Ukraine Riots

[Michchamp]

That said...do you think that Secretary of State Kerry has as yet informed the President that the 1980s called...?

maybe. lots of people keep making analogies to the Cold War... even though this is nothing like that.

I've also seen a million references to that scene in The Hunt For Red October.

participation in this movie made Fred Thompson a qualified Russian policy expert.

 

[food4thought]

You know, not every reference to Hitler is trying to make the bad guy appear to be another Hitler.

The thing about Putin is that he could very well be the type of ruler that get's a little bit of what he wants without much problem, and then decides later that he wants more, or perhaps is planning for more all along (absolute end of Hitler comparison, OK?)... at some point somebody has to stand up to the bully and say no, and have the ability to kick his sorry ass is he pushes to far. This is scary, because if he really is a sociopath, he won't care about the consequences and he has nuclear bombs. How long do you think it would take the other gangsters to oust him if he does go for more of the Ukraine and we have to send troops? What happens in the meantime, with several nuclear powers involved in a conventional war? What happens if China decides to take advantage and try to take a bit of disputed territory? How about all them militant groups in the south? At what point do the gangsters in charge feel they are going out, and probably have very little to lose since the Russians has a bit of a history of being harsh on their corrupt former leaders? What about other unstable parts of the world that see the world policemen busy, and decide now is the time to do what they couldn't do before for fear of US/UN retaliation... like North Korea? Several middle eastern countries come to mind also.

We absolutely have to make the right decisions right now, and stop this before it get's any worse. I have no idea what the right thing to do is, though. I sincerely hope I'm wrong and the Obama administration does.

We don't want war, but we can't just tell the Ukraine to bend over and take it, we do have a defense treaty.

 

[zyxt9]

while I agree Russia should just be given Crimea because in that agreement there really isn't a loser as the Crimean people apparently would prefer to be Russian or already consider themselves Russian anyway, there is that element of whether such an agreement will satiate Putin or will he view that as a sign that he can take more as there are other regions who have a preference to be Russian?

unlike hitler, I don't see Putin invading other nations like, say...Poland, but I can see him trying to get more chunks of Ukraine with heavy Russian influence but slightly less so than Crimea.

it is a delicate situation obviously, but I have a hard time seeing this becoming WWIII, at the end of the day it isn't worth that level of fighting over and I believe most will grasp that before trying to escalate it much further.

 

[Michchamp]

while I agree Russia should just be given Crimea because in that agreement there really isn't a loser as the Crimean people apparently would prefer to be Russian or already consider themselves Russian anyway, there is that element of whether such an agreement will satiate Putin or will he view that as a sign that he can take more as there are other regions who have a preference to be Russian?

unlike hitler, I don't see Putin invading other nations like, say...Poland, but I can see him trying to get more chunks of Ukraine with heavy Russian influence but slightly less so than Crimea.

it is a delicate situation obviously, but I have a hard time seeing this becoming WWIII, at the end of the day it isn't worth that level of fighting over and I believe most will grasp that before trying to escalate it much further.

Well, if he attacks Poland, a member of NATO, then we must go to war with Russia. maybe the most significant clause in the NATO treaty is that if one member is attacked the entire alliance must go to war. If Russia were to attack any NATO member, and there was no response, I think NATO would be breaking up pretty soon.

also, I don't believe we're obligated by treaty to defend Ukraine; I've read a couple articles that summarized the legal situation, and noted the '93 or '94 treaty under which Ukraine gave up it's nuclear weapons, and in return had its territory guaranteed by Russia and the US. none of these articles mentioned us being compelled to go to war by treaty though. I guess a territorial guarantee is different than a defense treaty.

 

[Thumb]

Well, if he attacks Poland, a member of NATO, then we must go to war with Russia. maybe the most significant clause in the NATO treaty is that if one member is attacked the entire alliance must go to war. If Russia were to attack any NATO member, and there was no response, I think NATO would be breaking up pretty soon.

also, I don't believe we're obligated by treaty to defend Ukraine; I've read a couple articles that summarized the legal situation, and noted the '93 or '94 treaty under which Ukraine gave up it's nuclear weapons, and in return had its territory guaranteed by Russia and the US. none of these articles mentioned us being compelled to go to war by treaty though. I guess a territorial guarantee is different than a defense treaty.

The treaty as I understand it says the US and UK guaranteed to defend Ukraine with military force (that could be subjective; could means troops and air strikes, could means arms/logistical support) if they gave up their nuclear arsenal. We basically said, you don't need THE BOMB, we will protect you.

I don't see how that can be interpreted any other way now that Ukraine's sovereignty is being challenged by a foreign power. And as far as the Crimea goes, if something is worked out and Russia annexes it or something that's one thing, but they have 0 right to just take it by force, no matter how many Russians live there, or wish it was that way.

 

[zyxt9]

champ, I am curious about whether you would actually support US military involvement if Russia initiates war and invades Ukraine in a takeover attempt. I recognize that such force would be very different from Iraq, so not bringing that element into play. just saying you have traditionally shown a very anti-war personality but this situation seems to have at a minimum brought you to an understanding it might happen.

not trying to attack you about this, honestly. it just has been such a different viewpoint that it has struck me slightly odd. I'm quite confident you, like 99.999% of the world would prefer a diplomatic solution, but for the first time that I can recall you actually seem ok with the idea of the US military becoming part of the equation if Russia goes beyond Crimea. is that accurate? not knocking you if that is how you feel because I think the majority of Americans would agree with that scenario and it just feels odd being on the same side as you regarding use of the US military so I cannot help be a little curious...is it mostly due to your Ukranian family members or would you feel the same way if Russia was behaving this way toward another sovereign neighbor? honestly just trying to understand your mindset with this, not looking to stir up negativity or be a jerk, so i apologize in advance if this post comes across that way in any fashion. we've just attacked each other so much in the past, i don't want that to influence your view of the sincerity of this post in just trying to understand your views a little deeper.

it would be nice to share the same viewpoint with you for a change regarding something military related. i would like to think Obama would have support by Dems and Libs alike, kind of like how W had support from both sides after 9/11 to attack Afghanistan. not that W had, nor Obama would have, 100%...that sort of thing will never happen I'm sure...

anyway, thanks in advance for clarifying if you feel you would like to.

 

[zyxt9]

The treaty as I understand it says the US and UK guaranteed to defend Ukraine with military force (that could be subjective; could means troops and air strikes, could means arms/logistical support) if they gave up their nuclear arsenal. We basically said, you don't need THE BOMB, we will protect you.

I don't see how that can be interpreted any other way now that Ukraine's sovereignty is being challenged by a foreign power. And as far as the Crimea goes, if something is worked out and Russia annexes it or something that's one thing, but they have 0 right to just take it by force, no matter how many Russians live there, or wish it was that way.

i maybe very wrong, but i seem to recall a strong push back in the 90s to try and convince Ukraine to join NATO, but Russia basically forbid that from happening. i always had hoped Russia would become a NATO member in hopes that in so doing there would be an even greater reduction in this type of thing happening. obviously the past few years have seen an increase in tension between the US and Russia. no, not going to place any blame on the US or our president(s) for that as Putin has undeniably been the reason for the gradually increasing rift. very unfortunate Putin was never replaced by a more West Friendly leader prior to all of this. always had hope for a true solid partnership between Russia and US and NATO. if it had happened, none of this Ukrainian business would be happening and who knows if Russia would have still supplied so much to the Arabs in the way of military support and whether or not the entire Middle East situation would be dramatically different.

obviously that is all just an academic exercise, and reality is now rearing an ugly head instead.

 

[Michchamp]

champ, I am curious about whether you would actually support US military involvement if Russia initiates war and invades Ukraine in a takeover attempt. I recognize that such force would be very different from Iraq, so not bringing that element into play. just saying you have traditionally shown a very anti-war personality but this situation seems to have at a minimum brought you to an understanding it might happen.

...

I'm not anti-war... I just don't think we've been in a war that was necessary in my lifetime. Maybe the 1990 Persian Gulf war. I very much believe Eisenhower was not fucking around when he gave his "military industrial complex" speech

Anyways, assuming this is just a limited occupation, and Putin's strategy is to take Crimea, and potentially use his willingness to fight as bargaining chips with the west, most likely to keep Ukraine neutral (i.e. if Ukraine won't join his customs union, at least they won't join the EU either)... assuming that's true, I don't think we should attack Russia over Ukraine. We would really be starting WWIII at that point.

I do think we should back Ukraine like we backed Afghanistan when the USSR invaded if it comes to a full-blown invasion... supply them with intelligence, weapons, etc.

and obviously, if Russia attacks any NATO members, we pretty much have to drop the gloves and fight. I don't think it would come to that though.

bottom line is... I'd like to see Ukraine aligned with the EU because of my own personal connections to the country. If this doesn't happen, I'd like to see it at least stay out of Russia's Eurasian Union. If neither of those things happen, well, that will suck, but I still don't think we have any long term reasons to fear Russia. Their border noticeably shrank after 1991, and we've ringed them with NATO nations now. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, etc.

 

[food4thought]

Yeah guys, I read my post and found it really didn't express my core point very well... I got sidetracked on how bad it could be, and how I personally think we really have very little choice but to become involved should Russia push further.

Really, I am praying for a peaceful settlement... something that crossed my mind would be getting Putin to pull out on the basis of having a Ukranian referendum on splitting between east and west. Of course, given the type of politics they play over there, a vote might not mean anything unless there is heavy UN oversite... even then, the potential for fraudulent results exist. I just thought this would be one possible way for both Russia and the west to win (assuming there are a large number of ethnic Russian Ukrainians who would prefer to split). Those districts in Ukrain who voted to split would then have the option of voting themselves into a Russian state or staying independent but just leaning towards Russia socio-politically-economically. democracy wins, and Putin get's perhaps much more than Crimea.

MichChamp... you have connections over there; do you know if the ethnic Russians really want to split and/or become part of Russia? Or is it more just general hatred for the way the Ukrain government is being run?

Sorry if this stuff is kind of common knowledge, I've been avoiding news broadcasts for quite a while now because I realized every network/host/blogger was biased and I'd never get a real clear picture of reality from any of them :/

 

[Gulo Blue]

participation in this movie made Fred Thompson a qualified Russian policy expert.

I like the scene in his office better.

What's their plan, son?
Russians don't take a dump without a plan.

 

[zyxt9]

I'm not anti-war... I just don't think we've been in a war that was necessary in my lifetime. Maybe the 1990 Persian Gulf war. I very much believe Eisenhower was not fucking around when he gave his "military industrial complex" speech

Anyways, assuming this is just a limited occupation, and Putin's strategy is to take Crimea, and potentially use his willingness to fight as bargaining chips with the west, most likely to keep Ukraine neutral (i.e. if Ukraine won't join his customs union, at least they won't join the EU either)... assuming that's true, I don't think we should attack Russia over Ukraine. We would really be starting WWIII at that point.

I do think we should back Ukraine like we backed Afghanistan when the USSR invaded if it comes to a full-blown invasion... supply them with intelligence, weapons, etc.

and obviously, if Russia attacks any NATO members, we pretty much have to drop the gloves and fight. I don't think it would come to that though.

bottom line is... I'd like to see Ukraine aligned with the EU because of my own personal connections to the country. If this doesn't happen, I'd like to see it at least stay out of Russia's Eurasian Union. If neither of those things happen, well, that will suck, but I still don't think we have any long term reasons to fear Russia. Their border noticeably shrank after 1991, and we've ringed them with NATO nations now. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, etc.

awesome post and response. cannot disagree with a single point but would like to think if we actually send troops to fight in Ukraine that they would be under strict orders to not cross into Russia...but we all know that can be a difficult thing during a firefight to honor and would not put it past Putin to claim the US had troops in Russia even if they never came closer than 100 miles.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Meanwhile Viking River Cruises has indefinitely suspended its Crimea River tour.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Poland is mobilizing tanks.

I can't find the link now and I forgot to note who said it, but someone from Poland was quoted saying something about how history has taught us that appeasing someone to buy time usually buys little time anyway.

 

[Michchamp]

...

MichChamp... you have connections over there; do you know if the ethnic Russians really want to split and/or become part of Russia? Or is it more just general hatred for the way the Ukrain government is being run?

Sorry if this stuff is kind of common knowledge, I've been avoiding news broadcasts for quite a while now because I realized every network/host/blogger was biased and I'd never get a real clear picture of reality from any of them :/

it really is a gray area. support for or against Moscow is stronger the further east you go. I don't think in any region is support for Moscow unanimous.

Most of Ukraine was anti-Yanukovich; he was just a terrible leader. While pretty much everyone wanted him out, not everyone will want to join the EU afterward.

I believe most ethnic Ukrainians are opposed to the Russian Eurasian Union initiative. While they may not support EU membership, they are not in favor of leaning east. Ethnic Russians on the other hand, are at least divided... though I'm not sure how the percentage breaks down. There's no clear answer, and I don't think they really have effective polling for this sort of thing like we do.

bottom line though... the nation as a whole is still mostly ethnic Ukrainian, and given that most ethnic Ukrainians are opposed to closer ties to Moscow, that has to carry the day, if there were fair elections conducted.

see this map, for an example (blue is Ukrainian speaking, Red, Russian, green Romanian, and purple Bulgarian I think:

I didn't post this article yet, but everyone should read it. I think it gives the clearest explanation of what the causes underlying the initial protests were, why they exploded into violence, and what is at stake going forward. The article also draws clear distinctions between what propaganda is being reported, and why, and keeps U.S. domestic politics out of it. (It's irritating listening to Fox News and Krauthammer, etc. try to score points against Obama already... no one knows what is going to happen, and hell... even Bush didn't lift a finger when Russia went into Georgia in '08.) Russia is painting all the protestors with a broad brush as "fascists" and "Nazis" and FWIW, some Americans have been too, and they should know better. (allegedly, Ron Paul's newsletter parroted the Russian viewpoint !?!?!)

Poland is mobilizing tanks.

I can't find the link now and I forgot to note who said it, but someone from Poland was quoted saying something about how history has taught us that appeasing someone to buy time usually buys little time anyway.

The Poles HATE the Russians. And given their history there, they are not going to sit back and let Russian tanks creep up to their border. it looks like Russia will have to fight both Ukraine and Poland, and therefore NATO. If NATO does not support Poland, a member state, it has essentially violated it's charter.

I think we have to fight then. A lot of the BS comments from the Right here about "drawing lines in the sand" and "looking tough" is just empty sabre rattling... but honoring a treaty is another matter.

 

[Gulo Blue]

(allegedly, Ron Paul's newsletter parroted the Russian viewpoint !?!?!)

I don't know what his newsletter said, but it would be shocking if he said anything hinting of being pro-intervention. He voted against everything involving Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Russia has given a deadline: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26413953

Russian military gives Ukrainian forces in Crimea until 03:00 GMT on Tuesday to surrender or face assault, Ukrainian officials say

 

[Gulo Blue]

So...weird question, since the ruble is dropping, if all your money was in rubles and you couldn't do anything about it except convert to bitcoin, would you? How much?

 

[Michchamp]

Russia has given a deadline: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26413953

Russian military gives Ukrainian forces in Crimea until 03:00 GMT on Tuesday to surrender or face assault, Ukrainian officials say

they oughta lay down their arms and march out. negotiate a surrender with the right to leave the Crimea (i.e. don't become POWs). no sense starting the war in a heavily outnumbered battle.

blockade the Russians on Crimea, and reinforce the borders with Russia, and probably Bylorussia as well (can't trust them in this either).

the Ukrainian navy might as well surrender their ships as well. I think they have one seagoing frigate and an old Soviet sub (which is not operational). they'd be better off fighting as marines on land.

 

[Michchamp]

I don't know what his newsletter said, but it would be shocking if he said anything hinting of being pro-intervention. He voted against everything involving Iraq and Afghanistan.

that's fine, but to be anti-interventionist by claiming the Ukrainian opposition is fascist is stupid. he's essentially endorsing Russia's casus belli.

 

[Gulo Blue]

the Ukrainian navy might as well surrender their ships as well. I think they have one seagoing frigate and an old Soviet sub (which is not operational). they'd be better off fighting as marines on land.

You mean the Crimean Navy.

http://rt.com/news/navy-chief-ukraine-crimea-485/

"Crimea forms its own fleet as Ukraine Navy chief sides with region"

...and by that, what is really meant is "Surrender the ships to Russia? Done."