Russia invades Ukraine. Roads and airports being blocked and occupied - Polidicks

Why does this all have to happen on my birthday? Everything was tense, but still relatively okay on March 1st, then the next day when I'm pondering about getting older and checking the news... Putin, I realize I asked you for a new war game, but this is [i]not[/i] what I wanted. I was thinking something along the lines of Battlefield 4, so... you can stop now. Just get me BF4 and I'll forgive all of this and forget it happened. :l

[QUOTE=laserguided;44110263]Damn commies! [quote]Russia and China are in broad agreement on Ukraine, says the Russian foreign ministry, as reported by AFP.[/quote][/QUOTE] Russia: And what would you do if you Taiwan gained independence and joined the Westerners? China: Oh- Well when you put it that way...

[QUOTE=Killuah;44110558]In his mind he still lives in the soviet area, that's not calculated, invading Ukraine in times where revolutions are happening all over the world, that's not calm. [editline]3rd March 2014[/editline] It also fucks Russias credibility in all the other central Asia countries. They can't be sure of Russia anymore.[/QUOTE] Had he lived in the Soviet era he would not be invading anyone at all. The invasion of Ukraine wasn't an attack on a sovereign nation for no reason, but rather a show of support for Crimea which has effectively announced itself as an independent entity that would no longer take orders from Kiev. The population of Crimea has asked for Russian protection and Putin responded by doing just that. If any other nation were to do this to their own nationals/pro-nationals it would be utterly fine and no one would bat an eyelid but because it's Russia suddenly entirely different standards are being applied here and that's preposterous. You may argue that 'on-paper' Crimea was and still is part of Ukraine but what is on paper means absolutely nothing when the country has just been through a violent coup and no proper authority has been established yet.

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110629]Had he lived in the Soviet era he would not be invading anyone at all. The invasion of Ukraine wasn't an attack on a sovereign nation for no reason, but rather a show of support for Crimea which has effectively announced itself as an independent entity that would no longer take orders from Kiev. The population of Crimea has asked for Russian protection and Putin responded by doing just that. If any other nation were to do this to their own nationals/pro-nationals it would be utterly fine and no one would bat an eyelid but because it's Russia suddenly entirely different standards are being applied here and that's preposterous. You may argue that 'on-paper' Crimea was and still is part of Ukraine but what is on paper means absolutely nothing when the country has just been through a violent coup and no authority has been established yet.[/QUOTE] So a large ethnic population that still supports the old country is all you need for grounds of a legitimate invasion?

[QUOTE=Killuah;44110558]In his mind he still lives in the soviet area, that's not calculated,[/QUOTE] umm, wasn't Putin the guy who said 'whoever doesn't miss the Sovier Union has no heart, whoever wants it back has no brain' ??? kinda doesn't go together with your random statement here

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110629]Had he lived in the Soviet era he would not be invading anyone at all. The invasion of Ukraine wasn't an attack on a sovereign nation for no reason, but rather a show of support for Crimea which has effectively announced itself as an independent entity that would no longer take orders from Kiev. The population of Crimea has asked for Russian protection and Putin responded by doing just that. If any other nation were to do this to their own nationals/pro-nationals it would be utterly fine and no one would bat an eyelid but because it's Russia suddenly entirely different standards are being applied here and that's preposterous. You may argue that 'on-paper' Crimea was and still is part of Ukraine but what is on paper means absolutely nothing when the country has just been through a violent coup and no proper authority has been established yet.[/QUOTE] Well to that "on paper" argument: The government didn't dissolve, neither did the country and even when nothing is established that doesn't mean you can just go establish things yourself, that's not how laws or politics are supposed to work. To the "majority" argument: The last time we shaped countries based on who is majority in a landscape was after WW2 and basically all of the modern time clusterfucks stem from that. Hint: It doesn't work like that. And to the "asking for protection" thing: [img]http://i.imgur.com/0DgSTGh.jpg[/img] [editline]3rd March 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=NotMeh;44110636]umm, wasn't Putin the guy who said 'whoever doesn't miss the Sovier Union has no heart, whoever wants it back has no brain' ??? kinda doesn't go together with your random statement here[/QUOTE] That doesn't mean that you can't admire the power it had. Many modern fascists are the same, they distance themselves from the atrocities done by the Nazis but they admire the power Germany once had.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78u77XAqk20[/media] It can't be sooo bad, they are now handing out care packages to russian troops.

Also Putins plans to form a Middle-Asian Union are well known.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44110635]So a large ethnic population that still supports the old country is all you need for grounds of a legitimate invasion?[/QUOTE] It's not exactly an invasion when the country you're invading isn't exactly a country but rather a large area which has declared itself independent of its former non-existent government and has called for your support. Let's use a hypothetical situation for a second. Mexico is just emerging from a violent uprising and the country is in chaos. A large city in Mexico is filled with American nationals, American supporters, the lot. They declare themselves independent of Mexico and are calling the U.S for support or even peaceful annexation to enjoy the benefits of American protection. The U.S agrees and sends troops into Mexico to occupy that city. Do you think that would be seen as an 'invasion of a sovereign nation' and would subject the U.S to worldwide condemnation?

[video=youtube;YWkyW_Im48I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWkyW_Im48I[/video]

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110666]It's not exactly an invasion when the country you're invading isn't exactly a country but rather a large area which has declared itself independent of its former non-existent government and has called for your support. Let's use a hypothetical situation for a second. Mexico is just emerging from a violent uprising and the country is in chaos. A large city in Mexico is filled with American nationals, American supporters, the lot. They declare themselves independent of Mexico and are calling the U.S for support or even peaceful annexation to enjoy the benefits of American protection. The U.S agrees and sends troops into Mexico to occupy that city. Do you think that would be seen as an 'invasion of a sovereign nation' and would subject the U.S to worldwide condemnation?[/QUOTE] Yes and even if it's no sovereign it's not right, you don't just invade stuff.

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110666]It's not exactly an invasion when the country you're invading isn't exactly a country but rather a large area which has declared itself independent of its former non-existent government and has called for your support. Let's use a hypothetical situation for a second. Mexico is just emerging from a violent uprising and the country is in chaos. A large city in Mexico is filled with American nationals, American supporters, the lot. They declare themselves independent of Mexico and are calling the U.S for support or even peaceful annexation to enjoy the benefits of American protection. The U.S agrees and sends troops into Mexico to occupy that city. Do you think that would be seen as an 'invasion of a sovereign nation' and would subject the U.S to worldwide condemnation?[/QUOTE] Yes that would be a fucking invasion. At best it's an act of war against mexico since it's their bloody territory and if a city declares itself independent then you basically have a civil war scenario in which the US would be supporting the side trying to annex mexico's territory.

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110666]It's not exactly an invasion when the country you're invading isn't exactly a country but rather a large area which has declared itself independent of its former non-existent government and has called for your support. Let's use a hypothetical situation for a second. Mexico is just emerging from a violent uprising and the country is in chaos. A large city in Mexico is filled with American nationals, American supporters, the lot. They declare themselves independent of Mexico and are calling the U.S for support or even peaceful annexation to enjoy the benefits of American protection. The U.S agrees and sends troops into Mexico to occupy that city. Do you think that would be seen as an 'invasion of a sovereign nation' and would subject the U.S to worldwide condemnation?[/QUOTE] That was the 19th century and Texas was its own country for a bit.

Didn't US officials say it was not an invasion but instead a "uncontested arrival"?

I've been sleeping and I hear that Russia have committed an act of war. I'm no expert, but does that mean a war just started? :v:

[QUOTE=laserguided;44110725]Didn't US officials say it was not an invasion but instead a "uncontested arrival"?[/QUOTE] I don't really care what the US calls it, it is an invasion as it's Ukrainian territory regardless of them claiming independence. Has the majority of nations recognized Crimea's independence? No. So it's part of the Ukraine and therefore an invasion. [editline]3rd March 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=geogzm;44110735]I've been sleeping and I hear that Russia have committed an act of war. I'm no expert, but does that mean a war just started? :v:[/QUOTE] I'd say an invasion is an act of war yes.

Hm I forgot Melnek is FPs Russian version of Bill O'Reilly

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110666]It's not exactly an invasion when the country you're invading isn't exactly a country but rather a large area which has declared itself independent of its former non-existent government and has called for your support. Let's use a hypothetical situation for a second. Mexico is just emerging from a violent uprising and the country is in chaos. A large city in Mexico is filled with American nationals, American supporters, the lot. They declare themselves independent of Mexico and are calling the U.S for support or even peaceful annexation to enjoy the benefits of American protection. The U.S agrees and sends troops into Mexico to occupy that city. Do you think that would be seen as an 'invasion of a sovereign nation' and would subject the U.S to worldwide condemnation?[/QUOTE] I would actually, because despite a large population of ethnic Americans who may still speak english, buy hamburgers, whatever, they're not technically American Citizens. As they were born in Mexico, they are Mexican Citizens, and not the responsibility of the American Government. And even if they were American Citizens, it's still land of the Mexican Government, and they (or their parents, caretakers, etc) chose to move there. At most, I could see the US doing evacuations for citizens, but not a goddamn land invasion to seize the city from Mexico and create an independent enclave.

[QUOTE=mobrockers;44110742]I don't really care what the US calls it, it is an invasion as it's Ukrainian territory regardless of them claiming independence. Has the majority of nations recognized Crimea's independence? No. So it's part of the Ukraine and therefore an invasion. [editline]3rd March 2014[/editline] I'd say an invasion is an act of war yes.[/QUOTE] I wonder if the worlds nations would accept it's independence if the referendum ends in support of secession.

[QUOTE=mobrockers;44110742]I don't really care what the US calls it, it is an invasion as it's Ukrainian territory regardless of them claiming independence. Has the majority of nations recognized Crimea's independence? No. So it's part of the Ukraine and therefore an invasion.[/QUOTE] Recognizing disputed territories takes nations [i]decades[/i]. And it isn't like it even matters if nations recognize it as such, because the simple fact is that it is no longer part of Ukraine because the ruling body of Crimea no longer takes orders from the capitol of Ukraine itself, period. Your horribly pragmatic view on this situation isn't helping and is actually ironic, since I'm sure you were supporting the protesters kicking the president out of Ukraine. In other words, you supported the will of the people regardless of what is said on paper. But when the subject at hand refers to the will of the pro-Russian people that no longer applies apparently and suddenly what is said on paper holds more weight than what is actually happening in reality.

Does Gazprom win or lose? Their stocks are down 11% but gas prices are up by more than $2.

[QUOTE=Killuah;44110758]Hm I forgot Melnek is FPs Russian version of Bill O'Reilly[/QUOTE] What?

Also Russian forces now control the ferry from Krasnodar Krai-Crimea. [IMG]http://i.cbc.ca/1.2557446.1393832163!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_620/ukraine-crisis.jpg[/IMG] [QUOTE]Pro-Russian troops took over a ferry terminal on the easternmost tip of Crimea close to Russia on Monday, exacerbating fears that Moscow is planning to bring even more troops into this strategic Black Sea region. The seizure of the terminal in the Ukrainian city of Kerch about 20 kilometres by boat to Russia, comes as the West try to figure out ways to halt and reverse the Russian incursion. Early on Monday, soldiers were operating the terminal, which serves as a common departure point for many Russian-bound ships. The men refused to identify themselves, but they spoke Russian and the vehicles transporting them had Russian license plates. Troops that Ukraine says are Russian soldiers have occupied airports in Crimea, smashed equipment at an air base and besieged a Ukrainian infantry base in this peninsula. [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/crimea-ferry-terminal-taken-over-by-pro-russia-troops-1.2557443[/url]

If Russia was really so concerned with having Ukraine as a neutral/pro-Russian buffer state, why would they annex it's territory? They're just driving them into the EU's arms at the point.

[QUOTE=laserguided;44110799]Does Gazprom win or lose? They're stocks are down 11% but gas prices are up by more than $2.[/QUOTE] If they can't sell oil and oil derivates at a profit then it doesn't matter, they'll still lose. They can't oversaturate the local market to cover the losses, either, especially if they ramp the prices.

[QUOTE=Melnek;44110789]Recognizing disputed territories takes nations [i]decades[/i]. And it isn't like it even matters if nations recognize it as such, because the simple fact is that it is no longer part of Ukraine because the ruling body of Crimea no longer takes orders from the capitol of Ukraine itself, period. Your horribly pragmatic view on this situation isn't helping and is actually ironic, since I'm sure you were supporting the protesters kicking the president out of Ukraine. In other words, you supported the will of the people regardless of what is said on paper. But when the subject at hand refers to the will of the pro-Russian people that no longer applies apparently and suddenly what is said on paper holds more weight than what is actually happening in reality.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure where you see the irony, perhaps you mean double standard, but do you honestly think those situations are comparable? In any case Russia invading the Ukraine is NOT the best way to deal with Crimea wanting to be independent.

[QUOTE=mobrockers;44110874]I'm not sure where you see the irony, perhaps you mean double standard, but do you honestly think those situations are comparable? In any case Russia invading the Ukraine is NOT the best way to deal with Crimea wanting to be independent.[/QUOTE] What is the best way? The referendum would have been shut down had the local government still be a part of Kiev. The referendum is illegal.

[QUOTE=laserguided;44110895]What is the best way? The referendum would have been shut down had the local government still be a part of Kiev. The referendum is illegal.[/QUOTE] I don't know. But risking all out war just can't be the best choice.

Was violence used in this invasion?

[QUOTE=geogzm;44110912]Was violence used in this invasion?[/QUOTE] Not yet I don't think.