• 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!

Kremlin Clears Way for Force in Ukraine; Separatist Split Feared

And in doing so makes us look weak and impotent.

Nope, to the rest of the world, it makes us look sensible.

Only makes us look weak to the warmongering right wing loons who get their "knowledge" of the world from FauxNews and rush limbaugh.

True, it's childish to threaten force and not back it up (i. e. speak loudly and carry a twig), but O has no choice; as a pol, he has to pacify the mindless warmongering right wing loons in Red State America, or else they'll go crazy.

A POTUS stating "there will be consequences" is no different than an Iranian President threatening to "destroy Israel"--just political fluff to keep the ignorant, hateful right wing masses in one's country quiet, like giving a baby his bottle.
 
Hmm..Russia invades Georgia and takes territories from them, now they are doing the same with Ukraine.

Right, but what rush limbaugh never told you was that the region in Georgia Putin seized--south Ossetia--was staunchly pro-Russian, so the invasion was actually welcomed by those people.

Ethnic Ossetians and Russians living in South Ossetia nearly unanimously approved a referendum on 12 November 2006 opting for independence from Georgia. The referendum was hugely popular, winning between 98 and 99 percent of the ballots, flag waving and celebration marked were seen across South Ossetia, but elsewhere observers were less enthusiastic.

South Ossetia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crimea is no different; it's largely pro-Russian.
 
Right, but what rush limbaugh never told you was that the region in Georgia Putin seized--south Ossetia--was staunchly pro-Russian, so the invasion was actually welcomed by those people.

Crimea is no different; it's largely pro-Russian.

A region's stance does not change the sovereignty of their nation, if Texans for example were mostly pro-secession would you expect the rest of the Union to simply accept that and let them go? How about the entire south?
 
A region's stance does not change the sovereignty of their nation, if Texans for example were mostly pro-secession would you expect the rest of the Union to simply accept that and let them go? How about the entire south?

Nothing would make educated Americans happier than for TX and its southern limbaugh-addicted red state brethren to secede from the Union :)
 
Right, but what rush limbaugh never told you was that the region in Georgia Putin seized--south Ossetia--was staunchly pro-Russian, so the invasion was actually welcomed by those people.

1: I don't listen to Rush. The only radio I listen to is a country station and then because its the only station that isn't some religious talk show or heavy metal crap...and even then I only listen to it on my 5 minute drive to work.

2: That is idiotic reasoning to invade another country's sovereignty. Would you support Mexico invading the US because a part of it was staunchly pro-Mexico? How about China invading the US because there's a segment that is staunchly pro-China? How about N. Korea invading a part of S. Korea because there is a small segment that is Pro-N. Korea? Oh wait...there are a lot of Pro-American folks out there in the world...should we invade all of the countries segments that house those people? Your arguement here has to be the weakest and lamest arguement that I have ever witnessed on these boards.

3: I noticed that you failed to address the very real fact that Russia is bound by treaty to NOT invade and take other countries territories.
 
Nothing would make educated Americans happier than for TX and its southern limbaugh-addicted red state brethren to secede from the Union :)

Until they took all that oil and agriculture with them, not to mention of America's largest and safest ports.
 
Right, but what rush limbaugh never told you was that the region in Georgia Putin seized--south Ossetia--was staunchly pro-Russian, so the invasion was actually welcomed by those people.



Crimea is no different; it's largely pro-Russian.

That's how Hitler justified invading Poland and Czechoslovakia.
 
Service men and troops are not quite the same thing.

Ramstein is an Air Force bas the vast majority of people there are essentially uniformed airport staff.

We have no combat troops any where close to the Ukraine

Fine, but NATO was created for specifically this purpose and we are not the only nation in NATO
 
Uh lol? Okay? Are you upset that I said it was funny that Europe thinks it's in a post violence world? lol

I think you have a negative attitude and this situation in Ukraine is concerning to me. We can talk about European pacifism another day.
 
And in doing so makes us look weak and impotent. He should have said nothing if he had no intention of following it up.

This is the problem-how many times has he had his bluff called? He's lost credibility and squandered his political capital. Im ashamed at how easily the world punks our president. He's truly out of his league.
 
Hmm..Russia invades Georgia and takes territories from them, now they are doing the same with Ukraine.

Now last I knew Russia was signatory to the UN Charter and the Geneva Convention. Now I can't remember which one has it but one of those has a clause in it that prohibits taking over another countries territory. Which means they are violating treaties. Why is this being allowed?

Who's going to stop them?
 
Nope, to the rest of the world, it makes us look sensible.

Only makes us look weak to the warmongering right wing loons who get their "knowledge" of the world from FauxNews and rush limbaugh.

True, it's childish to threaten force and not back it up (i. e. speak loudly and carry a twig), but O has no choice; as a pol, he has to pacify the mindless warmongering right wing loons in Red State America, or else they'll go crazy.

A POTUS stating "there will be consequences" is no different than an Iranian President threatening to "destroy Israel"--just political fluff to keep the ignorant, hateful right wing masses in one's country quiet, like giving a baby his bottle.

This is a rather myopic view on diplomacy.
 
Right, but what rush limbaugh never told you was that the region in Georgia Putin seized--south Ossetia--was staunchly pro-Russian, so the invasion was actually welcomed by those people.



Crimea is no different; it's largely pro-Russian.

That does not matter-change from within is one thing-inviting another nation to invade is entirely another. There were pro-nazi Poles and pro-soviet poles in WW2.
 
1: I don't listen to Rush. The only radio I listen to is a country station and then because its the only station that isn't some religious talk show or heavy metal crap...and even then I only listen to it on my 5 minute drive to work.

2: That is idiotic reasoning to invade another country's sovereignty. Would you support Mexico invading the US because a part of it was staunchly pro-Mexico? How about China invading the US because there's a segment that is staunchly pro-China? How about N. Korea invading a part of S. Korea because there is a small segment that is Pro-N. Korea? Oh wait...there are a lot of Pro-American folks out there in the world...should we invade all of the countries segments that house those people? Your arguement here has to be the weakest and lamest arguement that I have ever witnessed on these boards.

3: I noticed that you failed to address the very real fact that Russia is bound by treaty to NOT invade and take other countries territories.

The US govt. has zero credibility when it comes to lecturing other nations about international law and territorial sovereignty, since it continues its practice of repeatedly bombing and invading other countries that don't attack the US.

It's also lamentable that US taxpayer dollars are being used to fund/subsidize Russian opposition groups in the Ukraine, another thing you won't hear rush or the mainstream media talk about.

Putin's actions were wrong--he should have pursued a diplomatic sol'n that took into account the will of the Ukrainian people as well as those in Crimea before deciding to use force, but Putin has demonstrated a pattern of always preferring to use force.

But the key issue here is that the story isn't as one-sided as the fauxnews commentators and rush, hannity, etc. want to portray--Russia is not invading a region because it's just a mean 'ol country that likes to take advantage of people; rather, their invasion has largely been welcomed by Crimeans. That wouldn't be such a big deal, except for the fact that those aforementioned media personalities/outlets are the only source from which conservatives get their world view.
 
That does not matter-change from within is one thing-inviting another nation to invade is entirely another. There were pro-nazi Poles and pro-soviet poles in WW2.

It's also completely different when the individuals largely in favor of the invading forces occupy a geographically separate, mostly autonomous region, as is the case in Crimea.

That was not the case in Poland, so the analogy is false.
 
This is the problem-how many times has he had his bluff called? He's lost credibility and squandered his political capital. Im ashamed at how easily the world punks our president. He's truly out of his league.

Smart people already knew that Obama's talk about red lines, threats to Iran, etc., was cheap; there's nothing surprising there :rolleyes:

We knew this because Obama is sensible and never had any intention of doing anything about Iran's nuclear program, or about the internal conflict in Syria. The only reason he said, and continues to say "there will be consequences, they've crossed a red line, we cannot allow", etc. is just to pacify Red State America. That's it.

The tough talk, even if it's cheap, is like a security blanket for these folk, who are just scared of anything they don't understand and just want the US military to "kick butt" everywhere.
 
A region's stance does not change the sovereignty of their nation, if Texans for example were mostly pro-secession would you expect the rest of the Union to simply accept that and let them go? How about the entire south?

Good 'ol TX--the selective freedom state--where you can carry a gun anywhere but you can't buy a Tesla.
 
Last edited:
The US govt. has zero credibility when it comes to lecturing other nations about international law and territorial sovereignty, since it continues its practice of repeatedly bombing and invading other countries that don't attack the US.

It's also lamentable that US taxpayer dollars are being used to fund/subsidize Russian opposition groups in the Ukraine, another thing you won't hear rush or the mainstream media talk about.

Putin's actions were wrong--he should have pursued a diplomatic sol'n that took into account the will of the Ukrainian people as well as those in Crimea before deciding to use force, but Putin has demonstrated a pattern of always preferring to use force.

But the key issue here is that the story isn't as one-sided as the fauxnews commentators and rush, hannity, etc. want to portray--Russia is not invading a region because it's just a mean 'ol country that likes to take advantage of people; rather, their invasion has largely been welcomed by Crimeans. That wouldn't be such a big deal, except for the fact that those aforementioned media personalities/outlets are the only source from which conservatives get their world view.

What has this got to do with republicans? Or Democrats? Or any political party for that matter? Your continuous use of mentioning rush, "faux" news, hannity etc etc is about nothing more than your political bias showing and is an attempt at nothing more than downgrading anyone that doesn't see it your way. Sorry but thats not going to work with me. I don't like either party.

To the next point. Is the US all angelic and innocent? HELLZ NO! But that is no excuse to allow Russia to occupy another countries territory. So trying to play the old "but X is no better so you shouldn't be saying anything" game is not going to get you anywheres.

Third point. If the Crimeaians want to be a part of Russia and agree with Russian policies then they should move to Russia. Using them as an excuse to take over another country's territory is pathetic and opens up a whole can of worms that no sane country or individual really wants. That should be obvious considering this is the second time that Russia is trying to take over another country's territory on the same premise.
 
What has this got to do with republicans? Or Democrats? Or any political party for that matter? Your continuous use of mentioning rush, "faux" news, hannity etc etc is about nothing more than your political bias showing and is an attempt at nothing more than downgrading anyone that doesn't see it your way. Sorry but thats not going to work with me. I don't like either party.

To the next point. Is the US all angelic and innocent? HELLZ NO! But that is no excuse to allow Russia to occupy another countries territory. So trying to play the old "but X is no better so you shouldn't be saying anything" game is not going to get you anywheres.

Third point. If the Crimeaians want to be a part of Russia and agree with Russian policies then they should move to Russia. Using them as an excuse to take over another country's territory is pathetic and opens up a whole can of worms that no sane country or individual really wants. That should be obvious considering this is the second time that Russia is trying to take over another country's territory on the same premise.

As a practical matter, there's nothing Obama can do about it and that's largely not because of Obama's policies but because of the stupidity of Congress (mostly the GOP, but Congress in general) and its pro-Zionist leanings.

Yes, that's correct. If Obama does something to try to deter Russia (sanctions, freezing of assets of high-ranking Russian officials, businessmen), all Russia has to do is turn around and deliver its latest, greatest air-defense systems (S-4) to Iran.

And voila, Congress will back down and retract the freezes, sanctions, etc. because it's soooooooo desperate to do anything at all to coddle the Israeli regime. So the US govt. doesn't really care about international law, invasions, etc.; it really just cares about propping up the aggressive Israeli regime and defending its interests at all costs, and because Putin knows that, he has an ace in the hole--you do anything to me, I'll make Iran's life easier.

And that's the fundamental problem--the reason why the US is seen as weak on the international stage. In the past 50 years, in spite of its bellicose pro-freedom rhetoric, the US govt. has demonstrated by its actions that it doesn't really care about freedom; it just cares about maintaining its oil interests and the Israeli regime at all costs and uses "fighting for freedom, democracy" as a ruse to make its invasions popular among the gullible US public.
 
Back
Top Bottom