Ukraine Protests

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,177
#1,177
lawgator1 said:
I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that no US president could have prevented this by generally being more of a bad ass than Obama over these past five years, nor could any US president do anything about it to reverse it now, other than what Obama is doing.

I'm saying that the US is, for all practical purposes, irrelevant to the current situation in Crimea and that such would be the case no matter who was president.
Click to expand...

Sad that you can't see the fact we've been pushed around on the world stage for the past five years enough to embolden leaders around the world to take advantage of the power vacuum.

China, Iran, North Korea and a whole slew of third world dictators are watching this with keen interest right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,178
#1,178
volprof said:
I've said it already, but I'll say it again: yes, Palin "anticipated" a Russian threat, but why? Was it political prescience or mere campaign savvy (a good deal of Americans have thought Russia our primary enemy since 1945)? I guess we'll never know for sure, but I'd bet on the latter.
Click to expand...

Palin aside since she is a lightweight:

So here's an flip side question - why didn't Obama anticipate it? Political naivety or campaign savvy? Is either something to congratulate him for?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,179
#1,179
volinbham said:
1) Would Russia have had an agreement with Mexico ala the Budapest agreement?

2) Do you think that our overall relationship with Russia would have no impact whatsoever on our actions given that from #1 above Russia had some interests in Mexico?

3) Was Mexico historically part of the US and then freed with a collapse of the US power structure and was there concern that the US was trying to rebuild it's pre-collapse footprint?

4) Was Russia allies with all the Central American countries that also are concerned with the US controlling Mexico via puppet leaders and expressing interest in regaining lost territory?

5) Would Russia have an equivalent NATO alliance in Central America and military bases throughout the region?


All that said if we believed Russia would take no actions vs if we thought they would take actions could clearly impact HOW we go about our moves in Mexico. If Russia was highly dependent on us we could act with more impunity than if Russia had limited dependence on us.
See, it's a bit different. We do have interests in Ukraine remaining independent and we do have a power/dependence relationship with Russia that shapes the strategic calculus on both sides.
Click to expand...

If this were the early 80's and the US had a situation with Mexico like that then USSR would be all over it(since they had allies in Cuba and Nicaragua).
 
#1,180
#1,180
Velo Vol said:
In this case, in particular, there's been an exaggeration of the importance of US policy toward a regional dispute.
Click to expand...

we kinda had a hand in this dispute. Meddle -> backfire -> oops is not really a solid foreign policy
 
#1,182
#1,182
volinbham said:
So here's an flip side question - why didn't Obama anticipate it? Political naivety or campaign savvy? Is either something to congratulate him for?
Click to expand...

Actually he laughed when the matter was brought up about Russia being our number one geopolitical foe.

Along with the ultra-biased media.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,183
#1,183
Did anyone see the march of those unarmed Ukrainian soldiers on Russian positions at Belbek? That honestly was a thing to watch for sure...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,186
#1,186
John Kerry is on TV now talking about the conflict. Is it just me that thinks every word out of a Dems mouth is lying & never a spoken word of truth?
 
#1,187
#1,187
04 Mar. 2014
Statement by the North Atlantic Council following meeting under article 4 of the Washington Treaty

The North Atlantic Council has met at Poland’s request to hold consultations within the framework of Article 4 of the Washington Treaty, which states that “the parties will consult whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence, or security of any of the parties is threatened.”

Despite repeated calls by the international community, Russia continues to violate Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to violate its international commitments.

These developments present serious implications for the security and stability of the Euro‑Atlantic area.

Allies stand together in the spirit of strong solidarity in this grave crisis.

We undertake to pursue and intensify our rigorous and on-going assessment of the implications of this crisis for Alliance security, in close coordination and consultation.

We continue to support all constructive efforts for a peaceful solution to the current crisis in accordance with international law. We welcome the ongoing efforts undertaken by the United Nations, the European Union, the OSCE and the Council of Europe.

We will continue to consult with Ukraine within the NATO-Ukraine Commission.

We will engage with Russia in the NATO-Russia Council. We will hold a meeting tomorrow.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_107716.htm
 
#1,190
#1,190
volinbham said:
1) Would Russia have had an agreement with Mexico ala the Budapest agreement?

2) Do you think that our overall relationship with Russia would have no impact whatsoever on our actions given that from #1 above Russia had some interests in Mexico?

3) Was Mexico historically part of the US and then freed with a collapse of the US power structure and was there concern that the US was trying to rebuild it's pre-collapse footprint?

4) Was Russia allies with all the Central American countries that also are concerned with the US controlling Mexico via puppet leaders and expressing interest in regaining lost territory?

5) Would Russia have an equivalent NATO alliance in Central America and military bases throughout the region?
Click to expand...

(1) So what if it does?
(2) We have a treaty allowing us to operate in Mexico
(3) What if there were? Russia is going to fight for the Mexican government?
(4) Guatemala would be dictating Russian policy?
(5) Honduras isn't threatened.


See, it's a bit different. We do have interests in Ukraine remaining independent and we do have a power/dependence relationship with Russia that shapes the strategic calculus on both sides.
Click to expand...

Yes, we have a general economic interest in Ukraine. And a general interest that international law is upheld. But we're thousands of miles away. And Russia is only a few miles across a strait.

This makes it much more difficult to weld enough leverage to dissuade Russia from doing what it wants in its back yard. We're having a hard time getting even Europe to cooperate because they're afraid of losing Russian resources and Russian money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,192
#1,192
Velo Vol said:
Russia offered $15 billion.

How much have we offered?

More Obama weakness, right? He can't even outbid Putin.
Click to expand...

I saw an article yesterday, think Volprof posted it, that the Ukraine would require $45 Billion to keep their head above water.
 
#1,193
#1,193
Grand Vol said:
Sad that you can't see the fact we've been pushed around on the world stage for the past five years enough to embolden leaders around the world to take advantage of the power vacuum.

China, Iran, North Korea and a whole slew of third world dictators are watching this with keen interest right now.
Click to expand...


Your mentality of a zero sum game, where every advantage they gain is necessarily a disadvantage to us, such that we are forced to retaliate each and every time, even when our national interests are not remotely at stake, is the kind of Cold War mentality that almost annihilated the human race.

We are not the world's policeman. Do something that threatens us, or attack someone with whom we have a security agreement, then we act. But we cannot go around insinuating ourselves into every conflict, in every region, just because if we don't then someone's going to call us a wuss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#1,194
#1,194
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juH4SSX-zyM&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

While brave and defiant, extremely stupid. Doing something like this under these conditions could have started something neither party wants.
 
#1,196
#1,196
Grand Vol said:
I saw an article yesterday, think Volprof posted it, that the Ukraine would require $45 Billion to keep their head above water.
Click to expand...

That aint nothin. Uncle Sam spends that when he burns money to light his cigar.
 
#1,197
#1,197
lawgator1 said:
Your mentality of a zero sum game, where every advantage they gain is necessarily a disadvantage to us, such that we are forced to retaliate each and every time, even when our national interests are not remotely at stake, is the kind of Cold War mentality that almost annihilated the human race.

We are not the world's policeman. Do something that threatens us, or attack someone with whom we have a security agreement, then we act. But we cannot go around insinuating ourselves into every conflict, in every region, just because if we don't then someone's going to call us a wuss.
Click to expand...

More Jimmy Carter era defeatism where the US gets pushed around in most world disputes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,198
#1,198
volinbham said:
Palin aside since she is a lightweight:

So here's an flip side question - why didn't Obama anticipate it? Political naivety or campaign savvy? Is either something to congratulate him for?
Click to expand...

Once again, I place anticipate in " ." Obama was playing the terrorism card, which also appeals to a good deal of our nation's citizens. Russia and al-qaeda. It's a wonder neither party brought up the Nazis.
 
#1,199
#1,199
lawgator1 said:
Your mentality of a zero sum game, where every advantage they gain is necessarily a disadvantage to us, such that we are forced to retaliate each and every time, even when our national interests are not remotely at stake, is the kind of Cold War mentality that almost annihilated the human race.

We are not the world's policeman. Do something that threatens us, or attack someone with whom we have a security agreement, then we act. But we cannot go around insinuating ourselves into every conflict, in every region, just because if we don't then someone's going to call us a wuss.
Click to expand...

Please don't ever run for political office. You have zero concept of the geopolitical system and how it works.

Perception is reality and if the US is not seen as a major world power, other nations will look to the remaining power brokers to fill that void. And if that means they throw in their lot with Russia because they happen to be decisive and providing that real leadership, then they accept whatever comes along with it. And when that happens, Russia gains a trading partner, hence drawing foreign currency away from our industries that would typically sell on that market.

When the international community loses faith in your ability to provide world leadership, your nation suffers economically and politically. Call it ultra-nationalistic if you like or a Cold War mentality, but it's fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top