Thread: What Is Happening In Ukraine Is Far More Important Than Most People Realize

OBAMA WARNS RUSSIA








PUTIN IN CONTROL...

http://drudgereport.com/


Krauthammer: 'Everybody shocked by weakness of Obama's statement'...




PAPER: Ukraine Invasion Begins...

'Several Hundred' Russian Soldiers in Crimea...

Ousted president emerges at press conference...

DEFIANT: 'Fascist hooligans'...

Tensions echo Georgia '08...

Palin: I told you...

UPDATE: Russia Seeks Access to Bases in 8 Countries for Its Ships, Bombers...

Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua...

Here's Obama's answer to Putin ..

-------------------

1. Obama's Liberal Military Rife with Corruption - Godfather Politics
   
   godfatherpolitics.com/14530/obamas-liberal-military-rife-corruption/‎
   2 days ago - Obama's liberal ideology has so permeated through the military that it is now rife with the corruption of a recruiting scandal and millions of dollars. ... Not only has the insertion of homosexuals in the military weakened the moral ...
   
   
   
2. Obama 'throwing the case' over 'gays' in services - WorldNetDaily
   
   www.wnd.com/2010/09/201725/‎WorldNetDaily
   
   
   Sep 11, 2010 - The law states plainly that homosexuals are ineligible for military service, ... impaired recruitment and retention of soldiers, and likely increased ...
   
   
   
3. Seeing an Obama Army in Gay Pride Legions - NYTimes.com
   
   www.nytimes.com/.../obama-campaign-recruits-volun...The New York Times
   
   
   Jun 24, 2012 - Seeing an Obama Army in Gay Pride Legions ... forms to try to recruit them for any number of jobs like making phone calls or getting on a bus ...
   
   
   
4. Military officially ends homosexuality ban, gay recruits trickle in ...
   
   www.lifesitenews.com/.../military-officially-ends-homosexuality-ban-gay...‎
   Sep 21, 2011 - President Obama signs the law repealing military policy law during a ... and gay recruits began trickling towards recruiting tables this week.
   
   
   
5. US Military Accepts Openly Gay Recruits | Common Dreams
   
   https://www.commondreams.org/.../10/20-0‎Common Dreams NewsC...
   
   
   Oct 20, 2010 - America's military yesterday began accepting openly gay recruits into its ... Though the Obama administration is seeking to appeal against that ...
   
   _________________
   
   
   
   
   

1. 
   
   1. Few Army women want combat jobs, survey finds
      USA TODAY ‎- 3 days ago
      Survey also finds that those who would like a combat job are interested ... "The women don't want to lower the standards because they want the ...
   
   
   
   
   1. Small fraction of US army women want combat jobs, survey finds
      
      The Guardian‎ - 3 days ago
   2. AP Exclusive: Few Army Women Want Combat Jobs
      
      NPR‎ - 3 days ago
   
   
2. AP Exclusive: Few Army women want combat jobs
   
   bigstory.ap.org › Lifestyle‎Associated Press
   
   
   4 days ago - "The women don't want to lower the standards because they want the men to know they're just as able as they are to do the same task.
3. Few Army women want combat jobs anyway, survey shows ...
   
   www.washingtontimes.com/.../few-army-women-...‎The Washington Times
   
   
   4 days ago - A preliminary finding from a survey of 170000 female Army soldiers ... doors to combat for women, most don't want to jump into the middle of the ...
4. Few Army women want combat jobs - Philly.com
   
   www.philly.com/.../20140226_Few_Army_w...‎Philadelphia Media Netw...
   
   
   3 days ago - The relatively few women who do want combat roles say they want a ... "The women don't want to lower the standards because they want the ...

Don’t expect Ukraine to end up divided
thestar.com ^ | February 28, 2014 | Matthew Pauly
Posted on Fri Feb 28 20:14:46 2014


The last time Ukraine was separated into competing states was in 1917 when Ukrainian national leaders proclaimed the Ukrainian People’s Republic in Kiev and the Bolsheviks established a rival Soviet republic in the eastern city of Kharkiv. When the Red Army finally secured Soviet rule over Ukraine after a prolonged civil war, Bolshevik authorities placed the capital in Kharkiv, viewing the eastern, industrialized part of the republic as more hospitable to Soviet rule. After wartime additions of western territory, Nikita Khrushchev reassigned the Crimea to Ukraine from Soviet Russia in 1954, acknowledging Ukraine’s geographic and historical economic ties to the peninsula (and possibly as a reward for Ukrainian Communist support for his leadership).

But Ukraine in 2014 is not the Ukraine of 1917 and 1954. The Soviet government restricted (but did not curtail) Ukrainian national culture and could be brutal towards the republic’s population, but residents of the Ukrainian republic nevertheless increasingly recognized the reality of a Ukrainian territorial identity regardless of their ethnicity, language use, or views on the imperative of statehood. Twenty-three years of post-Soviet Ukrainian independence have only strengthened this sense of identity.

Talk of possible civil war and the division of Ukraine into “pro-Russia” and “pro-West” territories has taken place ever since the country achieved independence in 1991. Those who suggest this view are fond of reproducing maps suggesting a Ukrainian and Russian linguistic divide.

A more recent innovation has been the insertion of a map of the 2010 presidential elections that is supposed to bolster evidence of a politically motivated linguistic split (majority Russian-speaking provinces in the southeastern and southern parts of Ukraine are correlated to provinces whose electorate voted for the now ousted president Viktor Yanukovych).

When deputies of Ukraine’s eastern provincial assemblies met in Kharkiv on Feb. 22 to defend the “constitutional order” against what they viewed as a radical, nationalist opposition in Kiev, their assembly brought to mind the history of the 1917 divide. Recent demonstrations in Sevastopol, the naval base of the Russian Black Sea fleet in Crimea, in favor of the territory’s union with the Russian Federation also prompt reminders of Khrushchev’s “gift” to Ukraine.

Ukraine is perhaps closer to a split than it has ever been in the post-Soviet period. The interim president, Oleksandr Turchynov, an associate of former prime minister and jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, has warned of the dangers of separatism in Ukraine and suggested anyone fomenting secession will be held criminally liable. But there are multiple reasons to think this will not come to pass.

First, the linguistic divide of Ukraine is vastly overplayed. Russian is widely spoken on the streets of Kiev and among protestors on the Maidan (Independence Square). Leaders of the opposition, such as former heavyweight boxing champion turned politician, Vitali Klitschko, are Russian speakers first. To speak Russian does not mean a rejection of Ukraine. Turchynov and Tymoshenko, both hail from predominantly Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine.

Second, a vote for Yanukovych in the 2010 elections was not a vote for union with Russia or even a vote for membership in a Russian-led customs union. After all, Yanukovych ran on a platform backing integration with the EU and many in eastern Ukraine took him at his word.

Finally, although the demonstrations in Crimea in favor of a union with Russia are significant, they are not new. Crimea has long seen a history of such protests. Crimea is different from many parts of Russian-speaking Ukraine in that ethnic Russians form an absolute majority of the population. But Ukrainians and ethnic Tatars constitute a not insignificant 24.4 per cent and 12.1 per cent of the population respectively and a Tatar political movement supporting the maintenance of ties with Kiev is particularly well organized.

Furthermore, Crimea is recognized as an autonomous republic under a 1998 constitution for the territory that guarantees protection for the Russian language. There is nothing to suggest that the ousting of Yanukovych will alter Crimea’s autonomy and it arguably enjoys greater rights than any autonomous territory in the Russian Federation. While announced Russian military maneuvers near Ukraine’s borders and the recent seizure of the Crimean parliament and major airports in the territory by an unknown, well-armed “militia” are rightly alarming to Kiev, Russia does not ultimately covet Ukrainian territory or want to own Ukraine’s problems.

Perhaps the greatest evidence of Ukraine’s integrity is the very border that Yanukovych had difficulty crossing. Yanukovych fled first east to Kharkiv, then to his home base in Donetsk, but was denied further transit to Russia by border guards at the airport. He then traveled to Balaclava, outside of Simferopol, where his security detail left him. Although he has since resurfaced in Russia, Yanukovych sought and failed to find initial refuge in the very parts of Ukraine that are said to be on the verge of splitting away.

Ukraine’s new leaders must address very real regional tensions that persist. Mykhailo Dobkin, the governor of the Kharkiv province, has warned that the Ukrainian parliament, cajoled by the anti-Yanukovych opposition, has passed laws “that threaten all those who do not accept fascism and Nazism” and warned against possible new strictures on the use of the Russian language. It seems highly unlikely that the Russian language would ever be under threat in overwhelmingly Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine.

What Dobkin’s comments speak to is a different history, the legacy of the Second World War, which remains a politically contentious issue in Ukraine. Some of the hardcore protestors in Kiev represent the extreme political right; they claim Ukrainian nationalist organizations of the wartime era as their antecedents and paradoxically have little regard for integration with the EU. But these groups are still a minority among the vast majority of the hundreds of thousands who have taken to the Maidan since the protests first begin in November. And the protests were not limited to Kiev. Similar protests, in smaller numbers, took place in predominantly Russian-speaking Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhya and Odessa.

In the end, the protests in Ukraine have little to do with a West versus Russia split. The prospective trade agreement with the EU represented an opportunity, however optimistic, for Ukrainians to force their government to face the endemic problem of corruption that has plagued the country since independence. Yanukovych’s decision to unilaterally back away from an agreement his government had been preparing to sign exposed his disregard for democratic accountability and own political callousness.

The protesters on the Maidan ran ahead of the leaders of the opposition in their ambitions. Unlike the Orange Revolution of 2004, this was a protest movement that resisted orchestration by political parties. The corruption of the Yanukovych presidency is now on view for all of Ukraine to see at his sumptuous residency outside Kiev. The trick now for Ukraine’s new rulers is to convince all Ukrainian citizens that they have a stake in a change, that further reform will benefit the entire country and proceed transparently according to the rule of law.

This is a formidable challenge, but Ukraine’s fracture should not be in the offing.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comme...p_divided.html

Obama: 'The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back'

Obama's Statements on Invasion of Georgia and Ukraine


Published on Feb 28, 2014
From 2008 and 2014, respectively

Russia Confirms Moving Troops into Ukraine's Crimea Peninsula



by Mary Chastain 28 Feb 2014, 10:34 AM PDT 688 post a comment
The Russia foreign ministry admitted the country moved their troops into Ukraine's troubled Crimea peninsula. The autonomous republic within Ukraine identifies as Russian and has been fighting back since parliament ousted Viktor Yanukovych.

The Telegraph reports:

"The Ukrainian side was also passed a note regarding the movement of armoured vehicles of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Crimea, which is happening in full accordance with the foundation Russian-Ukrainian agreement on the Black Sea Fleet,” the ministry said in a statement posted on its website on Friday afternoon. In the same note the Russian foreign ministry said it had declined a Ukrainian request for “bilateral consultations” on events in Crimea because they are “the result of recent internal political processes in Ukraine.”

Moscow said it is for security reasons, but Ukraine warned them they must conform to previous agreements between the countries.

Late Thursday night, gunmen seized the Crimea airport, and witnesses said they wore the exact same gear as the men who took over government buildings in Simferopol earlier in the day. On Friday, 20 men wearing Russia's Black Sea Fleet uniforms surrounded the Ukrainian border guard post in Sevastopol. One man told journalists they were there to prevent a riot similar to that in Kiev.

Crimea's parliament dissolved their government and elected a pro-Russia chairman until they vote on May 25, if they want to remain the autonomous republic in Ukraine. That is the same day Ukraine holds their presidential elections. Over 58% of Crimea's residents are ethnic Russians, and Russia leases many Navy ports in the peninsula.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...imea-Peninsula

Video: Russian Soldiers, Helicopters in Crimea

by John Sexton 28 Feb 2014, 3:45 PM PDT post a comment

A news blog in Crimea has been collecting information on what the new Ukrainian leadership is calling an invasion and the U.S. is now calling an "uncontested arrival" by Russia into Crimea.

This first clip shows Russian helicopters headed for Sevastopol airport.



Another clip also posted to You Tube today shows soldiers who have taken up positions at Simferopol airport. The description on the Crimean blog notes that a reporter tried to ask who the soldiers were but were met with silence.



http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2...ters-in-Crimea

Should U.S. Pay for Ukraine's Bankruptcy?



by Chriss W. Street 28 Feb 2014, 2:21 PM PDT 244 post a comment

European and American media may be celebrating the triumph of the Ukraine “people’s revolution,” but the real question is who is going to pay for the $29 billion a year bailout to keep the country from going bankrupt.

United States Secretary of State John Kerry recognized the rebel government and pledged $1 billion of support. The 28 nation European Union (EU) offered to join with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in an aid package worth as much as $27 billion over seven years. But with the EU economy shrinking by a ½% over the last five years and many member nations needing financial assistance, the bulk of the cash for a Ukrainian bailout would have to come from the U.S. Given America’s foreign economic assistance budget is only $31.2 billion, are Americans willing or able to pay $29 billion a year to keep the Ukraine afloat?
The U.S. is the world's largest “bilateral” donor nation. American annual foreign aid budget is $54.5 billion, with $31.2 billion in economic assistance and $23.3 billion in military assistance. American economic assistance went to 183 countries. Afghanistan was the largest recipient at $3.3 billion; Brunei was the lowest recipient at $3,950.
Foreign aid is not popular with the American people, and there are misconceptions about the size and effectiveness of the spending. According to a Kaiser Foundation poll, “Americans think 28% of the federal budget is spent on foreign aid, when it is about 1 percent. Further, four in ten think a major part of U.S. foreign aid is given directly to developing countries to use as they see fit.” Only 22% of Americans believe that promoting democracy in other countries should be a top federal priority.
Three months of political upheaval exacerbated Ukraine’s weak economy and drained its foreign currency reserves. Their monthly import bill for Russian natural gas runs $1 billion, and debt service is $1.1 billion. Plus, the National Bank of Ukraine was forced to spend $1.7 billion to stabilize the currency after a 15% fall. Ukraine also has $17 billion due in minimum debt repayments in 2014. They also failed to sell off their bonds last week in a $2 billion offering. Ukraine's foreign currency reserves dropped from $20.4 billion to $17.8 billion in January. The nation only has enough cash to pay for imports through April, and rumors are swirling government salaries and pensions won’t be paid.
Ukraine received the first $3 billion tranche of a $20 billion Russian bailout in December that included $15 billion in bond purchases and a 30% discount on natural gas imports. But that support was suspended during January riots and canceled after revolution. Russia was willing to fund the Ukraine because it is the front door to invade Russia.
The Ukraine name translates into English as “borderland.” Western Ukrainians fought for Germany and eastern Ukrainians fought for Russia in World War I and in World War II. During July and August of 1943, one million Germans and two million Russians fought the largest tank battle in the history of the world at The Battle of Kursk in Ukraine, just 280 miles southwest of Moscow. The Red Army was victorious after being willing to suffer 1,600,000 casualties compared to the German Army’s 366,000 casualties. Kursk was the Nazi’s greatest military defeat and led to the invasion of the “Fatherland.”
America is the largest contributor to the IMF with a 17% voting share. Together with EU members they have over 40% control. The IMF and EU conditioned their financial assistance offer on the Ukraine signing an agreement to enact a slew of painful financial, fiscal, and labor austerity reforms to bring the country's post-Soviet economy up to Western standards. These reforms would entail the quality of life in the Ukraine falling for five to ten years, including lower purchasing power and surging energy costs. Yanukovich chose a Russian bailout to avoid the violent riots he expected if Ukraine signed an IMF bailout. This caused a violent revolution, forcing him to flee to Russia.
The new government in Kiev that toppled Yanukovich faces the same constraints as their predecessor. Stratfor Global Intelligence suggests: “the only card Kiev can play for the moment is to emphasize the destabilizing effects a default would have. The economic disruption caused by a default could reignite protests in Ukraine and shatter the fragile compromise brokered by Western powers -- an option the West would find unacceptable.” But a joint EU-IMF bailout of Ukraine without painful economic reforms would be politically indefensible to many European countries that have been battling their own economic crisis and have been subject to five years of stringent austerity.
Russia announced on February 26th “surprise military drills” along their borders with Ukraine. They activated over 150,000 army, navy, air force, and rocket forces personnel and put select combat units from the Moscow region on high alert. Russian fighter jets began screaming along the border as commanders were ordered to “verify operational readiness” and prepare for deployment in the event of a real military conflict.
The U.S. has engaged in bilateral military programs with Ukraine since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992. Combined U.S.-Ukraine military operations have taken place in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq. Ukrainians have proven their ability to be a reliable and capable peacekeeping force, but this is far from being able to challenge the Russians.
The willingness for Americans to financially bailout a basket-case like the Ukraine comes at a very difficult time as the budget sequestration is hacking away at federal spending across-the-board. Even the once untouchable Department of Defense announced plans on February 24th to shrink the Army from the post- 9/11 high of 570,000 to a pre-World War II size of 440,000. Paying for economic and military costs in the Ukraine would force steeper cuts at home. It may be enjoyable for Americans to root against the Russians, but why should the U.S. pay for Ukraine’s bankruptcy?

The author welcomes feedback and can be contacted at

chriss@chrissstreetandcompany.com

Chriss Street is teaching microeconomic at University of California, Irvine this spring. ECON X419.34 (3 units): March 31 – June 8, 2014 Where: ONLINE Fee: $630 Reg #: 00026 (Spring 2014) Call Student Services at (949) 824-5414 or visit http://unex.uci.edu/courses to enroll!

by Taboolaby Taboola

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2...e-s-Bankruptcy

12 Signs That Russia Is Ready To Fight A War Over Crimea

By Michael Snyder, on February 27th, 2014

Russia will never, ever give up Crimea without a fight. Anyone that thinks otherwise is just being delusional. The Russian Black Sea fleet's main base at Sevastopol is far too strategically important. In addition, ethnic Russians make up approximately 60 percent of the population of Crimea, and most of the population is rabidly pro-Russian. In fact, many prominent Crimean politicians are already calling for reunification with Russia. So if you have been thinking that Russia is just going to fold up shop and go home now that pro-European protesters have violently seized power in Kiev, you can quit holding your breath. The truth is that Russia is more than willing to fight a war over Crimea. And considering the fact that vitally important pipelines that pump natural gas from Russia to the rest of Europe go right through Ukraine, it is not likely that Russia will just willingly hand the rest of Ukraine over to the U.S. and the EU either. If the U.S. and the EU push too hard in Ukraine, a major regional war may erupt which could ultimately lead to something much larger.

Russia and Ukraine have very deep historical ties. Most Americans may not think that Ukraine is very important, but the Russians consider Ukraine to be of the utmost strategic importance.
As an American, how would you feel if another nation funded and organized the violent overthrow of the democratically-elected Canadian government and replaced it with a government that was virulently anti-American?
By doing this to Ukraine, the United States and the EU are essentially sticking a pin in Russia's eye. Needless to say, Russia is extremely angry at this point and they are gearing up for war.
The following are 12 signs that Russia is ready to fight a war over Crimea...
#1 More Russian military vehicles continue to pour into Crimea. Just check out this video.
#2 Russian military vehicles have been photographed in the main square of Sevastopol.
#3 Russian military jets near the border with Ukraine have been put on combat alert.
#4 Russia has ordered "surprise military exercises" along the Ukrainian border.
#5 In connection with those "exercises", it is being reported that Russia has deployed 150,000 troops along the border with Ukraine.
#6 Russia already has approximately 26,000 troops stationed at their naval base in Sevastopol.
#7 Russian ships carrying additional soldiers have been spotted off the coast of Crimea...

Russia’s large landing ship Nikolai Filchenkov has arrived near the Russia Black Sea Fleet’s base at Sevastopol, which Russia has leased from Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The ship is reported to be carrying as many as 200 soldiers and has joined four additional ships carrying an unknown amount of Special Forces troops. Flot.com also reported over the weekend that personnel from the 45th Airborne Special Forces unit and additional divisions had been airlifted into Anapa, a city on Russia’s Black Sea coastline.

#8 Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu made the following statement to reporters on Wednesday...

"Measures are taken to guarantee the security of our facilities."

#9 An unidentified Russian official has told the Financial Times that Russia is willing to use military force to protect Crimea...

Moscow earlier revealed that it would be ready to go for war over the Crimea region in order to protect the large population and army installations.
“If Ukraine breaks apart, it will trigger a war. They will lose Crimea first [because] we will go in and protect [it], just as we did in Georgia,” an unidentified Russian official told the Financial Times.

#10 Officials in Sevastopol have "installed" a Russian citizen as mayor of the city.
#11 Approximately 120 pro-Russian gunmen have seized the Crimean parliament building and have raised the Russian flag.
#12 There are rumors that Russian authorities have offered protection to ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych...

Viktor F. Yanukovych, the ousted president of Ukraine, declared on Thursday that he remained the lawful president of the country and appealed to Russia to “secure my personal safety from the actions of extremists.” Russian news agencies reported that he had already arrived in Russia, but officials did not immediately confirm that.

No matter what the "new government" in Kiev says, and no matter how hard the U.S. and the EU push, Russia will never give up Crimea. The following is what a recent Debka article had to say about the matter...

There is no way that President Vladimir Putin will relinquish Russian control of the Crimean peninsula and its military bases there - or more particularly the big Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol. This military stronghold is the key to Russia’s Middle East policy. If it is imperiled, so too are Russia’s military posture in Syria and its strategic understandings with Iran.

And you know what?
The people of Crimea do not want Russia to leave either. In fact, they overwhelmingly want Russia to help defend them against the "new government" in Kiev.
As you read this, militia groups are being formed in Crimea to fight back against the "nationalist invasion" that they are anticipating. Just check out the following excerpt from a recent Time Magazine article...

Many of the people at the rally in Sevastopol were not just ready to believe. They were convinced of the imminent nationalist invasion. What scared them most were the right-wing political parties and militant groups that have played a role in Ukraine’s revolution. “What do you think they’re going to do with all those weapons they seized from police in Kiev? They’re going to come here and make war,” said Sergei Bochenko, who identified himself as the commander of a local militia group in Sevastopol called the Southern Russian Cossack Battalion.
In preparation, he said, his group of several hundred men had armed themselves with assault rifles and begun to train for battle. “There’s not a chance in hell we’re going to accept the rule of that fascist scum running around in Kiev with swastikas,” he said. That may be overstating the case. Nowhere in Ukraine has the uprising involved neo-Nazi groups, and no swastikas have appeared on the revolution’s insignia. But every one of the dozen or so people TIME spoke to in Sevastopol was certain that the revolt was run by fascists, most likely on the payroll of the U.S. State Department.

And just remember what happened back in 2008 in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The Russians have already shown that they are not afraid to militarily intervene in order to protect Russian citizens.
So what would the U.S. and the EU do if a war erupts between Russia and Ukraine?
Would they risk a direct military confrontation with Russia in order to help Ukraine?
I am very concerned about where all of this could be heading.
What about you?
What do you think?

Please feel free to share your thoughts by posting a comment below...

Be Sociable, Share!

February 27th, 2014 | Tags: Crimea, Kiev, Michael T. Snyder, Natural Gas Pipelines, Russia, Russians, Sevastopol, Ukraine, War | Category: Commentary

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...ar-over-crimea

Russian Upper House Approves Use of Troops on Ukrainian Soil


BY: Reuters
March 1, 2014 11:04 am


MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russia’s upper house of parliament on Saturday approved a proposal by President Vladimir Putin to deploy Russian armed forces in Ukraine’s Crimea region.


The Federation Council voted overwhelmingly to back a proposal to use “the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine until the normalization of the socio-political situation in that country.”
It said the decision took effect immediately.


(Reporting by Lidia Kelly, Editing by Timothy Heritage)

http://freebeacon.com/russian-upper-...krainian-soil/