Huge pro-EU rally grips Ukraine

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Ukraine is a critical interest of Russia. Pressuring Russia to abandon it using economical measures would not help, it only shows hostile intent, which pressures Russian authorities to take more extreme measures to secure Russian critical national interests.

As to the USSR - the "defensive" posture has been taken in 1988. Previously (70s-80s) USSR was looking into the preemtive attacks, as to avoid the 1941 like disaster. This is why Soviets (pre 1988) were for example expanding their tank divisions into corps, to act as OMGs for the Army level formations.

The Sovjets learned against the Wehrmacht that they were only winning battles when they were attacking and took the offensive. When they defended, they got mauled. And that was what happened time and again especially in the first half of the war. This explains the later offensive doctrine after WWII: defending by attacking first, so to speak.

On sanctions, Russia already is looking for how to replace the food import that broke away after it banned many of them in retaliation against EU exporters. Brasil stands on guard, Faroer Islands (fish), Turkey (while the Greek were locke dout by the Kremlin), and some others, but also dubious allies like China and Belarus. This so far is hushed and done in a hurry, and will take time to be tuned into better efficiency. However, the longer the sanction regime is in place and retaliation will be in place as well, the more the statuzs shifts from contemprtaqry deals and impovised trade relations into stabile, fully suppported trade relations - and once the latter is established Russia will see little reasoin to give them up again at a later time to move back to an older trading with Western suppliers. Why should it want that then? The Wetsenr attempt of fiscal retaliatioin by targetting the money sector and the banks, also most likely will backfire. while foreiogn investors may flee and their money with them,. this will only increase the ambition by Krenmlin to topple the dollar regime in the Eastern part of the world. Diufferent to China Russia has diversified its reserves much more than China that is holding trillions in toxic US state bonds - and that cost China extreely high losses when the dollar weakens. China has beocme aware of that problem and tries to get away from that by buying old like crazy. So does Russia since 2007 at the latest, having doubled its gold reserves since 2007, and having added additonal 10% of its volume in the first 6-7 months of this year, and still buying.

I think this confrontation now more or less directly will formally introduce the opening of the big currency world war that is about to begin. As a matter of fact it already has begun many years ago, but it will win in pace and drive due to the Ukraine war. As long as the Western governments remain successful in manipulating the gold price (ironically probably in cooperation whith Gold-buying China and Russia) to keep it low and the public unalarmed about the state of things, the public in the West will not really care. But the Euro will break Europe's neck, and the dollar has lasted for the longest time for sure. What will come after the Euro, is uncertain, most likely a return to national paper (credit) currencies, and the dollar: most likely also already sees stockpiled new dollarnotes secretly hidden away in some hidden location in the US, a Dollar II, so to speak. So in the West, after the current papermoney probably another papermoney will be enforced on the people. Whether China and Russia will follow that and would accept these new currencies - is a completey different question. I say they will not.

Regarding the currencies, those people indeed are right who claim that world war three already is raging.

[MH]

A fragmentation warhead is not to be compared like a shotgun filled with 20 tiny bullets of the same size, but the fragmentation pattern and size of fragmentation cannot be predicted, like in an exploding handgrenaded. At best you have assembled it such a way that there are wanted rated break points, but even then you have a random generation of unpredictability to which degree each fragment follows that wanted breaking line, or is shorter or larger.

Fragmentation warheads explode in quite predictable pattern.
In particular in anti aircraft missiles...a lot of rocket science goes into that to make those weapons effective at intercepting warplanes .
We have seen some little bits a pieces.

A radar guided missile fired at airplane on relatively constant course would lead it by design and possibly explode in the front - which is also ideal by design.
Un aware passenger jet is ideal target.
from what I seen on some reconstruction pictures most of the damage is under on lower side of the jet and also wing , it makes sense.
Now ..you have the airplane disintegrating , sheet metal tearing , bits and pieces turning into splinters and all this eventually impacting the ground.
You not necessarily need see exit hole from exploding shells unless you really have to.

This two plane theory about and exit holes next to entry ones ...was the plane shot down by blue angels?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

This two plane theory about and exit holes next to entry ones ...was the plane shot down by blue angels?

No, but an Su-25 that was confirmed to be extremely close to it, with originally another flight apparently underway and maybe also close to it, too. And regarding the technical specs that plane type matches the scenario. It could fly that high, and it has the armament as suggested in the theory.

Read that original text that I linked too for yourself, I just have re-linked it again, haven't I. Not mine, but that pilot's report, and also the OSCE-observer in that video who was on location and commented on what his team by then was able to see (holes from what the man called "very very heavy machine gun fire") - and what not (indices pointing at a SAM hit). And when you're at it, read the doubt voiced by the Malaysians, and then the American intelligence officers as well who have fired questions at their own US government over its poor handling of the issue of evidences Washington claimed to have - two more links I have just provided once again above. Why is it that in this time when the West takes any ammo it gets to fire it against Russia in the ongoing propaganda battle, why is it that the West and namely Washington has become so completely silent about the whole story? Any guesses? Summer holidays, maybe? Power blackpout in the white house?

The preliminary report is ready since a longer time, several countries already have it, the Netherlands, Malaysia, the US, maybe more. And they hold it back since weeks. Why? Keep the assumptions simple, use Occam's razor: their findings are not what they hoped they would find, but what they actually found they do not want to be known. Easiest explanation there is. They need time to write a report that they can give to the public without standing on stage with lowered trousers.

Anyhow, as I said already when I posted that pilot'S piece for the first time: I do not say it was like that. All I say is, it is the one theory with by far the best explanation model for all info that was avialable to the global public, and that it now needs and deserve further verification or falsification effort. The governments and their depending services are not trustworthy to do that. Just saying "it was a SAM, they are all wrong", is not working on this, for such a simplistic attempt the theory is far too strongly founded and supported by several people whose expertise cannot just be cleaned off the table.

I also remind of that obviously previously available photographic evidence has been cleaned off the web, and that technical info on the SU-25 after the incident all of a sudden got forged in several public sources and replaced with wrong technical data (to rule out any participation of one or more SU-25s), and that one radar operator has suddenly gone amiss, and that several radar recordings by the Ukraine that put the official explanation of a SAM into doubt, all of a sudden have disappeared.

That are far too many opportunistic coincidences for my taste as if I buy "random chance" as an explanation.

[ikalugin]

So, what happened to those mech corps in 1941? Basically not only you mix up strategic and operational levels here, but also completely misunderstood the whole point I was making. Which was that on strategic level, due to the "1941 Barbarossa" syndrome Soviet leadership had, Soviets would pre empt an agression against the Soviet Union or it's allies.

Post 1988 this changed to a strategic "defensive" stance, which lead to changes in OOBs (of individual units and formations) and the Group of Forces (various) composition/deployement, as well as a number of other things.

Sorry for the offtopic.

[MH]

I have red some of the links.

Keep the assumptions simple, use Occam's razor: their findings are not what they hoped they would find, but what they actually found they do not want to be known. Easiest explanation there is.

... or maybe they don't want to add fuel to the fire .. keeping the report currently under the wraps makes it easer to reach some reasonable solutions without any side getting too much demonized or media having a lynch feast.
That is if the report is really ready with all the factual evidence.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

... or maybe they don't want to add fuel to the fire .. keeping the report currently under the wraps makes it easer to reach some reasonable solutions without any side getting too much demonized or media having a lynch feast.

That'S why the media stirr the propaganda war whereever they can, American senators demand weapons being immediately delivered, Easteuropean NATO members demand NATO intervention, five new NATO bases get build in the East, Russia gets compared to Nazi Germany - its all about avoiding to add fuel to the fire.

That is if the report is really ready with all the factual evidence.

Sure, they were just fantasizing its completion, and the Malaysians got intentionally misinformed about it, too.

Weaselweasel drives a Diesel always turning in circles...

[Sbygneus]

Why Russia is doing what it is doing in Ukraine? Because democratic Ukraine in EU is a threat to their Empire feelings, Democracy could possible radiate into Russia and it would be a problem for Russian non Democratic Government.

Some Russia lovers would claim Russia to be good civilised democratic country with free media etc. Just ask yourself: why Russian rich people don't keep money in Russian banks but in the West? How many Westerners would like to live in Russia? And how many Russians live in the West?
And why so many Russians live in the West? Because its evil? No , because it is civilisation and democracy.

whoever thinks different is either drunk or Russian

Russian rulers never gave up power. They will rather kill you and themselves at the funeral pyre then let you win.

I am mostly dissapointed with most of Russian inteligence who backs up Putin policy. I thought there were Russians who wish to develope democracy. Now I got a feeling they dont want any democracy. Instead they wish others to be affraid of Russia.

But they are not scary. Just pathetic thieves who stole Crimea.
But let me tell you something dear Russians: despite your military might you lost the hearts of Ukrainians and will possibly never get them back.
you are just to rude for this, and you cant do it with tanks.

[ikalugin]

Do you actually have anything to contribute?

[Jimbuna]

I believe they have contributed an opinion/viewpoint...one no worse than others already posted in this thread.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Do you actually have anything to contribute?

As it's been said here and there, the West now crippling under its debt is doing everything it's able to create a new cold war, and the media in all the West is doing its best to make its citizen feel Putin is just wrong, of course. No need to worry too much.

Other than that, this one from the good Paul Craig Roberts is worth checking, as well as this one . Not to forget Mr Cunningham too who's making more sense than the fossilized anti-russian propaganda a few in the West don't even notice they swallow without wondering if they do right.

Also, one must not confuse the Europeans we are , and the European Union.
The European Union was created by the United States of America, so of course the EU works very well, since it made the US of A able to force European countries to take decisions going against their self-interest (either for armaments - crucial for France - or in the oil and gas sector, crucial for all European major oil companies, or banking of course) and the ones of business communities. Is there any interest in exchanging sanctions between European nations and Russia, like is there any entity other than the US of A that's going to take advantage of that ? No, something that needs to be understood is that impoverishing Russia is just extremely harmful to European nations, since they just require Russia to be rich so that Russia is able to purchase their manufactured goods - specifically Germany, France and Italy - and it would definitely be counterproductive for them to fall in that bloody US trap aiming to both weaken the EU and Russia - particularly when it comes to the Mistral class (amphibious assault ships) purchased from France by Rosoboronexport. France is now supposed to decline to sell them just because "the US of A are concerned about that". These days France needs to be withdrawn from NATO command once again - De Gaulle did that in his day -, since the US's goal in that is to 1. prevent Russia from getting those projection ships (while this country has already been building and so already owns many ships of this kind ), and 2. to destroy the french military-industrial complex .

But well, getting back to Ukraine now, these days, who's taking decisions following that mess... It's always better when .
Thank you, Mr Rodney Martin.

[Buddahaid]

Sorry, I don't buy it that that US forced the EU into existence. If you don't like the EU you have only the leaders of those nations and the people who backed them to blame.

[ikalugin]

I think the story here is simpler and more complex at the same time.

When the cold war has ended the West has assumed that:
- the looser would behave as a looser should (as it was assumed that "Russia" lost the cold war).
- that Russia would soon follow the Western rules of the game and would be succeptable to the Western mentality.
- would quitely grow and would never fully recover.

This is not what happened. The reasons for this are many, the obvious ones are that Russia has viewed the results of the cold war differently and that Russia has a very different, eastern christian mentality/cultural heritage. If you are interested in further reading you can use this article:
http://pozneronline.ru/2014/03/7200/
It is writen by an independent journalist and was originally published in the opposition's media outlet (the Echo of Moscow radiostation).

[Buddahaid]

Are you saying that the differences go all the way back to the fall of the Roman Empire and following split of the Christian Church?

[Oberon]

You know that's probably not that far off, in fact it probably goes back more to the dying days of the Empire when it split into Eastern and Western sections with the Orthodox Church in what became the Byzantine Empire, and the Catholic Church in the Eastern Roman Empire which then fell into ruins.
Of course, the Byzantine Empire being kicked over by the Islamic hordes (tm) meant that Orthodoxism went north into the Rusland which was more pagan at that time IIRC.

Bear in mind I'm taking a lot of this from Crusader Kings II so I'm not exactly a professor on the subject.

The thing is Russia has a mentality that the west will never understand, it's not quite European, it's not quite Asian, it's a place all of its own, and as such will not behave in a manner we expect it to, unfortunately we westerners have made that mistake many times and tried to apply our cultural standards to Russia and been disappointed when they've not stuck. Obviously some things have taken, but some things have not or they have been modified to suit Russia.
Either which way, even though they may not have the same mind-set as us, they are not suicidal (unless the existence of their nation is at stake then watch out!) and will not want to get themselves into a position where war with NATO is inevitable, at the moment there is still quite a bit of leeway to wiggle around in, so both sides are going to take full advantage of that.

[ikalugin]

I don't think that NATO would escalate the conflict by participating in it openly.