Skip to comments.Ukraine fears Russia 'ready to attack'
Posted on 03/23/2014 9:33:11 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Kiev (AFP) - Ukraine's Western-backed leaders voiced fears on Sunday of an imminent Russian invasion of the eastern industrial heartland following the fall of their last airbase in Crimea to defiant Kremlin troops.
Saturday's takeover involving armoured personnel carriers and stun grenades provided the most spectacular show of force since the Kremlin sent troops into the heavily Russified peninsula three weeks ago before sealing its annexation Friday.
Alarm about a push outside Crimea by Moscow's overwhelming forces -- now conducting drills at Ukraine's eastern gate -- were fanned further Sunday by a call by its self-declared premier for Russians across the ex-Soviet country to rise up against Kiev's rule.
The interim leaders in Kiev fear that Russian President Vladimir Putin -- flushed with expansionist fervour -- is developing a sense of impunity after being hit by only limited EU and US sanctions for taking the Black Sea cape.
"The aim of Putin is not Crimea but all of Ukraine... His troops massed at the border are ready to attack at any moment," Ukraine's National Security and Defence Council chief Andriy Parubiy told a mass unity rally in Kiev.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Russia also has troops in Moldova in the Transdniestria region.
Some people here actually favor Putin’s tyrannical takeovers. I guess it’s a strange new form of conservatism that cheers for a bullying autocrat.
Ukraine's military is completely hollow. They maybe have 10,000 actual front line capable troops - the rest are interior police and general rabble. Yanukovych was possibly even working in concert with Russia to make sure Ukraine had no meaningful defensive capabilities.
Ukraine could not even use the fraction of their armor that is actually serviceable in any kind of conventional formations since the Russian air forces would quickly gain air dominance and savage anything the Ukraine could assemble in the open.
Russia's military is also not nearly as capable as this chart makes it appear. Maybe 10% of Russia's military is 1st world capable, but they'd still quickly overcome anything the Ukrainians could throw at them.
The Ukraine would have to fight a guerrilla/partisan type conflict which surrendered land in exchange for harassing and bloodying Russian troops and pro-Russian militias. Much like the Russians themselves have done in the past against enemies advancing against them through the Ukraine.
The question, should Russia actually invade, is do the Ukrainians have the stomach to fight a prolonged guerrilla type campaign that saps the Russian will. Since Russia would probably only seize and attempt to hold the heavily ethnic Russian regions, it might be very difficult for the Ukraine to do much of anything other than try to get the West to admit them into the EU, etc.
Yup, it's pathetic. Those are mostly the paulbot conspiracy theorists who think RT (Zerohedge and Infowars links to them constantly) is a real media outlet and that all of this is about fiat currency, gold stocks, neo-cons, etc. Add in a few misguided conservatives that hate Obama so much they think the enemy of their enemy is automatically their friend, and the isolationism streak that comes with the rising libertarian influence over segments of the conservative movement, and you get a lot of disgraceful pro Putin sentiment that makes one cringe reading some of these threads.
The faux plebiscite worked well in Crimea; watch for more.
A free people have the right to overthrow their government if it is tyrannically hurting the people. We need that here in America!
and how is “soros” and crew going to mount a massive pop. Outrage, organized? The injustices and economic mess are real in Ukraine and it is the ousted leadership that is responsible for that.
“Ukraine can hurt them badly enough to make Putin think twice.”
How much of that Ukrainian hardware actually WORKS???
Why didn’t they evacuate the helicopters and jets from Crimea?
Remember, the corruption in all institutions in Ukraine has been on a level that would make even a Russian Oligarch blush.
It’s simple really. Two schools of thought:
1.) This to shall pass (i.e., Obama/Decline of Western Civ)
2.) It won’t.
How much longer will this Republic endure with the lawlessness described by Ted Cruz? Or the infection of the culture of Death?
If you have something to be optimistic about, please share. Do your hopes ride on 2014/2016? If only we had that one charismatic figure with “shining city on a hill” rhetoric everything will be just fine.
Perhaps it’s Mark Levin’s Article V remedy?
Do you retreat to the safety and comfort of a 2nd Amendment solution?
Or perhaps it’s all over? What’s the historical lifespan of a Republic? 250 years? We’re almost there. What’s the natural state of man? It’s not republicanism. What has it got us? 55 million babies dead, a culture that worships sodomy and death. If that’s your idea of freedom then you can have it.
Crimea : the surrender of the Ukrainian fleet
Moscow announced that the Russian flag now floated on all 189 military installations on the peninsula.
The head of the Ukrainian navy, Counter Admiral Gaidouk has left for Ukraine earlier this week. Ukrainian sailors were allowed to return to Ukraine or to join the Russian navy . Few days after the referendum in Crimea and its attachment to Russian Federation , the Ukrainian fleet in Sevastopol has ceased to exist .
This disappearance closes the parenthesis opened by the partition of the large naval base on the Black Sea between Ukraine and the Russian navy fleet in 1992 after the independence of Ukraine. Russia has not waited until the lease ran until 2042 to use one of the three best anchorages of its fleet. The largest port founded by Catherine II is again fully under the control of Moscow.
What does this have to do with the Ukraine/Russia situation?
Certainly you aren't trying to defend Putin who overseas a country with a staggering abortion rate - one of (if not the highest) abortion rate in the entire world. Putin's Russia is not even remotely close to a state that holds individual freedom dear - or even any criticism of the state.
As to your other points. I am not terribly optimistic. I think the founding fathers did many great things right, but hopefully some future attempt at setting up the foundations of government will learn from their/our mistakes. It's pretty clear, at least to me, that you have to be more precise in writing out any ability for a federal government to build a social welfare state. As long as the individual states have to compete, they can experiment as they like but will always be constrained by what the other states are doing. But this sort of thing should never be allowed on the Federal level and any future constitution should expressively rule that out. Also, I do have to wonder if our 2 party setup is really the best solution. It almost always leads to general elections that force voters to cast ballots for the lesser of two evils. I wonder if a system which was not winner take all and allowed for coalition government might be better.
The more I read about Kiev rule the more I understand that corrupt policitians allowed for this to foster, Russia is simply taking advantage of an opportunity created from within Ukraine’s borders. Not that it makes it right, but clearly the raiding of the public’s money has contributed to the current situation.
Russians have been waiting for an opening since 1954.
I suspect there was some resentment towards Khrushchev’s handing over of Crimea to Ukraine, that contributed to his eventual removal.
Would Ukranians wage the kind of war the Vietnamese and Syrians wage? A guerrilla war means being willing to accept ten to a hundred losses for each loss for the occupier. Would a European nation these days be willing to accept those kind of losses? Also a good chunk of Eastern Ukraine would support the invasion since they are Russians, any guerrilla war would also be a civil war.
Russians will not fold easy, they have alot of fresh experience fighting guerrilla movements in the Caucus. Chechens are born and bred to kill and are pound for pound the most vicious killers in the world, so I think Russia is more than prepared for that kind of conflict.
I don’t like the idea of Europe turning into a battlefield again after almost a century of relative peace.
Not sure. Let’s see what happens.
What should Ukraine do?
1. Do not close the Border! Let all Ukrainian Soldiers back in—you need them!
2. Set up an international meeting in Keiv—include Russians too.
3. Do your May elections—you need a legit Government to sort things out.
4. Force all Russia speakers—Pro-Russian—Pro-Putin people to move to the provinces close to Creimea.
5. Give their homes to good Ukrainians who move out to the east back to the west—include Tartars too.
6. Ask west for—Food, gas, tanks, guns, planes,ships to defend their lands. Ask for EU/ NATO entry.
7. Let the west go back to Russia—BUT keep the east and rebuild-—with EU—USA money.
8. Invite Obama to come for a visit—also the other leaders of EU.
9. Set up a new treaty with Russia and Putin—as allies and good friends. Cut the best trade treaty you can.
10. Invite the Pope to come for a visit.
This is pathetic as heck. The representative of a nation of 50m people complaining about being invaded without actually offering any resistance to that invasion. It’s sounding more and more like Ukrainians - or at least the Ukrainian leadership - have no problem with being annexed to Russia. Imagine George Washington whining about being oppressed by the Crown to the French and demanding that the French back the Patriots with arms and money before a single shot was fired.
There's only 1.3m of them, so Ukrainians can be 3% as pugnacious, on average, and still kill thousands of Russians. Chechnya is an easier place for Russians to fight, because it's only 3% the land area of Ukraine. Iraq's 2/3 the size of Ukraine and mostly desert, where living things stick out, but its Sunni insurgents have had no problem inflicting on both coalition forces and the Iraqi government a continuous stream of casualties, despite being only being 20% of the population at best.
It's possible that neither the leadership nor the populace wants to fight. And that's certainly a respectable choice. The Patriots could have made their peace with the Crown, just as neither the Australians nor the Canadians chose to rebel against what were, after all, their extended kin. If they want anything more than moral support, though, they need to fight. They need to make this decision based only on what they have at hand, rather than be influenced by Western aid.