Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Posts: 251
Joined: Sat, 10 May 2014, 05:41
National Flag:
New ZealandNew Zealand

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby AUCKLANDREUNION » Sun, 07 Sep 2014, 07:33

The crisis in the Ukraine has taken the International Media spotlight off events in Gaza, this is most appropriate, as the Ukrainean situaton is far more important and dangerous.

Posts: 4294
Joined: Mon, 26 May 2014, 05:50
National Flag:
TurkeyTurkey

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Rowan » Sun, 07 Sep 2014, 08:58

The crisis in the Ukraine has taken the International Media spotlight off events in Gaza


Which may be no coincidence. Nothing like the spectre of war (especially between super powers) to galvanise and distract the unthinking public.

the Ukrainean situaton is far more important and dangerous.


Not sure what your gauge is there. Zionism has destroyed peace in the Middle East and robbed a people of their homeland. Would you be so quick to minimalize the British colonization of New Zealand, I wonder? I don't believe the situation in Ukraine is that dangerous. Peace is possible, there is a ceasefire underway now, and all Kiev has to do is eliminate the right sector, address the concerns of its ethnic Russian majority in the east, and forego future attempts to join NATO. The idea that a highly aggressive nuclear power hostile to Moscow can just rock up to Russia's border (again, in violation of post-Cold War agreements), without any reaction whatsoever, is absurd. Anyone who thinks this is just just fine & dandy has obviously never heard of the Cuban Missile Crisis - which was itself sparked by the presence of US missiles in Turkey.
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, then why not in between?

User avatar
Posts: 1710
Joined: Thu, 08 May 2014, 11:00
National Flag:
Faroe IslandsFaroe Islands

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Ser Podrick of Payne » Sun, 07 Sep 2014, 10:36

The ceasefire is already violated! No doubt the USA and Brits are to blame by attacking Mariupol while pretending to be Russians :roll:

EDIT rest of message deleted because there's no point debating with Rowan really is there?

Posts: 4294
Joined: Mon, 26 May 2014, 05:50
National Flag:
TurkeyTurkey

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Rowan » Sun, 07 Sep 2014, 18:17

I thought debating the issue was the point. But few of us seem to actually be doing that. & on that note, it is interesting that the English-language reports I've read have basically accused the pro-Russian rebels of violating the ceasefire, but when I looked at the lead story in the Spanish-language El Pais this morning it accused both sides of violating the ceasefire, and then when I looked at the lead story in the French-language Le Monde it gave the impression Ukranian forces had fired first. As for the Turkish-language press, Zaman did not lead with the Ukraine but carried a story about the ceasefire, noting there had been skirmishes without accusing either side of starting it. Anyway, most importantly, the ceasefire appears to be holding - for now :thumbup:
If they're good enough to play at World Cups, then why not in between?

User avatar
Posts: 1830
Joined: Tue, 15 Apr 2014, 18:36
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby iul » Sun, 07 Sep 2014, 18:44

The ceasefire is gone. They're at it again.

Posts: 665
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 20:56
National Flag:
GeorgiaGeorgia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby fullbackace » Sun, 07 Sep 2014, 20:26

I don't think Ceasefire was in place for "separatists" at all since they never stopped shelling and assaulting Ukr villages + Airports and the city of Mariupol. Ukrainian army had orders not to attack first but respond if attacked, so the fire never really stopped.
Putin keeps deceiving Naive and inexperienced Poroshenko who has 0 idea how to run a country during a war. For this reason the pressure is mounting on him and public is now favoring more right wing parties with stronger resilient and decisive leaders.

This is what Ukraine needs to do ASAP if their government has an ounce of brain.

1. Declare State of Emergency
2. Properly arm the soldiers - Hundreds of wounded soldiers have come home complaining, having faced tanks and artillery with just an ak47 and grenade launcher. they are very pissed at the government and feel like they've been used as meet shield against an advancing heavily armed force. the truth is their generals are so disorganized they take decisions based on Facebook posts and other sources.
3. Send in regular army battalions with tanks and heavy artillery instead of volunteer guerrillas on light armor.
4. Evacuate people from the east and bomb the place like there is no tomorrow. - Russians are gonna do it anyway.
5. I'm usually against nationalism of all kinds but after realizing that his government is full of spies who work for Russia it would be a good idea to bring some of those crazy righties at least until the situation is under control.
Don't Pray For Easy lives, Pray for enough Beer!

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Fri, 03 Jun 2016, 20:25

iul wrote:Why wouldn't blacks or hispanics want to live in America? Millions of hispanics have risked their lives running across the desert to make it into that country, do you reckon they did it just for fun?

Crimea was historically Tatar. It was only annexed by Russia in the lat 18th century.

That being said, Russia's actions in this whole conflict have been rational, from a Russian perspective, so it will be difficult to get them to stop.

And that was before the 18th century?

Or until the 13th century? The Tartars were not there!

Now most of the inhabitants of the Crimea - Russian, and in the referendum voted for the Russia .

And by the way you know that in Latvia want to ban some Russian names?

It is normal for the European Union? 8-)

User avatar
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Canalina » Fri, 03 Jun 2016, 22:52

It's like Cecenia. Most of the inhabitants wanted to be independent from Russia so Putin said: "this your choice, it's fair, go in peace for your way my loved brothers!"

User avatar
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat, 19 Apr 2014, 14:41
National Flag:
NetherlandsNetherlands

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby NedRugby » Fri, 03 Jun 2016, 23:33

Jeez, I just read this whole thread. I feel like I need to scrub my eyes with a stiff brush and detergent. Anybody still unsure why the boards are better since Rowan left?

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Sat, 04 Jun 2016, 04:55

Canalina wrote:It's like Cecenia. Most of the inhabitants wanted to be independent from Russia so Putin said: "this your choice, it's fair, go in peace for your way my loved brothers!"

Ask Crimean residents what they want!

They will answer, but their opinion is you do not care because it is different from yours!

Yeltsin gave Chechnya de facto independence in 1996.

Russian troops were not there!

And after 3 years of Chechen militants attacked Dagestan and blew up houses in Moscow!

And it is now Chechnya.

The capital of Grozny.

https://yandex.ru/images/search?text=%D ... source=wiz

And these people are now in the Russian army.

Image 8-)

User avatar
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Canalina » Sat, 04 Jun 2016, 06:04

I'm not an expert so I can't debate correctly, but there are some surprising things in your assertion: Chechnya has independence de facto and they are in the russian army? It seems a weak version of independence. So also the crimean people will serve the ukrainian army?
Kosovo people wanted to be independent from Serbia but Moscow has always been against that scenario. Then Crimea voted for independence and Russia quickly annexed it with the army. Quite incoherent, isn't it?
I'm not saying that Crimea must remain with Ukraine or that Kosovo must be independent; I know that is very difficult in similar situations to determine if we must follow the choice of the people or the integrity of a nation.
I'm just saying that there's an enormous incoherence in the behavior of Russia. They support the integrity of a nation when it is functional to their purposes and they support instead the will of the people when this is functional to their purposes

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Sat, 04 Jun 2016, 06:26

Canalina wrote:I'm not an expert so I can't debate correctly, but there are some surprising things in your assertion: Chechnya has independence de facto and they are in the russian army? It seems a weak version of independence. So also the crimean people will serve the ukrainian army?
Kosovo people wanted to be independent from Serbia but Moscow has always been against that scenario. Then Crimea voted for independence and Russia quickly annexed it with the army. Quite incoherent, isn't it?
I'm not saying that Crimea must remain with Ukraine or that Kosovo must be independent; I know that is very difficult in similar situations to determine if we must follow the choice of the people or the integrity of a nation.
I'm just saying that there's an enormous incoherence in the behavior of Russia. They support the integrity of a nation when it is functional to their purposes and they support instead the will of the people when this is functional to their purposes

Yeltsin withdrew troops from Chechnya in 1996.

In fact Chechnya was independent!

Russia continued to pay people pensions and benefits, but the Chechen people became poor.

After 3 years Basayev invaded the territory of the Russian Federation and a begin new war.

Russia is acting contraeictory? May be.

Do not start Russian redivision territores and begin war in Europe. It begin to US and NATO in Kosovo.

Gorbachev promised not to expand NATO eastward.

US act on the right of the strongest?

But the strength can resist strength the other.

My words you can chek with the local Georgians.

Sorry for my English.

Posts: 1124
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 09:18
Location: Bucharest
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby amz » Tue, 07 Jun 2016, 16:37

I didn't knew this thread until today...it's an odd read really...

Vova, there's a huge different between de facto and de iure ...Chechnya was never independent, it was Russia too weak to fight them.

About this statement:

Gorbachev promised not to expand NATO eastward.


Probably you wanted to say that NATO promised won't expand eastward. This is untrue as stated by Gorbatchev himself:

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front ... chev-pifer
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... grievances

The interviewer asked why Gorbachev did not “insist that the promises made to you [Gorbachev]—particularly U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s promise that NATO would not expand into the East—be legally encoded?” Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”

Gorbachev continued that “The agreement on a final settlement with Germany said that no new military structures would be created in the eastern part of the country; no additional troops would be deployed; no weapons of mass destruction would be placed there. It has been obeyed all these years.” To be sure, the former Soviet president criticized NATO enlargement and called it a violation of the spirit of the assurances given Moscow in 1990, but he made clear there was no promise regarding broader enlargement.

Several years after German reunification, in 1997, NATO said that in the “current and foreseeable security environment” there would be no permanent stationing of substantial combat forces on the territory of new NATO members. Up until the Russian military occupation of Crimea in March, there was virtually no stationing of any NATO combat forces on the territory of new members. Since March, NATO has increased the presence of its military forces in the Baltic region and Central Europe.

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Tue, 07 Jun 2016, 17:50

In Chechnya a summer 96 to August 99 there was not a single soldier of the Russian army!

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Tue, 07 Jun 2016, 17:54

Yes, I was wrong.

My English is not my strongest side.

I would like to say that the negotations on the US and Germany have promised to Gorbachev not to expand east.

It says about it Gorbachev in Russian, and you translate into English I donot know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXcWVTpQF3k

Promises were given verbally there is no agreement on paper.

And the words of the US and NATO are not worth anything.

We did not promise you anything, and we can do whatever we want ...



You better believe I'm coming

You better believe what I say

You better hold on to your promises

Because you bet, you'll get what you deserve

(с)

Posts: 1124
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 09:18
Location: Bucharest
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby amz » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 08:15

fullbackace wrote:In last few months the Russian expansionism has reached its peak, Russian soldiers are besieging Mariupol, It's already obvious that they are planning on reaching Moldova to connect Transnistria and Crimea to Russia by land. God forbid this but, what if it does happen. no one can rely on desperate Ukraine. what can Romania and Moldova do against Russian aggression if they reach the borders ? honestly if I were those guys id be preparing for the worst, I know Romania is in NATO but that only means NATO will block Bucharest from sending military aid to Moldova, so basically if this were to happen right now, we will have another country falling victim to Russian imperialism.


Obviously an old post and things looked quite different than but you overestimate Russia.

From military point of view, Russia recovered after Chechen Wars and clearly the armed forces are on a good path but there are logistical problems to hit as far as Moldova/Western Ukraine/Transnistria. Russian strategy involves small proxy wars here and there, trying to maintain a state of insecurity and dissension.

Regarding 2008 Russian-Georgian War, that was an Georgian mistake, both politically/strategically ( they looked like aggressors) and tactically (tanks in cities, really? :D) . There were serious flaws in planning such war and among them:
- try to train the army up from battalion level; some years in Irak fighting kebab does not equal high intensity war.
- try to let conduct of military operations for professionals and not political level; clan politics and different also special forces mindset is not always the best mind set for conduction combined arms operations; arms branches didn't cooperated much, including national guard
- Russian units used at 2nd August Kavkaz exercise didn't move home...only wait for an Georgian attack.
- next time try to fight as winners or at least listen the foreign advisers and blow Roki tunnel and blocking the road passing through the gorges, eventually attack in winter to avoid the other Caucasian ways to be used and only defend on one front; Tbilisi is the big prize so Roki tunnel blow is probably the most important route to be closed, even by destroying it.
- don't underestimate the Ossestians.
- try to also train commanders; both sides lacked efficient command over the size of battalion but Russian doctrine helped them when they were without orders or objective.
- special forces are not regular infantry; there's no point on having then of thousands of national guard if they don't receive basic military training and stay passive or aren't used by leadership; heroic stances as some of Georgian rugby players who come home will be only an useless sacrifice.
- don't understimate simplicity; and this is mostly for iul's remark towards old equipment; Georgians abandoned many upgraded and modernized weapons who didn't worked (IFVs new turrets, tank autoloaders); Russians had many vintage stuff worked much better.
- Russians' political mistake was that they did not occupied Tbilisi; they could have done it as basically at 15 August Georgian military was dissolved, unable to put up organised resistance;

Try to plan better next time. These are simple friendly observations from somebody who have as hobby military (history, actuality, etc.)

Now on Romania - Moldova/Transnistria issue:

Romania will help Moldova in case of war should the Moldovans want the help. This is also valid in case of peace; the main issue of Moldovans is their inconstant internal politics (Georgia is clearly oriented towards West compared with them). Also Romania is trying to act in a peaceful manner in Moldovan and don't want to hurt or destroy local flavor. This is clearly visible from the fact that Romanian citizenship (along with EU one) was awarded also to other ethnics than Moldovans/Romanians who could have proved that their ancestors had Romanian citizenship before 1945.

I guess the most effective thing would be a preemptive Romanian invasion of Moldova (including Transnistria) closely followed by an expulsion of the local ethnic Russian population on some made up justification that would be supported and published in the western media.


The expulsion of people based on ethnicity will never happened as long as Romania is an EU/NATO member...may only be possible if something catastrophic like a Romanian Hitlers will ever arise in power, which is highly unlikely considering that extreme right political groups are under 1% in Romanian politics.

Actually Russia is not in a good position to help Transnistria if something happens there now with a hostile Ukraine in between so little interest for an escalation of the situation there. The logistical isuess are simply too big. Will just try to induce insecurity feeling to Slav ethnics to keep a freezing conflict.

Moldovans are in total confusion of identity for over 25 years. They have a long history with the other half of Moldova (In medieval principality of Moldova), 100 years of pure Russian rule and force Russification, a brief history with Romania in interwar and truth to be told Basarabia did not get the best treatment from Romanian modern stat and than another time with the Soviet empire (with same forced Russification, families who lived in Romania forbidden to even meet and so on).

Then, after the collapse of USSR, followed for Moldova a 25 years of total collapse, misery and empty promises from all sides, local patriotism breathed on "Moldovan identity", which brought them finally to the bottom of this pit that is now.

There is a lot of talk here about an eventual Union with Romania and for a reason that I don't understand it seems that Russia don't like this possibility, although it's the same people and Russian rule over Moldova was obviously an arbitrary act between Ottomans and Russian Empire with which Principality of Moldova (as constituent part of Romanian modern state) never agreed. This union will happen at some point and will come naturally. Younger generation that will want the union it only has now no more than 30 years, and therefore still can not count very much on time politically but obviously its influence increases every year. When this generation will feel natural and normal gesture to reunite with Romania than this it will come about peacefully and with complete peace of conscience for everyone.

iul wrote:Romania could do a haka on the border to scare them off. Failing that I'm not sure we have much else to offer other than grunts with AKs as our army doesn't really have much modern equipment.


Could be a lot more ;)

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 18:18

« The confrontation between Russia and the West is the result of a "clash of perspectives," said Joshua Shifrinson, an associate professor at Texas A&M's Bush School of Government and Public Service. "The United States and its allies believe NATO can expand, that the Western sphere of influence can expand, and as long as conversations with the Russians and diplomacy continue that the United States can have its cake and eat it too."
Shifrinson has researched recently declassified documents that he says show that U.S. and European leaders, during 1990 talks on German reunification, offered assurances to Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev that NATO wouldn't expand eastward.
"Once the USSR went the way of the dodo and the United States was the only superpower standing, it had strong reasons to see the deals of 1990 as having been overtaken by events," Shifrinson said. »


http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/...ry.html#page=1 8-)

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 18:29

I guess the most effective thing would be a preemptive Romanian invasion of Moldova (including Transnistria) closely followed by an expulsion of the local ethnic Russian population on some made up justification that would be supported and published in the western media.

(c)

I think that Georgia is ready to join NATO and the European Union.

The values are the same. :lol:

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 18:51

Understand simple thing.

Nor Georgia ,nor Moldova ,nor Romania we do not need and no one wants you to occupy.

You need the United States as a geopolitical brigehead against Russia.

We need you as a market and source of labor for the European Union.

A Russia you do not need!


Romania

Image

Moldavia

Image

Georgia

Image


And what is most surprising that this is not to blame Putin! 8-)

User avatar
Posts: 1830
Joined: Tue, 15 Apr 2014, 18:36
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby iul » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 19:26

Vova12 wrote:I guess the most effective thing would be a preemptive Romanian invasion of Moldova (including Transnistria) closely followed by an expulsion of the local ethnic Russian population on some made up justification that would be supported and published in the western media.

(c)

I think that Georgia is ready to join NATO and the European Union.

The values are the same. :lol:

Not everyone can reach the heights of the Russians' moral righteousness.

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 19:37

iul wrote:
Vova12 wrote:I guess the most effective thing would be a preemptive Romanian invasion of Moldova (including Transnistria) closely followed by an expulsion of the local ethnic Russian population on some made up justification that would be supported and published in the western media.

(c)

I think that Georgia is ready to join NATO and the European Union.

The values are the same. :lol:

Not everyone can reach the heights of the Russians' moral righteousness.

No Romanians that's for sure ... 8-)

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Wed, 08 Jun 2016, 19:38

In addition Russian did not think that there should be a global moral autority and rule the world.

There fore turn in Washington, there to help you with morality ... :thumbup:

Posts: 1124
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 09:18
Location: Bucharest
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby amz » Thu, 09 Jun 2016, 05:24

Vova12 wrote:Nor Georgia ,nor Moldova ,nor Romania we do not need and no one wants you to occupy.


But Russia already occupy (directly or by proxy) parts of sovereign states of Georgia (Abkhazia, Ossetia) and Moldova (Transnistria).

Posts: 665
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 20:56
National Flag:
GeorgiaGeorgia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby fullbackace » Thu, 09 Jun 2016, 14:43

amz wrote:Obviously an old post and things looked quite different than but you overestimate Russia.

From military point of view, Russia recovered after Chechen Wars and clearly the armed forces are on a good path but there are logistical problems to hit as far as Moldova/Western Ukraine/Transnistria. Russian strategy involves small proxy wars here and there, trying to maintain a state of insecurity and dissension.

Regarding 2008 Russian-Georgian War, that was an Georgian mistake, both politically/strategically ( they looked like aggressors) and tactically (tanks in cities, really? :D) . There were serious flaws in planning such war and among them:
- try to train the army up from battalion level; some years in Irak fighting kebab does not equal high intensity war.
- try to let conduct of military operations for professionals and not political level; clan politics and different also special forces mindset is not always the best mind set for conduction combined arms operations; arms branches didn't cooperated much, including national guard
- Russian units used at 2nd August Kavkaz exercise didn't move home...only wait for an Georgian attack.
- next time try to fight as winners or at least listen the foreign advisers and blow Roki tunnel and blocking the road passing through the gorges, eventually attack in winter to avoid the other Caucasian ways to be used and only defend on one front; Tbilisi is the big prize so Roki tunnel blow is probably the most important route to be closed, even by destroying it.
- don't underestimate the Ossestians.
- try to also train commanders; both sides lacked efficient command over the size of battalion but Russian doctrine helped them when they were without orders or objective.
- special forces are not regular infantry; there's no point on having then of thousands of national guard if they don't receive basic military training and stay passive or aren't used by leadership; heroic stances as some of Georgian rugby players who come home will be only an useless sacrifice.
- don't understimate simplicity; and this is mostly for iul's remark towards old equipment; Georgians abandoned many upgraded and modernized weapons who didn't worked (IFVs new turrets, tank autoloaders); Russians had many vintage stuff worked much better.
- Russians' political mistake was that they did not occupied Tbilisi; they could have done it as basically at 15 August Georgian military was dissolved, unable to put up organised resistance;

Try to plan better next time. These are simple friendly observations from somebody who have as hobby military (history, actuality, etc.)

Now on Romania - Moldova/Transnistria issue:

Romania will help Moldova in case of war should the Moldovans want the help. This is also valid in case of peace; the main issue of Moldovans is their inconstant internal politics (Georgia is clearly oriented towards West compared with them). Also Romania is trying to act in a peaceful manner in Moldovan and don't want to hurt or destroy local flavor. This is clearly visible from the fact that Romanian citizenship (along with EU one) was awarded also to other ethnics than Moldovans/Romanians who could have proved that their ancestors had Romanian citizenship before 1945.

I guess the most effective thing would be a preemptive Romanian invasion of Moldova (including Transnistria) closely followed by an expulsion of the local ethnic Russian population on some made up justification that would be supported and published in the western media.


The expulsion of people based on ethnicity will never happened as long as Romania is an EU/NATO member...may only be possible if something catastrophic like a Romanian Hitlers will ever arise in power, which is highly unlikely considering that extreme right political groups are under 1% in Romanian politics.

Actually Russia is not in a good position to help Transnistria if something happens there now with a hostile Ukraine in between so little interest for an escalation of the situation there. The logistical isuess are simply too big. Will just try to induce insecurity feeling to Slav ethnics to keep a freezing conflict.

Moldovans are in total confusion of identity for over 25 years. They have a long history with the other half of Moldova (In medieval principality of Moldova), 100 years of pure Russian rule and force Russification, a brief history with Romania in interwar and truth to be told Basarabia did not get the best treatment from Romanian modern stat and than another time with the Soviet empire (with same forced Russification, families who lived in Romania forbidden to even meet and so on).

Then, after the collapse of USSR, followed for Moldova a 25 years of total collapse, misery and empty promises from all sides, local patriotism breathed on "Moldovan identity", which brought them finally to the bottom of this pit that is now.

There is a lot of talk here about an eventual Union with Romania and for a reason that I don't understand it seems that Russia don't like this possibility, although it's the same people and Russian rule over Moldova was obviously an arbitrary act between Ottomans and Russian Empire with which Principality of Moldova (as constituent part of Romanian modern state) never agreed. This union will happen at some point and will come naturally. Younger generation that will want the union it only has now no more than 30 years, and therefore still can not count very much on time politically but obviously its influence increases every year. When this generation will feel natural and normal gesture to reunite with Romania than this it will come about peacefully and with complete peace of conscience for everyone.


Yes well Saakashvili was a dipshit and that's why people can't stand him, Ossetians or Russians(and god knows who else) had terrorized border regions with kidnapping, killing, rape, and banditism. People on the borders had been pleading for ages for Georgian forces to support/defend them, So he thought he'd go in, clean out these bandits and get out. But that's exactly what Russia was waiting for. If you are going in you gotta blitz all the way to the pass and blow the mountain.

Afaik after Our battalions took Tskhinvali they ended the operation and just sat there doing nothing, totally unaware that Russian forces were advancing. And worst of all due to Saakashvili reforms, the defense ministry was occupied by inexperienced "children" with no idea about war. Saakashvili always wanted to be in charge, he didn't want any smart tactician who could potentially rival him, When retired generals offered their help during the war he told them to fuck off, only to end up begging them just a week later when the war was already lost. and that's why he's an idiot.


As for Moldova... they need to wake the fuck up already. if Georgia was on the west side of the sea we'd have joined NATO and EU before 2000.

Vova12 wrote:Understand simple thing.

Nor Georgia ,nor Moldova ,nor Romania we do not need and no one wants you to occupy.

You need the United States as a geopolitical brigehead against Russia.

We need you as a market and source of labor for the European Union.

A Russia you do not need!


Then why don't you get out there. So you don't need to but you just make people miserable for fun ?
Don't Pray For Easy lives, Pray for enough Beer!

User avatar
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed, 22 Jul 2015, 18:20
Location: Moscow
National Flag:
RussiaRussia

Re: Russia - Ukraine - Transnistria

Postby Vova12 » Thu, 09 Jun 2016, 16:19

amz wrote:
Vova12 wrote:Nor Georgia ,nor Moldova ,nor Romania we do not need and no one wants you to occupy.


But Russia already occupy (directly or by proxy) parts of sovereign states of Georgia (Abkhazia, Ossetia) and Moldova (Transnistria).

Moldova - Russia conquered territory from the Otoman Empire, Romania did not exist on the world map.

You do not have any relation to this territory.

Abkhazia became part of the Russian Empire separately from Georgia.

South Ossetia - Georgia's territory is populated by Ossetians relatively recently - 200 years.

It's true.


The inhabitants of Moldova, Ossetia and Abkhazia are satisfied with the presence of Russian military bases.

US occupies half of the world, but this is not indicative of the aggressiveness? :lol:

PreviousNext

Return to Other subjects

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest