[Humble_Opinion]

A unilateral move on the part of Ukraine against Russian forces in Crimea wouldn't go so well for them. Were I Obama I'd start letting it leak that if Russia insists on occupying the Crimea region, the U.S. will pursue NATO membership for the Ukraine and put the missile shield deployment to that part of the region back on the table.

What I'm interested to know is how the pro-Russian Yanukovych was elected in the first place if the majority of Ukrainians would rather have closer ties to the West?

[Purple Haize]

A unilateral move on the part of Ukraine against Russian forces in Crimea wouldn't go so well for them. Were I Obama I'd start letting it leak that if Russia insists on occupying the Crimea region, the U.S. will pursue NATO membership for the Ukraine and put the missile shield deployment to that part of the region back on the table.

What I'm interested to know is how the pro-Russian Yanukovych was elected in the first place if the majority of Ukrainians would rather have closer ties to the West?

Those would be a great move. Along with pulling travel visas for the Oligarch's, removing Russia from the G8 and other economic actions that affect the Oligarchs who can put pressure on Putin. The trouble with your solution is that Obama already nixed Ukraine's NATO application and stopped the Missile Shield in Poland and other former Soviet Satellites. I can't see him reversing that decision now. It's one of the few decisions he's actually made
I do find it funny they are trying to compare this to the situation in Georgia and blaming this on.....wait for it......Bush! They fail to acknowledge that 2008 was a transition year, and to Bush's credit, we was going to make promises to Georgia that he knew the next administration wouldn't keep.
Makes me wish Romney had won even more.

[SumItUp]

[youtube]

[/youtube]

[Schfourteenteen]

I say we use this news as smokescreen and take over Mexico. That will eliminate our illegal immigrant problem.

[ATrain]

I say we use this news as smokescreen and take over Mexico. That will eliminate our illegal immigrant problem.

:I chortle audibly.: Nice. I would have suggested Canada, but any imperialism is good imperialism.

Didn't I suggest taking over Mexico in the immigration thread?

[ALUmnus]

Here's a short list of some diplomatic pressure points that could be used. Some look like they're written by the oil lobby, but they'd be effective nonetheless.

http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2014 ... g-ukraine/

[Humble_Opinion]

It seems as though the major mistake made by the Ukraine here was to trust us back in 1994 when we signed onto a treaty (with the UK, Ukraine, and Russia) stating that we would protect the territorial integrity of the Ukraine if they relinquished the nuclear weapons program they had. All this as an attempt to reduce the nuclear weapons capabilities of the former Soviet Republics.

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was a international treaty signed on February, 5, 1994, in Budapest.
The diplomatic document saw signatories make promises to each other as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
It was signed by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine.
The agreement promises to protest Ukraine's borders in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02 ... th-russia/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... g-war.html

[jbock13]

I agree we should have no part in this but I love John Kerry (who served in Vietnam)... We had a signed agreement! How dare you violate it, you can't do this , we have a signed agreement!

Will they ever learn... well no.

[Purple Haize]

I agree we should have no part in this but I love John Kerry (who served in Vietnam)... We had a signed agreement! How dare you violate it, you can't do this , we have a signed agreement!

Will they ever learn... well no.

How about Obama saying 'Putin has a different group of lawyers who interpret it differently..."

[Purple Haize]

So the Crimean parliament has voted to secede from Ukraine. Whose freedom do we want to defend now? Not so black and white, right?

Yeah, I'm sure having Soviet tanks and troops on the ground didn't affect that at all. Or sinking a ship in Donuzlav Lake to create an obstacle into the Black Sea was really what Ukrainians wanted.
Plus, I don't think anyone said it was a black and white issue

[Purple Haize]

If you don't realize that Crimea would rather be a part of Russia, then you don't understand the region's politics at all. If Crimea attempted to secede without security there, they would be unsuccessful. The coup in Ukraine is certainly being used by Crimean and Russian politicians, but this is something that the Crimeans have wanted for a while.

And it sure seems like you were trying to make this into a black and white, Cold War scenario where the Russians were the bad guys and Ukranians the poor victims that we needed to rescue.

Despite claims that secession is against the Ukranian constitution by our President, no constitution can override the basic and fundamental human right of self determination. Unnatural political states in Europe have been breaking apart into more ethnically homogenous nations for decades now. This movement will continue to pick up steam.

I understand the region well. The Bolded part shows the error in the argument. It's a 2 sided coin. If they had wanted to secede they could have at any time. Having Russian troops there certainly would sway any swing voters.
Your argument about Europe breaking into different ethnic regions is accurate. But so is Russia's re-emerging presence and desire to replace the US as the Worlds Superpower. This is where we probably differ. I'm not a fan of letting that happen. I'm a fan of honoring our word and our Treaties. Like the one we signed with Ukraine. Like the promise to provide 'missile shields' to Poland etc.
As for the President, I, like about everyone else, just roll my eyes when he speaks about foreign policy.

[ATrain]

Once the pro-Russian Ukranian government in Kiev was toppled, my understanding was the people of Crimea began to start flying Russian flags, and then the Russian troops moved in...or is my understanding of this order of events not accurate?

[Purple Haize]

Once the pro-Russian Ukranian government in Kiev was toppled, my understanding was the people of Crimea began to start flying Russian flags, and then the Russian troops moved in...or is my understanding of this order of events not accurate?

You mean once the formerly pro Ukrainian government who did away with several democratic reforms after being bought off by the Russians and whose people tried to hold accountable before taking to the streets was toppled.....

[Purple Haize]

And yes Purple, the Ukranian people were justified in toppling their government. And the Crimeans are justified in seceding and joining with their people in the Russian Federation. The Ukrainians will be hacked off about it, because they are losing valuable real estate, but they need to accept the fact that the Crimeans wish to leave.

And that's the crux of the argument. If they wanted to leave, why not sooner? And the bigger question is are they leaving or is Russia expanding its influence. And will they stop with the Crimea? Neither of us know that answer but History shows they won't stop.

[Humble_Opinion]

I will concede that Crimea is largely pro-Russian and that they do have a right to self-determination just as the Ukrainians, whom overthrew Yanukovych to restore the rights they had lost, do as well. I agree with PH though... you can't hold a referendum after invading another countries sovereignty. I think Tymoshenko, the acting interim president of Ukraine, said it best:

...democracy will suffer if we allow Russia to hold a referendum at gunpoint.

As far as my overall view of what America's role in the world should be, I think where we find individual nations embracing the values of freedom and equality under the law we should stand with them and do whatever possible to ensure they succeed in the world. Regardless of what you think, we do live in an evil world that is still governed by the aggressive use of force. And as Rubio said in his remarks yesterday at CPAC:

"If this nation is not firmly on the side of human rights and freedom and the dignity of all people, what nation on the Earth will? And if we're prepared to walk away from that, then I submit to you that this century is going to be a dangerous and dark one."

[Purple Haize]

It didn't happen sooner because Ukraine had a pro-Russian government, and as you know, politics are all about moments of opportunity. The coup in Ukraine, coupled with Russia's willingness to come into Crimea made it an ideal time to vote on secession.

It isn't that we shouldn't be on the side of human rights and freedom, it's just that we shouldn't be willing to fight a war over it when it isn't our own. We cannot afford it in blood or treasure.

That is not true. Since 93 they have had several leaders and the early ones were most definitely NOT pro Russian. Even the current Government was Western friendly until Russian dollars started flowing into certain peoples bank accounts.
The 2nd part of you statement is true Thats the problem.

[Humble_Opinion]

Speaking of Mitt...

I know he said he wasn't going to run again, but he seems to be chiming in a lot more recently. Plus I had heard his old team had a "reunion" recently at a ski resort somewhere. Just seems kind of interesting timing...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... newsreel_1

[Purple Haize]

Speaking of Mitt...

I know he said he wasn't going to run again, but he seems to be chiming in a lot more recently. Plus I had heard his old team had a "reunion" recently at a ski resort somewhere. Just seems kind of interesting timing...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... newsreel_1

A lot of people are having 'buyers remorse'