[GHung]

Word is this "chemical plant" wasn't your basic weapons depot. It was being used for years to disassemble munitions from the Soviet era. The goal was to get the valuable metals, and the explosives were being stored in drums in great quantities. Seems no one knew what else to do with them, but the metals (brass, titanium, copper, stainless, aluminum, etc.) were worth the trouble and risks,, until now I guess.

No telling how many such caches of nastiness are kept out of sight/out of mind. Heck, a thousand years from now, someone may decide that the stainless caskets we store high-level nuclear wastes in are 'worth the trouble', especially if not understanding what they're dealing with.

[Rod_Cloutier]

It's kind of odd that no one in the mainstream media is covering this event ?? Officials blame this explosion as an industrial accident:

“This was caused by a dropped cigarette butt,” Andrey Lysenko told the media on Monday.

“Accidents often happen in factories where no one is responsible for fire safety.

http://theantimedia.org/media-silent-hu ... k-ukraine/

[ROCKMAN]

T - "If a nuke ever goes off there will be censoring to prevent mass panic." and you know the effects of nuclear fallout/radiation poisoning are overstated. Well, at least now we all have a very clear picture of your knowledge base. Thanks for enlightening us.

[Sixstrings]

It's kind of odd that no one in the mainstream media is covering this event ?? Officials blame this explosion as an industrial accident:

There's no reason to assume that's not the case.

Remember, everything in this conflict is rumor wrapped in enigma and it's just as plausible that cigars are just cigars, sometimes.

Industrial accidents happen. War raging all around is going to cause a lot of butterfly effects. Was watching a WWII documentary the other night, and we actually had like six times the casualties in factories back home, from accidents, than we did wounded on the battlefield. (at least in the early war)

[Sixstrings]

Obama says that he may arm Ukraine "if diplomacy fails:"

Ukraine conflict: US 'may supply arms to Ukraine'

President Barack Obama says the US is studying the option of supplying lethal defensive arms to Ukraine if diplomacy fails to end the crisis in the east.

Russia had violated "every commitment" made in the failing Minsk agreement, he added, after talks with the German chancellor on a new peace deal.

Mr Obama has come under pressure from senior US officials to supply arms, despite objections from Angela Merkel.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31279621

I saw some analysis on CNN that said Angela Merkel signaled if the US does arm them, then Germany won't complain about it after the fact, even though they will say they oppose it now.

And that does give peace a chance, too, and gives her an Uncle Sam big stick in the pocket (as a threat) as she negotiates with Putin.

America is the bad cop, Europe is the good cop -- we'll see which one Putin wants to work with. It's up to him.

[Donetsk]

According to some people who enjoy math more than I do, this event took about 1200 kg of explosives. Smerch+ explosives on the ground would do the trick well imo.

[Sixstrings]

Well okay I guess I'll camp out in this thread. That other thread over there is the occupied territories.

I hereby proclaim this thread a Peak OIl Peoples' Republic. And I, the self-appointed commissar and Most Excellent Grand Poobah, et cetera, et cetera. We'll be having a demokratic election, and your ballot will have two choices -- you can vote for me, or you can vote for me.

This is what they call -- "directed democracy:"

Guided democracy, also called managed democracy,[1] is a democratic government with increased autocracy. Governments are legitimated by elections that are free and fair but emptied of substantive meaning in their ability to change the state's policies, motives, and goals.[2]

In other words, the government has learned to control elections so that the people can exercise all their rights without truly changing public policy. While they follow basic democratic principles, there can be major deviations towards authoritarianism. Under managed democracy, the electorate is prevented from having a significant impact on policies adopted by the state's continuous use of propaganda techniques.[3]

The concept of a "guided democracy" was developed in the 20th century by Walter Lippmann in his seminal work Public Opinion (1922) and by Edward Louis Bernays in his work Crystallizing Public Opinion.

After the Second World War the term was used for Indonesia under the Sukarno administration from 1945 to 1967. It is today widely employed in Russia, where it was introduced into common practice by Kremlin theorists, in particular Gleb Pavlovsky,[4] and also the United States.[5][6] Princeton University professor Sheldon Wolin describes this process as inverted totalitarianism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_democracy

Okay, my first decree as Thread Despot is that everyone is free and can post and say whatever they want to. Just don't curse or be horrible to any other posters. And that's it, no more rules than that.

So here's a news update, comrades in freedom. The Kremlin has warned that His Excellency Mr. Putin has never even heared the "tone" of an ultimatum before, and it's unthinkable that anyone would speak to the Emperor, er I mean president with such a tone. It's unthinkable -- anyone trying to "could not do so" even if they wanted to.

Kremlin: Don't Issue Ultimatums To Putin

Vladimir Putin will not be spoken to in the language of ultimatums, a Russian radio station has quoted the Kremlin as saying.

Reports suggest German Chancellor Angela Merkel had given him until Wednesday to agree a peace plan over Ukraine or face new sanctions.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Govorit Moskva radio: "Nobody has ever talked to the president in the tone of an ultimatum - and could not do so even if they wanted to."

The warning came as Mrs Merkel met US President Barack Obama to discuss the peace initiative, while the White House considers supplying weapons to Kiev.
http://news.sky.com/story/1424105/kremlin-dont-issue-ultimatums-to-putin

My opinion: there should be no ultimatums. There just needs to be some military movement and perhaps arms supplies and other DIRECT leverage and pressure, in all theaters in the world where Western and Russian interests clash. Just try that, and see what the other side comes back with. Maybe they'll escalate, or maybe they'd come to the peace table for real.

The working theory is that Putin has only done all of this because he thought the West was weak. So show some strength. Sanctions aren't strength, ultimatums are just insulting -- nobody wants a war with Russia, but that doesn't mean you can't be as tough as Putin is, you know? So show some strength out there, get some street creed, get some respect this geopolitical playground.

[sparky]

.
Gosh , so much to say , so little chance to be heard

- Putin is only doing what any half competent Russian ruler would do
....responding to a threat

-the Russian opposition is made up of hyper nationalists of Jirinovsky party ( IE the insane super-patriots all gung ho )
-the communist party of Ziuganov whose line is the Beatles's "get back to the USSR"

no amount of economic hardship is going to change this , the Muscovite chattering classes are an irrelevance
except around the beltway ,
deep Russia is stone solid behind Putin , their only beef with him is that he is holding back
for most Russian Ukraine is not a country , it's a temporarily misplaced province

[Sixstrings]

From Radon's article over in the thread I'm avoiding:

And over the weekend, tough words from former NATO deputy supreme commander Sir Richard Shirreff concerning Prime Minister David Cameron's government made headlines.

'Where is Britain? Where is Cameron?'

Shirreff hit out against the state of British foreign policy. "The UK is a major NATO member, it is a major EU member, it is a member of the UN Security Council, and it is unfortunate that the weight that the British prime minister could bring to efforts to resolve this crisis appears to be absent," Shirreff told the BBC with regard to Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Francois Hollande's trip to Kyiv and Moscow last week.
http://www.dw.de/ukraine-crisis-are-the-british-backing-down/a-18246810

Man, I've sure noticed that all through this thing. And have said it before. The UK has just been absent this whole time. It's so strange. It's like Britain is Belgium now or something and you just never hear about it.

Britain used to have opinions on things. It used to be a power. Now they're just like "well we're glad Germany's handling it, no further comment."

I don't know what's happened to the UK. With Cameron in charge it's like a holding company, or something. It's just absent. Not there anymore. You never hear about the place. Where did they all go?

I don't see how anyone can like that Cameron, on the left or right, he's worse than O. How long do Brits have to be stuck with him. Just forever? Until his party loses, eventually? What happened to British spine. Margaret Thatchers and such.. who was that guy after Tony Blair, that one was even worse than Cameron.

Tony Blair was okay. They've been downhill ever since Thatcher though, generally, and that one after Thatcher was good but it's all been downhill since him and then a bit worse with Blair, and it just gets worse over there.

[Sixstrings]

(I'm not british and it's none of my business, but holy cow that Cameron is such a tool. I remember he said a lot of idiotic things during the Scottish independence vote. The man reminds me of a Mitt Romney, but not half as good. Just like a Mitt that's all hedge fund ceo and that's just it.)

Cameron is too posh, too fake, there is no spine, what kind of leader is that.

Downing Street denies Cameron is ‘diplomatic irrelevance’ in Ukraine talks

No 10 issued a robust defence after being criticised by an army general and the shadow foreign secretary for not being present at the diplomatic table when Europe is under threat of “total war”.

...

“This warning that he is a ‘bit player’ in foreign policy is yet more confirmation that David Cameron is weakening Britain’s influence abroad, at the time when it is most needed.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/06/downing-street-denies-david-cameron-diplomatic-irrelevance-ukraine-talks

Cameron just can't do the job, it's not in him, he's like a holding company ceo and he's just absent. It's a really odd vibe from him.

Although I'm not sure what Labour's angle is; they'd be even worse than Cameron on this.

If there's a new cold war on and maybe a hot proxy war, then British conservatives will need to pick someone else because Cameron is not a leader for these times.

He IS irrelevant on foreign policy -- I can tell that from over here. You never even hear about the UK anymore, about anything. Whereas Stephen Harper of Canada has been out in front on the issue.

Pick a side, any side, but don't be irrelevant.

[AgentR11]

According to some people who enjoy math more than I do, this event took about 1200 kg of explosives. Smerch+ explosives on the ground would do the trick well imo.

There was one good black and white video, it showed numerous small, rapid explosive events, then a final big one. The most likely explanation for the sequence was some MLRS fire on the site, with one lucky rocket finding just the right pile of goodies. (a pile of drums filled with explosive material seems the best fit, in my opinion)..

Industrial accident could also explain it, but it'd have to be really unlucky to set off a matching set of small explosions followed by the big one.

OTOH.. the story from Kiev about a great loss of vehicles doesn't make much sense at all; not impossible, but way down the list of likely; somewhere below ET using a laser...

"There just needs to be some military movement and perhaps arms supplies and other DIRECT leverage and pressure, in all theaters in the world where Western and Russian interests clash. Just try that, and see what the other side comes back with. Maybe they'll escalate, or maybe they'd come to the peace table for real. "

You leave off the most likely, in that they'll just continue doing what they are doing now. No need to escalate from the Russian POV. US weapons driven by Ukrainian troops will not roll back the lines. Russia assumes Germany and France will attempt to apply all possible sanctions; but Russia's being "cool" about it, and never responding with an over reaction that would do REAL harm to their economy. Its already part of the calculation, and the value of Crimea simply overwhelms any cost the West can apply; and thus, because those costs are linked to Crimea, they simply become the expensive but acceptable price tag for an asset that has unmatchable value to Russia.

[Sixstrings]

You leave off the most likely, in that they'll just continue doing what they are doing now. No need to escalate from the Russian POV. US weapons driven by Ukrainian troops will not roll back the lines.

Actually, it looks like if we arm Ukraine then Russia may do a full scale invasion (Lavrov's direct threat at Munich in the q&a).

And then I noticed this in Moscow times, it's got a whole list of things Russia could do in retaliation -- including having their buddies Iran attack Saudi Arabia.

Russia Would See U.S. Moves to Arm Ukraine as Declaration of War

But if such aid were sent, "Russia would reasonably consider the U.S. to be a direct participant in the conflict," said Evgeny Buzhinsky, a military expert at the Moscow-based PIR Center.

Speaking to The Moscow Times on a condition of anonymity, a member of the Russian Defense Ministry's public advisory board warned that Moscow would not only up the ante in eastern Ukraine, "but also respond asymmetrically against Washington or its allies on other fronts."

...

Pointing to one possible avenue of asymmetrical retaliation, the source said Moscow could give in to long-standing Chinese requests for sensitive defense technologies that would aid in its development of high-tech weapons capable of doing serious damage to U.S. naval forces in the Asia-Pacific.

Moscow has so far declined China's requests on "politically correct pretenses," the source said.

"That's just one example. We can also encourage Iran, or even back Iran in a fight — a military operation — with Saudi Arabia, so then the prices for oil will skyrocket," the source said, explaining that these were just two possible responses.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/u-s-military-aid-to-ukraine-would-be-declaration-of-proxy-war-russian-defense-analysts/515654.html

[AgentR11]

Actually, it looks like if we arm Ukraine then Russia may do a full scale invasion (Lavrov's direct threat at Munich in the q&a).

I thought you were someone that understood that Russians lie, and lie Big and Bold.

Do not care one bit what dribbles out of the mouth of Lavrov, whether denying forces are there, or threatening to send them. I'm only interested in what they do. So far, they aren't doing anything interesting that they haven't been doing for months.

As to the Russia China thing on defense tech, that's really a done deal; just like the gas thing; its just a question of negotiating price. China needs it, Russia isn't threatened by China having it; its just a commercial negotiation.

[Sixstrings]

100% Agree, Six. Cameron has lost the plot - indeed he probably never had a plot. Labour is just as bad if not worse. The UK does not have world class leaders anymore (last one was Thatcher - though she decimated British industry)

You know, I say the same thing about Reagan -- the last world class president, yet like Thatcher he began the process of offshoring domestic industry.

We've been downhill in "gravitasse" of leadership since Reagan / Thatcher era, too, so I guess we both have the same post modern problem of some kind with the newer generations.

It's really not good. What's strong about America was our English heritage -- capitalist hardworking "shopkeepers" as Napoleon called them. It was not Europeans that built the greatest empires, it was English. Something is lost if we get away from that and all become European types.

I'd guess that if times ever get dark, maybe UK would get some good leadership out of UKIP. But that party needs to moderate a tad and mature a bit.

We have no balls for a fight, Cameron has butchered our armed forces the last 5 years. We have two new aircraft carriers (one nearly complete, one complete) with no aircraft for them until 2017 or so (F35's). Army vastly reduced in numbers, RAF down to just over 200 fighters. Were doing a bit against ISIS but no way can we (or even the whole of Europe) take on Russia.

Militarily we are in a bad way - though we are building new nuclear powered / armed subs to replace the current Trident ones - but what use are they unless Armageddon approaches ?

I'm not British so I can't put my finger on what's going on, but there's something fishy. I've read insinuations that Cameron hangs out with a lot of Russian oligarchs or something. Maybe his silence has to do with all the Russian money in the UK.

Strength does matter. You guys don't want to become a Russian colony over there. That would be a rather sad end to thousands of years of Britannia. Here's where hawkish puggish bulldoggish obnoxious Thatcher or Churchill strength matters: it's what stops a Putin from thinking he can spread polonium radiation around your capital city to take out a dissident. Putin would never have done that over here, he is careful with us, because we are tough. UK also gets pushed around more by China, than we do.

The UK really does have interests in the world and could do things that aren't just in US tandem / not doing anything at all. You just don't want to be irrelevant is all. Look at Stephen Harper -- he's raised Canada's profile a lot. While the UK has receded more off the global stage than any time in its history.

If you're just irrelevant, like Luxembourg, then you LOSE diplomatic currency on other issues. A strong British prime minister could actually influence and sway what the US does. But as it is, they've just been absent and gone off the world stage for a few years now.

A stronger UK could also do its own foreign policy, independent of Europe and the US and be a player between the two again. For example there's a bit of a division in Europe between east and west.

A stronger UK could have made closer ties with east europeans, just as the US has. It doesn't have to all be an American colony in east europe -- they just want some allies and help, they'd love some Brits around same as Americans.

At minimum, British armed forces should never be drawn down to where it couldn't recover a Falklands islands. There's a good litmus level. You're right about the military cut back to nothing, although that new carrier design is innovative and good -- just don't have a hollowed military surrounding one good carrier.

I realize nobody in Britain gives a flip about Ukriane, but that's the kind of issue a Thatcher would have been all over. Because there's moral right in it, and the West is at stake, we're talking about democracy versus Putin dictatorship.

A UK could have had a higher profile in this, and get to do the right thing, and raise its geopolitical respect in the world. Here's just one issue -- some ally could have helped Ukraine fix their hospitals up and get some combat medical in there. That's actually very important "non lethal" aid, that's just as important as missiles or tanks. Ukraine has had atrocious -- and unnecessary -- casualty levels.

the whole bloody thing will come crashing down, thank god we (The UK) are an Island nation with our own currency - though when the shit hits the fan (Russia or the Euro or both) we will be hit by quite a lot of "the flying, nasty stuff" !!!

It's hard to imagine the euro could crash and dissolve. US gov and business is interested in global stability, and China is too. I would tend to think that the Euro cannot fail, you'd just have the US federal reserve intervening, and probably China too.

Anyhow.. Cameron is a tool.. he is what I imagine a British used car saleman or real estate agent may be like.

From what I read, he is just not on the caliber of a Merkel or even Hollande, Cameron is like a "PR" guy and sound bites. Not a serious leader.

Even if UK leaves the "EU," it doesn't matter, Europe is still there and can't be ignored.

Back to Ukraine - bloody awful what's going on over there. I don't know what the answer is. If I was Obama I would NOT give them arms - just end up another Viet-Nam or worse. Let Vlad take over, give the Ukranians free gas & Vodka & it's all sorted. We (the UK) don't want Ukraine in the EU either, we will be flooded with another 50 million cheap labour freeloaders. No - Vlad can have them.

I get you, you're a bit of alright Gas and we can differ.

Something has been lost in the world though, if the Brits don't care about democracy anymore. That maidan was the most real deal fight for democracy we've seen since Poland and Solidarity and the Berlin Wall. How do you abandon people like that. And Hong Kong -- thank goodness Beijing was responsible, because otherwise Britain wasn't saying peep about it.

For America it would be just like adding another half a Mexico alongside Texas !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Y'up for that folks !!

We already did that with Mexico, with nafta, anyway. Despite their problems it raised them up enormously. And we've had millions of immigrants from Mexico, it is what it is, a Ukraine wouldn't be so bad for UK it's not like it's on your border.

I think you don't see the opportunity with a Ukraine. Have places like Poland really affected the jobs situation and economy in the UK? From what I see here in the US, Ukrainian and Polish immigrants over here are some of the best immigrants there are. It's some other groups we have more of a problem with. The Ukrainians get jobs and work. If people get a job, that builds the economy.

I think the UK is missing a lot of opportunity in east europe. What happened to some Empire spirit? You can grow that way. If not America, if not Britain, then it would be the Chinese to develop Ukraine. Someone has to. It's a huge place with good land and resources and educated population -- just begging for some anglo hard nosed development and rule of law and good government. (which Germany is doing in east Europe, so why is the UK letting Germany have it all?)

I think the USA is going to wind up deep into Ukraine and once the dust settles it'll wind up being good for us, and American companies. And good for Ukrainians too. We'll come out ahead on it all in the end, just by default, because nobody else wants east europeans -- well okay, we'll take them.

[Sixstrings]

Bottom line about the UK: apparently Cameron is just awful.

Why doesn't the party oust him, rather than just lose the next election to Labour? Can't anyone see how awful he is? Does anybody actually like him? I mean, the man said a lot of stupid things leading up to the Scottish vote and he darn near oversaw the dissolution of the country.

UK has taken itself off the world stage. Isolationism will not work, it just makes you weak.

You can't be irrelevant, it's not good. For its own natl security, UK has to be seen as the leader in nato second to the US, for starters. Why just cede power and influence as it has done, in international organizations like nato.

Brits are anglos, like we are. They're supposed to be the bulldogs in an otherwise socialist alliance. Europe needs that bulldog, the Brits. Democracy needs it. A weak, absent Britain is a weak nato. What happens if we become weak too -- just in leadership -- and the Brits are also weak? Then things are really screwed up. It used to be that at least if we had weak leadership, maybe the Brits were strong and could drag us along somewhere and then we've got the muscle and they've got the good leadership.

It's just not good, to be absent like this.

Canada's Stephen Harper has stood up, but Canada is not in Europe -- that needed to be a British prime minister, not Canadian.

[Sixstrings]

Russia agrees to a cease fire:

Agreement on Ukraine Cease-Fire Deal Is Reported
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/world/europe/agreement-on-deal-for-ukraine-cease-fire-is-reported.html?_r=0

We'll see if it lasts or what measures Russian gov does to be real about it and not just sign it. But it looks like maybe this will be a cease fire for a while.

So see -- just a little bit of American toughness makes the difference, folks. Russian gov comes to the peace table if it just even thinks that US arms for Ukraine was close.

A George Bush could have used these kinds of tactics to prevent the entire crisis, and all the destruction so far, in the first place.

[Keith_McClary]

What you saw in that video was a modern multilayer laminated glass window being shattered and ripped off of its frame.

I don't think this is used in windows in most places.

Skylight glazing and automobile windshields typically use laminated glass. In geographical areas requiring hurricane-resistant construction, laminated glass is often used in exterior storefronts, curtain walls and windows.