Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Should the United States and/or NATO start giving lethal arms to the Ukranian military to help fight against the pro-Russian separatists that are slowly but surely gaining ground in eastern Ukraine? Do you think that would help the situation there or just worsen it? DISCUSS, PEOPLE!

1: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/opinion/europe-leaders-debate-aid-to-ukraine-but-not-russias-transgressions.html?_r=0
2: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/02/09/384943451/ukraine-likely-to-top-obama-merkel-talks-agenda
3: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/02/10/fighting-in-eastern-ukraine-intensifies-ahead-planned-peace-summit/

There's much more going on in Ukraine than we hear about. Ukraine is being painted as being a nice western loving democracy being attacked by fascistic, imperialist Russia. The reality is that Ukraine is being infested with ever more right-wing neo nazi elements in positions of power. Vadim Troyan being an example. It's far more complex than is being made out.

Originally posted by jaden101
The reality is that Ukraine is being infested with ever more right-wing neo nazi elements in positions of power. Vadim Troyan being an example. It's far more complex than is being made out.
Not really. There are a few Neo-Nazi figures in somewhat high positions, but no one higher than deputy defense minister, and in the last presidential election Far Right parties captured a mere 5% of the vote.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Not really. There are a few Neo-Nazi figures in somewhat high positions, but no one higher than deputy defense minister, and in the last presidential election Far Right parties captured a mere 5% of the vote.

The problem is that the de facto influence of the Far Right has little to do with the amount of votes they've got.

Originally posted by Bentley
The problem is that the de facto influence of the Far Right has little to do with the amount of votes they've got.
What does it have to do with then?

Because as I said, their highest official is a deputy defense minister. That's a consolation appointment if I ever saw one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31430230

Hopefully an agreement can be reached. Many civilians are dying from the constant shelling of the cities.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31430230

Hopefully an agreement can be reached. Many civilians are dying from the constant shelling of the cities.

Yo, are you Devil King? If so, welcome back.

Additionally, civvie deaths are unacceptable.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yo, are you Devil King? If so, welcome back.

Additionally, civvie deaths are unacceptable. Nope, lol.

Yes, agreed.

Three reasons the U.S. should not arm Ukraine: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/02/11/3-reasons-why-u-s-should-not-arm-ukraine/

What do y'all think?

This awesome little clip has recently been aired on a Kremlin-sponsored Russian TV channel. You don't have to know Russian to understand what it's about.
0OU4PScLOu8

Did they actually use ****ing Red Alert music?

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Did they actually use ****ing Red Alert music?

Uhh, don't think so.

looooool

Originally posted by Omega Vision
What does it have to do with then?

Influence with power groups and enterprises is always a must in any kind of political agenda.


Originally posted by Omega Vision
Because as I said, their highest official is a deputy defense minister. That's a consolation appointment if I ever saw one.

I actually count that among my blessings. I still consider Far Right groups a huge problem when it comes to helping Ukraine out of the current conflict, they are profitters.

Yes, it's distasteful, but it's much better than inaction against Far Right groups in Moscow waging an active war against Ukraine as we speak.

EDIT: Not to mention, the Far Right is not currently in charge of Ukraine. I wish I could say the same for Russia.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Uhh, don't think so.

lDQ7hXMLxGc

Originally posted by Bentley
Influence with power groups and enterprises is always a must in any kind of political agenda.




I actually count that among my blessings. I still consider Far Right groups a huge problem when it comes to helping Ukraine out of the current conflict, they are profitters.*

*profiteers

I never do this (correct spelling/grammar nazi bullshit) but this is one word I used to mess up for ages until someone corrected me.

So they reached a ceasefire deal. Hopefully it'll last unlike last time...

THere was something new today? or the one i heard yesterday.. that didnt sound very stabile (?)

The new ceasefire deal is even less convincing than the original one because it's less comprehensive and more tenuous this time around. By saying "the ceasefire line will be whatever the frontline is as of Saturday night," the Russians are essentially promising that the Separatists will engage in an all-out blitz to seize as much ground as possible by that time.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
The new ceasefire deal is even less convincing than the original one because it's less comprehensive and more tenuous this time around. By saying "the ceasefire line will be whatever the frontline is as of Saturday night," the Russians are essentially promising that the Separatists will engage in an all-out blitz to seize as much ground as possible by that time. Oh, definitely. But maybe Sunday and forward there will be some peace and Ukraine can get its shit together military-wise since the rebels will be off their ass for (hopefully) a good amount of time.

Originally posted by FinalAnswer
lDQ7hXMLxGc

I haven't really played RA3. Oh man, now that's what I call irony.

Damn. http://news.yahoo.com/fifty-tanks-40-missile-systems-crossed-russia-east-114255433.html

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Damn. http://news.yahoo.com/fifty-tanks-40-missile-systems-crossed-russia-east-114255433.html

Hah, and those tools really thought they could negotiate with Putin.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Should the United States and/or NATO start giving lethal arms to the Ukranian military to help fight against the pro-Russian separatists that are slowly but surely gaining ground in eastern Ukraine? Do you think that would help the situation there or just worsen it? DISCUSS, PEOPLE!

1: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/10/opinion/europe-leaders-debate-aid-to-ukraine-but-not-russias-transgressions.html?_r=0
2: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/02/09/384943451/ukraine-likely-to-top-obama-merkel-talks-agenda
3: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/02/10/fighting-in-eastern-ukraine-intensifies-ahead-planned-peace-summit/
Giving lethal weapons to pro-ukranian side would imply that pro-russian side is bad but these "pro-russian separatists" are citizens like anyone else. The problem started when the government was overthrown, many people didn't want it. It's a civil war.

I don't believe that this war will end after the agreement.

Russia is "putin" themselves out of line

Originally posted by dadudemon
*profiteers

I never do this (correct spelling/grammar nazi bullshit) but this is one word I used to mess up for ages until someone corrected me.

You're right, I actually knew that word but it didn't come to my head when I was posting. Thanks for the correction

Originally posted by Arhael
Giving lethal weapons to pro-ukranian side would imply that pro-russian side is bad but these "pro-russian separatists" are citizens like anyone else. The problem started when the government was overthrown, many people didn't want it. It's a civil war. They're also Russian soldiers and Ukrainian soldiers who defected. And as far as NATO's concerned it's basically Russia violating Ukraine's sovereignty by aiding the rebels and sending some of their military in.

Originally posted by Arhael
Giving lethal weapons to pro-ukranian side would imply that pro-russian side is bad but these "pro-russian separatists" are citizens like anyone else. The problem started when the government was overthrown, many people didn't want it. It's a civil war.
Originally posted by |King Joker|
They're also Russian soldiers and Ukrainian soldiers who defected. And as far as NATO's concerned it's basically Russia violating Ukraine's sovereignty by aiding the rebels and sending some of their military in.
It's a complicated situation because the cultural difference between Eastern Ukraine and Russia is as small as the cultural difference between Mexico and parts of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona along the Mexican-American border.

Most of the Separatists are homegrown, however their actual support within the Donbass Region is questionable. Most people in the East just want to see the war end and probably resent both sides for uprooting their lives.

It isn't up for debate that Russia is sending heavy weapons into Ukraine, and from this it's logical that they're also sending Russian military advisers and technicians to make sure the equipment is used properly. The newer tanks that have been showing up on the frontline feature reactive armor that the Ukrainian military has never possessed, so it can't be the result of defections or looted Ukrainian army bases.

If I were the US government, I'd be looking to buy Russian-made weapons from other countries (India, for instance) to sell to the Ukrainians. That way we'd be able to arm the Ukrainians without giving Putin the excuse he needs to ramp up the stakes. I know that sounds like some Iran-Contra BS, but hey, this is a dirty game so why are we trying to act like we're clean?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
It's a complicated situation because the cultural difference between Eastern Ukraine and Russia is as small as the cultural difference between Mexico and parts of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona along the Mexican-American border.

Most of the Separatists are homegrown, however their actual support within the Donbass Region is questionable. Most people in the East just want to see the war end and probably resent both sides for uprooting their lives.

It isn't up for debate that Russia is sending heavy weapons into Ukraine, and from this it's logical that they're also sending Russian military advisers and technicians to make sure the equipment is used properly. The newer tanks that have been showing up on the frontline feature reactive armor that the Ukrainian military has never possessed, so it can't be the result of defections or looted Ukrainian army bases.

If I were the US government, I'd be looking to buy Russian-made weapons from other countries (India, for instance) to sell to the Ukrainians. That way we'd be able to arm the Ukrainians without giving Putin the excuse he needs to ramp up the stakes. I know that sounds like some Iran-Contra BS, but hey, this is a dirty game so why are we trying to act like we're clean?
That's really smart actually.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/14/world/europe/ukraine-fighting-escalates-ahead-of-truce.html?_r=0

It is very stupid situation because both sides are same people with same values. All the hatred is caused by bigots on both sides and majority of pieceful people suffer as result.


It's actually is for debate. Both sides give completely different stories. A meteorite falls from sky for 10 seconds, there is lots of futage and other evidence. Russia sends troops and equipment and yet there is no concrete evidence, only claims and rumours.

I laughed how Poroshenko waved Russian passports as "proof" that there is Russian army in Ukraine. Only he didn't know that Russian troops never carry passports.
http://rt.com/op-edge/230295-poroshenko-russian-passports-propaganda/

What do you mean no concrete evidence? There are photographs and videos of Separatists using equipment that the Ukrainian military has never possessed.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
What do you mean no concrete evidence? There are photographs and videos of Separatists using equipment that the Ukrainian military has never possessed.

The guy used Russia Today as a source, so, you know...

RT isn't always wrong, it's just biased toward the Russian government's viewpoint.

When you read an English RT article covering the same event as the BBC or NYT, the articles often read quite the same. It's just when you see an RT article that focuses on a unique situation (one that isn't covered by other news sources) that the differences emerge.

http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN0LK0LT20150216?irpc=932
Ugh.

It really doesn't look like this "ceasefire" will last much longer.

Whelp, Ukraine lost Debaltseve.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31519000

The Russians have attacked us with Siberian air. dur

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31538987

I used first source that came up on google. I don't need to rely on sources for this one. Poroshenko's video is a source that proves my point on its own.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
What do you mean no concrete evidence? There are photographs and videos of Separatists using equipment that the Ukrainian military has never possessed.
Are you sure those are legitimate photographs and videos? Do they really prove things beyond denial. Because the new president will not agree with you:
92sOLL_I5nc
"This is the best evidence for the aggression and for the presence of Russian troops"

He labes those passports he is holding as "best evidence". If there are photographs and videos that make it undeniable prove of Russian invasion, then why would he be so pathethic to wave Russian passports on interview that russian military DOES NOT carry?

1. Passports are taken away from soldiers, when they join military, so those passports cannot possibly belong to Russian soldiers.

2. If Russia is denying invasion, they would make sure their soldiers did not carry any form of id.

3. Poroshenko is holding 5 passports. Two of them are internal that have any meaning only inside Russia. Three other passports are international that are used for traveling. So, russian military is carrying tourist passports now? Did they need to get visa to invade Ukraine?

New sanctions on Russia being considered: http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/21/europe/ukraine-conflict/

Originally posted by Arhael


He labes those passports he is holding as "best evidence". If there are photographs and videos that make it undeniable prove of Russian invasion, then why would he be so pathethic to wave Russian passports on interview that russian military DOES NOT carry?

1. Passports are taken away from soldiers, when they join military, so those passports cannot possibly belong to Russian soldiers.

2. If Russia is denying invasion, they would make sure their soldiers did not carry any form of id.

3. Poroshenko is holding 5 passports. Two of them are internal that have any meaning only inside Russia. Three other passports are international that are used for traveling. So, russian military is carrying tourist passports now? Did they need to get visa to invade Ukraine?
Him calling it the "best evidence" is political rhetoric, not any kind of legal declaration. C'mon, child's-play.

I don't disagree with your skepticism about his passport "evidence." I don't think it nullifies all the other evidence of direct Russian involvement, it just shows that Poroshenko is willing to sensationalize and engage in obvious propaganda.

The situation in Ukraine goes to prove how little elections matter to nationalistic groups.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Him calling it the "best evidence" is political rhetoric, not any kind of legal declaration. C'mon, child's-play.

I don't disagree with your skepticism about his passport "evidence." I don't think it nullifies all the other evidence of direct Russian involvement, it just shows that Poroshenko is willing to sensationalize and engage in obvious propaganda.
Yep, I understand it. But legitimacy of the other evidence remains at question. Are you sure those pictures and videos are taken in Ukraine? Those videos might as well have been taken during Russo-Georgian war, in fact that's what RT source says but considering the obvious bias of the source I not gonna bring it up. Who says true and who says lie? Two different stories from media on either side, same things happens in literally every instance of war in the past years.

Same thing was happening during Russo-Georgian war. Russia sent military as response to Georgia invading Osetia, while in USA media made it look like Russia attacked Georgia and Osetia.

Another source, seemingly unconnected to russia:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-13/thirst-war-sen-inhofe-releases-fake-photos-russian-troops-ukraine

Originally posted by Arhael
Yep, I understand it. But legitimacy of the other evidence remains at question. Are you sure those pictures and videos are taken in Ukraine? Those videos might as well have been taken during Russo-Georgian war, in fact that's what RT source says but considering the obvious bias of the source I not gonna bring it up. Who says true and who says lie? Two different stories from media on either side, same things happens in literally every instance of war in the past years.

Same thing was happening during Russo-Georgian war. Russia sent military as response to Georgia invading Osetia, while in USA media made it look like Russia attacked Georgia and Osetia.

Another source, seemingly unconnected to russia:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-13/thirst-war-sen-inhofe-releases-fake-photos-russian-troops-ukraine
I think "invading" is a misleading verb considering Osettia was Georgian territory that the Russians had no diplomatic right to intervene in.

I don't think there's any doubt there's lots of spinning going on on either side, but I think if you were to examine each photo and video coming out of Ukraine there would be landmarks that are unequivocally Ukraine and not Georgia, after all the two countries are extremely different in terms of geography.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/5/boehner-top-democrats-demand-obama-arm-ukraine/

Seems like the rebels are moving their weapons/forces back. Finally some good news.

Literally before going to bed last night I was thinking about when this was going to happen, then I just read this.

http://rt.com/news/240705-ukraine-poroshenko-weapons-europe/

Uh...
http://www.rferl.org/content/united-states-ukraine-russia-mexico-arms-/26921256.html

Is Mexico actually still bitter over the U.S. taking their territories back in the day? 'Cause if they're not this threat is just freaking hilarious.

Seems like the fighting is resuming.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32296796

I thought Russia took them over already.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/27/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-military-idUSKBN0OC2K820150527

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Uh...
http://www.rferl.org/content/united-states-ukraine-russia-mexico-arms-/26921256.html

Is Mexico actually still bitter over the U.S. taking their territories back in the day? 'Cause if they're not this threat is just freaking hilarious.

The US does an excellent job of arming Mexico itself anyway. And not just it's government.

What do y'all think NATO should do if Russia did a full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Originally posted by jaden101
The US does an excellent job of arming Mexico itself anyway. And not just it's government. Indeed, lol.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
What do y'all think NATO should do if Russia did a full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Direct covert intervention. Fight the Russians while lying through our teeth about even being there. Give the Russians a taste of their own medicine and bleed them out slowly until they're forced to withdraw.

Russia has actually never occupied an entire country in its modern (post-Soviet history) and probably isn't prepared to foot the financial and human costs of what that would entail.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33003237

Anyone actually think there'll be a full-scale Russian invasion? lol

Originally posted by |King Joker|
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33003237

Anyone actually think there'll be a full-scale Russian invasion? lol

If they can get away with it, yes.

Yea this is looking fantastic.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/23/politics/us-armor-tanks-europe-russia-ash-carter/

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea this is looking fantastic.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/23/politics/us-armor-tanks-europe-russia-ash-carter/

Good. Hopefully this dissuades Russia from more funny shit.

Doubtful.

An Uzbekistani colleague of mine at my university summed up the best reason for why Russia won't move on the Baltic States: there is literally nothing there that could be appetizing enough for Russia to risk all-out war with NATO. Those countries have few noteworthy resources and while they once were centers for heavy industry during Soviet times most of that has been moved to Poland.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea this is looking fantastic.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/23/politics/us-armor-tanks-europe-russia-ash-carter/
Always wanted to visit the Baltic States. You're telling me I can go for the low, low price of enlisting?

Sheeeet, sign my ass up.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
An Uzbekistani colleague of mine at my university summed up the best reason for why Russia won't move on the Baltic States: there is literally nothing there that could be appetizing enough for Russia to risk all-out war with NATO. Those countries have few noteworthy resources and while they once were centers for heavy industry during Soviet times most of that has been moved to Poland.

Always wanted to visit the Baltic States. You're telling me I can go for the low, low price of enlisting?

Sheeeet, sign my ass up.

Its obvious you acting ignorant to war coming soon.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Its obvious you acting ignorant to war coming soon.
So IYO, what's going to destroy America first, the imminent nuclear war or the equally imminent monetary system apocalypse?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
So IYO, what's going to destroy America first, the imminent nuclear war or the equally imminent monetary system apocalypse?

Another loaded/bait question. Really?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Another loaded/bait question. Really?


So, we're not all about to die while our dollars become worthless paper?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
So, we're not all about to die while our dollars become worthless paper?

Should this be in the gold or paper thread?

Nah, I'll stop being an ass now.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Nah, I'll stop being an ass now.

Don't hurt yourself.