• 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

I don't think our aircraft carriers or ships have access to bases in the Black Sea.

Turkey is a traditional enemy of Russia, both in the Crimea, and in the Caucuses.
 
This is demonstrably false. I can only conclude that you haven't looked at much history.

This is kind of strange, take a look at WWI, what started it? After WWI what did everyone do to try and avoid such a thing happening again?

This is not WWII again, Putin is not Hitler, he is not going to try and take over Europe.
 
Right now Russia is in the process of making more enemy's for itself.

Good point. I bet that will scare them in their little pointy boots.


....Or they won't care because Green NIMBYism keeps us from effectively developing the energy resources that would be necessary to save Eastern Europe from their grasp, they know that we won't respond with actual force, and Russians always prefer to be feared than loved in their Near Abroad.


What Enemy is Russia creating that is going to be so devastating for it? The EU? The EU is dependent upon Russian energy exports - what are they going to do?
 
Then study the history of Chechnya.

The US had no standing treaty to defend Chechnya. Also Chechnya was a known hotbed of Islamic terrorism that he US was in the process of combating anyway. As such, for right or wrong the US was indifferent to the Russia action in Chechnya which was itself in response to terrorist attacks and threats from the region.

Also consider the size of Chechnya when compared to Ukraine. While the Russian's say they only have designs on Crimea, in reality, if Ukraine decides to fight the occupation the war will suddenly grow to scales that haven't been seen in a very long time with massive refugee crisis within the EU member states that border Ukraine.

The Ukrainian military is 6,000,000 strong. While it would eventually loose to a Russian invasion the death toll would be staggering.
 
Good point. I bet that will scare them in their little pointy boots.


....Or they won't care because Green NIMBYism keeps us from effectively developing the energy resources that would be necessary to save Eastern Europe from their grasp, they know that we won't respond with actual force, and Russians always prefer to be feared than loved in their Near Abroad.

They will be unable to maintain control of the occupied territory because the occupied people will resist Russian attempts to establish control. Kind of similar to how we were unable to control Iraq.
 
The US had no standing treaty to defend Chechnya. Also Chechnya was a known hotbed of Islamic terrorism that he US was in the process of combating anyway. As such, for right or wrong the US was indifferent to the Russia action in Chechnya which was itself in response to terrorist attacks and threats from the region.

Also consider the size of Chechnya when compared to Ukraine. While the Russian's say they only have designs on Crimea, in reality, if Ukraine decides to fight the occupation the war will suddenly grow to scales that haven't been seen in a very long time with massive refugee crisis within the EU member states that border Ukraine.

The Ukrainian military is 6,000,000 strong. While it would eventually loose to a Russian invasion the death toll would be staggering.

Which is why Russia's military intervention is a sign of weakness.

Imagine the situation in Ukraine becoming a larger version of Chechnya?
 
They will be unable to maintain control of the occupied territory because the occupied people will resist Russian attempts to establish control. Kind of similar to how we were unable to control Iraq.

The populace in the areas that they have seized are almost unreservedly pro-Russian, and particularly this section of Ukraine has a long history of sometimes-being-part-of-Russia-sometimes-not. Furthermore, there are no strategic depth areas where insurgents can train, rest, refit, recruit, and avoid targeting; the EU sure as hell isn't going to start supporting armed groups taking on the Russians in the way that (for example) Syria and Iran supported armed groups taking on the Americans.

I will bet you a years' platinum membership right now that we do not see an insurgent effort in the Ukraine on par with the insurgency that threatened to wrest control of Iraq.
 
Which is why Russia's military intervention is a sign of weakness.

:lol: yeah. It's a sign of weakness when you are willing to invade another country secure in the knowledge that neither that country, nor any other of your major near-peer competitors, will lift a realistic finger to stop you.

What the hell is this - some kind of expansion of the "oh, he only commits crimes because of how deeply society has wounded him" analysis from the domestic to the international sphere?


Only this administration would be stupid or desperate enough to come up with an argument like that. I wonder how long and hard Putin laughed when he heard we had said that, or if nothing we say surprises him anymore.


Hey, don't worry, Ukraine, the fact that Russia is totally dominating you is just a sign of how weak they really are!

:roll:
 
The populace in the areas that they have seized are almost unreservedly pro-Russian, and particularly this section of Ukraine has a long history of sometimes-being-part-of-Russia-sometimes-not. Furthermore, there are no strategic depth areas where insurgents can train, rest, refit, recruit, and avoid targeting; the EU sure as hell isn't going to start supporting armed groups taking on the Russians in the way that (for example) Syria and Iran supported armed groups taking on the Americans.

I will bet you a years' platinum membership right now that we do not see an insurgent effort in the Ukraine on par with the insurgency that threatened to wrest control of Iraq.

Maybe Putin's plan is a new Holodomor, though I thought the early 20th century version removed most of the ethnic Ukrainians and subsequently the vacuum was filled with Russians.
 
:lol: yeah. It's a sign of weakness when you are willing to invade another country secure in the knowledge that neither that country, nor any other of your major near-peer competitors, will lift a realistic finger to stop you.

What the hell is this - some kind of expansion of the "oh, he only commits crimes because of how deeply society has wounded him" analysis from the domestic to the international sphere?


Only this administration would be stupid or desperate enough to come up with an argument like that. I wonder how long and hard Putin laughed when he heard we had said that, or if nothing we say surprises him anymore.


Hey, don't worry, Ukraine, the fact that Russia is totally dominating you is just a sign of how weak they really are!

:roll:

Russia previously used other means, such as economic warfare, to keep Ukraine in line. Why would it abandon less risky tactics for military ocupation?
 
If Russia commits war crimes they will be criticised as well. But here's the difference, Russia puts up little front of respecting IL.

???

Is your issue with people respecting international law or isn't it? Or is it about attitude toward international law? Can you please try to be consistent?
 
Ukraine has combined combat troops and reserves of 1,160,000.

Ukraine Military Strength

I am counting military ready civilian population which is actually 6.9 million, but a fair number of them are Russian sympathizers so the combined force that Ukraine could rally would be about 6,000,000.
 
Which is why Russia's military intervention is a sign of weakness.

Imagine the situation in Ukraine becoming a larger version of Chechnya?

Stupidity maybe, depending on the outcome, but weakness? No. The Russians have shown a willingness to drive an all out war to point where the enemy can only hope to win a Pyrrhic victory. They don't go half way.

By 10pm EST tonight we should know where this is going. Ukraine is certainly anti-Russia, but the one thing we know is that when it comes to waging war they are every bit as ruthless as Russia. I expect that if Ukraine doesn't forfeit Crimea that the war that would result from TWO ruthless ex-Soviet states will be catastrophic. Also, Ukrainians being Ukrainians I would be very surprised if they forfeited Crimea to the Russians.
 
Stage military readiness exercises of forces in the EU bases, issue orders to ready a deployment of a carrier group to the area. Any number of other levels of military posturing to let Putin know that the US is quite capable of defending Ukraine as per our treaty.

Once this is established then you can have a talk with Russia.

As it is Putin just laughs at any US attempt at diplomacy because he knows, in the end, that the US will do nothing to stand in the way.

Following this you can expect a few months later Putin will start signalling the need for Russian troops in some other state that was previously a part of the Soviet Union, claiming the need to protect ethnic Russians who invariably inhabit the border regions of ALL previously Soviet States.

This will also get China seriously thinking about action in Taiwan and elsewhere after Putin has shown the US will not protect its Allies. Hell, China even more-so than Russia will feel emboldened by this because China knows that the US would feel serious pain from a embargoing China.

I'm more concerned with the health and welfare of my countrymen than the Taiwanese or a minority of Ukrainian's, and I don't wish for our president to spend blood and treasure defending them. But sense at this point Putins actions are being mischaracterised, and if Pete is right about the last election, Putin is further legitimised. Otherwise there's a whole lot of speculation in your post.
 
Last edited:
You want to start WWIII for what reason? Why on earth would that be a good idea? What positive outcome could be SO worth it to do such a thing? You want millions of people to die to show Putin we're not ******s?

This is so incredibly unnecessary. Putin is going to keep Crimea, he wants to scare Ukraine and try and get another pro Russian puppet in there to replace the one that was just ousted, that's all he wants. Yes this sucks for Ukraine but I'm pretty sure its preferable to decimation.

Exactly correct.
 
Where did you read anything of Harper requesting the permission of Barrack Obama? Harper knows Obama is a fool, and has politely said so.

Harper knows that Obama is not really in charge of his government...this is where the NSA revelations of a deep state existing run by private contractors and entrenched government officials, explains more about U.S. foreign policy than anything the President says or wants to do...as recently explained by former Republican official - Mike Lofgren, in an interview on Bill Moyer's show: What’s Going On Underneath the Surface of Partisan Politics Harper doesn't have to look for directions from Obama, when he knows who is wielding power over foreign policy issues.
 
Yeah, but how many of them will fight with the Russians if it comes to that?

Considering how they fight wars in that region, I would expect that there will be millions involved in the war on either side no matter how the loyalties fall. Anti-Russian Ukrainians remember all too well the policies of the Soviet era that led to the starvation deaths of 20 million Ukrainians and they aren't too keen of moving back under Russian control.
 
Harper knows that Obama is not really in charge of his government...this is where the NSA revelations of a deep state existing run by private contractors and entrenched government officials, explains more about U.S. foreign policy than anything the President says or wants to do...as recently explained by former Republican official - Mike Lofgren, in an interview on Bill Moyer's show: What’s Going On Underneath the Surface of Partisan Politics Harper doesn't have to look for directions from Obama, when he knows who is wielding power over foreign policy issues.

Hmm... I'm wondering how much the Snowden information influenced Putin's move.
 
The US had no standing treaty to defend Chechnya. Also Chechnya was a known hotbed of Islamic terrorism that he US was in the process of combating anyway. As such, for right or wrong the US was indifferent to the Russia action in Chechnya which was itself in response to terrorist attacks and threats from the region.

Also consider the size of Chechnya when compared to Ukraine. While the Russian's say they only have designs on Crimea, in reality, if Ukraine decides to fight the occupation the war will suddenly grow to scales that haven't been seen in a very long time with massive refugee crisis within the EU member states that border Ukraine.

The Ukrainian military is 6,000,000 strong. While it would eventually loose to a Russian invasion the death toll would be staggering.

You continue to mischaracterise things. It's not "Ukraine", its some of the Ukrainians, and they started destroying public property, they toppled the government, seized the military and declared independence. You wouldn't condone that at home.
 
Harper knows that Obama is not really in charge of his government...this is where the NSA revelations of a deep state existing run by private contractors and entrenched government officials, explains more about U.S. foreign policy than anything the President says or wants to do...as recently explained by former Republican official - Mike Lofgren, in an interview on Bill Moyer's show: What’s Going On Underneath the Surface of Partisan Politics Harper doesn't have to look for directions from Obama, when he knows who is wielding power over foreign policy issues.

I have no interest in your conspiracy theories. There is a forum for them somewhere else on these boards.
 
I'm more concerned with the health and welfare of my countrymen than the Taiwanese or a minority of ukraine s, and I don't wish for our president to spend blood and treasure defending them. But sense at this point Putins actions are being mischaracterised, and if Pete is right about the last election, Putin is further legitimised. Otherwise there's a whole lot of speculation in your post.

There is a lot of speculation in your post too. Mine happens to be grounded in the reality of the situation, though.

You utterly fail to grasp the gravity of the situation in Ukraine and what it means to the world economy, and world peace.
 
Back
Top Bottom