The Ukraine situation

Huh, guess you haven't had time to peruse through the Iraq war link I gave you, although it is quite clear we disagree there, and never will see each other's "Facts" as Facts so that is a moot point...

Not sure where you got the idea that I suggested Putin wanted a war ??? What I said was Putin has already used Military force and has no issues with doing so, last nights report was that 16k Russian troops had entered Crimea...

Therefore my statement, "Is there anyone that thinks military action is a good idea besides Putin ?? It was your erroneous assumption that the words military action means only war....

Your assertion that the US will continue to stick its nose in is also in doubt, as most every American in this thread thinks it shouldn't, sooner or later the politicians might follow the will of the people, although that seems to be a world wide fallacy of politicians... BTW the US military doesn't stick it's nose anywhere without Civilian orders someplace in there...

Anyone that expected Russia to just walk away from its Black Sea naval base has been smoking something. Of course, Putin could have gone the guantanamo route and leased it in perpetuity from the former (friendly) ukraine leader....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splashone

Anyone that expected Russia to just walk away from its Black Sea naval base has been smoking something. Of course, Putin could have gone the guantanamo route and leased it in perpetuity from the former (friendly) ukraine leader....

---

Eh, why rent when you can own? :D

Bob

With respect to it all being about money:

I think back in the day we fought over lands to include them, or keep them into our economy's. In that respect, with "The Wall" falling, the world has become a small place... and the need to stop the communist "plight" is a thing of the past.

The Russian economy is 1/8th the size of America's the last I checked. Perhaps Russia still feels the need to "take" in order to grow, but we should all know by now, that between the EU's economy and America's economy, Russia doesn't stand a chance. Of course, it's by design that we are also dependent on one another. Hence, it gets complicated. Which is good - it's the same philosophy as mutually assured destruction.

But when it all comes down to it - Russia hasn't a chance if "the west" decides to put a strangle hold on it. Russia knows it, America knows it... the EU stresses how that'll effect them.

Of course, Russia is a world class nuclear power. So we all walk gently when it comes to throwing military might around. As well we should. The days of talking softly but carrying a big stick in the form of nukes are over... and if that sentence becomes false... well then, who the hell cares??

I guess what I am saying is, this is a short-term issue. Short-run problems are being addressed. Ultimately, Russia will back down, or everyone else will stop caring and let it become the new normal... but ultimately, if Russia doesn't back down, in the long-run, Russia will pay dearly.

That's my two cents as of today - I reserve the right to change my mind if either Gugi or Glen start throwing figures and facts at me :)!!

Just looking at the world headlines right now it seems that the New Norm as you put it David is that the Crimea is Russian again, and nobody seems to care all that much.. In fact the Sound Bite for the day is that Russia gave it to Ukraine in 1954 and it should be no surprise that they just took it back..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Just looking at the world headlines right now it seems that the New Norm as you put it David is that the Crimea is Russian again, and nobody seems to care all that much.. In fact the Sound Bite for the day is that Russia gave it to Ukraine in 1954 and it should be no surprise that they just took it back..

---

I can't wait till they get to the historical significance of it being the Russian birthplace of Christendom. :)


Let's hope they don't eh lol... then all hell will break out lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Just looking at the world headlines right now it seems that the New Norm as you put it David is that the Crimea is Russian again, and nobody seems to care all that much.. In fact the Sound Bite for the day is that Russia gave it to Ukraine in 1954 and it should be no surprise that they just took it back..

---

Shakespeare MUCH TO DO ABOUT NOTHING

There are many reasons for war. Money is only one of them. Often times it's about power and often times it's about hate.

The only thing I know is it looks to me like the world is going to hell in a handbasket. I think the Human Race is entering a very critical period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There are many reasons for war. Money is only one of them. Often times it's about power and often times it's about hate.

The only thing I know is it looks to me like the world is going to hell in a handbasket. I think the Human Race is entering a very critical period.

---

My feelings Exactally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Just looking at the world headlines right now it seems that the New Norm as you put it David is that the Crimea is Russian again, and nobody seems to care all that much.. In fact the Sound Bite for the day is that Russia gave it to Ukraine in 1954 and it should be no surprise that they just took it back..

---

Russia taking it and nobody much caring, if that is as far as it goes, should not surprise anyone.

Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobH

Russia taking it and nobody much caring, if that is as far as it goes, should not surprise anyone.

Bob

---

Just the way it should be,let them sort it out,let us keep our nose out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There are many reasons for war. Money is only one of them. Often times it's about power and often times it's about hate.

The only thing I know is it looks to me like the world is going to hell in a handbasket. I think the Human Race is entering a very critical period.

---

Not even trying to be funny - not at all but... every generation has said that throughout the history of man lol!! Every generation.

Keep positive my friend... and the world will be positive with you.

It is not strictly about money. Ukraine is heavily subsidized by Russia, that's why there is no alternative to it staying under Russian influence.

It is about restoring Russia to it's former superpower status - that is the legacy Putin wants and he thinks it is achievable. He just spent more money on a winter olympics than all former winter olympics combined.

Of course, extracting money is far easier when you are super power, so the long term strategy is very meaningful.

Then Putin is a KGB officer, he is actually a bit of the opposite of the macho image that he has been cultivating recently - he is reserved, calculating, and cautious.

He is most certainly not going to give control over Crimea any more than US would give control over Guam. I think this has been a base point in everybody's calculation no matter which side they are on.

Then there are the historic ties between Russia and Ukraine - the political and religious origins of Russia are in Kiev. Even a superficial familiarity with the history of that region is enough for the conclusion that Putin is not going to go to war with Ukraine.

So, what should be the US policy? Americans notoriously want everything to be simple, regardless of whether it is or it isn't. Either 'go all in' or 'stay the hell out of there'. In my view this is a serious flaw. There is a continuum of possible engagements and the extremes, while easy to understand are rarely the optimum.
If US wants to 'stand' for something meaningful it can not simply shrug it off as somebody else's problem. There were demonstrations against a corrupt, authoritarian, and kleptocratic government which lasted months, and close to 100 people were killed. The demonstrators vary from neo-facists, to nationalists, to democtats. At the end the government ceded control and left the country. A separate country pretty much annexed an autonomous region just because it could do it with impunity.
Brushing all this off as 'not my concern' is simply un-american in the sense that if you do it then you do not deserve hot dogs, beer, and fireworks come 4th of July.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There are many reasons for war. Money is only one of them. Often times it's about power and often times it's about hate.

The only thing I know is it looks to me like the world is going to hell in a handbasket. I think the Human Race is entering a very critical period.

---

You know if you look back in history this world has been going to hell in a hand basket since the beginning of recorded time. The only difference is the news media. and they are bias us.
depending on which news media you watch and there political out look. just my thoughts on the mater. and I don't why the US should send money to that country either. It just doesn't make since to borrow money to give away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

Just the way it should be,let them sort it out,let us keep our nose out of it.

---

Wasn't advocating anything either way, just amazed that the outcome, so far, would surprise anyone.

Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gugi

.
Brushing all this off as 'not my concern' is simply un-american in the sense that if you do it then you do not deserve hot dogs, beer, and fireworks come 4th of July.

---

The US has a rich history of isolationism, in fact many Americans wanted nothing to do with WW2, until Pearl Harbor which some say Roosevelt pushed Japan into, but that is even more conspiracy theory...
So to imply that the US saying "It is not our concern" is somehow un-American is simply not true, it is actually very American. Looking back at US history it seems the worst move we ever made was it become involved with the UN :hmmm:

The world is however a much entangled place, with many strings going to many places, and ties attached to those strings, so it might no longer be possible for the US to sit back and watch...


http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1601.html

Man - so after watching this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5CpgaEnCo

It seems the Canadians think this all about oil... sigh.

Black Sea/Caspian oil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Just looking at the world headlines right now it seems that the New Norm as you put it David is that the Crimea is Russian again, and nobody seems to care all that much.. In fact the Sound Bite for the day is that Russia gave it to Ukraine in 1954 and it should be no surprise that they just took it back..

---

Crimea is like Texas in that regard. Much like the US decided that it was going to own Texas, Russia may decide that it owns Crimea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

So to imply that the US saying "It is not our concern" is somehow un-American is simply not true, it is actually very American.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Looking back at US history it seems the worst move we ever made was it become involved with the UN :hmmm:

---

Nah. Today's world is one of entanglement. The US is far too dependent on the rest to ride an isolationist course. Given that, the only choice the US could have made was to not become one of the inner circle UN members, and thus not be on the security council or have veto power in a body that includes pretty much all other countries.

Once the US became, arguably, the Global Superpower post WWII the idea of isolationism became a non option. As was not being a permanent member of the UN Security Council a non option. That went with the territory of becoming the Superpower.

Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

The US has a rich history of isolationism, in fact many Americans wanted nothing to do with WW2, until Pearl Harbor which some say Roosevelt pushed Japan into, but that is even more conspiracy theory...
So to imply that the US saying "It is not our concern" is somehow un-American is simply not true, it is actually very American.

---

Yes, US also has a rich history of slavery and genocide. Usually on 4th of July americans celebrate the aspirations from the declaration of independence, the ideals that all human beings are created equal and injustices should be righted instead of looking the other way. That is why I didn't imply but explicitly stated that when one makes the choice to ignore the principles this country is supposedly founded upon it is un-american, regardless of how often the same choice has been made throughout the relatively short us history.

There are realities and what is possible, but there are also values and ideals to aspire to not just in big words on 4th of july.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earcutter

Man - so after watching this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5CpgaEnCo

It seems the Canadians think this all about oil... sigh.

---

I duuno, my take from that is that oil and gas may be a background issue and one of the many reasons for renewed Russian expansionism under Putin. Certainly not the sole or possibly main reason.

Apparently there are also large/huge shale gas fields in the eastern Ukraine estimated to be the 3rd largest in Europe. That region of the Ukraine, I believe, was pro Russian in the last election.

Shale gas in Poland and Ukraine: a great potential and an uncertain future

Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

There are many reasons for war. Money is only one of them. Often times it's about power and often times it's about hate.

---

War often seems to be the result when those who hate or lust for power convince the wealthy and powerful that there is money to be made.
Those ordinary folk who didn't pay attention in class, especially during history lessons, often facilitate the aspirations of the powerful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gugi

Yes, US also has a rich history of slavery and genocide. Usually on 4th of July americans celebrate the aspirations from the declaration of independence, the ideals that all human beings are created equal and injustices should be righted instead of looking the other way. That is why I didn't imply but explicitly stated that when one makes the choice to ignore the principles this country is supposedly founded upon it is un-american, regardless of how often the same choice has been made throughout the relatively short us history.

There are realities and what is possible, but there are also values and ideals to aspire to not just in big words on 4th of july.

---

George Washington

"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities."



Once again you are interpreting US history incorrectly, isolationism is our history, only since WW2 have we become embroiled in world affairs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

Nah. Today's world is one of entanglement. The US is far too dependent on the rest to ride an isolationist course. Given that, the only choice the US could have made was to not become one of the inner circle UN members, and thus not be on the security council or have veto power in a body that includes pretty much all other countries.

---

Yet without the US military the UN would have probably become irrelevant long ago in fact many argue that they already are..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobH

Once the US became, arguably, the Global Superpower post WWII the idea of isolationism became a non option. As was not being a permanent member of the UN Security Council a non option. That went with the territory of becoming the Superpower.

Bob

---

I think your are speaking of an older US, we now have a President that wants no part of the Super Power status, you have a citizenry that is in agreement for two separate reasons

The left agrees with the president in that we should no longer be a superpower, and the right agrees that this president should not be in control of a super power...
The American people are pretty hesitant to be involved..
Sooner or later that message will get through to our politicians...
I see a future more like our past, with the US slowly dis-entangling from the world other then for trade, perhaps a US more concerned with only her problems rather then the rest of the world...

I have read most of this thread quickly so I could have missed it but I do not remember seeing any mention of an agreement that was signed between the Ukraine and the US, the British, Germany and others back under Clinton. The agreement was for us (collectively) to protect Ukraine's sovereignty in return for them dis arming themselves and I believe that it was the tri-lateral disarmament treaty.

What happened to that?

Will N.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I think your are speaking of an older US, we now have a President that wants no part of the Super Power status, you have a citizenry that is in agreement for two separate reasons

The left agrees with the president in that we should no longer be a superpower, and the right agrees that this president should not be in control of a super power...
The American people are pretty hesitant to be involved..
Sooner or later that message will get through to our politicians...
I see a future more like our past, with the US slowly dis-entangling from the world other then for trade, perhaps a US more concerned with only her problems rather then the rest of the world...

---

I don't think it really matters what the US wants or it's president or the lefties or righties want. It is a case of tag you are it. That is until you shrink your military to the size of, say, ours and I don't see that happening. As long as The US has big global trading interests/ambitions and has to protect them there is little room for neo isolationism. Lastly there is the threat of terrorism to be dealt with globally.

Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillN

I have read most of this thread quickly so I could have missed it but I do not remember seeing any mention of an agreement that was signed between the Ukraine and the US, the British, Germany and others back under Clinton. The agreement was for us (collectively) to protect Ukraine's sovereignty in return for them dis arming themselves and I believe that it was the tri-lateral disarmament treaty.

What happened to that?

Will N.

---

The American and British treaty with the Ukraine brought to light - Wilmington Conservative | Examiner.com

Many links and tons of other opinions are already out there


here is the actual wording

https://www.msz.gov.pl/en/p/wiedenob...printMode=true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RezDog

Yup Canada is going to send our SeaKings over there.

---

or Maple Syrup and Beer!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Once again you are interpreting US history incorrectly, isolationism is our history, only since WW2 have we become embroiled in world affairs...

---

US soldiers did fight in WWI. That said US history doesn't go very far back. The desk that this computer sits on and the house that it is in both pre-date the USA's existence as an independent nation by more than a hundred years. The British joke is that we ran the world before you did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welshwizard

US soldiers did fight in WWI. That said US history doesn't go very far back. The desk that this computer sits on and the house that it is in both pre-date the USA's existence as an independent nation by more than a hundred years. The British joke is that we ran the world before you did.

---

From the link I posted above, contained in the WW1 section




"Germany's unfettered submarine warfare against American ships during World War I provoked the U.S. into abandoning the neutrality it had upheld for so many years. The country's resultant participation in World War I against the Central Powers marked its first major departure from isolationist policy. When the war ended, however, the United States was quick to leave behind its European commitment. Regardless of President Woodrow Wilson's efforts, the Senate repudiated the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war, and the United States failed to become a member of the League of Nations.

German sub sinks US ship Indeed, isolationism would persist for a few more decades. During the 1920s, American foreign affairs took a back seat. In addition, America tended to insulate itself in terms of trade. Tariffs were imposed on foreign goods to shield U.S. manufacturers.

America turned its back on Europe by restricting the number of immigrants permitted into the country. Until World War I, millions of people, mostly from Europe, had come to America to seek their fortune and perhaps flee poverty and persecution. Britons and Irishmen, Germans and Jews constituted the biggest groups. In 1921 the relatively liberal policy ended and quotas were introduced. By 1929 only 150,000 immigrants per year were allowed in.

During the 1920s and 1930s, the preponderance of Americans remained opposed to enmeshment in Europe's alliances and wars. Isolationism was solid in hinterland and small-town America in the Midwest and Great Plains states, and among Republicans. It claimed numerous sympathizers among Irish- and German-Americans. William Jennings Bryan of Nebraska, Robert M. La Follette of Wisconsin, and George W. Norris of Nebraska were among western agrarian progressives who argued fervently against involvement. Assuming an us-versus-them stance, they castigated various eastern, urban elites for their engagement in European affairs"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I see a future more like our past, with the US slowly dis-entangling from the world other then for trade, perhaps a US more concerned with only her problems rather then the rest of the world...

---

From reading your posts, Those of you that are "Not American" it seems that Ivan's remark about "American's having an all in or all out attitude", might also apply around the world :shrug:

Note that I being President Glen, did not say "all out", you guys did ,,,


It seems that most of you are wanting American involvement in Ukraine and Crimea yet castigate what the US has done in the past, ie: Hep us, hep us, now go away and leave us alone" :nono:

The EU has still not made a move other than to say it would welcome Ukrainian trade and recognize a legitimate Government... (That I have seen so far) Looks like once again the UN will resolute themselves into doing nothing... Time will of course tell, but Putin's speech yesterday seemed to calm the region, if stocks are an indicator anyway...

I guess we shall wait and see

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Yet without the US military the UN would have probably become irrelevant long ago in fact many argue that they already are..

---

I disagree that the UN is irrelevant. I think the UN is a noble concept. I think at some basic level it is a great thing for countries to recognize that we're all in this together, so to speak. As long as individual countries think only of themselves, they will think of conquest. The UN is limited by what it can enforce. However, it provides an international forum for diplomacy. And while that is far, far from perfect, it is better than the olden days when every country with a bit of power was actively plotting to take over the world.

Time for a comical note :)

Thanks Bruno, the IT department will send you a bill for the computer I just spit coffee all over....LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruno

I disagree that the UN is irrelevant. I think the UN is a noble concept. I think at some basic level it is a great thing for countries to recognize that we're all in this together, so to speak. As long as individual countries think only of themselves, they will think of conquest. The UN is limited by what it can enforce. However, it provides an international forum for diplomacy. And while that is far, far from perfect, it is better than the olden days when every country with a bit of power was actively plotting to take over the world.

---

I would like to think the UN is a noble concept - at least it is in theory. I know it was an American President's pet project bla, bla, bla, and that the US resisted for a long time bla, bla, bla, BUT... I think what many forget (or I am just making this up), is that when the US decided they could use the UN to stop communist spread and peruse it's economic agenda with it, the U.S. went gangbusters with it. Of course, when the "big dog" sells the world on an idea, the rest follow.

It might sound bitter - and don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the UN, but lets call a spade a spade, the UN has been a tool utilized by the west to get what they want. America has benefited HUGE!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earcutter

I would like to think the UN is a noble concept - at least it is in theory. I know it was an American President's pet project bla, bla, bla, and that the US resisted for a long time bla, bla, bla, BUT... I think what many forget (or I am just making this up), is that when the US decided they could use the UN to stop communist spread and peruse it's economic agenda with it, the U.S. went gangbusters with it. Of course, when the "big dog" sells the world on an idea, the rest follow.

It might sound bitter - and don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the UN, but lets call a spade a spade, the UN has been a tool utilized by the west to get what they want. America has benefited HUGE!

---

I actually agree, but let's also add that America has paid HUGE too - in Gold and Blood, let's finish the sentence if we are calling a spade a spade shall we...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I actually agree, but let's also add that America has paid HUGE too - in Gold and Blood, let's finish the sentence if we are calling a spade a spade shall we...

---

No question about it. In the end we always try to turn things to our benefit. The US has benefited and still does, but also paid huge.