Ukraine

[pepipop]

The Neo Nazi issue is also not a foreign idea in Russia either.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_National_Socialist_Party

“lists Orthodox Christianity as one of its four main ideological principles, the others being a strong state, aggressive Russian nationalism and non-Marxist socialism.”

Well at least they’re not in power in Russia.

 

[TEPO]

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140303-crimea-putin-russia-ukraine-khruschev-khruscheva-world/

Boris Yeltsin handpicked Putin, much of the austere aura in Russia is a result of the past 100 years. The fast paced and various social political movements alarm them. This is what our present administration failed to realize. There’s a glaring difference in the Catholic missionary work in Ukraine and the US political involvement which is more indicative of the current administration which continues the false path of a democratic dynasty world wide.

This is a good point! (I was thinking the same thing when sipping my coffee this morning). The way the West moves makes the East very uneasy and nervous. I’d even say that Russia is afraid of the West -but that’s not a bad thing. It shows that Russia has heart.

…but to break Russia’s heart causes cold reactions… They mimic what they perceive.

 

[pepipop]

The Church missionary progress is slightly different.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/ukrainian-catholic-church-sees-growth-in-south-of-country/

Very interesting piece. I noticed this last statement, it does make you wonder if the new Ukrainian government actually recognise Crimea, especially when they announced they were dismissing Russian as an official second working language.

*He said a system is still being developed for translating and adapting the Ukrainian liturgy into other languages and contexts.

In Crimea, where 97 percent of the population are reported to speak Russian and not Ukrainian, such adaptation practices are vital.

“If language will inhibit our ability to express the truth of love, we are ready to adapt the liturgy,” Fr. Bubniy told CNA, “like our Western brothers do.”*

 

[Vouthon]

Well at least they’re not in power in Russia.

Russia does have a far-right party, a fascist one, represented in its state duma or ‘parliament’. The leader of that party visited Crimea recently during the crisis and was cheered by the crowds there.

The party is the LDPR and its leader is Vladamir Zhinirovsky.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDPR_(political_party

The LDPR (Russian: ЛДПР),[7] formerly the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (Russian: Либерально-Демократическая Партия России – Liberal’no-Demokraticheskaya Partiya Rossii), is a far-right political party in Russia. Since its founding in 1991, it has been led by the charismatic and controversial figure Vladimir Zhirinovsky…

it is usually regarded as far-right and is identified with Russian ultranationalism, fiscally left national-populism and authoritarian conservatism.[9][10][11] Its ideology is based primarily on Zhirinovsky’s ideas of “imperial reconquest” (a “renewed Russian Empire”)[12] and authoritarian vision of a 'Greater Russia.’"[11][13]

The LDPR want to resurrect a Russian Empire and Zhirinovsky is fanatically racist:

Besides expressing his hatred for Turks and Caucasians,[24] Zhirinovsky also advocated for all Chinese and Japanese to be deported from the Russian Far East.[25] During the 1992 visit to the United States, Zhirinovsky called on television “for the preservation of the white race” and warned that the white Americans were in danger of turning their country over to black and Hispanic people…

Zhirinovsky is well known for his boasts pertaining to other countries, having expressed a desire to reunite countries of the ex-Soviet “near abroad” with Russia to within the Russia’s borders of 1900 (including Finland and Poland). He has advocated forcibly retaking Alaska from the United States (which would then become “a great place to put the Ukrainians”), turning Kazakhstan into “Russia’s back yard”, and provoking wars between the clans and the nations of the former Soviet Union and occupying what will remain of it when the wars are over.[26] Zhirinovsky, who encourages separatism within the Russian minority in the Baltic countries,[14] endorsed the forcible re-occupation of these countries and said nuclear waste should be dumped there.[26][27]

In 1999, at the start of the Second Chechen War, Zhirinovsky, the ardent supporter of the first war in Chechnya in the mid-1990s, advocated hitting some Chechen villages with tactical nuclear weapons.[28] He has also advocated using nuclear weapons and naval blockade-imposed starvation in a case of Russia’s war against Japan.[26] In 2008, during the resulting political row between the United Kingdom and Russia, he suggested dropping nuclear bombs over the Atlantic Ocean in an effort to flood Britain.[14]

Zhirinovsky said he’s dreaming of a day “when Russian soldiers can wash their boots in the warm waters of the Indian Ocean and switch to year-round summer uniforms”[30] following Russia’s conquest of Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey and occupation of the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean.[24] He also declared that Bulgaria should annex the Republic of Macedonia, and said that Romania is an artificial state supposedly created by Italian Gypsies who seized territory from Russia, Bulgaria and Hungary.[21]

Russia’s southern neighbor Georgia has been another frequent target of Zhirinovsky’s rhetoric. After Aslan Abashidze was ousted from power in 2004 as leader of Ajara, an autonomous Georgian region, Zhirinovsky worried that similar revolutions would occur in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.[31] Highly critical of Georgia’s pro-Western line,[32] he is an energetic supporter of the Georgia’s breakaway republic of Abkhazia; in a high-profile incident in August 2004, he departed on a campaign to promote a tourist season in Abkhazia aboard a cruise ship which was briefly intercepted by a Georgian coast guard vessel.[33] After war broke out between Russia and Georgia in 2008, Zhirinovsky argued in favor of Russian recognition of Abkhazian and South Ossetian independence. “We should have taken the whole territory of Georgia under control,” he complained, and “arrested all Georgian officers and taken them here, like to Guantanamo, arrested Saakashvili and handed him over for trial by a military tribunal and gone to the border with Turkey.”[34] In 2009, he called the decision to hold NATO military exercises in Georgia during Soviet Victory Day celebrations in Moscow a “total revision of the history of the Great Patriotic War” and suggested that Russia should respond by conducting large-scale joint military drills with Cuba and Venezuela in the Caribbean Sea.[35]…

In 2006, Zhirinovsky became persona non grata also in Ukraine, following his statements regarding the January 2006 Russia-Ukraine gas dispute (this ban was revoked in 2007). In reaction to Condoleezza Rice’s criticism of Russian foreign policy during the dispute, Zhirinovsky stated that “Condoleezza Rice needs a company of soldiers [and] needs to be taken to barracks where she would be satisfied.”[38] At the film premiere of the film Taras Bulba in 2009 he stated: “Everyone who sees the film will understand that Russians and Ukrainians are one people – and that the enemy is from the West".[39] In February 2010 Zhirinovsky claimed that Eastern Ukraine would become part of Russia “in five years" claiming that "the population is largely Russian” and called President-elect of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych “basically Russian” (Yanukovych’s father was an ethnic Polish-Belarusian, and his mother Russian)

He also accused Great Britain (according to him, “the most barbaric country on the planet”) of fomenting the World War I, the October Revolution, World War II, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union.[43]

 

[Vouthon]

For some reason, RT made no mention of this when Zhinirovsky visited Crimea

indiatoday.intoday.in/story/vladimir-zhirinovsky-russian-nationalist-ukraine-sevastopol/1/346231.html

Russian nationalist Zhirinovsky cheered by crowds in Sevastopol

Firebrand Russian nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky appeared in Sevastopol on Friday where a crowd outside the city administration gave him a hero’s welcome, shouting “Russia, thank you”.

 

[TEPO]

Really, the austere of Russia may be a reflection of ancient Mongolians or other aggressive nomadic or Persian cultures -stemming back through history, as Russians are said to have been a people who ‘live in the past’. Remember, the Russians never got consumed by the comforts of Roman protection. They were left, willingly, to fend for themselves unlike their Western Slavic cousins. They are, therefore, ‘different’.

But if Russians ‘mimic’ their rivals (which they seem to), perhaps the best way to approach them is with open arms. Has it even been tried?

 

[Vouthon]

Really, the austere of Russia may be a reflection of ancient Mongolians or other aggressive nomadic or Persian cultures -stemming back through history, as Russians are said to have been a people who ‘live in the past’.

If Russians mimic, perhaps the best way to approach them is with open arms. Has it even been tried?

Yes. Every since Obama came to power he has “opened” his arms to Russia, claiming to be setting back the clock. Look how much good it has done.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Yes. Every since Obama came to power he has “opened” his arms to Russia, claiming to be setting back the clock. Look how much good it has done.

Considering some of the other ideologies embraced by Obama’s open arms, I am not clear that pragmatic wisdom could find much ‘good’ there in any case. An embrace can turn into a death grip without much warning. It is prudential to question by whom one will be embraced, and simplistic to believe all embraces will be warm and loving.

 

[pepipop]

For some reason, RT made no mention of this when Zhinirovsky visited Crimea

indiatoday.intoday.in/story/vladimir-zhirinovsky-russian-nationalist-ukraine-sevastopol/1/346231.html

As I’ve said in previous posts, politics/parties/ideals et al, get me too confused.

However, I can only assume the Crimeans cheered him in relation to his party’s stance on wanting a united Russia, which it would seem the Crimeans want. It does not necessarily have to infer they agree with all that party’s policies.

It has been reported that the new Ukrainian government are anti-Russian. So if I was in Crimea, I know where I’d want to go - unless they can get an option to be autonomous, if that’s what they desire. The youtube link is a bbc news report ‘Neo-nazi threat in the new Ukraine’. I haven’t watched it.

crossmap.christianpost.com/news/ukraines-neo-nazis-win-senior-government-posts-they-are-the-anti-russian-9248

youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY

 

[pepipop]

Really, the austere of Russia may be a reflection of ancient Mongolians or other aggressive nomadic or Persian cultures -stemming back through history, as Russians are said to have been a people who ‘live in the past’. Remember, the Russians never got consumed by the comforts of Roman protection. They were left, willingly, to fend for themselves unlike their Western Slavic cousins. They are, therefore, ‘different’.

But if Russians ‘mimic’ their rivals (which they seem to), perhaps the best way to approach them is with open arms. Has it even been tried?

Personally, I visited Russia, in '96, visiting universities in St Petersburg, for a week. I found all the people I met, to have a vibrant energy about them, a very sharp sense of humour, very intelligent and shrewd, as the saying goes - there were no flies on them.

Their education system was also excellent, real old school akin more so to the Scottish HE system, covering all the subject areas at school leaving age, as opposed to the UK’s system (e.g.) which concentrates on 3 individual subjects.

I recognise this may not reflect Russia’s political approach to the rest of the world, but you can usually tell a country by its’ people.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

Really, the austere of Russia may be a reflection of ancient Mongolians or other aggressive nomadic or Persian cultures -stemming back through history, as Russians are said to have been a people who ‘live in the past’. Remember, the Russians never got consumed by the comforts of Roman protection. They were left, willingly, to fend for themselves unlike their Western Slavic cousins. They are, therefore, ‘different’.

But if Russians ‘mimic’ their rivals (which they seem to), perhaps the best way to approach them is with open arms. Has it even been tried?

I think Russia was treated exceptionally well after the curtain came down. They sell their resources to Europe on the open market. They take part in NATO, and are included in various international issues. Their economy is doing poorly, and they are having trouble finding their way. Confusion has caused them to pine for the good old days when the CCCP was large, and feared.

If that is what they mean by living in the past. Then I guess we have a little insight on how to proceed.

1.They must abide by international law.
2.They must remove their troops from the Crimea.
3. International military observers must be allowed in to the Crimea.

I don’t think we can expect them to give up their warm water port. So, deals will have to be made to enable them to ship goods, and protect their national interests. But again, this should be done legally.

ATB

 

[Vouthon]

I think Russia was treated exceptionally well after the curtain came down. They sell their resources to Europe on the open market. They take part in NATO, and are included in various international issues. Their economy is doing poorly, and they are having trouble finding their way. Confusion has caused them to pine for the good old days when the CCCP was large, and feared.

If that is what they mean by living in the past. Then I guess we have a little insight on how to proceed. They must be compelled to abide by international law. They must remove their troops from the Crimea.

I don’t think we can expect them to give up their warm water port. So, deals will have to be made to enable them to ship goods, and protect their national interests. But again, this should be done legally.

ATB

 

[josie_L]

Poland, for one (aside from the gadflies of Palikot’s gang, the consensus seems staunchly pro-life). Hungary, too. Croatia, of course, recently voted against SSM.

Which is what frustrates me about how some American Catholics here and elsewhere seem to think the only way to stop the barbarism is to side with Putin. There are countries between Minsk and the Oder, you know.

That’s exactly how I feel Cojuanco, it makes no exceptions for the diverse opinions of countries represented in the EU, while forgiving all the more unsavory aspects of Putin’s Russia.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Still though their economy in Russia has made progress under Putin, I have to think that the middle to lower class effected by the last 30-years probably see this as a motivating factor to go along with Putin, also going against him creates difficult situations with freedom of speech and rights.

 

[josie_L]

Well at least they’re not in power in Russia.

The Fascists are not in power in the Ukraine, that there are some fascists does not mean the whole government is, moreover, we should not assume that the word “fascist” is by default synonymous with Neo-Nazis:

UKRAINIAN fascists, nationalists and anti-Semites, sponsored by America, seize power in Kiev, overthrowing the legitimate (if ineffectual) president, Viktor Yanukovych. These new overlords humiliate Russian-speakers by outlawing the language and stand poised to sack Russia’s naval base in Sebastopol. Ethnic Russians run to Vladimir Putin for protection; he duly comes to their rescue. Mysterious military men with Russian rifles save the peace-loving people from the fascist threat.

So runs the plot invented by Russian propagandists to plunge Ukraine into chaos and seize the Crimean peninsula. Surreal as it sounds, the plot has been given some substance: parts of it only in the rantings of Russian politicians and journalists, parts—notably the bit about the rifles—in boots-on-the-ground reality. This spectacle of deception has jeopardised European security and pushed Russia into a confrontation with the West unlike any seen since the cold war.

On February 27th, four days after the end of the Sochi Olympics, Russia in effect occupied Crimea, part of the sovereign territory of Ukraine, under the pretence of protecting its Russian-speaking population. Russian forces based at various installations on the peninsula seized airports, government buildings and broadcasters within hours, and blockaded Ukrainian military bases. In Sebastopol, home to Russia’s Black Sea fleet, local people celebrated their liberation in the central square, waving Russian flags to the accompaniment of Cossack songs, a Soviet-era pop group, and the fleet’s choir.

There was only one thing missing: the enemy. Everyone in Crimea. and now across eastern Ukraine, is talking about Ukrainian fascists, but nobody has actually seen one. “We have not seen them here yet, but we have seen them on television,” said Stanislav Nagorny, an aide to the leader of a local “self-defence” force in Sebastopol. The confusion was understandable: Russian television had unleashed a propaganda campaign impressive in both its intensity and cynicism, stoking ethnic hatred and exacerbating historical divides, mixing half truths with outright lies. Right-wing extremists and nationalists did take part in the revolution, but they do not control the government.

Russia struck when Ukraine was at its weakest—mourning the deaths of those who died on the Maidan, Kiev’s Independence Square, during an abortive crackdown by Mr Yanukovych, and struggling to form a new government. The Kremlin was greatly assisted in its task by Ukraine’s parliament which, despite the obvious tension between the Russian-speaking east of the country and the Ukrainian-speaking west, irresponsibly passed a bill (later dropped) that repealed the status of Russian as an official language on a par with Ukrainian. Parliament also failed to bring politicians from eastern Ukraine into the government.

economist.com/news/briefing/21598744-having-occupied-crimea-russia-stirring-up-trouble-eastern-ukraine-end

The Economist is a respected Canadian magazine, wherein the article I cited was written the same day (March 8) your article was written by Global Research.

 

[TEPO]

I think Russia was treated exceptionally well after the curtain came down. They sell their resources to Europe on the open market. They take part in NATO, and are included in various international issues. Their economy is doing poorly, and they are having trouble finding their way. Confusion has caused them to pine for the good old days when the CCCP was large, and feared.

If that is what they mean by living in the past. Then I guess we have a little insight on how to proceed.

1.They must abide by international law.
2.They must remove their troops from the Crimea.
3. International military observers must be allowed in to the Crimea.

I don’t think we can expect them to give up their warm water port. So, deals will have to be made to enable them to ship goods, and protect their national interests. But again, this should be done legally.

ATB

The bolded, underlined section above, I think, is a false accusation that represents fear of a Slavic superpower. What makes one think that a Democratic/Christian and Slavic superpower is less capable of leading humanity than a Democratic/Humanist Germanic one?

…Because as the West continues to become more and more Socialist, we can’t really believe that Russians are more prone to a Socialist/Communist mentality than we are. Can we? Especially considering the fact that our government monitors every phone call and email we send or receive?

Sorry for being so Frank, no pun intended. I’m sorry in advance.

 

[josie_L]

The Fascists are not in power in the Ukraine, that there are some fascists does not mean the whole government is, moreover, we should not assume that the word “fascist” is by default synonymous with Neo-Nazis:

The Economist is a respected Canadian magazine, wherein the article I cited was written the same day (March 8) your article was written by Global Research.

From the same article:

Into the soft underbelly

The choreography was at once smooth and farcical. Assisted by Mr Yanukovych’s sudden reappearance on February 27th, Russia described events in Kiev as a coup while mounting a coup of its own to the south. As gunmen looked on, local deputies installed Sergei Aksenov, nicknamed “Goblin” and a rumoured ex-gangster, as prime minister (a perfectly legitimate procedure, according to Mr Putin). Mr Aksenov promptly called an unconstitutional referendum on Crimea’s status, declared himself in charge of Crimea’s armed forces and called on Mr Putin for help. Days later Crimea’s parliament voted to join Russia.

On March 1st Mr Putin asked the upper house of Russia’s parliament to grant him the right to use military force in Ukraine. It dutifully did so, in a lurid and theatrical session that evoked the days of Soviet grandstanding and grand pretence. Senators competed to evoke to the greatest effect the horrors being visited upon Russians in Ukraine. Thus, under the guise of fighting fascism, Russia achieved a bloodless takeover that could not help but remind the West of the Nazi annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland in 1938-39.

Still, not everything has gone quite to plan. Ukrainian troops in Crimea were put under enormous psychological pressure to defect, their officers blackmailed with threats of retribution to their families if they did not surrender. Thugs surrounded the Ukrainian naval headquarters, cutting off its water and electricity. But if Russia was hoping to follow the scenario of the Georgian war in 2008, when it managed to provoke the Georgians to fire first, it flopped. Ukrainian forces remained calm, the vast majority refusing to budge. As a Russian speaker who serves in the Ukrainian fleet put it ironically, “Russians do not surrender.” Dogged, as yet non-violent resistance seems to have given them a new sense of purpose and unity. Yet the tension could still result in violence. If it were to do so the Tatars, the indigenous Turkic people of Crimea, would fight on the side of the Ukrainian army.

The clash of civilisations

On March 4th, in his first public comments since the crisis broke, Mr Putin ludicrously denied that the troops on the ground were Russian forces. The very fact that he spoke lessened the tension, but what he said was not encouraging. Asked about the possibility of a wider war in Ukraine, Mr Putin sounded indifferent: it didn’t seem necessary, he said, but if he chose to invade eastern Ukraine, the move would be entirely legitimate. And as for the Budapest memorandum of 1994, under which Russia, America and Britain guaranteed Ukraine’s integrity in exchange for the country giving up its nuclear arsenal, Mr Putin no longer felt bound by it. Ukraine’s revolution, he claimed, has produced a new state with which Russia has no binding agreements. Later on the same day, Russia tested a ballistic missile.

With the economy in the dumps, his personal popularity declining and discontent rising, Mr Putin needs to mobilise the country and tighten his control over its elites. Entering the 15th year of his reign, he lacks a narrative to carry him through until 2018 and beyond. A war with Ukraine could provide a boost if it led to the de facto annexation of Crimea, which in the Russian imagination is a storied, cherished territory, the place where Vladimir I adopted Christianity as the state religion of ancient Rus, and a part of Russia until 1954.

economist.com/news/briefing/21598744-having-occupied-crimea-russia-stirring-up-trouble-eastern-ukraine-end

 

[Mickey_Finn]

The bolded, underlined section above, I think, is a false accusation that represents fear of a Slavic superpower. What makes one think that a Democratic/Christian and Slavic superpower is less capable of leading humanity than a Democratic/Humanist Germanic one?

…Because as the West continues to become more and more Socialist, we can’t really believe that Russians are more prone to a Socialist/Communist mentality than we are. Can we? Especially considering the fact that our government monitors every phone call and email we send or receive?

Sorry for being so Frank, no pun intended. I’m sorry in advance.

You are mistaken. Observations along with statements made by Vlad Putin, bear out my Hypothesis. That you think any super power will lead humanity is curious in and of itself. But as we have no example of Russia serving any role other than a bellicose bully.

Your mistaken as to the direction of the west as well. If anything, we have never been farther away from socialism than we are today. Examples of austerity measures, and foolish tax breaks for the wealthy are everywhere. Poverty remains high, as profits for corporations are unmatched in history. But this is for another thread I think.

ATB

 

[Vouthon]

That’s exactly how I feel Cojuanco, it makes no exceptions for the diverse opinions of countries represented in the EU, while forgiving all the more unsavory aspects of Putin’s Russia.

I second that

The EU is not a monolith. There are countries in the EU - such as Malta - where abortion is still banned. It is wrong to tar all European nations with the same stick while not judging Putinist Russia by those same standards of scrutiny.

 

[pepipop]

The bolded, underlined section above, I think, is a false accusation that represents fear of a Slavic superpower. What makes one think that a Democratic/Christian and Slavic superpower is less capable of leading humanity than a Democratic/Humanist Germanic one?

…Because as the West continues to become more and more Socialist, we can’t really believe that Russians are more prone to a Socialist/Communist mentality than we are. Can we? Especially considering the fact that our government monitors every phone call and email we send or receive?

Sorry for being so Frank, no pun intended. I’m sorry in advance.

On checking up about Russia’s trade with the EU, particularly their largest export gas, only one country in the world attempted to stop the gas pipes being laid to the EU countries, advising the Europeans not to do it.
Needless to say they were not European.