CNN: Was reporting one Ukrainian dead/injured and now is reporting Ukrainian forces authorized to "use weapons." We maybe on the verge of a war here in the next couple of hours or so. This will be the first time the other super power is actually making a stand in a conflict that could be to the scale of Iraq2.0. (Once I can get a link to work on my phone, I will get one, but it is on the main CNN website)
The only hope they have is to try and drag it out. But if the local population wants to be Russian, you can't make them Ukrainian without the muzzle point of a Kalashnikov. Obama was smart to stay out of this as was NATO.
From BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26637296 The Ukraine would be wise to simply accept that Crimea is no longer part of their country. Russia would be equally wise to avoid instigating a war with Ukraine, as it would likely result in a protracted and bloody conflict, which will only serve to hurt the Eurasian economy. Russian should have learned its lesson from Afghanistan that invasion and occupation of a hostile country will only result in failure. Either way, the US should STAY OUT of this conflict. It has no significant impact on our core national interests.
That would be a mistake on their part. They should just quit while they're ahead and declare victory. One thing is for sure, the US has no business getting involved in this conflict.
As much as I am appalled by Vlad the Invader's latest aggression and disturbed by the dangerous prospect that he'll get away with this (which will only encourage his revanchist impulses, as was the case with Hitler in the 1930s), it's probably true that Ukraine would be wise to let Crimea return to its pre-Soviet status. In the long run Ukraine will be a stronger, more cohesive country for it and the resolution of this territorial conflict will only enhance and expedite its goal of joining NATO.
Why not? Vlad the Invader and Russia have nothing to lose and valuable territory to gain. Ukraine can't defend itself and the US and EU won't do anything but bleat its impotence to the heavens for Putin's amusement.
Ukraine was once a part of Russia, or the old Soviet Union, take your pick. Crimea is ancestral land that once belonged to Russia, just ask Catherine the Great, who conquered it during a conflict that began before the United States was even a thought: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...mea-and-put-rest-world-edge-180949969/?no-ist This is why President Obama is not being taken seriously by President Putin, who disregards the U.S. in favor of an ancestral feud in the region that is older than the United States of America itself. Personally, I always laugh when the Boy King Obama tries to be taken seriously on the world stage. He reminds me of when Justin Bieber was booed at some music awards show last year after defiantly stating, "I am an artist and I deserve to be taken seriously!"
I don't see anything wrong with the world reassessing the borders that popped up during and after WWII. A lot of them are totally arbitary and do not reflect the nuance of cultural and ethnic diversity on the ground. I think a global restructuring via political decentralization is in order. Let every culture have its own nation. The US should rethink its own political structure and attempt to devolve more power to the states.
Indeed. It's been abit embarrassing to hear the Prez and that loaf Kerry pound their chests and Putin just laugh them off. They should have just kept their mouths shut.
If he were smart (I know, I know), he would just be honest and tell the American people and the world that we have no interest or business in this conflict, except to see it resolved peacefully and mutually, then he wouldn't come off looking like such an impotent and feckless leader when Putin ignores his threats and bluster.
I agree, and I think we should be consistent regarding the disintegration of the Soviet Union's artificial political and geographic constructs. Just as we accept the self-determination and sovereignty of Georgia, the Baltic states, the 'Stans, etc., we should be prepared to accept Crimea rejoining Russia, too.
Or even before WWII, when you think about it. Hmm...Alaska once belonged to Russia as well. Does this mean, "do svidanya, Amerika?" At the rate that Putin is going now, maybe so.
That seems to be what the Obama admin and the Neo Cons want.... Everyone is blathering about how Russia took over Crimeria but no one is saying a word about NATO pretty much taking over the rest of Ukraine....
...and where did all of those old Soviet nukes that were left in Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union go, I wonder? Perhaps there is more in Crimea than just a "Russian-speaking minority": https://www.msz.gov.pl/en/p/wiedeno...ssion_to_the_treaty_on_the_npt?printMode=true It is certainly starting to appear that President Putin is inviting the West to attack Russia's interests. I wonder what our Boy King will do in response? Well played, President Putin, well played...
You do know the Russians have a very important naval base there right? Hint look at a map to see the strategic value of that port. Then scroll over and see Iran and Syria... Connect the dots.
Oh yes, I agree. There is a lot of strategic value in Crimea's location: But the question was raised about NATO's aggression in the region, which began in the 1994 nuclear arms treaty when Ukraine was, at the time, the 3rd largest nuclear weapons power in the world due to its sudden inheritance of post-Soviet Union nuclear missiles. I was simply pondering the fate of those nuclear weapons. Did they remain in Ukraine or were they deposited elsewhere, like Crimea perhaps?
