View Poll Results: Who should stand up to Russia?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • US

    3 10.34%
  • EU

    8 27.59%
  • UKRAINE

    3 10.34%
  • RUSSIA ARE NOT THE BAD GUYS

    2 6.90%
  • STAY OUT OF IT

    13 44.83%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

  1. #1
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,242

    Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    So I'm working my night shift, I'm a little bored lol and I was reading through some of the threads regarding Ukraine. What struck me was the range of opinions in regards to who should respond and how we should respond. Got me thinking and I wondered what the forum thought about this issue?
    The Ukraine crisis has been ongoing for a few months now, has put the region on the verge of war and most importantly has brought back an enemy who for the last few decades has been forgotten by the West. Obviously the region is very fragile and one wrong move could plunge the region into chaos that being said I do believe that someone has to stand up to Russian aggression because history has taught us that much. My question to you is who do you think should be the ones standing up to Russia?

    1. USA the obvious choice for many reasons. Largest military, one of the worlds economic superpowers, has the most to lose from an economic/ social world breakdown, champion of freedom and of course the top dog on the playground who would rather not go back to the days of the Cold War. However many would argue that the US is weary of any kind of conflict whether it be militarily or diplomatic and many American voters would rather stay out of the conflict all together.

    2. The EU who wanted to entice the Ukraine into the fold and in doing so pushed some parts of the country away and into the arms of Russia. Germany/France have worked hard to try and make the EU into a stable union with a shared currency and shared interests. You could make the argument that if the EU were to stand by and allow parts of the Ukraine to be absorbed so easily that they could lose many other members/ potential members because of the fear that the EU can not protect their borders. I reluctantly include the UK in this section because even if we are at odds with the EU politically I still think its in our interest to put Russia in its place and continue to build on progress that has been made in Europe since the end of the Cold war. However thus far the EU has not stood united and could struggle with any kind of " show of force" against Russia.

    3. NATO who's reputation has been damaged by the complete lack of respect for the Budapest treaty and the continued Russian aggression in the region. Similar to the EU however NATO'S members might struggle to agree on the right course of actions and there is always the danger that any NATO engagement could rely too much on the US to carry the burden and might not have the support of the US in general.

    4. The Ukraine itself, many would argue that its their territory and if they were to call Putin's bluff they could deter any more Russian involvement especially with vocal support from NATO. However for this to happen we would have to assure the Ukraine of our support which they might be skeptical of given our actions thus far and obviously they wouldn't last long standing alone.

    5. No one should stand up to Russia because they are just protecting their borders and Russians speaking people from what they see as western aggression. So far most of the crisis has been blown out of proportion by the Western media who are eager to paint Russia as the "old enemy".

    6. Do nothing and see how this plays out.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  2. #2
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,242

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    If you feel like another option should be added just bring it into the debate, don't cry about it in a post because I will hate you and you will forever be on my zombie world death list.


    P.S if a mod can edit my poll to put NATO in I would appreciate it lol
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  3. #3
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    NATO, under the auspices of a joint approval from the US and the EU after getting the Ukraine government to request assistance.

    This has already started, with the US sending troops to Poland and other NATO countries for "training exercises."

    NATO should put troops along the border with NATO countries and Ukraine, and then let Russia know that if they move any further into Ukraine, that NATO will move in to create a line of no further aggression.

    Many here in the US are tired of war. We tend to forget that aggressors don't act on our timelines. Also, many here in the US, mostly on the left, use Nuclear Fear as an excuse to allow Russia to do anything they want. They tend to forget that it was one of their own, John F. Kennedy, that looked down the point of the nuclear missile threat and didn't blink.

    Nor should we now. If we do, Russia will know that they can do whatever they want without any threat of retribution or being held to account for their actions by the world. This will lead eventually to war when Russia is entrenched in foreign countries that they annex by the gun, and then, at that point, there will be no options for Russia other than the unthinkable to defend their actions and aggression.

    We are at a point that Russia can still back down while looking like they didn't to their own people. If we stand now, we can do so without firing a shot. If we wait, and Putin gives the order to take all of Ukraine, Estonia will be next, then the Balkans, then... well... by then it will be too late and WWIII will have already begun.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  4. #4
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,242

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    NATO, under the auspices of a joint approval from the US and the EU after getting the Ukraine government to request assistance.

    This has already started, with the US sending troops to Poland and other NATO countries for "training exercises."

    NATO should put troops along the border with NATO countries and Ukraine, and then let Russia know that if they move any further into Ukraine, that NATO will move in to create a line of no further aggression.

    Many here in the US are tired of war. We tend to forget that aggressors don't act on our timelines. Also, many here in the US, mostly on the left, use Nuclear Fear as an excuse to allow Russia to do anything they want. They tend to forget that it was one of their own, John F. Kennedy, that looked down the point of the nuclear missile threat and didn't blink.

    Nor should we now. If we do, Russia will know that they can do whatever they want without any threat of retribution or being held to account for their actions by the world. This will lead eventually to war when Russia is entrenched in foreign countries that they annex by the gun, and then, at that point, there will be no options for Russia other than the unthinkable to defend their actions and aggression.

    We are at a point that Russia can still back down while looking like they didn't to their own people. If we stand now, we can do so without firing a shot. If we wait, and Putin gives the order to take all of Ukraine, Estonia will be next, then the Balkans, then... well... by then it will be too late and WWIII will have already begun.

    Some good points. I personally don't think that WW3 will or even could break out from this crisis but I think given how much our global markets are connected a new cold war would be a disaster for everyone. That "new cold war" could easily happen as you pointed out as Putin could pounce on many surrounding nations especially Kazakhstan, Georgia and Moldova who are in my opinion particularly vulnerable. Personally it makes me sad that Europe once again has to look to the US for leadership but without it Nato doesn't function.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  5. #5
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins86 View Post
    So I'm working my night shift, I'm a little bored lol and I was reading through some of the threads regarding Ukraine. What struck me was the range of opinions in regards to who should respond and how we should respond. Got me thinking and I wondered what the forum thought about this issue?
    The Ukraine crisis has been ongoing for a few months now, has put the region on the verge of war and most importantly has brought back an enemy who for the last few decades has been forgotten by the West. Obviously the region is very fragile and one wrong move could plunge the region into chaos that being said I do believe that someone has to stand up to Russian aggression because history has taught us that much. My question to you is who do you think should be the ones standing up to Russia?

    1. USA the obvious choice for many reasons. Largest military, one of the worlds economic superpowers, has the most to lose from an economic/ social world breakdown, champion of freedom and of course the top dog on the playground who would rather not go back to the days of the Cold War. However many would argue that the US is weary of any kind of conflict whether it be militarily or diplomatic and many American voters would rather stay out of the conflict all together.

    2. The EU who wanted to entice the Ukraine into the fold and in doing so pushed some parts of the country away and into the arms of Russia. Germany/France have worked hard to try and make the EU into a stable union with a shared currency and shared interests. You could make the argument that if the EU were to stand by and allow parts of the Ukraine to be absorbed so easily that they could lose many other members/ potential members because of the fear that the EU can not protect their borders. I reluctantly include the UK in this section because even if we are at odds with the EU politically I still think its in our interest to put Russia in its place and continue to build on progress that has been made in Europe since the end of the Cold war. However thus far the EU has not stood united and could struggle with any kind of " show of force" against Russia.

    3. NATO who's reputation has been damaged by the complete lack of respect for the Budapest treaty and the continued Russian aggression in the region. Similar to the EU however NATO'S members might struggle to agree on the right course of actions and there is always the danger that any NATO engagement could rely too much on the US to carry the burden and might not have the support of the US in general.

    4. The Ukraine itself, many would argue that its their territory and if they were to call Putin's bluff they could deter any more Russian involvement especially with vocal support from NATO. However for this to happen we would have to assure the Ukraine of our support which they might be skeptical of given our actions thus far and obviously they wouldn't last long standing alone.

    5. No one should stand up to Russia because they are just protecting their borders and Russians speaking people from what they see as western aggression. So far most of the crisis has been blown out of proportion by the Western media who are eager to paint Russia as the "old enemy".

    6. Do nothing and see how this plays out.

    We should stay out of it.You should ask yourself whose lives are more important. The life of your fellow countrymen or the lives of Ukrainians? You also ask is it worth digging ourselves further into debt to stop Russia from taking over Ukraine.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  6. #6
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,586
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Beaudreaux is right, in my opinion. America is weary of war, and many believe our current president does not have the mettle or the international experience to take on a man like Putin, who has been a global top dog for decades. We are mired in Afghanistan and (now) to a lesser extent Iraq because of past poor choices. We see tens of thousands of our sons, our brothers, our sisters, our neighbors and friends, coming back from war changed, damaged, sometimes defeated by the trauma they've seen. We do not want any more of it.

    Which is why we cannot afford to allow any part of Europe to fall to Russian aggression, which could trigger a domino-effect of Greater Russia chewing its way through the continent.

    But... and it's a big one, the USA can not, should not, and will not take on Russia alone. Whether through NATO or military alliances with our European allies, the US should be part of the alliance, but should not lead it. Europe should and must take a leadership role in its own backyard, because Europe knows its own people, its own territory, and the political nuances surrounding them better than the US, for all its intelligence, could ever hope to. And Europeans will be more quickly devastated by the consequences of a widespread war than Americans, so if they are reluctant to act because they know what could lie ahead if the Russians aren't bluffing and are willing to sack the continent to get the territory they want, then I for one would allow them to make that choice, even if ends up being the wrong one.

    Make no mistake, I'm more concerned about a "world war" now that I ever have been in my lifetime. It is not America's place, however, to lead the charge and run roughshod over half of Europe in order to personally belly-bump our old nemesis. If Europe wants our help, we should give it without reservation, and let them tell us what they need from us rather than us telling them what we are going to do.

    Naive of me, perhaps, but it's what I think.

  7. #7
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,242

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    We should stay out of it.You should ask yourself whose lives are more important. The life of your fellow countrymen or the lives of Ukrainians? You also ask is it worth digging ourselves further into debt to stop Russia from taking over Ukraine.
    Which I agree with and as someone like yourself who has served my country I understand the sacrifices that are made. However do you feel the luxuries we have enjoyed since the end of WW2 are because we have been willing to stand up to enemies that would happily drag the world into chaos? From defeating Hitler, Korea, the cold war, the Balkans etc have we not secured our own freedoms and lifestyle?
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  8. #8
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins86 View Post
    Which I agree with and as someone like yourself who has served my country I understand the sacrifices that are made. However do you feel the luxuries we have enjoyed since the end of WW2 are because we have been willing to stand up to enemies that would happily drag the world into chaos? From defeating Hitler, Korea, the cold war, the Balkans etc have we not secured our own freedoms and lifestyle?

    Those wars have nothing to do with securing America's freedom. If we did not cut off trade with Japanese during a time of war we would have never gotten involved in WWII.If we did not deliberately sent a trade ship to get sunk by the Germans in WWI we would have never gotten involved.But scum in office wanted us involved in those wars, they are like the neocon pieces of **** today trying to get us into war with Syria and Russia.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  9. #9
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,242

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Beaudreaux is right, in my opinion. America is weary of war, and many believe our current president does not have the mettle or the international experience to take on a man like Putin, who has been a global top dog for decades. We are mired in Afghanistan and (now) to a lesser extent Iraq because of past poor choices. We see tens of thousands of our sons, our brothers, our sisters, our neighbors and friends, coming back from war changed, damaged, sometimes defeated by the trauma they've seen. We do not want any more of it.

    Which is why we cannot afford to allow any part of Europe to fall to Russian aggression, which could trigger a domino-effect of Greater Russia chewing its way through the continent.

    But... and it's a big one, the USA can not, should not, and will not take on Russia alone. Whether through NATO or military alliances with our European allies, the US should be part of the alliance, but should not lead it. Europe should and must take a leadership role in its own backyard, because Europe knows its own people, its own territory, and the political nuances surrounding them better than the US, for all its intelligence, could ever hope to. And Europeans will be more quickly devastated by the consequences of a widespread war than Americans, so if they are reluctant to act because they know what could lie ahead if the Russians aren't bluffing and are willing to sack the continent to get the territory they want, then I for one would allow them to make that choice, even if ends up being the wrong one.

    Make no mistake, I'm more concerned about a "world war" now that I ever have been in my lifetime. It is not America's place, however, to lead the charge and run roughshod over half of Europe in order to personally belly-bump our old nemesis. If Europe wants our help, we should give it without reservation, and let them tell us what they need from us rather than us telling them what we are going to do.

    Naive of me, perhaps, but it's what I think.

    I think that Americas place in the world right now is leading it and it has done since the start of the cold war where it was the only thing stopping Russia from running riot. However I agree that now is the time for someone else to step up and in my opinion that should be the EU ( Britain included). The force should itself should represent NATO and America should obviously be involved given its global power and position but it should be led by EU countries. If we want the EU to work and we want to deter Putin then the EU needs to show it will not be pushed around and that member states/ potential members states will be protected. The worse thing that can happen in my opinion is that the US deploy thousands of troops again and begin to heavily garrison bases in Germany etc. That will only make matters worse.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  10. #10
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,242

    Re: Who's should stand upto to Russia?`

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Those wars have nothing to do with securing America's freedom. If we did not cut off trade with Japanese during a time of war we would have never gotten involved in WWII.If we did not deliberately sent a trade ship to get sunk by the Germans in WWI we would have never gotten involved.But scum in office wanted us involved in those wars, they are like the neocon pieces of **** today trying to get us into war with Syria and Russia.
    I have to disagree with you there. I think given the sheer scale of WW2 it was inevitable that America got involved and the soldiers who died in that war did so defending the US.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •