What Happened in the Ukraine?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
I think I see exactly how this is going to go. Russia will take the Ukraine, the people will scream and shout for a bit, things will calm down and ultimately nothing will happen. People will forget and we will be back to obsessing over Beiber and Miley Cyrus’s tongue.
This is a freebie for Russia. They know nothings going to happen. They can do what they want with the Ukraine and the world ain’t gonna do shit about it. The implications are huge though. What it means for the baltics and former eastern European countries has to put them on edge.

Putin wins this one. He won in Syria, he’s making a mockery of us. Thanks obama.

[/quote]

People can take it as they like, but I don’t consider this to be a win/lose us vs. them type of thing. He’s taking care of business in his neck of the woods the way that they do it in that neck of the woods. Cultural relativism if you will.

Future world leaders could learn a lot from Putin as far as when to step in and when to stay out. He showed great restraint and judgement in not turning the Ukrainian uprising into an absolute blood bath by letting it calm down before rolling in and great timing for when he stepped in on that debacle that was Syria.

It seems like these past few months make it really clear (to me) that a lot of American people get all caught up in emotion and want to jump in and save the world when what we really need to do is let the rest of world sort it self out and we try to save our own asses.

As a country we’re about as fit to jump into another war as Biggie Smalls is to run a marathon. (which is to say that we are a bullet ridden bloated corps with a bunch of fucked up priorities)

[/quote]

Perhaps more importantly why is it when anything happens in the world American lives and dollars must be sacrificed lest we become “embarrassed” or appear “weak?”

I think the “super” patriots have somehow convinced everyone that America needs to get involved in things whenever another country has someone fart in it.

Why does being patriotic and loving your country mean you want to sacrifice our men and women as often as possible?

In b4 all the bullshit “but Hitler” comparisons. I think some people believe the US should always intervene and ironically some of those people say they are small government.

142

[quote]H factor wrote:

Perhaps more importantly why is it when anything happens in the world American lives and dollars must be sacrificed [/quote]

Why indeed.

It’s Europe’s turn…Ukraine’s desire to join the EU instead of accepting monies from Russia is kinda what sparked this whole shebang.

143

[quote]pat wrote:
I think I see exactly how this is going to go. Russia will take the Ukraine, the people will scream and shout for a bit, things will calm down and ultimately nothing will happen. People will forget and we will be back to obsessing over Beiber and Miley Cyrus’s tongue.
This is a freebie for Russia. They know nothings going to happen. They can do what they want with the Ukraine and the world ain’t gonna do shit about it. The implications are huge though. What it means for the baltics and former eastern European countries has to put them on edge.

Putin wins this one. He won in Syria, he’s making a mockery of us. Thanks obama.

[/quote]

Completely disagree here. See Skys’s post, Dr. Matt and magick as well. He’s taking care of business there, and if they had really wanted to get Ukraine annexed into Russia, they’ve had 65 years to do it since they gave it away.

144

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Picture relevant. [/quote]

That was too funny.[/quote]

I admit it, I did in fact Lol pretty hard. Nicely played sir

145

[quote]H factor wrote:
I think some people believe the US should always intervene and ironically some of those people say they are small government. [/quote]
And how many of them are willing to pick up a gun and go?

146

[quote]pushharder wrote:
On the other hand, it is a bit 1930’s-esque what’s happening on the Black Sea. We’ve got a Russian dual citizen on this thread trumpeting away about all these “good reasons” for the military maneuvers. Likewise, in 1938 we had German American citizens in this country jumping for joy when the Sudetenland and Austria were gathered into the fold.
[/quote]

Because Crimea had been defacto Russian territory since the late 19th cen., and is a part of Russia’s cultural and historical birthplace.

In comparison, the newly created modern German state of the 20th cen. might as well be called Big Prussia, and is culturally distinct from Austria.

147

I honestly don’t know why Americans look at what happens in foreign places in such a black and white picture.

Liberals are talking about how it’s Russia being totalitarian and crushing the freedom of other people and such. Conservatives are talking about how Russia is trying to be all big and scary again and presenting a threat to the Western world.

But both agree that what Russia is doing is bad.

Why is it bad again?

149

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
People can take it as they like, but I don’t consider this to be a win/lose us vs. them type of thing. He’s taking care of business in his neck of the woods the way that they do it in that neck of the woods. Cultural relativism if you will.

Future world leaders could learn a lot from Putin as far as when to step in and when to stay out. He showed great restraint and judgement in not turning the Ukrainian uprising into an absolute blood bath by letting it calm down before rolling in and great timing for when he stepped in on that debacle that was Syria.

It seems like these past few months make it really clear (to me) that a lot of American people get all caught up in emotion and want to jump in and save the world when what we really need to do is let the rest of world sort it self out and we try to save our own asses.

As a country we’re about as fit to jump into another war as Biggie Smalls is to run a marathon. (which is to say that we are a bullet ridden bloated corps with a bunch of fucked up priorities)

[/quote]

Well said.
[/quote]

I agree and it was Skyz’ post that prompted my previous one.

Then again, after I thought about it a bit history reminded me how much you, Skyz and I sound like Joe American Citizen Blow circa 1935. And that bothers me a little. Is there a reason why it shouldn’t?[/quote]

There probably aren’t any reasons why it shouldn’t at least a little. History does have a way of repeating itself.

Lets say that they fired up the dozers and started digging trenches for the bodies tomorrow though.

What are we gonna do about it? Is an economic sanction going to change the mind of a person who wants to commit genocide?

151

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
On the other hand, it is a bit 1930’s-esque what’s happening on the Black Sea. We’ve got a Russian dual citizen on this thread trumpeting away about all these “good reasons” for the military maneuvers. Likewise, in 1938 we had German American citizens in this country jumping for joy when the Sudetenland and Austria were gathered into the fold.
[/quote]

Because Crimea had been defacto Russian territory since the late 19th cen., and is a part of Russia’s cultural and historical birthplace.

In comparison, the newly created modern German state of the 20th cen. might as well be called Big Prussia, and is culturally distinct from Austria.[/quote]

I hear you Push, and it does bother me some as well. But in addition to what magick said, it all goes back to the fact that Russia’s had the ability to take the Ukraine back, and certainly Crimea, for almost 70 years. They havent. And I don’t think they will. Is Putin a cold bastard? Damn straight. But he’s also very shrewd, and politics isn’t really a charity anyway, and this situation yields nothing for Russia if they annex the country or a portion of the country.

I do believe he wants to get his “boys” back into power, but then I think the same would go for us ina reciprocal situation (and in fact it has many times, in Latin America where we mess with politics). Regardless, his sphere of influence is huge with them no matter who is in power.

Does he want something out of this? You bet your ass. What, exactly, it is I don’t know for sure but this is not a Cold War prelude kind of situation. An extension of regional power? Yes, perhaps with the hope to consolidate more influence and better positioning. But these are goals any state will pursue, and we do (although not nearly as shrewdly). In that sense there’s no denying it, even though it is rather uncomfortable.

152

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
On the other hand, it is a bit 1930’s-esque what’s happening on the Black Sea. We’ve got a Russian dual citizen on this thread trumpeting away about all these “good reasons” for the military maneuvers. Likewise, in 1938 we had German American citizens in this country jumping for joy when the Sudetenland and Austria were gathered into the fold.
[/quote]

Because Crimea had been defacto Russian territory since the late 19th cen., and is a part of Russia’s cultural and historical birthplace.

In comparison, the newly created modern German state of the 20th cen. might as well be called Big Prussia, and is culturally distinct from Austria.[/quote]

I hear you Push, and it does bother me some as well. But in addition to what magick said, it all goes back to the fact that Russia’s had the ability to take the Ukraine back, and certainly Crimea, for almost 70 years. They havent. And I don’t think they will. Is Putin a cold bastard? Damn straight. But he’s also very shrewd, and politics isn’t really a charity anyway, and this situation yields nothing for Russia if they annex the country or a portion of the country.

I do believe he wants to get his “boys” back into power, but then I think the same would go for us ina reciprocal situation (and in fact it has many times, in Latin America where we mess with politics). Regardless, his sphere of influence is huge with them no matter who is in power.

Does he want something out of this? You bet your ass. What, exactly, it is I don’t know for sure but this is not a Cold War prelude kind of situation. An extension of regional power? Yes, perhaps with the hope to consolidate more influence and better positioning. But these are goals any state will pursue, and we do (although not nearly as shrewdly). In that sense there’s no denying it, even though it is rather uncomfortable.[/quote]

Uncomfortable?
How about this scenario:

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania each have a significant Russian ethnic minority and former Soviet veterans. They have tried to establish the primacy of their own language and granted Russian-speakers certain rights.
Let’s imagine that some Russian ethnic “national safety” patrols appear, in masks and uniforms without markings, armed, and claim that Russians may be in some danger: No proof necessary, merely the claim of some vague danger.
By the logic I have seen so far, Russian troops can fly in in Ilyushin aircraft (as they did in Simferopol) to “protect their interests.”

After all, all three states were historically part of the Russian sphere of interest.

There is a small difference. The Baltic states are members of the European Union and NATO. The United States is obliged by treaty to defend their sovereignty. Everyone knows that NATO is a toothless shell and clearly, the US is not prepared to defend the Baltics. And the “legal” precedent for a complete capitulation has been established in Ukraine.

Now then: which pressures from the EU and US would be appropriate in that situation that are not appropriate now, in the Ukraine?

153

70 years ago, being a mostly continental power was enough.
But it’s not the case anymore, because today’s Globalization strongly favors maritime powers.
So the Baltic States, Crimea and the Kuril Islands are becoming more and more interesting for Russia.

154

[quote]kamui wrote:

70 years ago, being a mostly continental power was enough.
But it’s not the case anymore, because today’s Globalization strongly favors maritime powers.
So the Baltic States, Crimea and the Kuril Islands are becoming more and more interesting for Russia.
[/quote]

Eh? Maritime trade has been the greatest deal ever since man developed ships that could actually reliably sail the seas.

Heck, a major part of Russian policy in the 19th century was defeating the Ottoman Empire, specifically so that they can get unrestricted access to the Med. No point having access to the Black Sea if you got the Ottoman saying you can’t cross their strait.

The Baltic gets too damned cold (maybe with new tech that’s not the case, I dunno) to be used as a good year-long port region.

Russia is virtually a landlocked state if it loses access to the Black Sea.

Crimea really is a big deal to them. Id imagine it’ll be something like the U.S. losing guaranteed access to the Panama Canal. If Panama one day said “We don’t know if we’re gonna let you cross this here canal whenever you want anymore” to the U.S., I’m willing to bet you everything I have that the U.S. will do everything in its power (including outright occupation of the canals again) to regain unrestricted access.

We’ve already seen the Brits and the French just straight-up invade Egypt a while back when the Egyptians nationalized the Suez Canal.

155

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
I think some people believe the US should always intervene and ironically some of those people say they are small government. [/quote]
And how many of them are willing to pick up a gun and go? [/quote]

Much easier to complain about Obama and how “weak” he is making us look from a keyboard than a uniform?

156

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
I think some people believe the US should always intervene and ironically some of those people say they are small government. [/quote]
And how many of them are willing to pick up a gun and go? [/quote]

Much easier to complain about Obama and how “weak” he is making us look from a keyboard than a uniform? [/quote]
That moron Ted Nugent suggested we nuke Iraq and Afghanistan, because he is a badass, but it turns out he is a draft dodger. But as long as he “looks” the part (shooting deer is apparently as badass as shooting people…who shoot back) he is looked to as being “strong” while a democrat (even one who went to Vietnam, like Gore) is seen as being weak. How a party full of draft dodgers managed to convince its followers they were the Dirty Dozen or Magnificent Seven is beyond me.

157

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
On the other hand, it is a bit 1930’s-esque what’s happening on the Black Sea. We’ve got a Russian dual citizen on this thread trumpeting away about all these “good reasons” for the military maneuvers. Likewise, in 1938 we had German American citizens in this country jumping for joy when the Sudetenland and Austria were gathered into the fold.
[/quote]

Because Crimea had been defacto Russian territory since the late 19th cen., and is a part of Russia’s cultural and historical birthplace.

In comparison, the newly created modern German state of the 20th cen. might as well be called Big Prussia, and is culturally distinct from Austria.[/quote]

I hear you Push, and it does bother me some as well. But in addition to what magick said, it all goes back to the fact that Russia’s had the ability to take the Ukraine back, and certainly Crimea, for almost 70 years. They havent. And I don’t think they will. Is Putin a cold bastard? Damn straight. But he’s also very shrewd, and politics isn’t really a charity anyway, and this situation yields nothing for Russia if they annex the country or a portion of the country.

I do believe he wants to get his “boys” back into power, but then I think the same would go for us ina reciprocal situation (and in fact it has many times, in Latin America where we mess with politics). Regardless, his sphere of influence is huge with them no matter who is in power.

Does he want something out of this? You bet your ass. What, exactly, it is I don’t know for sure but this is not a Cold War prelude kind of situation. An extension of regional power? Yes, perhaps with the hope to consolidate more influence and better positioning. But these are goals any state will pursue, and we do (although not nearly as shrewdly). In that sense there’s no denying it, even though it is rather uncomfortable.[/quote]

Uncomfortable?
How about this scenario:

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania each have a significant Russian ethnic minority and former Soviet veterans. They have tried to establish the primacy of their own language and granted Russian-speakers certain rights.
Let’s imagine that some Russian ethnic “national safety” patrols appear, in masks and uniforms without markings, armed, and claim that Russians may be in some danger: No proof necessary, merely the claim of some vague danger.
By the logic I have seen so far, Russian troops can fly in in Ilyushin aircraft (as they did in Simferopol) to “protect their interests.”

After all, all three states were historically part of the Russian sphere of interest.

There is a small difference. The Baltic states are members of the European Union and NATO. The United States is obliged by treaty to defend their sovereignty. Everyone knows that NATO is a toothless shell and clearly, the US is not prepared to defend the Baltics. And the “legal” precedent for a complete capitulation has been established in Ukraine.

Now then: which pressures from the EU and US would be appropriate in that situation that are not appropriate now, in the Ukraine?
[/quote]

Does Russia hold a treaty with any of the aforementioned states that specifically allow them to have up to 25,000 troops in the country’s borders? If not, and they don’t to my knowledge, then this is a rather major difference between the states you’ve mentioned and the Ukraine.

158

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
I think some people believe the US should always intervene and ironically some of those people say they are small government. [/quote]
And how many of them are willing to pick up a gun and go? [/quote]

Much easier to complain about Obama and how “weak” he is making us look from a keyboard than a uniform? [/quote]
That moron Ted Nugent suggested we nuke Iraq and Afghanistan, because he is a badass, but it turns out he is a draft dodger. But as long as he “looks” the part (shooting deer is apparently as badass as shooting people…who shoot back) he is looked to as being “strong” while a democrat (even one who went to Vietnam, like Gore) is seen as being weak. How a party full of draft dodgers managed to convince its followers they were the Dirty Dozen or Magnificent Seven is beyond me. [/quote]

Lol. Like the Dems don’t have a shitload of draft dodgers too. Jeez. Your partisanship is showing.

So, Russia. About the Ukraine thing yeah?

159

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:
I think some people believe the US should always intervene and ironically some of those people say they are small government. [/quote]
And how many of them are willing to pick up a gun and go? [/quote]

Much easier to complain about Obama and how “weak” he is making us look from a keyboard than a uniform? [/quote]
That moron Ted Nugent suggested we nuke Iraq and Afghanistan, because he is a badass, but it turns out he is a draft dodger. But as long as he “looks” the part (shooting deer is apparently as badass as shooting people…who shoot back) he is looked to as being “strong” while a democrat (even one who went to Vietnam, like Gore) is seen as being weak. How a party full of draft dodgers managed to convince its followers they were the Dirty Dozen or Magnificent Seven is beyond me. [/quote]

Lol. Like the Dems don’t have a shitload of draft dodgers too. Jeez. Your partisanship is showing.
[/quote]

Isn’t Clinton the poster child for draft dodging?

160

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

So, Russia. About the Ukraine thing yeah?[/quote]

Something like 15% of their oil and gas exports go though Ukraine pipelines.

Putin isn’t going anywhere until he knows those are safe. Europe isn’t going to push all that hard on sanctions because they need the oil & gas, and we will likely just use this to trash each politically.

As long as no shots are fired, and no mass graves dug, we’re okay. This is about $ first, everything else a distant second.