• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ukraine accuses Russia of Occupation calls for help from US/UK

VanceMack said:
Your problem is that you have the guy sitting in the White House TODAY that goes about threatening war and then drawing impotent 'red lines' and making empty threats.

I dont know if sending in the troops is the right answer. I DO know for certain that you cant threaten to hold your breath til you pass out as an effective foreign policy strategy. Obama is a limp moron and the world sees it and knows it.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

1924773_10151893666171384_803715717_n.jpg


Now I'm not certain that this is going to evolve into another cold war. It could, and Putin's KGB background and experience certainly plays into that. Perhaps it's what he's most comfortable with? But you have to admit the parallels between modern Ukraine and previous history's Czechoslovakia and Hungary is deeply disturbing.
 
Commie said:
I think it's a problem that he's threatening war in the first place! If he wasn't aware of what his staffers like Nuland were doing, he should have removed them as soon as possible afterwards. The Ukraine almost broke up in the immediate aftermath gaining independence in the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union. How did they not know that trying to pry the Ukraine out of the Russian orbit, would cause a break up?
Click to expand...
What? Obama? Aware of someone in his administration?

Shaggy...on in 3...2...1...roll it!

 
NIMBY said:
Rubio wants sanctions which will lead to a cold war with a top 5 member of the security council.
He and Cruz need to let the adults speak, like Buck McKeon, instead of expanding on their ignorance .
Click to expand...
Wait...Rubio is calling for the same thing Obama called for...and you hopscotched your CiC and attack Rubio?

Its ALWAYS the other guy...right? Even when it is YOUR guy...its the other guys fault. The other guy made you do it it. At WORST, you are offering comments from Rubio in SUPPORT of Obamas serious economic and political consequences threat.
 
Man of Context said:
Sending supplies would do absolutely nothing. I don't think Ukrainian soldiers will even try to stand up to Russian forces, whatever armaments we give them.

Mobilizing American naval and air forces is the only meaningful thing we can do to show Russia that we mean business, and to show the Ukrainian military that they aren't alone if war breaks out. This, I think, would stiffen Ukrainian resolve and weaken Russian resolve, enough that Russia withdraws.

Will that happen? Almost certainly not. Russia will come out on top in this, I think.

So much for winning the Cold War.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you are blaming Obama, but Americans are increasingly disinterested in spending blood and treasure in places around the world that aren't a threat to us. Syria proved this. It's a good thing too. And Russia is doing nothing different than the US has done so many times around the world.
 
PoS said:
MAD has kept the peace in Europe for half a century. Call this a crazy idea but if you want real world peace then every country, no matter how small, should be armed with hundreds of nukes, that way nobody would be dumb enough to start a war with one another.
Click to expand...

Yep, every country gets them, or no country gets them, and preferably nobody.
 
iguanaman said:
I can't believe you think this is all our fight since the Ukraine is right on Europe's doorstep. Saber rattling will only inflame the situation. NATO needs to make a statement and sanctions agreed upon. The best way to get to Putin is in his pocketbook and a embargo on Russian oil and natural gas will strangle the beast. This is not the USSR of the 1960's.
Click to expand...

Sanctions are an act of war, at least an invitation, of themselves. I don't think Putin has designs on Europe. This should be let alone.
 
The worst thing that can happen at this point for Ukraine is that the provisional government decides to take military action. I think Putin's strategy is that he hopes Ukraine launches an assault to try to drive the Russians out of the Crimea, and Russia can then use this as a casus belli to occupy the rest of the country and reinstate Yanukovych. Putin is counting on the West not intervening.
 
Montecresto said:
I don't know if you are blaming Obama, but Americans are increasingly disinterested in spending blood and treasure in places around the world that aren't a threat to us. Syria proved this. It's a good thing too. And Russia is doing nothing different than the US has done so many times around the world.
Click to expand...

It is sad that I have to preface this question by saying this is a question, but here it is....I have now read this quote from you Monte several times, and it suggests that you are excusing Putin for inserting troops into the Ukraine based on the fact that America in your eyes has done the same in the past, thus giving Putin a pass for doing so. Why, if you are to be intellectually honest, would you do that?
 
Man of Context said:
Ukraine IS Europe, and if I believed Europe to be politically capable of dealing with this issue I would see things differently.

But Europe is barely politically capable of holding together what amounts to little more than a free trade agreement.

Like modern America, Europe is far more likely to cede either swathes of Ukrainian territory to Russia or political control of Ukraine to pro-Russians. They won't fight for Ukraine.



Sanctions would be more harmful for European members of NATO than they would be for Russia. Any serious sanctions will gain no political traction in Europe. Even if they did, I think that Putin really thinks that he can make Russia a real player in global politics again, and who knows what he's willing to risk for that vision.

Regarding inflammation of the situation, allowing Russia to invade it's neighbors without any serious action taken against them is really what'll inflame the situation. The Russians need to come to understand that they'll never have the same geopolitical influence they once did. Only then can the situation really cool down.



If "the beast" is what little remains of European unity, sure.
Click to expand...

It's difficult to dogmatically state what the Ukraine IS. It has been voluntarily under Russian control, under the kingdom of Poland by conquest, independent, under Russian control by force, briefly independent, and may come under control of Russia again by force. It's no traditional European country.
 
j-mac said:
It is sad that I have to preface this question by saying this is a question, but here it is....I have now read this quote from you Monte several times, and it suggests that you are excusing Putin for inserting troops into the Ukraine based on the fact that America in your eyes has done the same in the past, thus giving Putin a pass for doing so. Why, if you are to be intellectually honest, would you do that?
Click to expand...

I'm not excusing force ever even though you argue it's the world we live in and necessary. It's not an excuse as much as an acknowledgement that powerful nations do what think is in their own best interests with no regard to individual liberty. But my main point was that neither Russia nor the Ukraine is a threat to the US and I don't want our blood and treasure spent defending it. ESPECIALLY if it meant engaging Russia, for a group of Ukrainian protesters. I'm glad that a majority of Americans no longer feel the need for the US to intervene every time there's a protest aimed at toppling a government. And it's not an absence of sympathy towards the human desire for liberty, no more than Americans lacked sympathy for those hitler was attacking in the late 30's early 40's. it's just that not all Americans want the US to jump in the middle of every dispute around the world.
 
This is how WWII began.
 
Graffias said:
The worst thing that can happen at this point for Ukraine is that the provisional government decides to take military action. I think Putin's strategy is that he hopes Ukraine launches an assault to try to drive the Russians out of the Crimea, and Russia can then use this as a casus belli to occupy the rest of the country and reinstate Yanukovych. Putin is counting on the West not intervening.
Click to expand...

Good, nor should they. This will end quicker, with less loss of life if the US at least tends to its own business. Russia can handle this.
 
Montecresto said:
I don't know if you are blaming Obama, but Americans are increasingly disinterested in spending blood and treasure in places around the world that aren't a threat to us.
Click to expand...

We convinced Ukraine to surrender their nuclear weapons under the belief that we'd defend them in the case of a Russian attack.

Being hegemon is a responsibility that shouldn't be taken lightly. Allowing major regional powers to invade their neighbors is bad for everyone.

And Russia is doing nothing different than the US has done so many times around the world.
Click to expand...

It's been some time since America has engaged in a war of conquest. Something like a century.

Montecresto said:
Sanctions are an act of war, at least an invitation, of themselves. I don't think Putin has designs on Europe. This should be let alone.
Click to expand...

You don't think Putin has designs on Europe?

He's invading Ukraine as we speak. I suspect the Baltic states to be next.

The Russians peoples are Europeans, just like their Slavic brothers in the Czech Republic or Croatia. I don't know where you get any idea to the contrary from.
 
DDD said:
Chechnya was too extreme Muslim. Georgia had East Timor and the other place which were predominantly Russian thereby the lands also belong to the Russian government irrelevant of Georgia's integrity. Now Ukrainian Crimea is also predominantly Russian thereby it too belongs to the Russian government.

Are we not finding excuses always not to help these places? Then wonder why they work with Russians and sometimes against our interests?

Ukraine is in crossroads. It has either Russia or EU to join. If not helped when needed they could fall and then work with Russia against our interests.
Click to expand...

You are thinking of South Ossetia and Abkhazia which are culturally distinct from Georgia fought wars of independence from Georgia, and were ruled as defacto independent states from 1995 or so

As for Crimea, I expect it will be declared independent from Ukraine and be given protection by Russia
 
Montecresto said:
It's difficult to dogmatically state what the Ukraine IS.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. It's in Eastern Europe.

It has been voluntarily under Russian control,
Click to expand...

Actually, it was Russia. For several hundred years Kiev was central to Russian culture until the Mongol invasions, when the torch was passed to Novgorod.

under the kingdom of Poland by conquest,
Click to expand...

Properly, under the Kingdom of Lithuania by conquest, held in that manner for nearly 200 years under the personal rule of the King of Poland and Lithuania, which would finally become the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

All of which means nothing. The Ukraine, like all the Russias, is European.

independent, under Russian control by force, briefly independent, and may come under control of Russia again by force. It's no traditional European country.[/QUOTE]
 
Man of Context said:
We convinced Ukraine to surrender their nuclear weapons under the belief that we'd defend them in the case of a Russian attack.

Being hegemon is a responsibility that shouldn't be taken lightly. Allowing major regional powers to invade their neighbors is bad for everyone.



It's been some time since America has engaged in a war of conquest. Something like a century.



You don't think Putin has designs on Europe?

He's invading Ukraine as we speak. I suspect the Baltic states to be next.

The Russians peoples are Europeans, just like their Slavic brothers in the Czech Republic or Croatia. I don't know where you get any idea to the contrary from.
Click to expand...

I would prefer that we STOP making such assurances and that all countries have nukes, or no countries have them and would prefer that no country have them.

I don't approve of US hegemony, and disagree with you that the US hasn't been involved in wars of conquest, right up to the present.

No, I don't think Putin has designs on Europe, and he's not in the Ukraine because he does. He's in the Ukraine because their was civil unrest, a toppling of the Ukrainian government and Russian ports and other assets are at risk, the country borders Russia and nobody likes an unstable country on their border, he's doing nothing that the US hasn't/wouldn't do and we should mind our own business! But I know you boys don't like being told that.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
You are thinking of South Ossetia and Abkhazia which are culturally distinct from Georgia fought wars of independence from Georgia, and were ruled as defacto independent states from 1995 or so

As for Crimea, I expect it will be declared independent from Ukraine and be given protection by Russia
Click to expand...

Why exactly would Russia declare it independent? Remember that the whole pretext here is that old European notion that people of a certain nationality should share a single government, that same pretext which lead to a century of bloody European warfare.

Ukraine is culturally Russian. Whether or not this ought to put them under the control of Moscow is the real question.
 
Montecresto said:
Are you predicting WW111? Do you think Putin has designs beyond the Ukraine?
Click to expand...

Having the Ukraine is the difference between Russia being a top world power or not. It is that vital to Russia's overall unique power.

Likely Putin would be happy with "just" it, which a bit like saying Germany would be happy with "just" France. The Ukraine is massive and with a huge population.

No, I do not anticipate WW3 out of this because I do not expect the USA to do anything about it but bitch. What I anticipate happening is worldwide nuclear proliferation as counties are left with no other real choice for national self defense.

I anticipate, to some degree, another arms race and another Cold War, plus militarization rather than demilitarization. An increase in terrorism.

They made a terrible mistake giving up their nuclear weapons trusting the USA and Britain. They will effectively lose the most lucrative regions of their country as a result of such foolishness.
 
Last edited:
Man of Context said:
Why exactly would Russia declare it independent? Remember that the whole pretext here is that old European notion that people of a certain nationality should share a single government, that same pretext which lead to a century of bloody European warfare.

Ukraine is culturally Russian. Whether or not this ought to put them under the control of Moscow is the real question.
Click to expand...

Historically Ukrainians liked killing Russians more than anyone else.
 
Man of Context said:
No, it's not. It's in Eastern Europe.



Actually, it was Russia. For several hundred years Kiev was central to Russian culture until the Mongol invasions, when the torch was passed to Novgorod.



Properly, under the Kingdom of Lithuania by conquest, held in that manner for nearly 200 years under the personal rule of the King of Poland and Lithuania, which would finally become the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

All of which means nothing. The Ukraine, like all the Russias, is European.

independent, under Russian control by force, briefly independent, and may come under control of Russia again by force. It's no traditional European country.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Again! It's no traditional European country. Putin will have this problem solved swiftly, with far less loss of life then if the US intervenes.
 
joko104 said:
This is how WWII began.
Click to expand...

No, it's OK. Putin clarified his actions. All he wants is a little lebensraum.

All we need now is for Obama to assure us that there will be peace in our time and we can all breathe a sigh of relief.
 
joko104 said:
Having the Ukraine is the difference between Russia being a top world power or not. It is that vital to Russia's overall unique power.

Likely Putin would be happy with "just" it, which a bit like saying Germany would be happy with "just" France. The Ukraine is massive and with a huge population.

No, I do not anticipate WW3 out of this because I do not expect the USA to do anything about it but bitch. What I anticipate happening is worldwide nuclear proliferation as counties are left with no other real choice for national self defense.

They made a terrible mistake giving up their nuclear weapons trusting the USA and Britain. They will effectively lose the most lucrative regions of their country as a result of such foolishness.
Click to expand...

I basically agree. Everybody needs nukes if anybody has nukes.
 
Montecresto said:
I would prefer that we STOP making such assurances and that all countries have nukes, or no countries have them and would prefer that no country have them.
Click to expand...

Preferences don't rewrite history. We DID make those assurances.

I don't approve of US hegemony, and disagree with you that the US hasn't been involved in wars of conquest, right up to the present.
Click to expand...

In which case you should look up the word "conquest".

No, I don't think Putin has designs on Europe, and he's not in the Ukraine because he does.
Click to expand...

Putin is in the process of conquering parts of the Ukraine. He certainly has designs on Europe, and he's acting on those designs right this second.

He's in the Ukraine because their was civil unrest, a toppling of the Ukrainian government and Russian ports and other assets are at risk, the country borders Russia and nobody likes an unstable country on their border, he's doing nothing that the US hasn't/wouldn't do and we should mind our own business! But I know you boys don't like being told that.
Click to expand...

These are fantastic pretexts, except this isn't all they're using. Russian nationalism is the predominant pretext. These territories are largely Russian speaking, and thus should be under Russian control, by their thinking.

You'll recognize this pretext if you study 19th and 20th century European history.
 
Montecresto said:
Are you predicting WW111? Do you think Putin has designs beyond the Ukraine?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is predicting WWIII just yet, but a this is the same kind of power vacuum and limp diplomacy that we saw in the 1930s that emboldened Japan and Germany and hastened WWII.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom