quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

The Ukraine situation seems to be heating up, with serious questions about possible responses from the west.

Since the apparently officially sanctioned thread's OP is nothing but a partisan snark that poisons discussion, and the counter thread led with partisan snark as well has been locked, I propose that we move the conversation here, and do it without further intervention from the mods, as there may be some need to call people on their shit.

I believe that the US is no position to do anything about any Russian intervention morally or practically, and will likely expand into other aspects of that as the thread rolls, but will simply ask questions that offer a level field to begin with.

Given the location and historical connection of Crimea and The Ukraine to Russia, does this need to a matter of real concern to the western nations?

Should any such determination be based on the national interest of the western nations, or the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) approach to foreign policy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

hope this is considered neither partisan nor snarky, it is not intended to be.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR hope this is considered neither partisan nor snarky, it is not intended to be.
I am pointing out something that I mentioned in another thread.
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR hope this is considered neither partisan nor snarky, it is not intended to be.
I am pointing out something that I mentioned in another thread.
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

nonsense.
A planned downsizing at least a year in the future caused Putin to invade one of his neighbors now? You do realize we still do have all those troops in uniform?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR hope this is considered neither partisan nor snarky, it is not intended to be.
I am pointing out something that I mentioned in another thread.
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

nonsense.
A planned downsizing at least a year in the future caused Putin to invade one of his neighbors now? You do realize we still do have all those troops in uniform?

I said it served as a non deterrent.
Hagel is planning for an isolationist military incapable of projecting power.
If you had actually read what I said you would see that once again you have misinterpreted my words.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

EDIT: and precisely how is this an unmoderated thread? Don't the mods start all of those? is this an attempt to get people to speak their minds and then get them in trouble with the mods?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR hope this is considered neither partisan nor snarky, it is not intended to be.
I am pointing out something that I mentioned in another thread.
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

nonsense.
A planned downsizing at least a year in the future caused Putin to invade one of his neighbors now? You do realize we still do have all those troops in uniform?

I said it served as a non deterrent.
Hagel is planning for an isolationist military incapable of projecting power.
If you had actually read what I said you would see that once again you have misinterpreted my words.

Hagel made no such statement. What Hagel actually said was we were not going to plan on fighting 2 regional conflicts at the same time with active duty troops alone any more.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

I don't think it would make a damn bit of difference if Hagel had announced we were reinstating the draft and running the army up to 1.2 million, producing a 21st Century update to the A-10, and dusting off Reagan's 600 ship navy idea. This is happening on Moscow's turf, and they are going to do what they are going to do.

Given the current state of relations between the US and Russia, not aided by the relationship between our respective heads of state, I think the US needs to limit ourselves to some diplomatic tongue clucking, if that. Any sort of attempted tough talk from our President is only likely to be counterproductive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
FR hope this is considered neither partisan nor snarky, it is not intended to be.
I am pointing out something that I mentioned in another thread.
Hagel had no more than finished announcing that we were going to slash the army
till the Russians moved.
Admittedly Sochi had something to do with the timing but our announced intention
of moving back to a pre Pearl Harbor sized military did nothing to dissuade them.

nonsense.
A planned downsizing at least a year in the future caused Putin to invade one of his neighbors now? You do realize we still do have all those troops in uniform?

I said it served as a non deterrent.
Hagel is planning for an isolationist military incapable of projecting power.
If you had actually read what I said you would see that once again you have misinterpreted my words.

Hagel made no such statement. What Hagel actually said was we were not going to plan on fighting 2 regional conflicts at the same time with active duty troops alone any more.

He wants to reduce our troop strength to what it was before Pearl Harbor.
Not being able to fight in two theaters at one time mean you can't fight in one for fear something bigger will come up someplace
else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Given the location and historical connection of Crimea and The Ukraine to Russia, does this need to a matter of real concern to the western nations?

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

well... it's not in russia or the US where most of the refugees will seek protection if a civil war starts so the western nations in europe have a real concern about the situation. By the way, one of the reasons this shit happened is also who ukraine should seek as a major economical partner, russia or the UE. But I think the role of western countries is to stop a possible civil war not to plump one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I have been saying - for at least 11 years - that I am sick and tired of being looked to as being the world's policemen.

I am a proud isolationist. I make no apology. Unless something happens on our soil or it truly affects our national interests (Note: not necessarily the interests of large corporations; but of the continuation of our republic), I wish we could sit down, shut the fuck up and keep our mitts in our pockets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

A good sentiment, well expressed. Thank you.

We could, I suppose, just leave the whole thing on Canada's doorstep, and let them take the lead on something. After all, Russia is more their neighbor than ours.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I have been saying - for at least 11 years - that I am sick and tired of being looked to as being the world's policemen.

I am a proud isolationist. I make no apology. Unless something happens on our soil or it truly affects our national interests (Note: not necessarily the interests of large corporations; but of the continuation of our republic), I wish we could sit down, shut the fuck up and keep our mitts in our pockets.

I understand that there is suffering in the world and that's a shame. I understand that there are times when there are people that need the world to notice and help but Putin is no Hitler.

I compare the Ukraine situation to Louisiana, wanting to secede from the U.S. Whether you come down for or against such a thing, would you want Russia deciding that out-come?

I quoted Jefferson in another thread. How about if I make it even simpler. How about we start employing the Golden Rule?