Ukraine

Bar the Bull said:
How far should action against Russia go? Should it include freezing bank accounts of the elite?
Click to expand...

Further than it does at the moment

They have annexed a section of a foreign state. Where's next? Otherwise Wait for the justification for the "Russian populations" in the Baltic states

Crimea is a lt less "Russian" than many are suggesting. Great article by the excellent Timothy garten ash in the guardian last week blew away some myths

Putin will have his hand wringing apologists (mostly on the left where they ust love authoritarian leaders) but whilst I believe he's too cautious to get out of control the west should be working on hammering their economy in every way. Pity the need for gas by Germany (didnt they think ahead?) is still there because a economy which is purely commodity based is inherently weak and vulnerable.
 
Last edited:
Good man, ignore the points made by others, wait a couple of days, and then repeat your nonsense. The fact is that Clinton, Putin, Merkel and Cameron are making arses out of themselves and it's nothing to do with left and right and everything to do with ignorance. Anyone with a bit of feeling for history knows this, whether they write in the Telegraph (Halligan) or even the Mail (Hitchens).
 
Fcking time waster as usual

Bar asked a straight question and I gave a straight answer. Something wrong with that?

I've made my points. Try answering them rather than you usual knee jerk sneer. Not that I'm much interested in your response admittedly

"History" doe not justify annexation.
 
Last edited:
The point is you haven't answered Bar's question, you haven't even attempted to, just repeated stuff you said a few days ago. You're completely barking up the wrong tree with this cold war crap.
 
Can't you read?

I said sanctions should go further than proposed so far and we should be hammering their economy. Freezing a few bank accounts is nothing

Sanctions are no good for both sides. We don't gain if they lose.

What it should attempt to do is bring about a drawback and negotiations.
 
Last edited:
What sort of sanctions are you proposing? Drawback from what?

Even your friend Garton Ash thinks Crimea is already a fait accompli.
 
Last edited:
Seems a bit strong when they are not part of the administration there. I'm not sure in truth

Trade would be ideal
 
Last edited:
Not entirely sure why the Putin thread got moved to Mods Forum, but the subject of MH17/Ukraine should be discussed imo, so perhaps we can keep the dialogue civil going forward?

Regardless of who brought the plane down - and it was almost certainly the pro-Russian rebels - the offensive launched by the Ukraine Government today is utterly stupid, given the priority is all about safe access for crash investigators and their related teams.

This course of action will not only stymie those efforts, but it will also lead to questions of opportinism, and feed Russia's laughable claim that Ukraine were responsible all along - and are using the tragedy as a smokescreen for a harder push. It would also let Putin wriggle off the hook.

For all that Western governments are rightly vocal and beating their chests at Russia....they should also have a quieter word in Ukraine's ear, and tell them this isn't the time to be launching an offensive.

If they sit on their hands and allow international pressure on Putin to play-out, they might get what they want, without another shot being fired.

Is it just me, or are political advisers the world over all complete ar*seholes?
 
i want to know why there has not been an issue with the airline...they put those passengers in a dangerous place..north of an already dangerous flight path...nothing been said on news about it..its a warzone..planes get shot down ..shock
 
Pretty sure that discussion will eventually happen as part of the crash investigation. It is, however, a (relatively) minor consideration at this stage, imo.
 
Colin Phillips said:
No profit in peace, Grass.
Click to expand...

This is a myth perpetuated by the military-industrial complex, Col.

The world is a much smaller place in the 21st century, and 99.9% of us realise we aren't so different from one another; at least not so different that we need to be scared by that fact.

By all means make enough bullets to take-out the 0.1% of ar*seholes who ruin it for everyone, but if Halliburton made beach-huts and cocktails, instead of armaments, they'd find their profits would increase a thousand-fold.
 
Grasshopper said:
Pretty sure that discussion will eventually happen as part of the crash investigation. It is, however, a (relatively) minor consideration at this stage, imo.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is minor though..plane would still be in one piece if they had not have flown where they did..unless it went missing..

tbh..and i can't stand Putin...all i'm seeing though is its a stick to beat him with by the media..its just the same old same old thing..russians are bad men..its like when i were a kid..communists..oooh dark..not nice people...bogiemen russians

a minor consideration..give over..its the main reason it happened.

if you sent a load of school kids across the M1 and they all got run down and killed...would you blame the drivers?.do you think the fact you sent them over a dangerous road be a minor consideration when it was scrutinised later?
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
I don't think it is minor though..plane would still be in one piece if they had not have flown where they did..unless it went missing..

tbh..and i can't stand Putin...all i'm seeing though is its a stick to beat him with by the media..its just the same old same old thing..russians are bad men..its like when i were a kid..communists..oooh dark..not nice people...bogiemen russians

a minor consideration..give over..its the main reason it happened.

if you sent a load of school kids across the M1 and they all got run down and killed...would you blame the drivers?.do you think the fact you sent them over a dangerous road be a minor consideration when it was scrutinised later?
Click to expand...

Clearly the primary consideration - at this stage - is to recover the dead, afford them a decent burial, and establish as far as possible, the truth behind what happened.

I am in no way suggesting that flying over a war-zone is a good thing, and the relevant civil aviation authorities (or their global representatives) obviously have questions to answer....but you're looking under the wrong rock, imo. Flights now skirting the Ukrainian border remain well within reach of the type of missile that allegedly took down MH17, and if there was malice aforethought, they could just as easy have knocked-out a commmercial airliner to the North or South.

I'm not trivialising the flight-path, or the apparent decision to permit it above a certain altitude. With the benefit of hindsight it clearly looks more risk than it's worrh absorbing. However, Malaysian were not unique in their use of this path, it was ratified as safe by the relevant authorities, and there's a high likelihood that similar precedent had been set......but nobody accounted for gross negligence/bumbling amateurs to be allowed to be in control of SAMs.

Again, there are questions to be answered and there will doubtless be a change of protocol.....but it's only a part of an inquiry that has a much broader scope.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
Clearly the primary consideration - at this stage - is to recover the dead, afford them a decent burial, and establish as far as possible, the truth behind what happened.

I am in no way suggesting that flying over a war-zone is a good thing, and the relevant civil aviation authorities (or their global representatives) obviously have questions to answer....but you're looking under the wrong rock, imo. Flights now skirting the Ukrainian border remain well within reach of the type of missile that allegedly took down MH17, and if there was malice aforethought, they could just as easy have knocked-out a commmercial airliner to the North or South.

I'm not trivialising the flight-path, or the apparent decision to permit it above a certain altitude. With the benefit of hindsight it clearly looks more risk than it's worrh absorbing. However, Malaysian were not unique in their use of this path, it was ratified as safe by the relevant authorities, and there's a high likelihood that similar precedent had been set......but nobody accounted for gross negligence/bumbling amateurs to be allowed to be in control of SAMs.

Again, there are questions to be answered and there will doubtless be a change of protocol.....but it's only a part of an inquiry that has a much broader scope.
Click to expand...

the actual flight path was more to the south though Grass..the picture i saw showed that the plane had flown north of the correct path...into danger

i agree..other things are more important..but the media have just got Russia/Putin bashing on the brain..if they can spend as much times as they are on that then some should be spent on questioning the flight path..they are blaming the drivers as per the scenario with the M1 thing..which to me is back to front
 
Thats ridiculous frankly

You really think the russian defence should be that it was the flights fault for being there? Thats madness
 
Grasshopper said:
Regardless of who brought the plane down - and it was almost certainly the pro-Russian rebels - the offensive launched by the Ukraine Government today is utterly stupid, given the priority is all about safe access for crash investigators and their related teams.
Click to expand...

On the subject of who did it, interesting piece below on the (abstract) incentive structure from a purely rational perspective:

http://politicalviolenceataglance.org/2014/07/21/the-blame-game/

I'm not at all saying that the plane wasn't brought down by pro-Russian separatists - all of the evidence points to that being the case.

That said, I have a hard time believing they would be stupid enough to deliberately bring down a commercial jet - my hunch would be that this is a tragic case of mistaken identity. Of course, that doesn't absolve Russia of any blame whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
I think it probably started out as a case of mistaken identity but I wouldn't call it "tragic".

It was arrogant and sordid, more like. Arrogant in the sense that those who took the plane down probably assumed they were shooting at a military target but should have known better. Sordid because the site has been blocked off from interested parties, no thought is being given to grieving relatives and attempts are being made to pass the blame for the whole fiasco elsewhere.
 
Back
Top