Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on March 23, 2015
Russian Crimea: One Year Later
NATO calls Crimea “invaded” and “occupied.” NATO has taught the world well what invasion and occupation really looks like, and Crimea isn’t it. In 2001, NATO invaded and began the occupation of the South-Central Asian country of Afghanistan. The invasion and occupation has left tens of thousands dead, many more displaced, and has resulted in continued chaos and violence up until and including present day. Throughout the conflict, revelations of abuses, mass murder, and other atrocities including systematic torture have been exposed, perpetrated by invading NATO forces and their Afghan collaborators.
The war has also resulted in the use of armed drone aircraft which regularly kill men, women, and children indiscriminately along the Afghan-Pakistani border – a campaign of mass murder ongoing for nearly as long as the conflict has raged.
In 2003, NATO-members joined the United States in the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. An estimated 1 million people would lose their lives, including thousands of Western troops. For nearly a decade the United State occupied Iraq, and during its attempts to prop up a suitable client regime, laid waste to the nation. American forces in their bid to exercise control over the Iraqi population would conduct sweeping assaults on entire cities. The city of Fallujah would be leveled nearly to the ground, twice.
The US also maintained prison camps across the entire nation. Some vast and spanning, others dark and secret, including the infamous Abu Ghraib prison and the atrocities carried out there. In addition to Western armed forces, a significant number of paid mercenaries participated in both the occupation and the atrocities carried out during it, including the mass killing of civilians resulting in criminal cases still reverberating through Western legal systems and undermining Western credibility worldwide.
This is what real invasions and occupations look like. The armed entrance into a nation, the absolute subjugation of all its people through maximum force – or as the US calls it “shock and awe” – and an occupation by gunpoint with tanks and troops in the streets of a people who do not want them there, and who are willing to fight and die to drive them out.
So when in March of 2014, Crimea was returned to Russia and NATO called the move an “invasion” and “occupation,” the world was reasonably concerned. Some were concerned because they equated the words “invasion” and “occupation” with the levels of mass murder and decimation associated with NATO’s decades of foreign interventions – believing that such violence was now unfolding in Crimea, this time at the hands of the Russians. Others were concerned because of the obvious falsehood within which NATO was framing events in Crimea.
The Difference Between NATO and Russian Interventions
NATO’s intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan ran into heavy resistance while Russia’s intervention in Crimea did not, because of several crucial differences. First, NATO was invading nations literally oceans away. The targets of their military aggression shared no common history with the West, no cultural, religious, or linguistic similarities, and surely no mutual contemporary shared interests. No significant party within either Iraq or Afghanistan asked the West to intervene beyond token proxies arranged by the West itself.Crimea on the other hand, had once existed as part of Russia. Many in Crimea identify themselves either as Russians, or of Russian descent. They speak Russian and observe Russian customs. Many in Crimea recognize that the soil beneath their feet has been soaked in Russian blood to defend it from aggression throughout history, including against the Nazis in World War 2.
When the government of Ukraine was violently overthrown by an overtly US-backed coup in Kiev, and many of the familiar symbols and movements that had in the past taken power with the help of Adolf Hitler in the 1940’s began stirring in western Ukraine again, turning to Russia for protection was only natural. Not only did the people of Crimea ask Russia to intervene, a referendum was held that overwhelmingly quantified their request.
Aside from storming several military bases and some tense moments in stand-off’s with Ukrainian troops, there was no violence when Russian forces began moving into Crimea.
A Year On, All is Well…
Life in Russian Crimea today is exceedingly normal. While a war rages on next door in Ukraine, the people of Crimea enjoy peace, stability, and a sense of unity and hope for the future. Even with economic setbacks delivered by NATO’s attempts to take the horrors they’ve created within Ukraine, and recreate them on the other side of the border in Russia, people are still able to conduct business more or less as they did before the conflict began. Some say the economy has actually improved despite the sanctions.
Of course, the transition, with an armed conflict unfolding just across the border, is not seamless. Euronews would report mixed feelings in Crimea, stating in its article, “Crimea economy one year on after Russian annexation,” that:
For many locals the biggest worry is the spiralling cost of food. Kyiv’s refusal to recognise the border means it can’t legally export to Crimea directly.
Most supplies come from Russia by ferry but bad weather can delay shipments for days. Many products are just not available. Regional government data showed inflation jumped 38 percent and the cost of food increased by almost a half from March through to December. Not a single Russian supermarket chain has opened in Crimea.
But a poll at the end of January by a Ukraine market research agency recorded that more than half of the 800 people questioned believe they are better off financially since joining Russia.
Despite this, after only a year, and considering the circumstances, Crimea is faring well, especially compared to neighboring Ukraine. Logistical networks will surely be restructured and markets will surely adjust. With the West desperately seeking to portray Crimea’s state one year after returning to Russia as dire as possible, that the best they can do is cite the disappearance of “McDonald’s” and “Apple” stores as “proof” that Crimea is “suffering,” bodes well for the Crimean people.
22 Comments on "Russian Crimea: One Year Later"
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 6:30 am
It’s pretty clear the USSA is in the wrong. They are spreading their tentacles around the world and destabilizing other countries on purpose in order to complete it’s mission for world domination. Russia is seen as a weak regional power by the nutjobs running Washington who have embraced the “Wolfowitz Doctrine”. This is why the US is egging the Russians into a military conflict.
They could get their wish but it won’t end well for that region and possibly the world if someone who hates losing decides to go nuclear which the nutjobs in Washington think they can win a first strike nuclear conflict with Russia.
Davy on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 7:59 am
So Roadstar, you are saying Russia shares no sin. In that case you are saying the world is black an white with only good or evil. Your comments smells like a half baked cake because there is so much more to this than a petty USSA bad Great Russia Great statement.
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 8:41 am
“you are saying Russia shares no sin.”
Based on a loaded question like that…NO !
Have you stopped beating your wife, Davy? See how loaded questions work?
penury on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 9:14 am
I see in the news that the administration has once again dispatched V, Nuland to a couple of nations hoping to stir up another overthrow of elected governments. The one thing that you can be certain of is that truth will always bring out the USA,USA,USA crowd, Thinking is not their strong point. Its a shame that we are allowing them to lead this country into another war. War is not good for women and children.
Davy on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 9:15 am
Poor, Roadstar likes to dish out the crap but when he is confronted he is all flustered. If you are going to be an agendist then why not admit it. You are obnoxiously anti-American pro any alternative. Road star what is so hard about that admission. You want to be a propagandist but when you get called one you are all green in the face.
Davy on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 9:24 am
I agree Pen, they are thieves and the number one threat to world peace. I see no alternative that is any better in the next 4 years. In fact if a loon like Cruz gets any traction, Geeze Louise! Can you imagine a Hillery against Cruz race. Imagine the mutual attack ads. It will make the Super Bowl commercials look like a community college advertising 101.
So Pen is that flag waiving still? Is that not thinking much? Just so I know? I am trying to understand what is flag waiving and what is not. Am I still too much USA USA USA? Or sorry USSA USSA USSA. Damn forgot UFSA UFSA UFSA
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 10:19 am
“Poor, Roadstar likes to dish out the crap but when he is confronted he is all flustered. If you are going to be an agendist then why not admit it. You are obnoxiously anti-American pro any alternative. Road star what is so hard about that admission. You want to be a propagandist but when you get called one you are all green in the face.”
Not flustered and you did not address or answer anything other than offering up BS distractions to the main argument. I’m just not a flag waving USA card carrying member like you.
1)Was Ukraine a national security threat to the USSA?
2)The USSA made a verbal promise to Gorbachev back in the 80’s that NATO would not expanded in the USSR made reforms and dissolved the Warsaw pact. The USSA did just the opposite. They have expanded and threatened Russia by cutting off it’s supply route to the Black Sea. Then they have demonized Putin for taking back what was rightfully his, Crimea which has been part of Russia for several hundred years.
Did Russia and Putin destabilize Canada?
Did Russia or Putin destabilize Mexico?
Did Russia or Putin arm the Mexican drug cartel to destabilize the USSA?
Maybe Davy you should reread the constitution which the framers of this Nation once said…”NO FOREIGN ENTANGLEMENTS”. It’s pretty simple isn’t it? But the USSA’s quest for “World Domination” to intoxicating to give that kind of power.
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 10:21 am
I’m waiting Davy for you non answer sideshow arguments. So please answer those questions I posed !
Plantagenet on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 11:06 am
Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is still continuing.
penury on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 11:18 am
I don’t know Davy where did I say anyone was a thief? Where have I ever used the “USSA” ? What does Cruz vs Hillary have to do with anything in the article or in my statement? Your answer seems to reinforce my statements rather than dispute them for that I guess I should say thank you.
GregT on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 11:42 am
“Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is still continuing.”
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 12:03 pm
“Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is still continuing.”
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!
Don’t worry Greg ! 🙂
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 1:21 pm
No response from Davy, he must be flustered.
Tita on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 3:03 pm
So rodster, USA engineered the Orange Revolution, as well as the Euromaiden Revolution?
No… Mostly corruption and fraud were behind these revolutions, from either sides. Also, there is a multicutural aspect that has to be dealt in the reconstruction of this country. But blaming USA, who has no other interest in Ukraine besides having no war escalation there, is nonsense.
But what is the most funny is from another article from this fine piece of newspaper the article above was taken from:
“This complete inversion of reality is par for the course for the West, which, recognizing it cannot achieve its geopolitical ambitions in Ukraine by force, instead will seek to do it through propaganda.”
This is nothing but a pot calling a kettle black!
Rodster on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 3:14 pm
“So rodster, USA engineered the Orange Revolution, as well as the Euromaiden Revolution?”
Hot Dogs, Apple Pie and Chevrolet. Now where’s my flag.
dissident on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 5:05 pm
Nuland admitted the USA spent $5 BILLION on “civil society” operations in Ukraine. This would include sponsoring both the 2004 Orange and 2013-14 Maidan putsches. The US sum is not the only contribution. Russian mafia oligarch in exile Boris Berezovsky spent a vast amount of his fortune on the 2004 putsch as well.
The USA recruited Banderites after WWII to fight communism but has kept using them to fight Russia long after communism is dead. The current regime in Kiev and the Orange regime which lost power at the ballot box in 2010, in a free and fair election according to the OSCE, both put Stepan Bandera on a pedestal as a national hero. Bandera was a Nazi genocidal maniac who exterminated the Jewish and Polish communities in western Ukraine.
Makati1 on Mon, 23rd Mar 2015 8:21 pm
An interesting article summing up the UFSA:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-provocations-on-russias-borders/5438099
And the drums of war get louder and louder…
Tita on Tue, 24th Mar 2015 4:13 am
All these newspaper (RT, Sputnik, globalresearch, New Eastern Outlook) are politically oriented. They dispense a propaganda, the very same kind of westerners media like “Voice of America”, “Fox News” or “CNN”. The aim is to turn the public opinion on one side of this conflict. But this is all bullshit for the most. The only side you can take is for a cease-fire.
Some journalists are in there, and write about this conflict from the inside. An example here make a better picture of what is really happening:
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2015/mar/23/two-ukraine-towns-divided-bitter/
Davy on Tue, 24th Mar 2015 6:24 am
Hey, Roadstar, did I say anything about the US. Did I deny anything you commented on above? No Sir, I asked you if you are an anti-American and a Russia flag waiver. My central point is Russia is a mafia country run by corrupt leaders. It is a cultural in decline no different than the decadent US but with a Russian flavor. Roadstar why are you so one sided with agendas and consumed by propaganda?
This situation is a battle of powers. Both sides are up to no good. The US is clearly in the wrong for being there in the first place and initiating a conflict with money and organization. Yet, this conflict was ready to happen anyway. This was a powder keg ready to explode. The US saw a way to punish Russia so it lit the fuse. That is wrong and I admit that. You happy now Roadstar? I admit this so why the long winded comment Roadstar acting as if I was denying your comment? Are you trying to disguise your flag waiving?
I am trying to support the US indirectly from subjectivity and lack of balance by saying Russia is not a glorious country with an honest leadership. Its people are not super human like several on this forum paint. They tell me Russians are clearly stronger than the US and can face challenges the US can’t. Cat Piss that friends as subjective agenda and propaganda.
The Russians culture shows multiple dangerous signs of decline. Russia is a banana republic relying on commodities to fund its system. It people have become fat, lazy, and corrupt from oil. It is called the oil curse. Why would the Russian’s not suffer this? The US has it too with suburban sprawl, overconsumption, and a shale debt bubble. You Russian flag waivers want to bash the US then glorify Russia like they are the home team. Are our discussions spectator sports or serious objective analysis of current events? Russia has many comparative advantages along with serious comparative disadvantages. I see little reason to glorify Russia especially with the excessive US bashing. It is unbalance and unfair.
Makati1 on Tue, 24th Mar 2015 8:08 am
Tita, but if you don’t read ALL of the sources, how do you decide what is real? I think sources outside the US MSM Iron Curtain are more likely to be valid than anything from the Ministry of truth.
Anyone with two working brain cells can see the BS flowing out of Washington for what it is, pure propaganda as it changes with the current bad guy of the month. We are back to Iran as a good guy, and even Cuba is losing it’s bad taste as the Empire is losing it’s power and is clutching at straws as one by one, it’s allies are moving east. Six corporations provide 99+% of the US ‘news’ and they are ALL ‘owned’ by Washington.
If you read some 50 different websites regularly, as I do, you get a pretty clear picture of the world today as it really is. Did you know that you can access almost all of the world newspapers online? I read the newspaper from my home town in the US. Try it sometime.
http://www.onlinenewspapers.com/
Davy on Tue, 24th Mar 2015 9:16 am
Boy that is a bold statement just above from an agendist that uses propaganda to fight propaganda.
Tita, I echo your sentiments and say it is better to fight propaganda with the truth or as close as we can call it truth.
Tita on Tue, 24th Mar 2015 11:59 am
Makati1, if a news source is unable to write anything criticizing his own governement, then you know this news source is unreliable! I’d like to get news from the eastern point of view. But the censor is so active, you don’t get anything! Just look at website of RT. All you read is about the greatness of Russia, how bad is Ukraine (except east), Israel, and how bad are the bad guys from US and the west. There is no controversy about the fact that internationals organisations like “Human Rights Watch” or “Amnesty International” are not welcome by the authority of the country, and labelled “foreign agents”. If you read carefully what they are saying, you begin to feel bad. You understand that something is not right. I don’t say that they lie. They just distort the news in some ways, not talking about some stuff, and insisting on others.
Usually, I research deep coverage. You need journalists to do it. Lots of western Newspaper cover deeply some subjects, without any censor. You feel that there is a work behind. I don’t think reading 50 different websites telling the same bullshit helps. You need to read with critism, knowing who is talking, why is he talking about something.
Understanding why a news source is unreliable is like detecting a viral ad, well disguised. Because propaganda is only that, advertisment for a policy.