Merged Ukraine erupts in riots and general strike.

[L.Y.S.]

Just for fun, here's a slanging match on the subject of Russia and Ukraine, in which Michael Heseltine says the UK and Europe ought to stay out of it, the Russian former Kremlin advisor puts forward the Russia Today narrative and David Aaronovitch mocks both of them for reneging on a treaty that was signed by governments that both of them actually worked for:

Angrysoba, this was awesome.

 

[L.Y.S.]

LYS: are you sure you have read the Monroe Doctrine?

Here is the text, in case you have not.

I think I could offer a decent argument that, having participated in WW I, the Monroe Doctrine was rendered at least in part moot. The general tone of that document was

"you European powers stay on your side of the pond, and we'll stay out ... so you make sure you stay out of our side of the pond."

So this doctrine wasn't used when the KGB operatives and Soviets got really friendly with anti-American regimes of 20th century's Latin America?

 

[LSSBB]

So this doctrine wasn't used when the KGB operatives and Soviets got really friendly with anti-American regimes of 20th century's Latin America?

No, that was Containment. Cold War.

 

[L.Y.S.]

No, that was Containment. Cold War.

According to this article, some Cold War Latin American interventions were still operating partially under the premise of the Monroe Doctrine.

 

[LSSBB]

According to this article, some Cold War Latin American interventions were still operating partially under the premise of the Monroe Doctrine.

Under the sources of that article, that doctrine was applied ideologically toward anti-communism. Good counterpoint, however I would argue it was no longer the same concept - in effect, the strategy was an extension of containment: the goal was no longer hemispheric, it was now specifically anti-communism. Kennedy, despite phrasing justification in terms of Monroe, specifically feared the basing of Soviet missiles near the U. S.

 

[Cain]

http://news.yahoo.com/sarah-palin-nukes-best-putin-containment-strategy-005149323.html

Asked about the situation unfolding in Ukraine, Sarah Palin observed, "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke."

So that's what's keeping Obama in check.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Fascists. I said fascists.

Indeed you did say Fascists and not Nazis, my bad. The two concepts are so similar ... in fact, I see you confused me by using it in the almost meaningless sense of, basically, "a jerk." A real Fascist, for example, hates communists. You won't find any of those either on the Yanukovych side. His Regions party was allied with the Communist party, and some non-aligned MPs, in the parliament minority. Both parties are now threatened with being outlawed, by the Fascist and neo-Nazi and "economic development group" parties on the side you have been rooting for. (ref: WP)

Yes, they're in there along with some liberal and leftist voices as well, who are probably more what you root for. We can all see your distaste for any Naziism/fascism on your side. But even more so what comes through is your minimization and avoidance of it, and penchant for instantly shifting the subject to Putin. In that, you're right in step with the times and the Western mind, as molded. We'll see just how dangerously wrong that view was. Maybe it will all come out okay, but I'm not optimistic.

"Those guys" aren't in power. A few of them are, while the rest of the government isn't "Nazi, fascist white supremacist dangerous thugs". A popular rebellion took place, and not all of the groups involved are lily-white. Seemingly everyone but you are aware of that fact.

They and or ideological allies are vastly closer to power, the treasury, the armories, etc. than ever before.

I'm the only one who's unaware that there are bad apples amongst the Kiev cabal? Hello, who confused himself with his own rhetoric here?

As for a name, how about Vladimir Putin? Let's hear you denounce him.

I denounce whatever he's done that merits it. My interest, however, is in the riots and stuff that at once demonized and overthrew the government of Ukraine.

None of this excuses all the hand-waving and apologetics you spew for the fascist in the Kremlin, though. It's quite disgusting.

Why don't you just do that a few more times, and confuse yourself some more?

Sorry for the long delay. I've been busy elsewhere, but finally have some thoughts together I'll be back with shortly.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Just to add couple of points which seem to be missing from that wiki quote. Before the Constitutional Court overturned the 2004 constitution Yanukovich had replaced the judges with his allies. And before the Feb 21 voting Yanukovich had gone missing and was nowhere to be found to actually sign the laws he had agreed to. Feb 20th his advisor Hanna Herman said to sign them on his behalf but she didn't have authority to do it.

And a fact missing from this blame-Y+P narrative. Yeah, he was gone on the 21st, because the mystery snipers killed a bunch of people, so the mob and militants decided there could be no deal, broke the deal, and in various ways (under-appreciated mass violence and threats of more, moral confusion, defections, trickery, etc.) overthrew the government. That was against the terms of the deal, before the president's inability to sign the deal, became a problem.

 

[spin0]

BBC: Russia has miscalculated over Crimea incursion, says Hague
Russia has made a "big miscalculation" in entering Crimea, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has warned.


Private Eye has an interesting piece about the money flows by Yanukovich and his cronies through UK LLPs: How the UK helped Viktor loot Ukraine

The method of choice for Yanukovych and acolytes to plunder their country was via corrupt contracts (a central role was reportedly played by Ukraine’s richest oligarch and close Yanukovych confidant Rinat Akhmetov). They often used LLPs such as Highways Investment Processing LLP, which in 2011 won a Ukrainian government contract for a $400m oil rig when the going rate was at least $100m cheaper (Eye 1326).

The LLP in question, the Eye discovered, was based at a disused kitchen shop in Cardiff, while the man running the company-formations business responsible for it (and at least 750 more LLPs owned by offshore shell companies) had no idea who was behind the network of shell operations paying him handsomely.

ETA: For those interested here's European Commission's overview of the economic support package for Ukraine: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010...s/2014/03/pdf/20140306-ukraine-package_en.pdf

Highlights:

* €3 billion from the EU budget in the coming years, €1.6 billion in macro financial assistance loans (MFA) and an assistance package of grants of €1.4 billion;

* Up to €8 billion from the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development;

* Potential €3.5 billion leveraged through the Neighbourhood Investment Facility;

* Setting up of a donor coordination platform;

* Provisional application of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area when Association Agreement is signed and, if need be, by autonomous frontloading of trade measures;

* Organisation of a High Level Investment Forum/Task Force;

* Modernisation of the Ukraine Gas Transit System and work on reverse flows, notably via Slovakia;

* Acceleration of Visa Liberalisation Action Plan within the established framework; Offer of a Mobility Partnership;

* Technical assistance on a number of areas from constitutional to judicial reform and preparation of elections.

 

[uke2se]

Indeed you did say Fascists and not Nazis, my bad. The two concepts are so similar ... in fact, I see you confused me by using it in the almost meaningless sense of, basically, "a jerk." A real Fascist, for example, hates communists. You won't find any of those either on the Yanukovych side. His Regions party was allied with the Communist party, and some non-aligned MPs, in the parliament minority. Both parties are now threatened with being outlawed, by the Fascist and neo-Nazi and "economic development group" parties on the side you have been rooting for. (ref: WP)

You're going to have to point out to where in the article it says that the Nazis and fascists are looking to ban the Party of Regions and the Communists. As far as I can see, the Party of Regions still have the most amount of seats, and the Party of Regions voted to impeach Yanukovych.

Yes, they're in there along with some liberal and leftist voices as well, who are probably more what you root for. We can all see your distaste for any Naziism/fascism on your side. But even more so what comes through is your minimization and avoidance of it, and penchant for instantly shifting the subject to Putin. In that, you're right in step with the times and the Western mind, as molded. We'll see just how dangerously wrong that view was. Maybe it will all come out okay, but I'm not optimistic.

According to the Wiki article you linked, Svoboda has 8.1% of the parliament. While that's more than I'd prefer, it's hardly catastrophic, and rather in line with extreme right wing parties in other European countries.

They and or ideological allies are vastly closer to power, the treasury, the armories, etc. than ever before.

Again, looking at your Wiki article, Svoboda has lost points over time. They were stronger in 2012.

I'm the only one who's unaware that there are bad apples amongst the Kiev cabal? Hello, who confused himself with his own rhetoric here?

No, you appear to be the only one who doesn't understand that a popular rebellion took place and that a few of the players aren't lily-white. It seems to have been your contention all along that the new regime in Kiev is Nazi, fascist or ultra-nationalist. It clearly isn't.

I denounce whatever he's done that merits it. My interest, however, is in the riots and stuff that at once demonized and overthrew the government of Ukraine.

Since I've never seen you denounce Putin for anything, I can only assume that you don't think anything he's done merits denunciation. Instead of looking at what's going on, you're content playing "spot the Nazi" and investigoogling whether mystery snipers where present at the protests.

Why don't you just do that a few more times, and confuse yourself some more?

I'm not confused. I see what you're doing pretty clearly.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Sniper Updates

Cited, and time-stamps refer to 41 minute video

Earlier in the thread, I had said that video showed no real/obvious crime, just the shooting of insurgents, not protesters. I didn't watch it close enough then. And in a related note, the "really interesting" concept with graphic I posted later - saying no protester/insurgents were shot in the back from the hotel - is quite wrong.

I still see no clear evidence anyone was shot in the Maidan proper, where there were more non-rebel cameras trained. But "near" it, on Instytustska, out the other side of the hotel, yes - whatever the victims' intent pushing towards the seat of government, these first several people sent in are unarmed, and relentlessly gunning them down where pinned in is criminal to the extreme.

A Ukrainian-language video CE probably already linked to makes this case quite well. My belated analysis agrees with that and others that all those we can see being shot in that deadly area were hit "from behind," from the hotel, the direction hardly anyone ever shielded themselves from. There's some fire from ahead too, but that also is ambiguous and might kill no one - at 9:08 Berkut can be seen running away from the Metro station area, under gunfire. And I think I have a helmeted insurgent barely visible, aiming a rifle behind them.

New reports from the Kiev cabal say there were sniper shells on the roof of the national bank, and also confirmed firing from a residence next to the presidential administration building, and from the hotel - 3 directions total. The hotel never was excluded even though it was generally insurgent-held (there are lots of rooms in there, with guests of Yanukovych, they'd say ...). So all the analyses proving fire from there arguably don't matter.

But in fact it seems likely all the relevant fire came from that spot and none from up ahead, south or southeast. The massacre seems to have been brief - 12:30 to maybe 1:00. By 1:15 they said a sniper was caught, single, clearly at the hotel as they had no access at all to the other sites, yet. And about then it seems the way was clear for the advance, this time by the guys with the white power symbols on the barricades, suffering less shooting injury. In that sense, the rebel story is consistent, the angle of fire arguments will be seen as irrelevant, and it won't be so easy to prove or even suggest it was a false flag sniper in whatever room.

Possible clues, short of proof, include:
- this was all but needed. As the new health minister put it: "if there hadn't been this provocation, this action from a 'third sector,' I think Yanukovych would have remained in power." He blames Russia.
- As for who was picked to go in then, if this were a plan, those sent in first for nothing but to die, deserve scrutiny. Were they a bunch of naiive hippies a Nazi type would consider expendable, and good at making the "protests" and the martyrs look less Nazi?
- the lingering drama and possible subtext beneath each shooting - the irony of the boy shot at 12:25, just moments after picking up a shield and positioning it right to not matter at all. An improperly held shield precedes shooting (14:08) - just sitting behind the wall, doing nothing gets two at least killed (16:45) ... one guy with no shield but a rifle, no defense from the hotel - not shot. (14:24)
- cameraman never shot or shot at. There are no other cameras I know of capturing this kind of footage. He doesn't hide. Killing him and his camera is all you'd have to do to delete most evidence. Was he approved, by the snipers? Apparently so. Was he hired by the Russians too?
- forensic details may hold clues for the experts, and just from the video: audio (volume,delay, reverb), lines-of-sight - the missing segments of the video - is this just spots not filmed, or extra-embarrassin scenes edited out?
- the one-sniper-caught narrative, ending the terror, fails to explain the un-captured "sleeper" sniper the BBC reporter saw after sunset - looking like one of the armed protesters who ran the place, and then went looking for the sniper. If a team lingered in the hotel that whole time, why did they stop shooting after the sacrifice, and otherwise allow the insurgents to progress unhindered?

Next: One-side-shooting-everyone/Third Force/Blame-Russia Narrative Updates

 

[uke2se]

 

[Caustic Logic]

You're going to have to point out to where in the article it says that the Nazis and fascists are looking to ban the Party of Regions and the Communists. As far as I can see, the Party of Regions still have the most amount of seats, and the Party of Regions voted to impeach Yanukovych.

Ah, I didn't ref that. Sorry. Let's see... Regions, kind of demonized. I don't really know they're to be banned. Got me there. Communists, there's a proposal to criminalize it. Here's the Nation saying it's one of Svoboda's general goals. Ah, here we go: politicians propose holding referendum on banning Communist party, ideology Or is that it? That was October. Well anyway, there will be if there isn't, and it'll do better than before.

Otherwise, what I said. No time to bicker each point again.

 

[uke2se]

Ah, I didn't ref that. Sorry. Let's see... Regions, kind of demonized. I don't really know they're to be banned. Got me there. Communists, there's a proposal to criminalize it. Here's the Nation saying it's one of Svoboda's general goals. Ah, here we go: politicians propose holding referendum on banning Communist party, ideology Or is that it? That was October. Well anyway, there will be if there isn't, and it'll do better than before.

Otherwise, what I said. No time to bicker each point again.

So, nothing about anyone wanting to ban the Party of Regions then?

 

[Caustic Logic]

meaning?

Since I've never seen you denounce Putin for anything, I can only assume that you don't think anything he's done merits denunciation.

It's not an obsession of mine. But if this pans out, I think it counts. It's old research, half-ass, relying mainly on one article that's worth re-considering. But I still kind of suspect Putin did that. Not good.

Instead of looking at what's going on, you're content playing "spot the Nazi" and investigoogling whether mystery snipers where present at the protests.

'Scuse me? Instead of looking at "what's going on" (what the Great Putan is doing and looking for further denunciations to wring from it) I'm looking at what happened when "Ukraine erupts in riots and general strike."

Yes. Yes I am.

 

[uke2se]

meaning?

Meaning "totally called it!"

It's not an obsession of mine. But if this pans out, I think it counts. It's old research, half-ass, relying mainly on one article that's worth re-considering. But I still kind of suspect Putin did that. Not good.

So invading sovereign nations doesn't cut it?

'Scuse me? Instead of looking at "what's going on" (what the Great Putan is doing and looking for further denunciations to wring from it) I'm looking at what happened when "Ukraine erupts in riots and general strike."

Yes. Yes I am.

We're past the riots and general strike. Since then, we've had a popular rebellion and now we're at the "Russia invades a neighboring country" stage. Do try to keep up.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Meaning "totally called it!"

Totally called what? Where? Did you even read that whole post? It's kind of long.

So invading sovereign nations doesn't cut it?

It's inherently not a good thing. Possibly blowing up hundreds of your own citizens just to blame a foreign enemy doesn't cut it?

How about this: what if I told you I suspect Putin was behind the mystery sniper in the hotel? Not to stop the protests, but to egg them on by killing a few innocents, provoking the rest to overthrow Yanukovych. Perhaps the idea would be he could then cite the "Nazi" takeover as some "emergency" and use it as an excuse to launch a full invasion and annexation of Ukraine. Would that make you happy, or more curious about the sniper?

We're past the riots and general strike. Since then, we've had a popular rebellion and now we're at the "Russia invades a neighboring country" stage. Do try to keep up.

No, you run on ahead to wherever you're told to go and denounce your enemies. I don't think you guys really need my help there as bad as you pretend. I will linger over the evidence that interests me until I get the best reading I can. I understand your reticence to follow suit, of course, as with those in the Kiev cabal.

 

[uke2se]

Totally called what? Where? Did you even read that whole post? It's kind of long.

That you would focus on investigoogling.

It's inherently not a good thing. Possibly blowing up hundreds of your own citizens just to blame a foreign enemy doesn't cut it?

I generally don't go for conspiracy theories.

How about this: what if I told you I suspect Putin was behind the mystery sniper in the hotel? Not to stop the protests, but to egg them on by killing a few innocents, provoking the rest to overthrow Yanukovych. Perhaps the idea would be he could then cite the "Nazi" takeover as some "emergency" and use it as an excuse to launch a full invasion and annexation of Ukraine. Would that make you happy, or more curious about the sniper?

Nope. It would make me question your intelligence.

No, you run on ahead to wherever you're told to go and denounce your enemies.

Told to go?

I don't think you guys really need my help there as bad as you pretend.

Wut?

I will linger over the evidence that interests me until I get the best reading I can.

Or you could do as the rest of us and wait for an investigation by actually qualified people working from more than youtube videos

I understand your reticence to follow suit, of course, as with those in the Kiev cabal.

Your insults aren't really that biting, pal.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Nope. It would make me question your intelligence.

Hm. Good answer.

The government's new health minister — a doctor who helped oversee medical treatment for casualties during the protests — told The Associated Press that the similarity of bullets wounds suffered by opposition victims and police indicates the shooters were trying to stoke tensions on both sides and spark even greater violence, with the goal of toppling Yanukovych.
...
Forensic evidence, in particular the similarity of the bullet wounds, led him and other to conclude that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan — and that the shootings were intended to generate a wave of revulsion so strong that it would topple Yanukovych and also justify a Russian invasion.
...
"In fact if there hadn't been this provocation, this action from a 'third sector,' I think Yanukovych would have remained in power," Musiy told AP.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/0...ersions-sniper-tragedy-that-drove-yanukovych/

He offers this as a rebuttal to the claim that the snipers shot both sides to stoke tensions and provoke an overthrow, and were hired by the people who had reason to and were involved in an overthrow. That. he thinks, "does not correspond with reality." Reality is that + Russia did it, so they could invade, and obviously Crimea is just the beginning. Official story in Kiev. What say you to that CT nuttery? Can you catch up with this one?

ETA: Oh but I found that by "investigoogling!" It doesn't count! Just like videos lose all evidentiary value once they're put on Youtube. Duh.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Your insults aren't really that biting, pal.

That wasn't an insult, just an observation. No one wants to consider the details of this ridiculous alleged crime, just to keep on acting like it must be just as sold.

So should we wait for truther Muisy's CT investigation before drawing conclusions, and then just draw his conclusion? Why?