8 ms·

The port of Odessa is already pretty damn close to Sevastopol, I'd gather the Americans would see two Russian warships stationed in the port of Havana as practi

The port of Odessa is already pretty damn close to Sevastopol, I'd gather the Americans would see two Russian warships stationed in the port of Havana as practically being stationed in Miami or Key West. It's too bad that the Montreux Treaty doesn't mean anything anymore and that things got to escalate this far (I live very close to where all this is happening and it kind of makes me very nervous).

petre 5y ago
Except Sevastopol is in Crimea which is internationally recognized as being part of Ukraine, not Russia. Gdansk is also basically a stick's throw from Kalinigrad. The presence of NATO forces in the ports of Odessa, Constanta or Varna would improve the balance of power in the Black Sea, which would otherwise become a Russian lake now that Turkey has its own agenda and it's not such a reliable partner as it was in the past.
- pirate787 5y ago
  Crimea is ethnically Russian and was only part of Ukraine as an accident of Soviet political history.
  - sgc 5y ago
    Oh, all good then. Nothing to see here.
  - thinkcontext 5y ago
    And Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons.
    - 0x737368 5y ago
      Surely that changes when the government of a country has shifted to an aggressively anti-Russian one which will threaten one of your country's few naval ports and will likely welcome American military bases with open arms. Or should Russia just bend the knee to the US overlords and be a good lapdog?
      - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
        Your position seems to be that Russia has the right to not respect another country's territorial integrity when that country elects a government that Russia doesn't like. And, yeah, Russia probably does in fact think that. But if you wonder why everybody in the neighborhood is scrambling for NATO membership, this attitude is exactly that. > Or should Russia just bend the knee to the US overlords and be a good lapdog? Funny, you seem to expect that Ukraine should bend the knee to the Russian overlords and be a good lapdog...
        0x737368 5y ago
        The reason everybody was scrambling for NATO membership was the threat of being taken over by USSR. The reason USSR was taking over neighbouring countries was, among other benefits, mainly to create a buffer zone so that in case of attack Russia's "heart", i.e. Moscow, St Petersburg, etc, would be more protected. Now with the coming of ICBMs, jets, and especially nuclear weapons it is no longer as vital for Russia to have these buffer zones. America on the other hand keeps purporting this outdated myth of scary Russia despite Russia barely even being a threat anymore so that it can keep members of NATO as effectively vassal states. This way it can control them - "you do as I say, or scary Russia will come and take you". Having American military bases and American influence around its border will only increase tensions between Russia and their neighbouring countries. That is precisely the reason Finland hasn't joined NATO and they and Russia have been getting along fine. Russian troops haven't rolled into Helsinki as of yet. It should also be noted that Russia's claim to join NATO was rejected in 1954, and Putin has stated that he has suggested Russia joining NATO to Clinton and was again rejected. Now I can see how USSR during Cold War would be rejected, but why was post-USSR crumbling and then Western-friendly Russia rejected? I'll suggest that it was because US would then lose its favourite boogeyman.
        petre 5y ago
        Finland also beat the crap out of Russia in WW2. Russia's strategy in Eastern Europe and more recently in Crimea was not to fight, but send in little green men with rifles and organise elections. That's how the USSR has installed regimes of their choice in its vassal states which later formed the Warsaw Pact. NATO and thd US has a new bogeyman called China now. Russua has its own version of NATO called the CSTO and is part of the SCO or Shanghai Pact along with China and their satellite states.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      > Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons. Every country is obligated to respect territorial integrity of others. It's not something that you get in a deal.
      - thinkcontext 5y ago
        Yet such a deal was indeed made. Do you feel you have sufficient historical understanding on why the parties chose to do that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...
        wolverine876 5y ago
        Fuck you and your condescension. You're so informed about IR that you're citing Wikipedia? :D
  - tremon 5y ago
    You say that as if making claims about ethnicity has ever lead to a positive outcome for all parties involved.
  - drran 5y ago
    Crimean Tatars, Goths, Greeks, Italians, Turks, Ukrainians are not ethnic Russian. Crimean Russians are not exists.
    - 0x737368 5y ago
      Don't spread blatant lies. Look in demographics section in the sidebar here[0] and you'll see that Russians comprise 65.3% of the population. "Crimean Russians are not exists" - lol. 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > Crimea is ethnically Russian and was only part of Ukraine as an accident of Soviet political history. Every square meter in the world has multiple claims to it on endless bases, including history, ethnicity, etc. Much of the U.S. is ethnically German and was owned by Native Americans. The only important question is, what do the people of Crimea want? It's their choice, not yours or mine or Putin's. There's another important question: How do we country-level political changes? We can't have geographical areas constantly switching countries.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    Crimea had a large Tatar minority until the Soviets deported them en masse. Crimea is still ethnically mixed.
- 0x737368 5y ago
  It is recognised de jure to be part of Ukraine, but part of Russia de facto. And by "improve" the balance of power in the Black Sea I'm sure you mean move it in US's favour?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - petre 5y ago
    I mean in favour of the other countries with Black Sea coastline, including Georgia. And yes in the US' favour, because US companies like Exxon would benefit from oil extraction rights in the Black Sea, which they are quite happy to grant in exchange for keeping Russia at bay.
    - 0x737368 5y ago
      Well in that case Russia should indeed just give up their access to Black Sea and let the US set up yet another sphere of influence! /s
paganel 5y ago
I was just saying yesterday [1] that as a guy living in the area this stuff makes me incredibly nervous, I hope cooler heads will prevail on both sides. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=27590860 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=27590860
denton-scratch 5y ago
FSVO "close". Sevastopol is on the west side of the Crimean peninsula, on the Black Sea; Odessa is on the east side of Crimea, on the Azov Sea, and not on the Crimean peninsula at all. There have been reports (AP, attributed to a Russsian source) of warning shots being fired and bombs being dropped. Anyone know where that is supposed to have happened?

petre 5y ago

Except Sevastopol is in Crimea which is internationally recognized as being part of Ukraine, not Russia. Gdansk is also basically a stick's throw from Kalinigrad. The presence of NATO forces in the ports of Odessa, Constanta or Varna would improve the balance of power in the Black Sea, which would otherwise become a Russian lake now that Turkey has its own agenda and it's not such a reliable partner as it was in the past.

pirate787 5y ago
Crimea is ethnically Russian and was only part of Ukraine as an accident of Soviet political history.
- sgc 5y ago
  Oh, all good then. Nothing to see here.
- thinkcontext 5y ago
  And Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons.
  - 0x737368 5y ago
    Surely that changes when the government of a country has shifted to an aggressively anti-Russian one which will threaten one of your country's few naval ports and will likely welcome American military bases with open arms. Or should Russia just bend the knee to the US overlords and be a good lapdog?
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      Your position seems to be that Russia has the right to not respect another country's territorial integrity when that country elects a government that Russia doesn't like. And, yeah, Russia probably does in fact think that. But if you wonder why everybody in the neighborhood is scrambling for NATO membership, this attitude is exactly that. > Or should Russia just bend the knee to the US overlords and be a good lapdog? Funny, you seem to expect that Ukraine should bend the knee to the Russian overlords and be a good lapdog...
      - 0x737368 5y ago
        The reason everybody was scrambling for NATO membership was the threat of being taken over by USSR. The reason USSR was taking over neighbouring countries was, among other benefits, mainly to create a buffer zone so that in case of attack Russia's "heart", i.e. Moscow, St Petersburg, etc, would be more protected. Now with the coming of ICBMs, jets, and especially nuclear weapons it is no longer as vital for Russia to have these buffer zones. America on the other hand keeps purporting this outdated myth of scary Russia despite Russia barely even being a threat anymore so that it can keep members of NATO as effectively vassal states. This way it can control them - "you do as I say, or scary Russia will come and take you". Having American military bases and American influence around its border will only increase tensions between Russia and their neighbouring countries. That is precisely the reason Finland hasn't joined NATO and they and Russia have been getting along fine. Russian troops haven't rolled into Helsinki as of yet. It should also be noted that Russia's claim to join NATO was rejected in 1954, and Putin has stated that he has suggested Russia joining NATO to Clinton and was again rejected. Now I can see how USSR during Cold War would be rejected, but why was post-USSR crumbling and then Western-friendly Russia rejected? I'll suggest that it was because US would then lose its favourite boogeyman.
        petre 5y ago
        Finland also beat the crap out of Russia in WW2. Russia's strategy in Eastern Europe and more recently in Crimea was not to fight, but send in little green men with rifles and organise elections. That's how the USSR has installed regimes of their choice in its vassal states which later formed the Warsaw Pact. NATO and thd US has a new bogeyman called China now. Russua has its own version of NATO called the CSTO and is part of the SCO or Shanghai Pact along with China and their satellite states.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons. Every country is obligated to respect territorial integrity of others. It's not something that you get in a deal.
    - thinkcontext 5y ago
      Yet such a deal was indeed made. Do you feel you have sufficient historical understanding on why the parties chose to do that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...
      - wolverine876 5y ago
        Fuck you and your condescension. You're so informed about IR that you're citing Wikipedia? :D
- tremon 5y ago
  You say that as if making claims about ethnicity has ever lead to a positive outcome for all parties involved.
- drran 5y ago
  Crimean Tatars, Goths, Greeks, Italians, Turks, Ukrainians are not ethnic Russian. Crimean Russians are not exists.
  - 0x737368 5y ago
    Don't spread blatant lies. Look in demographics section in the sidebar here[0] and you'll see that Russians comprise 65.3% of the population. "Crimean Russians are not exists" - lol. 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > Crimea is ethnically Russian and was only part of Ukraine as an accident of Soviet political history. Every square meter in the world has multiple claims to it on endless bases, including history, ethnicity, etc. Much of the U.S. is ethnically German and was owned by Native Americans. The only important question is, what do the people of Crimea want? It's their choice, not yours or mine or Putin's. There's another important question: How do we country-level political changes? We can't have geographical areas constantly switching countries.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  Crimea had a large Tatar minority until the Soviets deported them en masse. Crimea is still ethnically mixed.
0x737368 5y ago
It is recognised de jure to be part of Ukraine, but part of Russia de facto. And by "improve" the balance of power in the Black Sea I'm sure you mean move it in US's favour?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- petre 5y ago
  I mean in favour of the other countries with Black Sea coastline, including Georgia. And yes in the US' favour, because US companies like Exxon would benefit from oil extraction rights in the Black Sea, which they are quite happy to grant in exchange for keeping Russia at bay.
  - 0x737368 5y ago
    Well in that case Russia should indeed just give up their access to Black Sea and let the US set up yet another sphere of influence! /s

paganel 5y ago

I was just saying yesterday [1] that as a guy living in the area this stuff makes me incredibly nervous, I hope cooler heads will prevail on both sides. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=27590860 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=27590860

denton-scratch 5y ago

FSVO "close". Sevastopol is on the west side of the Crimean peninsula, on the Black Sea; Odessa is on the east side of Crimea, on the Azov Sea, and not on the Crimean peninsula at all. There have been reports (AP, attributed to a Russsian source) of warning shots being fired and bombs being dropped. Anyone know where that is supposed to have happened?