quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

Well your shrub certainly handled putin (`s tacticals) with great skill.....lol


Sending in McGrampa to save Georgia from the ruskies.......that worked good.....


I`m hearing the lunatic fringe imagine how st. ronnie would have handled this......


By selling surface to air missiles to Iran?


And we won`t hear President Obama saying something pathetically subservient like "I looked the man in the eye.
I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country.”

Truth be known, President Bush was pushing hard for Georgia's full admission to NATO so it could be legitimately protected by the armed might all these nations, a effort that took too long and was pre-empted by Russian action before that process already in motion could be completed. That is how you handle Georgia, the only way one can, by being allies. This is what McWindyCity had a lot of time to do but he was too busy with McWindyCityCare and halting the pipeline and sucking up to the Russians, so too bad for the Ukraine that they have Mr. WindyCity, they don't even pretend to count on him. Fortunately for us, Windbag has learned not to draw red lines.

Actually W encouraged the Georgian attacks that led to the Russian invasion. Then he, being the pitiful useless coward that he is, he cut and ran abandoning them to Putin.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8281990.stm

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Not sure how that is true, are there Russian troops in the actual Ukraine?  Or are they all around Sebastapol?

There are agreements and treaties for that area.  They have the right to secure it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas


Oops. I do appologize. I was inaccurate.

Ambassador Bolton confirmed today that Bush was pushing for BOTH the Ukraine and Georgia to become Nato members in order to protect them from what his Administration knew was coming. Unfortunately the EU resisted this so as to not antagonize the Bear.

So, this meant Bush sought to protect both these nations in the only viable manner possible, Nato membership.

This also means that Obama has had five years (five years!!!!) to continue the push for Ukraine Nato membership and could have long ago accomplished this so there would be no invasion of that country today.

Clearly, Obama is to blame and it is because he dropped the ball handed to him and focused on you know what and golf and parties and vacation and frankly, nothing really, that we are here today powerless and a joke to the world just as we were during the Carter presidency.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

Lol, so it's solely obama's fault huh? Not Harper of Canada or any of the other NATO countries for pushing for Ukrainian NATO membership? Cmon, there's more countries on this world than the self obsessed USA. Not to mention that between the Arab Spring and the crap Obama had to deal with in terms of an obstructionist right wing congress and misinformation about various issues (such as benghazi), it's not a surprise that the interests of Ukraine took a back seat. It's not the USA's place to act as the world's police/moral authority, regardless of what party is running it.

Also, the Americans have always been a joke to the world, it's just that recently with your whole "shut down the government" thing, really sealed the deal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Not sure how that is true, are there Russian troops in the actual Ukraine?  Or are they all around Sebastapol?

There are agreements and treaties for that area.  They have the right to secure it.

I agree. Invading the Crimea to secure their naval base is clearly their right. Unmarked uniforms, unidentified Cossacks and all. And clearly, surrounding and "securing" what are Ukranian naval installations is part of that legitimate action.

La, la, la, la la...everything is okay...la, la, la. It's all good. We Socialists understand the truth here and agree with your post. They have the right and therefore the might. Whoops, had that backwards, didn't I.

quote:


It's a bitch, the world is dangerous and it takes strong leaders and not a glorified community organizer to keep things under control. It always has and always will.

quote:

 
We can only hope somebody does not push the nuke button over there, the Ukraine has nukes and somebody might decided to toss some over the border to stop the red tide massing there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

Lol, so it's solely obama's fault huh? Not Harper of Canada or any of the other NATO countries for pushing for Ukrainian NATO membership? Cmon, there's more countries on this world than the self obsessed USA. Not to mention that between the Arab Spring and the crap Obama had to deal with in terms of an obstructionist right wing congress and misinformation about various issues (such as benghazi), it's not a surprise that the interests of Ukraine took a back seat. It's not the USA's place to act as the world's police/moral authority, regardless of what party is running it.

Also, the Americans have always been a joke to the world, it's just that recently with your whole "shut down the government" thing, really sealed the deal.

Yep. The buck stops at his desk. Leader of the Free World. Sorry that the world does not fit fantasy or the lib agenda. It's a bitch, the world is dangerous and it takes strong leaders and not a glorified community organizer to keep things under control. It always has and always will. We can only hope somebody does not push the nuke button over there, the Ukraine has nukes and somebody might decided to toss some over the border to stop the red tide massing there.

I'm afraid Obama has Obamacare but let things get away as far as "provide for the common defense" which is what the fuck his job really is if you read the Consitution. That a-whole might let wwIII put an end to Obamacare unless we are damn lucky.

quote:

Also, the Americans have always been a joke to the world, it's just that recently with your whole "shut down the government" thing, really sealed the deal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Not sure how that is true, are there Russian troops in the actual Ukraine?  Or are they all around Sebastapol?

There are agreements and treaties for that area.  They have the right to secure it.

I agree. Invading the Crimea to secure their naval base is clearly their right. Unmarked uniforms, unidentified Cossacks and all. And clearly, surrounding and "securing" what are Ukranian naval installations is part of that legitimate action.

La, la, la, la la...everything is okay...la, la, la. It's all good. We Socialists understand the truth here and agree with your post. They have the right and therefore the might. Whoops, had that backwards, didn't I.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:


It's a bitch, the world is dangerous and it takes strong leaders and not a glorified community organizer to keep things under control. It always has and always will.

That would be the nutsackers taking on the role of pussy.  The soviet union collapsed in 1991.

quote:

 
We can only hope somebody does not push the nuke button over there, the Ukraine has nukes and somebody might decided to toss some over the border to stop the red tide massing there.

Uh, no....more nutsackerism, they have no nukes, they gave them to Russia.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Not sure how that is true, are there Russian troops in the actual Ukraine?  Or are they all around Sebastapol?

There are agreements and treaties for that area.  They have the right to secure it.

I agree. Invading the Crimea to secure their naval base is clearly their right. Unmarked uniforms, unidentified Cossacks and all. And clearly, surrounding and "securing" what are Ukranian naval installations is part of that legitimate action.

La, la, la, la la...everything is okay...la, la, la. It's all good. We Socialists understand the truth here and agree with your post. They have the right and therefore the might. Whoops, had that backwards, didn't I.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas


It also means the free world must protect them under that treaty and quess who the free world leader is today? That's right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

It did. It isn't. They didn't.

They did not "give" them to Russia. They dismantled them. They can reassemble them and still have nuclear facilities intact to do so and can do so since Russia has violated the "Budapest Memorandum", the treaty in which Russia and the free world guaranteed their sovereignty if they dismantled their nukes. Now they can reassemble them and they can and in their place we would also if faced with overwhelming military force and needing an 'equalizer'. It also means the free world must protect them under that treaty and quess who the free world leader is today? That's right.