its neighbors. Their salami tactics are working right now. What is the final piece of Salami which the world can't accept? Taking half of Ukraine? Taking all Ukraine? Taking the Baltics?
I do not have an answer to this, but something must be done, we cannot condone it.


Culturally, when Russians challenge you to a game of chicken you can't back down or they think you're a bunch of pansies who are begging to be invaded.

This is what a lot of western countries don't get. You have to respond with equal bluster or they will think you are push-overs. And it's about acting tough too, it's about appearances not actually engaging in a war. There's a reason why the cold war happened and lasted as long as it did.
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:44 am

alfa164 wrote:
Who knew Trump read A.net to utilize its foreign policy expertise?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/05/poli ... index.html

I am guessing the Russia "hardliners" did a lot of convincing; he and his man-friend Putin must be on the outs...

;)

Lol, another stupidity of the US government. What do they want to achieve? A couple of weeks waiting for the next statements about"aggressively flying planes of Russia"?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:02 am

Jouhou wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
How to handle Russia whom is bullying his neighbor? Don't do anything which you aren't prepared to finish. And on the other hand, Russia must be stopped from just doing anything it likes to its neighbors. Their salami tactics are working right now. What is the final piece of Salami which the world can't accept? Taking half of Ukraine? Taking all Ukraine? Taking the Baltics?
I do not have an answer to this, but something must be done, we cannot condone it.


Culturally, when Russians challenge you to a game of chicken you can't back down or they think you're a bunch of pansies who are begging to be invaded.

This is what a lot of western countries don't get. You have to respond with equal bluster or they will think you are push-overs. And it's about acting tough too, it's about appearances not actually engaging in a war. There's a reason why the cold war happened and lasted as long as it did.


Then you are playing the Russian game and make them more important than they are.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:05 am

Scorpius wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
Who knew Trump read A.net to utilize its foreign policy expertise?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/05/poli ... index.html

I am guessing the Russia "hardliners" did a lot of convincing; he and his man-friend Putin must be on the outs...

;)

Lol, another stupidity of the US government. What do they want to achieve? A couple of weeks waiting for the next statements about"aggressively flying planes of Russia"?



Glad you agree that Russia is behaving agressively.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:35 am

Scorpius wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
Who knew Trump read A.net to utilize its foreign policy expertise?

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/05/poli ... index.html

I am guessing the Russia "hardliners" did a lot of convincing; he and his man-friend Putin must be on the outs...

;)

Lol, another stupidity of the US government. What do they want to achieve? A couple of weeks waiting for the next statements about"aggressively flying planes of Russia"?


That would be a couple of weeks where Russia doesn´t harass Ukrainian naval units in their own territorial waters.

"Aggressively flying" is just code for saying "Russia acted like a 3-year old again".

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
WIederling
Posts: 7150
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:35 am

Jouhou wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
How to handle Russia whom is bullying his neighbor? Don't do anything which you aren't prepared to finish. And on the other hand, Russia must be stopped from just doing anything it likes to its neighbors. Their salami tactics are working right now. What is the final piece of Salami which the world can't accept? Taking half of Ukraine? Taking all Ukraine? Taking the Baltics?
I do not have an answer to this, but something must be done, we cannot condone it.


Culturally, when Russians challenge you to a game of chicken you can't back down or they think you're a bunch of pansies who are begging to be invaded.

This is what a lot of western countries don't get. You have to respond with equal bluster or they will think you are push-overs. And it's about acting tough too, it's about appearances not actually engaging in a war. There's a reason why the cold war happened and lasted as long as it did.


Now replace Russia with USA and you are all set.
Brinkmanship is a decidedly American concept of interaction.
( which nearly ruined the globe during the Reagan reign.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1100
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:46 am

WIederling wrote:
Jouhou wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
How to handle Russia whom is bullying his neighbor? Don't do anything which you aren't prepared to finish. And on the other hand, Russia must be stopped from just doing anything it likes to its neighbors. Their salami tactics are working right now. What is the final piece of Salami which the world can't accept? Taking half of Ukraine? Taking all Ukraine? Taking the Baltics?
I do not have an answer to this, but something must be done, we cannot condone it.


Culturally, when Russians challenge you to a game of chicken you can't back down or they think you're a bunch of pansies who are begging to be invaded.

This is what a lot of western countries don't get. You have to respond with equal bluster or they will think you are push-overs. And it's about acting tough too, it's about appearances not actually engaging in a war. There's a reason why the cold war happened and lasted as long as it did.


Now replace Russia with USA and you are all set.
Brinkmanship is a decidedly American concept of interaction.
( which nearly ruined the globe during the Reagan reign.)


I wasn't saying the US didn't do that, I'm actually kind of acknowledging that it seems the behavior exercised by the US during the cold war kept them in check, because it seems like they now think they can do whatever they want and no one is going to stand up to them.
 
WIederling
Posts: 7150
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 12:29 pm

Jouhou wrote:
I wasn't saying the US didn't do that, I'm actually kind of acknowledging that it seems the behavior exercised by the US during the cold war kept them in check, because it seems like they now think they can do whatever they want and no one is going to stand up to them.


About my position till about 1989..91 when all the Soviet ( and other ) archives opened.

With the new information available complementing the picture presented in the west
the situation changed: The US had strongly provoced the Soviets as often as possible
( while those acts were never reported the push Soviet back was strongly highlighted
judiciously expanded and presented as "those mad aggressive Soviets, devil incarnate".)
On a lot of other occasions they themselves played the "Bad Soviet" part in False Flag ops.

How ever one sees this the creativity and money spent on tainting the Soviets was enormous.
After subverting the follow up system ( RF ) did not work out as planned ( drunk Jeltzin followed by
a sober Putin with a very patriotic streak ) the old catalog of activities was brought back online.

Is this driven by "only the US in all its glory and unexceptionality can have valid patriotism" ?
Murphy is an optimist
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 2:39 pm

tommy1808 wrote:

That would be a couple of weeks where Russia doesn´t harass Ukrainian naval units in their own territorial waters.

best regards
Thomas

Is it serious? And what will prevent them? In case of further attempts to violate the territorial borders of Russia, Ukrainian ships will also be delayed. Or what, you now tell us that the ship US Navy will try to attack the Russian border ships? In this case, the us Navy ship will be destroyed. And then?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:19 pm

Scorpius wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

That would be a couple of weeks where Russia doesn´t harass Ukrainian naval units in their own territorial waters.

best regards
Thomas

Is it serious? And what will prevent them?


The Russian navies tail between its legs. Like every single time they face push back. They never ever punsch in their own weigh class, let alone above it.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:25 pm

Scorpius wrote:
In case of further attempts to violate the territorial borders of Russia


As long as the Russian navy stays inside the international regonized territorial waters of Russia, there is no problem.........
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:08 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Scorpius wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:

That would be a couple of weeks where Russia doesn´t harass Ukrainian naval units in their own territorial waters.

best regards
Thomas

Is it serious? And what will prevent them?


The Russian navies tail between its legs. Like every single time they face push back. They never ever punsch in their own weigh class, let alone above it.

Best regards
Thomas

More lies from you, Tommy. I will remind you how the Russian border guards drove an American cruiser with a destroyer without even using weapons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Blac ... g_incident
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:17 pm

Dutchy wrote:
1) Crimea: the simple truth is that the Greenman were Russian military, Putin himself said so, so that is a fact.

Green men went in after the locals, fearing for their lives formed militias to stand up for themselves.

Dutchy wrote:
2) Syria: Assad is a dictator of the worst kind. This started with a protest against the Assad regime, which the Assad regime reacted with blood. After 5 years of war people are fat-up with it, so I can imagine that some peace and quiet are preferable. No real good solution there.

So if there is a protest against the Macron regime right now that makes him a dictator of the words kind? :?
Syrians themselves have no clue how the mess started, but some of them did hint at a provocation.
Afterall, when you have crowds on one side and police on the other in close proximity, it doesn't take much to start a shitstorm.
For example - have some guys shoot both some police and protesters at the same time and you just lit the fuse. Something Russian Services should probably do if they wanted to blow up civil unrest like the protests in the U.S. and in Europe :roll:

Another thing I didn't mention in my initial post, with some of these Syrians on initial contact I said I was from Canada, to which the reaction was neutral. After I mentioned that I am Russian and now live in Russia, the reaction was much more positive.
So explain to me - why is it that the Syrians that escaped from Syria, while the west was professing their love and concern for the poor Syrians opressed by the bloody tyrant have absolutely no love for these western countries that claimed so much concern for them? And hate Obama with a passion (the phrase "Obama = Sharmuta" that you usually hear from them when mentioning why the war started or what they think of the west means "Obama is a whore/slut" in Arabic)

3) Russia did all those things in the west and against western democracies, its neighbors and against 298 innocent people, that makes them an outcast in the eyes of at least the western world.[/quote]
Well then good that Russia wants to distance itself from the west, isn't it?
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:52 pm

DeltaMD90 wrote:
Hey, long time no talk! Been very busy, might take a while to read and digest your post (and it seems like the conversation has moved on quite a bit already.)

Guess I have the same question for you... Do Russians actually think NATO has any interest in invading Russia? (Outside of Crimea actually, I do not want to get into the "is Crimea part or Ukraine or Russia" right now)


Well my opinion and that many of those that I know is that the U.S., atleast for the near future is not actively planning to attack/invade Russia militarily. Some do think otherwise though.
However the almost unanimous opinion, and if you look real close - it kinda is true, that for the past many decades the U.S. has actively acted to undermine Russian sovreignty by sponsoring and promoting those opposed to Russia having a leadership that puts Russian interests first. Basically trying to get our leadership to dance to your flute, your values. It is pretty much the same all the fuss in the U.S. right now about Russia influencing your elections and meddling in your internal affairs.
If you look at it, the U.S. has been doing that in Russia since even before the collapse of the Soviet Union, that's why I always say - what's the problem? ;)

So to sum it up, the great majority of Russians believe that the U.S. has and is trying to destabilize Russia from the inside, after which there won't really be any need for a military invasion. But I will add to this that unlike the U.S. which hasn't actually been invaded or attacked on your own soil (not considering 9/11 here), Russia has had foreign troops on our land quite regularly, and most of them were coming from the west under one pretext or another...like it or not, that does influence people's thinking :scratchchin:
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:04 pm

Tugger wrote:
tu204 wrote:
1) Crimea - I even made a post about this when I visited in January 2015. People clearly had overwhelming support for leaving Ukraine and supported joining Russia. Although it was clear that the main point was to GTFO of Ukraine was the main concern, joining Russia was just a means of achieving this and security afterwards.
Just recently I met several Crimeans that were directly involved in the armed militia groups that they themselves formed to protect themselves from nationalist Ukranians that were trying to pay them not-so-friendly visits. These guys were not a handfull, they had massive support from other Crimeans and it was almost a week that they stood their ground before Russian Forces came in to reinforce them and guarantee that the refferendum could take place. During which, by the way nobody was threatened to vote either way or vote in general, there was widespread public support.
Therefore, after these facts what possible dialogue could I have with someone that does not accept these facts and throws back rubber stamp comments back at me, not having been there personally any not having talked to locals?


Then Russia has only itself to blame for the utter mess it is in now. Can't really argue that many in the Crimean peninsula were unhappy with the Ukraine governance. Nor that any vote would have resulted in them leaving (as I have noted before, a majority of the population in the Crimea are Russian soo...).

The problem is that Russia completely cocked up the entire situation. Even with locals creating their own militia etc. to protect themselves, it was Ukrainian territory, under their law and jurisdiction, and recognized as such by the entire world. By annexing the peninsula, by not slowing down and REQUIRING international support of some kind for it's independence, by not REQUIRING a fully independent commission to set up the poll AND including an option for independence, Russia made themselves judge, jury and executioner of the situation. Not a "liberator". And Russia will suffer the consequences of that ill thought action for years to come, even if the annexation becomes de-facto recognized someday.

It wouldn't have been that hard for them do "do it right" and out think the legal elements etc. But they chose not to do it and instead chose force and speed over a well thought plan and patience, and in a world that works hard to not have real wars where one country takes from another that is not acceptable. And to begin accepting such only invites more so it can't be allowed to happen unpunished.

I would say that is a fact too.



Yeah I do agree with you that it was handled hastily and had one major cockup.

That cockup in my view was not including Independence on the refferendum. Or holding two consequtive refferendums, the first one: Ukraine or Independence; and after obviously the majority would have voted Independence have another: Join the Russian Federation - Yes or No.

Other than that I really don't see how the situation could have been handled differently. I mean it wasn't possible to keep Crimea under Ukranian administration after what happened in Kiev, the west wouldn't have agreed to a Russian peacekeeping force or even a joint one at that since the coup in Kiev was supported by them. Realistically the west wouldn't have sent any of their observers to monitor the refferendum if the territory was not under their control or that of Kiev...but there could have been an open invitation for any willing and accredited journalists for example to come and monitor.

So anyhow, I partially do agree with you.
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:44 pm

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
1) Crimea: the simple truth is that the Greenman were Russian military, Putin himself said so, so that is a fact.

Green men went in after the locals, fearing for their lives formed militias to stand up for themselves.


The simple fact is the Russian troops were send inside another country to do some kind of operation. Russia was the aggressor, no matter how you would like to frame this.

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
2) Syria: Assad is a dictator of the worst kind. This started with a protest against the Assad regime, which the Assad regime reacted with blood. After 5 years of war people are fat-up with it, so I can imagine that some peace and quiet are preferable. No real good solution there.

So if there is a protest against the Macron regime right now that makes him a dictator of the words kind? :?
Syrians themselves have no clue how the mess started, but some of them did hint at a provocation.
Afterall, when you have crowds on one side and police on the other in close proximity, it doesn't take much to start a shitstorm.
For example - have some guys shoot both some police and protesters at the same time and you just lit the fuse. Something Russian Services should probably do if they wanted to blow up civil unrest like the protests in the U.S. and in Europe :roll:


The most peculiar kind of comparison: uprise in France against Macron and the uprise to the Assad regime. This makes him a dictator of the worst kind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Syria
And you can Google yourself for all kind of independent investigations into this, UN, Amnesty International etc. But if you are asserting this kind of things, makes me doubt you are looking for something that even remotely resembles the truth, to be honest.

tu204 wrote:
Another thing I didn't mention in my initial post, with some of these Syrians on initial contact I said I was from Canada, to which the reaction was neutral. After I mentioned that I am Russian and now live in Russia, the reaction was much more positive.


Anecdotical evidence. There has been some research into this and there are a lot of Syrians that want peace and quiet and will take Assad without any other real alternative.

tu204 wrote:
So explain to me - why is it that the Syrians that escaped from Syria, while the west was professing their love and concern for the poor Syrians opressed by the bloody tyrant have absolutely no love for these western countries that claimed so much concern for them? And hate Obama with a passion (the phrase "Obama = Sharmuta" that you usually hear from them when mentioning why the war started or what they think of the west means "Obama is a whore/slut" in Arabic)


Explain to me why most Syrians didn't escape to Russia, but to surrounding countries and much less to the EU, but hardly to Russia.

BTW most refugees started to flee after the Russian intervention and the Assad regime started to gain some traction again, that prolonged the war with all the excessive force that came with it, although the famous barrel bombs from the Syrian army are also quite excessive to the civil population.

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
3) Russia did all those things in the west and against western democracies, its neighbors and against 298 innocent people, that makes them an outcast in the eyes of at least the western world.

Well then good that Russia wants to distance itself from the west, isn't it?


I am fine if Russia would take one of the following options:
1. Russia just just plays by international rules and contributed to the world as a grown-up nation
2. Russia does the isolation thing and concentrates on everything except outside its borders and thus leaves its neighbors and other countries alone

The game the Putin regime is playing at the moment, only hurts everyone, including your fellow Russians.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:00 pm

Dutchy wrote:
The simple fact is the Russian troops were send inside another country to do some kind of operation. Russia was the aggressor, no matter how you would like to frame this.

More like the protector. Russian troops were sent in after there was already an overwhelming interest by the residents of that part of that country to self determination and self preservation after said country experienced an illegal by their own laws and constitution overthrow of government.

Dutchy wrote:
The most peculiar kind of comparison: uprise in France against Macron and the uprise to the Assad regime. This makes him a dictator of the worst kind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Syria
And you can Google yourself for all kind of independent investigations into this, UN, Amnesty International etc. But if you are asserting this kind of things, makes me doubt you are looking for something that even remotely resembles the truth, to be honest.

No, I am saying that your labelling him a tyrant due to him starting the civil war is moot. There is not enough credible information and it is anecdotal at best at this time.
I also pointed out how easy it is to start a large scale civil conflict should you play your cards right. Something that many Syrians I talked to personally suspect happened.
As I said, it is an easy equation: trigger happy police on a power trip + pissed off protesters + third party that takes some shots at both = shitstorm and rapid acceleration of the conflict. You know, you could easily do that in the U.S. after their regular protests. I agree now, France was not the correct example here.


Dutchy wrote:
Explain to me why most Syrians didn't escape to Russia, but to surrounding countries and much less to the EU, but hardly to Russia.


That one is easy. It is nearly impossible to get refugee status in the Russian Federation. Something that Russia has been constantly critisized about by the UNHCR. I think the refusal rate was something like 98% until the mess in Ukraine when Ukranians were given preferential treatment during the process...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_ ... n_Refugees

Dutchy wrote:
I am fine if Russia would take one of the following options:
1. Russia just just plays by international rules and contributed to the world as a grown-up nation
2. Russia does the isolation thing and concentrates on everything except outside its borders and thus leaves its neighbors and other countries alone

The game the Putin regime is playing at the moment, only hurts everyone, including your fellow Russians.


Fine with me.
There are a lot of other countries outside the west that welcome Russian involvment, countries where there is western involvment that they do not want to see. What do we do in this case? :roll:
There has to be a balance. If the west wasn't playing this game worldwide I would totally agree that Russian influence and Russian interests should remain within our borders. Problem is you guys aren't playing by these rules, so here I totally agree with Russian foreign policy that neither should we.
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:42 pm

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
The simple fact is the Russian troops were send inside another country to do some kind of operation. Russia was the aggressor, no matter how you would like to frame this.

More like the protector. Russian troops were sent in after there was already an overwhelming interest by the residents of that part of that country to self determination and self preservation after said country experienced an illegal by their own laws and constitution overthrow of government.


That is highly debated if it was according to the constitution or not, the fact is that the previous president escaped to Russia. Fact is that the "secretion" of Crimea of Ukraine was against the Ukranian constitution (as well as the annexation to Russia was against international law, thus invalid). The "green men" were there before the secretion, so nobody disputes that this was Ukraine soil and Russian military men were there, no matter how you would like to frame it.

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
The most peculiar kind of comparison: uprise in France against Macron and the uprise to the Assad regime. This makes him a dictator of the worst kind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Syria
And you can Google yourself for all kind of independent investigations into this, UN, Amnesty International etc. But if you are asserting this kind of things, makes me doubt you are looking for something that even remotely resembles the truth, to be honest.

No, I am saying that your labelling him a tyrant due to him starting the civil war is moot. There is not enough credible information and it is anecdotal at best at this time.
I also pointed out how easy it is to start a large scale civil conflict should you play your cards right. Something that many Syrians I talked to personally suspect happened.
As I said, it is an easy equation: trigger happy police on a power trip + pissed off protesters + third party that takes some shots at both = shitstorm and rapid acceleration of the conflict. You know, you could easily do that in the U.S. after their regular protests. I agree now, France was not the correct example here.


Neither is the US or any other nation with a developed and independent rule of law. And since Syria is and was a dictatorship, it doesn't have an independent rule of law.

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Explain to me why most Syrians didn't escape to Russia, but to surrounding countries and much less to the EU, but hardly to Russia.


That one is easy. It is nearly impossible to get refugee status in the Russian Federation. Something that Russia has been constantly critisized about by the UNHCR. I think the refusal rate was something like 98% until the mess in Ukraine when Ukranians were given preferential treatment during the process...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_ ... n_Refugees


Oh ok, let Russia make a mess of Syria and let Europe take care of the blow out (and especially nations around Syria: Turkey, Libanon and Jordan). Yeah, Russia has really been a friend of the Syrians, or better a friend of the oppressive Assad regime, or better follow its own interest to have a poppet state at the Mediterranean.

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
I am fine if Russia would take one of the following options:
1. Russia just just plays by international rules and contributed to the world as a grown-up nation
2. Russia does the isolation thing and concentrates on everything except outside its borders and thus leaves its neighbors and other countries alone

The game the Putin regime is playing at the moment, only hurts everyone, including your fellow Russians.

Fine with me.
There are a lot of other countries outside the west that welcome Russian involvment, countries where there is western involvment that they do not want to see. What do we do in this case? :roll:
There has to be a balance. If the west wasn't playing this game worldwide I would totally agree that Russian influence and Russian interests should remain within our borders. Problem is you guys aren't playing by these rules, so here I totally agree with Russian foreign policy that neither should we.


Russia is a regional power, current Russia isn't up to par, Russia hasn't have the means to play that part. China is playing that part, but that comes with strings attached, as does Russian involvement btw. Sometimes you can see that western involvement is for the benifit of the people and the world. I do agree not all the time, but it is a bit more idialistic than Chinese or Russian involvement.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:47 pm

tu204 wrote:
There has to be a balance. If the west wasn't playing this game worldwide I would totally agree that Russian influence and Russian interests should remain within our borders. Problem is you guys aren't playing by these rules, so here I totally agree with Russian foreign policy that neither should we.


Well, the problem is, you are threatening to blow up the planet, when you:
a) don't play by the rules
b) a slap on the wrist is coming

So, no, for the sake of this planet, you guys have to go. Same way Assyria, Babylon and countless others went before you.

Moscovia esse delendam.
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
THS214
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:28 pm

tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
The simple fact is the Russian troops were send inside another country to do some kind of operation. Russia was the aggressor, no matter how you would like to frame this.

More like the protector. Russian troops were sent in after there was already an overwhelming interest by the residents of that part of that country to self determination and self preservation after said country experienced an illegal by their own laws and constitution overthrow of government.

Remember that initially Russia didn't send any troops there but it was some green men. A long after Russia acknowledged that it was their troops. To help local people came long after that.

So initially Russia didn't go there to protect local people and even then what were they protected for? It took years to come where the reason was to protect local people.

Its clear that Russia was after Crimea and everything else in smoke and screen.
 
A3801000
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:14 pm

THS214 wrote:
tu204 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
The simple fact is the Russian troops were send inside another country to do some kind of operation. Russia was the aggressor, no matter how you would like to frame this.

More like the protector. Russian troops were sent in after there was already an overwhelming interest by the residents of that part of that country to self determination and self preservation after said country experienced an illegal by their own laws and constitution overthrow of government.

Remember that initially Russia didn't send any troops there but it was some green men. A long after Russia acknowledged that it was their troops. To help local people came long after that.

So initially Russia didn't go there to protect local people and even then what were they protected for? It took years to come where the reason was to protect local people.

Its clear that Russia was after Crimea and everything else in smoke and screen.


Your first day working in the troll factory today?
 
Scipio
Posts: 916
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:38 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Thu Dec 06, 2018 11:28 pm

US conducts 'extraordinary' observation flight to reaffirm commitment to Ukraine

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/06/poli ... index.html?
 
THS214
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Fri Dec 07, 2018 3:35 am

A3801000 wrote:
THS214 wrote:
tu204 wrote:

"More like the protector. Russian troops were sent in after there was already an overwhelming interest by the residents of that part of that country to self determination and self preservation after said country experienced an illegal by their own laws and constitution overthrow of government."

Remember that initially Russia didn't send any troops there but it was some green men. A long after Russia acknowledged that it was their troops. To help local people came long after that.

So initially Russia didn't go there to protect local people and even then what were they protected for? It took years to come where the reason was to protect local people.

Its clear that Russia was after Crimea and everything else in smoke and screen.


Your first day working in the troll factory today?


No. Just made a mistake in quote. :) First two lines were written by tu204. Now reread my post with that in mind and the meaning changes. Sorry for the confusion.
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:23 am

Phosphorus wrote:
tu204 wrote:
There has to be a balance. If the west wasn't playing this game worldwide I would totally agree that Russian influence and Russian interests should remain within our borders. Problem is you guys aren't playing by these rules, so here I totally agree with Russian foreign policy that neither should we.


Well, the problem is, you are threatening to blow up the planet, when you:
a) don't play by the rules
b) a slap on the wrist is coming

So, no, for the sake of this planet, you guys have to go. Same way Assyria, Babylon and countless others went before you.

Moscovia esse delendam.


Aaaah, Scorpius' evil twin :lol:

Pretty weak, my troll friend. Where are the threats to turn Russia into a nuclear wasteland or to wash your boots in the Pacific Ocean? :confused:

Or are you just starting your job and still have some catching up to do? :mrgreen:
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:49 am

Dutchy wrote:
That is highly debated if it was according to the constitution or not, the fact is that the previous president escaped to Russia. Fact is that the "secretion" of Crimea of Ukraine was against the Ukranian constitution (as well as the annexation to Russia was against international law, thus invalid). The "green men" were there before the secretion, so nobody disputes that this was Ukraine soil and Russian military men were there, no matter how you would like to frame it.

I don't know where you found any room for debate on that. The process of impeachment is clearly forumated in the Ukranian Constitution. It wasn't followed. Simple as that. That makes his removal from office illegal.
You are correct that Crimeas seccesion from Ukraine is also regulated by the Ukranian Constitution and that was not followed either.
However since you want to debate and deny the first issue, which is also black and white, then...well you get it.
That is actually the way that Crimeans thought. If the dudes in Kiev spit on the law, so will we.

There were also green men on the territory of Kosovo and the rest of the former Yugoslavia, and its dissolution was also against the Yugoslavian basic law and that of Serbia later. So there was a precedent for Crimea. There are special scenarios where a part of one country has the right to unilaterally secceed. Kosovo, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Crimea are such scenarios in my opinion. Of course I can admit that, but Russia will never accept Kosovo, and your guys won't accept the other three for political reasons.


Dutchy wrote:
Oh ok, let Russia make a mess of Syria and let Europe take care of the blow out (and especially nations around Syria: Turkey, Libanon and Jordan). Yeah, Russia has really been a friend of the Syrians, or better a friend of the oppressive Assad regime, or better follow its own interest to have a poppet state at the Mediterranean.

While maybe Russia did escalate the situation in Syria by giving the Syrians a fighting chance against Islamists, in the end it was a success. ISIS is gone thanks to that and now the threat against Russia from radical Islamic militants is very low. We fixed the mess that the U.S. started by invading Iraq and then the entire west picked up on with the support for all those Arab Spring movements that ended up being a breeding ground for radical Islam, which ended up threating Russia (remember, Russia has a sizable Muslim population and these ISIS dudes are pretty good at brainwashing).
So in the end, I am not all too concerned that Europe got flooded with refugees. You created that problem for yourselves in the beginning (remember, about half of those refugees are from other Arab countries that were "liberated" by you guys). We solved our immediate threat from radical Islam, gave our military some well needed real life practice.

Dutchy wrote:

Russia is a regional power, current Russia isn't up to par, Russia hasn't have the means to play that part. China is playing that part, but that comes with strings attached, as does Russian involvement btw. Sometimes you can see that western involvement is for the benifit of the people and the world. I do agree not all the time, but it is a bit more idialistic than Chinese or Russian involvement.

You can keep on being dillusional about Russia being a regional power, unless you mean that Russia doesn't have any say or influence in Australia/Oceania. That is the only "region" where Russia doesn't have influence, so I guess you are right in that sense. :roll:

With western involvment in the last 20 years, the bar has been set pretty low and I can't really think of any good that has come out of it. I am not saying this was done on purpose, but probably due to the pure incometence of your strategists and policymakers combined with the belief in your ultimate truth that your view is the correct one and there is no other possible. By the way that is why Russia is able to be a world power and not have to spend trillions on it. Like it or not, but there are some pretty intelligent strategists working in Foreign Intelligence departments of Russia.

So in the end, since the west set the bar so low with all of it's "help" abroad, all Russia and China have to do is not create that big of a fuckup to be viewed possitively.
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:53 am

Scorpius wrote:
I will remind you how the Russian border guards drove an American cruiser with a destroyer without even using weapons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Blac ... g_incident


Yeah.. in soviet territorial waters... so 180° different from the situation now.

May i remind you that the USSR command in this regard saw the light in the end. And ordered its boats back. Pushback -> Tail -> between legs.

Thank you for confirming my statement for me.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:34 am

tu204 wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
tu204 wrote:
There has to be a balance. If the west wasn't playing this game worldwide I would totally agree that Russian influence and Russian interests should remain within our borders. Problem is you guys aren't playing by these rules, so here I totally agree with Russian foreign policy that neither should we.


Well, the problem is, you are threatening to blow up the planet, when you:
a) don't play by the rules
b) a slap on the wrist is coming

So, no, for the sake of this planet, you guys have to go. Same way Assyria, Babylon and countless others went before you.

Moscovia esse delendam.


Aaaah, Scorpius' evil twin :lol:

Pretty weak, my troll friend. Where are the threats to turn Russia into a nuclear wasteland or to wash your boots in the Pacific Ocean? :confused:

Or are you just starting your job and still have some catching up to do? :mrgreen:

You know what makes me laugh at the same time, but on the other hand, makes me want to make a facepalm? That when I talk about the end result of confrontational politics-total war, they think I'm threatening them. While I only mention the logical conclusion of the path they are now on.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Fri Dec 07, 2018 10:08 pm

tu204 wrote:
I don't know where you found any room for debate on that. The process of impeachment is clearly forumated in the Ukranian Constitution. It wasn't followed. Simple as that. That makes his removal from office illegal.
You are correct that Crimeas seccesion from Ukraine is also regulated by the Ukranian Constitution and that was not followed either.
However since you want to debate and deny the first issue, which is also black and white, then...well you get it.
That is actually the way that Crimeans thought. If the dudes in Kiev spit on the law, so will we.


I might shock you to know that I am not a scholar on the Ukranian constitution and may I be so bold to say that neither are you. So I listen to experts and they don't agree on that. So yes, there is room for debate on what to do when a President has fled the country.

The Crimea succession is very clear, unconstitutional because it is not possible to do that unilateral. You cannot talk for all Crimeans and what they were thinking in 2014.

tu204 wrote:
There were also green men on the territory of Kosovo and the rest of the former Yugoslavia, and its dissolution was also against the Yugoslavian basic law and that of Serbia later. So there was a precedent for Crimea. There are special scenarios where a part of one country has the right to unilaterally secceed. Kosovo, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Crimea are such scenarios in my opinion. Of course I can admit that, but Russia will never accept Kosovo, and your guys won't accept the other three for political reasons.


Totally different situations. Kosovo isn't a president for South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Crimea. Crimea is the only part which was annexed by another country. South Ossetia and Abkhazia was a unilateral intervention by the Putin regime, thus Russian aggression. Kosovo wasn't.

tu204 wrote:
While maybe Russia did escalate the situation in Syria by giving the Syrians a fighting chance against Islamists, in the end it was a success. ISIS is gone thanks to that and now the threat against Russia from radical Islamic militants is very low. We fixed the mess that the U.S. started by invading Iraq and then the entire west picked up on with the support for all those Arab Spring movements that ended up being a breeding ground for radical Islam, which ended up threating Russia (remember, Russia has a sizable Muslim population and these ISIS dudes are pretty good at brainwashing).
So in the end, I am not all too concerned that Europe got flooded with refugees. You created that problem for yourselves in the beginning (remember, about half of those refugees are from other Arab countries that were "liberated" by you guys). We solved our immediate threat from radical Islam, gave our military some well needed real life practice.


Some framing here. The Assad regime and Russians / Iranians actually focused on all fractions except ISIS, that was left to the international coalition together with the Kurds. Russia didn't fix ISIS. Russia kept the Assad regime from being eliminated, that's it. So that is incorrect from you.

Arab Spring movements showed that it is hard to bring democracy to a country which has never had a democratic tradition. Just like in Russia in the 1990's and Russia isn't a democracy either. But removing harsh dictatorships by their own people is something positive if the aftermath is managed. Tunesia it kind of has worked or atleast is moving in the right direction.

tu204 wrote:
You can keep on being dillusional about Russia being a regional power, unless you mean that Russia doesn't have any say or influence in Australia/Oceania. That is the only "region" where Russia doesn't have influence, so I guess you are right in that sense. :roll:

With western involvment in the last 20 years, the bar has been set pretty low and I can't really think of any good that has come out of it. I am not saying this was done on purpose, but probably due to the pure incometence of your strategists and policymakers combined with the belief in your ultimate truth that your view is the correct one and there is no other possible. By the way that is why Russia is able to be a world power and not have to spend trillions on it. Like it or not, but there are some pretty intelligent strategists working in Foreign Intelligence departments of Russia.

So in the end, since the west set the bar so low with all of it's "help" abroad, all Russia and China have to do is not create that big of a fuckup to be viewed possitively.


Russia is a regional power and Russians are delusional about being a truly world power. The seat in the United Nations Security Council is a remembrance of the cold war. G7 and Russia weren't invited to join. Russia has some influence with some countries, but not truly on a global scale. Just look at how many countries recognized the annexation of Crimea: Afghanistan, Cuba, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, Sudan, Syria, and Zimbabwe.

Truly global power and influence: America, China and the EU (EU also through its member states, so kind of a special case), that's it. Nobody in its right mind would suggest that current Russia is at par with the influence of China, America or the EU.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 12:26 pm

So, it's time to analyze the incident in detail.

The border service of the Federal security service of the Russian Federation holds a briefing on the Ukrainian provocation in the Kerch Strait.

Two boats followed to the North-East in the direction of the Kerch Strait. At 21:30 24 November to 8 miles from the boundaries of the data the boats was informed about the procedure of crossing the state border. From boats the answer was received that the passage of the Strait is not planned. After that, the Ukrainian sailors were informed that it is necessary to apply for 48, 24 and 4 hours to pass. None of these applications were filed.

These rules are more than 20 years old, and all this time have never been violated by either Russian or Ukrainian sailors. I will inform you that the rules are MANDATORY.


22: 23 the commander of the Russian border boat informed the Ukrainian crews about closing of the Kerch Strait. Ukrainian vessels continued maneuvering 6 miles from the sea borders of the Russian Federation. To overcome this distance is enough for 30-40 minutes at their speed. We have not received an answer to why this was done.

Let me remind you of the attempts of ukrainiuan subversive groups to infiltrate the Crimean Peninsula.


Ukrainian sailors previously stated that if Russian ships approach them at a distance of 20 cable, it will open fire. Artillery installations were sent to where the Russian border ships were.
As you know, there were regular statements from Ukrainian politicians to destroy the Crimean bridge. The border service of the FSB was forced to increase the number of ships in the area of the Kerch-yenikal canal to minimize the threat.

For a long time we have inspected only about 10-12% of the vessels that followed the Crimean bridge. At the same time, the bulk of the inspected vessels were sent to Russian ports. About any so-called blockade of the Ukrainian ports of the speech doesn't go.


Next added:
Closing the passage through the Kerch Strait, as I think everyone understands, was due to the need to stop the Ukrainian provocation.


25 Nov. 2:05 (Moscow time). Border patrol "Emerald" found two boats of the Navy "Berdyansk" and "Nikopol", which are connected with the ships "Gorlovka" and "Yana Kapu" just 4 miles from the sea border of Russia. For what purpose they deviated from the General route and tried to hide the actions? During the same period (at night) was carried out refueling boats at the borders of Russia.

5:35. The border post learned that the boats and the tug set out to follow in Berdyansk. The representative of FSB reminded that before the Ukrainian seamen didn't send any notification.

5:45 Once again it was reported about closing of pass through the Kerch Strait.

5:50 the Commander of "Berdyansk" began to read the Agreement on cooperation concerning freedom of navigation. At that time, there were 166 civil courts in the area of anchorages.

To reach the Parking, the boats had to cross the border of the Russian Federation, entering the Russian territorial waters, and only after that the boats would be in the area where free passage is possible.

6: 30 the Russian frontier guard again brought to Ukrainians information that the application for passage of Strait is necessary - to the captain of the Kerch port. This information the boat group ignored and continued to follow to the border of the Russian Federation.

7: 01 They crossed border of Russia and came into the territorial sea. It should be noted that they entered the territorial sea where the sovereignty of the Russian Federation extended even before Crimea became part of the Russian Federation.

7: 20 the Ships of FSB of the Russian Federation "Don" and "Emerald" called the Ukrainian crews on communication, reporting on need to leave the territorial sea. But no response was received.

8: 30 Crews of the Russian frontier ships recorded moving of artillery complex in combat readiness. Artillery complex were directed towards the Russian ships. By that time on the Russian ships calculations in combat readiness weren't given. One can only guess what the attack from the Ukrainian boats in the area of intensive navigation in such conditions would lead to.

With 10:35 to 18:30, a group of Ukrainian ships have been blocked in the area of the anchor.

Meanwhile, at 11:30, the leadership of the Ukrainian Navy gives a command and sends several boats from Berdyansk to the Kerch Strait. These boats were met on the approach and couldn't take part in provocation.

At 18:30 the Ukrainian ships took measures for break from the Russian territorial sea. Russian ships began to pursue them and send signals.

20:42 PSKR "Emerald" has warned that will use weapons if the ships of naval forces of Ukraine will not stop. Due to the fact that Ukrainian ships are not stopped, the commander of the "Emerald" took the decision about a warning fire in the direction of the Ukrainian boats.

20:45 Warning shooting done from a distance of 2 cables (~400 meters) except of the Ukrainian Navy ships.

20: 50 "Berdyansk" was warned that firing will be open on defeat if boats don't stop.

20:55 PSKR "Emerald" had used the weapon on the boat "Berdyansk" so that the use of a 30 mm 6-barrel installation caused minimal damage to the boat and crew. The commander of the ship was tasked to minimize the damage. All this happened in the dark. Those wounds which, unfortunately, are got by seamen, they are insignificant.

20: 58. "Berdyansk" went into the drift. The captain asked for help. After 8 minutes, our border guards have already provided assistance to Ukrainian sailors. Everything was done very quickly.

22: 28 All three ships of naval forces of VSU were detained in the territorial sea of the Russian Federation.

0:40 Wounded sailors taken for treatment to Kerch.

On boats and tugs were found weapons and ammunition exceeding the standard ammunition

There are also official explanations from the FSB of Russia, given on their website:

The Federal security service of the Russian Federation has information that the provocative actions of the Ukrainian Navy ships were carried out on the direct instructions of the Kiev authorities.
The territorial waters of the Russian Federation, which were invaded by Ukrainian warships, were such even before the reunification of Crimea with Russia.
Coordination of provocation was carried out by two employees of the security Service of Ukraine, seconded to the crews of military boats.
http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438316%40fsbMessage.html

And
http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438315%40fsbMessage.html

In 07.01 25 November despite the warnings of the closure of the area of the territorial sea of the Russian Federation on the approaches to the Kerch Strait from the Black sea ships of the Ukrainian Navy (tank "Berdyansk" tank "Nikopol", MB "Jana Kapu") in the coordinates W=44°52,7' n, D=36°31,3' VD crossed the state border of the Russian Federation and carried out the sunset in the temporarily closed area for swimming than violated the requirements of the UN Convention on the law of the sea 1982, Law of the Russian Federation from April, 1st, 1993 n 4730-I "About State border of the Russian Federation".
Reference in accordance with articles:
- 21, 22 of the Convention, the coastal state may, if necessary and taking into account the safety of navigation, require foreign vessels (ships) exercising the right of innocent passage to use the sea corridors and traffic separation schemes that it may establish or prescribe to regulate the passage of ships;
- 13 Federal law" on internal sea waters, territorial sea and adjacent zone of the Russian Federation " foreign ships, foreign warships, exercising the right of peaceful passage through the territorial sea, must comply with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the rules relating to the peaceful passage through the territorial sea, in respect of:
safety of navigation and regulation of ship traffic, including the use of sea corridors and traffic separation schemes.
...
On the detained military vessels of the Ukrainian Navy were the following types of weapons and ammunition:
1. 30 mm gun - 4 units.
2. Automatic grenade launcher AGS -17 – 4 units.
3. Machine gun "DShK" 12.7 mm - 2 units.
4. Machine gun PKT 7.62 mm – 4 units.
5. Automatic AK-47 5.45 mm-13 units.
6. Gun PM 9mm-4 units.
7. Traumatic gun 9mm-1 unit.
8. Signal pistol PS-1 unit.
9. High-explosive fragmentation projectile 30 mm-765 units. + (32 zinc, unnumbered, set the number is not possible)
10. Shot VOG-17 – 1975 units.
11. VOG shot-495 units.
12. RGD-5 grenade – 40
13. Grenade RG-42 – 48 units.
14. Grenade RGD-20 units.
15. Fuse uzrgm-2 – 30 units.
16. Fuse RG-42 – 38 units.
17. 30 mm signal cartridge-87 units.
18. Cartridges 7,62 mm-9865 units.
19. Cartridges 5,45 mm-11736 units.
20. Cartridges 9 mm-1189 units.
21. Cartridges 12,7 mm - 612 units.
22. Bayonet-knife-15 units.
23. Shop AK-74 – 42 units.
24. Shop PM - 4 units.
(Cannon 30 mm AGS-17 and PKT is 1 the gun mount, there are only 4, two on each boat.).

During the inspection of the detained Ukrainian military boats on the boat "Nikopol" found document: "Checklist of readiness of the boat "Nikopol" to the sea from 9.00 to 18.00 23.11.2018 25.11.2018 of the year" in which the older group of ships is a direct challenge to make the transition from Odessa to Berdyansk "secretive order", "focusing on ensuring a stealth approach to the Kerch-Yenikalsky canal and passing through it."
http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438317%40fsbMessage.html
 
alfa164
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 12:40 pm

Scorpius wrote:
So, it's time to analyze the incident in detail. The border service of the Federal security service of the Russian Federation holds a briefing on the Ukrainian provocation in the Kerch Strait. Two boats followed to the North-East in the direction of the Kerch Strait. At 21:30 24 November to 8 miles from the boundaries of the data the boats was informed about the procedure of crossing the state border. From boats the answer was received that the passage of the Strait is not planned. After that, the Ukrainian sailors were informed that it is necessary to apply for 48, 24 and 4 hours to pass. None of these applications were filed.
These rules are more than 20 years old, and all this time have never been violated by either Russian or Ukrainian sailors. I will inform you that the rules are MANDATORY.

22: 23 the commander of the Russian border boat informed the Ukrainian crews about closing of the Kerch Strait. Ukrainian vessels continued maneuvering 6 miles from the sea borders of the Russian Federation. To overcome this distance is enough for 30-40 minutes at their speed. We have not received an answer to why this was done.
Let me remind you of the attempts of ukrainiuan subversive groups to infiltrate the Crimean Peninsula.

Ukrainian sailors previously stated that if Russian ships approach them at a distance of 20 cable, it will open fire. Artillery installations were sent to where the Russian border ships were.
As you know, there were regular statements from Ukrainian politicians to destroy the Crimean bridge. The border service of the FSB was forced to increase the number of ships in the area of the Kerch-yenikal canal to minimize the threat.
For a long time we have inspected only about 10-12% of the vessels that followed the Crimean bridge. At the same time, the bulk of the inspected vessels were sent to Russian ports. About any so-called blockade of the Ukrainian ports of the speech doesn't go.

Next added:
Closing the passage through the Kerch Strait, as I think everyone understands, was due to the need to stop the Ukrainian provocation.

25 Nov. 2:05 (Moscow time). Border patrol "Emerald" found two boats of the Navy "Berdyansk" and "Nikopol", which are connected with the ships "Gorlovka" and "Yana Kapu" just 4 miles from the sea border of Russia. For what purpose they deviated from the General route and tried to hide the actions? During the same period (at night) was carried out refueling boats at the borders of Russia.
5:35. The border post learned that the boats and the tug set out to follow in Berdyansk. The representative of FSB reminded that before the Ukrainian seamen didn't send any notification.
5:45 Once again it was reported about closing of pass through the Kerch Strait.
5:50 the Commander of "Berdyansk" began to read the Agreement on cooperation concerning freedom of navigation. At that time, there were 166 civil courts in the area of anchorages.
To reach the Parking, the boats had to cross the border of the Russian Federation, entering the Russian territorial waters, and only after that the boats would be in the area where free passage is possible.
6: 30 the Russian frontier guard again brought to Ukrainians information that the application for passage of Strait is necessary - to the captain of the Kerch port. This information the boat group ignored and continued to follow to the border of the Russian Federation.
7: 01 They crossed border of Russia and came into the territorial sea. It should be noted that they entered the territorial sea where the sovereignty of the Russian Federation extended even before Crimea became part of the Russian Federation.
7: 20 the Ships of FSB of the Russian Federation "Don" and "Emerald" called the Ukrainian crews on communication, reporting on need to leave the territorial sea. But no response was received.
8: 30 Crews of the Russian frontier ships recorded moving of artillery complex in combat readiness. Artillery complex were directed towards the Russian ships. By that time on the Russian ships calculations in combat readiness weren't given. One can only guess what the attack from the Ukrainian boats in the area of intensive navigation in such conditions would lead to.
With 10:35 to 18:30, a group of Ukrainian ships have been blocked in the area of the anchor.
Meanwhile, at 11:30, the leadership of the Ukrainian Navy gives a command and sends several boats from Berdyansk to the Kerch Strait. These boats were met on the approach and couldn't take part in provocation.
At 18:30 the Ukrainian ships took measures for break from the Russian territorial sea. Russian ships began to pursue them and send signals.
20:42 PSKR "Emerald" has warned that will use weapons if the ships of naval forces of Ukraine will not stop. Due to the fact that Ukrainian ships are not stopped, the commander of the "Emerald" took the decision about a warning fire in the direction of the Ukrainian boats.
20:45 Warning shooting done from a distance of 2 cables (~400 meters) except of the Ukrainian Navy ships.
20: 50 "Berdyansk" was warned that firing will be open on defeat if boats don't stop.
20:55 PSKR "Emerald" had used the weapon on the boat "Berdyansk" so that the use of a 30 mm 6-barrel installation caused minimal damage to the boat and crew. The commander of the ship was tasked to minimize the damage. All this happened in the dark. Those wounds which, unfortunately, are got by seamen, they are insignificant.
20: 58. "Berdyansk" went into the drift. The captain asked for help. After 8 minutes, our border guards have already provided assistance to Ukrainian sailors. Everything was done very quickly.
22: 28 All three ships of naval forces of VSU were detained in the territorial sea of the Russian Federation.
0:40 Wounded sailors taken for treatment to Kerch.
On boats and tugs were found weapons and ammunition exceeding the standard ammunition
There are also official explanations from the FSB of Russia, given on their website:
The Federal security service of the Russian Federation has information that the provocative actions of the Ukrainian Navy ships were carried out on the direct instructions of the Kiev authorities.
The territorial waters of the Russian Federation, which were invaded by Ukrainian warships, were such even before the reunification of Crimea with Russia.
Coordination of provocation was carried out by two employees of the security Service of Ukraine, seconded to the crews of military boats.
http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438316%40fsbMessage.html
And http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438315%40fsbMessage.html
In 07.01 25 November despite the warnings of the closure of the area of the territorial sea of the Russian Federation on the approaches to the Kerch Strait from the Black sea ships of the Ukrainian Navy (tank "Berdyansk" tank "Nikopol", MB "Jana Kapu") in the coordinates W=44°52,7' n, D=36°31,3' VD crossed the state border of the Russian Federation and carried out the sunset in the temporarily closed area for swimming than violated the requirements of the UN Convention on the law of the sea 1982, Law of the Russian Federation from April, 1st, 1993 n 4730-I "About State border of the Russian Federation".
Reference in accordance with articles:
- 21, 22 of the Convention, the coastal state may, if necessary and taking into account the safety of navigation, require foreign vessels (ships) exercising the right of innocent passage to use the sea corridors and traffic separation schemes that it may establish or prescribe to regulate the passage of ships;
- 13 Federal law" on internal sea waters, territorial sea and adjacent zone of the Russian Federation " foreign ships, foreign warships, exercising the right of peaceful passage through the territorial sea, must comply with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the rules relating to the peaceful passage through the territorial sea, in respect of: safety of navigation and regulation of ship traffic, including the use of sea corridors and traffic separation schemes.
On the detained military vessels of the Ukrainian Navy were the following types of weapons and ammunition:
1. 30 mm gun - 4 units.
2. Automatic grenade launcher AGS -17 – 4 units.
3. Machine gun "DShK" 12.7 mm - 2 units.
4. Machine gun PKT 7.62 mm – 4 units.
5. Automatic AK-47 5.45 mm-13 units.
6. Gun PM 9mm-4 units.
7. Traumatic gun 9mm-1 unit.
8. Signal pistol PS-1 unit.
9. High-explosive fragmentation projectile 30 mm-765 units. + (32 zinc, unnumbered, set the number is not possible)
10. Shot VOG-17 – 1975 units.
11. VOG shot-495 units.
12. RGD-5 grenade – 40
13. Grenade RG-42 – 48 units.
14. Grenade RGD-20 units.
15. Fuse uzrgm-2 – 30 units.
16. Fuse RG-42 – 38 units.
17. 30 mm signal cartridge-87 units.
18. Cartridges 7,62 mm-9865 units.
19. Cartridges 5,45 mm-11736 units.
20. Cartridges 9 mm-1189 units.
21. Cartridges 12,7 mm - 612 units.
22. Bayonet-knife-15 units.
23. Shop AK-74 – 42 units.
24. Shop PM - 4 units.
(Cannon 30 mm AGS-17 and PKT is 1 the gun mount, there are only 4, two on each boat.).
During the inspection of the detained Ukrainian military boats on the boat "Nikopol" found document: "Checklist of readiness of the boat "Nikopol" to the sea from 9.00 to 18.00 23.11.2018 25.11.2018 of the year" in which the older group of ships is a direct challenge to make the transition from Odessa to Berdyansk "secretive order", "focusing on ensuring a stealth approach to the Kerch-Yenikalsky canal and passing through it."
http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438317%40fsbMessage.html


We know you must earn your rubles somewhere, but I hope you realize: nobody believes any of the Russian propaganda anymore. After all the lies and deceptions about MH17 and the Crimea invasion, no thinking person believes anything from liliPutin's disinformation campaigns.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:11 pm

alfa164 wrote:
We know you must earn your rubles somewhere, but I hope you realize: nobody believes any of the Russian propaganda anymore. After all the lies and deceptions about MH17 and the Crimea invasion, no thinking person believes anything from liliPutin's disinformation campaigns.


There little handbook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UinHXoRas5k
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:15 pm

Dutchy wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
We know you must earn your rubles somewhere, but I hope you realize: nobody believes any of the Russian propaganda anymore. After all the lies and deceptions about MH17 and the Crimea invasion, no thinking person believes anything from liliPutin's disinformation campaigns.


There little handbook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UinHXoRas5k

Your link is a direct lie. For example, for the first time in my life I learned about the existence of a book from the author Dugin. Oh, Yes. Such "popularity" that even those interested in politics Russian (like me) do not know about the existence of such.
The conflict in Abkhazia and South Ossetia began long before Putin appeared. In fact, Abkhazia and South Ossetia were regions that did not want to secede from the USSR and whose opinion was ignored by Georgia's regional elites. I recommend you at least learn a little history, Dutchy. Otherwise, you look ridiculous.


About Crimea that idiot on Youtube too directly lies. I specifically sought out this book and the quick search looked at the mention of the Crimea. And found, in particular, the following quote:
Crimea is a special geopolitical entity, traditionally different
ethnic mosaic. Little Russians, great Russians and Crimean Tatars are settled
in the Crimea in very complex configurations, and provide enough
hostile to each other geopoliti cal pulse. Great focused
emphasized Pro-Moscow (more aggressive than on the rest of Ukraine, even
Eastern.) The Ruthenians, on the contrary, are extremely nationalistic. Crimean Tatar
in General, Vana focuses more on Turkey and is quite hostile to Russia. Taking into account the geopolitical orientation of the Crimean Tatars is out of the question,
since Turkey in all respects is a direct geopolitical
Russia's enemy. But the presence of Tatars in the Crimea can not be considered as well.
Direct annexation of Crimea to Russia will cause an extremely negative reaction
little Russian population and will create problems of integration of the Peninsula in the
the Russian system through the Ukrainian territories that in General is a little real.
Leaving Crimea "sovereign Ukraine" is also impossible, because it creates
a direct threat to Russia's geopolitical security and generates ethnic
tension in the Crimea. Taking into account all these considerations, it begs
conclusion on the need to give Crimea a special status and ensure
maximum autonomy with direct strategic control of Moscow, but taking into account the socio - economic interests of Ukraine and ethnic and cultural
requirements of Crimean Tatars.

As you can see, there was no question that the Crimea was somehow annexed to Russia.

If we talk in General about what I saw, briefly acquainted with this book - this is only one of the many attempts to understand the strategic path of Russia in the post-Soviet realities. However, many statements and proposals from this book have already shown their failure, because 20 years since its release mn6ogoe was refuted by the actual state of Affairs. However, in General, Dugin chose an obvious strategy of integration of Russia with the surrounding States to create the Eurasian Union - and the General outline of these arguments is true. General, but not particular.
Why in the video are false data that do not correspond to what is actually written in this book? Why, I wonder, once again, mention a photo of Putin riding a horse? This photo, by the way, went almost unnoticed in Russia - it is discussed for some reason mainly by foreign media. In General, once again Dutchy, you bring here low-grade propaganda lies about Russia. Tell me, how many dollars do you get for each comment about Russia? Obviously, you're a Troll on your salary
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8465
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 7:08 pm

Scorpius wrote:
So, it's time to analyze the incident in detail.

Your post goes on unnecessarily to long, it needs only a few line. So yes, let's analyze:

Russia invades a sovereign nation.

Russia declares part of that sovereign nation "independent" then promptly annexes said region into Russia.

The rest of the world understands this is illegal and does not recognize such.

Russia pretends the region is now Russian and therefore imagines the coast waters to be under their control.

Russia thinks it can therefore take the ships of the sovereign nation that are sailing it's own water.

The rest of the world understands this is illegal and does not recognize such.

Russia keeps screwing up.


Russia either needs to learn to play the long game and be patient and not do anything because they are big and strong enough that basically no one will do anything physically to the nation. Maybe this is their version of the long game, but if it is it is costing them a lot as it encourages the world to keep sanctions on place and even increase them. Economics are internal and external, and the actions which the world is taking are creating internal impacts. So it seems dumb to encourage this.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 7:45 pm

alfa164 wrote:
We know you must earn your rubles somewhere, but I hope you realize: nobody believes any of the Russian propaganda anymore. After all the lies and deceptions about MH17 and the Crimea invasion, no thinking person believes anything from liliPutin's disinformation campaigns.


Who believes the Western propaganda recently, some folks here aside? All too frequently its stories wither fall apart without any proof or evidence, or just get forgotten without seeing any of those.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:12 pm

Tugger wrote:
Scorpius wrote:
So, it's time to analyze the incident in detail.

Your post goes on unnecessarily to long, it needs only a few line. So yes, let's analyze:

Russia invades a sovereign nation.

Russia declares part of that sovereign nation "independent" then promptly annexes said region into Russia.

The rest of the world understands this is illegal and does not recognize such.

Russia pretends the region is now Russian and therefore imagines the coast waters to be under their control.

Russia thinks it can therefore take the ships of the sovereign nation that are sailing it's own water.

The rest of the world understands this is illegal and does not recognize such.

Russia keeps screwing up.


Russia either needs to learn to play the long game and be patient and not do anything because they are big and strong enough that basically no one will do anything physically to the nation. Maybe this is their version of the long game, but if it is it is costing them a lot as it encourages the world to keep sanctions on place and even increase them. Economics are internal and external, and the actions which the world is taking are creating internal impacts. So it seems dumb to encourage this.

Tugg


Alright, let’s analyze this particular incident. Yes, Crimea and its territorial waters are Russian. At least Russia considers them such, behaves this way, and accordingly guards them. Just as any nation, any state is expected to do - protect their territory and its waters. And it should have been expected that they will, regardless of who thinks what about “whose is Crimea”.

What’s striking here is thinking of Ukrainian “commanders”. The ships were given orders to “approach Kerch strait and go under Crimea bridge, secretly and unnoticed”. And the orders were given knowing that Crimea is stuffed with Russian military, surveillance, radars, missiles and many more things. And - the vessels were tracked from Odessa and were contacted. Hence - someone who gave such an order has given these 25 sailors a one way ticket to the bottom of the sea, or - at best - sent them straight to jail of the neighboring country. How can someone possibly support such thing and side with it? How can one support sending 25 people straight to death, regardless of rights or opinions, even on important matters? This is what is puzzling me.

And that is given that Russians didn’t even block them from passing. Ukrainians were just asked to wait for permission, time slot and a pilot to cross the strait. Totally talentless and needless “combat”.

Overall, Russians handled this situations very humanely, professionally and courteously, by not just sinking these vessels and only arresting the crews. The Ukrainians were brought to safety and given required medical attention. They even kicked in for one of these cadets and asked Ukrainians to not expel him from college.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:28 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Scorpius wrote:
alfa164 wrote:

We know you must earn your rubles somewhere, but I hope you realize: nobody believes any of the Russian propaganda anymore. After all the lies and deceptions about MH17 and the Crimea invasion, no thinking person believes anything from liliPutin's disinformation campaigns.


You look like a little boy who shuts his ears and shouts, "I can't hear, it doesn't count, you're cheating!".

I brought here the facts, the official report of the Russian border service. It is obvious that if the UN or somewhere else wanted to understand what happened, they would first create a joint Commission that would investigate the arguments of both sides and examine the evidence. However, (here it is surprising!) this has not been done. Instead, we see (hmm, as in the case of MH17, an amazing coincidence!), without any investigation to blame Russia in everything.

And you continue to yell here at the forum that there is no need for evidence - "everything is so clear, Russia is to blame." You know, my opinion about foreigners ' mental abilities keeps falling. Either you understand that you are on the side of the liars - and then falls for my opinion on your moral qualities.
I will repeat here again what I repeat to all the fools who have decided that their sanctions policy can give a positive result. So: all these sanctions lead to one thing - you will lead to war with Russia. Now answer yourself-are you ready for the fact that your house will fall bombs? You don't have to answer me. Answer yourself. Because the current policy of the West leads to this.


Welcome Scorpius 2! Threats, but we haven't seen any tanks in Lisboa, nor will we. A threat is a sign of weakness, as we all know. Makes me wonder what you actually want to achieve, not putting Russia in a good light in the eyes of westerners or the rest of the world. Just meham apparently. Ah well, nothing new. Hope you got weekend pay for this.


Let’s say that threatening with war over sanctions alone is not necessary - if the war is to start, it won’t be because of sanctions. These sanctions will get lifted eventually. What can start the war though - is a stupid incident, such as a missile from a NATO nation flew into Russian territory and killed someone there. Now this is aggression, and absolutely any response to such thing is acceptable - including strikes over Europe’s military facilities (regardless whose they are), and - yes, tanks in Lisboa if Russians decide that they want them there. And nobody will be looking to answer a question “was it an incident or not”.

Same is true about this incident with Ukraine. Technically - entering someone’s territorial waters is invasion. And any response from Russia to such thing is legitimate - including entering military into the territory and finally dismantling that “independence”.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:41 pm

Dutchy wrote:
2) Syria: Assad is a dictator of the worst kind. This started with a protest against the Assad regime, which the Assad regime reacted with blood. After 5 years of war people are fat-up with it, so I can imagine that some peace and quiet are preferable. No real good solution there.


What’s your business - who is Assad? Whether he is a President, a dictator, an emperor - what’s your business? Syria is a different country where some other nation lives. It’s their business to decide who and how is to run their country, not yours.

Dutchy wrote:
3) Russia did all those things in the west and against western democracies, its neighbors and against 298 innocent people, that makes them an outcast in the eyes of at least the western world.

The most recent news about these 298 innocent people was that missile that was shown belonged to Ukrainian military. Or is connected to Ukraine at least. There was nothing else heard since.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:46 pm

Tugger wrote:
No, they are not.

Tugg


Did you even read my post? In this context, your opinion on whose the territorial waters are is secondary. What matters - who controls and protects them. It’s Russia - they believe they are theirs, are in control over them and are patrolling them. And yes - they will take steps to protect them if threatened. Like it or not. And hence sending these 25 people to such a “mission” would be just sending them to the ancestors - and this is what’s the most important thing here.
 
Scorpius
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:14 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:00 pm

anrec80 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
No, they are not.

Tugg


Did you even read my post? In this context, your opinion on whose the territorial waters are is secondary. What matters - who controls and protects them. It’s Russia - they believe they are theirs, are in control over them and are patrolling them. And yes - they will take steps to protect them if threatened. Like it or not. And hence sending these 25 people to such a “mission” would be just sending them to the ancestors - and this is what’s the most important thing here.


I am touched by news such as those that are now broadcast: "the Head of the Ministry of defense of Ukraine Stepan Poltorak said that Ukrainian ships, if necessary, will continue to use the Kerch Strait"

But nobody forbade Ukraine to use the Kerch Strait! Russia's position-Ukraine must comply with the rules of passage through the Strait-and all.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:20 pm

Scorpius wrote:
But nobody forbade Ukraine to use the Kerch Strait! Russia's position-Ukraine must comply with the rules of passage through the Strait-and all.


This is exactly the meat of the story - nobody forbids Ukrainian military to sail in Azov sea and use that strait. All they are asked is to obtain a time slot and a pilot, just as any other ship was doing there for decades. Nothing else.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8465
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:39 am

anrec80 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
No, they are not.

Tugg


Did you even read my post? In this context, your opinion on whose the territorial waters are is secondary. What matters - who controls and protects them. It’s Russia - they believe they are theirs, are in control over them and are patrolling them. And yes - they will take steps to protect them if threatened. Like it or not. And hence sending these 25 people to such a “mission” would be just sending them to the ancestors - and this is what’s the most important thing here.

You keep missing the whole problem:

This is Russia's problem.

The Crimean peninsula is Ukraine territory and therefore the coast and waters are also Ukraine not Russian. Whatever Russia may believe or wish does not mean the world is going to react in that manner or accept it. If this leads to war, well I guess I have to repeat myself: That is Russia's problem. And while they will make it everyone elses problem as well, it will remain Russia's problem, even if they start a war over it. And Russia will suffer.

And even though the rest of the world may also suffer, Russia will suffer the most. That is as stupid a plan as I have ever heard. But it may actually come to pass. And I am sad for Russia if that happens as well being sad for the world and the unnecessary loss Russia will impose upon it.

Dumb.

Russia needs to stop or pause or stand down or whatever. And I already had a thread on options Russia could take to not do this. Half a trillion dollars (33,209,500,000,000 rubles) could just possibly work. And would be much cheaper for Russia than any war. And of course as was noted in that thread, it is entirely possible and perhaps probable that the world would not accept that either but I think if Ukraine does then the world will follow.

Russia needs to figure out how to solve the problem. Force won't work. No matter what fantasy some may have that it will.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
GDB
Posts: 13082
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:19 pm

Redd wrote:
Why the should the US get involved? France, the UK and Germany each have a very strong Navy and it would be good to see the EU show some force in protecting Europe instead of relying on the US. If there's one thing we've learned since Trump came to power, that's that we can't rely on the USA for security.

Ukraine is a buffer between the EU and Russia and it would be in the EU's best interest to keep it that way.


Currently, there is a series on Channel 5 in the UK, 'Warship - Life At Sea' which follows a Type 45 Destroyer HMS Duncan, on a long deployment.
In the last one shown on Monday, Duncan and the three other NATO warships it is leading for this stage of the deployment, entered the Black Sea, after one day of a couple of Russian jets over flying them, the next day saw 17 of them, SU-24's and SU-27/30's, buzzing the ships at one time. Over 30 air contacts were recorded overall.
They got so close that Duncan's powerful radar was a threat to the aircraft's systems, they warned the Russian pilots and they did withdraw.
(Did not get a close look at the other NATO ships but one looked to be a Turkish FFG-7 class).

The deployment was a mix of freedom of navigation and responding to requests from Romania, as they are concerned that Russia is trying to turn the Black Sea into a Russian lake.
The Black Sea phase was completed and tomorrow will show where HMS Duncan went next.
(I would love to show footage but on You Tube it all seems to be those robo-voiced fake jobs, rather than from Channel 5 who presumably own the footage).
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:54 pm

Dutchy wrote:
I might shock you to know that I am not a scholar on the Ukranian constitution and may I be so bold to say that neither are you. So I listen to experts and they don't agree on that. So yes, there is room for debate on what to do when a President has fled the country.

The Crimea succession is very clear, unconstitutional because it is not possible to do that unilateral. You cannot talk for all Crimeans and what they were thinking in 2014.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Ukraine
You don't have to be a scholar to interpret this. It is black and white. What you are talking about is the western regime's apologists trying to interpret it to their liking. Just the same as Russian apologists are defending the legality of Crimea's seccesion.
So you either accept one of two options:
1) There is room to interpret the Ukranian constitution and the power change was legal, the seccesion of Crimea is also up for interpretation and was also legal.
or
2) There was a illegal coup that led to the change of power in Ukraine and Crimea secceded from Ukraine illegaly.


Dutchy wrote:
Totally different situations. Kosovo isn't a president for South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Crimea. Crimea is the only part which was annexed by another country. South Ossetia and Abkhazia was a unilateral intervention by the Putin regime, thus Russian aggression. Kosovo wasn't.

Sure it is and sure there are.
That is the precedent that the western regimes have set. South Ossetia and Abkhazia have not ben annexed by anyone and are sovreign states due to the fact that they were artificially made to be a part of Georgia, who on their end tried to throw an ethnic cleansing party back in 1991-1993 and got their asses kicked. It was a frozen conflict since then untill 2008 when Georgia thought themselves to be high and mighty and got their asses handed to them again.
These states will never be a part of Georgia again untill there is a single Ossetian/Abkhazian alive there. Just like Kosovo will never be a part of Serbia unless you kill all the Kosovars.
Absolutely the same situation, just different sides.

Dutchy wrote:
Some framing here. The Assad regime and Russians / Iranians actually focused on all fractions except ISIS, that was left to the international coalition together with the Kurds. Russia didn't fix ISIS. Russia kept the Assad regime from being eliminated, that's it. So that is incorrect from you.

Arab Spring movements showed that it is hard to bring democracy to a country which has never had a democratic tradition. Just like in Russia in the 1990's and Russia isn't a democracy either. But removing harsh dictatorships by their own people is something positive if the aftermath is managed. Tunesia it kind of has worked or atleast is moving in the right direction.

We took care of the threat. The "opposition" that the western regimes were backing were pretty much ISIS with a different name. Your guys were supporting the "good" terrorists while doing a half assed attempt to bomb the "bad" ones. We took care of both and you are welcome by the way for the fact that you don't have to worry about that ISIS issue over in Europe anymore.

Dutchy wrote:

Russia is a regional power and Russians are delusional about being a truly world power. The seat in the United Nations Security Council is a remembrance of the cold war. G7 and Russia weren't invited to join. Russia has some influence with some countries, but not truly on a global scale. Just look at how many countries recognized the annexation of Crimea: Afghanistan, Cuba, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Nicaragua, Sudan, Syria, and Zimbabwe.

Truly global power and influence: America, China and the EU (EU also through its member states, so kind of a special case), that's it. Nobody in its right mind would suggest that current Russia is at par with the influence of China, America or the EU.

Just look at Presiden Putin's schedule and the meetings within the last year. If Russia is not a world power, why does everyone visit? Besides, nobody cares what the E.U. thinks or says outside of the E.U.
The Russian Federation has as much or more of an influence in world politics than the U.S., like it or not. China is getting there, but they are more about pushing their business interests and not about getting into politics.
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
tu204
Posts: 1703
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 pm

Tugger wrote:
anrec80 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
No, they are not.

Tugg


Did you even read my post? In this context, your opinion on whose the territorial waters are is secondary. What matters - who controls and protects them. It’s Russia - they believe they are theirs, are in control over them and are patrolling them. And yes - they will take steps to protect them if threatened. Like it or not. And hence sending these 25 people to such a “mission” would be just sending them to the ancestors - and this is what’s the most important thing here.

You keep missing the whole problem:

This is Russia's problem.

The Crimean peninsula is Ukraine territory and therefore the coast and waters are also Ukraine not Russian. Whatever Russia may believe or wish does not mean the world is going to react in that manner or accept it. If this leads to war, well I guess I have to repeat myself: That is Russia's problem. And while they will make it everyone elses problem as well, it will remain Russia's problem, even if they start a war over it. And Russia will suffer.

And even though the rest of the world may also suffer, Russia will suffer the most. That is as stupid a plan as I have ever heard. But it may actually come to pass. And I am sad for Russia if that happens as well being sad for the world and the unnecessary loss Russia will impose upon it.

Dumb.

Russia needs to stop or pause or stand down or whatever. And I already had a thread on options Russia could take to not do this. Half a trillion dollars (33,209,500,000,000 rubles) could just possibly work. And would be much cheaper for Russia than any war. And of course as was noted in that thread, it is entirely possible and perhaps probable that the world would not accept that either but I think if Ukraine does then the world will follow.

Russia needs to figure out how to solve the problem. Force won't work. No matter what fantasy some may have that it will.

Tugg


He ain't missing much, buddy.

The fact is that Crimea is a part of Russia and that's it. Like it or not.
Believing that the moon is part of Germany/U.S./France won't make it so.
So it is wise to act accordingly, otherwise shit like this will happen.
I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
 
A3801000
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 pm

If you feel you have to convince us how oh so important Russia is maybe Russia isn't that important and mighty at all? Using absurd claims isn't really helping. Face it, Russia has nukes, oil, gas and a large landmass and is known to be a aggressive bully, that's why other countries talk with it. Else? Nope..
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:20 pm

tu204 wrote:
The Russian Federation has as much or more of an influence in world politics than the U.S., like it or not.


According to you, Russia is the most powerful country in the world. No evidence for that, none and a lot of evidence that it is just a regional power. Why, according to you, haven't more countries recognize the annexation of Crimea by Russia? If they had such an influence in the world, you would reckon that at least 75% would have recognized it, only a handful countries have.

You have gone off the deep end, no use to debate with you anymore. No sense of reality, so not going to spend my time on you anymore..
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Tugger
Topic Author
Posts: 8465
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:33 pm

tu204 wrote:
So it is wise to act accordingly, otherwise shit like this will happen.

....aaaand we come back to threats.

Yes I understand exactly what you and others are saying, and I do not accept that the world should accede to such. And if "shit starts" it will be due to Russia and its action and Russia and Russian people will suffer even more. Sadly. As I said this is Russia's problem of it's own making and it should be able to figure its way out of it.

Dumb.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:22 pm

Tugger wrote:
You keep missing the whole problem:

This is Russia's problem.

The Crimean peninsula is Ukraine territory and therefore the coast and waters are also Ukraine not Russian. Whatever Russia may believe or wish does not mean the world is going to react in that manner or accept it. If this leads to war, well I guess I have to repeat myself: That is Russia's problem. And while they will make it everyone elses problem as well, it will remain Russia's problem, even if they start a war over it. And Russia will suffer.

And even though the rest of the world may also suffer, Russia will suffer the most. That is as stupid a plan as I have ever heard. But it may actually come to pass. And I am sad for Russia if that happens as well being sad for the world and the unnecessary loss Russia will impose upon it.

Dumb.

Russia needs to stop or pause or stand down or whatever. And I already had a thread on options Russia could take to not do this. Half a trillion dollars (33,209,500,000,000 rubles) could just possibly work. And would be much cheaper for Russia than any war. And of course as was noted in that thread, it is entirely possible and perhaps probable that the world would not accept that either but I think if Ukraine does then the world will follow.

Russia needs to figure out how to solve the problem. Force won't work. No matter what fantasy some may have that it will.

Tugg


No, it’s you who keeps missing the point. Currently - at the very least Russia regards Crimea and waters around it as their territory. And will act just as any other power protecting its territory. No argument about that, this is actuality. Part of this - any ship in territorial waters that refuses to obey coast guard gets sunk. It’s the case everywhere in the world. Every country is in full right to do exactly that. Whether you believe Crimea is Russian or not, you like it or not - you have to take it into account. Any attempt to act as if it’s not the case - it’s the problem of those who dares to attempt.

In my post, I raised a matter of Ukrainian sailors basically being sent to the bottom of the sea, and by lucky chance they wound up in a Russian jail. It sounded to me that you don’t care about those 25 sailors who have no choice but go wherever they are being sent, you just found an opportunity to create some problems for Russia. Well, this has been the position of the whole West in Ukraine - nobody (including Ukrainian own leadership) cares how many Ukrainians will get sent to the other world, but everyone cares what problems they can create to Russia. What’s for Ukraine in Russia having problems elsewhere? Ukrainians will certainly remember this.

Crimea has gone due to mistakes of Maidan leaders, it’s time to accept and acknowledge that. It cannot be undone.
 
anrec80
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:24 pm

Tugger wrote:
Yes I understand exactly what you and others are saying, and I do not accept that the world should accede to such. And if "shit starts" it will be due to Russia and its action and Russia and Russian people will suffer even more. Sadly. As I said this is Russia's problem of it's own making and it should be able to figure its way out of it.

Dumb.

Tugg


Crimean people and Russia have it figured out already - Crimeans expressed the will to join Russian Federation, and were accepted. This is the reality. It’s the problem of those who organized Kiev Maidan and those who supported it, how to recognize, accept and acknowledge this. Both in Ukraine and the West.
 
A3801000
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: Should US Navy park several ships in Ukraine waters near Kerch Strait ?

Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:30 pm

Considering Russia has zilch to sell but gas and oil the problems with Russia being a bully will be solved sooner or later by itself.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CPH-R, Dutchy, Kno, Richard28, seahawk and 12 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos