Civil war in Ukraine

[soldier of Putin]

Russias economy is as big as Spain, its a not a major power and getting smaller and weaker every day.

BS. For every tank Germany built, we built 10. We destroyed Germany because of our much more powerful industry.

 

[soldier of Putin]

Russia is a weak, technologically backword country without the people or money to develop anything as advanced as the F22.

BS. Our tanks were better than German tanks. T-34 had revolutionary slopped armor far more advanced than German tanks.

 

[wegweg]

BS. For every tank Germany built, we built 10. We destroyed Germany because of our much more powerful industry.

That was the soviet union, which has gone. as have the people. Today Russian industry has gone, as has its talent. Its mine and gas station now.

 

[pmaitra]

I guess they can make the t50 out of coal Russia has very little industry, its mainly mining.

With PPP, you may have a point, but to the point that Russian military hardware even in dollar terms is expensive.

Russia does make exportable military hardware (with sometimes variable quality), but its pool of people is shrinking. One estimate I read said Russia has 10% of the aerospace engineers compared to communist times.

I think you are taking the liberty of assuming things I have not said. I did not say Russia's coal mining is more than that of Germany, Spain, France, and UK combined.

I should have included power.

Anyway, if you think Russia's little industrial base is less than that of Spain, France, Germany, and UK combined, then so be it. If you were talking about consumer electronics, then you would have a point.

Russia's military hardware is of very good quality. For example, we have not had problems with Soviet made MiG-21 in IAF. Most of the problems were with those made locally. I'd go with our experience than what you have to say about Russia.

 

[wegweg]

Look here
https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/rus/

at least 90% of Russian exports are raw materials. The only manufactured goods in Russia's top 20 exports are 'sawn wood' . Planks.

Compare to Germany. Their raw materials exports are a few percent. They manufacture.

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/deu/

 

[soldier of Putin]

That was the soviet union, which has gone. as have the people. Today Russian industry has gone, as has its talent. Its mine and gas station now.

Soviet Union is gone because it was a drag. You dissolved your British Empire for the same reason, no? With the exception of Antonov, we still have all aircraft makers Sukhoi, Mikoyan Gurevich, Ilyushin, Tupolev, Beriev, Mil, Kamov.

 

[soldier of Putin]

Look here
https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/rus/

at least 90% of Russian exports are raw materials. The only manufactured goods in Russia's top 20 exports are 'sawn wood' . Planks.

Compare to Germany. Their raw materials exports are a few percent. They manufacture.

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/deu/

We export a lot of military hardware. Indonesia is buying our Su-35s. Egypt is buying our Ka-52s. Iraq is buying our Mi-28s. Heck, even Pakistan is buying our Mi-35s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_industry_of_Russia#Exports

 

[pmaitra]

Look here
https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/rus/

at least 90% of Russian exports are raw materials. The only manufactured goods in Russia's top 20 exports are 'sawn wood' . Planks.

Compare to Germany. Their raw materials exports are a few percent. They manufacture.

https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/deu/

We are not debating which country exports how many tonnes of raw materials.

We are debating which country has a bigger industrial and mining base.

My position is Russia has a bigger industrial and mining base than Spain, France, Germany, and UK combined, and it cannot be measured in dollar terms.

Is this difficult for you to understand?

And if you must talk about planks, and ignore military hardware exports, do I need to speculate further as to the credibility of whatever your source is?

 

[pmaitra]

Soviet Union is gone because it was a drag. You dissolved your British Empire for the same reason, no? With the exception of Antonov, we still have all aircraft makers Sukhoi, Mikoyan Gurevich, Ilyushin, Tupolev, Beriev, Mil, Kamov.

He is not British. He is Polish. Expect a healthy amount of anti-Russia bias from his posts.

 

[gadeshi]

Look, guys, why do you talk with this miserable wrgweg?
He is a little ukrainian shitter that have fled from cannon meat mobilisation to Donbass warfront. He sits in poland.
He visits all the forums and publics possible to crap there.
He has been banned almost everywhere for his stupid crap.
So, don't read it, just ban it.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

 

[wegweg]

And if you must talk about planks, and ignore military hardware exports,

Ok, I showed you how Russia has no industrial base, Can find me the numbers or quantity of Russia's military exports? I think they are number 2 in the market, how many tanks and aircraft is that per year?

 

[Akim]

Look, guys, why do you talk with this miserable wrgweg?
He is a little ukrainian shitter that have fled from cannon meat mobilisation to Donbass warfront. He sits in poland.
He visits all the forums and publics possible to crap there.
He has been banned almost everywhere for his stupid crap.
So, don't read it, just ban it.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

У страха глаза велики. (Fear has magnifying eyes).

 

[pmaitra]

Ok, I showed you how Russia has no industrial base, Can find me the numbers or quantity of Russia's military exports? I think they are number 2 in the market, how many tanks and aircraft is that per year?

You showed Russia has no industrial base? Do you know what this statement means? It means Russians are still living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

You showed nothing. You just made some claims.

I have no interest in trying to convince you about things that are obvious.

 

[Akim]

You showed Russia has no industrial base? Do you know what this statement means? It means Russians are still living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

You showed nothing. You just made some claims.

I have no interest in trying to convince you about things that are obvious.

Ti itself it so much.:biggrin2: Of course, the CIS countries have high technology

 

[pmaitra]

Ukraine Prepares to Default on Its Russian Loan
Ukraine's failure to secure a bigger haircut on its private debt means that it now has no alternative but to default on its loan to Russia.

• The only question is whether the IMF will then break its rules and continue to support it

Alexander Mercouris | Russia Insider


Yanukovych and Putin - Sealing the agreement for Russia's loan to Ukraine

In an article we published shortly after Ukraine announced it had agreed a haircut deal with its private creditors, we said that the numbers did not add up.

We pointed out that the IMF package upon which Kiev depends assumes debt relief of £15 billion. The numbers that came out of the haircut deal seemed to put that figure out of reach.

It is now clear that this preliminary view was right, and that the numbers don’t add up.

It is now also clear that the only way the numbers can be made to add up is if the Russians agree to restructure the $3 billion debt Ukraine owes them, which will mature in December.

If the Russians refuse to restructure that debt, then either the IMF package will have to be increased, or Ukraine will have to default.

The Russians have categorically refused to restructure the debt. Since the debt was made to Ukraine out of Russia’s National Welfare Fund, agreeing to restructure it might be contrary to Russian law.

The Ukrainians are now all but saying that if the Russians won’t restructure it, they will default on it.

That throws the ball directly back into the IMF’s court.

If Ukraine defaults will the IMF pull out, or agree with Ukraine it is private debt and go ahead with its programme? Or will the IMF, before that happens, increase the programme or look to Western governments to increase their help to Ukraine?

As I have discussed previously, any claim the debt is not public debt is farfetched. The IMF’s bureaucracy appears to agree. The IMF’s own rules say that if a state defaults on its public debt it cannot be supported by the IMF with an IMF programme.

It is now known that in 2010 Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the then head of the IMF, overrode the IMF’s bureaucracy and doubters on the IMF’s Board to force through support for a bailout of Greece, the IMF bureaucracy warned was unsustainable, and which broke the IMF’s rules.

Will the IMF’s present head, Christine Lagarde, try to do the same thing again?

The implications of doing something like that - exposing the IMF as a Western geopolitical tool at a time when it is being challenged by the new institutions set up by China - and linking it to a failing government in Ukraine - looks utterly reckless.

However such are the political imperatives that most people believe that that is what Lagarde will in the end do.

It goes without saying that this is a decision Lagarde would far rather not have to make.

She must be quietly furious that Western governments have put her in this position, leaving her in the lurch by failing to provide Ukraine with enough money to pay its debt to Russia, thereby forcing her to make a decision that can only damage her own credibility and the IMF’s reputation whatever she eventually decides to do.

Ultimately, what this episode does is expose once again how unwilling Western governments are to give Ukraine anything more than token amounts of money.

The $3 billion Ukraine owes Russia is for Ukraine a cripplingly huge amount.

For the West by contrast it is an almost laughably small amount.

Given the loud declarations of support for Ukraine that have issued forth from Western capitals, one might have expected a generous aid package that would have provided Ukraine with the means to pay this debt, saving Lagarde from the need to make such a hard decision.

Instead the money has only come in dribs and drabs, and is never enough to turn the situation round.

The result is that the IMF - the West’s key financial institution - is being put in a position where its reputation and credibility are now on the line.

Some will say this is happening because the West wants to humiliate Russia, by demonstrating to Russia that debts owed to Russia do not have the same value as debts owed to the West.

That is certainly wrong.

At a time when Western financial dominance is for the first time being seriously challenged, the Western powers - and the IMF - simply cannot afford to play such games.

The true reason Western leaders - for all their florid declarations - won’t give Ukraine the money it needs is because the amounts involved are so big their national parliaments would have to authorise them.

Asking their parliaments to authorise financial help for Ukraine on anything like the necessary scale is however something Western leaders are extremely unwilling to do - which is why it has never happened.

They know it would open up their whole Ukrainian policy for the first time to serious debate, with many EU parliaments including the Bundestag, the French National Assembly and the Italian parliament - not to mention the parliaments of some of the smaller EU states - packed with skeptics who would finally have a chance to have their say.

The refusal of the British parliament and the likely refusal of the US House of Representatives in 2013 to authorise Western military strikes on Syria was for Western governments a searing experience, and given the widespread doubts about their Ukrainian policy Western governments don’t want to risk the same thing happening again.

Even if they could be sure a majority in their parliaments would support them, they would face for the first time serious questions about their Ukrainian policy, which they would rather not have to answer.

Regardless of what the IMF does, it should be clear that if Ukraine defaults on payment of its Russian debt, it will legally speaking be in default.

Legal proceedings in London will follow in which the IMF - if it decides to proceed with its programme - risks becoming a third party.

At that point Ukraine will also be closed off from international capital markets, save to the extent that Western governments are prepared to guarantee any loans made to it.

The Russians for their part will refuse to extend Ukraine further credit.

With coal stocks at disaster levels, and with Ukraine obliged to import gas again from Russia to get through the winter, the prospect of an imminent total cut-off of Russian credit following a default in December on the Russian debt probably explains Ukraine’s decision to ask the G7 to pay for its gas imports from Russia.

Whether the G7 will be prepared to pay for these imports - they have always refused to do so in the past - remains to be seen.

 

[gadeshi]

У страха глаза велики. (Fear has magnifying eyes).

The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters - herr Nichshe has said about you.
Sitting in Poland, hiding from our government, that treats you as stupid mamal and cannonmeat, and in the same moment "loving Ukraine from a distance" and hating Russia who saves us from extinction, and taking a crap on it on Indian forum is apretty good anamnesys for shisophrenia diagnosis.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

 

[pmaitra]

US Attacks on International Law Are Driving the World to War
Christopher Black | (New Eastern Outlook) | Russia Insider

The author is a prominent criminal and human rights lawyer who is an outspoken critic of what he says are miscarriages of justice in the prosecution of global political leaders.

He is known for defending Slobodan Milosevic. He lives in Toronto, Canada.

This article originally appeared at New Eastern Outlook

On July 10th this writer had the honour of participating in a unique event that took place in the stunningly beautiful Reception House of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Moscow.

In a chamber of white marble walls and glittering chandeliers, dozens of legal experts, parliamentarians, social activists and government representatives from Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, the CIS states, Georgia, Canada, Israel, Turkey, USA and Russia, met to present their views on the state of international law and the world crisis provoked by the aggressive and militaristic policies of the NATO powers.

The meeting was organised by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund as well as the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Kutafin Moscow State Law University, and the Russian Historical Association.

The Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of Russia, Sergey Naryshkin, chaired the discussion, which took place in the format of a Roundtable. He began the exchange with a statement on the burning topic of the implementation of the Minsk agreements, in which he pointed out the hypocritical positions of the NATO and EU countries which, while claiming to support the Minsk agreement, are in fact actively undermining it.

This writer followed shortly thereafter by stating that although the principles and the framework of international law are well established the NATO powers completely ignore them when it suits their interests and they have politicized all the international bodies supposedly set up to prevent crimes against humanity and use these bodies, such as the various ad hoc war crimes tribunals, the International Criminal Court, and the UN Human Rights Commission, as organs of propaganda.

It was further stated that these bodies are capable themselves of committing crimes in order to accomplish their objectives and in this regard referred to the fact that just a few days before his unexplained death in 2006, President Milosevic had written to the Russian Embassy in The Hague stating that he was being poisoned.

I added that it was clear that NATO would deliver the same fate to President Putin if they could. As an aside, I was asked several times why Canada had such an aggressive policy towards Russia and in reply stated that one had only to look at Canada’s history of subservience to Washington to understand its current position and that Canada was being used, against the will of most of its people, as an American cat’s paw to try to damage Russia since many people in the world naively view Canada as a peace loving and neutral country whereas in fact it has always been a willing participant in British and American aggression around the world.

The discussion continued with informative statements by delegates from the CIS countries on the situation in their respective countries with respect to human rights and then proceeded to the situation within Germany where there is a conflict between the aggressive policies of the government on the one hand and on the other, the desire of most people to have better relations with Russia and to find peaceful solutions to international disputes.

A member of the Finnish parliament then spoke about the recent refusal by the government of Finland to allow Russian parliamentarians to attend a meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE, and she and others spoke about the constant use of double standards by the NATO and EU countries vis a vis Russia and other countries.

An interesting paper was presented by Dr. Alexey Gromyko, co-authored by Dr. Valentin Fedorov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, proposing that economic sanctions be banned outright as a tool for controlling or eliminating political regimes.

Dr, Gromyko made a strong argument that sanctions rarely influence the behavior of the targeted governments and result only in causing immense suffering of the people of the country being targeted. He said, “Sanctions are nothing but the people under attack.” He is correct since they are a form of collective punishment against the people of a country for the supposed transgressions of a few in their government.

A member of the Likud Party from Israel countered that sanctions had been useful in the case of South Africa, but we never had the time to challenge his position in view of the fact that his party opposes embargos against Israel and in view of the fact that case of South Africa is doubtful.

Dr. Gromyko continued his principled argument by stating that Russia’s use of counter-sanctions was a contradictory policy since Russia possesses less capacity to affect the western countries than they do Russia and that since they are selective, with the supply of hydrocarbons being kept outside any sanctions regime, Russia is forced to restrict sanctions to secondary products and that whereas the west can hurt Russia on an economy-wide scale, Russia’s sanctions can only have an affect on the corporate scale. Therefore he proposed that an international ban on the use of sanctions, even those that can currently be approved by the UN, be implemented through an international convention.

There then followed a series of interventions on particular situations in various countries, followed by further discussion as to whether international law could be said to exist and if so what it was.

There was forceful argument from the head of the Russian diplomatic academy that international law, being distinct from domestic law, still existed through dozens of treaties, international conventions and customary behavior. But the crux of the matter still boiled down to the fact that despite all this, without the good will of all countries to abide by international law, the result was chaos and catastrophe.

One Russian historian recalled the ancient west African tribal practice that obligated the leaders of tribes in dispute to sit down at a table and not to leave it until they had arrived at a peaceful solution, an anecdote that was picked up by others in the chamber.

But again, such customs can only exist and be applied when both sides are willing to search for a peaceful solution whereas the NATO powers and the United States in particular prefer the use of force against those who refuse to kowtow to their demands.

At the end, Mr. Gromyko quipped in response that we should also keep in mind that the women of ancient Greece had another strategy to use when their men wanted war instead of peace, referring to the Aristophanes’ play Lysistrata, in which the women of Greece withheld sexual favours from the men until they stopped their interminable wars, perhaps a suitable ending to an interesting and stimulating discussion about how to stop the incessant wars over the past century.

The Roundtable discussion concluded in the later afternoon with no concrete results in the sense of ways being found to make the nations of the world adhere to international law and to respect the sovereignty of nations, or how to achieve and guarantee peace in the 21st century, in the face of the increasing militarism of the United States and its dependencies.

However, the fact such a meeting took place at all is a remarkable thing. I don’t think anyone can imagine that the American Congress or Canadian or British parliaments would ever convoke such a meeting of international minds to discuss ways and means of achieving the rule of international law and securing a peaceful world.

That it had to happen in Russia speaks volumes about the world reality and about the sincerity of the Russian government and people in their search for the right to live in peace.

It also went some way to reviving the lost credo of internationalism that vanished with the disappearance of the Soviet Union, an internationalism that recognized that all the peoples of the world are one and together yearn for the peace and cooperation needed to solve the world’s urgent problems. In that regard, this event was an important step in reaffirming the principles of international law and the need for international solidarity against the forces of militarism and fascism that once again threaten us all.

We must hope that the exercise is repeated but next time with broader participation from more countries in the western hemisphere, Africa, the Middle East and Asia and, that it take place in the very near future; for the crisis is upon us and unless the people of the world talk to each other and exchange views with a sincere commitment to international law and to achieving peace and security the crisis will pass into world war.
First appeared:http://journal-neo.org/2015/07/28/report-from-moscow-urgent-issues-of-international-law/

 

[Akim]

The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters - herr Nichshe has said about you.
Sitting in Poland, hiding from our government, that treats you as stupid mamal and cannonmeat, and in the same moment "loving Ukraine from a distance" and hating Russia who saves us from extinction, and taking a crap on it on Indian forum is apretty good anamnesys for shisophrenia diagnosis.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

Rumor begets rumor. I was told a lot of rumors about the events of may 2, 2014, is proving. that this is true. Tried to convince a witness. Likewise with mobilization. I also talked about catching of on the streets students and forced mobilization. Actually went through the war only 1% of the male population there are No nurses, which was forcibly taken sent to the front. There are no trains, which were filmed and recorded in NG. You look like the student from Dnipropetrovsk, who called on the radio "Vesti" and complained that he was afraid to walk the streets because he can call in the recruitment office.

 

[soldier of Putin]

Ukraine is a joke

Russian frigate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_frigate_Admiral_Gorshkov


Ukrainian frigate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_frigate_Hetman_Sahaydachniy_(U130)

 

[gadeshi]

Ukraine is a joke

Russian frigate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_frigate_Admiral_Gorshkov


Ukrainian frigate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_frigate_Hetman_Sahaydachniy_(U130)

Sagaidachniy is not a frigate, it is small anti-submarine ship (corvette). Ukrainians call it a frigate to raise their hubris, because they have never head frigate sized ships.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk