Slashdot Mirror
Russians Take Ukraine's Last Land Base In Crimea
An anonymous reader writes "Firing shots in the air and using stun grenades, Russian troops captured the last Ukrainian military base in Crimea today. From the LA Times: 'Meanwhile, Ukrainian and Russian officials were carrying on talks on evacuating Ukraine's loyal servicemen and families from the peninsula, a top Ukrainian military official said during a briefing Monday in Kiev. "About 50% [of Ukraine servicemen stationed in Crimea] joined the Russian side," said Olexandr Razmazin, army deputy chief of staff, the UNIAN news agency reported. The decision has been made to carry out the evacuation, he said, "but we need to work out a legal way to do it."'"
"All your base are belong to Rus'"
Although fighting for something on principle isn't always a bad thing, doing so in a hopeless situation is foolish.
Because it would have been A> futile, and B> converted this into a full-scale shooting war, which no one, but particularly Ukranians, want to see in their country. Ukraine cannot, as a practical matter, do anything about Russia.
This space for rent.
Did you mean that sarcastically? The majority of people in Crimea were loyal to Russia before any of this unrest began a few months ago. The last elected Ukranian president was a Russian loyalist. He was a deposed by a moltov-throwing mob with west-leaning sympathies, so we support them. But that doesn't change the feelings of the majority there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
At the time Germay was "reoccupying land dominated by Germans". The League of Nations stood by and actually there were negotiated terms, the Munich Accord which spelled out what would happen.
However, Germany was emboldened by the success of expansion. And the occupation was far from the end of the aggression.
I myself have been to combat more than once.
I'm not sure how much I would like to fight a Russian MRR on the offense.
These guys use recoilles rifles (modern bazookas) to rescue children. They killed 1 out of every 13 Afghans in the Soviet-Afghan war (no shit). Look how Chechnya looked after the battles.
to finer tune your point, the Ukranians stand alone and will lose even more if/when this escalates.
Because they'd get walked over. They are nothing compared to the red army.
Some of the commanders on bases were publicly BEGGING the Ukrainian leadership to give them the order to leave, because until they got that order, they were going to stand their ground ... and they knew what the result would be. They were more than willing to die for their country if that was what they were supposed to do, but not for a cause they weren't going to win.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Maybe they are following orders of the elected government, not the coup leaders.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
It's the same reason you give your wallet to the mugger with the gun and the crazy eyes.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Well, according to the OP, about 50% joined the Russian side, so even without the outside forces you'd have most people dead, assuming equal training and weaponry (which if they're all from the same base, is pretty likely). Also, most of these guys would have served together for years, so it's likely they didn't relish the idea of killing (and being killed by) their comrades when the alternative was "pack up your shit and go home to be with your families."
Now add in the outside Russian forces, and anyone who fought back would have been quickly destroyed. Ukrainians aren't stupid, but they can be pretty pragmatic. The ones from Crimea were likely Russian heritage or at least had Russian sympathies, and the ones who were just stationed there likely didn't give much of a rat's arse about losing the peninsula after most of the people there voted to leave Ukraine. So rather than dying, they went home.
There's a lot to be said for living to fight another day, and it seems like these people "get it" in that regard. Why die for a lost cause that you may not really believe in? Why defend a peninsula that doesn't really seem to want to be defended? Russia takes what it wants, the "allies" of Ukraine have made it clear they have no intention of doing more than a bit of posturing in response, why stay and fight?
I don't get why the obviously loyal Ukrainian military didn't defend their bases with firepower against the invading Russians? Were they just too scared?
Because they don't want to give Russia a casus belli for a war with Ukraine. Without being directly fired upon, if Ukrainina soldiers shoot at the Russians the Russians can rightfully claim Ukraine as the agressor and invade. Also the Ukrainian soldeirs have been given express orders not to shoot except in cases of self defense. If a Ukrainian soldier shoots a Russian "peacekeeper" (where's a sarcasm tag when you need one?) Russia won't stop until they have tanks parked on the streets of Kiev.
One other thing: look at all the pictures that have been taken over the past few weeks regarding the standoff between the Russians and Ukrainians. The Russians have been posturing with armored vehicles and the Ukrainians have not been seen deploying any heavy weapons in any type of defensive fortifications. This would indicate that these troops are armed with nothing more than light weapons, with heavier weapons probably stored in depots elsewhere, if at all. No sane soldier is going to try to stand against amored vehicles with nothing heavier than a light machine gun. It's not fear. It's realism and following orders.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
I don't get why the obviously loyal Ukrainian military didn't defend their bases with firepower against the invading Russians?
They didn't have the firepower necessary to hold off even an immediate attack, much win the conflict they would have started when things escalated. All they could accomplish would be to get themselves and possibly others killed. Worse, the example of Georgia has shown that the Russians will use any violent resistance as an excuse to just seize even more territory.
Some of the bases personnel essentially chose to engage in nonviolent protest, marching with flag and no guns (despite getting warning shots from the Russians). It's been a really weird conflict so far, from this distance.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Here we go again. I thought this ended when I was a kid and that when my father and his generation passed away, that WWII would finally be over as though he was a good man, the death of that generation means the end of suffering for all those who not only fought in the war ... but had to come home and live with what they had done. Fighting a war, even for 'the good guys and reasons' still means you have to do things that no civilized man should be able to do in a healthy frame of mind, and none of them come up the same as they left. The winners are still losers.
Alas it looks like Russia doesn't want it to be over and wants to rekindle its 'former glory'.
Is my son now going to have to suffer the life of a soldier like my father because of some assholes half way around the planet can't just fucking leave well enough alone with his rich life of being a political prick?
I'm beginning to wonder if my father and his cold war hate weren't that unjustified.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... At the time Germay was "reoccupying land dominated by Germans". The League of Nations stood by and actually there were negotiated terms, the Munich Accord which spelled out what would happen.
However, Germany was emboldened by the success of expansion. And the occupation was far from the end of the aggression.
I have found it the height of irony that Putin has been essentially mirroring the beginning of a conflict that killed millions of Russians (not to mention millions of people from other countries as well) in the name of protecting "Russians". Putin is playing a very dangerous game, especially when you consider that, for the last few weeks, whether or not Russia and Ukraine went to war was essentially dependent on some panicked soldiers not giving in to fear or uncertainty and pulling the trigger.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
It's the same reason you give your wallet to the mugger with the gun and the crazy eyes.
And this is exactly what it is. Putin is a mugger with a gun and crazy eyes. Too bad he also has nuclear weapons so nobody can do anything about. The only thing that can be done is to isolate Russia the same way as we isolate North Korea. Nazdrovje!
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
Unfortunately we are in the very dangerous point of really needing lots of people to die to stop Putin. I am sure he knows this and knows that until he encounters a country
a) willing to commit to the loss of lives
and
b) expecting to be able to "win" should a) occur
Putin is going to be able to do whatever he wants.
After the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistian it is clear that the west is highly resistant to (a) and is uncertain if (b) is even possible. With those massive levels of innertia Putin is going to be able to march all over the Ukraine and likely several other "Soviet" regions as well.
Where on earth did Russia get the idea they could stir up political descent with spys, attack a countries network infrastructure then invade after there was a coup and have the people hold questionable votes for a new government that violate that sovereign nations constitution all while at gunpoint? Oh wait... that's right, we did. Shit.
The actual beginning of the end for the League of Nations as a meaningful quantity was when it stood by and let Italy seize Abyssinia without question. Once it became clear to Hitler that there were no real repercussions to forced annexations, he felt quite free to begin plotting his own.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
There were many reasons for Finland's relative success that don't apply today to this conflict, and if you don't understand that you are in the realm of magical thinking. I will also point out that as glorious as Finland's resistance was, Finland actually lost that war and had some of its territory taken by the Soviet Union and added to the Russian Soviet Republic.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Yes I guess the Ukranians should have added "no backsies" to the 1994 Belgium memorandum. But I guess that piece of international law was "more like guidlines".
I guess we should watch out for Mexico reclaiming parts of Texas real soon now because "it is Mexican". After all they over 60% are Mexican and they speak "Mexican" and a scant 160 years ago they did rule the place.
Hell why we are at the Russians should take back Alaska too. After all what are borders when Russians get bored of the current borders. Never mind that the reason that the Crimea is mostly russian is that only 25% of the Tatars repatriated after Stalin kicked them out. And also that Russian soldiers were given free apartments and cars when they "decided" to retire to Yalta.
As Latvian, I not give two potato about situation in Crimea.
I give one potato, but only because is very important issue.
how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?
The last elected Ukranian president was a Russian loyalist.
Perhaps he should have been loyal to Ukraine.
I guess you are throwing the right of self determination out of the window dude. What sort of international law are you talking about? It's funny because in Kosovo, there was no referendum at all, it became independent just by bombing. The alaska thing is straw man, it was sold to the US.
It did not legally belong to Russia at all. At a time when it was legally owned by the USSR an internal transfer was made from one region to another.
A referendum with two alternatives, both of which were the same.
Wrong. Independence wasn't either of the options. They were both "join Russia".
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
According to CNN, it looks like the US and the other members of the G8 voted to kick Russia out. Russia's response to that should be interesting.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
are sitting in Odessa, discussing what is going on in Ukraine.
Man 1: I stopped speaking Russian.
Man 2: Why? Afraid the Ukranians will beat you?
Man 1: No, that Russians will come to protect me.
Finland dished out an awesomely disproportionate asskicking, but in the end, who won? Do you think Stalin missed all the guys Russia lost? Think Finland's equally failed to mourn their fallen?
Regardless of whatever Ukraine could do, they're thinking about what they should do, and a lot of their people getting killed, doesn't rank high on the list. Even if you can kill a bunch of Russians, sometimes your death isn't worth it.
BTW, to anyone who thinks the Crimean referendum was a sham election, you need to talk to an American Republican to get the right perspective. Keeping dissenters away from the polls wasn't a rights violation; it was all about preventing election fraud. ;-)
The alaska thing is straw man, it was sold to the US.
Russia keeps the receipts and has an expansive view on return policies.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
That is disengenuous and will only fool those who don't know what's going on. The two options were:
"Are you in favour of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the Russian Federation?"
"Are you in favour of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea as a part of Ukraine?"
The latter establishes an independent state technically within Crimea, but with autonomy to later join Russia if it wishes, and the parliament already said it does.
So, basically, the options were "Join Russia now, or join later." There was no option to remain as part of Ukraine under the status quo.
No the grand parent remember wrong as well. The two options was independence or join russia. Remain in Ukraine was not an option which is why 40% of the population (tartars and ukranians) boycutted the election. Fortunately their boycut was made up for by 120% voter turnout in the capital.
Are people making a big deal out of this because even though the majority of Crimerians voted to merge with Russia, they believe that vote was coerced under the threat of violence ( Russian troops massing on the border )?
No, people are making a big deal out of this because Russia marched troops and mobile armor into Ukraine, allowed (some would say encouraged) armed mobs of fanatical ethnic Russians to run amok, surrounded Ukrainian bases in Crimea, and then decided there should be a hastily organized vote on whether Crimea should join Russia immediately or become independent and let its leadership vote on whether to join Russia (no options to remain part of Ukraine). Ethnic Russians make up about 51% of Crimea. Since Crimea was handed to Ukraine some 60 years ago, younger generations of ethnic Russians have grown up as Ukrainians and largely self-identify as Ukrainian. About 15% of the population there are ethnic Tatars, who were brutalized and murdered by Russia until Crimea came under control of Ukraine. The rest is mostly ethnic Ukrainian.
So with Russian tanks and armed troops parked outside peoples' homes and armed mobs of fanatical pro-Russia groups roaming the streets uninhibited, a vote took place in which 97% of votes cast were to join Russia. 97%, despite the fact that at least 15% of the population would essentially be like Jews voting to have their homes fall under the control of the Nazis. The Russians claim this is somehow a legitimate vote and that the people of Crimea have the right to simply vote themselves part of any country they choose (so long as that country is Russia).
Why are some Crimerians fighting and not others? Different ethnic groups being for and against the merger?
There's very little fighting going on. Much of the violence you're seeing in Crimea is from pro-Russian fanatics who've formed armed mobs supported by the Russian military. They've killed or wounded a small number of Ukrainian soldiers stationed at Ukrainian bases in Crimea and they're generally running amok because nobody's stopping them. The Ukrainian troops in Crimea aren't shooting because if they did, the Russians would just murder them (bombing from the air, rockets from helicopters, shelling from artillery; the Russians have a lot of options against small numbers in tight quarters armed only with small arms). As it turns out, about half the Ukrainian military on the ground in Crimea are joining Russian forces, likely because they don't want to be on the losing end of a potential slaughter and/or due to personal or familial Russian self-identification issues.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
The referendum was bogus by any rational measure. No time was set up for voters to become aware of the issues or debate them, it was obviously rushed. There was plenty of heavy handed intimidation by mobs in the streets, Tatar houses were marked with Stalinist era crosses, and so forth. No opposition would want to speak out in that environment. Journalists were intimidated. The government itself was essentially gone; the Crimean government buildings had been taken over forcibly and flags replaced before any voting. Ukrainian forces (the legal military protectors of that region of land) were blockaded in their bases. The pro-Russian people essentially set up a de-facto "we're already Russian" system in a couple of days.