To be fair, every major world power has "tentacles." The people running the world's largest militaries aren't very "moral" in the traditional sense. Wars and foreign policy in general are about strategic influence, not good vs. evil.
Crimea is a poor region, economically it will be better for them be part of Russia or even poor (but not as poor) Ukraine.
Nope. Not interested in Kiev at all. We'll just take Crimea back home. But perhaps South-East will follow the way of Crimea if the people there will be willing to re-unite with Russia or, at least, overthrow Kievan thugs' "power" in the nearby future.
Possibly, although it's not all about money. The reason why Crimea was granted autonomy back in the 90s was due to cultural factors. While most Crimeans share a lot in common with Russians, they might still have a desire to expand on their autonomy in such a way that joining Russia might not allow. If they become part of Russia, it's questionable as to how much autonomy they retain. It's very doubtful they'll keep a separate president, for example.
One of the agreements by the then Secretary of State Baker was that Nato would not extend into nations which had been part of the Soviet Union. What happened is that the Polish Americans and other Catholics who are on the Western side of the 'Catholic/Orthodox' divide in Eastern Europe, decided to extend their historical differences with Russia as well as their animosities and paranoias into our American politics. Since many of them are concentrated in the strategic electoral state of Pennsylvania, Clinton decided to appease them in deference to Russia and the non Catholic Eastern Europeans by supporting Croatia and Bosnia against Serbia. This together with the missiles in Poland restarted the Cold War. The Democrats continued this appeasement of their supporters more recently when President Obama did not attend the games at Socchi to please the gays.
There was a rally and problems in Donestk. One person was killed and many injured. The pro Russia group said it was a provocation by the Pro Junta group because they could have held their rally anywhere else, but instead preferred to hold it in the same place. According to the Russian paper the two groups were evenly matched.
I love how the Russians keep lying about the Ukranians being taken over by extremists, nationalists, and anti-Semites. meanwhile the Rabbis and Jews of Ukraien say its all a lie and propaganda.
sorry, but Rabbis keep giving interviews to the Jerusalem Post, Israeli media, and other media saying that the threat of nationlists and extremists against Jews in Ukraine, is WAAAY overblown and just Putin propaganda.
Well, some might say, they would say that wouldn't they. I have read other Rabbis saying the opposite when quoted in Haaretz.
yeah? lets see some quotes from Rabbis in Ukraine saying the extremist and anti-Semite situation is very dangerous and they need Russian protection.
article posted on Feb. 22nd. Time has moved on since then. If the Jews were in danger, we would know about it.
It could be argued that you do know about it but as a result of false propaganda from the West as well as censorship by omission from their media lapdogs, you and others are effectively ignoring it. Listen, I don't know the real truth and nobody does. All I would say, is that given the Western historical propensity to deceive and lie as the means of furthering their geopolitical and economic strategic objectives, it's wise to be cautious about Western claims.
The USSR was notorious for its blatant lies and porpaganda. Russia has inherited this and mastered the practise. Just look at the disgusting Pro-Putin tv station, funded by the Kremlin, known as RT. I don't trust RT as far as I can throw it. You should read about the brave people who have been quiting their high-paying jobs at RT simply because of the pro-Russian propaganda.
I agree with you actually. At least these female journalists in question were able to air their views on their respective programmes and therefore had editorial control. One of them still remains in her job and the other resigned. On the BBC on the other hand, an opinion that would strongly and stridently come out in favour of Russia on, for instance, the issue of the leaked tapes that nobody in the mainstream has thought worthy of investigating further, would not be permitted to on the bogus pretext that such views would undermine alleged impartiality. If a journalist on air on the BBC openly uttered the truth while on air, namely that the BBC was an echo-chamber for state propaganda, do you think he or she would remain in his job? I'll answer that for you. Not a chance.
I take the combined news provided by The NY Times, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, and make my opinions from there. They all agree that Russia has violated Ukraine's soverign borders and this is against international law.
And I agree with them. That's not the issue though. It is my contention that had the puppet government in Ukraine not been installed for the benefit of Western interests, then the crisis in Crimea would not have happened in the first place. You see, just because Russia has violated sovereignty does not justify the West doing the same. The mainstream media is not giving the people the full picture.
The President of Ukraine has been impeached. His own party kicked him out. There is now an interim PM and there will be an election in a few months. Russia has no right to do what it is doing, and the West is right to sanction them for doing so. Even China agrees that Russia has messed up.
Yes. The people tried to engage in peaceful protest and the authoritarian wanna-be dictator Yanukovich decided to crack down.
That's the simplistic official narrative from the West. But the truth is a bit more complicated than that.