Krise in der Ukraine

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

schatzl die erste quelle unzensiert.at ist ne nazi website fpö.^^ aber schon interessant auf welchen seiten du dich erleuchten lässt.
es geht der ukraine doch "nur" um waffen. sicherlich ists problematisch denn der scheinbar gestörte mensch im kreml könnte es als direkte provokation ansehen. aber was hat denn die ukraine für eine wahl es gibt keine andere alternative.

Taktik im Ukraine-Konflikt: "Die russische Führung hat sich in die Falle manövriert"
tmaßlich tausend russische Soldaten kämpfen in der Ukraine, der Westen spricht von einer "militärischen Intervention". Welche Ziele verfolgt Wladimir Putin? Russland-Expertin Sabine Fischer spricht über das Dilemma des Präsidenten.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Frau Fischer, die Nato geht davon aus, dass 1000 Soldaten in der Ukraine kämpfen. Welche Strategie verfolgt Russlands Präsident Wladimir Putin?

Sabine Fischer: Putins Handeln ist weniger strategisch als taktisch. Die russische Führung hat sich sowohl international als auch innenpolitisch in eine Ecke manövriert, aus der sie jetzt nicht mehr herauskommt. Putin kann sich eine militärische Niederlage der Separatisten vor allem innenpolitisch nicht leisten. Die Kampfhandlungen haben sich aber nicht im Sinne der Separatisten entwickelt, also muss er eingreifen. Letztendlich geht es um das Markieren von Territorium. Und hierbei geht Putin teilweise unkalkulierbare Risiken ein.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Es heißt, dass es sich bei den Soldaten um "Freizeitkämpfer" handelt. Ist es vorstellbar, dass sie tatsächlich auf eigene Faust handeln?
Fischer: Das ist vollkommener Unsinn. Wenn diese Soldaten wirklich eigenständig handeln würden, bedeutete das ja, dass Russland keine Kontrolle mehr über sein Militär hat. Und das wäre eine Katastrophe. Tausend Soldaten, die sich Urlaub nehmen, um in einen Krieg in einem Nachbarland einzugreifen? Das ist schlicht und ergreifend absurd.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Wie weit wird Putin jetzt gehen? Ist die ganze Ukraine in Gefahr?

Fischer: Es geht hier nicht um Geografie. Eine Besetzung oder Einverleibung der Ostukraine ist aus meiner Sicht nie Teil des russischen Plans gewesen. Wenn man überhaupt von einem Plan sprechen kann. Es geht um die Wahrung von Kontrolle. Russland lässt sich dabei immer tiefer hineingleiten in den Konflikt. Es ist allerdings nicht auszuschließen, dass die eskalierte Situation jetzt genutzt wird, um eine Landverbindung mit der Krim herzustellen.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Welche Möglichkeiten hat der Westen noch, um auf die russische Intervention zu reagieren?

Fischer: Das Einzige, was der Westen tun kann, ist, die bisherige Linie weiterzuverfolgen. Natürlich muss jetzt die Gangart verschärft werden.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Sie meinen: weitere Sanktionen.

Fischer: Ja. Wenn Russland in den nächsten Tagen nicht zur spürbaren Deeskalation beiträgt, muss es weitere Sanktionen geben. Der Westen muss politischen Druck ausüben. Er muss aber auch weiter verhandeln. Ein militärisches Eingreifen ist keine Option. Denkbar wäre allerdings, dass der Westen dabei hilft, die ukrainische Grenze zu schützen.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Wie soll das gehen, ohne Militär zu schicken?

Fischer: Indem man, wie teilweise auch schon angedacht, auf ukrainischer Seite Kapazitäten aufbaut, um zu einer Sicherung dieser Grenze beizutragen.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Mit Waffenlieferungen?

Fischer: Da wäre ich vorsichtig. Es geht eher um die Verstärkung der OSZE-Beobachtermission, die ja jetzt schon in dem Sektor arbeitet. Auch die EU bringt eine zivile Mission zur Unterstützung von Sicherheitssektorreformen in der Ukraine auf den Weg. Etwas Ähnliches könnte man für die Grenztruppen überlegen.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Am Mittwoch hat Putin dem ukrainischen Präsidenten Petro Poroschenko noch die Hand geschüttelt und versichert "alles für den Friedensprozess zu tun", dann kam der Einmarsch. Wie ist diese Janusköpfigkeit zu verstehen?

Fischer: Die ukrainische und die russische Position für einen Waffenstillstand sind noch immer unvereinbar. Die Ukraine verlangt von Russland die Schließung der Grenzen und die Einstellung von Russlands Unterstützung der Separatisten vor Eintreten eines Waffenstillstands. Aus russischer Perspektive stellt sich das genau umgekehrt dar. Russland verlangt von der Ukraine erst einen Waffenstillstand sowie das Eingehen auf politische Forderungen der Separatisten und Russlands, bevor es bereit ist, die Grenze zu schließen und Unterstützungsmaßnahmen einzustellen.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Putin hat die Separatisten für ihren Einsatz gelobt. Er spricht von "wichtigen Erfolgen der Landwehr". Die Separatisten würden Kiews Militäroperation unterbinden, die "eine tödliche Gefahr für die Zivilbevölkerung darstellen". Was bezweckt er mit dieser Ansprache?

Fischer: Das richtet sich auch ganz stark an die russische Bevölkerung. Putin stellt sich als gemäßigter Staatsmann dar, der an der Lösung des Konflikts und dem Schutz der Zivilbevölkerung interessiert ist. Es passt in das Bild, das in Russland von dem Konflikt herrscht: Der Kampf der russischsprachigen Bevölkerungsteile in der Ostukraine in Selbstverteidigung gegen ein extremistisches Regime in Kiew.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Laut einer Umfrage ist die überwältigende Mehrheit der Russen gegen einen Einmarsch in die Ukraine. Was bedeutet das für Putin?

Fischer: Daraus kann ein erhebliches Dilemma entstehen. Wenn er einerseits eine militärische Niederlage der Separatisten hinnimmt, verliert er innenpolitisch das Gesicht. Gleichzeitig ist die Bevölkerung gegen eine Invasion, die Meldungen über Tote und Verletzte russische Soldaten häufen sich jedoch in den russischen Medien. Dies ist eine Gefahr für Putin. Im Moment sehe ich aber nicht, wie er das Dilemma lösen will. Die russische Führung hat sich durch die nationalistische und patriotische Rhetorik und ihre Herangehensweise an diesen Konflikt in die Falle manövriert, aus der sie jetzt nur noch mit den allergrößten Schwierigkeiten herauskommt. Wenn überhaupt.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Es ist also nicht zu erwarten, dass Putin irgendwann zugibt, in der Ukraine zu operieren?

Fischer: Nein, das ist nicht absehbar. Ukraine-Krise: Russland und Putin stecken in einem Dilemma - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Klicke in dieses Feld, um es in vollständiger Größe anzuzeigen.

p.s. du glaubst doch nicht wirklich noch an das märchen der freiwilligen urlaubskämpfer?
es ist auch ein seltsamer zufall dass gerade als die separatisten am ende waren plötzlich bewegungen an der grenze stattfanden russland dementierte und 2 tage später haben die milizen die oberhand ja eröffnen eine zweite front...

Anzeige

bushido · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Die OSZE hat es gerade bestätigt - siehe N-TV. Fragt sich an was du glaubst. Offensichtlich auch an den Osterhasen und den Weihnachtsmann.

Und da Academi (aka Xe, aka Blackwater) auf der anderen Seite kämpft, und du dich nicht darüber aufregst, kann man mit Fug und Recht behaupten, daß du dich hier auf eine ganz widerwärtige Weise durch den Thread heuchelst.

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

klar ist oder besser war blackwater dort unterwegs.wenn ich nichts dazu sage darfst es als zustimmung sehen.
wenn das die osze behauptet dann muss es wohl stimmen.
frage mich nur weshalb russischen mütter ihre söhne vermissen welche offziell zu übungen an die ukrainische grenze geschickt wurden und nur die verletzten zurückkamen. müssen echt komische übungen sein bei denen es dermaßen viele verletzte gibt und die toten irgendwo verscharrt werden.

bushido · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Hast du eine bessere neutralere Quelle?

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

um auf deine erste frage bzgl blackwater einzugehen: laut den tatzigen twitter meldungen sind die jetzt wohl auf "isis-tournee"

ich hab nur die muttis welche ihre kinder vermissen...

Heimliche Beerdigungen in russischen Städten: Todesliste: Starben schon hunderte russische Soldaten in der Ukraine? - Ausland - FOCUS Online - Nachrichten

Ukraine: Soldatenmütter fordern Kreml heraus - SPIEGEL ONLINE

sind zu manövern an der grenze bekommen plötzlich alle urlaub und entscheiden sich dafür freiwillig in den krieg zu ziehen. ist schon etwas eigenartig

raid-rush · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Zumindest den Rubel lassen die Meldungen nicht kalt. Die Ukraine ist bei einem Krieg absolut unterlegen und auch die Infrastruktur ist nicht dafür ausgelegt, die Atomkraftwerke stellen sogar ein relativ großes Risiko dar.

Wenn Russland so weiter macht, wird die Ukraine vermutlich in die NATO aufgenommen. Das ist doch genau das was sie eigentlich nicht wollten...?!

Russland versucht seine Währung zu retten, China hilft.

Die Invasion wird natürlich etwas dramatisiert, aber das verkauft sich eben besser und Nachrichten sind eben (im Westen) meist nicht staatlich sondern Unternehmen.

Wenn sich Putin in seinen alles überspielenden Staatsmedien feiert und andere Meinungen zensiert und unterdrückt ist klar, dass dies zu einer noch stärkeren journalistischen Gegenwelle führt.

bushido · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Du persönlich kannst glauben was du möchtest, mit den Fakten hat das momentan allerdings relativ wenig zu tun.

Deine Quellen spekulieren alle nur. Dazu muß ich diese nicht mal anklicken.

@raid-rush

Bei der volatilen Lage sollten sich auch die Westmedien mit derartigen Falschmeldungen, gefährlichen Spekulationen und Hetze zurückhalten. Dabei spielt es keine Rolle ob sie staatlich oder privat sind.

Im Übrigen ist ja nun wirklich einwandfrei nachgewiesen, daß die Medien im Westen zwar nicht staatlich sind, aber trotzdem von politischen Thinktanks, dem militärisch industriellen Komplex (USA), von Geheimdiensten (USA) und der Politik beeinflußt werden. Von Neutralität kann bei uns überhaupt keine Rede sein.

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

na dann glauben wir doch der osze bei mir sinds ja nur weinende frauen wer träumt nicht von einem urlaub im kriegsgebiet

Ukraine-Krise: Russlands unerklärter Krieg - Ausland - Politik - Wirtschaftswoche

…und täglich grüßt der Kreml-Troll
29. August 2014, Autor: Florian Willershausen

Seit dieser Woche lässt es sich nun wirklich nicht mehr relativieren: Russland führt gegen die Ukraine einen Angriffskrieg. Der Kreml, ob direkt oder indirekt, unterstützt Separatisten in der Ost-Ukraine nicht nur mit Waffen – sondern auch mit eigenen Soldaten. Plötzlich werden sie ruhig, die “Kreml-Trolle”, wie neuerdings jene Kommentatoren im Internet genannt werden, die Putin auf Teufel-komm-heraus verteidigen und die Schuld an jeder Aggression auf einen Obama-Merkel-Komplott lenken. Für jeden Journalisten, der vor Ort recherchiert und russischen wie ukrainischen Quellen gründlich misstraut, haben sich diese Herrschaften als wahre Plage erwiesen.

Ganz konfus vom Kreml-Kurs, sitzen sie jetzt an ihren Rechnern und lecken die Wunden. Aber sie rüsten auf, um mit neuen fadenscheinigen Argumenten gegen den Westen zu schüren. Bevor ich mich in den Urlaub verabschiede und dieser Plage bewusst entziehe, noch ein paar Klarstellungen zu bisher wenig beleuchteten Standard-Argumenten:

Fünf Milliarden Dollar sollen die USA an die Ukraine gezahlt haben, behaupten diese Kommentatoren immer wieder. Damit soll die „Revolution“ in der Ukraine finanziert worden sein. Das ist eine verkürzte Information, die russische Medien seit dem Frühjahr streuen. Sie fußen auf einer Rede, die Amerikas EU-Beauftrage Victoria Nuland im Dezember 2013 gehalten hat. Sie bezifferte darin die Entwicklungshilfe der USA an die Ukraine auf fünf Milliarden Dollar – seit der Unabhängigkeit im Jahr 1991. Dass sich die Summe auf den Zeitraum von zwölf Jahren bezieht, verschweigen russische Medien gern. Stattdessen wird der Eindruck erweckt, als seien die Proteste nur wegen der US-Finanzhilfe möglich gewesen. Das ist Unsinn. EU-Ländern haben aufs Jahr gerechnet seit Anfang der 90er Jahre mehr Geld in den Staatsaufbau gepumpt, von Weltbank und IWF ganz zu schweigen.

Hunter Biden, der Sohn des US-Vizepräsidenten mit dem Vornamen Joe, sitzt im Vorstand des ukrainischen Gas-Herstellers Burisma, ja. Na und? Das Unternehmen produziert keine zehn Prozent des ukrainischen Gases und hat bislang noch keinen Gewinn ausgewiesen. Die Förderlizenzen beziehen sich vor allem auf Felder der Südost- und Ost-Ukraine, wo wegen der politischen Lage auf absehbare Zeit keine Förderung möglich sein wird. In einem nach wie vor korrupten Land mit mörderischer Bürokratie wie der Ukraine sind Investitionen in die langfristig ausgerichtete Öl- und Gasindustrie ein riskantes Unterfangen, keine Goldgrube. Wenn sich ein Privatunternehmen einen US-Anwalt mit guten Kontakten zur Politik engagiert, ist das nur legitim. Die Ukraine fördert übrigens im ganzen Land so viel Gas die Russen aus einem einzigen Feld rausholen.

Flug MH17 sei ja in Wahrheit von den Ukrainern selbst abgeschossen worden. Ach, es gibt noch viel krudere Verschwörungstheorien. Erst diese Woche schrieb die “KP” in Moskau, in der Ukraine sei die über dem Indischen Ozean verschollene Boeing-777 mit Flugnummer MH-370 abgestürzt, ohne Passagiere natürlich. Möchte das mal jemand den Hinterbliebenen erklären? Um es klar zu sagen: Es wird wahrscheinlich keine Beweise geben, wonach irrlichternde Separatisten das Flugzeug vom Himmel geholt haben. Der Flugschreiber wird den Einschlag registriert haben, nicht aber die Richtung, aus der einer Rakete kam. Überwachungsbilder – so sie denn existieren – geben weder Russen noch Amerikaner preis: Keiner will dem anderen zeigen, was seine Spione alles filmen können. Wie im kalten Krieg. Gleichwohl ist die Indizienlage erdrückend – und sie spricht klar gegen die Rebellen.

Sorry, das klingt jetzt fast so, als würde ich die Aktivitäten der USA pauschal gut heißen. Das ist nicht der Fall. Natürlich mischt sich die US-Politik auf schädliche Weise in die EU-Politik gegenüber Europa ein: Washington liebäugelt mit Waffenlieferungen an die Ukraine (falls die nicht schon laufen) und die US-Politik gießt mit Säbelrasseln immer weiter Öl ins Feuer des Konflikts. Die Krise in der Ukraine ist eine europäische Angelegenheit, die europäisch gelöst werden sollte – was die EU auch vorhat. Dass Washington sich immer wieder einmischt und ständig quer schießt, ist kontraproduktiv.

Gleichwohl sollten wir fair bleiben: Das Märchen, wonach das Finanzkapital der USA die Weltherrschaft anstrebt, Europa unterjocht und sich einzig Russland der Hegemonie tapfer entgegen stellt – es gehört ins Reich der Verschwörungstheorien. Oder in die Propaganda-Show des russischen Staatsfernsehens, die die Menschen dort zu Zombies macht.

Und hiermit verabschiede ich mich 3 Wochen in den Urlaub. Hoffentlich.

Florian Willershausenhttp://blog.wiwo.de/on-the-road/2014/08/29/und-taglich-grust-der-kreml-troll/

Klicke in dieses Feld, um es in vollständiger Größe anzuzeigen.

Fedja · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Ich schau ja ab und zu mal das russische Fernseh und dort wurde berichtet das die Separatisten einen Weg bis zur der russischen Grenze für die Flüchtlinge.. und auch für ukrainische Soldaten mit der Bedingung ihre Waffen sowie Panzer etc abzulegen... dürfen sie die russiche Grenze passieren...
------
Viele Soldaten die nach Russland geflüchtet sind haben ihre Familien dort gelassen und kämpfen jetzt Seite an Seite mit den Separatisten...
-------

Es werden sogar von einigen ukrainischen Bataillonen Waffen, Nahrungsmittel wie Fahrzeuge für die Separatisten zur verfügung gestellt.

gruß
Fedja

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

jup seit heute und auf anweisung des großartigen führers vlad welcher in minsk noch beteuerte keine kontrolle über die separatisten zu haben.

bushido · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Behauptung wurde von der OSZE widerlegt.

Eine absolute Frechheit! Eine Lüge!

Aufgrund der Lügen zuvor, kann man das nur noch als Hetze werten!

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

3 sätze aus einem 2 seitigen artikel gefetzt und schon steht das weltbild.bravo^^ mal abgesehen davon gehts mir nicht um die reißerischen schlagzeilen sondern eher um die witzigen russischen aussagen wie z.b.

und das nimmst du einfach als gegeben? jetzt versteh ich auch den ebola- und impfthread

raid-rush · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Die OSZE ist erst dabei die Belege für die verhärteten Indizien zu enthüllen... das ist etwas anderes als "widerlegen"

Die russischen Waffen die den Separatisten gestellt wurden, müssen ja auch bedient werden... wenn nicht offiziell dann eben beurlaubt in zivil, das macht es nicht besser. So kann man eben nicht nachweisen das es offiziell angeordnet wurde, weil es zählt nicht als Invastion wenn die privat zum kämpfen gehen, dafür kann ja Russland nichts *zwinker*

Wenn Lügen lügen lernen ist es dann die Wahrheit? Die EU und Deutschland sind nur aus Spaß so aus dem Häuschen ist ja nur eine Lappalie was Russland macht, deshalb auch die lustigen Verhandlungen und Sanktionen stimmt's?

bushido · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Das waren Beispiele, die mit der von dir als "witzig" beschriebenen Spekulation begründet wurden. Das ist alles andere als neutraler, sachlicher Journalismus.

------------------------------

Die OSZE spricht ganz klar von Söldnern, nicht von Soldaten, die im Auftrag Rußlands dort sind. Mag ja sein, daß das der Fall ist, aber dafür gibt es derzeit keinen einzigen Beweis!

Ich werde dir dein auf Lügen basierendes Weltbild nicht austreiben, dazu bist du viel zu sehr in der NATO Propagandamaschinerie und dieser "wir sind die Guten" Denkweise gefangen. Mir ist eure "Herrenmenschen"mentalität einfach zuwider, sie ekelt mich regelrecht an, weil mittlerweile wirklich deutlich geworden ist, daß ihr gegen die Fakten in diesem Konflikt völlig immun seid.

analprolaps · 29. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

...bitte löschen

YaLcIn · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Wir sind bereits im 3.Weltkrieg.
Das ist derzeit die Vorspeise.
Ich denke die Atombomben, kommen zur Nachspeise. 3 Atombomben und die Menschheit gibt es nicht mehr.
Ich denke in den nächsten 5 Jahren geht es los.

GaaraDerWüste · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Also um von dem Gepöbel gerade auf Atombomben zu schließen muss man schon Nostradamus sein
Kannst mir auch die Lottozahlen von nächster Woche verraten?

Fedja · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Hier ist ein Video in voller Länge .. wo über Ukraine. Nato und die kriminelle Machenschaften der Politik gesprochen wird.

The Presidential Press and Information Office before the meeting with Seliger 2014 Forum participants, August 29, 2014

Vladimir Putin is visiting the Seliger 2014 10th National Youth Forum. The Forum's current participants, gathering under the name of the Knowledge Generation, include postgraduates and young teachers from around Russia in the fields of history, political science, sociology, philosophy and economics.

The President's discussions with Forum participants cover current issues in Russia's political and economic life and international affairs.

YouTube-Video

Moderator Ksenia Razuvayeva: Mr President, we are happy to welcome you to the Seliger Youth Forum's fifth session.

This year, the Seliger Forum is celebrating its tenth anniversary. This session, where everyone was looking forward to your visit, is quite unusual, perhaps even the most unusual so far over this decade.

Here today we have 800 teachers from Russia's top universities. They work in philosophy, economics, political science and sociology. They are our country's future and our intellectual elite.

The floor is yours. We were looking forward very much to your visit and we are very pleased to see you.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, friends,

Thank you for your words of welcome.

It is even a little daunting to meet with such an audience because... well, you understand what I mean. (Laughter). The fields in which you work are areas that arouse interest in the past, present and future all at once.

It is not easy to talk with professionals who know the answer to questions such as whether philosophy is a science or an art. Not everyone would be able to say, but philosophers can probably tell us and will perhaps share the answer with us today.

It is an even harder task to speak with historians who can analyse everything that has happened in our country's past and the world's past, look back in retrospective and look too at where we are going and what we need to do to make our road forward as effective as possible, so as to reach the goals that we have set.

Sociology is another matter altogether. They know everything. And they certainly know it better than anyone else. But let me say that this is indeed a very interesting group that has gathered here. I think we will have the chance to discuss issues and exchange views on our country's development and its place in the world.

Of course I am not only happy to answer your questions, but would be interested to hear your views too. This is extremely important because this is a rare opportunity to meet with people like yourselves in such number and format and be able to have a frank and open discussion.

Let me end my remarks here. I propose that we move on to the discussion itself.

Alexei Makarenko: Good afternoon, Mr President. My name is Alexei Makarenko and I represent the International Graduate School of Management at the St Petersburg State Polytechnic University.

Even though our forum has an education focus, we are actively following current events in the world, and many of the current events concern Ukraine of course. In particular, there was your meeting with President Poroshenko in Minsk, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's statement about the plans to send another humanitarian convoy. There was also the news about the local militia's plans to continue their humanitarian-military operation, and there was your recent appeal to the militia to open a humanitarian corridor in order to avoid unnecessary bloodshed. There have also been a number of media reports that Western countries might hold discussions on possible further sanctions, and then there have been reports that a group of Russian servicemen was detained on Ukrainian territory.

In this context, could you please give your view of the current situation and say something about how it is likely to develop?

Vladimir Putin: Let's start with the question of our servicemen. I have already said that we have had cases of Ukrainian servicemen ending up on Russian territory, and in far greater number too. In one case there were 450 people, and in another case there were 60. Just recently there were another 60 servicemen with their arms. There were cases when they ended up on our territory and said that they had got lost - in their armoured vehicles and with their weapons.

This is the truth in fact. I am serious here. I believe that they did get lost because there is no demarcated border there. If military operations are underway or our servicemen are patrolling the border, this is entirely possible. I think that this matter is therefore a technical one.

Mr Poroshenko and I discussed this issue, and he assured me that the Russian servicemen would be handed back to Russia, just as we have handed over Ukrainian servicemen and continue to do so.

What's more, we provided them with medical assistance, treated them in our hospitals, and so there is every reason to believe that both sides will behave in proper fashion in this matter.

As for the situation overall, it is far more serious of course. To repeat what I have already said about what happened, President Yanukovych postponed the signing of an economic agreement with the European Union because he believed that the document still needed substantial additional work.

Our Western partners, with the support of fairly radically inclined and nationalist-leaning groups, carried out a coup d'état there. No matter what anyone says, we all understand what happened. There are no fools among us. We all saw the symbolic pies handed out on the Maidan. This information and political support, what does it mean?

This was a case of the United States and European countries getting fully involved in a change of power, an anti-constitutional change of power carried out by force, and the part of the country that does not accept this change is being suppressed with brute military force and the use of planes, artillery, multiple launch rocket systems and tanks. If this is what today's European values are about, then I am more than disappointed.

What happened next? We had numerous discussions with the Ukrainian leadership, the US leadership and the European countries about the need for an immediate end to this fratricidal war and the start of negotiations. What did the Ukrainian government propose three or four weeks ago after all? Unilaterally it all sounded so fine: "We have ended military operations." But then the very next thing they say is that the ceasefire will last for seven days and whoever does not lay down their arms will be destroyed. Is this the road to negotiations? This is an ultimatum.

Of course the people who had taken up arms could not agree to these conditions. After all, they took up arms so as to defend themselves and their lives and dignity. The military operations then resumed once more and what do we have today? The Ukrainian army has surrounded small towns and big cities and are firing directly at residential areas in order to destroy infrastructure and crush the will to resist and so on.

Sad as it is to say, but this reminds me of the events of World War II, when the Nazi troops surrounded our towns, in particular Leningrad - you are from St Petersburg, yes? - and fired directly on the towns and their people. On Nevsky Prospekt, as you know, you can still see the sign "Citizens! Take care: this side of the street is most dangerous in artillery attacks." This is the point things have come to. This is terrible! This is a catastrophe! I can therefore understand the militia in southeast Ukraine, in Donbass and Lugansk, for attempting to defend themselves.

Why do they call their operation a military-humanitarian operation? What are they trying to do today? They are trying to push back artillery and multiple launch rocket systems from the big towns so that they won't be able to kill people. But what do we hear in response from our Western partners? We are told that they do not have the right to do this. They are supposed to let themselves suffer, let themselves be killed, and then they will be considered good guys? We need to sit down at the negotiating table.

It has become clear to me now that our partners' position amounts to saying that yes, we do need to begin negotiations, but first we need to let the Ukrainian government shoot for a while, and then they might be able to swiftly bring some order there.

But it is time to realise that this is not going to work, and we need to make the Ukrainian authorities start negotiations of real substance, negotiations of substance. Not just talk about the technical issues, which are important too of course, as they deal with humanitarian matters such as prisoner exchanges, as they call it, and other issues too.

There need to be negotiations of substance. [Foreign Minister] Lavrov was here, and the diplomats love this term. Negotiations need to work out in substance what rights the people in Donbass, Lugansk and the entire southeast of Ukraine will have. Their lawful rights and interests must be formulated and guaranteed within the framework of modern civilised rules. These are the issues that need to be discussed. From there I am sure it will be relatively easy to settle matters concerning the border, guaranteeing security and so on. But the problem is that they do not really want to talk.

Now concerning my appeal about the humanitarian corridor, I saw in the news reports above all, and also from the reports of our special services what is happening. I saw the reactions of mothers and wives of these Ukrainian servicemen who are surrounded. This is a tragedy for them too. This was why I appealed to the Donbass militia to open a humanitarian corridor so that people could leave. Many of them have been there for several days without food or water. They have run out of ammunition. They should be given the chance to leave.

The latest news is that the Ukrainian military commanders and the leadership have decided not to let them leave this encirclement and are making attempts to push back the militia forces and fight their way out. I think this is a colossal mistake that will lead to much loss of life. This is terrible.

Now, on the substance. This is an immense tragedy, this conflict in Ukraine. There are historians here, and people with their own views on our country's history might argue with me, but I think that the Russian and Ukrainian peoples are practically one single people, no matter what others might say.

Correct me of course if you want, but just listen first. There was no Russian people as such back then. There were Slavic tribes. Some say there were 16, others 32, people have different figures for these tribes, Slavs, Drevlians and so on. And with the baptism of Rus, Vladimir was himself first baptised in Chersonesus, and this makes Crimea a holy place for us too, and he then came to Kiev and had the whole of Rus baptised.

It was after this that the Russian nation began to take shape, but it was multi-ethnic right from the start. People living in what is Ukraine today all called themselves 'Russian'. Yes, there was Galicia, the territories in the west, close to Western Europe, and it was natural that they developed particular relations with the Catholic world and their neighbours through the intermingling of languages and cultures. But they should not impose their views on their entire Ukrainian people.

My point is that I think that what is happening in Ukraine today is an immense common tragedy for us all. And we need to do everything possible to end this tragedy as soon as possible.

<...>

Vladimir Putin: On the matter of the Arctic, this is a crucially important region for Russia. Our country is the world's biggest in terms of size. Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was truly vast, Russia remains the biggest country in terms of territory, but more than 70 percent of our territory is located in the Far North. This is something we need to remember.

The Arctic is a particular region not just for its harsh climate but also in the opportunities it holds. Lomonosov said in his time that Russia would grow through Siberia and this is exactly what is happening, but the Arctic is certainly set to develop too. This is not just because the region holds enormous reserves of mineral wealth, reserves big enough for the entire planet - I'm talking about gas, oil and metals - but it is also an exceptionally convenient region for developing transport infrastructure.

We have begun reviving the Northern Sea Route. You have no doubt read about this many times and probably discuss it with your students. This route will be a powerful competitor for the existing transport routes and could cut freight transport costs for business.

The Arctic plays a very important part for us in terms of guaranteeing our security too. It is regrettably the case that the United States' attack submarines are concentrated in that area, not far from the Norwegian coast, and the missiles they carry would reach Moscow within 15-16 minutes, just to remind you.

But we have our navy there and quite a big part of our submarine fleet. It is quite easy today to track submarines, but if they go under the Arctic ice this makes them invisible and this is a big problem for the people trying to track them. In short, we have this concentration of interests in the Arctic.

Of course we must give more attention to developing the Arctic and strengthening our position there. You might have noticed that we are already doing this. This concerns our plans to build a fleet of nuclear icebreakers too, and our plans to return to some territories, including islands, return in the economic sense and maintain a military presence too.

I hope that you saw the news recently about our military group that landed in the region. They are there for peaceful purposes but they are a military group and this is our territory. We will redevelop the entire military infrastructure there and the Emergency Situations Ministry infrastructure. We are doing this also because we need to ensure safe shipping and keep the trade routes secure, and not because we plan to fight a war with anyone or seek conflict.

Many view our activeness with caution and concern. We have said on numerous occasions that we will act solely within the framework of international law. We have always acted this way and will continue to do so. Other countries also have many interests there. We will take these interests into account and seek acceptable compromises, at the same time defending our own interests of course.

On the question of territorial and administrative divisions and organising work in these regions, we have a federal state in which all territories are part of the Russian Federation constituent entities, which have particular powers with regard to these territories' management. The federal authorities have some powers too, and the regional and local authorities have powers. In individual cases requiring particular attention, we will set up... Incidentally, in some countries, despite having a federal system, some territories are under direct federal jurisdiction. This practice exists, this is true. All in all, there is nothing to stop us from doing this too, but we have no such plans at the present.

We have organised several regional ministries responsible for developing particular territories. We have ministries for the Far East, the North Caucasus, and Crimea and Sevastopol. We have to see how this will work and what it gives in practice. Now that everything is already up and running, some specialists say that it would be better if every ministry had deputies directly appointed to deal with this or that territory. They say that this might be a more effective system. This is because we have the ministry set up specifically for developing the particular region, but they still have to come to the Finance Ministry, Economic Development Ministry and so on. But it is too early to make any hasty conclusions and we need to see how this will work for the different regions concerned.

Furthermore, there are social issues or issues concerning the use of natural resources that must have the approval of the people living in the region concerned. There are environmental issues for example, respect for environmental standards in mining and extraction operations, including hydrocarbon production in these northern regions. These activities and this work must be carried out in such a way that does not upset the natural way of life, the economic life and traditional forms of life and work that have taken shape among the local people over centuries. But I am not sure that all of this can be regulated in all its subtle nuances from Moscow.

Yevgeny Chernov: Good afternoon, Mr President. I am Yevgeny Chernov from the Volga Management Institute in Saratov, and have a PhD in political science.

We devoted our first days here in Seliger to politics. Our political system has undergone some substantial transformations over the last 2.5 years, including the new law on elections to the State Duma and the return to direct elections of regional governors. Mr President, would you say that now the political system's foundations have been laid and we can expect only small changes from here?

Vladimir Putin: Have the political system's foundations been laid? Who can say? Let me explain. Practice is the only true criteria and we now have to see how all that we have developed works in real life. Time will tell if what we have established is in keeping with our country's and society's current level of development.

I think that the main supports have been built though. Russia is a very unique country in some ways. We made our nobles grow long beards, then made them shave them off, then made them grow them long again, then cut them off again. Why do we do this? It's the same with the economy.

If you look around, when individual countries' economies or the global economy goes into crisis, the level of state regulation increases and people say that this is necessary, and that the state needs to take this or take that. As soon as the economy recovers from the crisis, people say that state regulation is just a set of shackles, puts chains on the economy and stops it from moving ahead. They say the market is self-regulating. And so then you got this liberal movement that did indeed help to speed up development, but crisis phenomena build up even faster and are inevitable, and so some amount of state regulation is then needed again.

It is the same too in the way society and the state are organised. We cannot rely only on our past experience of course. We do need to keep hold of our traditional values, but they must not prevent us from moving forward. We need to look at the situation in society, the circumstances of the moment.

During the Soviet years for example, for all the criticism of that period there was a time when the economy did grow very fast and the country strengthened rapidly. Whatever people might say about the number of victims in World War II and the Great Patriotic War, we did win in the end. We can criticise the commanders and Stalin all we like, but can anyone say with certainty that a different approach would have enabled us to win? No one denies that Stalin was a tyrant and that we had the labour camps and the personality cult, but we need to be able to look at issues from every angle.

It became clear that our development had reached a stage when rule by one party, the Communist Party in this case, did not reflect the level of our society's development and was preventing the country from moving further. This in large part was what led to the Soviet Union's collapse and to the unravelling of its economy and political system.

Now we have a multiparty system. People criticise it of course and say that we have no real opposition. But I completely disagree here. We have a genuine multiparty system. We have different parties in the parliament and they compete quite intensely in election campaigns when they think they have a chance.

Look at the election campaign in 2012. Was it just a sort of game? Not at all. Any unbiased observer could see that there was a fierce fight between the parties. Then the election took place, and as often happens, with the election over, people know there's no sense fighting further on that front, so the fight moves to other areas. We now have these four parliamentary parties that have developed and taken shape. They have their own views on economic development, social issues, and on the country in general.

We have liberalised party activity in general. I think we have around 70 non-parliamentary parties registered. Many of them took part in the elections last year, in gubernatorial elections and elections to regional legislative assemblies. Not all of them were able to be field candidates. But this year there will be even more gubernatorial elections. Last year, there were six or eight, I think, while this year there will be 30, and practically all the parties will be fielding candidates.

Yes, we were obliged to introduce some rules that act as a kind of filter for deciding which political parties can take part in political life. But this kind of system exists practically everywhere, just take a look at any European country. Otherwise it is impossible for people to make head or tail of all these huge numbers of parties with all these candidates. You end up with enormous lists, and voters come and cannot even read it all in one go.

And so parties need to either be known from earlier elections, known to the voters, or collect a certain number of signatures from voters. There are other mechanisms too. I think therefore that overall we have laid the foundations of our modern political system. But this does not mean that they are set in cement and cannot change to keep up with life.

Life sets us new challenges and forces us to respond. And we can and will respond of course. But in modern society this needs to happen through direct contact with the public, which modern information technology makes it possible to do.

You know that we have introduced the idea for example of using the internet for putting forward legislative initiatives. We will continue to introduce and make wider use of these kinds of instruments.

<...>

Yekaterina Mityagina: Hello, Mr President.

I am from the Vyatka State Humanities University in Kirov.

Recently, it's been very fashionable to conduct various polls and ratings. We have been here for seven days now, many of us are sociologists, and so we took it onto ourselves to do a small study on mentions of you by speakers who spoke to us here - positive and negative mentions.

And the results of our small study are as follows. The greatest number of times you were mentioned by a single speaker was six. Combined, all speakers mentioned you in their speeches over 40 times. It is immediately clear that all these mentions were positive. We did not hear any criticism of you from speakers at the forum.

Vladimir Putin: You just said, and I even wrote it down: "There were positive and negative mentions." And then you said that there weren't any negative ones. So were there or weren't there?

Yekaterina Mityagina: Mr President, that was the initial goal. In other words, as objective sociologists, we must take into account both positive and negative mentions. But unfortunately, until today, we were not able to... or rather, fortunately.

Vladimir Putin: This was an omission by the authorities. These mentions should have been balanced. It's an omission from the organisers.

Yekaterina Mityagina: Mr President, in this regard, we have a question from Kirov, Novosibirsk and Kaliningrad, i.e., researchers from these cities worked on this study. The question is, how do you feel about ratings overall, how do you feel about your high approval ratings today, the Russian and global ratings? Are you afraid of such ratings? And how do you feel about the results of our modest sociological study?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Russia is a nation that is not afraid of anything. But it always analyses everything happening within and around it objectively and sets up its work accordingly. This is fully true of any citizen of our nation, and it is true for me. You know, people who do the work I do must certainly be aware of their ratings and take them into account, but they should never use them as a benchmark. And I have never used them as one.

What are the main criteria that allow for achieving success? A person must be truly convinced of his right cause, of the work he is doing. If it is something that is not yet rated positively in the public consciousness, the goal is not to fall in line with the common point of view; instead, the goal is to honestly and openly explain what he or she is doing.

That is extremely important; if people see that the head of a region, city or state believes in what he is doing, if he is honest and open, then I assure you, I have seen this many times, people begin to trust and support him. This is extremely important.

And even if this is not reflected in the mid-term ratings, so long as there are no mistakes, so long as we are moving in the right direction, then the right and principled position always pays off; people understand and support this. That is how I try to work.

Timur Vishnevsky: Hello, Mr President.

We have a question from Tatarstan, from Kazan. My name is Timur Vishnevsky, and I come from the Kazan (Volga) Federal University.

My question is as follows. You certainly know that the Republic of Tatarstan is home to ethnic Tatars and Russians. I come from a mixed Russian-Tatar family. So I have a question about a sore point, so to speak.

The Republic of Tatarstan is, as far as I know, the last ethnic republic in Russia where the institution of presidency has been maintained. So how is it that some Russian citizens have one President, the President of the Russian Federation, while others have two Presidents: the President of the Russian Federation and the President of the Republic of Tatarstan?

My question is, do you believe a single presidency institution be established soon in our nation? And how do you view the future of Russia's federal structure?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: As far as the nation's federal structure is concerned, I have already partially answered this question when we discussed the problems in the Arctic. I feel that the federal structure is a very important and essential component in our statehood because it allows us to better take into account the interests of all of the nation's citizens, regardless of where they live, to take into account their ethnic, historical, religious and cultural diversity.

That is precisely why Russia's regions have fairly significant powers, particularly in the areas I just mentioned. Incidentally, for some reason, I don't know why, our Ukrainian partners are very afraid of federalisation. That is their choice; naturally, we will not meddle under any circumstances. There are plenty of countries in the world with federal system of governance: Russia, the US, Brazil, Germany...

The point is to give an opportunity to live a full-fledged life to people living in various territories, who have significant distinctions in the areas I mentioned. I feel that we must strengthen federalism in our nation.

As for Tatarstan and the fact that that the highest public office in the federal constituent territory is called "President," this does not in any way affect Tatarstan's status as a full-fledged Russian federal constituent entity. According to our legislation, it is up to the region to decide how to build this system and how to call its top official.

I must admit that both the former President of Tatarstan, Mintimer Shaimiyev, and the current President, are statesmen in the highest and most direct sense of the word and full-fledged citizens of the Russian Federations - indeed, not just citizens, but Russian patriots.

And I hope that we all felt this during the events in Crimea, when the incumbent President of Tatarstan went to Crimea many times, met with Crimean Tatar representatives and spoke about how life works in the Russian Federation for one of its majority peoples - the Tatars.

After all, in Tatarstan, I believe you have less than three million Tatars - somewhere between 2.5 and three million - and another 2.5 to three million more live in other regions of the Russian Federation. And our goal is to make all people, regardless of where they live or what their ethnicity may be, feel themselves to be full-fledged citizens of Russia and have the same rights.

But again, there are also certain distinctions and they must be taken into account when developing federalism. The title of the highest official is, first and foremost, your business - the business of Russian citizens who live in the Republic of Tatarstan.

<...>

Vladimir Putin: (responding to a question about transferring the capital of Russia to Siberia) There are certain symbols in the lives and history of our people that serve to unite us. Moscow is one such symbol.

But that does not mean we need to concentrate all central resources in Moscow. Take, for example, our German neighbours, whose constitutional court is located in Karlsruhe - in fact, their entire judicial system is there, I think. That is the same thing we are doing now; we have moved the Constitutional Court to St Petersburg and are planning to move the Supreme Court there as well, which we have merged with the Higher Arbitration Court.

I feel it is possible and right to transfer certain central federal agencies to Siberia. For example, Krasnoyarsk is, in my view, a good place for this because it is the geographical centre of our nation. It is approximately equidistant to Moscow and Vladivostok.

Now, with Crimea, our geographical centre will shift somewhat, but that's a small detail. It is a major city with over a million inhabitants, well-developed infrastructure, a good airport, beautiful nature and great people. We should think along those lines.

Why have some of the major Russian companies settled in Moscow? Let them operate in the regions as well. This will increase revenues for regional and local budgets. It's just that they got attached to Moscow, following a tradition that evolved, and it's fairly hard to squeeze them out of the Moscow streets. But we will gradually work in that direction, I promise you.

Now with regard to the nationally oriented opposition, whether there is one. Yes, of course there is. I spoke about the parliamentary parties. Remember the fierce competition during the 2012 presidential campaign? I already spoke about it. It was tough and absolutely uncompromising, and sometimes even somewhat indecent, I think, but nevertheless. And the way people united around the events in Crimea, when everyone felt and understood that we are right.

We must restore historic justice that was disrupted with the transfer - I want to stress this - the unlawful transfer of Crimea to Ukraine. Why was it unlawful? Because even under Soviet laws, there had to be a resolution by the republics' supreme councils. This was not done; everything was decided through presidiums. But that's not even the point; the main point is that we had to protect our compatriots who live there.

Now, I think, it is clear to everyone - when we look at the events in Donbass, Lugansk and Odessa - it is now clear to everyone what would have happened to Crimea, if we had not taken corresponding measures to ensure that people could freely express their will. We did not annex it, we did not seize it, we gave people the opportunity to express themselves and make a decision and we treated that decision with respect.

I feel we protected them. And all this has truly greatly united us, including the opposition parties that are fairly critical of the authorities in power, critically assessing the actions of the authorities with regard to politics and the economy. So we have a nationally oriented opposition.

We also have the so-called non-systemic opposition, but it is also not a single whole and it features different people: people who are patriotic and people who feel differently. Regardless of how hurtful it might be to hear, perhaps, even to some of this audience, people who hold leftist views, but in the First World War, the Bolsheviks wished to see their Fatherland defeated. And while the heroic Russian soldiers and officers shed their blood on the fronts in World War I, some were shaking Russia from within and shook it to the point that Russia as a state collapsed and declared itself defeated by a country that had lost the war. It is nonsense, it is absurd, but it happened! This was a complete betrayal of national interests!

We have such people in our nation today as well. Well, what can we do? Unfortunately, no nation can avoid it. But nevertheless, I feel that the basic foundations of our state's viability will never let such people into leading positions in the government.

Anna Sazonova: Good afternoon, Mr President. I am Anna Sazonova, my colleagues and I represent the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia.

Vladimir Putin: The one named after Patrice Lumumba?

Anna Sazonova: Yes, it has a different name now.

Everybody is talking about nationalism in Ukraine nowadays. However, we are concerned about a different situation, namely the growth of nationalistic sentiments in Kazakhstan, in the south of that country in particular. In our view the acting President, Mr Nazarbayev is the main restraining factor here. An adequate perception by Kazakhs of Russian political rhetoric is also an issue. This is obvious from the internet, from the activities of public organisations and in personal conversations.

Our question is should we expect developments in Kazakhstan to follow the Ukrainian scenario should Mr Nazarbayev leave his post? Is there any strategy designed to prevent this? We have some proposals; we would like to join this work, if possible. What are the prospects for Eurasian integration?

And on a personal note, I would like to say you look well, this cardigan suits you very well. Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: So this is a cardigan? (Laughs) Ok. Thank you for the compliment.

Here is what I can say about Kazakhstan. It is our closest strategic ally and partner. First, President Nazarbayev is alive and well, and, thank god, has no intention of resigning; however, being the wise and experienced leader that he is, he is always concerned about the future of his country.

As for some individual comments on the internet and some discussions with citizens of Kazakhstan - naturally, people are different and they may express different views. In population that country is about ten times smaller than Russia, its population is about 15 million, but by European standards this is a large country. However, I am convinced that a vast majority of the citizens of Kazakhstan favour stronger ties with Russia. We see this and we know it.

As you may know, Mr Nazarbayev is a very wise leader, I believe he is the wisest on the post-Soviet space, and he would never go against the will of his people. He can feel what his people expect of him. Therefore, everything that has been done lately - largely due to his talent of an organiser and his political expertise - is all in the interests of Kazakhstan as a state.

I already said that he has performed a unique feat: he has created a state on a territory where there has never been a state. The Kazakhs never had a state of their own, and he created it. In this sense, he is a unique person on the post-Soviet space and in Kazakhstan. However, I would like to repeat, that this is not about him, but about the sentiments of the people, of the vast majority of society.

So now, we are working to create the Customs Union, the Common Economic Space and the Eurasian Union - which, by the way, was his idea. I have to admit that he was the one who came up with the idea, not I. And we are helping; we got involved in this effort and are bringing it to a logical close. Philosophers know where this idea of a Eurasian union came from and how it developed, who supported it in Russia. The Kazakhs picked it up proceeding from the understanding that it is good for their economy, it helps them stay within the so-called 'greater Russian world', which is part of world civilisation, it is good for the development of their industry, of advanced technologies and so forth. I am convinced that this will continue in the same vein for the mid- and long historical term.

<...>

Vladimir Putin: (responding to a question about the development of regional higher education institutions) First, regarding the general idea of setting up such institutions in our country and whether there are any prospects for establishing higher education institutions outside of large cities, in remote areas. You know, I would like to begin with an example from medicine (I will get back to education). When we had to make a decision regarding the creation of high-tech medical centres across the country, I heard many people express the fear that this was practically impossible because we did not have enough qualified experts, and those who were qualified would not move to remote areas, while without them the project would never work.

I am very happy now that I did not listen to those of my colleagues who had such views. We have developed a network of perinatal centres and advanced medical centres across the entire territory of the Russian Federation. You know, it was a thrill to watch the people who work there because they truly were top grade experts, who easily moved from big cities, and many even returned from abroad. Why?

Firstly, because these centres have world-class top-of-the-range equipment, secondly, because these centres offer an opportunity to grow both professionally and administratively, which is not easy in the traditional centres: when the spot is occupied, frankly speaking, it is not easy to make a career.

However, the most important thing is that they became accessible to the people who live in those remote areas, as well as to those in the neighbouring regions, because most of these centres cover several regions. I see this as a success.

We are trying to do the same as we develop the network of federal and research universities in various parts of the Russian Federation. Your university is obviously a regional one, not federal, but when such networks are created - be it medical or educational - they serve to raise the overall standards of medicine or education, as the case may be.

Besides, such large regions of the Russian Federation as Nizhny Novgorod have every opportunity - intellectual, educational, historical and even financial - to develop such a system. It should of course comply with the overall level of education that exists now and that will be developed across the Russian Federation, at the leading universities. I think this is possible.

However, we have to be reasonable here. I am not ready to assess your university in any way, I did not even know it existed, but I am certain that at least in the larger regions of the Russian Federation this is possible and could be a success.

Klicke in dieses Feld, um es in vollständiger Größe anzuzeigen.

quelle: With dignity, knowledge and compassion Putin talks Ukraine, NATO, Crimea at Q&A with Russian youth -- Puppet Masters -- Sott.net

Ein sehr interessantes Video!

gruß
Fedja

Sancho-Pancho · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Nur mal so...

Er "labert" wenigstens, anstatt einfach nur mehr oder weniger sinnfrei Videos zu posten.

LieberLeo · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Ich jedenfalls bin schon wieder auf die nun fast tägliche Invasionsmeldung gespannt.

Nach der Invasion des Gespensterkonvois, nach der Invasion der BabynahrungsLKWs, nach der geheimen Invasion von 10 Falschrimspringern (selbstverständlich mit russischem Pass in der Tasche) und nach der Invasion von den unsichtbaren Soldaten wäre es mal wieder Zeit für ein neues Kapitel im Invasionsuniversum von unseren Forumsverschwörern

Also analprolabs, plankton, mr.knut, raid-rush...gibts wieder ein paar schlagkräftige Twitterbeweise? Oder vielleicht sogar ein Facebookpost?

Fedja · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

du willst mir also sagen der Inhalt dieses Videos wäre ohne Informationen, ohne sachliche Meinungsäußerung

gruß
Fedja

Ps.: Und ja natürlich gebe ich YaLcIn recht seine Äußerungen basieren auf Fakten

bushido · 30. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

YouTube-Video

Rede des russischen Vertreters bei der UNO. Der US Vertreterin fällt nichts Besseres ein als unverschämt, fast schon widerlich zu grinsen.

LieberLeo · 31. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Es wird immer abstruser: Die Videospielinvasion !

Russian Foreign Minister: Those Images of Tanks in Ukraine Are From a Video Game

Michi · 31. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

von cod mw?

hier gibts noch so ähnliche methoden 4 Gaza Propaganda Tactics Ripped Off From Internet Trolls | Cracked.com

LieberLeo · 31. August 2014

AW: Krise in der Ukraine

Gut möglich..Ballerspiele können die amis.

Heut fand übrigens auch ein Gefangenenaustausch Kiews mit Moskau statt. Die 10 russischen Fallschirmjäger wurden gegen mehr als 60! ukrainische Soldaten ausgetauscht, welche die russische Grenze illegal überquert hatten.

Krise in der Ukraine

Anhänge:

49767ddfad.png

Videos zum Themenbereich

Nützliche Suchen

Krise in der Ukraine

Anhänge:

49767ddfad.png

Videos zum Themenbereich