Shady Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 That is correct. They used the Georgian invasion as a reason to go in. Fuelled by Obama's proclamations and not followed through redlines. Quote
Wilber Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 I don't think it has much to do with what Obama did or did not do. Putin is very aware of the limited US options in this part of the world and they are the same no matter who is sitting in the White House. I agree that one should not make threats they aren't prepared to make good on but Republicans should take a page out of the same book. Their outrage and posturing on this issue is every bit as much hot air as anything Obama has said. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
GostHacked Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 http://nypost.com/2014/03/05/putin-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize/ Might look good next to Obama's. The ironing. Quote
Wilber Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 “We are getting an increasing number of nominations from people in countries that have never submitted nominations before,” Lundestad said. Nominated by who? Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Bonam Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 http://nypost.com/2014/03/05/putin-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize/ Might look good next to Obama's. And about equally well deserved. Quote
Shady Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 Nominated by who? All kinds of people get nominated every year. The process is fairly easy. Quote
Shady Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 I don't think it has much to do with what Obama did or did not do. Putin is very aware of the limited US options in this part of the world and they are the same no matter who is sitting in the White House. I agree that one should not make threats they aren't prepared to make good on but Republicans should take a page out of the same book. Their outrage and posturing on this issue is every bit as much hot air as anything Obama has said. No posturing is necessary. Start aiding Ukraine and Georgia etc with building nuclear weapons programs. The same way Russia is doing with Syria and Iran. You'll hear them whine like babies. Quote
tinydancer Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Gentlemen, As a Ukrainian, I see a lot of misunderstanding of the current situation in (the) Ukraine, including this forum. I can answer any question regarding the subject. As for this topic, Obama must force Russia to obey conditions of Budapest Memorandum of 1994. If Putin prevails, you can forget about nuclear proliferation. Every country will have a moral right to possess nuclear weapons. It will be a blow to US credibility. I also believe in US administration sincere support of the right of Ukrainian people to boot a dictator and decide on own destiny. The 1997 treaty between Ukraine and Russia allows for Russia to have up to 25,000 troops in the Crimea. This was not an invasion. As to a dictator. Please. Viktor Yanukovych was duly elected. Hence the people HAD decided on their own destiny. If you don't like the outcome that's part of living in a democracy. You wait till the next election and try to convince others to vote for your platform. And this election was observed and thought to be extraordinary in its competiveness and fairness. Instead this coup was strong armed by individuals in the opposition who wanted to seize power and join the EU. Yanukovych set to become president as observers say Ukraine election was fair• Yulia Tymoshenko under pressure to concede defeat• Monitors praise 'impressive display' of democracy From the article: Observers from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) said there were no indications of serious fraud and described the vote as an "impressive display" of democracy. "For everyone in Ukraine this election was a victory," João Soares, president of the OSCE's parliamentary assembly, said.With almost all votes counted, the Russian-leaning opposition leader, Viktor Yanukovych, had a clear 2.65% lead over Tymoshenko More at link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/feb/08/viktor-yanukovych-ukraine-president-election Edited March 5, 2014 by tinydancer Quote
tinydancer Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 Sorry Wilber, In the essence, Putin is Hitler. Goals (assembling an empire) and methods (using nation's humiliation after a lost war and darkest human instincts) are the same. The Putin's propaganda machine has been compared to Goebbels'. The difference is Hitler was honest, Putin is not. Yes, Putin does not have racial madness. Actually, Putin compares himself to Stalin. This would be more accurate comparison. (All is IMHO, of course). It wasn't an invasion. The 1997 treaty signed by the Ukraine and Russia allows Russia up to 25,000 troops in the Crimea. Quote
tinydancer Posted March 5, 2014 Report Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Now back to the OP. I post on many US boards and if there is one thing that is bringing both sides of America together is the absolute rage against the country's leaders for not only sticking their noses into other country's issues but also giving away $$$$ that America doesn't have. This is bipartisan fury. And I can't blame them. I've been a Canadian Conservative party person for eons, I'm of Ukrainian descent and still I am royally angry that we are involved in yet another foreign issue that we should not be involved in. I can commiserate with the American voter. And depending how the US Presidential candidates positon themselves on foreign policy and foreign aid I do believe that the Ukraine as well as Syria, Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq and cripes did I miss any? will have an impact on the next election. Edited March 5, 2014 by tinydancer Quote
Wilber Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 No posturing is necessary. Start aiding Ukraine and Georgia etc with building nuclear weapons programs. The same way Russia is doing with Syria and Iran. You'll hear them whine like babies. More nukes, that'll do it. What then? That's the problem, they keep getting into this crap without thinking past the knee jerk reaction. They have no policy other than sticking it in the other guys eye. As others have pointed out, the Crimean situation is far more complicated than the black and white boys are willing to try and comprehend.; Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
ASIP Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 tinydancer, It's ridiculous! 25,000 is total number of personnel on the facilities of the Russian Black Sea Fleet (BSF) - NOT TROOPS. This number includes mostly support staff, e.g., construction workers, auto mechanics, plumbers, janitors, cooks and even kinder garden teachers (there are three kinder gardens in BSF). RTFM! See Annex 2 to the agreement of May 28, 1997. Only 1,987 combat troops are allowed. Pilots from navy aircraft are included. Russia invaded Ukraine with 6,000 commandos. The permitted number of military vehicles was also exceeded. It was reported in the UN two days ago. But the biggest problem is that Russian troops are not allowed outside their facilities without permission of Ukrainian bodies. When foreign soldiers with weapons move freely on your streets and establish a puppet government, this is an invasion. As to Yanukovich. Yes, he was elected democratically (election frauds apart) in 2010. But for four years he changed constitution illegaly, bankrupted the country, his family grabbed many businesses. He ordered to suppress peaceful protests brutally. Later he ordered to shoot live ammunition on ordinary citizens. Only sheep can tolerate this. This not for you to teach Ukrainian people what is democracy and what is not. And for your knowledge. Yanukovich was not deposited. An agreement for further actions was signed. His personal safety was guaranteed by representatives of EU. Instead he fled and was in hiding for one week, popping up in Russia. Read Ukrainian constitution! There are four cases when president is to be replaced. Yanukovich meets at least two of them. May be you do not know, the current Ukrainian parliament was elected 7 years ago. It is still the same, including all MPs from the Yanukovich party. The parliament is still in charge. Just now Ukraine has an interim president. The presidential election is scheduled for May 25. What a bloody coup are you talking about?! Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 American candidates and voters have a lot higher priority domestic and foreign policy issues to worry about than Russia's alleged occupation of Crimea. As in Syria, there is no compelling reason for military force by the U.S., and American leadership will not be able to make the case for it given current circumstances. Only a desperate candidate would ignore the isolationist tea leaves. The Ukraine has survived and thrived after far worse things in its history. And it's not like Ukrainian immigrants to Canada and the U.S. had a cakewalk either. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 It wasn't an invasion. The 1997 treaty signed by the Ukraine and Russia allows Russia up to 25,000 troops in the Crimea. Complete and utter nonsense. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 Fuelled by Obama's proclamations and not followed through redlines. Just to keep you up to date, Obama wasn't president then. Quote
August1991 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 As to Yanukovich. Yes, he was elected democratically (election frauds apart) in 2010. But for four years he changed constitution illegaly, bankrupted the country, his family grabbed many businesses. He ordered to suppress peaceful protests brutally. Later he ordered to shoot live ammunition on ordinary citizens. Only sheep can tolerate this. This not for you to teach Ukrainian people what is democracy and what is not.Many Canadians would say the same of Canada's Liberal Party. Trudeau imprisoned hundreds. In the US, Nixon authorized the military to shoot innocent American citizens. I'm with TinyDancer. The Ukrainian regime may not have been a perfect democracy but mobs are not democracy either. ASIP, you strike me as a Ukrainian nationalist and you wish to draw westerners into the defence of your nation. Stephen Harper, to get your vote, seems to be going along with you. ----- I am wondering about another question: in what State should the Crimea find itself? The Crimea was once part of Russia (until Khrushchev gave it away). People in Crimea speak Russian, watch Russian TV. I ask about Crimea but I could also ask about other cities/areas in eastern Ukraine. Along the Dnieper River, most people are Russian-speaking. Finally, there are many mixed families: a Russian married to a Ukrainian. Such families live in Donetsk, Kiev, Lviv, Moscow - and even Montreal. Quote
The_Squid Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 People in Crimea need to decide for themselves where they want to go... Russia can't be deciding for them with machine guns in hand and tanks in the streets. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 I am "faintly hoping" that this will blow over as we move along. Putin made his move just to make sure he has control of his only warm water port. I can see some strategic reason for that. From what I see the Russian speakers in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine are happily going about their business like everyone else. Quote
August1991 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) People in Crimea need to decide for themselves where they want to go... Russia can't be deciding for them with machine guns in hand and tanks in the streets.People decide for themselves? I think that was Woodrow Wilson's solution at Versailles in 1919. Despite the book of that historian (what was her name), Woodrow Wilson was wrong. Paris 1919 was not a historic event and it solved nothing. (I reckon that the book's cover photo - and its thick pages - explain sales.) Wilson's solution just lead to rampant European nationalism. IOW, letting people decide by vote where they will live is an invitation to nationalism. ===== In a world of Skype and expedia (cheap communication and travel), I wonder when backward politicians (such as Putin) will figure out that it's the State's ability to tax individuals wherever they are that gives the State power - not the State's control of land or territory. The IRS knows this. Putin apparently still doesn't. Edited March 6, 2014 by August1991 Quote
ASIP Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) The Crimea was once part of Russia (until Khrushchev gave it away). Khrushev gave it away... Can you prove it? Hint: this is a myth. I am wondering about another question: in what State should the Crimea find itself? The Crimea was once part of Russia (until Khrushchev gave it away). People in Crimea speak Russian, watch Russian TV. I ask about Crimea but I could also ask about other cities/areas in eastern Ukraine. Along the Dnieper River, most people are Russian-speaking. The answer is obvious: for 60 years people of Crimea have had no problems being within Ukraine. Surprisingly, a Crimean jurisdiction became a problem several hours after heavily armed men overpowered police and sealed the Crimean parliament building. Can you point out any demonstrations for a referendum in Crimea, say last year, five years ago? Russian-speaking in no way means they are eager to join Russia. This is Ukrainian people. By blood they are Ukrainian, Russians, Jews, Greeks, and many others, but they are all Ukrainians. Ukraine is their country, their land. Everybody speaks language he wants. There is no language police. Its not Quebec. And why you do not mention Crimean Tatars? Crimea is their native land. They are a big factor in Crimean affairs. Ukrainians and Russians are brother nations. Unfortunately, imperial ambitions of this sick man, Putin, poisoned relations between people, between countries. There is another, economical reason why people in Ukraine, Crimea included, will not join Russia voluntarily. Their business elite absolutely understands that joining Russia is equal to losing businesses to Russian oligarchs. . Edited March 6, 2014 by ASIP Quote
ReeferMadness Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 Khrushev gave it away... Can you prove it? Hint: this is a myth. The answer is obvious: for 60 years people of Crimea have had no problems being within Ukraine. Surprisingly, a Crimean jurisdiction became a problem several hours after heavily armed men overpowered police and sealed the Crimean parliament building. Can you point out any demonstrations for a referendum in Crimea, say last year, five years ago? Russian-speaking in no way means they are eager to join Russia. This is Ukrainian people. By blood they are Ukrainian, Russians, Jews, Greeks, and many others, but they are all Ukrainians. Ukraine is their country, their land. Everybody speaks language he wants. There is no language police. Its not Quebec. And why you do not mention Crimean Tatars? Crimea is their native land. They are a big factor in Crimean affairs. Ukrainians and Russians are brother nations. Unfortunately, imperial ambitions of this sick man, Putin, poisoned relations between people, between countries. There is another, economical reason why people in Ukraine, Crimea included, will not join Russia voluntarily. Their business elite absolutely understands that joining Russia is equal to losing businesses to Russian oligarchs. . ASIP, I don't claim any expertise on this matter. However, I understand that the population of Crimea is mostly ethnic Russians. If there were a referendum, would Crimea vote to split and join Russia? And if Krushchev didn't gift Crimea to Ukraine, what happened in 1954? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Shady Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 I am "faintly hoping" that this will blow over as we move along. Putin made his move just to make sure he has control of his only warm water port. I can see some strategic reason for that. From what I see the Russian speakers in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine are happily going about their business like everyone else. I see, so if he already had a warm port THEN it would be wrong. That's some great logic. Anyways, what do you think Sochi is? Quote
Wilber Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 Anyways, what do you think Sochi is? Certainly not Sevastopol. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
On Guard for Thee Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 I see, so if he already had a warm port THEN it would be wrong. That's some great logic. Anyways, what do you think Sochi is? Nothing to do with logic, at least not mine. I'm just expressing hope it doesn't escalate into gunfire. Quote
Wilber Posted March 6, 2014 Report Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) Sochi isn't a port, it's a resort town on a beach. There is no real harbour, just a breakwater protecting a marina with a few yachts. Edited March 6, 2014 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.