View Poll Results: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

Voters
76. You may not vote on this poll
  • NATO

    18 23.68%
  • UN

    7 9.21%
  • EU

    10 13.16%
  • USA

    11 14.47%
  • Russia

    10 13.16%
  • Ukraine

    9 11.84%
  • Nobody

    33 43.42%
  • Santa / Ded Moroz

    3 3.95%
  • Other

    3 3.95%
  • None of my business

    11 14.47%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 101

Thread: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Now that the tension around Ukraine is rising, who do you think is justified sending troops in Crimea, Ukraine?

    Putin proposes to send Russian armed forces to Ukraine | Reuters

  2. #2
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,036

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    Now that the tension around Ukraine is rising, who do you think is justified sending troops in Crimea, Ukraine?

    Putin proposes to send Russian armed forces to Ukraine | Reuters
    Nyet. Not us.

    There's a reason why Russia never sent troops to any of the places we bombed over the last twenty years: because it would erupt into a needlessly giant ****storm that no one wants.

  3. #3
    User Politicalunrest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 11:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    89
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Totally agree Carinal... no one should send troops in to another sovereign country unless asked by their government, or the government has become completely illegitimate through mass murder or other crimes against humanity, and even then interference is iffy at best.

    Besides russia seems to be taking action similar to Nazi Germany right before WW2 officially started with france and britten entering the fight. Taking up first thsoe places that were "Ethnically" and "historically" german, in this case russian, and then expanding on that each time saying " we will stop after this" and then ignoring any peace treaty or agreement afterwords. I hope the world has learned Appeasement never works. First Georgia, now Ukraine.
    Always remember... God Loves you.

    Good Luck

  4. #4
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,036

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Politicalunrest View Post
    Totally agree Carinal... no one should send troops in to another sovereign country unless asked by their government, or the government has become completely illegitimate through mass murder or other crimes against humanity, and even then interference is iffy at best.

    Besides russia seems to be taking action similar to Nazi Germany right before WW2 officially started with france and britten entering the fight. Taking up first thsoe places that were "Ethnically" and "historically" german, in this case russian, and then expanding on that each time saying " we will stop after this" and then ignoring any peace treaty or agreement afterwords. I hope the world has learned Appeasement never works. First Georgia, now Ukraine.
    Poor analogy. NATO, nuclear weapons and mutually assured destruction exist as much now as they did at any time during the Cold War. If those things existed in 1939 there wouldn't have been a WWII.

    Why do you think Russia went nuts over the previous Soviet bloc nations that joined NATO?
    Last edited by Cardinal; 03-01-14 at 11:31 AM.

  5. #5
    Minister of Love
    PoS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Oceania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,955

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    I hope not because if we do it will have to be a NATO undertaking and thats gonna involved a lot of talks before that even happens. Also, I dont think it will happen because it seems to me Obama is pretty timid as far as this crisis has gone so far- and he's the only one with enough influence to cobble together a coalition to get this through politically.

    Also, unless the Ukrainian military fragments along ethnic lines like Yugoslavia did I think the most they will be asking for is shipments of ammo and money- a united Ukrainian military can bloody the Russians if they have the will to do it.

  6. #6
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,036

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Quote Originally Posted by PoS View Post
    I hope not because if we do it will have to be a NATO undertaking and thats gonna involved a lot of talks before that even happens. Also, I dont think it will happen because it seems to me Obama is pretty timid as far as this crisis has gone so far- and he's the only one with enough influence to cobble together a coalition to get this through politically.

    Also, unless the Ukrainian military fragments along ethnic lines like Yugoslavia did I think the most they will be asking for is shipments of ammo and money- a united Ukrainian military can bloody the Russians if they have the will to do it.
    See, that's the problem with waging wars against vastly inferior militaries for the last forty years: people have gotten to thinking wars are really easy and that the worst we'll have to encounter is guerrilla fighting after the three day post-bombing high. Only an increasingly aging generation can remember a time when we faced off against a worthy adversary.
    Last edited by Cardinal; 03-01-14 at 12:04 PM.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?


  8. #8
    User Politicalunrest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 11:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    89
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    Poor analogy. NATO, nuclear weapons and mutually assured destruction exist as much now as they did at any time during the Cold War. If those things existed in 1939 there wouldn't have been a WWII.

    Why do you think Russia went nuts over the previous Soviet bloc nations that joined NATO?
    With the exception of a complete Mutually Assured Destruction, and a FORMAL Nato, and FORMAL UN, we did have international groups in place such as the League of nations the predecessor to the UN, and it was believed that if another world war happened that due to technology it would last so long that most of the worlds population would be destroyed and / or starve afterwords.... Though this didn't happen exactly a large portion of the world did end up dead, and / or starving after ww2. So at the time there was a form of MAD just not so immediate. as for NATO, there were treaties that united the USA, Britain, France among others that said that if germany became aggressive again they would immediately put it down for fear of a second Great War. these treaties were ignored in favor of Appeasement which became FORMAL policy in all three countries until germany got to close to home. no one wanted to go through it again, and fear stopped them from kicking it in the but early.

    Pre ww2 is a perfect analogy for what is happening, except the UE and NATO might actually do something other then sit on their asses.... Maybe.
    Always remember... God Loves you.

    Good Luck

  9. #9
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,036

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Politicalunrest View Post
    With the exception of a complete Mutually Assured Destruction,
    No! No "exception." You cannot remove mutually assured nuclear destruction from the equation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Politicalunrest View Post
    and a FORMAL Nato, and FORMAL UN, we did have international groups in place such as the League of nations the predecessor to the UN, and it was believed that if another world war happened that due to technology it would last so long that most of the worlds population would be destroyed and / or starve afterwords.... Though this didn't happen exactly a large portion of the world did end up dead, and / or starving after ww2. So at the time there was a form of MAD just not so immediate. as for NATO, there were treaties that united the USA, Britain, France among others that said that if germany became aggressive again they would immediately put it down for fear of a second Great War. these treaties were ignored in favor of Appeasement which became FORMAL policy in all three countries until germany got to close to home. no one wanted to go through it again, and fear stopped them from kicking it in the but early.
    Complete apples and oranges. NATO is an armed-to-the-teeth organization specifically tasked with the objective of stopping further Soviet incursions. There was no such military pre-WWII created for the purpose of stopping German transgressions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Politicalunrest View Post
    Pre ww2 is a perfect analogy for what is happening, except the UE and NATO might actually do something other then sit on their asses.... Maybe.

  10. #10
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Who should send troops in Ukraine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    Poor analogy. NATO, nuclear weapons and mutually assured destruction exist as much now as they did at any time during the Cold War. If those things existed in 1939 there wouldn't have been a WWII.
    Appeasement and the threat of aggression to international stability exist as much today as they did during World War II. If they didn't exist in 1939 there also wouldn't have been a WWII.

    That being said, this should be a primarily European Union responsibility, seeing as Ukraine is in their own backyard and that the revolution was pro-EU. We should aid them, especially if Russia backs a separatist movement in Crimea, but we should only send in troops (through NATO) if Russia makes incursions beyond Crimea.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •