Pro-Russian Forces Enter Donetsk Airport As Ukrainian Military Loses Ground

[bananas]

Source: International Business Times

The Ukrainian military has lost part of Donetsk airport Wednesday after four days of intense artillery bombardment from advancing pro-Russian fighters, according to reports from the Ukrainian Independent Information Agency (UNIAN), citing Hromadske TV, a Ukrainian television channel. Ukrainian artillery support was able to slow the rebels' advance Tuesday, keeping them within 450 yards of the airport's newest terminal, but fresh bombardment overnight has allowed separatist fighters access to one-third of the terminal where intense fighting has continued.

A soldier of the 80th Airmobile Brigade told the Ukrainian TV channel that two posts in the terminal were destroyed by Russian tanks, while another was purposefully blown up by Ukrainian fighters to create a barrier. "The area is lost," the soldier talking to Hromadske.tv said. "There must be a thorough fight back to secure the positions where the Russians are: the old terminal, the [monastery] and other positions."

Donetsk airport has been the epicenter of fighting in the region, despite a ceasefire being signed in September. On Tuesday the air traffic control tower, which was a symbol of the fight over the airport, was destroyed prior to the pro-Russian advance overnight, according to UNIAN. The Ukrainian military was able to support soldiers trapped in the airport with artillery fire, but that offered only a brief respite as the rebels attacked from two sides in a flanking maneuver.

As the separatists moved to within 450 yards of the airport Tuesday, the Ukrainian military was offered a 5 p.m. ultimatum to vacate the airport. The deadline came and went as rebels advanced inside the terminal.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.ibtimes.com/pro-russian-forces-enter-donetsk-airport-ukrainian-military-loses-ground-1783636

[uhnope]

1. more rape and plunder for the Russian terrorists as Putin wages the war of New Russia

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609016/Six-month-pregnant-journalist-taken-hospital-treatment-pro-Kremlin-political-leader-ordered-aides-violently-rape-press-conference-asked-sanctions-against-Ukraine.html

http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-dovgan-public-abuse-donetsk/26561342.html

http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/07/29/captured-spy-reveals-reveals-gruesome-details-about-separatist-activity-in-eastern-ukraine/

[Central Scruitinizer]

4. You parrot the propaganda very well

The fact is Obama's Dept of State through Victoria Nuland boosted neo-nazi factions into a violent coup on a Ukraine president who agreed to vacate office in a legal fashion.

Americans are taught to hate, Putin hates gays! He is corrupt! Putin annexed Crimea!

While we repeat these false memes Americans self righteously condemn events that never happened while vilifying those brave enough to tell the truth on the Ukrainian coup, and the genocide the neo-nazis attempted on Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east and south.

Alternative media has the facts, the stories, and documentation, but American media propaganda carefully avoids such facts that might inform us of the lies we love to repeat.

[uhnope]

5. welcome to DU, Putin-supporting conspiracy theorist

enjoy your stay

[Central Scruitinizer]

7. Namecalling?

Really?
You can deny all you want, but American media has been carefully spoonfeeding you a lie.

If you can come up with more than hot air, maybe actual refutations of the truth Americans proudly ignore you might hold a bit of credibility.

Ignorance is strength after all, strength for the oligarchs who lead the masses by their noses.

[OKNancy]

26. he didn't.. lol

[geek tragedy]

8. Go west young man! nt

[NuclearDem]

9. You really should just wait out the suspension.

[tabasco]

10. LOL!

Take a look in the mirror, Einstein.

[MBS]

29. horrible

[bananas]

2. Last night: Heavy shelling reported at the government held Donetsk International airport.

News story posted in the video forum: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017237819

[uhnope]

3. that disgusting "NOVORUSSIA2015" RT vid

Russian political war porn

[pampango]

6. People in eastern Ukraine, including ethnic Russians, want to keep Ukraine's old borders.

Last edited Wed Jan 14, 2015, 08:24 PM - Edit history (1)

Only in Crimea was that not the case. And ethnic Ukrainians are a majority in every province other than Crimea.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/08/new-poll-shows-eastern-ukraines-separatists-are-wrong/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russians_in_Ukraine#mediaviewer/File:Russians_Ukraine_2001.PNG

[happyslug]

11. That poll was taken before the coup, and wars can change people's opinion

In 1988 an actual election took place throughout the Soviet Union and the majority of people in all states voted to stay together as the Soviet Union. Within a year the Soviet Union was no more. The election was a fair election, people could vote the way they wanted and they wanted to stay as one nation.

The coup attempt in 1989 and what Yeltsin did to stop the coup changed everything, the same with the coup in the Ukraine, it changed everything. People of the Ukraine wanted to stay independent and as one nation, but with strong connection with Russia. The coup changed that, it said it would BREAK up trade with Russia (which was important to the Eastern Parts of the Ukraine, but NOT the Western Part) and that was unacceptable to the Russian speaking eastern parts of the Ukraine.

The dispute involved TRADE and the two half of the Ukraine see their future trade going in two different directions. The Eastern Part would stay in the Ukraine PROVIDED its trade with Russia would continue. The coup basically was a call to end that trade and shift trade to Western Europe. Western Ukraine is an agricultural export area and sees Western Europe as the nature place to export their crops. Eastern Ukraine is Industrial and tied in with the industrial parts of Russia. It can NOT compete with Western Europe and thus MUST trade with Russia. No trade with Russia, the Economy of the Eastern Ukraine collapses. That is why the Eastern Ukraine revolted, this is NOT ethnic, religious or ideological driven revolt but an economic driven revolt and until the Government of the Ukraine addresses those economic concerns (and it has refused to do so for the Western Ukraine objects to such discussion) this revolt will continue.

Side note: The Eastern Ukraine is much like the US Midwest, strong industry, but tied in with local production (and in the case of the Eastern Ukraine tied in with Russia) NOT foreign exports. Thus reducing trade with Russia and going with trade with Western Europe means massive unemployment in the Eastern Ukraine an that is unacceptable to the people of the Eastern Ukraine.

Ideally a unified Ukraine would be best, even Putin thinks so. The problem is any united Ukraine MUST address both the desires of both the Eastern AND Western Ukraine. At present no one is advocating such unity in thinking in the Government of the Ukraine, they keep saying they will FORCE the Eastern Ukraine to go along with their plans for the Ukraine as a whole. That is unacceptable to the people of the Eastern Ukraine who instead have embraced Putin's solution, a Federation of the various parts of the Ukraine.

Side note: Kiev is in the center of the Ukraine, and is the largest city in the Ukraine BUT outside Kiev, the center of the Ukraine is the least populated area of the Ukraine. The two ends have much larger populations. The Ukraine has a center, but it is weak even when the Ukraine was a united country. When you have a weak center but strong regions within the country, a federation tends to be the solution for it permits those regions to act on their own when it is to their best interest but to present a united front when that is needed. Russia is a Federation and some of its federated territories have extensive self rule privileges (such as the Crimea, which was an "Autonomous Republic" when it was within the Russian Federation before 1954, when it was part of the Ukraine after 1954 and is again such an "Autonomous Republic" today as part of the Russian Federation).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_autonomous_areas_by_country

The Russian Federation is made up of 46 Autonomous "Oblasts" (Generally translated as "Provinces" but more like US States):



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblasts_of_Russia

22 Autonomous Republic (Provinces with even more internal powers)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_state#List_of_federal_units_by_federation
9 Krais (Generally translated as "Frontiers" but Territories would be a good translation):



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krais_of_Russia

9 Autonomous okrug, Generally translated as "Areas" but "Reservation" (Without any connotation these areas are "Reserves" for the natives only) may be a better translation for these tend to cover native people in northern parts of Russia:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_okrugs_of_Russia

and Three "Federal Cities" (Moscow, St Petersburg and Sevastopol) These are like the District of Columbia but larger to include their suburbs. Russia decided it needed three and has three. Even when the Crimea was part of the Ukraine, Sevastopol was a "Federal City" within the Ukraine independent of the Crimea. That is how important Sevastopol was the Russia under the Communists and the earlier under the Tsar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_cities_of_Russia

I bring this up for Putin's solution to the Ukraine is something that has worked in Russia since the 1920s. Such a solution may be the best that can be hoped for in the Ukraine.

[pampango]

13. The polls show people's attitudes before war was brought to eastern Ukraine. Indeed, war does change

people's attitudes and cause many people to be killed, injured or to flee as refugees or internally displaced persons. Polls might not show the same thing today.

It can NOT compete with Western Europe and thus MUST trade with Russia.

That is an interesting opinion from a liberal. Workers in eastern Ukraine are well trained and lowly paid, precisely the kind of workers whom many liberals would think have an 'unfair advantage' over the highly paid, unionized workers of Western Europe.

Certainly in a historical sense the economy of eastern Ukraine has been oriented towards trade with Russia. The same was true of the Baltic states, Poland and much of eastern Europe at one time. Now their trade is more oriented towards western Europe. Their workers were able to "compete" just fine. I suspect that Ukrainian workers will be no different.

In the long run it makes sense for Ukraine to trade with both Russia and Europe, as the Baltic and other eastern European countries do. A large majority of Ukrainians (70%) support having close ties with either the EU alone or both the EU and Russia. (The number who support this is 85% in western and 56% in eastern Ukraine.) I doubt that a majority of Ukrainians share your conviction that Ukrainian workers "cannot compete with Western Europe".

... this is NOT ethnic, religious or ideological driven revolt but an economic driven revolt ...

Certainly economics plays a part. It always does. But to argue that ethnicity and linguistics do not play a major role makes no sense. Crimea did not separate from Ukraine and join Russia because of economics but for reasons of military/national security for Russia and because ethnic Russians wanted to rejoin Russia.

One could argue that the "revolt" in Kiev was more "economic driven" than what is happening in eastern Ukraine. Yanukovich had campaigned for the presidency on a platform of economic integration with Europe. He continued to speak and govern in support of this policy until just before the conference at which the association agreement with Europe was to be signed, then suddenly changed his mind.

As the polls I referenced above show, this policy reversal was not what most Ukrainians supported so they came out in the streets. The rest, as they say, is history.

Thanks for the information on how the Russian federal system works.

[happyslug]

14. You have to watch polls, the results are often what the poll taker wanted.

For example in the US you have constant polls saying people want more gun controls, but when ask details on such controls the opposition to those solutions to the desire for more gun control overwhelms the support for gun controls. i.e People want more gun controls so people who do harm with guns can NOT get them, but they themselves want to retain the right to obtain a gun if they decide they "need" one. That the NRA NEVER asks a question on "Gun Control" itself, but the various proposals to actually do gun control (and then cite those results as opposition to ALL gun regulations). The Anti-Gunners do the same, they go with polls showing support for gun controls, but do not ask about any actual proposed gun control law (and then cite those polls showing support for "gun control" as evidence that people support a ban on guns).

Another example of this is polls on Abortion. People OPPOSE abortion thus when asked that question they will say yes, they oppose abortion. On the other hand the same people want to maintain the OPTION of people getting one if they believe it is necessary. Thus people both oppose abortion AND oppose restrictions on Abortions. Both sides devise polls to push what they want out of this split and then cite those polls.

Gun Controls and Abortion are two of American hot button areas of politics for the majority of American want both gun control and freedom to own guns AND Americans want to live in a society without any abortions at the same time oppose any restrictions on those woman who believe they need to get one. This may sounds like contradicting positions, but there are not. The better way to look at these two issues is Americans want to have the good points of both and get rid of the bad points of both AND understand that is impossible so some sort of compromise will have to sufficience.

Notice the problem is the question being ASKED for it leads to an answer the poll taker wants. Often you have areas of opinion that people would like to apply to others but not themselves so if you ask the question in a way that the person sees it as applying to others, you get one answer, but if the question is worded as applying to them you get another answer.

Thus the problem with the Ukrainian poll, all of the Ukraine clearly wanted to stay one nation, that was NOT in dispute (even today the Eastern Sections have embraced the concept of Federation for in many ways they want to stay in the Ukraine). The real issue is which way was the Ukraine to go, east, west or neutral? The poll did NOT address that issue for it would have shown a very divided country. The Western Areas wanted to look to the EU and the Eastern Areas wanted to maintain and improve trade with Russia.

Here is a Population Map of the Ukraine, notice the Eastern and Western areas of the Ukraine are the heaviest populated, while the center (around Kiev) except for Kiev is the least populated. In many ways this is the main problem with the Ukraine, its geographical center is weak:



http://ukrexport.gov.ua/eng/about_ukraine/population/ukr/179.html

Thsi divide between the eastern parts of the Ukraine (which prior to WWI had been under Austrian rule, from WWI to the end of WWII under Polish Rule, and was only under Soviet Rule from the end of WWII. IN Contrast the Eastern part of the Ukraine, has been under Russian Rule since the time of Catherine the Great in the late 1700s, thus received the full pressure of Stalin's rule in the 1930s and his collectivization policy.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QdpNMEFkBLk/Uw_oi_8OjGI/AAAAAAAAZEI/y-XHyyZlw1c/s400/Ukraine+Language.png

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2014/02/28/civil-war-lurking-in-ukraine-n1801974/page/full

The following map list the OFFICIAL Local language not what is spoken at home:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_language_in_Ukraine

The Follwoing Map reflects what is spoken AT HOME and is a more accurate map of the language situation in the Ukraine, Notice the map includes "Creole" a French Term where you have two languages mixing together to form something that is neither but both at the same time. Notice it is in the middle of the country, NOT the West nor the East:

?imgmax=800

http://bread-circuses-today.blogspot.com/2014/06/lies-damned-lies-and-ukrainian-language.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surzhyk

Here is map of the 2010 Election, the split was already clear by then, the East perferring the Candidate more likely to look to Moscow for trade, the West voting for the Candidate more likely to look to the EU.



http://galleryhip.com/ukraine-language.html

[pampango]

15. That is certainly possible. If the case, there would be polls showing showing the "truth".

... all of the Ukraine clearly wanted to stay one nation, that was NOT in dispute ...

Agreed.

The real issue is which way was the Ukraine to go, east, west or neutral? The poll did NOT address that issue for it would have shown a very divided country. The Western Areas wanted to look to the EU and the Eastern Areas wanted to maintain and improve trade with Russia.

The poll addressed precisely that issue. You don't seem to like the response that Ukrainians gave in the poll.

[happyslug]

16. The Poll did not, as can be seen in the 2010 election results

Yes both candidates said they wanted to increase trade with the EU, but the difference is what was the Ukraine willing to give up and the Eastern Ukraine voted for the man who said he would NOT give up the Eastern Ukraine and its trade with Russia, while the Western Ukraine said it would gladly do so. The Subsequent coup also indicated that the powers who did the coup are willing to sacrifice the Eastern Ukraine and its trade with Russia.

The Soviet Union had been a fully integrated united country, it was a federation like the US and almost as fully integrated. Thus the 1988 poll showing most people of the then Soviet Union wanted to stay in one country (despite that desire of most of the people of the Soviet Union, it broke up in 1989).

The key was the policy being adopted and before he was overthrown the elected President had shown he was willing to make a deal with Russia to continue that trade, an agreement with massive support in the Eastern Part of the Ukraine, but opposed by the Western Ukraine. That coup and the subsequent rejection of that treaty is what prompted the Western Ukraine to revolt. The Eastern Ukraine wanted that treaty and are clearly willing to fight for it.

Given the present situation in the Ukraine the Government in Kiev has to make a decision, what are they going to offer the people of the Eastern Ukraine? So far the answer has been nothing, thus the fighting continues. To end this war the Western Ukraine has to give the Eastern Ukraine something and right now the Western Ukraine is NOT willing to give the Eastern Ukraine anything. At the same time the Ukraine is still dependent on Russia oil and Natural Gas. The Ukrainian Army appears to have broken up do to the coup and what fighting done by the Ukrainian Army appears to have been by small units that ended up being destroyed by the rebels. The Rebels do not have the "Tail" to move to Kiev thus we have the present truce line (held more by the inability of either side to go much further then they are at present then anything else).

Some sort of deal has to be reached, but so far I have NOT heard of any concrete proposals from the present government in the Ukraine. They have to offer the people of the Eastern Ukraine something, not say "wait till we are stronger". Maybe the best thing to happen is for Putin to take Kiev and force a peace treaty down they throats. The Russian Army can take Kiev in two weeks and everyone knows it. Putin appears NOT to want to exercise that option, but if you want a peace that is the quickest way to achieve peace. Putin take Kiev, forces the present government to sign a peace treaty granting federation status to the Ukraine and Putin pulls out his troops. Operation, peace treaty and new constitution done in a month and the problem would be solved. No annexation (that would lead to other problems) just a treaty setting up a federation.

The EU and the US would condemn Russia for such an invasion for both like the fact this is festering on Russia's border thus they do NOT want this to end. Putin does NOT want to appear to be an enemy of peace so he has decline to invade the Ukraine but that leave the Ukraine festering on his border. Putin is in a no win situation, he can not leave the Eastern Ukrainians be overrun and be massacred (The Western Ukrainians have done that to Eastern Ukraines after the Coup in areas the Ukrainian National Guard took over) nor can he really invade without paying a high cost for such an invasion. Thus the Ukraine festers for that is what the US and EU wants and Russia is NOT strong enough to dismiss them. The Ukraine is a mess until someone works out a compromise, but to many people like the idea of the Ukraine festering on the border of Russia to really want to resolve the dispute. The Ukrainians can solve this by deciding to talk and work out an settlement, but to much money is being spent to prevent that, Russia could intervene and end the mess, but that would lead to more isolation of Russia, something Putin does not want. Thus we have this continuing mess for that is what the US and EU want, neither wants to solution for both like that is is a mess on the border of Russia and thus Russia's problem.

[bemildred]

17. There seems to be a good deal of disagreement as to whose problem it is.

I have been of the opinion from the beginning that they are all going to regret it. It's a lose-lose if I ever saw one. So far that has proved to be a very good guess.

[happyslug]

20. I agree to that, but I suspect some people see this remaining a mess is in their best interest,

n/t

[bemildred]

25. I do too, but I think they are dead wrong.

This was never going anywhere but right where it is.

[pampango]

18. "Maybe the best thing to happen is for Putin to take Kiev and force a peace treaty down they throats

The Russian Army can take Kiev in two weeks and everyone knows it. Putin appears NOT to want to exercise that option, but if you want a peace that is the quickest way to achieve peace. Putin take Kiev, forces the present government to sign a peace treaty granting federation status to the Ukraine and Putin pulls out his troops. Operation, peace treaty and new constitution done in a month and the problem would be solved. No annexation (that would lead to other problems) just a treaty setting up a federation."

Thanks for making your opinion on the matter clear. The Russian military can solve the problem in 2 weeks. Liberals favor one country invading another now to force political settlements?

[happyslug]

19. All I was saying is what Putin can do, it is like saying the sun rises in the East

That Putin can take Kiev is not in dispute, he has the forces to do so and that is all I am saying. I am also saying it is ONE SOLUTION a SOLUTION Putin had REJECTED.

[pampango]

21. And there is no doubt that the US could conquer all of Ukraine in 2 weeks. That proves nothing and

it is bellicose to even bring up the reality that large countries with strong militaries can conquer smaller countries with weak militaries. (Ukraine spends about 1% of its GDP on its military - similar to Germany and Sweden. Russia spends over 4% of its much larger economy on its military.) The ability of Russia or the US to conquer Ukraine is not really in question and is not something that is a liberal policy option to discuss here at DU.

Foreign invasion, with or without subsequent territorial annexation, to solve political disagreements in another country is a neo-con solution. Bush/Cheney have proven that. Neo-cons always look for military solutions to economic and political problems. If you want to suggest a Russian invasion as a possible solution to Ukraine's problems, please do so at a neo-con website.

[happyslug]

24. First I do NOT know if the US could take the Ukraine in two weeks....

Unlike Afghanistan you have a concept of being a united country in the Ukraine, thus both sides will work together is such an invasion, Furthermore, the US would need permission of various countries to fly in the troops, countries may view such an conquest NOT in their best interest. Russia borders the Ukraine and thus does NOT have to go through any other country to invade the Ukraine. The US had permission of Pakistan to fly over Pakistan when the US took Afghanistan and it still took a couple of months to build up the forces.

The US invaded Mexico in the 1910s while Mexico was going through its revolution. The reason for the intervention was simple, it was on the US border and causing problems on the US side of the border.

You saw the same thing occurring in Yugoslavia when it broke up. While Germany did NOT technically border Yugoslavia, Austria did and Austria, from an economic point of view is Germany. Slovenia had been part of the Austrian Empire from the 1500s to the end of WWI and as Yugoslavia broke up, it became an economic satellite of Germany via Austria. These lead to NATO invention into Yugoslavia for Germany could NOT stand by while you had a mess on its economic borders.

Thus countries have a long history of intervening in countries on their borders when those countries are in revolution, civil war or other internal strife and such strife does not end quickly.

[pampango]

27. My point was that it is a neo-con mentality to consider an invasion as a solution to the problem.

I did not mean to get bogged down into a discussion of the prospects for military success or failure of such an imperialist adventure or whether the military of country X or country Y would have more success at it.

[joshcryer]

12. This report is fascinating.

Given that the rebels were completely routed...

It's like the media wanted to create a false narrative about taking of the airport.

[bemildred]

22. Fierce battle for airport breaks out in Ukraine's east

Donetsk (Ukraine) (AFP) - Heavy artillery and shelling rocked Ukraine's east on Thursday as the army and pro-Russian rebels waged a fierce battle for a key airport, forcing monitors to flee and threatening all-out conflict.

The fighting came as Ukraine made renewed accusations of a Russian military build up on its border, and approved fresh troop mobilisations in the midst of a wave of violence over recent days.

A national day of mourning was also held for 13 people killed on Tuesday when a rocket exploded near a commuter bus travelling towards the Ukrainian city of Donetsk, the worst loss of civilian life since a September truce that only partially halted the violence.

The upsurge in fighting that has rocked eastern Ukraine follows the postponement of a planned peace summit between President Petro Poroshenko and the leaders of Russia, Germany and France.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/world/a/26012578/

[bemildred]

23. Pro-Russian separatists claim Donetsk airport

Russian-backed separatists announced on Thursday (Friday NZT) they had captured the shattered remains of the Donetsk airport terminal in eastern Ukraine and plan to claw back more territory, further dashing hopes for a lasting peace agreement.

The airport, on the fringes of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk, has been at the centre of bitter battles since May. Control over it was split between the separatists and Ukrainian forces who had held onto the main civilian terminal. Reduced to little more than a shell-littered wreck, the building is of limited strategic importance but has great symbolic value.

An AP reporter saw a rebel flag hoisted over that building, although fighting still appeared to be ongoing. Ukraine insisted government troops were holding their positions at the airport.

The rebel leader in Donetsk, Alexander Zakharchenko, said the separatist offensive would continue and its goal was to recapture all territory lost to government forces last year.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/65102193/prorussian-separatists-claim-donetsk-airport

[Xithras]

28. Here's a fascinating video shot in the airport during the fight.

It was filmed by a Russian media agency, so the opinions of the reporter are about as biased as you'd expect, but it has some incredible footage of the actual firefight INSIDE the airport, including conversations with some of the rebels while they're actually firing and fighting. The video doesn't show any dead or wounded, but it's pretty brutal nonetheless. It gets really interesting starting about a minute and a half in.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=70f_1421335145