Russian Bear eying the Ukraine...

[ouwasp]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/27/us-ukraine-crisis-crimea-idUSBREA1P23U20140227

We'll see how far this goes...I read the Russian tricolor was actually raised over a Ukrainian gov't HQ...what popped into my mind was "I bet the Ukrainians wish they had those nukes they handed over to the Russkies back in the early 90s". Without proper maintenance, they wouldn't work now anyways, but still...what do they have to hold back the Big Bear if Mother Russia decides to pounce? Will the US do anything? I saw a headline that mentioned BHO warning something or other, but can't find it now...

[diverdog]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/27/us-ukraine-crisis-crimea-idUSBREA1P23U20140227

We'll see how far this goes...I read the Russian tricolor was actually raised over a Ukrainian gov't HQ...what popped into my mind was "I bet the Ukrainians wish they had those nukes they handed over to the Russkies back in the early 90s". Without proper maintenance, they wouldn't work now anyways, but still...what do they have to hold back the Big Bear if Mother Russia decides to pounce? Will the US do anything? I saw a headline that mentioned BHO warning something or other, but can't find it now...

The Ukraine is a corrupt cesspool. Let Russia have them. We do not need that headache.

[SoonerProphet]

The Black Sea fleet is based out of Sevastopol, so the Ruskies have a legitimate interest in the Crimea. What can the US and EU do, the Ukrainian government is close to default...should we float them a loan. Military adventurism sounds like a real stupid idea.

[8timechamps]

I try to be as reasonable as possible when it comes to Obama, but he made a big mistake today. I think his foreign policy is terrible to start with, but he would have been much better off keeping his mouth shut on this one. Warning Russia not to invade the Ukraine is a mistake, and frankly, something we aren't prepared to deal with. Whomever advised him that making a statement on this issue was a good idea should be punched in the throat, then fired. In that order.

We need to leave Ukraine the hell alone. If the EU wants to be involved, then have at it, otherwise, we need to sit this one out.

[hawaii 5-0]

I hope we sit onthe sideline for this one.

Lots of folks in eastern Ukraine like the Ruskies.

I imagine the Ukraine will split in two (or more) like several other eastern European nations.


5-0

[olevetonahill]

Never Fear Superstupid is here!

http://www.bartcop.com/super-obama.jpg

[ouwasp]

Our vital national security interests are not at stake here and I know of no one advocating any sort of .military intervention.

But it is worth noting the Russians are on prowl again. Cue up The Empire Strikes Back theme song..

[diverdog]

I try to be as reasonable as possible when it comes to Obama, but he made a big mistake today. I think his foreign policy is terrible to start with, but he would have been much better off keeping his mouth shut on this one. Warning Russia not to invade the Ukraine is a mistake, and frankly, something we aren't prepared to deal with. Whomever advised him that making a statement on this issue was a good idea should be punched in the throat, then fired. In that order.

We need to leave Ukraine the hell alone. If the EU wants to be involved, then have at it, otherwise, we need to sit this one out.

Great post.

[FaninAma]

Pull our ambassador. Boycott the G-8 meeting in Solchi. Freeze Russian accounts in the
US especially those with ties to the Russian Mob.

Obama will do none of these but instead will play Betty White in her role in the Snickers commercial.

[8timechamps]

Pull our ambassador. Boycott the G-8 meeting in Solchi. Freeze Russian accounts in the
US especially those with ties to the Russian Mob.

Obama will do none of these but instead will play Betty White in her role in the Snickers commercial.

Completely agree.

I am firmly against any US involvement in this situation, but I also realize that Russia can't be allowed to simply walk in and declare part of a sovereign nation as theirs. The precedent could lead to a lot of unwanted aggression from others.

Not only should military involvement not be on the table, it shouldn't be in the same room as the table. However, the things you mention are the best ways to use "diplomacy" to send a message without getting the country involved.

I did hear today that the US, England and Canada have elected not to attend the G8 meetings, so that's at least a start. I'm not sure what the White House is waiting on in regard to your other suggestions.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

There isn't any part of the Ukraine that anyone would want. The western part is so impoverished, that they were desperate to get back to the "good ole days" when they were part of Poland and Rumania. Even if Russia lets them go, I sincerely doubt anyone in the EU is actively going to embrace them back.

I think next you will see Putin go after Belarus, but I don't think he has the big brass ones to go after the Baltic States. That would pretty much tie our hands up in defending them as they are a member of NATO.

[8timechamps]

There isn't any part of the Ukraine that anyone would want. The western part is so impoverished, that they were desperate to get back to the "good ole days" when they were part of Poland and Rumania. Even if Russia lets them go, I sincerely doubt anyone in the EU is actively going to embrace them back.

I think next you will see Putin go after Belarus, but I don't think he has the big brass ones to go after the Baltic States. That would pretty much tie our hands up in defending them as they are a member of NATO.

A month ago I would have thought your comment (regarding Putin and Belarus) was crazy. Now, I think that is a reasonable concern. Afterall, he pretty much broke every international law and even his countries own treaty with the Ukraine when he sent troops in, there's no reason to really believe he wouldn't go after more.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

A month ago I would have thought your comment (regarding Putin and Belarus) was crazy. Now, I think that is a reasonable concern. Afterall, he pretty much broke every international law and even his countries own treaty with the Ukraine when he sent troops in, there's no reason to really believe he wouldn't go after more.

The guy, whether intentional or not, is acting like Mussolini. He is much smarter about it, having come up through the KGB, but the ambition is still there. The whole crap with Georgia 5 years ago pretty much assured him that NATO wasn't going to do anything about him invading his former republics. If George W Bush isn't going to go to war with you when you do something that audacious, then there isn't a chance any other president would do it over the Ukraine. (Of course, I think W would have pulled the trigger on the Ukraine since what Georgia was doing was something America couldn't support).

Basically, post-Georgia/post-Bush, my thinking is that he is funding/training agitators to give him reasons to move in and protect Russian interests. That is why I think he'll pull off another semi-bloodless invasion on Belarus. What worries me is "Victor's Disease". If he gets greedy then this could escalate as fast as Hitler invading Poland.

[BigTip]

Sarah Palin getting a nice "I told you so" redemption. Not such a crazy person afterall, eh main stream media?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/01/sarah-palin-vladimir-putin_n_4880874.html

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Sarah Palin getting a nice "I told you so" redemption. Not such a crazy person afterall, eh main stream media?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/01/sarah-palin-vladimir-putin_n_4880874.html

She is taking credit for a short term statement that came true in the long term. It is the difference in me saying OU will win a national title in football [implied this year] vs OU will win another national title in football [implied future].

[okie52]

She is taking credit for a short term statement that came true in the long term. It is the difference in me saying OU will win a national title in football [implied this year] vs OU will win another national title in football [implied future].

5-6 years isn't really that long term...

[rock on sooner]

Completely agree.

I am firmly against any US involvement in this situation, but I also realize that Russia can't be allowed to simply walk in and declare part of a sovereign nation as theirs. The precedent could lead to a lot of unwanted aggression from others.

Not only should military involvement not be on the table, it shouldn't be in the same room as the table. However, the things you mention are the best ways to use "diplomacy" to send a message without getting the country involved.

I did hear today that the US, England and Canada have elected not to attend the G8 meetings, so that's at least a start. I'm not sure what the White House is waiting on in regard to your other suggestions.

Couple of points here...I agree that we don't need to be involved, short of
someone's mention about boycotting Sochi and using economic sanctions
on Russia. Obama's hand was sort of forced by the internal politics of our
two party system...the right yelping about doing something, moderates sitting
on their hands, the hawkish left yelping about doing something. That said, it
looks like Putin wants to reunite the USSR, one failed state at a time and he's
doing it with Stalin-like activity.

Turning the economic screws on a weak Russian economy will damage them,
eventually...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

5-6 years isn't really that long term...

For us, no. In Politics, it is an eternity.

[okie52]

For us, no. In Politics, it is an eternity.

Given the short attention span of the American voter this is probably true...just like Obama stating marriage was between a man and a woman in 2008......

[SoonerProphet]

Basically, post-Georgia/post-Bush, my thinking is that he is funding/training agitators to give him reasons to move in and protect Russian interests. That is why I think he'll pull off another semi-bloodless invasion on Belarus. What worries me is "Victor's Disease". If he gets greedy then this could escalate as fast as Hitler invading Poland.

So Western backed funding/training agitators into Russia's sphere of influence is to be ignored. The hypocrisy of the Western nations was summed up best by the freak show that is John Kerry, "[Y] just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text," what a crock of sh!t that is. How the McCains, Graham's, and Nulands of the world can ever be taken seriously is beyond me.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

So Western backed funding/training agitators into Russia's sphere of influence is to be ignored. The hypocrisy of the Western nations was summed up best by the freak show that is John Kerry, "[Y] just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text," what a crock of sh!t that is. How the McCains, Graham's, and Nulands of the world can ever be taken seriously is beyond me.

As far as the US goes, we need to stop while we are wayyyy behind. Every single person that the US has put into power since Syngman Rhee has ended up being an opposition killing despot.

[ouwasp]

as this drags on, I'm beginning to sorta think: If the Ukrainian military doesn't care to defend its nation's sovereignty, why should we be all that concerned?

I know that is an overly-simplistic viewpoint. And that Ukrainian armed forces wouldn't stand a chance against against the Russian fascists. Etc.

There do seem to be some parallels to 1930s Europe and the nazis absorbing their neighbors. I'm an old cold warrior, will always be deeply suspicious of anything coming out of Moscow or Beijing, or any other commie/ neo-commie stronghold, and I'm usually of the opinion to do whatever is necessary to portray them to be the punks they are.

So I'm not sure what course BHO, our State Dept, and allies should take. Ignoring it won't help anything. But is there anything to be helped? What is there to do?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

as this drags on, I'm beginning to sorta think: If the Ukrainian military doesn't care to defend its nation's sovereignty, why should we be all that concerned?

I know that is an overly-simplistic viewpoint. And that Ukrainian armed forces wouldn't stand a chance against against the Russian fascists. Etc.

There do seem to be some parallels to 1930s Europe and the nazis absorbing their neighbors. I'm an old cold warrior, will always be deeply suspicious of anything coming out of Moscow or Beijing, or any other commie/ neo-commie stronghold, and I'm usually of the opinion to do whatever is necessary to portray them to be the punks they are.

So I'm not sure what course BHO, our State Dept, and allies should take. Ignoring it won't help anything. But is there anything to be helped? What is there to do?

That depends on whether they can look at this objectively.

Situation Losers:
1. Russia - There are 4 counties out of 70 some-odd that have anywhere near close to Russia's per capita income. So unless they only annex those eastern counties and the Crimea, they are basically taking on a mafia-saturated welfare state. If they annex the whole thing, it is going to cost them a crapton of money to get the standard of living up, because Poland and Rumania are not going to welcome immigration from the western provinces.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Gdpercapita_Russia.png

2. Poland and Rumania - Poof goes the buffer zone

Situation Winners:

1. Ukraine - we are giving them money, Russia will give them money. This is basically the best possible scenario for them to get outside capital infused

Belarus is in marginally better shape. As they have taken strides to become an export economy, but they still aren't any better than Russia.

[ouwasp]

good info jkm... the interesting thing is, just an hour or so ago I heard some sort of Russian statement the mentioned the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. So, yeah, the Russians know what's what. This has been planned for along time.

The question is: when, if ever, will the Ukrainian military do anything? Do they have a tripwire? Or are they going to obligingly allow their nation to be divided, once again being reminiscent of 1938 Czechoslovakia. And if the world witnesses the Bear pounce upon Ukraine with claws out, will there be any strong sentiment anywhere to actually do anything? I'm thinking the prevailing attitude will be nope, not our problem.

[8timechamps]

The guy, whether intentional or not, is acting like Mussolini. He is much smarter about it, having come up through the KGB, but the ambition is still there. The whole crap with Georgia 5 years ago pretty much assured him that NATO wasn't going to do anything about him invading his former republics. If George W Bush isn't going to go to war with you when you do something that audacious, then there isn't a chance any other president would do it over the Ukraine. (Of course, I think W would have pulled the trigger on the Ukraine since what Georgia was doing was something America couldn't support).

Basically, post-Georgia/post-Bush, my thinking is that he is funding/training agitators to give him reasons to move in and protect Russian interests. That is why I think he'll pull off another semi-bloodless invasion on Belarus. What worries me is "Victor's Disease". If he gets greedy then this could escalate as fast as Hitler invading Poland.

I've had discussions with folks (long before this happened) about Putin, and I've believed all along he was a hardliner. It's not hard to connect the dots, after all, he was in the KGB for a long time. Nonetheless, he's not dumb, he knows that he can make these moves and nobody will do anything to stop him.

The only thing I'm really watching now is German's reaction (not so much immediately, but in the near term). Right now, they aren't taking the same stance as the rest of the "west", but they have a lot more as stake (financially) than anyone else. However, at some point their feet are going to be held to the fire, and we'll see how that goes.

[SoonerProphet]

The question is: when, if ever, will the Ukrainian military do anything? Do they have a tripwire? Or are they going to obligingly allow their nation to be divided, once again being reminiscent of 1938 Czechoslovakia. And if the world witnesses the Bear pounce upon Ukraine with claws out, will there be any strong sentiment anywhere to actually do anything? I'm thinking the prevailing attitude will be nope, not our problem.

One answer to that question is the current government is suffering a crisis of legitimacy. I don't think the Western installed rump parliament led by our banking pal Yatshisname has much legal ground to stand on. Might be the Ukrainian military is just as split as the former government. Currently the conflict is seemingly isolated to the Crimea. It has flirted with autonomy off and on after the Soviet breakup. A complete absorption of the Ukraine is not what the Russians want.

[8timechamps]

as this drags on, I'm beginning to sorta think: If the Ukrainian military doesn't care to defend its nation's sovereignty, why should we be all that concerned?

I know that is an overly-simplistic viewpoint. And that Ukrainian armed forces wouldn't stand a chance against against the Russian fascists. Etc.

There do seem to be some parallels to 1930s Europe and the nazis absorbing their neighbors. I'm an old cold warrior, will always be deeply suspicious of anything coming out of Moscow or Beijing, or any other commie/ neo-commie stronghold, and I'm usually of the opinion to do whatever is necessary to portray them to be the punks they are.

So I'm not sure what course BHO, our State Dept, and allies should take. Ignoring it won't help anything. But is there anything to be helped? What is there to do?

I'm not sure how "concerned" I am about Crimea, since there is a lot more to that region than just being within the borders of the Ukraine. However, I am concerned about the precedent this could set. First, I don't think Putin would give a second thought to annexing more of the Ukraine (eastern regions) and Belarus, all in the name of "the Russions people living in those lands want us there!". Once that happens, that sends a pretty clear message to China that they can take the disputed islands without fear of any NATO interdiction. More than anything, I'm concerned that our reaction makes the US look weak and unprepared to handle these types of things (which, apparently we are).

I'm not going to pretend I know the best actions to take, but a lot of this started with the "red line" in Syria. More than anything, it reaffirms that this administration is all talk on foreign issues. I'd rather the White House come out and say "We're not getting involved" than to make idle threats and warnings.

[8timechamps]

One answer to that question is the current government is suffering a crisis of legitimacy. I don't think the Western installed rump parliament led by our banking pal Yatshisname has much legal ground to stand on. Might be the Ukrainian military is just as split as the former government. Currently the conflict is seemingly isolated to the Crimea. It has flirted with autonomy off and on after the Soviet breakup. A complete absorption of the Ukraine is not what the Russians want.

I think that is a large part of the inaction by the Ukrainian military. The other reasons are two-fold:

1. The Ukrainians are't dumb, they know if they start something, they won't hold up long without help (and it doesn't appear there is any help on the horizon...at least not militarily).

2. Even though their sovereign soil has been invaded, no shots have been fired, and they certainly don't want to be the one's firing first.

[SoonerProphet]

I'm not sure how "concerned" I am about Crimea, since there is a lot more to that region than just being within the borders of the Ukraine. However, I am concerned about the precedent this could set. First, I don't think Putin would give a second thought to annexing more of the Ukraine (eastern regions) and Belarus, all in the name of "the Russions people living in those lands want us there!". Once that happens, that sends a pretty clear message to China that they can take the disputed islands without fear of any NATO interdiction. More than anything, I'm concerned that our reaction makes the US look weak and unprepared to handle these types of things (which, apparently we are).

I'm not going to pretend I know the best actions to take, but a lot of this started with the "red line" in Syria. More than anything, it reaffirms that this administration is all talk on foreign issues. I'd rather the White House come out and say "We're not getting involved" than to make idle threats and warnings.

I don't know if I buy into that line of reasoning, the old post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Attacking the Syrians would have not deterred the Russian from attacking to protect their interests in what the see as a threat to stability in their backyard. Hawks of all types have touted the "weakness is provocative" line and it doesn't hold up to much scrutiny.

Let's face facts, Nuland and the EU pushed for this current poking of the bear ritual the neocons love to do, it has blown up in their faces.

[BigTip]

this current poking of the bear ritual the neocons love to do, it has blown up in their faces.
Huh? I have no idea what you are talking about.

Poking a bear would make them mad and force them to attack you.
Making yourself appear big and strong would deter a bear from attacking you.

I need a quote or a source or something to make your analogy valid. I can't think of a single action where an American politician or political group was advocating provocation of Russia into a fight.

[SoonerProphet]

Huh? I have no idea what you are talking about.

Poking a bear would make them mad and force them to attack you.
Making yourself appear big and strong would deter a bear from attacking you.

I need a quote or a source or something to make your analogy valid. I can't think of a single action where an American politician or political group was advocating provocation of Russia into a fight.

Victoria Nuland's leaked phone conversation to Ambassador Pyatt gives a rather insightful look into who exactly she feels needs to be the pm in the Ukraine. We had members of our government protesting and cheerleading in maidan square, proselytizing the joys of austerity and debt. I'd say the Russians might be rather displeased. Don't forget the whole Georgian fiasco in 08, had we listened to mcain and the neocons we'd of gone to war in the Caucuses.

[BigTip]

Hmmm. So not much really.

Trying to paint the "neocons" as snorting, wildeyed, hawkish types itching for a fight is not only far fetched, but also passe these days.

[hawaii 5-0]

There's a fat natural gas pipeline running from Russia to Germany.

There's a reason Germany is not taking a stance against the Russkies.


Also the Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1959 or so. Before that it was part of Russia for 200 years.

The history, plus the only major warm water Russian naval port with retired Russian naval folks and their families nearby and I fully understand why Putin would want to keep the Crimea.


5-0

[SoonerProphet]

Hmmm. So not much really.

Trying to paint the "neocons" as snorting, wildeyed, hawkish types itching for a fight is not only far fetched, but also passe these days.

Sure, except when a senior senator and the assistant sec. of state are actively engaged to remove an elected government. Passé huh? I guess that means nobody wants to discuss the epic clusterf*cks they got us in. Best to put our heads in the sand and ignore the obvious.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

There's a fat natural gas pipeline running from Russia to Germany.

There's a reason Germany is not taking a stance against the Russkies.


Also the Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1959 or so. Before that it was part of Russia for 200 years.

The history, plus the only major warm water Russian naval port with retired Russian naval folks and their families nearby and I fully understand why Putin would want to keep the Crimea.


5-0

They had 99 year leases on the Sevastopol base signed when the Ukraine went independent. This doesn't even get into what a paper tiger the Baltic Sea fleet is since Turkey won't let them through the Dardanelles.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Victoria Nuland's leaked phone conversation to Ambassador Pyatt gives a rather insightful look into who exactly she feels needs to be the pm in the Ukraine. We had members of our government protesting and cheerleading in maidan square, proselytizing the joys of austerity and debt. I'd say the Russians might be rather displeased. Don't forget the whole Georgian fiasco in 08, had we listened to mcain and the neocons we'd of gone to war in the Caucuses.

I remember this differently than you do. I remember him complaining about NATO more than anything. Had they been a part of NATO then yes we would have had to defend them, but they weren't so it was moot. Heck, the only people that really screamed about it were the Baltic states. From a US perspective, what Georgia was doing to the South Ossetia population should have put us squarely on the side of Russia.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/08/mccain_on_the_russian_invasion.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_and_NATO

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I found this amusing:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/03/ukraine-russia-crimea-stats

[OU68]

Reminds me of the cartoon back in the "oil" days of a mouse giving the finger to an eagle...

[olevetonahill]

Reminds me of the cartoon back in the "oil" days of a mouse giving the finger to an eagle...

Heh
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQPTKUai3LJH1tIN0CaN5IO4dKeFqHf1 uOv8qfsd7q1u7XycrGfaA

[8timechamps]

I don't know if I buy into that line of reasoning, the old post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Attacking the Syrians would have not deterred the Russian from attacking to protect their interests in what the see as a threat to stability in their backyard. Hawks of all types have touted the "weakness is provocative" line and it doesn't hold up to much scrutiny.

Let's face facts, Nuland and the EU pushed for this current poking of the bear ritual the neocons love to do, it has blown up in their faces.

You really don't believe the"red line" ordeal didn't send a message to Putin? Of course it did. We were within hours of air attacks on Syria, and Putin steps in and the rest is history. Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy we didn't intervene although nothing much has really changed in Syria. However, in geopolitical terms, that absolutely sent a message to Putin.

It's not Post hoc ergo proter hoc when 1+1 absolutely (and eventually) equals 2.

[8timechamps]

Victoria Nuland's leaked phone conversation to Ambassador Pyatt gives a rather insightful look into who exactly she feels needs to be the pm in the Ukraine. We had members of our government protesting and cheerleading in maidan square, proselytizing the joys of austerity and debt. I'd say the Russians might be rather displeased. Don't forget the whole Georgian fiasco in 08, had we listened to mcain and the neocons we'd of gone to war in the Caucuses.

I never agree with this line of reasoning. Has the US ever installed a 'puppet' government for the benefit of the US? Sure. Does it happen every time the citizens of a country protest and oust a current dictator/leader? No.

Which country on earth has the oldest democracy? Let's suppose you just took control of a country (as a citizen of said country), and the reason you are in control is because the people want a democracy. Who would you call on for guidance? Who may have some insight on how to establish and run such a system of government?

This is not a US generated or led uprising/ousting. This is home grown, and that's exactly why Russia is in the Crimea right now.

[SoonerProphet]

You really don't believe the"red line" ordeal didn't send a message to Putin? Of course it did. We were within hours of air attacks on Syria, and Putin steps in and the rest is history. Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy we didn't intervene although nothing much has really changed in Syria. However, in geopolitical terms, that absolutely sent a message to Putin.

It's not Post hoc ergo proter hoc when 1+1 absolutely (and eventually) equals 2.

I think this assumption is because we didn't take decisive action in Syria it led to a failure to deter Russia is a false one. To attack Syria against strong protestations not to would have infuriated Moscow and have made advances into the Ukraine more likely. They already blame the crisis on Western meddling and have stated such, they view the actions in Maidan as an illegal putsch. Increasing paranoia in Russia does not make sense for the case of deterrence as far as I can tell.

[SoonerProphet]

I never agree with this line of reasoning. Has the US ever installed a 'puppet' government for the benefit of the US? Sure. Does it happen every time the citizens of a country protest and oust a current dictator/leader? No.

Which country on earth has the oldest democracy? Let's suppose you just took control of a country (as a citizen of said country), and the reason you are in control is because the people want a democracy. Who would you call on for guidance? Who may have some insight on how to establish and run such a system of government?

This is not a US generated or led uprising/ousting. This is home grown, and that's exactly why Russia is in the Crimea right now.

It was pretty blatant attempt at direct intervention. The phone call about Yatsihisname as pm, Nuland handing out donuts, McCain's constant adventurism, what other conclusions do you expect the Kremlin and Duma to make. Lets be clear about wanting "democracy" too, this was an elected government that was removed by a coup. The Regions Party made many concessions and were rejected out of hand. Nuland and Pyatt need to be called to the carpet for this ordeal and it rests on their shoulders.

[8timechamps]

I think this assumption is because we didn't take decisive action in Syria it led to a failure to deter Russia is a false one. To attack Syria against strong protestations not to would have infuriated Moscow and have made advances into the Ukraine more likely. They already blame the crisis on Western meddling and have stated such, they view the actions in Maidan as an illegal putsch. Increasing paranoia in Russia does not make sense for the case of deterrence as far as I can tell.

On this one, we'll just have to agree to disagree.



It was pretty blatant attempt at direct intervention. The phone call about Yatsihisname as pm, Nuland handing out donuts, McCain's constant adventurism, what other conclusions do you expect the Kremlin and Duma to make. Lets be clear about wanting "democracy" too, this was an elected government that was removed by a coup. The Regions Party made many concessions and were rejected out of hand. Nuland and Pyatt need to be called to the carpet for this ordeal and it rests on their shoulders.

I don't really think we can call this a coup, as I believe he was actually voted out by the legislation. I've used the word "coup" too, but I think it's worth noting that this really wasn't, and the government operated within their constitution.

I'm not under the misguided impression that the US has no interest in a west leaning democracy in the Ukraine, obviously that's the case. However, I'm not complete sure, but I think Nyatt was acting on an invitation from the Ukraine. Clearly, her words weren't what the public is used to hearing, but I don't think her involvement was being forced. You do bring up an interesting point though, to what extent is the invasion a response to the leaked phone call. Don't get me wrong, I think this has been planned for a long time, but the timing certainly makes it interesting.

[SoonerProphet]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/our-entirely-self-inflicted-ukraine-disaster/

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/our-entirely-self-inflicted-ukraine-disaster/

As I said above, we need to stop while we are behind.


The US, historically, is really really good at signals intelligence (the whole Snowden affair). From 1933 -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty


What was unknown to the participants of the Conference was that the American "Black Chamber" (the Cypher Bureau, a US intelligence service), commanded by Herbert Yardley, was spying on the delegations' communications with their home capitals. In particular, Japanese communications were penetrated thoroughly, and American negotiators were able to get the minimum possible deal the Japanese had indicated they would accept, less than which they would renounce the Conference. As this ratio value was unpopular with much of the Imperial Japanese Navy and with the increasingly active and important ultranationalist groups, the value the Japanese Government accepted was the cause of much suspicion and accusation among Japanese politicians and Naval officers

This, of course, is good and bad from an immediate threat point. We get so dependent on reading someone else's mail that if they properly compartmentalize we have zero clue as to what is coming (see Harbor, Pearl).

On the flip side, we are just terribad at reading how the cards are going to fall when we try to influence the internal politics of another entity. Most of the time, all we do is getting a lot of common citizens killed for no reason under some harsh dictator.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_sponsored_regime_change

[SoonerProphet]

Seems to be some issues concerning which side the snipers in maidan actually were on.

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/03/05/leaked_eu_officials_speculate_kiev_snipers_acted_o n_protesters_orders

[FaninAma]

She is taking credit for a short term statement that came true in the long term. It is the difference in me saying OU will win a national title in football [implied this year] vs OU will win another national title in football [implied future].

Not exactly. She predicted it would happen during Obama's presidency. That isn't exactly an open ended period of time.

[FaninAma]

As I said above, we need to stop while we are behind.


The US, historically, is really really good at signals intelligence (the whole Snowden affair). From 1933 -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty



This, of course, is good and bad from an immediate threat point. We get so dependent on reading someone else's mail that if they properly compartmentalize we have zero clue as to what is coming (see Harbor, Pearl).

On the flip side, we are just terribad at reading how the cards are going to fall when we try to influence the internal politics of another entity. Most of the time, all we do is getting a lot of common citizens killed for no reason under some harsh dictator.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_sponsored_regime_change

See Iran and the Mosadeq saga.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Not exactly. She predicted it would happen during Obama's presidency. That isn't exactly an open ended period of time.

Her quote ->


In October 2008, after Russia's invasion of neighboring Georgia emerged as a foreign policy flashpoint in the homestretch of a heated campaign, Palin told an audience in Nevada, "After the Russian army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama's reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia's Putin to invade Ukraine next."

[8timechamps]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/our-entirely-self-inflicted-ukraine-disaster/

Eh, that's more of an editorial. This part didn't make much sense to me:


What drives it? Or more precisely, what is the motivation to try to drive the sphere of Western influence right up to Russia’s borders? Is it because our ambitions (and whose, exactly?) are insatiable? Because that seems to be it: we aren’t satisfied with the liberation of the satellites of Eastern Europe, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, former Cold War flashpoints and now NATO members; with the reunification of Germany and under Western auspices, so that Berlin is now a virtual capital of Nato; with the Baltic states as NATO members too. There seemed to be no end to it.

It's not like that happened a few years ago, so I don't really get the idea that we've become some uprising-hungry merchant of democracy consistently meddling in post Soviet Union nations. I just don't really buy the idea that the US caused any of what is going on in the Ukraine.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

It's not like that happened a few years ago, so I don't really get the idea that we've become some uprising-hungry merchant of democracy consistently meddling in post Soviet Union nations. I just don't really buy the idea that the US caused any of what is going on in the Ukraine.

I'm not sure if you know the history here, but the Russians have a longstanding irritation with NATO since they were rejected for membership in 1954. That was when they created the Warsaw Pact as a counterbalance to what they felt was NATO being a pawn to Germany rearming. Basically Germany + US and Europe wasn't something they wanted to fight alone. So you have to look at it from there point of view -> As long as there was a buffer zone between them and NATO countries they didn't have to worry about little things like border disputes or cracking a few neighbor country skulls getting them into a full blown war. But as NATO expands (and more importantly keeps absorbing 1st world countries with 1st world military capabilities that are now augmented with US Tech), it has to be viewed as a threat ESPECIALLY if these newly added countries have a huge bone to pick with Moscow.

TLDR -> The problem as the Russians see it is that NATO is basically a UN consisting of only 1st world countries with them as its only enemy.

[ouwasp]

Talked to my middle school students about this today...had to give them a very brief rundown on the Evil Empire, told 'em why Russia values the Crimea, and ended with this: Sometimes Bullies Win

That's what is happening here.

[8timechamps]

I'm not sure if you know the history here, but the Russians have a longstanding irritation with NATO since they were rejected for membership in 1954. That was when they created the Warsaw Pact as a counterbalance to what they felt was NATO being a pawn to Germany rearming. Basically Germany + US and Europe wasn't something they wanted to fight alone. So you have to look at it from there point of view -> As long as there was a buffer zone between them and NATO countries they didn't have to worry about little things like border disputes or cracking a few neighbor country skulls getting them into a full blown war. But as NATO expands (and more importantly keeps absorbing 1st world countries with 1st world military capabilities that are now augmented with US Tech), it has to be viewed as a threat ESPECIALLY if these newly added countries have a huge bone to pick with Moscow.

TLDR -> The problem as the Russians see it is that NATO is basically a UN consisting of only 1st world countries with them as its only enemy.

Yeah, I'm very familiar with NATO (and the old Warsaw pact). I also realize that the Ukraine would love to join (although, I'm not sure how soon that was/is going to happen). I can certainly see why Russia has interest in the Crimea (and much of southern Ukraine) as it relates to NATO, so I can buy that being a partial cause, however, Putin's desire to "get the band back together" has more to do with his ideal of what Russia should be more than it has to do with his desire to keep NATO (physically) at bay. That's just my opinion though. Nonetheless, I still don't think the US caused the current situation, nor do I think the US regardless of whom is in the White House) has a trigger finger liberating European countries (as the author of the editorial seemed to infer).

[8timechamps]

Talked to my middle school students about this today...had to give them a very brief rundown on the Evil Empire, told 'em why Russia values the Crimea, and ended with this: Sometimes Bullies Win

That's what is happening here.

My middle school son has become very interested in all of this. I've always been a geopolitical/current event kind of guy, but my interest didn't really begin until high school. I think (in an odd turn of events) Social Media has garnered his interest in the current situation. That brought it to his attention (and the fact that I'm consistently reading about it on my laptop), and so I found myself giving him a Complete Idiots Guide to the old Soviet Union and the Cold War. I was pretty excited when he wanted to know more about this, but I probably gave him more information than he wanted.

[SoonerProphet]

Yeah, I'm very familiar with NATO (and the old Warsaw pact). I also realize that the Ukraine would love to join (although, I'm not sure how soon that was/is going to happen). I can certainly see why Russia has interest in the Crimea (and much of southern Ukraine) as it relates to NATO, so I can buy that being a partial cause, however, Putin's desire to "get the band back together" has more to do with his ideal of what Russia should be more than it has to do with his desire to keep NATO (physically) at bay. That's just my opinion though. Nonetheless, I still don't think the US caused the current situation, nor do I think the US regardless of whom is in the White House) has a trigger finger liberating European countries (as the author of the editorial seemed to infer).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Ukraine_NATO_pie_chart.PNG

I realize the poll is a bit dated but it seems to refute your notion that a majority wants to be a part of NATO. You are entitled to your opinion on Putin and Russia's interest in its near abroad, we have agreed to disagree on this thread. It seems a bit wrongheaded to turn a blind eye to the fact that Senator McCain and Assistant Sec of State Nuland participated in the Maiden protest. If Russia had government officials agitating for government change in Mexico many would be apoplectic, and rightfully so.

[BigTip]

https://scontent-b-pao.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/t1/1798639_314265788698532_1306766061_n.jpg

[BigTip]

She is taking credit for a short term statement that came true in the long term. It is the difference in me saying OU will win a national title in football [implied this year] vs OU will win another national title in football [implied future].

I can't believe that you, and others, are not giving her credit for this because it didn't happen the next week/month/year. The point is that she recognized that Putin had an eye on the Crimea. She said he would act after seeing perceived weakness from us. He stuck the first chance afforded him. She deserves a big "I told you so."

[hawaii 5-0]

I still don't think Palin could pick out Ukraine on a world map.

Some pundit put a suggestion in her ear and she parroted it.


5-0

[olevetonahill]

I still don't think Palin could pick out Ukraine on a world map.

Some pundit put a suggestion in her ear and she parroted it.


5-0

I would love to watch a Live debate between YOU and Sarah.
I get so tickled at those who thinks shes so stupid. :soap:

[BigTip]

I still don't think Palin could pick out Ukraine on a world map.

Some pundit put a suggestion in her ear and she parroted it.


5-0

Well then give her credit for at least being smart enough to surround herself with people that are smart enough.

[hawaii 5-0]

Well then give her credit for at least being smart enough to surround herself with people that are smart enough.



Then who told her Africa was a country?

Why didn't she ever learn why there is a North and South Korea?

Me thinks she had other things on her mind in junior high.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

Then who told her Africa was a country?

Why didn't she ever learn why there is a North and South Korea?

Me thinks she had other things on her mind in junior high.

5-0

Kinda Like Obammy campaigning in 57 states?

[SoonerProphet]

The European Union must recognize that its bureaucratic dilatoriness and subordination of the strategic element to domestic politics in negotiating Ukraine’s relationship to Europe contributed to turning a negotiation into a crisis. Foreign policy is the art of establishing priorities.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html

[FaninAma]

If Obama had invested in natural gas and oil infrastructure and production instead of pissing billions away in green energy companies he would be in a much stronger position for dealing with Russia and the various dictators in the Middle East.

Instead he made a decision based not on the national interests of this country but motives motivated by politics alone. That is all he has ever done. He is a political machine product that uses graft and rewards for supporters and he was put in the most powerful position in the world by a bunch of dumb-downed, entitlement dependent morons.

[rock on sooner]

Then who told her Africa was a country?

Why didn't she ever learn why there is a North and South Korea?

Me thinks she had other things on her mind in junior high.

5-0

I heard somewhere that her husband supplied the brains...don't
know if that's true or not....

[Soonerjeepman]

http://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-compares-putin-actions-hitlers-173823662.html

hillary comparing putin to hitler....good? bad? indifferent? to me, it's a bad move.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Then who told her Africa was a country?

Why didn't she ever learn why there is a North and South Korea?

Me thinks she had other things on her mind in junior high.

5-0

I see you still think you're the smartest mother****er in the world...

[Soonerjeepman]

I see you still think you're the smartest mother****er in the world...

at least he's smarter than obama...57 states...they forget that~

[8timechamps]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Ukraine_NATO_pie_chart.PNG

I realize the poll is a bit dated but it seems to refute your notion that a majority wants to be a part of NATO. You are entitled to your opinion on Putin and Russia's interest in its near abroad, we have agreed to disagree on this thread. It seems a bit wrongheaded to turn a blind eye to the fact that Senator McCain and Assistant Sec of State Nuland participated in the Maiden protest. If Russia had government officials agitating for government change in Mexico many would be apoplectic, and rightfully so.

I'm going to have to see something at least within the past three years if I'm going to believe Ukraine's majority doesn't want into NATO. That poll's not "a bit dated", it's almost 5 years old. A lot has happened in 5 years.

Maybe I'm not clear on your point (wouldn't be the first time I misinterpreted someone's message). What does McCain and Nuland have to do with Putin's invasion of Ukraine? My assessment all along has been that the US foreign policy has looked very weak, and Putin knew that going into this. I also don't believe any of this was initiated by the US. If you're inferring that because McCain and Nuland came out against the regime, that somehow caused all of this, then I completely disagree (but I'm not sure if that's what you're saying).

[8timechamps]

http://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-compares-putin-actions-hitlers-173823662.html

hillary comparing putin to hitler....good? bad? indifferent? to me, it's a bad move.

IMO, it's a bad move if she plans to run for president. I also think the analogy is over the top.

[8timechamps]

The European Union must recognize that its bureaucratic dilatoriness and subordination of the strategic element to domestic politics in negotiating Ukraine’s relationship to Europe contributed to turning a negotiation into a crisis. Foreign policy is the art of establishing priorities.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html

Well, well...we do agree on something. :)

[olevetonahill]

I heard somewhere that her husband supplied the brains...don't
know if that's true or not....

Shes smarter than Old "Get a Shotgun", Uncle Joe!

[Turd_Ferguson]

I think we should show H-20 and Barack a little rspect.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/07/obama-tries-to-shows-some-r-e-s-p-e-c-t/

[SoonerProphet]

I'm going to have to see something at least within the past three years if I'm going to believe Ukraine's majority doesn't want into NATO. That poll's not "a bit dated", it's almost 5 years old. A lot has happened in 5 years.

Maybe I'm not clear on your point (wouldn't be the first time I misinterpreted someone's message). What does McCain and Nuland have to do with Putin's invasion of Ukraine? My assessment all along has been that the US foreign policy has looked very weak, and Putin knew that going into this. I also don't believe any of this was initiated by the US. If you're inferring that because McCain and Nuland came out against the regime, that somehow caused all of this, then I completely disagree (but I'm not sure if that's what you're saying).

Here is a wiki article that discusses the history of NATO and Ukraine. The latest poll is dated 2012 with a 60% against joining. Obviously there has been, and will continue to be, sharp divisions in the Ukraine on the issue of which way to go, Russia or EU.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations

I've discussed several times in this thread the meddling of the US government in the affairs of the Ukraine.

Here is an article discussing the phone call referenced in earlier posts on this thread.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

The phone call between Nuland and Pyatt clearly demonstrates the level of US involvement in the affairs of the Ukraine and just how they are attempting to move things in the direction they want and eventually get. After all Arseniy Yatseniuk is the new PM and that is who was advocated in this conversation. In addition to this revealing phone call was Nuland's statements on a youtube video discussing why the US dropped $5 billion in an effort to move Ukraine in a desired direction.

McCain met with far right Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok back in December is his trip to Maidan to cavort with the protesters.

Again, I think this goes further than just simply coming out against the regime, these are actions of direct intervention. You don't find it the least bit odd, I assume you think it is some grand coincidence, that those we have been publicly supporting since November are now the people in charge of what many view as coup against the democratically elected leadership of Ukraine.

[SoonerProphet]

My assessment all along has been that the US foreign policy has looked very weak, and Putin knew that going into this.

http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/05/russia-didnt-invade-ukraine-because-of-u

The truth is, anyone who actually believes Putin took military action in Ukraine because Obama backed away from his plans to bomb Syria illegally, doesn’t know anything about international relations.

[ouwasp]

IMO, it's a bad move if she plans to run for president. I also think the analogy is over the top.

it's not a perfect analogy, but there are some parallels, imo. Plus, knee-jerk folks know how to react when the Hitler name is invoked.

As for HRC running in 2016, I'm thinking that deal is in the bag. Why wouldn't she run? She's wanted it forever, and the Demos can hardly wait to put her out there. NY, CA, NE, all the usual suspects, are gonna be strong Hillary states. What can stop her?

[8timechamps]

http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/05/russia-didnt-invade-ukraine-because-of-u

The truth is, anyone who actually believes Putin took military action in Ukraine because Obama backed away from his plans to bomb Syria illegally, doesn’t know anything about international relations.

I would never have said Putin invaded Crimera because the US looked weak, as I believe this move was planned long ago. I do believe it made it that much easier for him to make the call to do it.

[Soonerjeepman]

Here is a wiki article that discusses the history of NATO and Ukraine. The latest poll is dated 2012 with a 60% against joining. Obviously there has been, and will continue to be, sharp divisions in the Ukraine on the issue of which way to go, Russia or EU.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations

I've discussed several times in this thread the meddling of the US government in the affairs of the Ukraine.

Here is an article discussing the phone call referenced in earlier posts on this thread.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

The phone call between Nuland and Pyatt clearly demonstrates the level of US involvement in the affairs of the Ukraine and just how they are attempting to move things in the direction they want and eventually get. After all Arseniy Yatseniuk is the new PM and that is who was advocated in this conversation. In addition to this revealing phone call was Nuland's statements on a youtube video discussing why the US dropped $5 billion in an effort to move Ukraine in a desired direction.

McCain met with far right Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok back in December is his trip to Maidan to cavort with the protesters.

Again, I think this goes further than just simply coming out against the regime, these are actions of direct intervention. You don't find it the least bit odd, I assume you think it is some grand coincidence, that those we have been publicly supporting since November are now the people in charge of what many view as coup against the democratically elected leadership of Ukraine.

Michael Savage was all over this the other night...I'm assuming your saying the US has and is pushing the revolt...

[8timechamps]

it's not a perfect analogy, but there are some parallels, imo. Plus, knee-jerk folks know how to react when the Hitler name is invoked.

As for HRC running in 2016, I'm thinking that deal is in the bag. Why wouldn't she run? She's wanted it forever, and the Demos can hardly wait to put her out there. NY, CA, NE, all the usual suspects, are gonna be strong Hillary states. What can stop her?

Yeah, she's going to run. I think the dems are just waiting until they can get some big mileage out of the announcement.

Once the pubs get a candidate, I think it's going to be a lot harder on old Hillary than she/they are expecting.

[hawaii 5-0]

I see you still think you're the smartest mother****er in the world...



Never thought it. Never said it.


But I see you still think that I think I'm smart. Didja write that remark on your hand so you could remember it? Maybe 5 or 6 times you've accused me of the same lame thing. You're still wrong.


5-0

[Turd_Ferguson]

Never thought it. Never said it.


But I see you still think that I think I'm smart. Didja write that remark on your hand so you could remember it? Maybe 5 or 6 times you've accused me of the same lame thing. You're still wrong.


5-0

Naw, never wrote it down...I just think the same thing every time I read one of your post.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

I never thought "Team America: World Police" would ever be a model for diplomacy...But the Leftist has done it and sent Putin a "sternly worded letter"...

[BoulderSooner79]

I never thought "Team America: World Police" would ever be a model for diplomacy...But the Leftist has done it and sent Putin a "sternly worded letter"...

And exactly what should have been done? I think any administration from any party would have done the same thing because there is no alternative response that is rational. Even McCain would act differently if he had to make the call vs. comment from the peanut gallery.

[TAFBSooner]

And exactly what should have been done? I think any administration from any party would have done the same thing because there is no alternative response that is rational.

100% agree.



Even McCain would act differently if he had to make the call vs. comment from the peanut gallery.

One would hope. But he's thrown a lot of peanuts over the years.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

And exactly what should have been done? I think any administration from any party would have done the same thing because there is no alternative response that is rational. Even McCain would act differently if he had to make the call vs. comment from the peanut gallery.

Oh, I am not necessarily saying anything else should be done... But I think more than a "sternly worded letter" and banning a few high priests of Putin from this country could have been done. Putin called the bluff and now Crimea and soon the Ukraine will be back in the Russian fold... That is unless we start building a natural gas pipeline from the West to Kiev. I am sure Putin will not hesitate to stop the flow on his side...

[BoulderSooner79]

Oh, I am not necessarily saying anything else should be done... But I think more than a "sternly worded letter" and banning a few high priests of Putin from this country could have been done. Putin called the bluff and now Crimea and soon the Ukraine will be back in the Russian fold... That is unless we start building a natural gas pipeline from the West to Kiev. I am sure Putin will not hesitate to stop the flow on his side...

And that's the thing I fear will happen. I'd rather Ukraine burn Russia's precious natural gas resources than ours. And we'd be giving it away under the guise of a guaranteed loan (i.e. us tax payers). The Crimea region is one thing and will probably become a pain in the rear for Putin when he has to deal with Muslim extremists. The rest of Ukraine is another deal and they have more ties to NATO countries. Is it worth US lives to prop up the Ukraine? Or just massive support $$ ? I don't have any answers, but I hope our response is more reasoned than wanting to "look tough" and how it might impact mid-term elections. The effectiveness of any future response will be determined by how much of a united front Putin has to deal with from NATO et. al., not just the US. The Crimea grab should help unite the rest of NATO and friends and up the cost factor in the equation for Putin.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Then who told her Africa was a country?

Why didn't she ever learn why there is a North and South Korea?

Me thinks she had other things on her mind in junior high.

5-0

How about Sheila Jackson Lee thinking the Constitution is 400 y.o.? I could go on about that nut job. Palin would wipe her off the floor. I am so tired of the conservative bashing... What about that Georgia nut job that lost her seat, she was certifiable. Oh, hey, what about the criminal jesse jackson jr and his fine upstanding wife...need I go on?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Going back to my point about cost, here is an article about the immediate cash infusion that Russia is going to have to make in the Crimea. Please note that while they talk all about the corruption, they throw out realistic numbers for intervention, not ones that would be severely inflated by graft (like the power plant example).

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20140319&id=17447730

As we've seen with our own economy, you can only support so many boat anchors. Russia can float Crimea (although it is going to be a lot more floating than even Moscow understands with all of the corruption), but they make themselves more vulnerable if something bad happens (like oil/gas cratering or another boat anchor like the rest of the Ukraine). I just don't see how Putin can afford to go after any more breakaways without severely crippling his own economy.

[hawaii 5-0]

http://loiter.co/v/watch-as-1000years-of-european-boarders-change/



Let's try it again. It's a short video showing how the map of Europe has changed over the past 1000 years.


5-0

[8timechamps]

Going back to my point about cost, here is an article about the immediate cash infusion that Russia is going to have to make in the Crimea. Please note that while they talk all about the corruption, they throw out realistic numbers for intervention, not ones that would be severely inflated by graft (like the power plant example).

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20140319&id=17447730

As we've seen with our own economy, you can only support so many boat anchors. Russia can float Crimea (although it is going to be a lot more floating than even Moscow understands with all of the corruption), but they make themselves more vulnerable if something bad happens (like oil/gas cratering or another boat anchor like the rest of the Ukraine). I just don't see how Putin can afford to go after any more breakaways without severely crippling his own economy.

All of the geopolitical stuff aside, I don't really understand the move either. Financially, it doesn't make a lot of sense (unless the larger goal is Ukraine as a whole). I've heard (more than once) that Putin wanted a warm water port, but that doesn't make sense either, as Russia already virtually owned the naval port in Crimera.

With all the media attention being placed on the military/invasion side of things, nobody has really stopped to asked "why" Putin made the move. Like I said (and as you mentioned), the move makes almost no sense financially, and to stir the pot for what amounts to a small land grab just doesn't really compute.

I've heard folks talk about Putin's move as a precursor to taking back Ukraine, and that would certainly make more financial sense, but otherwise, it's a bad move economically. If Putin does make a run for the entire country, then international sanctions (with teeth) are sure to follow. Combine that with a sagging Russian stock market, and their economy will undoubtedly be in shambles.

[SoonerProphet]

Going back to my point about cost, here is an article about the immediate cash infusion that Russia is going to have to make in the Crimea. Please note that while they talk all about the corruption, they throw out realistic numbers for intervention, not ones that would be severely inflated by graft (like the power plant example).

Heh, no better than Palestine, sad indeed. South Ossetia is another example of annexation that hasn't panned out as well, a lot of cost and no gain. Crimea is no South Ossetia though. I realize pensions, infrastructure, graft, etc all are economic drags for Russia, there is some upside. Location and tourism, (don't laugh), mineral rights, the 15 billion loan they guaranteed the yanukovich govt, the discount on gas for Sevastopol, etc add to Russian coffers.

[SoonerProphet]

All of the geopolitical stuff aside, I don't really understand the move either. Financially, it doesn't make a lot of sense (unless the larger goal is Ukraine as a whole). I've heard (more than once) that Putin wanted a warm water port, but that doesn't make sense either, as Russia already virtually owned the naval port in Crimera.

With all the media attention being placed on the military/invasion side of things, nobody has really stopped to asked "why" Putin made the move. Like I said (and as you mentioned), the move makes almost no sense financially, and to stir the pot for what amounts to a small land grab just doesn't really compute.

I've heard folks talk about Putin's move as a precursor to taking back Ukraine, and that would certainly make more financial sense, but otherwise, it's a bad move economically. If Putin does make a run for the entire country, then international sanctions (with teeth) are sure to follow. Combine that with a sagging Russian stock market, and their economy will undoubtedly be in shambles.

Putin's actions are motivated by ethno-nationalism and Realpolitik. The moment NATO began to flirt with adding Georgia and further pushing into traditional Russian spheres of influence he moved. The same happened in Ukraine. The foreign policy establishment is even more clueless of geopolitics than I gave them credit for if they did not see this coming.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

So the NYTimes has this gallery of the events -> http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/ukraine-divisions-crimea.html

To me, the key is the 2nd to last map which shows the ethnicity. This shows the nature of both Crimea and the heavily industrialized (and polluted) Donets basin. This area is roughly equivalent to our own rust belt in the late 70's early 80's.

Crimea
1. There is absolutely no reason that a major port should ever be a net economic liability for a region. When that major port is also a prime tourist destination it absolutely boggles the mind. In other words, the fact that the federal government in Kiev has to provide over 1/2 of the region's funding is lunacy. To put this in perspective, it would be like our government having to prop up Long Beach, CA. um, hmm.
2. I can't find exact numbers for sevastapol but it looks like it is way under the capacity of Odessa. This doesn't even consider the transport problems of getting crap across the isthmuses to the port. In other words, the port has good strategic value, but not necessarily the best operational value.

Donets
1. Once again, it is heavily populated, heavily polluted (yay strip mining coal) and is the country's primary industrial region. The question I have is whether its long term negative value (outside of the people) is worth its short term positive value.

Once again, I just don't understand what Russia is getting out of this except for population and strategic dirt.

[TAFBSooner]

Once again, I just don't understand what Russia is getting out of this except for population and strategic dirt.

What Putin wants and desperately needs is Russians. Ethnic Russians. The USSR had a horrid policy of deporting ethic members of a captive nation like Estonia or Lithuania and replacing them with communists: these tended to be Muscovite Russians.

. . . friends . . . told the same story: after WW II the USSR would deport ethnic Lithuanians and Estonians to Siberia to settle there, and replace them with ethnic Russians who would sometimes assume the names of the people they replaced. The notion was to better integrate the captive Baltic nations into the Soviet Empire. It didn’t work very well, and worse, from the point of view of the new Russian government, many of those ethnic Russians have identified with their new homelands and do not admit to being Russian any longer; and most have converted to the Lutheran Church, so they might not be welcome back in the USSR.

The birth rate among ethnic Russians in Russia is low and falling. Russia is running out of Russians. While this is not an immediate problem, the continued population decline appears to be steady and inevitable, and that is a downward spiral with great consequences, aging population being one obvious result. Without young men you have no army; or so it has been through most of history. Russia needs Russians. Putin believes he represents the soul of Russia. Putin needs Russians.

. . .

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/view/page/2/

This is at the bottom of p. 2 and so will be on Page 3 soon.

[8timechamps]

The Russian stock market is down about 20% on the year (estimated loss somewhere in the area of $75 billion). Investors are way too spooked to jump in there, and the international community wouldn't touch it with Oprah's money. It's not getting better anytime soon, and will continue in a downward trend. Meanwhile, Russia has pretty much claimed everything in Crimea, and I think Ukraine (and everyone else) is just going to have to suck it up. From a financial perspective, this was a really bad move on Putin's part, but he has what he wanted.

[REDREX]

I heard Putin had shorted the index before he invaded

[TheHumanAlphabet]

My guess is the Crimea is sitting on all the gas and oil leases of Ukraine. This puts Putin in control of energy of the region, rather than the Ukraine, from which it could flex more independence. With this move, he locked up the major port into Russian hands, brings native Russians in the region back into Russia, locks in energy resources and brings ultimately the Ukraine back into his fold. I doubt Ukraine seeks NATO or EU alliance now. I am not sure if he hasn't quieted the EU as they will still require Russian natural gas. They are importing more LNG into the area, but its not enough to shut the Russian pipeline.

[SoonerProphet]

Some shady sh1t going on in Kiev.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/03/26/ultranationalists-killing-underscores-ukraines-ugly-divisions/?tid=hp_mm

[Sooner8th]

Some shady sh1t going on in Kiev.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/03/26/ultranationalists-killing-underscores-ukraines-ugly-divisions/?tid=hp_mm

Putin came up through KGB. He was, is and always will be KGB, not to mention nuts. I'm not seeing where it is in our national interest to defend Ukraine.

[SCOUT]

Some shady sh1t going on in Kiev.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/03/26/ultranationalists-killing-underscores-ukraines-ugly-divisions/?tid=hp_mm

You always seem to have a studied opinion on these types of matters. I would be curious to hear your take on what is going on.

[ouwasp]

Putin came up through KGB. He was, is and always will be KGB, not to mention nuts. I'm not seeing where it is in our national interest to defend Ukraine.

Agreed. The US and UK never should have signed that treaty with Ukraine back in the 90s. How do we go about un-signing the thing? Need to do that pronto.

[SoonerProphet]

You always seem to have a studied opinion on these types of matters. I would be curious to hear your take on what is going on.

Seems that the Right Sector has served its purpose and it's time to move them out of the circles of power.

[SCOUT]

Seems that the Right Sector has served its purpose and it's time to move them out of the circles of power.

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but what is the Right Sector?

[SoonerProphet]

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but what is the Right Sector?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Sector

This fellow took up arms against the Russian in Chechnya and has a propensity for inflammatory commentary regarding non-Ukrainians. Many feel that Right Sector and a few other "neofascist" outfits were the muscle at the Euromaidan protests. Perhaps the recently installed government feels it is time to distance themselves from these reactionary groups and sent a message.

[SCOUT]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Sector

This fellow took up arms against the Russian in Chechnya and has a propensity for inflammatory commentary regarding non-Ukrainians. Many feel that Right Sector and a few other "neofascist" outfits were the muscle at the Euromaidan protests. Perhaps the recently installed government feels it is time to distance themselves from these reactionary groups and sent a message.

Thank you

[8timechamps]

Seems that the Right Sector has served its purpose and it's time to move them out of the circles of power.

No kidding. What a mess.