The Situation in the Ukraine. #18

auslander wrote:

Khepesh wrote:And some of the recent messages from Gorlovka. Tanks and howitzers at Maiorsk, 5th quarter and Kalinovka under bombardment. Also seems some developments at Krasny Partizan again, a likely axis of advance when they come.

I guess OSCE only works 9 to 5, after that it's party time in the hotel bar. Damn them too.

Ruthenius wrote:When you think that they all just cannot degrade any lower

The Times wrote:Ukraine rebels ‘building dirty bomb’ with Russian scientists
Maxim Tucker Donetsk Published at 12:02AM, August 1 2015

Rebels in Ukraine are working to develop a radioactive dirty bomb with the help of Russian nuclear scientists, according to a Ukrainian security service dossier obtained by The Times.

The report draws on hacked emails between rebels and intercepted radio communications, as well as a field agent’s findings. It claims that Russian specialists have withdrawn radioactive industrial waste from a secure bunker at the Donetsk state chemical plant and moved it to a rebel military base, where it can be combined with explosives to create a devastating effective weapon. Continue reading.

flamming_python wrote:

Khepesh wrote:Which is the reality? what are the reasons not to go on the offensive for either side?

Novorossiya will not attack as that will break Minsk and will be the excuse for ukrops offensive and bad PR for Russia and be against the "cunning plan", geopolitics etc etc.
But: VSN cannot long delay an attack because of growing internal dissent about inactivity and, more importantly, ukrops defences will become too great for VSN to overcome without direct Russian assistance, which will not happen. Minsk is already broken by Kiev, the anti Russian hysteria is in full swing and Russia will get all the blame no matter who is responsible for any offensive, so what is there to loose by a VSN offensive?

Kiev will not attack as they do not want to be seen as the side that breaks Minsk.
But: They clearly break Minsk, they know they break Minsk and their handlers know they break Minsk. Western poodles of Washington and MSM tell everybody that Novorossiya Russia, breaks Minsk every day and that only Kiev holds Minsk. As Kiev will not be blamed for any offensive as the blame is already heaped on Russia, what is there to loose by a ukrops offensive? and after all, it is an ATO and people in the west will probably wonder why Kiev does not attack to destroy these "terrorists" by now.

The essence of a "cunning plan" is that nobody, least of all denizens of the networks, will have any idea what it is, otherwise it will hardly be a "cunning plan". Waiting for Ukraine to implode and then simply walk in to claim the spoils is not much of a plan and hardly cunning. Washington knows the true state of affairs in Kiev, and they will simply let it implode ?. One side cannot sit waiting for something it hopes will happen, and the other side cannot sit hoping it will not happen, this is not human nature, this is not a plan for either side. The cards are stacked against Kiev, they know this, their handlers know this and I think it is they who will not wait because they cannot wait.

The rebels (prompted by Russia I suspect) have pushed for the withdrawal of sub-100mm artillery. If those efforts reach success and there is some indication that the US has got on board and that Poroshenko is now pushing it through - then we can expect that these sort of bombardments and artillery exchanges will die down.
There will for sure be more initiatives if this one succeeds - with the ultimate objective of quieting artillery in this region - this is one thing Russia doesn't need at the moment.

On the other hand, if these initiatives are rejected or accepted formally but ignored de-facto (as has been the case up until now), then a limited offensive will be needed to push the Maidanists back - however Russia hopes that it won't come to that and that everything can quieten down.

The reason is very simple - and it has to do with that same 'cunning plan' that you correctly identified, and that many of the agitators in this thread such as Flagship Haushofer et all. also seem to have no problem identifying but for whatever reason you all seem to keep forgetting it.

So let me remind you again - waiting for the Ukraine to implode. OK, technically not a cunning one, nor a subtle one, but one that I must say - has been going swimmingly.
The economic and social collapse of the Ukraine has been happeneing at a pace exceeding projections. True, the government and statehood has been holding on for the last 17-18 months - but this is nothing unusual; the Soviet Union under the same sort of conditions held out for 6 years (3 years from the point the first internal conflict broke out in Nagorny-Karabakh in 1988); while Yugoslavia held out for about 3 years; the process was slow and painful and nothing happened immediately.

The latest news, as mentioned 2-3 pages ago - is that Ukrainian power generation is in crisis; Ukrainian thermal power plants are critically low on coal; the Ukraine has no money to buy gas for the winter season which also includes the gas for its gas-fired power plants, the nuclear power plants are experiencing problems with the attempt to change to American fuel.

Know what requires electricity? Industry. If Ukrainian power-generation goes; it's heavy industries will be forced to shut-down at least partially (and due to the lack of gas too), same with many light industries - this will immediately cut industrial output and further accelerate Ukrainian economic collapse.
This is really a critical juncture and if the Ukraine proves unable to deal with this, one of their most serious problems yet; and there is little cause to suspect that they will be able to as so far they've managed to mess up everything else - then it will just further cascade into yet more grave problems.

Russia is patient, it can afford to be, the direction it chose was of waiting for the Ukrainian government to collapse and be overthrown by its own people and so far everything is going to plan.
Why should it have to risk doing something that would derail the current course of favourable events? Why should it order any offensives? Why should it risk drawing support to the Ukrainian government again by making itself into an external enemy? Why should it betray its own propaganda effort that it has been developing amongst the Ukrainian population for the last year?
Why why why?
I don't understand you people. I can't understand you.
You just keep talking the same rubbish. Pull your heads out of your ass, FFS, and see the big picture.

Know what Russia did while Dudayev's Chechnya was turning into an international crime-nest of arms trafficking, drug-smuggling? While the ethnic Russian population was being evicted from their homes?
Nothing.
It just waited too, and in fact tried to negotiate. 3 years of negotiation. Then an attempt at formenting a rebellion there through local allied elements (who were strong in the north, much like the NAF are dominant in the Donbass), once it garnered sufficient support; and long after Chechnya's economy had collapsed due to its own ruler's ineptness and Russia's isolation of it. Yet that didn't succeed either. Then - and only then - when none of those approaches brought any results - did Russia actually directly invade.
And this - for a republic that was by international law - actually a part of Russia; where Russia had the juristiction to solve its own internal problem however it wanted to.

Now, I'm not saying the Russian approach in Chechnya was correct - in retrospect Russia itself played a large part in forming that lawlessness, and it should have acted/reacted to the unfriendly turn of events sooner.
However, what it does go to show - is Russia's approach; and it's patience - and this hasn't changed much since; Russia is exercising the same caution in the Ukraine. This time however, the results are already noticeable, and dissent is already visibly building-up in the Ukraine. 18 months gone so far. Let's see how it will all look in another 18 months. Russia has time on its side, don't forget that, and it has chosen its course. So FFS, stop fkcing panicking.

flamming_python wrote:

Khepesh wrote:Which is the reality? what are the reasons not to go on the offensive for either side?

Novorossiya will not attack as that will break Minsk and will be the excuse for ukrops offensive and bad PR for Russia and be against the "cunning plan", geopolitics etc etc.
But: VSN cannot long delay an attack because of growing internal dissent about inactivity and, more importantly, ukrops defences will become too great for VSN to overcome without direct Russian assistance, which will not happen. Minsk is already broken by Kiev, the anti Russian hysteria is in full swing and Russia will get all the blame no matter who is responsible for any offensive, so what is there to loose by a VSN offensive?

Kiev will not attack as they do not want to be seen as the side that breaks Minsk.
But: They clearly break Minsk, they know they break Minsk and their handlers know they break Minsk. Western poodles of Washington and MSM tell everybody that Novorossiya Russia, breaks Minsk every day and that only Kiev holds Minsk. As Kiev will not be blamed for any offensive as the blame is already heaped on Russia, what is there to loose by a ukrops offensive? and after all, it is an ATO and people in the west will probably wonder why Kiev does not attack to destroy these "terrorists" by now.

The essence of a "cunning plan" is that nobody, least of all denizens of the networks, will have any idea what it is, otherwise it will hardly be a "cunning plan". Waiting for Ukraine to implode and then simply walk in to claim the spoils is not much of a plan and hardly cunning. Washington knows the true state of affairs in Kiev, and they will simply let it implode ?. One side cannot sit waiting for something it hopes will happen, and the other side cannot sit hoping it will not happen, this is not human nature, this is not a plan for either side. The cards are stacked against Kiev, they know this, their handlers know this and I think it is they who will not wait because they cannot wait.

So let me remind you again - waiting for the Ukraine to implode. OK, technically not a cunning one, nor a subtle one, but one that I must say - has been going swimmingly.
The economic and social collapse of the Ukraine has been happeneing at a pace exceeding projections. True, the government and statehood has been holding on for the last 17-18 months - but this is nothing unusual; the Soviet Union under the same sort of conditions held out for 6 years (3 years from the point the first internal conflict broke out in Nagorny-Karabakh in 1988); while Yugoslavia held out for about 3 years; the process was slow and painful and nothing happened immediately.

The latest news, as mentioned 2-3 pages ago - is that Ukrainian power generation is in crisis; Ukrainian thermal power plants are critically low on coal; the Ukraine has no money to buy gas for the winter season which also includes the gas for its gas-fired power plants, the nuclear power plants are experiencing problems with the attempt to change to American fuel.

Know what requires electricity? Industry. If Ukrainian power-generation goes; it's heavy industries will be forced to shut-down at least partially (and due to the lack of gas too), same with many light industries - this will immediately cut industrial output and further accelerate Ukrainian economic collapse.
This is really a critical juncture and if the Ukraine proves unable to deal with this, one of their most serious problems yet; and there is little cause to suspect that they will be able to as so far they've managed to mess up everything else - then it will just further cascade into yet more grave problems.

Russia is patient, it can afford to be, the direction it chose was of waiting for the Ukrainian government to collapse and be overthrown by its own people and so far everything is going to plan.
Why should it have to risk doing something that would derail the current course of favourable events? Why should it order any offensives? Why should it risk drawing support to the Ukrainian government again by making itself into an external enemy? Why should it betray its own propaganda effort that it has been developing amongst the Ukrainian population for the last year?
Why why why?
I don't understand you people. I can't understand you.
You just keep talking the same rubbish. Pull your heads out of your ass, FFS, and see the big picture.

Know what Russia did while Dudayev's Chechnya was turning into an international crime-nest of arms trafficking, drug-smuggling? While the ethnic Russian population was being evicted from their homes?
Nothing.
It just waited too, and in fact tried to negotiate. 3 years of negotiation. Then an attempt at formenting a rebellion there through local allied elements (who were strong in the north, much like the NAF are dominant in the Donbass), once it garnered sufficient support; and long after Chechnya's economy had collapsed due to its own ruler's ineptness and Russia's isolation of it. Yet that didn't succeed either. Then - and only then - when none of those approaches brought any results - did Russia actually directly invade.
And this - for a republic that was by international law - actually a part of Russia; where Russia had the juristiction to solve its own internal problem however it wanted to.

Now, I'm not saying the Russian approach in Chechnya was correct - in retrospect Russia itself played a large part in forming that lawlessness, and it should have acted/reacted to the unfriendly turn of events sooner.
However, what it does go to show - is Russia's approach; and it's patience - and this hasn't changed much since; Russia is exercising the same caution in the Ukraine. This time however, the results are already noticeable, and dissent is already visibly building-up in the Ukraine. 18 months gone so far. Let's see how it will all look in another 18 months. Russia has time on its side, don't forget that, and it has chosen its course. So FFS, stop fkcing panicking.

Ghoster wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

Khepesh wrote:Which is the reality? what are the reasons not to go on the offensive for either side?

Novorossiya will not attack as that will break Minsk and will be the excuse for ukrops offensive and bad PR for Russia and be against the "cunning plan", geopolitics etc etc.
But: VSN cannot long delay an attack because of growing internal dissent about inactivity and, more importantly, ukrops defences will become too great for VSN to overcome without direct Russian assistance, which will not happen. Minsk is already broken by Kiev, the anti Russian hysteria is in full swing and Russia will get all the blame no matter who is responsible for any offensive, so what is there to loose by a VSN offensive?

Kiev will not attack as they do not want to be seen as the side that breaks Minsk.
But: They clearly break Minsk, they know they break Minsk and their handlers know they break Minsk. Western poodles of Washington and MSM tell everybody that Novorossiya Russia, breaks Minsk every day and that only Kiev holds Minsk. As Kiev will not be blamed for any offensive as the blame is already heaped on Russia, what is there to loose by a ukrops offensive? and after all, it is an ATO and people in the west will probably wonder why Kiev does not attack to destroy these "terrorists" by now.

The essence of a "cunning plan" is that nobody, least of all denizens of the networks, will have any idea what it is, otherwise it will hardly be a "cunning plan". Waiting for Ukraine to implode and then simply walk in to claim the spoils is not much of a plan and hardly cunning. Washington knows the true state of affairs in Kiev, and they will simply let it implode ?. One side cannot sit waiting for something it hopes will happen, and the other side cannot sit hoping it will not happen, this is not human nature, this is not a plan for either side. The cards are stacked against Kiev, they know this, their handlers know this and I think it is they who will not wait because they cannot wait.

So let me remind you again - waiting for the Ukraine to implode. OK, technically not a cunning one, nor a subtle one, but one that I must say - has been going swimmingly.
The economic and social collapse of the Ukraine has been happeneing at a pace exceeding projections. True, the government and statehood has been holding on for the last 17-18 months - but this is nothing unusual; the Soviet Union under the same sort of conditions held out for 6 years (3 years from the point the first internal conflict broke out in Nagorny-Karabakh in 1988); while Yugoslavia held out for about 3 years; the process was slow and painful and nothing happened immediately.

The latest news, as mentioned 2-3 pages ago - is that Ukrainian power generation is in crisis; Ukrainian thermal power plants are critically low on coal; the Ukraine has no money to buy gas for the winter season which also includes the gas for its gas-fired power plants, the nuclear power plants are experiencing problems with the attempt to change to American fuel.

Know what requires electricity? Industry. If Ukrainian power-generation goes; it's heavy industries will be forced to shut-down at least partially (and due to the lack of gas too), same with many light industries - this will immediately cut industrial output and further accelerate Ukrainian economic collapse.
This is really a critical juncture and if the Ukraine proves unable to deal with this, one of their most serious problems yet; and there is little cause to suspect that they will be able to as so far they've managed to mess up everything else - then it will just further cascade into yet more grave problems.

Russia is patient, it can afford to be, the direction it chose was of waiting for the Ukrainian government to collapse and be overthrown by its own people and so far everything is going to plan.
Why should it have to risk doing something that would derail the current course of favourable events? Why should it order any offensives? Why should it risk drawing support to the Ukrainian government again by making itself into an external enemy? Why should it betray its own propaganda effort that it has been developing amongst the Ukrainian population for the last year?
Why why why?
I don't understand you people. I can't understand you.
You just keep talking the same rubbish. Pull your heads out of your ass, FFS, and see the big picture.

Know what Russia did while Dudayev's Chechnya was turning into an international crime-nest of arms trafficking, drug-smuggling? While the ethnic Russian population was being evicted from their homes?
Nothing.
It just waited too, and in fact tried to negotiate. 3 years of negotiation. Then an attempt at formenting a rebellion there through local allied elements (who were strong in the north, much like the NAF are dominant in the Donbass), once it garnered sufficient support; and long after Chechnya's economy had collapsed due to its own ruler's ineptness and Russia's isolation of it. Yet that didn't succeed either. Then - and only then - when none of those approaches brought any results - did Russia actually directly invade.
And this - for a republic that was by international law - actually a part of Russia; where Russia had the juristiction to solve its own internal problem however it wanted to.

Now, I'm not saying the Russian approach in Chechnya was correct - in retrospect Russia itself played a large part in forming that lawlessness, and it should have acted/reacted to the unfriendly turn of events sooner.
However, what it does go to show - is Russia's approach; and it's patience - and this hasn't changed much since; Russia is exercising the same caution in the Ukraine. This time however, the results are already noticeable, and dissent is already visibly building-up in the Ukraine. 18 months gone so far. Let's see how it will all look in another 18 months. Russia has time on its side, don't forget that, and it has chosen its course. So FFS, stop fkcing panicking.

The attacks against Donetsk, Gorlovka and other cities can only be classed as a genocide. Doing nothing to stop or condemn it is akin to supporting it. I haven't seen any condemnation from Russia or any threats of sanctions against junta for killing innocent civilians every day.

Here's what Russia's patience will do. In Gorlovka alone there are 6 civilians wounded and 2 killed every day. And this will only increase. That means that by the end of the year there will be 300 more civilian victims and about a thousand wounded.

Ukraine won't collapse because of some energy crisis. It was 10 times worse last winter, and everyone was sure the government would collapse just after a week or two. It won't. As long as it has access to IMF and other western aid, not to mention transit fees and cheap gas from Russia, it won't collapse.

There won't be any NAF offensive. Russia doesn't want more economic sanctions and problems for its economy, so it won't allow it to happen either.

Keeping these things in mind, there probably is a higher chance of Novorossiya being destroyed in these 18 months rather than Ukraine. Its civilians are getting massacred every day by artillery after all. That would seem like a much more important problem, and inaction would more likely lead to a collapse.

flamming_python wrote:

Now, I'm not saying the Russian approach in Chechnya was correct - in retrospect Russia itself played a large part in forming that lawlessness, and it should have acted/reacted to the unfriendly turn of events sooner

Karl Haushofer wrote:The same will lacked in Moscow in 1991. If different people were in charge in Russia in 1991 the USSR might still be intact. The disintegration of the country was not a necessity, it was a choice.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:The same will lacked in Moscow in 1991. If different people were in charge in Russia in 1991 the USSR might still be intact. The disintegration of the country was not a necessity, it was a choice.

The USSR was too discredited after the August coup, though a different Union might have survived.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:The same will lacked in Moscow in 1991. If different people were in charge in Russia in 1991 the USSR might still be intact. The disintegration of the country was not a necessity, it was a choice.

The USSR was too discredited after the August coup, though a different Union might have survived.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:The same will lacked in Moscow in 1991. If different people were in charge in Russia in 1991 the USSR might still be intact. The disintegration of the country was not a necessity, it was a choice.

The USSR was too discredited after the August coup, though a different Union might have survived.

Read about the deal regarding USSR, the Union was dead as soon as Yeltsin became RSSFR Chairman then it was down hill. The motherfucker and his douchebag cronies had made deals to break up the Union ANYWAY. It was a firesale and worked like all firesales. Everyone grabbed what they could and ran with it. Ukraine and Russia had big issues with the Central Asian Republics especially Kazakhstan that tried to avoid the break up straight away. It happened despite the will of more than half the people of USSR. This is the reality and this is why Russia.

Karl Haushofer wrote:There SHOULD have been enough will and patriotism to save the country after the coup. This was a superpower with 300 million people and nukes.

Karl Haushofer wrote:Nothing catastrophic or irreversible had yet happened. People in Kremlin were just incompetent fools.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:
It was a rotting superpower that was losing more and more influence and control over its territory.
Kind of like modern-day Ukraine without superpower status.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:
The first SSRs were already seceding from the Union.

Ruthenius wrote:When you think that they all just cannot degrade any lower

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4514313.ece