4 ms·

that's the problem, Antonov is based in Kyiv, Ukraine

baybal2 6y ago
And that's the problem. The state of Ukraine is just few months away from going bust. If Ukraine falls, EU will have big problems.
- the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
  Why would Ukraine defaulting cause big problems for the EU?
  - clawoo 6y ago
    Presumably because that would push them into the hands of Russia (whether they want it or not).
    - fit2rule 6y ago
      Who are "they"? Ukraine? Ukraine rejoining the CIS would be good for everyone, except those with an interest in selling arms and fomenting war and disruption in the area. EDIT: downvoters/flaggers: are you censoring the narrative because it doesn't jive with what you've been told, or because you simply cannot tolerate a viewpoint that is counter to the one you have subsumed through authoritarian contact? Because, on the ground, things may be very different to what you've been told through the fog of war, which is being weaponised on this topic. Take that into consideration.
      - evgen 6y ago
        Given the fact that the only way Russia was able to claw back a bit of Ukrainian territory was through outright invasion I think that the Ukrainian people do not share your misguided belief that it would be good for them to rejoin the CIS. In fact, other than Russian apparatchiks I do not think there is anyone in the world who thinks that this would be a good idea.
        fit2rule 6y ago
        Well, Russia didn't take a 'bit' of Ukrainian territory, they annexed Crimea, where their nuclear base and black water navy base was located, a region for which the people of Russia have had cultural ties for over 700 years as a nation, installed a buffer zone around their military assets - and then conveniently left most of the rest of the Ukraine for the people of Ukraine. Wasn't that gracious of them? Not at all like the piles of smoking rubble, immense list of war crimes and demolished infrastructure of recent Western "police action" standards, but nevertheless, for those of us familiar with the area, not as drastic a scenario as the dis-sovereignty forced on so many nations by the West that we can't even keep count any more, not that anyone is interested... I mean, really, if you really think you know what Russia has done in Crimea, "pics or gtfo". Citizens of the West can feign indignance at this action, and call for an immediate response from their own noble, ethical military forces who can do no wrong, whatsoever, but since the Ukraine is on my doorstep I personally know a lot of Russian citizens who live in the area who are quite content with the state of affairs, and even quite a few Ukrainians too .. In fact, like I said, the only ones who are really pissed are those who had hoped to profit from the coup d'etat, i.e. war mongers, who are relatively disincentivized by the fact that yes, Russia has managed to de-escalate in the region, since they have the support of the people in the area, and therefore the provocateurs in Kiev won't be selling as many Stingers and Javelins as they'd hoped might be needed by the citizens in the region .. EDIT: there is a Western narrative which most readers are familiar with. But there is a Crimea/Russia narrative which deserves your enlightened consideration too. Do not fall so easily into the warmonger trap: the Ukraine is a lot more peaceful than Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Syria at the moment. Precisely because there are Russian forces in the region, not in spite of it. The 5-eyes coalition would not dare do to Crimea what it has done many, many times elsewhere: i.e. committing war crimes with impunity is not going to happen. The people of Ukraine and Crimea are very, very much more informed about what the USA's War Coalition has been doing with its illegal wars than the average American citizen. There is a great deal of validity to the idea that the CIA wanted to do to Ukraine what it did to Libya - but was thwarted by Russias Little Green Men. So, take that into account. Western Media is not the only narrative for the region. (s/Croatia/Crimea/ autocorrect brainfart)
        6y ago
  - baybal2 6y ago
    Because Ukraine army salaries are paid by the government of Ukraine? If Ukraine falls, Russian tanks will be withing zero kilometres from EU border, and four states who are only relatively recent NATO members, without much weight in the NATO block. Add to these that all four of those states are far from being 100% reliable, with clepto-political elites who are very similar to ones who switched sides to Russia in the Ukraine conflict. The nightmare scenarios is of course if Poland gives in. Then, you will only have 300-500km of very flat land, and good roads in between them, and Berlin, Vienna, Prague, Dresden, Nuremberg, Munich, and ability to cut off the Eastern route around alps.
- fit2rule 6y ago
  Brexit .. and to a lesser extent, Ukraine-fail .. is the least of EU's problems. It was, in the first place, formed to guard against these kinds of circumstances. So, its probably better to say "EU will be unit tested" by Ukraine's disruption, rather than 'have big problems' ..
- go13 6y ago
  I would worry about Russia more. It will go bust sooner or later. If Russia is now a problem for everyone, then it can be not a problem but a disaster.
  - baybal2 6y ago
    Yes, completely right. EU, and NATO will have a problem almost on the same scale if Russia collapses on them, as if it will launch an attack on them. Russia has 8 times the population of Syria, and people can't live on a big part of its territory without artificial heating (and thus fuel supplies; your heating bill is pretty much a live or die price in a lot of places there,) or completely reliant for on long range freight for essential supplies.
    - fit2rule 6y ago
      Russia is a very, very big country and economic unit. It may have been sanctioned into oblivion by its Western enemies, but its collapse before the USA devolves into civil war is anything but certain. >Russia has 8 times the population of Syria, and people can't live on a big part of its territory without artificial heating, or completely reliant for on long range freight for essential supplies. What part of this makes you think Russia is dependent on the Wests' criminal sanctions being lifted?
    - pjc50 6y ago
      This kind of already happened in the 90s? And to some extent is why the current problems exist.
      - baybal2 6y ago
        The state was far from complete failure, very far from it. Nowhere near Syria. The state kept control of the military. Troops were orderly demobilised. The criminality was comparatively low in comparison to Putin's years. The state-mafia fusion came long after the years immediately following the collapse. The same is for much of the industry, much of it has failed over nineties, and not immediately after. The remnants of state economy at least managed to keep supplies going. Utilities in cities on "life support" were failing, but otherwise kept working at any cost. If Russia will fail today, the collapse will be much less gradual, and this time, there will be a civil war, and warlordism, and famine, and mass humanitarian catastrophy.

And that's the problem. The state of Ukraine is just few months away from going bust. If Ukraine falls, EU will have big problems.

the_mitsuhiko 6y ago
Why would Ukraine defaulting cause big problems for the EU?
- clawoo 6y ago
  Presumably because that would push them into the hands of Russia (whether they want it or not).
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    Who are "they"? Ukraine? Ukraine rejoining the CIS would be good for everyone, except those with an interest in selling arms and fomenting war and disruption in the area. EDIT: downvoters/flaggers: are you censoring the narrative because it doesn't jive with what you've been told, or because you simply cannot tolerate a viewpoint that is counter to the one you have subsumed through authoritarian contact? Because, on the ground, things may be very different to what you've been told through the fog of war, which is being weaponised on this topic. Take that into consideration.
    - evgen 6y ago
      Given the fact that the only way Russia was able to claw back a bit of Ukrainian territory was through outright invasion I think that the Ukrainian people do not share your misguided belief that it would be good for them to rejoin the CIS. In fact, other than Russian apparatchiks I do not think there is anyone in the world who thinks that this would be a good idea.
      - fit2rule 6y ago
        Well, Russia didn't take a 'bit' of Ukrainian territory, they annexed Crimea, where their nuclear base and black water navy base was located, a region for which the people of Russia have had cultural ties for over 700 years as a nation, installed a buffer zone around their military assets - and then conveniently left most of the rest of the Ukraine for the people of Ukraine. Wasn't that gracious of them? Not at all like the piles of smoking rubble, immense list of war crimes and demolished infrastructure of recent Western "police action" standards, but nevertheless, for those of us familiar with the area, not as drastic a scenario as the dis-sovereignty forced on so many nations by the West that we can't even keep count any more, not that anyone is interested... I mean, really, if you really think you know what Russia has done in Crimea, "pics or gtfo". Citizens of the West can feign indignance at this action, and call for an immediate response from their own noble, ethical military forces who can do no wrong, whatsoever, but since the Ukraine is on my doorstep I personally know a lot of Russian citizens who live in the area who are quite content with the state of affairs, and even quite a few Ukrainians too .. In fact, like I said, the only ones who are really pissed are those who had hoped to profit from the coup d'etat, i.e. war mongers, who are relatively disincentivized by the fact that yes, Russia has managed to de-escalate in the region, since they have the support of the people in the area, and therefore the provocateurs in Kiev won't be selling as many Stingers and Javelins as they'd hoped might be needed by the citizens in the region .. EDIT: there is a Western narrative which most readers are familiar with. But there is a Crimea/Russia narrative which deserves your enlightened consideration too. Do not fall so easily into the warmonger trap: the Ukraine is a lot more peaceful than Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Syria at the moment. Precisely because there are Russian forces in the region, not in spite of it. The 5-eyes coalition would not dare do to Crimea what it has done many, many times elsewhere: i.e. committing war crimes with impunity is not going to happen. The people of Ukraine and Crimea are very, very much more informed about what the USA's War Coalition has been doing with its illegal wars than the average American citizen. There is a great deal of validity to the idea that the CIA wanted to do to Ukraine what it did to Libya - but was thwarted by Russias Little Green Men. So, take that into account. Western Media is not the only narrative for the region. (s/Croatia/Crimea/ autocorrect brainfart)
        6y ago
- baybal2 6y ago
  Because Ukraine army salaries are paid by the government of Ukraine? If Ukraine falls, Russian tanks will be withing zero kilometres from EU border, and four states who are only relatively recent NATO members, without much weight in the NATO block. Add to these that all four of those states are far from being 100% reliable, with clepto-political elites who are very similar to ones who switched sides to Russia in the Ukraine conflict. The nightmare scenarios is of course if Poland gives in. Then, you will only have 300-500km of very flat land, and good roads in between them, and Berlin, Vienna, Prague, Dresden, Nuremberg, Munich, and ability to cut off the Eastern route around alps.
fit2rule 6y ago
Brexit .. and to a lesser extent, Ukraine-fail .. is the least of EU's problems. It was, in the first place, formed to guard against these kinds of circumstances. So, its probably better to say "EU will be unit tested" by Ukraine's disruption, rather than 'have big problems' ..
go13 6y ago
I would worry about Russia more. It will go bust sooner or later. If Russia is now a problem for everyone, then it can be not a problem but a disaster.
- baybal2 6y ago
  Yes, completely right. EU, and NATO will have a problem almost on the same scale if Russia collapses on them, as if it will launch an attack on them. Russia has 8 times the population of Syria, and people can't live on a big part of its territory without artificial heating (and thus fuel supplies; your heating bill is pretty much a live or die price in a lot of places there,) or completely reliant for on long range freight for essential supplies.
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    Russia is a very, very big country and economic unit. It may have been sanctioned into oblivion by its Western enemies, but its collapse before the USA devolves into civil war is anything but certain. >Russia has 8 times the population of Syria, and people can't live on a big part of its territory without artificial heating, or completely reliant for on long range freight for essential supplies. What part of this makes you think Russia is dependent on the Wests' criminal sanctions being lifted?
  - pjc50 6y ago
    This kind of already happened in the 90s? And to some extent is why the current problems exist.
    - baybal2 6y ago
      The state was far from complete failure, very far from it. Nowhere near Syria. The state kept control of the military. Troops were orderly demobilised. The criminality was comparatively low in comparison to Putin's years. The state-mafia fusion came long after the years immediately following the collapse. The same is for much of the industry, much of it has failed over nineties, and not immediately after. The remnants of state economy at least managed to keep supplies going. Utilities in cities on "life support" were failing, but otherwise kept working at any cost. If Russia will fail today, the collapse will be much less gradual, and this time, there will be a civil war, and warlordism, and famine, and mass humanitarian catastrophy.