War in Ukraine

Thanks for those links.

Interesting. Why didn't anyone post a link to the latter debunking in the Arab Spring thread?

I believe because nobody on the AS thread took Hersh's article seriously enough.

I vaguely recall a longer piece in FP being posted debunking it though.

edited 15th Nov '14 8:06:40 AM by Achaemenid

It's quite obvious that Bellingcat is merely a Western propaganda mouthpiece in a different package.

...Do you mean that sarcastically, or intentionally? Because either way, their research on the issue is pretty solid and lacks any blatant jingoism.

Sarcastically.

There's a reason why they always recommend using smilies or quotation marks whenever on the web, it helps others or those with poor sarcasm detectors know when you're joking or not.

Then again, knowing how this wiki works I suppose Entropy13 could've made the mistake of using double apostrophes instead of the normal quotation marks. Hey, it happens.

edited 15th Nov '14 9:08:21 AM by SgtRicko

In most comments sections of websites/blogs (i.e. they aren't forums), there are no smilies. An example would be SB Nation's sports blogs. There's an informal way of being sarcastic there by using italics (or the "smallfonts" tag) for whole statements. Because italics are normally only used to differentiate a word or a phrase from the rest of the sentence, italicizing sentence(s) to differentiate it fulfills the "sarcastic" tag.

I don't see the point of the sarcasm, considering it seems directed at me despite liking the links...

I'm sure he only meant to anticipate the official Russian position.

Let me add my own thanks to Ach for that "Interpreter" link. There's an article there about a popular Russian insult for Americans that I found fascinating.

edited 15th Nov '14 11:59:52 AM by demarquis

• Complains that posts of that nature in this thread is aimed at him
• Assumes that all posts of that nature in this thread is aimed at him

What.

And yeah I'm just channeling the "official" spirit of Russia. Slightly related, someone in another forum consistently insists that all actions made by Russia (obviously including everything they have done in Ukraine thus far) were merely "reactions" from significant pressure in various forms from the Imperialist, Evil Westerners. Putin was essentially "backed against a wall" so to speak for the last decade or so. Any guesses where he is from? LOL

edited 15th Nov '14 6:48:59 PM by entropy13

And so automatically irrelevant and wrong, yes? From the perspective of the Russians, be they Putinist or liberal or Commie Nazi, that IS the perception the country has of the west, backed up by Western actions since the 90s and 2000s to now. It's WHY Putin remains popular with numbers Obama or anyone else in the west could only dream of (as opposed to them somehow being dumber or Dismissing it off like a joke is exactly why they're reacting like this now. We've had liberal Russians on this thread before, horrified by whats happened, and even they think the West needs to cool it with the villainization.

And your sarcasm has been directed at me before. So stuff it with your flat whats, misplaced hostility and all the rest and be civil.

Poroshenko: Ukraine rebel areas to lose state services"

"Ukraine's president has ordered the withdrawal of all state services, including funding for hospitals and schools, from rebel-held areas.

Petro Poroshenko issued a decree that also asks parliament to revoke a law granting self-rule to the Donetsk and Luhansk regions."

Not unexpected at this juncture, but it does beg the question of something that's been on my mind. Where are the separatist regions going to get any sort of funding from? Russia doesn't have the cash to waste at this point for an area that doesn't even officially belong to it (beyond some cursory PR propping up I suppose, but I always thought a big part of the reason Russia hasn't outright annexed the LPR/DPR was so they wouldn't have to pay for anything). It's not like people are going to be tripping over themselves to flow money into such a volatile (militarily and politically) region. Even people sympathetic to the LPR/DPR are going to want to invest their money sensibly. They've started taxing and registering businesses, but there needs to be much more money coming in than the people of Donbass can provide.

edited 16th Nov '14 12:54:31 AM by fairywine

Rundown of the various republics and their leaders for those of you confused.

It's a question everybody in Ukraine is asking.

@Shinra chill out man, you angrily ordering people to stop being hostile isn't going to help.

Now might I calmly request that everyone calm down a bit, both in not making personal attacks and not automatically assuming that general statements are attacks on you. This is a general request for everyone, so please don't take it as a on attack on you.

Black market. Ironically with Kiev itself. There was a deal some time ago about Kiev buying coal from South Africa to supplant the Donbass supply (which, in turn, they needed to supplant Russian gas in the short term). But for a variety of reasons, that has since fallen through. Even with marked up prices, Donbass coal is Kiev's best (under the table) option versus Russian gas or a non-Ukrainian coal source.

That said, the economy issue could actually become a factor in hostilities ratcheting up further than it has already in an effort to move the frontline away from production centers under the rebels control or to seize production centers (like Mariupol) under Kiev's control. Maybe even moving beyond Donbass proper.

Takes two to tango, Silas. I'll abide if others do as well.

edited 16th Nov '14 5:53:07 AM by FFShinra

Except that the Ukrainian society is watching this space closely, and any kind of under-the-table deal with Donetsk will add to Poroshenko's and Yatsenyuk's growing unpopularity. It won't push them over the edge, but patience is running thin (especially with the mess of the parliamentary majority coalition which still hasn't been decided due to Poroshenko only accepting terms that would give him a lot of power and control over the Rada).

An order to implement a complete ceasefire in an hour has been given by the Ukrainian commandment.

Pragmatism will force them to do it, even if it hurts them in public opinion. They don't have the money to afford anything else.

And I thought Yats was the golden boy?

Nope. Yatsenyuk is seen as Not So Different with Poroshenko. The reason he's popular is that he's seen as a counter-weight to Poroshenko's attempts to gather as much power in his hands as possible. In other words - Yatsenyuk is good while he hasn't got that much power.

Also, pragmatism is successful when you actually explain it to the people. Which neither Poroshenko nor Yatsenyuk have bothered to do (one of Poroshenko's biggest vices so far is his steadfast refusal to communicate with people openly or explain his strategies. He has only released a few video speeches where he speaks very abstractly.). People tend to think the worst when they don't know.

pragmatism is successful when it has the intended effect. In this case, reducing the heating bill/dependency on Russia.

That said, I agree that not explaining things to the people is bad. Though is it because they feel the people won't let them be pragmatic or is it more nefarious?

Also, if things get bad enough, do the people intend to ovethrow Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk and if so, who do they replace them with?

The lack of alternatives is what's keeping them in power. If the worst comes to the worst (unlikely), I think either Sadovyi or Lyashko are next in line, depending on the mood of the nation.

Some of the decisions to keep quiet are because people wouldn't let them be pragmatic, but others are just... mysterious. Why the promise to "return Donbass" without outlining any clear strategy on HOW to get it back? It cannot even be chalked up to populism, because if people believe that and then see no clear results, they become even more disillusioned and mistrustful. And so on. When Poroshenko does speak, he speaks of vague, broad ideas ("we'll get Donbass back" "we'll improve the economy") without ever speaking about anything concrete. And so everyone has no idea on what Poroshenko's plan truly is.

And SUDDENLY! a video surfaces, purportedly showing the first minutes after the crash of MH17.

edited 16th Nov '14 10:15:15 AM by emuran

Why the promise to "return Donbass" without outlining any clear strategy on HOW to get it back? It cannot even be chalked up to populism, because if people believe that and then see no clear results, they become even more disillusioned and mistrustful.

Huh? People promise things they can't keep all the time.

Poroshenko doesn't exactly have the opportunity to do things like that. He's walking the ragged edge of disaster. Especially if he wants to stay in power, which seems to be his primary goal.

Eh, if power as president doesn't mean anything or is reduced to nothing (aka, if the situation becomes hopeless) I think he'd rather have the money and just flee.

Looking at the recent election data though, I'm not sure if the part of the south still loyal to Kiev would accept someone from Lviv or Cherniy...

That's a curious way to spell Lwów and Czernihów...

edited 16th Nov '14 12:41:13 PM by Achaemenid