Ukraine protests: Thousands march through capital
- over 100,000 by some counts
Ukrainian protesters besiege government building
Clashes amid huge Ukraine protest against U-turn on EU
Over 300,000 defy protest ban in Ukraine- "Fierce clashes erupt after protesters take to streets again, chanting "revolution" as anger against government grows."
What started as a protest against the decision not to sign an agreement with the EU seems to have escalated into a "Color Revolution" or "Arab Spring" style movement to force the government to resign. By some reports, the police are using violent tactics to suppress the street protests.
The Western half of the Ukraine has historically felt closer to Europe , and wants to move Ukrainian society in that direction. Eastern Ukraine feels culturally closer to Russia, and favors closer relations with that country. The current regime of President Viktor Yanukovich is part of that camp. The current confrontations can be seen as a clash between these two halves of Ukrainian society.
EDIT (2/24/2022)
This thread was originally opened in 2013 during the beginning of the revolt in Ukraine that eventually over-threw the dictatorship of the Yanukovyich regime and instituted democratic elections soon afterward. As of this writing, in the aftermath of the Russian invasion that began on 2/23, it is not clear whether or for how long Ukraine will continue to exist as an independent country.
Statements made nine years ago still seem relevant: "The Western half of the Ukraine has historically felt closer to Europe , and wants to move Ukrainian society in that direction. Eastern Ukraine feels culturally closer to Russia, and favors closer relations with that country... The current confrontations can be seen as a clash between these two halves of Ukrainian society." Some people have expressed the view that the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, beginning in 2014, never really ended.
The invasion is also a result of certain grievances proclaimed by Vladimir Putin, the current President of Russia, and used by him as justification for armed attack and occupation. Western governments, and others around the world, have joined together in condemnation of this attack.
While we do not know what the ultimate outcome of these events will be, this thread will continue to be made available as a place to record news, ask questions and express opinions about the "Crisis in Ukraine."
This map will help track the latest developments.
Do not post anything about the Ukrainian military movement and strategy. This could actually result in casualties.
No discussion regarding nuclear war. As nuclear weapons are not being used by either side, nuclear war is off-topic.
When posting social media links, please (1) state the source [e.g. Reuters reporter? State-sponsored Facebook account? Civilian Twitter?] (2) clarify if it is fact or opinion and (3) summarize the information being presented.
Edited by Tabs on Mar 20th 2022 at 4:26:26 AM
Beware the Crazy Man.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Better put than I.
Heh. Though I wonder what weapon one uses to counter anti-tank missile crews...
Generally? The tanks themselves and infantry protecting the tanks. Lone tanks parked in a visible position without support, are a common sight with groups who don't know how to use them.
edited 23rd Dec '17 11:25:51 PM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
Infantry or a lot of artillery. Which incidentally the rebels have quite a bit of supporting them.
Bellingcat has made an interactive map of shelling during the summer of 2014
Yeah, I was thinking artillery supported by drones for finding targets..
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
A procrastination in of itself
Shinra’s point was that the anti-tank weapons aren’t going to calm things down, they will be responded to with anti-anti-tank weapons from Russia and the only thing will change is that the Russian and American governments will have spent money helping cause more dead Ukrainians.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
The law in the night
Well, they aren't supposed to calm things down. They are supposed to give the Ukrainians something to effectively deal with all those totally not Russian T-72Bs that are mysteriously vanishing from Russian army depots and showing up on the separatist hands.
Inter arma enim silent leges
A procrastination in of itself
Except they won’t do that, because the Russians have more tanks they can send and have no issue doing so, so either the battleliens stay the same or the Russians get pissy enough to spend so many tanks that the Ukrainians loose ground.
What they’re meant to do is distract from the fact that the Republican Party has basically become a stooge group for Putin, which I must say they’re doing a fantastical job at.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare
IIRC, NATO has been supplying the Ukrainians since the beginnings of the conflict using its Eastern European members (e.g Poland and Lithuania) as fronts. It's only now the US has decided to openly get involved diplomatically.
edited 24th Dec '17 9:18:01 AM by Fourthspartan56
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
NATO and the EU have also been openly supplying Kiev with non-lethal support since almost the beginning of this crisis.
I honestly don't see this is a huge escalation.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
A procrastination in of itself
Thing is Russia won’t be the only one bleeding, so will the Ukrainians and so will the peace in Eastern Europe, I don’t want peace in Eastern Europe to die.
Again it’s not realy hurting Russian influence, it’s pushing Russian to retaliatory escalation, but there’s a difference between that and hurting Russia.
And while Muller hasn’t been fired let’s not pretend that Republicans aren’t using stuff like this to look tough on Russia while they try and discredit Muller and ignore Trump’s obvious collusion.
It’s not a huge escalation, it’s a pretty small one to be honest, but small escalations begat other small escalations, combined they eventually form a combined larger escalation.
edited 24th Dec '17 10:49:28 AM by Silasw
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
A procrastination in of itself
The peace has a lot more life in it than you seem to realise, right now it’s a small scale conflict where Russia is mainly using proxies in one region and the conflict has stalled, enough pushing and we could have Russian tanks in Kiev.
Also sure the majority of the blame falls on the Russian government (well first the groups that turned to violence to further separatist aims, then the Russian government), but that’s osnt mean there isn’t contributatiry blame to go around as well.
There’s always enough blame to go around for everyone to get a slice.
edited 24th Dec '17 10:52:53 AM by Silasw
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
edited 24th Dec '17 10:57:33 AM by Fourthspartan56
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
A procrastination in of itself
I like to hold the US to higher moral and ethical standards than those which the Russian government continuously drop to.
Putting aside the ethics of it for a second, do you get the practical point I’m making, that this move is going to escalate the conflict further, and no it’s not going to lead instantly to a direct Russian invasion, but it can be a stone in that path.
The responding escalation could be more Russian tanks, that’s responded to with US troops doing some anti-tank training exercises in Poland that Ukrainian troops observe, Russia reacts by sending more Russian troops to train tank crews, the Ukrainian government responded to the increase in armour with increased artillery presence, this leads to Russian ‘volunteer’ pillows getting involved, the Ukrainian government starts utilising anti-air against said pilots, the Russians have their own anti-air crews train the pillows at how to avoid the Ukrainian anti-air (that’s Russian made), the Ukrainians escalate by purchasing some old NATO anti-air that the Russian ‘volunteers’ aren’t trained at avoiding, the Russians escalate with an increase air presence that becomes more open, Ukraine responds by borrowing some more modern NATO anti-air equipment from Poland, the Russian government sees all the NATO equipment coming across from Poland and ‘suddenly’ the anti-Kiev rebels have a presence out west, the Ukrainian government deploys soilders there to deal with said rebels, the Russian government then starts arming them up more.
The cycle can keep escelating bit by bit, tiny things build upon each other, each reaction is in a vacuum totally reasonable and appropriate, but the reasonable reaction to escalation number 6 ended up being wildly disproportional for the initial offence that started it, that’s how you go from escalation 507 (Russian tanks wondering across the border) to escalation 6824 (Russian peacekeepers entering Kiev because of a breakdown of law and order after food riots bought about due to armed conflict in the countryside).
Part of being a big boy on the world stage is looking and more than the moral conquences of a action in a vacuum, one also has to look at the moral implimaction of an action when set against others actions that it may cause, dominoes that it may knock over.
edited 24th Dec '17 12:43:26 PM by Silasw
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
Will it possibly lead to escalation? Maybe, but the fundamental facts that make war so unlikely mean that we gain more from this action then we lose (at-least in my view).
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
Is it still trench warfare and low-intensity firefights at the moment?
Trench warfare with low intensity firefights and the occasional high intensity artillery barrage.
Nobody is going for a breakthrough. Yet.
edited 24th Dec '17 1:04:00 PM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
A procrastination in of itself
That comes down to how you define helping, the US certainly isn’t helping restore peace or end the civil war with this move, it’s giving the Ukrainian government a thing it asked for, that’s not inherently the same as helping the Ukrainian people.
Is helping about making things better (which this doesn’t do), or giving a group what they want (which this is going)?
For me you’re not helping unless you’re making things better, you’re not doing the moral thing if your actions make things worse than if you took no action.
That’s what morality comes down to for me, likely outcomes, and the likely outcome of this move is a net negative.
You are however totally right that the US gains more from this than by doing nothing, but the US’s strategic interests do not always align with European peace or the security of the Ukrainian people, both of which matter more to me than US interests.
edited 24th Dec '17 1:08:13 PM by Silasw
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
Then it may be best if we agree to disagree, because from my perspective help is not a binary between 'solve all your problems' or 'do nothing', it's a question of degrees and giving them weapons is a form of help that I see absolutely nothing wrong with.
A procrastination in of itself
Are you reading my posts properly? I never said solve everything, I said make a net positive impact, sometimes that means ensuring that things only get slightly worse instead of dramatically worse (see Libya).
I can’t realy respond to the rest of your post, as you seem to have fundamentally misunderstood my position.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
No I understand your position, I just view supplying them with weapons as a likely net-positive impact.
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
A procrastination in of itself
Than say that instead of pretending I’m asking for some perfect solution fix.
We can disagree on if one action is a net positive or net negative without you strawmanning me.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
Yes, but now they'll be smouldering tanks! Makes for a change.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele