ukle posted:

Yeah past 69 now. Seems like a full blown capital flight is on, Russia could collapse within weeks given how bad this is going.

Cingulate posted:

Has the West left any exit strategy for Putin, or for some way for Russian who are not Putin to use the situation to turn things around?
Just putting economic pressure on Russia seems to have resulted in a desolate situation, but surely the plan wasn't simply to make Russian people suffer and hope that this magically makes things better.

Cingulate posted:

Russia is a place. It doesn't do things. Maybe it's a nation, but nations don't really do things unless you're on a really abstract scale. People do things. For example, Russian people stand in long lines trying to buy things while their currency is dying, and Putting signs things, or maybe he doesn't sign things.
This isn't just semantics.
Yes, but is there any way for Putin to do that? The order to back out of the Crimea won't be signed by the personalised collective suffering of the Russian people, but by some dude, and that dude probably needs an incentive to do that - it needs to seem like be the better option to him. Did the West plan for a situation to arise where it would seem like the better option to the person in charge of signing the order?

Cingulate posted:

That's a direct, and depressing, answer to my question.

Cingulate posted:

I guess so, but isn't that a different issue from getting Putin to stop the occupation of the Ukraine, which the Ukraine probably also needs?

quote:

Those who called it "the Ukraine" in English must have known that the word meant "borderland", says Anatoly Liberman, a professor at the University of Minnesota with a specialism in etymology. So they referred to it as "the borderland".

Lucy Heartfilia posted:

Putin is officially in Ukraine until the occupation of Crimea is ended.

Jaramin posted:

Like this?

Mightypeon posted:

Mightypeon posted:

You are right, those squads partly (imho, and I explicitly called them "not quite death squads") sent themselfs.
IIRC Ruban also said/implied that such squads were active at the beginning, and that the opposition and the Ukrainian regular military cooperated against them. Strelkov implied that too, as was actually proud to have brought this cooperation to an end.
There is also the thing on how you rate Kolomoisky (who was in fact using incredibly heavy handed tactics from the getgo), how you rate his association with such squads (which exists, but the details and the timing are up to dispute) and how you rate his degree of allegiance to the authorities in Kyiv (I would wager that he doesnt know himself and changes his mind every 2 hours or so).
To the opposition, Kolomoisky is very much the face wearing the jackboot stomping on their faces forever, and their view on that certainly matters. There is also a notable up and down regarding representatives of such squads in Kyiv and Dnipro leadership. And this is really complex, on one hand, Sasha Belyi gets executed by Kyiv without a trial in a totally transparent open and blatant assasination (not that I would shed any tears for him), on the other the hand the vice commander of Azov Batallion becomes head of the Kyiv police. This is not a clear picture, and the opposition naturally assumes the very worst.
One could interpret the formation of a national guard as an attempt to reign those squads in by Kyiv (which I think was what the Kyiv leadership planned to do with that formation). But it was seen by the opposition as outfitting these squads with heavy weaponry and thus further escalated resistance and mutual slaughter.

E: some additions

Mightypeon posted:

Sasha Belyi (White Sasha) was this guy:
http://www.unian.info/politics/910242-sasha-belyi-shot-himself-from-gun-deputy-prosecutor-general.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleksandr_Muzychko
He was a Chechen War veteran (on the side of the Chechens), who got a reputation for unusual amounts of cruelty and hatred of Russia. (That is saying something among Chechens). He was then the boss of Right Sector in Western Ukraine.
Also had a reputation as a loose cannon, and there was a video that shows him enjoying some pretty masochist stuff somewhere.
The guy was dangerous, and got put down by Arsen Avakov aligned forces.
According to the official report, he shot himself by accident, apperantly after handcuffing himself and then removing his bullet proof west.
This was a powerplay "We loving murdered that guy Right Sector, now do somethign about it!"
As a result of this, Right Sector marched on Kiev, demanded Avakovs resignation and quite interestingly nothing happened. I think Avakov is remembering this exploit if he cant sleep at night. Avakovs actions could be seen as a concession/insurance to the opposition, but as far as I know nothing came out of it. Russian propaganda was too intent on throwing dirt on anything in Kyiv, which propably contributed to nothing coming out on it.

Kolomoisky
is a lot more important:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ihor_Kolomoyskyi
He is a major mover and shaker, and an important Oligarch.
He is seen as highly competent, utterly ruthless and unusually bloody even for Ukrainian/Post Soviet Oligarch standarts (there are/were 2 or 3 Oligarchs in Russia who are even more hardcore), .
Compared to Poroshenko, Kolomoisky is characterized by having his assets in a dense concentration. This gives him a lot of political power there, but also makes him vulnerable since, geographically, all his eggs are in one basket.
Poroshenkos assets are comparably wide spread, since he, in his pre presidential history, never had the local crushing superiority that Koloimoisky often enjoyed in Dnipro, Poroshenko was usually characterized as far more diplomatic then Kolomoisky. As older Russian Propaganda (someone we can shake hands with), Poroshenkos own Propaganda (I am the peacebringer!) and iirc also Kolomoiskys Propganda (Poroshenko is a Weakling!) agreed on that. 2014 caused a drastic redistribution of power within the Oligarchiate, and old impressions/stereotypes may no longer be valid.
What set Kolomoisky apart from also regionally concentrated Rinat Akhmetov is that Kolomoisky often relies on surprise, and on several occassions simply seized stuff without even bothering to make "an offer you cant refuse" previously (getting such an offer can give the victim time to organize resistance). In those terms, only the son of Yanukovich came close (I think he was aware that Daddys time in supreme power was limited, and that Russia was not very keen on dealing with him, so he ruthlessly and recklessly tried to make hay while the sun shone), but Kolomoisky had a well deserved reputation for being really dangerous. Note that all Oligarchs have propaganda, and all oligarchs choose to shape the way in which they are presented. There are some indications that Kolomoisky liked having that reputation, and thus increased it further. If he was a CK 2 character, Midas touched, pretty good stats, cruel, greedy, patient, diligent and highly ambitious.
He did crush opposition sentiment in Dnipro and surrounding, made a literal killing in monetary terms out of the war so far but his own ambitions make him a pretty uneasy subordinate for Poroshenko. Thankfully for Poroshenko, the opposition hates Kolomoisky (one should add that Right Sector moved its base to Dnipro after Kolomoisky took full power there) more than they do anyone else in Ukraine, which means that Kolomoisky cannot focus on either Donbass or on Kyiv, and also has to worry about becoming the scapegoat for everything shoudl Kyiv secretly strike a deal with Moscow.

Some actors in Russia believe that Kolomoisky could have been enticed to switch sides prior to the Crisis, but I disagree there. The man is too ambitious and too competent to play second fiddle to anyone. Also, his demands for switching sides pre Crisis would have been such that Russian Oligarch would get ideas, making a deal with him not very palatable for Putins faction within the high state.

Cuntpunch posted:

Also to those who missed it - Mightypeon's claim about Russian troops in Ukraine is largely "they weren't there but the West acted like they were so there was no loss to doing so."

Clearly every falsely imprisoned person in the world(of which Russia has many) should just go ahead and commit the crimes they were accused of. I mean it only stands to reason.

Ardennes posted:

To be clear might have been some local rumbling in Eastern Ukraine, but I think the ring leaders in the beginning were almost entirely Russian citizens. State support for them is always debatable in the beginning but by the time heavier weapons started showing up, it was far more clear the Russian state had to be involved.

Panas posted:

Nationalism is the best.

The Russians are well acquainted with fighting guerrilla movements. When big countries invade small countries it's game over. Don't play up this heroic defense bullshit.

El Perkele posted:

If you are from a nation neighbouring Russia, especially one that has suffered ethnic cleansing under their rule, then he is truly infuriating.

El Perkele posted:

I like to reas discussion of Russia. I like to read what Russian leadership does, how they react, their ideology etc.

What I get bored of is the endless apologetic barrage of lazy you too arguments. Mightypeon's only argument is basically "bbbut the West", and he has been nothing but vague of just what "the West" actually is. Is Lithuania responsible for France's adventures in Africa? If not, then just how is it relevant and just not a bad deflection tactic? What is the Western media? Is he seriously saying that spheres of influence are good now, because they were bad in the past? It sure looks that way when you get past his word salad. He's been pulling the same line for hundreds of posts. But he is not unique, which is also important to remember.

Although at times his posts have insight and are relevant, you have to understand that there are literally thousands of his kind everywhere in Eastern European discussions; what little novelty he has here is simply because this board is isolated from the larger metadiscussion of Russian-EU relations. Only rarely are they actually useful to assess Russian politics; more often they are useful in assessing where Russian propaganda is going at some moment - not a very fruitful endeavour in the longer run.

I can read Russian apologists every day in the headlines of major newspapers and online comment sections. All of them are the same - russia is justified in annexing Crimea and assisting separatists that shoot down airliners, because in 1980 someone somewhere something. It works as an obfuscation, but is in no way informative of what the Russian grand strategy even is - around the kernel of truth of hurt pride of a world power is woven an impenetrable network of bad propaganda. Disseminating the same propaganda over and over again is not enlightening or civilizing, but a bored regurgiation of something that, IMHO, is not very inducing to understand what the Russia as a state aims for. When someone in what Russia considers their spehre of influence states "gently caress this", MP and his ilk are quick to state that actually no it's good because Grenada, Kosovo or whatever.

And the fact that MP ran away from the nation he now so cheerleads for leads me to disregard him as just another completely ignorant coward, cheering for death and suffering while never facing the consequences and acting all chauvinistic towards those who potentially have something to lose. The comparison to neocons of early 2000s is apt, even though neocons were even more detached from reality.

my dad posted:

So, does anyone have any info about the stuff going on in Ukraine right now? I mean, the past few weeks were mostly spent talking about stuff that isn't Ukraine, and complaining about talking about stuff that isn't Ukraine. Anything new happening?

Three Olives posted:

http://news.yahoo.com/dollar-mortga...zk4XzEEc2VjA3Nj

So Russians have mortgages denominated in USD because Jesus Christ why?

Three Olives posted:

I could kind of understand that if you were say taking a loan out in another third tier currency but betting that your currency is going to hold steady against the de facto world reserve currency is madness, at best you are just hoping that you don't get completely hosed.

Lucy Heartfilia posted:

He doesn't care a single bit about the deaths and suffering of Ukrainians.

George Friedman posted:

I try not to be drawn into matters of right and wrong, not because I don't believe there is a difference but because history is rarely decided by moral principles.

Tainen posted:

!!!

HorseLord posted:

I like how you're talking about cost in a way that only makes sense in a market economy, or that providing work for everyone is somehow incompatible with the notion of economic growth in a system that considers growth to be an increase in the amount of poo poo they crank out.

If you've got the holy grail of good central planning, full employment is piss easy and happens basically by accident. Not building enough toasters? Build a toaster factory. There you just made work for thousands of people because every step of the process from printing out job ads, to bricklaying, to training everyone to make toasters, to training people to lay bricks and post job ads, etc, is a job that needs doing. And you can literally print and destroy "money" at will because in your planned economy you've got god mode on and it's nothing but a glorified book token anyway.

Now obviously this holy grail was never found, or else we'd not be having this conversation. But you're still talking about this as if they were (or, hypothetically would) running a capitalist economy with a market and everything depending on the circulation of currency and poo poo. No.

Warcabbit posted:

Girls, girls, you're both pretty.

So, let's say Putin's heart grows three sizes and he declares the return of the Soviet Union. What happens?

kalstrams posted:

Well, he says he hasn't got any legal paperwork from the court within the deadlines set by criminal code. He says he hasn't got even not so official part of paperwork, and same for his brother, yet they both are detained, even though in different.

Brown Moses posted:

I was on Belgian TV News tonight, talking about the work we've done at Bellingcat on MH17. My bits are in English

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ynrB_ji--Q

Brown Moses posted:

Yeah,53rd Brigade near Kursk. The soldiers in the brigade helpfully posted loads of images from the base on VK.com and Instagram which we used to link the convoy to their brigade. I've been interviewed as a witness as part of the Dutch criminal investigation, so they have all this stuff.

Brown Moses posted:

Well any time they do anything like that it's a provable lie, so it's great fun picking it apart. Examples include the fake satellite map image of MH17 being shot down, and the Russian MoD lying about the Luhansk Buk video. They also told some other provable lies in that same press conference about the flight path of MH17, which I'm writing up at the moment.

HorseLord posted:

There's no loving way on earth that's a coincidence.

Flaky posted:

As am I waiting until all the required information has been verified, that and I am busy with work at the moment. I also have to be careful what I say on work computers! which are all that are available to me.


Why dont you do something productive while you wait, like read The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich

Disinterested posted:

Flaky posted:

Allusions to the Reichstag fire shall savour but of shallow wit compared to the amassed incendiary material (straw or otherwise).

"for if you hide the crown
Even in your hearts,
there will he rake for it"

Cuntpunch posted:

Adam Curtis did a fun miniblurb again this year, Russia is kind of central to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcy8uLjRHPM