RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Excerpt: "Ukrainian Interior Ministry troops expelled pro-Russian demonstrators from a regional administration building in the eastern city of Kharkiv early on Tuesday, arresting about 70 protesters as the provisional government in Kiev moved to exert control over unrest."

Ukraine has moved troops to dampen protests in the eastern part of the country. (photo: RT)
Ukraine has moved troops to dampen protests in the eastern part of the country. (photo: RT)


Ukrainian Troops Move to Reassert Control in East

By David M. Herszenhorn and Andrew Roth, The New York Times

08 April 14

 

Ukrainian Interior Ministry troops expelled pro-Russian demonstrators from a regional administration building in the eastern city of Kharkiv early on Tuesday, arresting about 70 protesters as the provisional government in Kiev moved to exert control over unrest that the United States and its Western allies fear might lead to a Russian military invasion.

The successful operation to remove the demonstrators was announced by Ukraine’s acting interior minister, Arsen Avakov, who had traveled to Kharkiv to supervise the enforcement effort and described a dramatic overnight siege during which the building was briefly set on fire.

Mr. Avakov, writing on Facebook, boasted that the building had been retaken “without firing a shot, grenades, or other special weapons.” He said that the special forces that carried out the operation in Kharkiv were part of a broader redeployment of Interior Ministry troops to eastern Ukraine aimed at countering the unrest, which the government in Kiev has said is being orchestrated by Russia.

go to original article

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
-13 # Patrice Ayme 2014-04-08 11:23
By grossly violating International Law in exactly the same way as Hitler did with Austria and Czechoslovakia in 1938. (Hitler did a better job, getting everything without firing a shot.) Putin has opened the gates of violence. Not only has Putin’s psychology tipped irreversibly in the Dark Side, but he has set in motion forces that push him ever further that way.
The weakness of the West only encourages him. Hitler was stunned when France and Britain sent him an ultimatum, on September 1, 1939. In retrospect, it should have been done earlier. Fortunately this time, the West is not divided. And an economic ultimatum can be sent to Putin.
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2014/04/07/hitlers-book/
 
 
+13 # dsepeczi 2014-04-08 11:50
Quoting Patrice Ayme:
By grossly violating International Law in exactly the same way as Hitler did with Austria and Czechoslovakia in 1938. (Hitler did a better job, getting everything without firing a shot.) Putin has opened the gates of violence. Not only has Putin’s psychology tipped irreversibly in the Dark Side, but he has set in motion forces that push him ever further that way.
The weakness of the West only encourages him. Hitler was stunned when France and Britain sent him an ultimatum, on September 1, 1939. In retrospect, it should have been done earlier. Fortunately this time, the West is not divided. And an economic ultimatum can be sent to Putin.
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2014/04/07/hitlers-book/

Patrice, once again, you are WAY off base. The US and EU started this by deliberately destabilizing the elected government of Ukraine and inserting "their guy". The evidence of our involvement couldn't be more convincing. The only one grossly violating International Law is the good old USA (United Stasi of Aristocracy). To say Putin is wrong here is to say to Putin and all other international leaders that it would be perfectly okay if they destabilized regions by the US, inserted their guys, and then moved to build missiles surrounding our country. You KNOW how we would respomd were anyone to do such a thing to us ... so why do you defend the actions of the US when we do it to others ?
 
 
+5 # mighead 2014-04-08 15:03
Why anyone would think 'destabilizing' a stable nuclear state would be a good idea - much less a viable political strategy - is UTTERLY BEYOND ME!!!

That the Clintons were in Ukraine last fall pushing the idea is certainly NOT who I thought either of them were!!!
 
 
+3 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 08:04
Quoting mighead:
Why anyone would think 'destabilizing' a stable nuclear state would be a good idea - much less a viable political strategy - is UTTERLY BEYOND ME!!!

That the Clintons were in Ukraine last fall pushing the idea is certainly NOT who I thought either of them were!!!


Sadly, they are who I thought they were. They are US politicians, complete with the same Master's Degree in "bullshit" as nearly every other US politician.
 
 
+4 # geraldom 2014-04-08 18:22
What really pisses me off, dsepeczi, is that the new leader of Ukraine, the American puppet installed by the U.S. as a result of an illegal coup d'etat, Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk, is doing exactly what the former democratically- elected prime minister of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich, should have done when he still was in power, acted strongly to stop what he even knew at the time to be a coup d'etat being orchestrated against him by the U.S. and the EU.

Please explain to me why Viktor Yanukovych refused to stop the street protests and the takeover of govt buildings early on when the coup was in its infancy, before it totally got out of hand, to nip it in the bud so to speak. He seemed afraid of his own shadow. Why?

In addition, the current illegitimate govt of Ukraine under the illegitimate leadership of PM Arseny Yatseniuk isn't afraid to ask for direct help from the U.S. and NATO. NATO had agreed to work with Arseny Yatseniuk by joining the Ukrainian army in combined military exercises. When things really out of hand in Kiev, why didn't Yanukovych request assistance from Russia at the time to stop what was obviously a coup d'etat in progress.

In my opinion, if Russia doesn't intercede here immediately and with force, which, in my opinion, is there right to do, as it would be the right of the U.S. to intercede in a similar situation if it was occurring here in its own backyard, in North America, then Russia will be effectively cutting its own throat.
 
 
+2 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 07:51
Quoting Harold R. Mencher:


In my opinion, if Russia doesn't intercede here immediately and with force, which, in my opinion, is there right to do, as it would be the right of the U.S. to intercede in a similar situation if it was occurring here in its own backyard, in North America, then Russia will be effectively cutting its own throat.


I'm assuming you're referring to Yanukovich's hesitation to send out the police before the Maidan Square incident ? I'm not sure why he didn't. I think I read somewhere that he explained that he felt that bringing out the police would just cause more trouble. What he did do after the shooting incident was negotiate a cease fire with the EU that promised to order the police to stand down and move up elections. Then the coup moved in almost immediately and chased him out of town. I agree with you that Russia has to see the situation for what it is. If they cave to US demands now, it'll only be a matter of time before the US breaks out it's "playbook" in all of the other surrounding territories around Russia and will forever place themselves in a position to bully Russia. I think Putin knows what's at stake and he's prepared to make a stand. With the "chickenhawks" still cheering on moves that could lead to war with Russia, we're living in pretty scary times. I'd like to say I have at least enough faith in our leaders that they wouldn't blow up the world over Crimea ... but I don't. I've lost all faith in US leadership.
 
 
+1 # dsepeczi 2014-04-08 13:11
OMG ! After following your link, Patrice, all I can say is that you need to follow your "motto" for lack of a better word.

"Morality Without Intelligence Makes As Much Sense As Will Without Mind. Intelligence Is At The Core Of Humanism."

I agree that intelligence should be at the core of humanism but you're not doing a very good job of advocating that with your website, since you've omitted nearly all truth from your arguments against Russia. The US didn't have anything to do with the destabilization of Ukraine ? Then how do you explain a recorded conversation between two US diplomats (Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt) discussing who the succesor to Ukraine's leadership should be ... a full month BEFORE the coup threw out their elected leader ? Maybe they were just clairvoyants ? Lol. C'mon, Patrice. Before you go opening up another US propaganda page, maybe you should at least try to surround yourself with at least some basic facts that even the US doesn't try to deny. As a primer, may I suggest you google that infamous Victoria (Fuck the EU) conversation. Then, if you still have trouble getting past the brainwashing the US media has done to you and you still think that we never do anything wrong, look up the recent flap about the US getting caught pulling the exact same (but not successful) tactics in Cuba.
 
 
+4 # geraldom 2014-04-08 20:46
And let's not forget the coup d'etat planned and carried out by the United States in 1953 against the democratically- elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh utilizing precisely the very same methods used to overthrow the democratically- elected leader of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych via the use of paid rioters. Reference the following Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

You can tell Patrice that this is not fiction. It's history.
 
 
+1 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 08:11
Quoting Harold R. Mencher:
And let's not forget the coup d'etat planned and carried out by the United States in 1953 against the democratically-elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh utilizing precisely the very same methods used to overthrow the democratically-elected leader of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych via the use of paid rioters. Reference the following Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

You can tell Patrice that this is not fiction. It's history.


I think Patrice is more of the "Karl Rove" faction and believes she can rewrite history by just repeating the same lies until everyone believes they are truth. Lol. But yes, Harold, we have been using that playbook for a long time ... and it never seems to work out for us quite the way we planned.
 
 
+1 # geraldom 2014-04-09 08:21
dsepeczi, I'd suggest that you watch the first 15 minutes of Democracy Now that was aired today, April 9th. Here's the URL:

http://www.democracynow.org/

Run the video. The very first thing that Amy Goodman covers in the news highlights (the first 15 minutes) once her program opens up right after she introduces who her guest will be for the hour, will be what's happening in Ukraine.

Part of that coverage is a speech that John Kerry made in front of Congress accusing Russia of direct involvement in these pro-Russian demonstrations in eastern Ukraine. When you listen to what he is saying, the hypocrisy of it all, the very same thing can be said, has been said, of the violent demonstrations that took place which overthrew Yanukovych.

This is the continued hypocrisy by the U.S. when it accuses Russia of exactly what the U.S. and the EU did in overthrowing Yanukovych. The big difference is that Yanukovych was democratically elected as PM in an election that even the U.S. claimed (at the time) was fair and honest, while Arseny Yatseniuk took over Ukraine by force, by an illegal coup d'etat planned and backed by the U.S. and the EU, and who is right now making decisions for Ukraine that he has no legal right to be making, at least before having those early elections the Ukrainian people were promised.

The agreement he made with the EU which requites those austerity measures that will hurt the Ukrainian people who are already hurting, is totally illegal.
 
 
+1 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 08:33
Quoting Harold R. Mencher:
dsepeczi, I'd suggest that you watch the first 15 minutes of Democracy Now that was aired today, April 9th. Here's the URL:

http://www.democracynow.org/


Part of that coverage is a speech that John Kerry made in front of Congress accusing Russia of direct involvement in these pro-Russian demonstrations in eastern Ukraine. When you listen to what he is saying, the hypocrisy of it all, the very same thing can be said, has been said, of the violent demonstrations that took place which overthrew Yanukovych.

This is the continued hypocrisy by the U.S. when it accuses Russia of exactly what the U.S. and the EU did in overthrowing Yanukovych. The big difference is that Yanukovych was democratically elected as PM in an election that even the U.S. claimed (at the time) was fair and honest, while Arseny Yatseniuk took over Ukraine by force, by an illegal coup d'etat planned and backed by the U.S. and the EU, and who is right now making decisions for Ukraine that he has no legal right to be making, at least before having those early elections the Ukrainian people were promised.

The agreement he made with the EU which requites those austerity measures that will hurt the Ukrainian people who are already hurting, is totally illegal.


I'll take a look at the video as soon as I get a chance but, I agree, "Yats" has no business entering his country into agreements that will hurt the Ukraine for years. Thanks, Harold.
 
 
+5 # dsepeczi 2014-04-08 14:06
Lastly, since you keep referring to Russia as agressors and compare Putin to Hitler, let's bring up a scorecard, shall we ? Since WW II, how many countries has Russia put it's stamp on ? I can only count parts of Georgia, Chechnya, Afghanistan (which failed when we trained and armed Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban) and Crimea. How many conflicts have the US directly or indirectly been involved in ? I can't even count them all, and when it comes to operatives we probably don't even know how many they are actively angaged in, but here's a short list: Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Venezuela (US operatives captured their leader), Honduras, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Cuba, Afghanistan,Pak istan (drones), Yemen (drones) ... the list goes on and on. You'll note that every time Russia got involved militarily or otherwise, it was protecting interests around its borders. You might also note that we're basically fucking with everyone around the world. Mind you, the list of "US involvement" doesn't even include all the known interference that the US has been involved in, yet alone the unknown.
It also doesn't include Syria only because Russia talked them out of it by finding a peaceful solution to the problem. Given the scorecard, which I remind you is not complete, who's the aggressor nation here ? Before you call Putin Hitler again, maybe take some time to answer that question for yourself.
 
 
-2 # WBoardman 2014-04-08 17:39
Under "Russian" incursions,
it seems fair to include Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovaka,
and such, since WW II is the chosen benchmark.

What if the benchmark was 1776?
 
 
+3 # geraldom 2014-04-09 00:25
Quoting WBoardman:
Under "Russian" incursions,
it seems fair to include Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovaka,
and such, since WW II is the chosen benchmark......


Please correct me if I'm wrong here, Mr. Boardman. I agree with you that dsepeczi left out the aforementioned countries that you mentioned above, but those countries as well as the others that became part of the USSR after WWII were already under Russian control before the end of WWII.

Russia in pushing back the Germans all the way to Germany during WWII occupied these nations that ultimately made up the USSR along the way.

When WWII finally ended in Europe, Russia simply decided at the time not to give up complete control of these countries, but when it did in the early 1990s as a result of the agreement made between Bush Senior and Mikhail Gorbachev, an agreement that the U.S. violated big time during both the Clinton and Bush Junior administrations , Russia gave up most of their military bases in these countries as they moved out of these countries.

The key word that dsepeczi used in his statement was the word "after," after WWII. But, I would like to point out that since WWII, with very few exceptions, the United States has never vacated any of its military bases anywhere in the world and has only added to them in more and more countries who knows how many times over.

The Japanese people want the U.S. to remove all military bases from Japan, but the U.S. reuses to do so.
 
 
0 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 07:32
Quoting WBoardman:
Under "Russian" incursions,
it seems fair to include Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovaka,
and such, since WW II is the chosen benchmark.

What if the benchmark was 1776?


I'd have to go back a long way on that one and don't have an immediate answer. As Harold mentions in the following post, I didn't include those countries because they were all occupied by the Soviet Union by the end of the war but I can see your point in referencing them. Also, as Harold Mencher stated below, Russia actually relinquished their hold on several lands and, as part of that treaty, the US had promised not to expand NATO forces into any areas included in the Warsaw pact .... but reneged on that promise. In my opinion, we have been the aggressors for quite some time but we still try to convince the world that Russia's the aggressor here. Granted, Putin likely took advantage of a situation that we created but Ukraine would still be under Yanukovich's rule until their next scheduled election had we not intervened.
 
 
+1 # geraldom 2014-04-09 08:33
dsepeczi, someone gave you a thumbs down. I negated that with a thumbs up.

Please read my post under this article that I address to you which mentions today's airing of Democracy Now and run the video at the referenced URL.

At the very beginning of Amy Goodman's program when she starts with the news highlights, you will hear a very interesting statement by John Kerry in front of the U.S. Congress.

Hypocrisy is alive and well here in the United States.
 
 
+1 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 12:25
Quoting Harold R. Mencher:

Please read my post under this article that I address to you which mentions today's airing of Democracy Now and run the video at the referenced URL.

At the very beginning of Amy Goodman's program when she starts with the news highlights, you will hear a very interesting statement by John Kerry in front of the U.S. Congress.

Hypocrisy is alive and well here in the United States.


I finally got a chance to check out your link. Ugh. I'm so sick of Kerry bloviating about International Law when we were the first ones to violate it in this, and nearly every other case you can think of. I couldn't help but roll my eyes as Kerry recited the actions America has already been proven to have used to destabilize the Ukraine while accusing Russia to be the only one guilty of actively using these tactics, without evidence of any kind. Equally "puke worthy" was listening to John McCain sound off on the issue, accusing Obama of being soft. I guess if John McCain was in office, he'd drop nukes and ask questions from inside his bunker later ? Or maybe "the maverick" would ride that warhead right into Russia like Slim Pickens did in Dr. Strangelove. Lol. Then we had a UN security council member egging us on to do something about Syria even though I read just yeaterday that it looks like the sarin gas came from Turkey, not Assad. She said the rebels are bad but Assad's worse. Proof, please ? I think the world's truly gone mad.
 
 
+1 # geraldom 2014-04-09 16:27
I'm glad you enjoyed listening to this BS. Like you, I wanted to puke listening to all of this crap. As far as the other stuff you mentioned, I wanted to yell at my TV hoping assholes like Senator John McCain and the woman from the HRC would hear me, but that would raise my blood pressure. It appears that the United States now fully controls, not only NATO, and the United Nations under Ban Ki-moon, and the IAEA under Yukiya Amano, it now also controls the U.N. Human Rights Commission.

The way I see it at this juncture, since Russia can do no right as far as the U.S. and its western puppet allies are concerned, other then giving up Crimea and vacating its forces along the Ukraine border and to allow the western powers to further encroach closer in to and further surround Russia with NATO forces, that Russia really has very little to lose if they do what they really need to do right now, and that is to send their military into Ukraine and to completely unify the whole country under the Russian banner.

And, to enforce its action and to prevent a nuclear war with the west, to tell the U.S. and its western puppet allies that if they don't back off and if they want to start a full blown nuclear war by interfering in Russia's backyard and into what Russia needs to do in order to protect its borders and its national security from outside forces who wish to destroy it. then let's have at it, that Russia is ready to go.
 
 
+1 # dsepeczi 2014-04-09 08:22
What I think will prove to be the most ironic part of this ongoing story, assuming (well, hoping !) we eventually reach an impasse with Russia that lets Russia keep Crimea is that, in the end, once the Ukrainians get a taste of the kind of help the EU, US and IMF are offering (think Greece austerity measures) ... the rest of Ukraine is likely going to take to the streets again against the new government in an effort to "make friends" with Russia again, who truly was offering a sweeter deal for Ukraine ... a deal that I didn't blame Yanukovich for accepting. I'm guessing that reason, more than any other reason, is why the EU and US are so adamant about not letting Russia govern Crimea. They don't want Ukrainians to see their former countrymen in Crimea actually living better off, economically, than they are. Kind of like republicans fighting all democratic bills that at least partially help the middle class. They're not worried that American citizens won't enjoy a higher minimum wage, affordable healthcare, etc. What they're really worried about is that they will.
 
 
+1 # geraldom 2014-04-09 17:15
I also suspect that (not if, but) when the Ukrainian people once again take to the streets to demonstrate, to protest, once they realize the predicament that their new illegitimate government and their new illegitimate leader, Arseny Yatseniuk, has put them in by accepting the harsh requirements by the EU and IMF as the cost for Ukrainian membership in the EU, the hurtful austerity program that will be established and the IMF loan that will end up putting the Ukrainian people in indentured servitude status to the U.S., to the EU and to the IMF, like a choke around their necks, the Ukrainian people are going to quickly find out that new Ukrainian government, whether it be under Arseny Yatseniuk after the next election (if there is a next election, or an honest one at that) or someone else, will not be anywhere near as kind to them as Viktor Yanukovych was when he headed the government.

The streets will be a whole lot more bloodier than they were under Yanukovych, and the United States and its western puppet allies in Europe will say nothing and will do nothing to stop it since the new Ukrainian government is one that they now support.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN