[radon1]

Ukraine has ordered a full military mobilisation in response to Russia's build-up of its forces in Crimea.

They appear to have canceled this already.

[dolanbaker]

Ukraine has ordered a full military mobilisation in response to Russia's build-up of its forces in Crimea.

They appear to have canceled this already.

I'm not seeing that on the news here?

[radon1]

I'm not seeing that on the news here?

Using a translator, see the 15:04 record in the real-time news feed beneath the article.

http://top.rbc.ru/textonlines/01/03/2014/908428.shtml

[radon1]

There is no "we," "us," or "our," except citizens who are saddled with war costs or are affected by collateral damage.

Appears to be quite a balanced summary.

[dolanbaker]

I'm not seeing that on the news here?

Using a translator, see the 15:04 record in the real-time news feed beneath the article.

http://top.rbc.ru/textonlines/01/03/2014/908428.shtml

Of martial law is not the question. Yesterday, the National Security Council decided not to impose martial law and declare mobilization.

Is that the Russian Security council?

[radon1]

I'm not seeing that on the news here?

Using a translator, see the 15:04 record in the real-time news feed beneath the article.

http://top.rbc.ru/textonlines/01/03/2014/908428.shtml

Of martial law is not the question. Yesterday, the National Security Council decided not to impose martial law and declare mobilization.

Is that the Russian Security council?

No, the Ukranian one. They decided not to declare mobilization.

[dolanbaker]

BBC news has conflicting stories now,

Ukraine puts its army on full combat alert after Russia approves the deployment of its troops

Ukraine orders full military mobilisation over Russia moves

[radon1]

BBC news has conflicting stories now,

Ukraine orders full military mobilisation over Russia moves

They did, yesterday, and today they seem to have halted it.

Will have to wait and see, perhaps.

It is interesting how are they going to implement a "full mobilization" in their situation.

[dorlomin]

Statement on Crimea, from the Russian Left

[Keith_McClary]

BBC news has conflicting stories now,

Ukraine orders full military mobilisation over Russia moves

They did, yesterday, and today they seem to have halted it.

Will have to wait and see, perhaps.

It is interesting how are they going to implement a "full mobilization" in their situation.

This appears to be a an uprising/coup by a regional ethno-religious minority led by people like Oleh Tyahnybok (Wiki):

In 2002, Tyahnybok was reelected to the Ukrainian parliament as a member of Victor Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine bloc.[9] In parliament he submitted 36 motions for debate, but the parliament adopted only four of them.[11] In the majority of his motions he opposed the introduction of the Russian language as the second official state language, proposed recognition of the fighting role of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army during World War II, called for the lustration of former communist officials, security service officers and undercover agents, and demanded the prohibition of communist ideology.[11] None of these motions where adopted.[11]
On July 20, 2004, Tyahnybok was expelled from the Our Ukraine parliamentary faction[9][12] after he made a speech in the Carpathian Mountains at the gravesite of a commander of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army.[12] In the speech, which was aired on television in the summer of 2004, he made comments like:[13]
"[You are the ones] that the Moscow-Jewish mafia ruling Ukraine fears most"[12]
and
"They were not afraid and we should not be afraid. They took their automatic guns on their necks and went into the woods, and fought against the Moskali, Germans, Kikes and other scum who wanted to take away our Ukrainian state."[11]

Moskal (Москаль, Moskalik,Moskal’) is a historical term for Russians used in Ukraine until 20th century. It is also a family name predominantly found amongst residents of Eastern Europe. Moskal is also one of characters of a popular gathering in Ukraine Vertep.
Nowadays, it is considered to be an ethnic slur in the countries of the former Soviet Union and Russian Empire. It is primarily used as a slur in Ukraine, Poland, and Belarus.[1][2] Similarly Ukrainian word Zhyd (Ukrainian: Жид) referring to a Jewish national since Middle Ages became a slur during the Soviet period as well.

I don't know the ethnic composition of the military or the locations of the bases. How loyal would the military be to this regime?

[radon1]

I don't know the ethnic composition of the military or the locations of the bases. How loyal would the military be to this regime?

No idea, really. Most likely, along the line of the existing divisions. For example, the Crimean top military commander, appointed by the new "government", has just taken a formal oath of allegiance "to the people of Crimea" (meaning explicitly - not to Ukraine in general).

Safe some stupid action from any corner, uniting everyone, or substantial "assistance" from outside, their military should stay where they stationed. The "government" has neither cash nor logistical facilities for large operations on their own. But who knows.

[Sixstrings]

Has the Russian government said that they are in fact acting in Russia's capacity as a guarantor of the 1990 agreement?

Russian diplomats are playing the "Baghdad Bob" game. They don't even admit they have sent forces into Crimea. It's incredible. And we're supposed to trust Putin, ever again? On anything? How can you? Jesus.

Apparently Russia just wants us to believe these troops came from Mars:



Watching Fareed Zakaria on CNN. He's right about everything, and he's no right winger or hothead. He says if the world allows Russia to get away with this, then next China and other nations will feel free to do similar actions. It would be a total breakdown of basic international law and a much more dangerous world.

(Synapsid, watch the UN security council meeting yesterday, the meeting that the Russian ambassador *did not want* to be public, and the Russians didn't want the US or Britain or France to speak:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf7QWR5L_fs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AwpWKTkxpg

The Russian ambassador says that Ukraine is wrong, there is no invasion, and all the Russian ambassador will say is the Duma authorized force but that hasn't been decided yet -- unless I missed something, he never admits Russian troops are in there or says anything about these Russian "blackwater" professional army contractors)

[radon1]

He says if the world allows Russia to get away with this, then next China and other nations will feel free to do similar actions.

Could you confirm who "the world" are, and how "the world" is different from "China and other nations", so that those who do not belong to "the world" would not forget to kneel down when they see a representative of "the world".

[radon1]

They are now saying in the news that the mobilization in Ukraine goes on, but that they only got 1.5% of the conscripts so far, people are avoiding the conscription, do not pick up the phones etc. But this is the Russian state tv (Kremlin propaganda).

[Sixstrings]

None of that shit concerns me, benefits me or harms me. It's just a pissing contest. Whats the point in killing a whole lot of people, and destroying a whole lot of shit?

I agree. Russia should have just let Ukraine have its orange revolution and kept its troops out of it. This whole thing started because Putin put pressure on Yanu to back out of the EU association deal and then the people took to the streets. Ukrainians fought for freedom and died, the thing had settled down, and now Russia starts it up again with its armed forces in the country.

As for pissing contests.. it actually does matter in the world that nations abide international law and it not become okay to just start rolling over borders and seizing land. That's very disruptive and its war and it's a lot of chaos in the world if that becomes okay.

How would such a world affect you, as an American (assuming you are)? Well, if we don't squash it soon then we'll wind up in a big war over it. We're bound by treaty to defend Japan and South Korea. What if in this post-Crimea paradigm, China now feels free to seize some Japanese islands. Or Taiwan (though that one's unlikely).

Andy, I know people aren't used to this kind of instability because we've known world peace for our whole lives, but it really would be bad if countries just start grabbing land and there's no international law anymore.

About the arctic.. you can say you don't care.. but what will Canada do, one day, if Russians just claim their arctic waters? If you do nothing then you're laying down to tyranny and surrendering.

What is it that Russia is doing that is so bad? How does it compare say to dropping nukes on highly populated cities, invading Iraq or the rest in the long list of wars where the US has sent its superior military to kill and destroy? So far Russians havn't killed anyone, or bombed anything.

SO FAR. Right. Wait until the first Russian soldier is shot at. Or the tatars rise up.. then Russia will bring the hammer down, Chechnya style.

A democratically elected government has been overthrown by rebels in the Ukraine, and somehow they are the good guys? WTF?

Okay so you're in the dove camp. Fair enough. We can just sit back for a few years and see if things with Russia get worse, but the bad precedent here is that if international law has broken down then China and others may make a move and that's a big big mess.

[Sixstrings]

Could you confirm who "the world" are, and how "the world" is different from "China and other nations", so that those who do not belong to "the world" would not forget to kneel down when they see a representative of "the world".

"The world" as expressed in the UN and international consensus. It seems to be lining up against Russia's action in Crimea.

I haven't read anything out of China yet.. just strategically, Fareed Zakaria is right, China is usually very prickly about the precedent for respecting sovereignty. But if this stands with Crimea, then China may take advantage of the new paradigm. And then it's okay for China to do the same, and grab some place that it wants and feels its national security requires it to take.

[Keith_McClary]

Ukraine 'on brink of disaster' as navy chief 'defects' and surrenders Crimean HQ to Russian forces

it emerged that the newly-appointed head of Ukraine's navy had “defected” to the Crimea region, pledging allegiance to its unrecognised pro-Russian leader and surrendering the country's Sevastopol headquarters.

The Ukrainian security council said it has fired Rear Admiral Denis Berezovsky, and that it would be opening a case against him for treason.

[radon1]

Andy, I know people aren't used to this kind of instability because we've known world peace for our whole lives, but it really would be bad if countries just start grabbing land and there's no international law anymore.

It has been like this since 1999, and was made such by the West, with no Russia's involvement.

[Sixstrings]

It has been like this since 1999, and was made such by the West, with no Russia's involvement.

To be fair to Russia, I've heard some analysis on CNN that makes sense to me. That Crimea is not a big victory for Putin, but rather his worst nightmare. He'd rather have influence over Ukraine WITHOUT having to use troops. And that if Putin really were building an empire he'd have done a lot more over the years besides Georgia and now Ukraine.

Russia is a kelptocracy, it's for Putin and the oligarchs to get rich, and maybe they really aren't about building an empire. Unless it's to grab something to make money like in the arctic, but otherwise Russia will never be a real Hitler type situation. Also, I know from my own reading, that Russia can't even afford all of this -- its GDP is the same as Brazil for goodness sake. And that Russia CAN'T push it too far with Europe, because Gazprom needs those customers -- if Russia builds pipelines to India and China, THEN it could afford to really break with Europe.

The real danger about this Crimea thing may just be the precedent -- if this now gives China a pass to take something it wants. And then everyone else in the world will too, it will be chaos and could spin off into world war.

And by the way, CNN really is fair and their analysts and reporters look at all angles -- for example, it's true that the Russian people have a lot of feelings about Crimea and that Putin was pressured to "do something." It's still illegal though, under international law, regardless of how strongly Russians feel about it.

[radon1]

To be fair to Russia, I've heard some analysis on CNN that makes sense to me. That Crimea is not a big victory for Putin, but rather his worst nightmare. He'd rather have influence over Ukraine WITHOUT having to use troops. And that if Putin really were building an empire he'd have done a lot more over the years besides Georgia and now Ukraine.

Then why don't you send somebody reasonable and wise to help Ukrainians form a balanced and consensual interim government, who could cautiously stir the way through the crisis, given that Ukraine is in a genuine need of help in this respect at that point? Instead of this cretin lady "F* de EU" who appears to be focusing on nothing but instigating a large-scale bloodshed, with or without Russia's involvement.

Is this because O is about to sign the military cuts and vested interests are affected? Or because nobody really cares and this whole thing is driven solely by lady F* de EU because she wants a promotion?