Nothing is forgotten. This report was by the Dutch Safety Board (OVV), the criminal inquiry by the JIT is still very much ongoing. Dutch chief prosecutor Westerbeke even stated earlier that whilst as of yet no one has officially been branded a suspect they do have individuals of "special interest" in their sights.
Military Crisis in Ukraine
Posted 14 October 2015 - 03:49 PM
And they established that the area from which the Buk was fired was under separatist control..
Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:12 PM
I don't recall US special forces conducting covert invasions of the sovereign territory of European states in the last couple of years, but unlike you I'm not a Kremlin apologist.
this stupid cold war 2.0 thing, again largely created by the US.
Crimea was 2 decades in the making, it didn't come out of a vacuum. It was a result of the U.S. ignoring Russia's interests and concerns, and feeling it could do what it wanted after the Cold War. The U.S. expanding NATO, stationing missile defence systems everywhere, pushing Kosovan independence, undertaking the Iraq War and then especially getting heavily involved in the Ukraine situation, were obviously going to antagonise Russia. If the U.S. is going to disregard written and unwritten rules, then obviously so is Russia. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Posted 12 February 2016 - 06:52 PM
Depending on whom you listen to, it's a lot longer than that. You can trace it back to about 1953 when Khrushchev gifted Crimea to the Ukraine, a decision that many Russian hardliners over the years have lamented. But the actual invasion was purely an attempt to preserve Russian military power in the Black Sea. Claiming it's a culmination of post Soviet history misses the most obvious justification- that the Sevastopol base is Russia's only naval gateway to the Mediterranean and North Africa, and it's continued existence was reliant on the goodwill of a Ukrainian administration hostile to the Kremlin.
Crimea was 2 decades in the making, it didn't come out of a vacuum.
Except this doesn't really categorise the 1999-2004 period of Russian-Western relations. The assertion that Russian behaviour is some kind of a reaction to American interference in their previous areas of hegemony simply doesn't hold water when you actually look at the causus belli for the ongoing hostilities. Excluding the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko and the Second Chechen War, both of which are certainly contributing factors but the former of which isn't about Russian hegemony and the latter NATO doesn't care about, the major events marking the downturn in relations are pretty Rusocentric. The 2007 cyber attacks on Estonia, the Azbakhia conflict which was fought largely to prevent Georgia joining NATO, Dagestan, Crimea, Donbass. I mean, the US placated Russia very publicly by cancelling plans to deploy ABM missile shields in Poland which is something you cite as a cause for Russian concern, so literally makes no sense.
It was a result of the U.S. ignoring Russia's interests and concerns
That's not how NATO works; statements like this really do bely how little you actually know.
The U.S. expanding NATO
As above, cancelled due to pressure and military grandstanding from the Kremlin.
stationing missile defence systems everywhere
Conversely, enabling Kosovar self-determination. Unless you support the notion of Kosovans being kept under the boot of an ultranationalist Serbian regime just so Russia can maintain continued influence in the Balkans?
pushing Kosovan independence
I don't see how this is relevant to Russia at all?
undertaking the Iraq War
I'm sorry but this is simply utter sh*te. NATO was completely uninvolved in events in Ukraine and for the most part still is. Lots of apologists like to assert that the revolution was somehow at the behest of NATO, Europe or the US but this is completely without evidential basis.
and then especially getting heavily involved in the Ukraine situation
A defence of Russian aggression on "sphere of influence" grounds is logically no different from defending China's attempts to seize the entire South China Sea under their illegal Nine-Dash Line policy. Or defending the last Ethnocentric European neutered great power, stuck in economic turmoil after losing a conflict and apparently surrounded by aggressors and seeking to control land beyond their borders as part of a policy to unite people of a particular ethnic identity.
- Irviding likes this
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users