Civil war in Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
@Cadian -this is an excellent informant. The man who never was in Ukraine. Tell me me why I never advise you to India and USA?
That is true. The Kiev regime forces have used vehicles marked with a red cross to haul artillery. Pictures have already been posted.

Sir, regarding the red cross symbol, we must never forget UA army using it on vehicles carrying troops and towed artillery.
You claim to live in Odessa, yet, you don't seem to know any better.

You live in Ukraine, yet you do not know that the Kiev regime used vehicles marked with a red cross to haul towed artillery. See? You might live in Ukraine, but you know very little.

keep forgeting that "Ukraine" is not something different to "russia"
keep forgeting what Kiev was.. and who was Oleg of Novgorod >>
I have told him about Kievskaya Rus and Oleg of Novgorod, but since he is from Ukraine, you should not expect him to know much about Ukraine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
@Damian, @militarysta, in the news was mentioned that Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine establish a common brigade with base in Poland. Any info?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
- If I wanted to, Russian troops would be in two days not only in Kyiv, but also in Riga, Vilnius, Tallinn, Warsaw and Bucharest.

No mention of Helsinki from Putin, seems like they have learned...
Putinin uhkaava puhelu vuoti: "Kiova, Riika, Vilna, Tallinna, Varsova, Bukarest"
Looks like Finnish media, along with the Finnish Foreign Minister and the former Finnish Ambassador are all out of touch, and keeping up with the western tradition, indulging in concoctions and distortions.

Fact: Russia threatens to release Putin's disputed phone call
Fact: You do not know the conversation between Putin and Barroso.

Moreover, this was already posted earlier, but keep up with your attempts at creating an echo chamber.
 

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,138
Looks like Finnish media, along with the Finnish Foreign Minister and the former Finnish Ambassador are all out of touch, and keeping up with the western tradition, indulging in concoctions and distortions.

Fact: Russia threatens to release Putin's disputed phone call
Fact: You do not know the conversation between Putin and Barroso.

Moreover, this was already posted earlier, but keep up with your attempts at creating an echo chamber.
This is different call: between VP and PP, not MB
 

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,114
Likes
8,543
Country flag
I, for one, cannot believe a Communist can become religious.

They are, including those who were a part of the USSR, can ever be religious, except the Muslims of USSR, since Islam is a very forceful religion that has a very strong message for their believers.
Religion in the USSR ever was. Just above was ideology. Therefore, religion tried to obliterate. But this does not mean that the Communists were able to completely destroy. Me, in infancy baptized and my parents too. This is one of the legends created about the USSR, like the lie about the destruction of the nobility. The nobility was abolished, as a class, but not destroyed themselves nobility/people totally. However, why did you remember the USSR? What does modern Russia?
 

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,114
Likes
8,543
Country flag
That is true. The Kiev regime forces have used vehicles marked with a red cross to haul artillery. Pictures have already been posted.
This is wrong. However, we do not know everything.
 

bhramos

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
25,625
Likes
37,233
Country flag
9/19/14 Posted by blogger Alexander Rogers. "Another blow to ukropskim illusions! Residents of Mariupol hijacked two tanks APU. Ukrainian soldiers, confident in his own integrity, went to the store, leaving the entrance two tanks with running engines. And more of them have not seen . combat vehicle "has attached feet" residents of Mariupol. Tanks passed to militias.
 

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,114
Likes
8,543
Country flag
9/19/14 Posted by blogger Alexander Rogers. "Another blow to ukropskim illusions! Residents of Mariupol hijacked two tanks APU. Ukrainian soldiers, confident in his own integrity, went to the store, leaving the entrance two tanks with running engines. And more of them have not seen . combat vehicle "has attached feet" residents of Mariupol. Tanks passed to militias.

Ravings The tank is not car. It must be able to drive. And to overcome the three rings of defense Mariupol.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Neither warmongers nor wimps
BRITTA PETERSEN


he debate over Europe's economic, political and military readiness to retaliate against Russia shows in a nutshell what is currently at stake in Ukraine: the future of European foreign policy. But every crisis carries with it the seed of a chance, and this one is pushing the EU in the right direction

It is a very German discussion that has been occupying the media of Europe's largest economy for the last few months. It started with a cover story in the leading news magazine Der Spiegel that called on policymakers to "Stop Putin. Now." The conservative daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) followed suit with an op-ed demanding a new "double-track-decision" that would show Europe's "economic, political and military readiness to retaliate" against Russia.

In a largely pacifist country, this air of hawkishness that brings back memories of the Cold War could not pass uncontradicted. Garbor Steingart, Editor-in-Chief of the business weekly Das Handelsblatt rubbished these articles as "mental conscription calls," an accusation that led FAZ to speculate about the amount of pressure Mr. Steingart might face from the German business lobby: "Be nice to Putin, whatever he does, otherwise our economy will be in trouble."

A policy review

The debate shows in a nutshell what is currently at stake in the Ukraine: the future of European foreign policy. The crisis not only reveals the centrifugal forces that are always at work within the European Union (EU): different economic interests and political cultures of its member states versus a growing need to speak and act as a unified player. It also shows a deep sense of insecurity of what a European foreign policy should be. But every crisis carries with it the seed of a chance. And this one is pushing the EU in the right direction.

More than two decades after the end of the Cold War, it is clear to everybody that Europe cannot afford to remain divided and indecisive in a conflict at its own doorstep. The shooting down in July of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over the Ukraine, widely believed to be by Russia-backed rebels, brought back memories of war to a continent that liked to believe that the age of wars — in this part of the world — is over.

Pictures of rotting bodies in the badlands of the Ukraine — all 298 passengers died — did not only prove the contrary. In an 'Open Letter' to German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, 21 German intellectuals from across the political spectrum claim: "The German government resists persistently to talk about Russia's war against the Ukraine. But every realistic policy has to call a spade a spade. The EU must not leave any doubt that the aggression against a state, with which it has an association agreement will come at a high political and economic price."

In the Netherlands, from where most of the victims of the ill-fated flight originated, the incident triggered a serious policy review: from business-oriented pussyfooting vis-à-vis Mr. Putin towards a more resolute stance against Russia. Like many other European countries, the Netherlands depends on Russian oil and gas imports for much of its energy needs and has one of the highest trade deficits with Russia. For Italy and Germany too, Russia is an important commercial partner and gas supplier.

That's one part of the problem. The other is that the relationship between the EU and Russia has not delivered on the promise of a genuine partnership that seemed to be possible after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. One might call that hope for an age of peace, prosperity and democracy as naive, but it has shaped public opinion in Europe after the Cold War at a large scale.

Instead, Vladimir Putin, who was once called a "flawless democrat" by former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröeder, has proven an unpredictable neighbour, to say the least. In a drive to secure his own fragile power basis at home, he seems to be determined to bring the Ukraine back into Russia's orbit, at any cost. And here, the misunderstanding begins.

British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard believes that Mr. Putin is "obsessed with an imaginary threat from an ageing, pacifist Europe in slow decline." But that underestimates the attractiveness of the European model that is obvious to everybody in its vicinity. And it underestimates the pull that a value-based foreign policy approach has for those who are lacking the freedoms and possibilities that the European Union promises.

Obviously, it has given incentives for political change in the Ukraine. "The majority of the people in the Ukraine want a European-style democracy, rule of law and free market economy. The Kremlin has understood very well that this is a threat to Putin's authoritarian and corrupt regime," says Doris Heimann, a German correspondent in Moscow, who has covered Eastern Europe for more than two decades.

While Mr. Putin might satisfy the demand for a strong Russian posture at home, he has little to offer even to his own people in the long run. Andrew Kuchins, Director of the Russia and Eurasia Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC, believes that Mr. Putin, like his Soviet predecessors, might have decided to avoid necessary economic reforms because they could destroy his authoritarian system. While prospects of a positive economic development in Russia seem to be bleak, former communist countries that joined the EU, like Poland, are flourishing economically.

The European right

Europe therefore needs to take a closer look at the implications of its value-based foreign policy. The EU has taken the right decision to impose strict economic sanctions on Russia as a reaction to the Crimean crisis. Under the leadership of Ms. Merkel, Europe stands united in a major security crisis for the first time and it proves those critics wrong who prematurely assumed that "a shaken EU makes no real effort to confront Russia over Ukraine."

It should be added here that the European extreme right that has gained influence — especially the French National Front and even the German Euro-critical party AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) — count among the staunch supporters of Mr. Putin. And it is clear why: both Mr. Putin and the populist parties of the right want to weaken the European Union, for different reasons. But so far, their influence remains limited.

The buck does not stop here. As Mr. Steinmeier put it, "sanctions alone are no policy." But what is? This is the background of Germany's heated discussion about "warmongering" or "appeasement" that rings so much like 1980s rhetoric.

Economic sanctions can only be one part of an overall strategy towards Russia. The role of the military is another element that needs to be reflected on. While the European public is largely pacifist as a result of two devastating wars in the 20th century, policymakers must be aware that "European values" become an empty phrase if nothing follows in case of their violation.

"Will Europe stand by and watch how a state is being destroyed that has opted for European values?" This is the question the signatories of the 'Open Letter' to Ms. Merkel ask. They suggest an expansion of the sanctions against Russia and large-scale financial support for the Ukraine. But do not mention the military.

That is the crux of European foreign policy at the moment. "In the European Union's world, things such as balance of power and armed intervention are simply not on the table, although individual member states such as France continue to undertake military interventions on their own," writes Kathleen McNamara.

In Germany, things are even more complicated because national interest hardly counts as a relevant element of foreign policy. Therefore, every action has to be justified on moral grounds. "The problem of German security policy is that it neither asks itself what German interests are nor does it explain these interests to the people," writes Alan Posener, correspondent at the conservative daily, Die Welt.

As a result, everybody who suggests an element of military deterrence in a European strategy towards Moscow, risks being labelled as "warmongering." That does not only weaken Europe's position, but also ignores the fact that European continent is still heavily militarised.

Other 'frozen' conflicts

Apart from Russia's aggression against the Ukraine and Mr. Putin's plan for a neo-imperialist "Novorossiya" ("New Russia"), there are several "frozen" conflicts in South Eastern Europe and the Caucasus that remain unresolved and represent a continuing risk of military conflict: South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, to name just a few. At the same time, thousands of nuclear weapons are still central to the security arrangements of the continent.

The Ukraine, under the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances of 1994, gave up the world's third largest nuclear weapons stockpile that it had inherited from the Soviet Union. The memorandum that was signed by the United States, the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation included security assurances against threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine. Europe sees the invasion of Crimea and Russia's interference in the Ukraine as a breach of international law and Russia's obligations of the Budapest Memorandum.

It is therefore more than justified that a discussion has started about a military component in the EU's strategy vis-à-vis Russia. The Nato Summit on September 4-5 in Wales discussed a plan of how to free the Baltic States — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — as well as the Eastern European countries such as Poland and Romania from the fear of being threatened or even attacked by Russia.

For everybody who lived in Germany before and after the fall of the Berlin wall, this is a mind-boggling return of "the enemy in the East." As German President Joachim Gauck put it in a much debated speech at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year, Germany still believes that it is "surrounded by friends."

But this might not be the case anymore. "Russia cannot be seen as our strategic partner anymore," writes Wolfgang Ischinger, Chairman of the Munich Security Conference and asks: "When, if not now, is the right time to take steps towards a European Defence Union?"

Given this psychological situation of the German public and the strong economical interests in the German business community, one cannot expect that German foreign policy will be coming-of-age overnight. Neither will the European Union start acting as the "United States of Europe" any time soon. But driven by the dramatic events in the Ukraine, a far-reaching process has started, in Germany and in other European countries. For this time, the EU is on the right path.

(Britta Petersen was South Asia correspondent of the German Financial Times in India and Country Director of the Heinrich Boell Foundation in Pakistan. She is currently Senior Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in Delhi.)
Neither warmongers nor wimps - The Hindu
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
EU sanctions on Russia could self-harm
PARVATHI MENON


The impact of the new and most comprehensive sanctions package so far against Russia, which the European Union (EU) announced on July 29 will do some self-damage, but the burden of that should be equally shared amongst European economies, Foreign Secretary Phillip Hammond said.

"It will affect our economy... but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, and if we want to impose economic pain on Russia in order to try to encourage it to behave properly in eastern Ukraine and to give access to the crash site, then we have to be prepared to take these measures," he said in an interview to a news channel.

Though the sanctions package is designed to punish Russia more than it hurts Europe, it would be "absurd to suggest we can impose wide-ranging sanctions on the Russian economy without also having some impact on ourselves," he said.

"So our discussions last week focused on a package, which shares the burden fairly across the EU, making sure that the big economies share the pain."

The raft of sanctions was announced on Tuesday by the EU after a marathon discussion.

In their statement, the 28 member-nations said, "It is meant as a strong warning: illegal annexation of territory and deliberate destabilisation of a neighbouring sovereign country cannot be accepted in 21st century Europe. Furthermore, when the violence created spirals out of control and leads to the killing of almost 300 innocent civilians in their flight from the Netherlands to Malaysia, the situation requires urgent and determined response."

The sanctions, which will be reviewed in October, target specific sectors of the Russian economy. According to the statement, the sanctions will "limit access to EU capital markets for Russian state-owned financial institutions, impose an embargo on trade in arms, establish an export ban for dual use goods for military end-users, and curtail Russian access to sensitive technologies particularly in the field of the oil sector."

The EU had only last week put another 15 Russian individuals and 18 entities to asset freezes and visa bans on their list for "undermining Ukrainian territorial integrity and sovereignty."

The names included those of the heads of the Federal Security Service (FSB) and foreign intelligence, the president of Chechnya, as well as two Crimean energy firms. The list of targets is now 87.

Germany's endorsement tilted the balance in favour of going for the higher level of sanctions. As the strongest EU economy, and the country with the biggest trade ties with Russia, its backing was crucial. In a statement, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that the sanctions were "inevitable."

"It's now up to the Russian leadership to decide if it wants to follow the path of de-escalation and cooperation."

The sanctions will not apply retroactively, but will take effect only for future transactions. Thus, the concerns of at least one nation, France, will be addressed as the curbs on arms sale will not stop its sale of two Mistral helicopter carrier warships to Russia under a contract signed in 2011.

A Bill in the Russian Parliament that proposes retaliatory sanctions has been proposed by a group of parliamentarians led by Evgeny Fyodoro, RT.com reported.

The report quotes from an interview given by Mr. Fyodoro to the Russian daily Izvestia. The Bill will allow the government to prepare lists of 'aggressor nations' – countries where authorities introduce sanctions against Russia, its citizens or companies.

Their citizens will then lose the right to register a company in Russia, deliver legal services, consultancies and audits.

The list of companies would include all six major US auditing and consulting companies that work in Russia – Deloitte, KPMG, Ernst and Young, Price Waterhouse Coopers, Boston Consulting and McKinsey.
EU sanctions on Russia could self-harm - The Hindu
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Caught between Russia and the EU
PARVATHI MENON


Ukraine threatens to become the Syria of Eastern Europe. And like Syria, civil war could ultimately decimate a vibrant and ethnically diverse society, and a rich civilisational legacy

The political crisis in Ukraine, that has now entered its fourth month, is rapidly reaching a point of no return. Territorial fissures in the country along political, linguistic and ethnic lines, the real possibility of civil war, and the emergence of the southern (autonomous) Ukrainian republic of Crimea as a potential, international military flashpoint, are among the different aspects of the current situation in the country, which is the second largest state in Europe.

The focus has shifted from Kiev to the southern province of Crimea where the interim government that deposed former President Viktor Yanukovych has not been recognised. With its complex ethnic mix and historical past, the region has traditionally had strong ties with Russia.

Russia has stepped up its military presence in Crimea — it already has a treaty with Ukraine that allows it to station its Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol, and its Parliament recently passed a resolution reserving the right for limited military intervention to defend the rights of 1.5 million Russians in Crimea.

The western bloc has accused Russia of the "armed seizure" of Crimea, and Washington is putting together legislation for a package of sanctions against Russia that could include trade restrictions, visa bans and asset freezes. These countries have withdrawn from preparations for the G8 Summit that is to be held in Sochi, the venue of the Winter Olympics.

Euromaidan and agreement

The background to the crisis goes back to the three month occupation of the Euromaidan in Kiev which grew out of opposition to President Yanukovych's decision to postpone signing an Association Agreement with the European Union (EU).

The protests and sit-ins rapidly spiralled into pitched battles between protesters and police. Police reprisals against protesters — of whom a large section were armed with deadly weapons including Molotov cocktails to force entry into government buildings — resulted in 85 deaths.

In the face of escalating street clashes, and increasing pressure from the EU and the United States to accommodate the opposition's demands, Mr. Yanukovych was forced to sign an EU-brokered agreement with his Maidan opponents on February 21.

The agreement represented the first real breakthrough in the deadlock, as it had the support of all the players in the conflict — including the western bloc and Russia. Mr. Yanukovych promised a return to the 2004 Constitution within 48 hours, the setting up of a government of national unity, and presidential elections between September and December of this year.

The opposition parties and their backers, however, clearly had a bigger agenda. A day later they broke the agreement and seized power in Kiev. This sent the deposed President, who now faces charges of mass murder, into refuge in southern Russia.

Ukraine is now facing an acute economic crisis as well. It is close to bankruptcy with a debt of nearly $73 billion. In December, President Yanukovych had secured a bailout deal with Russia, which offered to buy $15 billion of Ukrainian debt in two-year bonds, plus a $3.5 billion discount on natural gas purchases. The offer stands withdrawn in the light of the recent political changes.

With elections announced for May, the new government is seeking a $35 billion aid package from the International Monetary Fund, which, if it does come, will have unpopular strings attached in the form of harsh austerity measures. The U.S. government has also offered $1 billion in immediate aid.

Two perspectives

History shows how swiftly the root causes of international conflict often get buried under the layers of subsequent events. This seems to be fast happening in the Ukrainian crisis with the ground now shifting to the Crimean crisis, and the Russian military threat there.

Nevertheless, the two perspectives on the conflict remain unchanged. Europe and the U.S. view regime change in Kiev as the outcome of a democratic revolution and President Yanukovych as a corrupt and tyrannical surrogate for Russian President Vladimir Putin. This view permeates most sections of the western media. The Euromaidan reportage continued to see the protest as popular and spontaneous long after its leadership had been infiltrated by avowedly right wing and neo-Nazi nationalist groups. The overt western support for the protests was at best glossed over and at worst justified. The resistance to the new Kiev government in the Crimea and eastern regions, which derives from a complex play of factors, is still presented as Russia-sponsored dissent.

The other perspective sees regime change in Kiev as a coup, funded by the West, with right-wing forces firmly in the driving seat.

The regime of President Yanukovych was undoubtedly authoritarian and corrupt but he was not only a democratically elected President, but had also agreed to an interim government ahead of an advanced schedule of elections.

A stream of high-profile figures from the EU and the U.S. visited the Maidan actively stoking dissent, actions that would not be tolerated in any western capital where anti-government protests are taking place. The visitors included Special Representative of the EU, Baroness Ashton; former U.S. presidential candidate John McCain; and the U.S. Assistant Secretary General for Europe and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland. In fact, the substantial part of Ms Nuland's infamous leaked conversation with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pratt — which the western media swooped on for her abusive dismissal of the EU — has only lent credence to the allegation of U.S. micromanagement of regime change in Kiev.

Western-backed coup

"Without doubt a western-backed coup," is how Marcus Papadopoulos, London-based Editor of Politics First magazine, described the political change in Ukraine. "Ukraine is an independent country. How has the U.S. and the EU respected its independence? By joining the protests that they called a pro-democracy movement," he told The Hindu. "Ukraine has a huge industry-military complex. Forty per cent of south and east Ukraine are Russian-speaking, and Russia will seek to protect them. It has a right to make sure its economic interests are protected. It does not want a country on its borders that is illegitimate.

"In 1997, Russia and Ukraine signed an agreement on the division of the Black Sea Fleet, with 81 per cent going to Russia along with Sevastopol and other military installations in the Crimea. In return, Moscow compensated Kiev with a large sum of money as well as writing off a large amount of Ukrainian debt. Russia also pays Ukraine an annual fee."

After its independence in 1991 from the former Soviet Union, Ukraine has swung between its desire for integration into the European Union and keeping friendly ties with Russia, which continues to be its largest single trading partner that it depends on for cheap energy resources.

According to Mr. Yanukovych, integration into the EU through a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA) would have cost the Ukrainian economy €20 billion.

Restrictive trade policy

"This is a highly restrictive and bullying trade policy by the EU," said Robert Oulds, Director of the Bruges Group, a London-based think-tank. "When President Yanukovych postponed signing an Association Agreement in late 2011 it did not create a political issue. This time the EU and the U.S. whipped up opposition to him," he said.

According to Mr. Oulds, Mr. Yanukovych had strong reasons for caution as 75 per cent of the United Kingdom's industrial exports go to Russia, and a major part of Ukraine's export is to the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). "Ukraine cannot be part of an EU Free Trade Association and also be part of the Russian[-led] Custom's union. An EU agreement will put quotas on Ukraine, the highest being on agricultural goods like sugar and wheat. The quota for wheat is limited to 20,000 tonnes [subsequently negotiated to two million tonnes], whereas globally, Ukraine exports 10-15 million tonnes. European integration will result in huge job losses owing to the closure of many businesses because of higher EU regulations. For Ukraine it is a very bad deal," he said.

Clearly, the EU's vision for the integration of Ukraine has ramifications beyond the economic as it seeks to draw Ukraine into a defence, security and political framework that would give it strategic importance as a pro-NATO state on the very borders of Russia.

A policy paper prepared by the Razumkov Centre, a pro-EU think-tank located in Kiev, set this framework out clearly.

"The EU's interests (that condition its actions and influence with respect to Ukraine) ensue from the ideology of the European Neighbourhood Policy and priorities of the Eastern Partnership," it states. "They involve creating around the EU a belt of democratic, prosperous and stable states sharing common values "¦ forming a security area around it and expanding its sphere of influence to the South and East. The EU is interested in 'Europeanising' Ukraine, introducing the European norms and standards to its domestic and foreign policy."

Meanwhile, the interim government in Kiev has announced elections on May 25, an exercise that Crimea has already said it will boycott and replace by a referendum on whether to stay within Ukraine.

In the Kiev ministry, 10 key posts have gone to the Fatherland Party of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, including President Olexander Turchyonov and Prime Minister in the interim government Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Of significance however is the presence of the far-right parties, who acted as the steel fists of the Euromaidan movement. The neo-Nazi and Russo-phobic Svoboda Party is not far behind with major portfolios including defence, economic affairs, education, ecology and agriculture. Also represented are members of the Right Sector party, another far-right outfit.

Tetyana Chornovol, portrayed as a crusading journalist, but who has also been involved with the ultra-right Ukrainian National Assembly, was named chair of the government's anti-corruption committee.

Ukraine threatens to become the Syria of Eastern Europe. And like Syria, civil war could ultimately decimate a vibrant and ethnically diverse society, and a rich civilisational legacy.
Caught between Russia and the EU - The Hindu
 

arpakola

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
1,278
Likes
577
So .. that is Zionist pro fascist israel citizens.. in their war against Palastain (Hamas - PLO) find in the regime of Ukraine an ally ??
=====================================

Poroshenko's speech in front of the Imperial Senate
the begger..

but some time ago.. also..

==========================
Atletik- Bilbao fans marched in support of Donbass:
this is what normal people say ..>>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,114
Likes
8,543
Country flag
this is what normal people say ..>>
Funny, especially if we recall that the local oligarchs 22 years robbed the Donbass and the Donbass suffered. The people there put in a sexual pose
 

arpakola

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
1,278
Likes
577



Crimea.. always Russian (or Greek in the past). apart the period that scam Hrutsof and Yieltsin conspired to give it away..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

arpakola

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
1,278
Likes
577
Last edited:

Akim

Professional
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
10,114
Likes
8,543
Country flag
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top