http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ru...0U019G20151217

Strange, Putin suddenly decided to admit that Russia does in fact have a military presence in East Ukraine. So he is now admitting he has been lying about it from the start. Why suddenly now admit it? Russia has pent so much time denying it, hiding graves of soldiers, etc.

Because Putin is arrogant and believes he can do or say whatever he wishes without any reaction or penalty. Who knows, maybe his belief is correct?


Or perhaps he is encouraged by Italy blocking the automatic renewal of the Russian sanctions last week?

In the same Press conference he was asked why the murderers of Boris
Nemtsov have not yet been caught. He did not give a clear answer

Originally from Giampaolo Rossi, in the Milan-based daily il Giornale: Stab in the back: Russian forces fight ISIS while NATO continues aggressive push towards Moscow

Excerpts:

"If we look at military expenditure, the US spends eight times more on its military than Russia. And, according to the International Institute for Strategic Research, in 2014 the NATO nations poured over $800 billion into defense spending - compared with the less than $70 billion spent by Russia."

"So who is fanning the flames? Who is interested in driving a wedge between Russia and Europe? Who is pouring oil on the gathering flames? Maybe we should look toward Washington for the answers," Rossi concluded.

__________________
"Live every day as if it were going to be your last; for one day you're sure to be right." — Harry Morant

Putin trolled by NATO

Putin is certainly no more arrogant than his Western peers.
The European Commission has behaved recklessly in Ukraine by antagonizing Russia.

Despite all the loans Western lenders have pledged, Ukraine's economy will further go down the drain. No Eastern European or CIS country has so much failed as has Ukraine.

Its corrupt and inefficient government can continue fudge its reported debt and deficit figures, that will not prevent the country to default, as a result the debt will keep growing until it becomes unmanageable.

There is a very high risk of political and social unrests and if the mess is not contained the entire country will fall into chaotic violence in the coming years.

I am very sad for the people of Ukraine

You've forgotten to add: only if Russia starts sending weapons and little green people there again.

Kind of misleading. The US has probably the most advanced military in the world, but their resources are spread thruout the world, not concentrated in EU like most of Russia's military is. EU militaries are lethargic and not kept up to date. The US/EU combined NATO equipment actually in Europe is probably roughly on equal standing with Russia. But will a NATO/Russia conflict be an all-out war? Or would it be a hybrid war with a series of small conflicts spread over time? Would Putin actually use nuclear weapons, as he's reminded us before?

As for "provocations", if NATO truely wanted to advance on Russia, Ukraine would have been the perfect opportunity for that. Ukraine had an army ready and willing to fight Russia and was begging NATO for help....but NATO refused. They sent no weapons. No combat troops. Not even any realistic offer to join NATO. If NATO was so eager to destroy Russia, why did they pass on this golden opportunity?

Yes, especially when one compares at purchasing power parity and not nominal and it would make much more sense as both US and Russia armies have own industries. And, last but not least, Russia has also "secret" budget that is supposed to go to the military as well.

Simply too risky.

Crimea: Was It Seized by Russia, or Did Russia Block Its Seizure by the U.S.?

«What Dwight Eisenhower’s, Allen Dulles’s, and Kermit Roosevelt’s CIA operation had done to Iran in 1953, Barack Obama’s and Victoria Nuland’s operation did to Ukraine in 2014: a violent coup installing a far-right government…»

«Outside of the English-speaking world, and especially in the regions that are not controlled by the U.S., the fakery of ‘journalism’ in the English-speaking world is becoming shockingly more evident than it formerly was.»

Despite the inevitable fact-free hyperbole from the anti-Russian peanut gallery here, the article is an insightful and well-documented recap of what actually happened, most of which was blacked out by western media.

__________________
"Live every day as if it were going to be your last; for one day you're sure to be right." — Harry Morant

'Impossible' Kerch Strait Bridge Is Metaphor for Ukraine's Fantasies About Russia

Russia doesn't build anything - except state-of-the-art 19 km long bridges

«In January 2014, Ukraine thought building the bridge was totally possible - but in March, everybody in Ukraine was totally sure it was impossible.»

Another insightful article.

Enter the russophobic US/NATO minions...

Attached Images

 

Why should it be impossible to build a bridge across the Kerch Straight? 4km width with max water depth of 18m doesn't sound that challenging as long as you manage to keep the pillars shielded from (perhaps moving) winter ice.

The route the Russians have selected requires a 19Km bridge utilising a couple of existing islands on the way. The have completed a temporary bridge to the first island to allow transport of materials & such.


The contract was given to a Russian company which is rumoured to have no experience of bridge building; the owner is part of Putin's circle.


Technically it is not a major challenge.

You say russophobic like it's a bad.

Russophobic means peaceful, prosperous and scientific mind.

Not from where I sit.

A Lada on a shoddily built bridge?

Nope, just an informed position uninfluenced by zionist propaganda.

Yet another antisemite hiding behind "Anti Zionism" as your previous post showed. Zionism has nothing to do with Russia.