Who benefits from war between Russia and Ukraine?

[Hugabear]

[geek tragedy]

1. Putin thought he would. Next question? nt

[JustAnotherGen]

2. Co-sign this

Comes down to who owns the energy on that side of the world.

[misterhighwasted]

5. unfortunate but there is that direct line to every war lately.

Last edited Fri Jul 18, 2014, 05:07 PM - Edit history (1)

[conservaphobe]

4. How dare you!

They had a cute cartoon and everything.

[stevenleser]

3. Very simple. Russia. They would win a full war in less than a week.

Ukraine would become another Russian province. I think this is what Putin/the Russians want.
'
Not only that, all of the military hardware on both sides is Russian.

[misterhighwasted]

7. yes. Russia & Putin's ego.

I am hoping we hear of unity from other Nations. United States cannot do this alone.

[MattSh]

19. So you're saying they want...

a broke and bankrupt country that will cost them tens of billions of dollars for the next 20 years or so? Why wouldn't Russia want the USA and the EU to fix that mess?

[stevenleser]

22. Nationalism and Empire-building isn't so rational and well thought out.

If it were, Putin wouldnt have invaded Crimea in the first place.

Russia had plenty of ways to make money that wouldnt annoy the rest of the world. This isnt about money.

[socialist_n_TN]

36. Of COURSE it's about money. it's ALWAYS about money......

or more precisely, profits, either through market share, resources, or spheres of influence. And EVERY FUCKING ONE OF THE IMPERIALIST POWERS IS IN IT FOR MONEY. That includes Russia, the EU, and the USA. They are ALL imperialist blocs. It just depends on which group of owners you want screwing you.

As to Crimea, Russia has a warm water port now. If it wasn't for that port, Russia wouldn't have wanted Crimea either.

[stevenleser]

38. Has nothing to do with money or a warm water port. Russia had full use of the port before

the invasion. And in a country that is already poor, Crimea is among the poorest part.

This is about power and face saving, nothing more.

[socialist_n_TN]

39. I'm sorry that's just not logical.....

Of course it's about money or in this case resources, which is the same as money, and the warm water port. As to the port, I'm sure Russia would feel TOTALLY comfortable with a NATOized Ukraine allowing them to use the port in Crimea, ESPECIALLY when their oligarchs are battling the EU and American oligarchs for diminishing resources in the area. BTW, that was

I agree with the power part, but that power is control over resources by the capitalist powers in each of the various empires. Which translates into profits for whichever one of the capitalist empires controls those resources. Face saving? That don't even register when profits are at stake.

This is about naked capitalism and it's end-stage bastard child, imperialism. Nothing more, nothing less.

[stevenleser]

41. You're looking to fit this into your agenda instead of letting the facts speak for themselves

Russia had use of the port in Crimea essentially forever and Crimea is among the poorest parts of Ukraine.

All of the spinning and gyrations won't change either of those two facts.

[socialist_n_TN]

42. My GOD, man! Think!.......

What is "forever" anyway? NOTHING is "forever". Are you seriously suggesting that NATO would allow a Russian military presence in a Ukraine that they (NATO) controlled? There's no way that would happen.

You are trying to spin this into some sort of "personal vendetta" by Putin, when it is just history repeating itself. Or at least echoing itself. These are many of the same tensions that were present a century ago previous to WWI. If you think that WWI began because of the assassination of some obscure archduke by a Serbian anarchist, then you are sadly mistaken. It is about imperial rivalries over resources and access to markets. Ukraine is a similar situation with similar motivations by the imperialisms involved.

And if you consider historical materialism an "agenda", then yes, you can call this an agenda. I just call it Marxism. It's a way of seeing trends and predicting the most likely actions and outcomes of trading blocs on the world stage BEFORE they happen so that you can plan a response. Even before the Maidan protests kicked in, I wrote in my perspectives for the upcoming period (roughly a year to three) about increasing imperialist rivalries. I figured it would be China/Japan/USA that would kick it off instead of this particular one, but Ukraine fits the general outline just fine. A perspective is not about getting things exactly right. It's not prophesy, it's noting trends. So let me "predict" right now that Ukraine won't be the last of this kind of thing to happen. Ukraine types of conflicts will increase as resources dwindle and capitalism tries to continue to expand. The various blocs of trading empires supported by their governments will come into increasing conflict over resources and markets in the next couple of years. And the conflicts, both by proxy players and by the main players, will be increasingly sharp and increasingly often as the system of capitalism itself begins to really collapse under the weight of it's internal contradictions.

[sabrina 1]

24. So you think that Russia thinks they would just be going to war to with Ukraine?

NATO would never get involved if that were to happen? Is that your theory? And of course, as part of NATO, the US would just go on with its own business?

McCain desperately wants that war, why do you think HE and for that matter, most Republicans, including Cheney who thinks we need 'Leadership now', why do you think they want a war with Russia?

Hard to find oneself on Cheney's side I imagine, thankfully I don't believe a word out of the mouths of these war mongers.

[tammywammy]

29. Since Ukraine isn't a member of NATO

I wouldn't bet on NATO jumping at helping Ukraine. But NATO would assist Poland with fortifying their borders. Now if the Ukraine/Russia mess spilled into Poland, NATO would be all over it.

[TwilightGardener]

6. Putin is trying to salvage whatever he could after losing influence in Ukraine

to the EU. His installed Russian-friendly puppet is long gone, there was no coup, there is now an elected and legitimate government, and the "rebels" are being repeatedly stoked for action, and then abandoned, and then stoked again, to suit his whims. The people of Russia are being whipped into nationalist fervor and he has to maintain his popularity or it all comes crashing down in a humiliating way. This is 100% his baby. He is responsible for a whole lot of bloodshed. Why? Because he didn't get his way in February when Yanukovich fled the country.

[TBF]

8. Maybe this list will help ....

The following is a list of the Top-100 U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Prime Contractors in FY 2014 ranked by the total amount of money awarded. In fiscal year 2014, as of July 15, the DoD has awarded a total of $132.62 billion in defense contracts (data may in some cases have lag of 90 days).

In FY 2014, top awardee Lockheed Martin has received $13.15 billion in contracts (prime contracts) or 9.9% of total contract funds awarded by the DoD. Runner-up is Boeing with $10.20 billion (7.7%) followed by Raytheon in third place with $5.66 billion (4.3%). General Dynamics has received $4.80 billion (3.6%) followed by Northrop Grumman, United Technologies, L-3 Communications, Humana, Health Net, and Unitedhealth Group. BAE Systems, #13 on the list, is the largest foreign DoD defense contractor in FY 2014 ...

http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Top-100-Defense-Contractors-2014.html

[geek tragedy]

9. which has . . . what? to do with a war where both sides are using

Russian/Soviet/Warsaw pact weapons and equipment?

And how does that explain that Russia pretty much started this war?

[TBF]

10. The question is who benefits from escalation of the conflict. nt

[geek tragedy]

12. to what escalation are you referring?

Russia thought it could drag Ukraine back into its sphere of influence as a vassal state. It miscalculated, badly.

[Igel]

16. Lots of people.

Take the Vietnamese war.

The US MIC certainly benefited. But those out protesting the MIC tended to ignore that the Vietnamese also had weapons. Chinese and Russian. Their supporters (although that shifted, to be sure).

But while it's comforting to think that everything has to be reduced to money, in some ways power is a better marker. And fighting the US in Vietnam kept the US from having as much power; it gained power for the socialist countries; it kept the US tied down. Perhaps eventually money would get involved, but for a lot of people money is just a path to power, and power is primary.

Then there are the true believers. Those who fight for an Idea, for a Cause. Money isn't important. Power in a crude or crass sense is corollary. What matters is that you win and your ego and your Cause triumph.

People who ask "Who benefits?" when looking for a motive usually can't see past their own brain case. The One True Motive is the one that they see and put in the minds and mouths of everybody else.

[TBF]

20. PNAC was always about both power and money. nt

[Hugabear]

11. You don't think American arms manufacturers are itching to provide Ukraine with new weapons?

Hell, we've already got Repugs pushing for exactly that.

Plus, my OP doesn't specify which nationality benefits. It's arms dealers in general who benefit.

[geek tragedy]

13. The Russian MIC no doubt was eager to see a Ukrainian conflict.

Which is one reason President Obama has singled out the Russian MIC for sanctions.

[TBF]

17. Exactly - who are beating the drums the loudest?

I mean besides a few people here on DU. It is idiots like Cheney, McSame etc...

It has always been PNAC pushing behind the scenes for domination and profit. They may be quieter now but I doubt they are out of the picture.

[stevenleser]

26. No one is beating any drums. Virtually no one is proposing war with Russia over Ukraine.

You're forcing the point way beyond where it is justified.

[TBF]

30. This is FPI's release from yesterday -

http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/it%E2%80%99s-finally-time-west-stand-putin

FPI=PNAC

[stevenleser]

31. That's not 'beating the drums for war' unless the meaning of that phrase has changed radically

No one is saying the US and western Europe should go to war against Russia over Ukraine.

[TBF]

32. Did you read the entire release?

FPI is most certainly pushing escalation of this conflict. I don't know what kind of language you require to be convinced, but I tried to highlight some of the stronger statements to help you out:


It is long past time that the United States and its NATO allies supply the Ukrainian military with the lethal aid it has long requested, so that it can at least defend itself and its airspace from Russia. NATO should deploy more troops to Poland and the Baltic states, which are understandably nervous about Russian designs on their territory and quietly doubt the Alliance’s Article 5 commitment stipulating that an attack on one is an attack on all. Sectoral sanctions that could cripple the Russian economy are also long overdue. And, if Russian involvement in this attack is conclusively demonstrated, Russia should be added to the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism.

On Monday, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Derek Chollet addressed the German Marshall Fund in Washington, where he delivered a fairly rosy picture of U.S.-Russia relations. In spite of the many disagreeements, the Obama administration, he said, does not view Russia as “an adversary.” When I skeptically asked him what it would take for the United States government to revise its assessment, given everything from Edward Snowden to the situation in Ukraine, Chollet replied that he “did not want to get into speculating about where Russia can go, where the line is to cross about being an adversary or an enemy.” I hope we now have our answer.

- See more at: http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/it%E2%80%99s-finally-time-west-stand-putin#sthash.ccWnycbu.dpuf

[stevenleser]

33. I did. No calls for the US or western Europe to go to war with Russia over Ukraine. nt

[TBF]

35. Very literal interpretation but that's fine. We can agree to disagree. nt

[stevenleser]

27. So, it was US arms manufacturers in the Conservatory with the pipe? Give it a rest already.

This is a simple matter of the Russians supporting careless idiot rebels. Nothing more.

[sabrina 1]

25. Who benefits from war? Got any ideas on that? Who benefited from our last adventures

overseas?

Here let me put it this way:

1) The American People

2) The Iraqi/Afghan People

3) Defense Contractors, Halliburton, KB&R et al

I'm going with #3

[LanternWaste]

14. Very likely the same ones who benefited themselves from annexing the Crimea.

Very likely the same ones who benefited themselves from annexing the Crimea.

[Demeter]

15. Energy companies, Banksters, Military/Industrial /Intelligence complex

the rest of us are ants at the picnic.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. War is politics by other means. Clausewitz The fucking politicians..as usual.

No cause justifies the deaths of innocent people. Albert Camus

[MattSh]

21. Ukraine, Arab Spring, Cold War II and Price Wars Hardly Disguised

2014-06-08 by Phil Butler

Ukraine, Kiev’s Maidan Square protests, the current US versus Russia mess, all this is about gas and profit, and nothing else.

When US President Barack Obama began the campaign to “punish” Vladimir Putin and Russia over interference in Ukraine, we all should have known there was more to the story. And there is. As it turns out, Ukraine’s violence, and most of the unrest abroad in fact, is a competition in between huge investment partners, gas companies like Exxon Mobile, and Russia’s Gazprom. As for the people, the public? They are just collateral damage, pawns or meaningless in a worldwide corporate game for profit. The Obama administration, and almost all the western governments are involved in one way or other, are fighting a price war over gas against Russia.

Sounds conspiratorial and unfeasible, doesn’t it? But the intuitive and honest reader somehow knows it’s all true. All you have to do is ask a few fairly simple questions, know a few key names, and see the logic bankers and investors always apply. Here’s a few questions to head your thinking into the right direction:

Why were economic sanctions applied to swiftly and forcefully against Putin’s and Russia’s oligarchs and industrialists?

Who will benefit from the Ukraine/natural gas situation if an alternative to Russia supply of Europe is created?

Who, and for how long is involved in capitalizing on a European market for alternative liquid natural gas (LNG) shipments?

What other factors involving LNG amplify the need for disrupting Russia’s market for natural gas?

Before I answer some of these for you, please think about why the son of a US Vice President ends up working for the biggest Ukrainian gas company. Then wonder why a college chum of Secretary of State John Kerry ends up at the same Cyprus based Burisma Holdings? These two are bit players though, in a money power play of staggering proportions. Like something straight out of an Orwellian nightmare, industrialists who pull the strings on powerful politicians now hide in plain sight, dealing in lives, greed, corporate skulduggery all disguised as lobbying, aggressive business, economic upturn, and so on. Look at the dogma, then look at the separate reality hidden in each:

President Obama‘s “Climate Action Plan” (Billionaire Richard Branson is in love) – The plan promotes natural gas above all other energy sources

Whatever you heard about the “Odessa Massacre“ – it’s about ensuring an investment from the west in the only LNG “regasification” plant in Ukraine

Russia’s Gazprom & A Secret UN Gas Cadre – Fox broke this gas conspiracy, but Obama’s constituents represent another energy cartel

A licensing melee (Lebanon offshore) has begun in between energy companies like Royal Dutch Shell, Marathon oil in the US, and others

Mega-firm Baker & McKenzie instrumental in world natural gas – here’s their guide (and above from the PDF) showing North Africa (Arab Spring states’) potential

Smaller players like former PR/lobbying firm MWW’s VP Ankit Desai, who’s migration from a key Obama supporter to the energy sector (LNG in focus, Cheniere) show the ever widening spider web of connections in between big government, big business, and big profits

http://everything-pr.com/ukraine-and-the-natural-gas-price-war/249305/

[misterhighwasted]

23. Thank You MattSh. Excellent Post

Must Read for seeing the Big Picture.

[geek tragedy]

28. Nice conspiracy theory. Reality is that Putin invaded Ukraine

and Eastern Ukraine, and that now the pro-Russian terrorists and thugs have turned the area into a war zone, all in the name of Russian rightwing nationalism and in order to give Russia access to Ukraine's gas fields.

Please explain how western gas interests made the barbarian, Putin-loving scum in the east shoot down a plane and then blockade investigators.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014849793

No, sad reality is that the side fighting for Putin are barbarians, murderers, and terrorists, who now desecrate a grave site while trying to block an international investigation.

But this is what we would expect from those who support an evil, rightwing, imperialist oligarchy like Putin's Russia.

[stevenleser]

34. You didn't hear? It was US arms manufacturers and oil firms in the Conservatory with the pipe

that's whodunit.

[840high]

37. Good read. TY

[Roy Serohz]

40. MIC

And that isn't a slur against the Irish!