What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?

[GQBlues]

It's not that hard. It's not for "me" to accept nor any of you. Ukraine's elected officials deemed him unfit to serve and voted him out. All in Ukraine's (or rather's Russia's own) style of democracy. Yes, I'm okay with that and it has nothing to do with my opinion of Putin or Yankovict's ties to Putin. I expect I'd be okay with an impeachment vote or a vote to remove Obama from office. They have been wiping their ass with the constitution too long already. What I think of Yanukovich has no bearing on my opinion of the legality of Ukrainian law. They voted Yanu out and they have their reasons. It wasn't done at the barrel of a gun. They were fed up with the corruption. Ukraine's parliament responding to it's constituents. The idea that Ukraine has no right to remove a president who lost favor with the population to bow down to Putin's demands IMHO, is their right. The fact that this angers Putin doesn't give him rights to invade or seize Ukraine. You were earlier arguing the Ukrainian constitutional semantics.  It is their constitution. They have a right to change it....

FP, they didn't vote him out. The impeachment protocol never got the full process. So they overthrew him instead. Doing things outside the bounds of your presiding constitution makes it a coup. We demonize Iranians for overthrowing the Shah. The US placed him to rule Iran. He wasn't even elected  or chosen by the people. We put him there so the Brits can continue to suck it's oil. You can't have it both ways, man. Yanu in Ukraine is no different than the Shah of Iran. Wrong is wrong and shouldn't be determined on what aisle any of us is sitting on.

...You've put much too much stock in a recorded phone call of Nuland. Do you honestly believe she can or had the ability to place who she deemed? I don't. She is but another clown of the Obama admin. Neither does Kerry, Biden or King Obama himself. ...

She did exactly that, FP. She even went as far as making a point why Klitchko was not and cannot be the right choice.

...Hell no. My opinion of Putin has nothing to do with anything. The PMs phone call while likely valid is still nothing more than heresay. Just as Nuland's. It can be just as false and it can be true. I'm all for an investigation but any kind of investigation isn't going to happen until Putin exits the stage, taking his invasion with him. I suspect such an investigation would reveal far more about Yanu and Putin than the West's financing protests in Kiev...

On the one hand you subscribe to speculations and media misinformation simply because it adds fire against Putin. Then at the same time blatantly deny or disregard full audio recordings as heresay simply because it counters biased opinions.

Why hasn't the EU refute the information regarding the origin of the sniper? Why hasn't there been an investigation soon after information revealed it wasn't from Yanukovyck's corner? Look, crimes against humanity committed by Kosovars, Bosnians, etc... against the Serbs, prior to, during and after the Balkans war aren't surfacing until just recently. Almost 20 years after the war. NATO and the UN literally turned a blind eye to all these atrocities. We undermined and instigated that unrest/war just as what were doing here in Ukraine today.

I don't like Putin. I don't like him leading Russia either. But that doesn't negate one iota the US undermined this Ukrainian crisis. My dislike of Putin doesn't negate the crimes WE are committing in Ukraine through this crisis.

[LiveFromUkraine]

My head isn't in the sand here guy. I have no doubt Western entities are complicit in the destabilization of Ukraine. I also have little to no doubt of the Obama's admin complicity, too. The reasons why are pure conjecture and immaterial. Although LT's description is probably more truth than fiction. However, the blood being spilled is not by the hand of the West, it is by Putin. Stop excusing his actions. What has happened in Ukraine has been happening throughout the world for the last 1000 years. Russia has and continues to do the very same crimes you accuse the West of. It's not "okay" for Russia to carry out these crimes because the West allegedly, in your mind, started it.

Sounds like we agree on the west having some blame in destabilizing Ukraine.  It looks like we disagree on what has happened afterwards.  From my understanding, you seem to be blaming Putin for all of the violence.  I don't necessarily think he doesn't have his hands involved, but I also don't think he is the sole cause. 


I think the destabilization is the cause which we both agree in the US/EU being a big part of.  I am having a hard time understanding why you and some others seem to think all the violence is caused by Putin.


Looking at the picture I posted, I don't see why Putin would be working with the Odessa police.  You have a guy with a gun dressed up in black standing next to a cop.  Looking at the video, the same cops are helping guys with the same red bands wrapped around their arms. 


Add in the sniper remarks that GQ brought back up and you really don't see anything that raises an eyebrow? 


Just because I am stating the West has it's hands bloody doesn't mean I am excusing anyone else involved.  That is a red herring.   I rather know the truth and how I feel about Putin doesn't negate that.  What about you and others here?

He was elected. Fairly or not, who is to say but, that's not the point. He sold Ukraine up the river to Moscow. He was a crook, a thief and Putin's puppet, his own party wanted him out of office. The Ukrainian people/government took measures to end it. It was completed by a vote. It should also be noted it was while he was on the lamb and hiding with his master. You and numerous others here blame the West for that. You blame the West for assisting that action. Would you feel better if it wasn't the West but rather China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea?

Every politician there is a crook.  All Ukrainians know that.


You can't call that vote democratic if it wasn't aligned with their constitution.  I have to shake my head at the idea that people complain Putin isn't allowing Ukraine their own democracy and the same people applaud a coup backed by the US and EU trying to make it sound like the people had spoken.  Well, no, the people elected Yanu and he was replaced by the people the US/EU wanted.


As for Yanu bailing from Kiev, you don't think our President would have been whisked away if there was a coup threatening?  I don't understand why you think Yanu should have stayed and risked his life.

I didn't say they didn't do it. I'm not defending the actions of the Obama admin or their complicity in the Ukrainian situation. Let's keep that clear. If the West didn't do it, another country or countries would have. It is/was an opportunity that someone would have exploited/ taken advantage of. I don't like it, certainly don't agree with it or think it just but, it is, what it is. That is the reality. This reality was possible because of Yankovict, his thievery and serving Putin rather than Ukraine.

Yes, it is what it is.  The west helped create a weak Ukraine and now there is a massive civil war going on.  You and others can try to blame all the blood shed on Putin but that is misleading.  There are many Ukrainians that were not going to accept what had happened in Kiev and that has nothing to do with Putin.

There are many fingerprints all over this situation but, the current bloodshed is clearly on Putin's hands IMHO. He is the catalyst of the fighting. If Putin were correct in his declarations, he would allow Ukrainians to have an unfettered election unimpeded with terror or disruption. The fact that he isn't should be an indicator to you.

Yanu was elected in an infettered election.  Yanu even agreed to have early elections but the coup wouldn't have it.  We obviously disagree on the catalyst.  No big deal man, you can't be right all the time.   

 

[Tulip]

Interesting article on the Odessa tragedy.  It was pieced together, in Russia, from youtube videos so who knows if it is accurate.


http://rt.com/news/156744-video-footage-odessa-fire/

If there is someone who is not so stupid as Obama and others seems to look like, please, read it and look at these pictures http://ersieesist.livejournal.com/813.html Even stupid sheep could realize who has murdered people in Odessa

[GQBlues]

...The PMs phone call while likely valid is still nothing more than heresay. Just as Nuland's. It can be just as false and it can be true....

btw- both recorded audios by Nuland and that of the PM's were all authenticated. Merkel and the German government had confirmed and even reacted unfavorably against it (Nuland's rift), and Cathy Ashton from the EU, along with the PM, admitted to the exchange and comments by the Prime Minister to also have taken place.

So, they are not heresay..

[LiveFromUkraine]

If there is someone who is not so stupid as Obama and others seems to look like, please, read it and look at these pictures http://ersieesist.livejournal.com/813.html Even stupid sheep could realize who has murdered people in Odessa

The "facts" were a little too much a stretch for me to take serious.

[BillyB]

Yanu's removal is illegal. The process of impeachment was not consummated due to failure in parliamentary protocol so they simply abandoned the process and overthrew him regardless.

When will you stop crying over Yanukovych's ousting? Putin got over it. GET OVER IT and stop spreading false information. There was NO impeachment. Yanukovych was ousted because he failed to perform his duties. Nowhere in Ukraine's constitution does it say 3/4 of a vote is needed by parliament to oust a president for failing to perform his duties as it's needed for impeachment. Parliament didn't do anything wrong and Putin has stopped calling Ynaukovych president after reviewing the legalities of how Ukraine's parliament handled it.

[GQBlues]

- blather here -

Until such time you actually understand what *non-binding* & dissenting opinions* mean, and/or what a nation's constitution provide; You shouldn't make it too obvious to us you're a stooge and a clod.

Shooo!

[lordtiberius]

You, GQ nor I have any idea what Putin's plan is. I don't think him smart either.

Is he himself?  He may not be in control anymore.  He maybe just a Brezhnev - a pawn shared between competing factions in the Kremlin.

My knowledge of the Siloviki is poor but if I had to guess, the real power behind the throne is this man; Dmitry Rogozin and yes its a WAG.



This is a GRU operation just as Georgia was and Syria is.  For Russia, unlike Obama the real prize is Ukraine, not Syria or Iran.  18 pipelines and 16B of trade every year passes through Ukraine including a significant amount of defense specific commodities.

The damage he has inflicted thus far will be far reaching into the future of Russia as well as Ukraine. Russia's position on the world stage is diminishing daily. It won't bother Putin or his cronies personally as he's already moved his stolen billions all over the world. It will affect your average Russian. This includes my wife's family and our Russian family and friends in Russia. This is where my personal concern is mainly focused. I don't personally have a dog in the fight in Ukraine but, I am seeing the world being reshaped as a result and I do not like it one bit. There is a method to my madness. The best course of action for Putin right now, today is to pack up and go home and be happy with the change of Crimea. Anything beyond that is going to come at a very expensive price IMHO

I think a lot of people feel the way you do.  The reason why more people don't express this sentiment, have their reasons. . . .



My in-laws are out of work or looking for work.  Prices are going up in Ukraine, but they are in Bila Tserkva.  I feel for CC3, his people are in Luhansk.  Of my associates there, one has allied himself to Right Sector, another fled to Israel, another works in a hospital.

[Faux Pas]

FP, they didn't vote him out. The impeachment protocol never got the full process. So they overthrew him instead. Doing things outside the bounds of your presiding constitution makes it a coup. We demonize Iranians for overthrowing the Shah. The US placed him to rule Iran. He wasn't even elected  or chosen by the people. We put him there so the Brits can continue to suck it's oil. You can't have it both ways, man. Yanu in Ukraine is no different than the Shah of Iran. Wrong is wrong and shouldn't be determined on what aisle any of us is sitting on.

Here, we'll have to agree to disagree. Do you believe the Muslim Brotherhood should be returned to power in Egypt? The legal process of Ukraine kicked Yankovict out. They had very valid reasons for doing so. Frankly, it's not up to me or my beliefs on the rule of law to agree or disagree with their decision. Do you believe that if they hadn't voted him out, there would be no unrest in Ukraine today?

She did exactly that, FP. She even went as far as making a point why Klitchko was not and cannot be the right choice.

She certainly said it but, there is no indication that she had the power or wherewithall to do it. She might think she does/did but that doesn't mean much in the grander scheme of things, does it? She spent a lot of someone's money. What that bought her is very fuzzy, isn't it?

On the one hand you subscribe to speculations and media misinformation simply because it adds fire against Putin. Then at the same time blatantly deny or disregard full audio recordings as heresay simply because it counters biased opinions.

Not really. I see all of the media coverage and speculation as something to be deciphered, cross checked and cross checked again.Honestly, I don't much bother cross checking the RT propaganda, only the US and BBC versions. You and I could have phone conversations where I declared I've spent oodles of money on North Star beer and I am now in a position to take over the brewery. Even though I did spend the money on the beer, it doesn't necessarily mean I get the brewery, does it?
 

Why hasn't the EU refute the information regarding the origin of the sniper? Why hasn't there been an investigation soon after information revealed it wasn't from Yanukovyck's corner? Look, crimes against humanity committed by Kosovars, Bosnians, etc... against the Serbs, prior to, during and after the Balkans war aren't surfacing until just recently. Almost 20 years after the war. NATO and the UN literally turned a blind eye to all these atrocities. We undermined and instigated that unrest/war just as what were doing here in Ukraine today.

I don't like Putin. I don't like him leading Russia either. But that doesn't negate one iota the US undermined this Ukrainian crisis. My dislike of Putin doesn't negate the crimes WE are committing in Ukraine through this crisis.

[/quote]

I don't know and that is a good question. Probability that accurate information on that incident will never be revealed. Trust me here, if it's not convenient to the powers that be, it will not be revealed. If it is told, it'll be suppressed so that few ever hear it. That's the world we live in. Those rules apply to the West, EU and Russia.

I agree with you, We have committed crimes in Ukraine "IF" Nuland's revelations are true. I suspect that it is half true but that is only my suspicion. I noted 20 pages ago in  the thread we have complicity. That doesn't mean to the extent of bloodshed.Perhaps we do but that doesn't give Putin free gratis to rape and pillage. Trust me here brah, we are a long time from knowing the real truth of what is actually occurring, if we ever hear the full unvarnished version. That I highly doubt

[Muzh]

My country is in rage after Odessa massacre. Would you so kind to shut up for now.

Why is your country in such rage?


The people burned were not "Russians" were they? They were Russian vassals, correct? So nothing much was lost, was there?


It happened in Ukraine among "Ukrainians."


So, really. Why is your country in such a rage?


Can't get past the partisan war?


Ooops, a little miscalculation maybe?

[Muzh]

ha!  What he does isn't called thinking!

Hey LFU!


I encourage you to take the guy off of ignore.  Keep him talking as he can't help but harm his own cause, which is good for us that would like to keep America out of these foreign affairs. 


Fathertime!

Can you tell us what is your real purpose on this list?

[GQBlues]

Here, we'll have to agree to disagree. Do you believe the Muslim Brotherhood should be returned to power in Egypt? The legal process of Ukraine kicked Yankovict out. They had very valid reasons for doing so. Frankly, it's not up to me or my beliefs on the rule of law to agree or disagree with their decision. Do you believe that if they hadn't voted him out, there would be no unrest in Ukraine today?...

Yes, very likely to agree to disagree because:

a) If the Muslim brotherhood is the people's choice, then that's their choice. Why shouldn't they be? Regardless of who they elect to be their leaders are choices solely made by their citizens. Hell, the majority in us is making us live with this bastid White House stooge while he rapes the country unabated.
b) the ousting of the president was anything but 'legal'. Maybe there's something in the Ukrainian constitution you can show me where they can remove the president in the manner they did and within the confines of their Constitution? The Constitutional Article dealing directly with this is Article 108 in which it states:

"The President of Ukraine exercises his or her powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The powers of the President of Ukraine terminate prior to the expiration of term in cases of:

1. resignation;
2. inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3. removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4. death."

Heck, they don't even have a provision for unforeseen situations/conditions.

This is the official stated reason for his removal:

Given that President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych withdrew from performing the constitutional powers The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine hereby resolves:

He didn't withdrew. The coalition chased him out of the country when the sniper shots were fired and blamed it on him.

d) The cause of the unrest is not because of Yanu's presidency but rather the protest against of trade agreements. There has been plenty of anti-trade agreements the world over FP but none escalated to the violence you saw in Kiev. What caused the violence? Snipers. So to *guess* on your hypothesis, very likely *no*, not in the same fashion we're seeing today. Yanu has been in office for 3 years running, with one year left to his presidency. Seem rather silly to pin this pending civil war over a person's presidency which is 75% over with, no?

...She certainly said it but, there is no indication that she had the power or wherewithall to do it. She might think she does/did but that doesn't mean much in the grander scheme of things, does it? She spent a lot of someone's money. What that bought her is very fuzzy, isn't it?...

LOL. Yeah...never mind that she also said delegations from the UN will be arriving shortly to *validate* the choice and presto, the person she chose is now *running* the country. Listen to the transcript FP.

..Not really. I see all of the media coverage and speculation as something to be deciphered, cross checked and cross checked again.Honestly, I don't much bother cross checking the RT propaganda, only the US and BBC versions....

It doesn't appear you've been diligent of your cross-examination of the western media much, FP. Considering you are speculative and apprehensive of authenticated tapped audio conversations between key personnel about vital issues/segment in this crisis seem to suggest so.

...You and I could have phone conversations where I declared I've spent oodles of money on North Star beer and I am now in a position to take over the brewery. Even though I did spend the money on the beer, it doesn't necessarily mean I get the brewery, does it?...

Not if you mentioned official folks are scheduled to arrive soon to validate the sale and the very next day you're sitting in the brewery's board of governorship and running the show, yes?

...I don't know and that is a good question. Probability that accurate information on that incident will never be revealed. Trust me here, if it's not convenient to the powers that be, it will not be revealed. If it is told, it'll be suppressed so that few ever hear it. That's the world we live in. Those rules apply to the West, EU and Russia....

I would agree. But until it is fully revealed, the fact this was between Estonia's Foreign Minister and EU's representative, IMO suggests to me there's a much higher probability that Kiev's coalition should own the dubious lion's share of suspicion. After all, that is exactly the information Urmas Paet had in his conversation with Catherine in what he described as "very disturbing"....

...I agree with you, We have committed crimes in Ukraine "IF" Nuland's revelations are true. I suspect that it is half true but that is only my suspicion. I noted 20 pages ago in  the thread we have complicity. That doesn't mean to the extent of bloodshed.Perhaps we do but that doesn't give Putin free gratis to rape and pillage. Trust me here brah, we are a long time from knowing the real truth of what is actually occurring, if we ever hear the full unvarnished version. That I highly doubt

...even if there's only half-truths FP, the fact is 'WE' are in there meddling. There's been many covert operations that we've done in the past, both long ago and recent past - which none of us knew about until way after the fact. That doesn't negate or lessen the gravity of our sins - regardless of intent - because lot's of people die in it. To this day, over 2,000 Serbs' bodies have not been found when the KLA, a unit we provided arms for for their rebellion, captured and took away and sent over to Albania - after the war.

http://iwpr.net/report-news/kosovo-crimes-against-serbs-investigated

[lordtiberius]

No crime against meddling

[GQBlues]

...Do you believe that if they hadn't voted him out, there would be no unrest in Ukraine today?...

FP, here's food for thought.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/178716/dark-side-ukraine-revolt#

"...Ukraine is in deep economic trouble, and for the past year the government has been casting about for a way out. Bailout negotiations were opened with the International Monetary Fund and the European Union, but the loan would have required onerous austerity measures that, according to Citibank analyst Ivan Tchakarov, would “most probably mean a recession in 2014.”

It was at this juncture that Yanukovych abandoned talks with the EU and opened negotiations with the Russians. That turnaround was the spark for last November’s demonstrations.

But as Ben Aris, editor of Business News Europe, says, “Under the terms of the EU offer of last year—which virtually nobody in the Western media has seriously examined—the EU was offering $160 million per year for the next five years, while just the bond payments to the IMF were greater than that.”

Russia, on the other hand, “offered $15 billion in cash and immediately paid $3 billion.… Had Yanukovych accepted the EU deal, the country would have collapsed,” says Aris.

The current situation is dangerous precisely because it touches a Russian security nerve. The Soviet Union lost some twenty-five to twenty-seven million people in World War II, and Russians to this day are touchy about their borders. They also know who inflicted those casualties, and those who celebrate a Waffen SS division are not likely to be well thought of in the south or the east of Ukraine.

Border security is hardly ancient history for the Kremlin. As Russian expert Cohen points out, “Since the Clinton administration in the 1990s, the US-led West has been on a steady march toward post-Soviet Russia, beginning with the expansion of NATO…all the way to the Russian border.”

NATO now includes Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia and former Soviet-led Warsaw Pact members Albania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Romania.

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s comment that the IMF-EU package for Ukraine would have been “a major boost for Euro-Atlantic security” suggests that NATO had set its sights on bringing Ukraine into the military alliance.

The massive demonstrations over the past three months reflected widespread outrage at the corruption of the Yanukovych regime, but they have also unleashed a dark side of Ukraine’s politics. That dark side was on display at last year’s rally in Cherkasy. Victor Smal, a lawyer and human rights activist, said he told “the men in the T-shirts they were promoting hatred. They beat me to the ground until I lost consciousness.”

Svoboda and its allies do not make up a majority of the demonstrators, but as Cohen points out, “Five percent of a population that’s tough, resolute, ruthless, armed and well funded, and knows what it wants, can make history.”

It is not the kind of history most would like to repeat...."

[fathertime]

Hell no. My opinion of Putin has nothing to do with anything. The PMs phone call while likely valid is still nothing more than heresay. Just as Nuland's. It can be just as false and it can be true. I'm all for an investigation but any kind of investigation isn't going to happen until Putin exits the stage, taking his invasion with him. I suspect such an investigation would reveal far more about Yanu and Putin than the West's financing protests in Kiev.

Now you are just completely misstating things....there may be a Russian invasion, BUT it hasn't happened YET. As numerous posters with relatives are stating, there is a deep divide and Ukrainians are taking to the streets. 

Yes, very likely to agree to disagree because:

a) If the Muslim brotherhood is the people's choice, then that's their choice. Why shouldn't they be? Regardless of who they elect to be their leaders are choices solely made by their citizens. Hell, the majority in us is making us live with this bastid White House stooge while he rapes the country unabated.
b) the ousting of the president was anything but 'legal'. Maybe there's something in the Ukrainian constitution you can show me where they can remove the president in the manner they did and within the confines of their Constitution? The Constitutional Article dealing directly with this is Article 108 in which it states:

"The President of Ukraine exercises his or her powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The powers of the President of Ukraine terminate prior to the expiration of term in cases of:

1. resignation;
2. inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3. removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4. death."

Heck, they don't even have a provision for unforeseen situations/conditions.

This is the official stated reason for his removal:

Given that President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych withdrew from performing the constitutional powers The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine hereby resolves:

He didn't withdrew. The coalition chased him out of the country when the sniper shots were fired and blamed it on him.

d) The cause of the unrest is not because of Yanu's presidency but rather the protest against of trade agreements. There has been plenty of anti-trade agreements the world over FP but none escalated to the violence you saw in Kiev. What caused the violence? Snipers. So to *guess* on your hypothesis, very likely *no*, not in the same fashion we're seeing today. Yanu has been in office for 3 years running, with one year left to his presidency. Seem rather silly to pin this pending civil war over a person's presidency which is 75% over with, no?

LOL. Yeah...never mind that she also said delegations from the UN will be arriving shortly to *validate* the choice and presto, the person she chose is now *running* the country. Listen to the transcript FP.


It doesn't appear you've been diligent of your cross-examination of the western media much, FP. Considering you are speculative and apprehensive of authenticated tapped audio conversations between key personnel about vital issues/segment in this crisis seem to suggest so.
 

I think there is very little doubt that we (the US) had a lot to do with the installation of the current 'leadership'...Listening to these tapes again, and of course looking at our recent history of forcing 'regime change' it is very easy reach that conclusion.  Given that, pro-Russians were not going to stand by and do nothing at all.  I'd think Russia is giving some sort of support and I don't blame them for doing that.   A civil war might be in the cards, but I think it can be avoided if reasonable concessions are made. 


Why not allow for more autonomy in regions where that is what they are asking for...if indeed the populace of those regions votes for it? That might wind up being the best deal Ukraine can get, the longer this drags on I'd think the less palatable the outcome would be. 


Fathertime! 

[lordtiberius]

I didn't know there were so many Constitutional lawyers on the forum

[Anotherkiwi]

Why not allow for more autonomy in regions where that is what they are asking for...if indeed the populace of those regions votes for it? That might wind up being the best deal Ukraine can get, the longer this drags on I'd think the less palatable the outcome would be.

That sounds wonderful in theory, but that is what Crimea already had.  From what I can see, Putin is adamant that the only solution possible agreeable to Russia is federalisation, where he can then pick off one small (relatively helpless) region at a time.  If that happens, Ukraine east of the Dnieper won't exist in 10 years because Putin will have conquered annexed invited it all to become part of Russia, after managing to change the Russian constitution to allow him to be President for Life - failing that, he will install a puppet to follow him who will do exactly what Putin wants.

[fathertime]

That sounds wonderful in theory, but that is what Crimea already had.  From what I can see, Putin is adamant that the only solution possible agreeable to Russia is federalisation, where he can then pick off one small (relatively helpless) region at a time.  If that happens, Ukraine east of the Dnieper won't exist in 10 years because Putin will have conquered annexed invited it all to become part of Russia, after managing to change the Russian constitution to allow him to be President for Life - failing that, he will install a puppet to follow him who will do exactly what Putin wants.

Hey AK, 
That might be true, Russia might want to pick off those regions and make them a part of Russia...BUT Russia could do that at any time.  In the case of a federation, the leadership of Ukraine would need to write in reasonable requirements, one being that a region COULD not decide to secede without a countrywide vote.  This is the type of discussion that I would think could happen when Ukraine finally has somebody to represent their country's desires.   


Yes it is also likely that Russia could heavily influence these autonomous regions.  Perhaps the majority of people in the area would approve of that influence, especially if they saw tangible benefits from it....if that were the case then more power to them...then again with the autonomy there would be certain costs written in, and they might decide that those costs (if not made up for by Russia) might not be worth the 'autonomy'. 


I don't know if there is any better solution out there given the state of affairs, but I'd like to hear some other ideas. 


Fathertime! 

[southernX]

That might be true, Russia might want to pick off those regions and make them a part of Russia...BUT Russia could do that at any time.  In the case of a federation, the leadership of Ukraine would need to write in reasonable requirements, one being that a region COULD not decide to secede without a countrywide vote.  This is the type of discussion that I would think could happen when Ukraine finally has somebody to represent their country's desires.   

FT , your kidding ??  have you read up on the crimea farce ??
what do you think was required under the ukraine laws for crimea to hold its own referendum and be annexed by russia ??  yes it needed to be a national referendum and vote to succeed ,

just acouple of points

1 no country would join NATO  if it didnt wish to , all new additions to NATO made the request  to join presumably  for there own security by their own volition , says something about how russia makes them nervous doesnt it ??  given the current situation who would blame them ?

2 ukraine has every right to choose who it wishes to build relationships with and the nature of those relationships , it is not required to ask permission from its neighbours,   
ukrainians have every right to express their voice in a peacefull non violent way at elections /referendums under their constitution

3 finally , when will some people get it into their head that ukraine HAS already been invaded by RUSSIA  !!   all of  putins destabilisation is designed to stop the elections on may 25th or at least discredit and hamper a clean result

4 anyone who thinks putins aim is not to weaken and destabilise ukraine and keep it tight under putins unfluence /regime control  to stop it growing independent and stronger away from his russia as a good example should be putting funds into research looking for the loch ness monster as well

SX

[fathertime]

FT , your kidding ??  have you read up on the crimea farce ??
what do you think was required under the ukraine laws for crimea to hold its own referendum and be annexed by russia ??  yes it needed to be a national referendum and vote to succeed ,

 

Yes I've read up quite a bit...Russia invaded Crimea first and then held an election that probably did reflect the will of the majority...but it appears obvious the election wasn't proper.   

 
 

3 finally , when will some people get it into their head that ukraine HAS already been invaded by RUSSIA  !!   all of  putins destabilisation is designed to stop the elections on may 25th or at least discredit and hamper a clean result



 

I disagree with this point.  Perhaps you define invasion differently than most.  What is happening in Ukraine appears to be springing from the regular people that are presumably highly dissatisfied with what has happened.  Those people may be getting arms from Russia.  Russia probably has helped organize too.  That does not constituent an invasion in my book. There is evidence that shows we support and sent arms to Syrians/Libyans  but that is not a US invasion.    If the troops parked on the border start barreling in with force, THAT will be an invasion, imo.       


Perhaps you have a different solution that will diffuse the situation that the people can live with.


Fathertime! 

[southernX]

ft,

im sure you are quite a sensible guy , so im quite perplexed at your apparent lack of understanding of what you wrote

Yes I've read up quite a bit...Russia invaded Crimea first and then held an election that probably did reflect the will of the majority...but it appears obvious the election wasn't proper.   

so you agree russia invaded crimea , which is legally part of the sovereign country of ukraine ??yes ??

but then you say

I disagree with this point.  Perhaps you define invasion differently than most.  What is happening in Ukraine appears to be springing from the regular people that are presumably highly dissatisfied with what has happened.  Those people may be getting arms from Russia.  Russia probably has helped organize too.  That does not constituent an invasion in my book.

sir can you please make up your mind ??  and voice it clearly ?

imho an invasion has happened already and it is continuing in the s/east of ukraine , people are suffering as a direct result of putins actions , he has russians on the ground to coordinate this he is far more culpable than you give him credit for FT

SX

[fathertime]

ft,

im sure you are quite asensible guy , so im quite perplexed at your apaprent lack of understanding of what you wrote

so you agree russia invaded crimea , which is legally part of the sovereign country of ukraine ??yes ??

but then you say

sir can you please make up your mind ??  and voice it clearly ?

SX

Yes that was unclear I agree... I agree that Russia did invade Crimea...Russia has not invaded the mainland. 

BUT in looking at your quote which was:

3 finally , when will some people get it into their head that ukraine HAS already been invaded by RUSSIA  !!   all of  putins destabilisation is designed to stop the elections on may 25th or at least discredit and hamper a clean result
 
 

I guess this question/statement is addressed to some of the other posters then...because I'm not among those that deny an invasion of Crimea did take place prior to their vote.  My intent was to refute that Russia has invaded the mainland of Ukraine as of yet.   

Fathertime!   

[lordtiberius]

Questions for ft, the Libyan/Syrian scenarios vis-a-vis NATO & US, those are not invasions by your definition.

1) If we deployed Special Operations forces to help the "rebels" is that an invasion? 

2) Do you accept the premise that GRU and Russian Spetsnaz forces deployed in Eastern Ukraine to help the "rebels"?

3) is that an invasion? 

4) If NATO mirrored Russian involvement deployment of NATO-US SOF forces in Western & Central Ukraine, is that an invasion?

5) Would you oppose such an escalation?

Thank you in advance.

[fathertime]

Questions for ft, the Libyan/Syrian scenarios vis-a-vis NATO & US, those are not invasions by your definition.

1) If we deployed Special Operations forces to help the "rebels" is that an invasion? 

2) Do you accept the premise that GRU and Russian Spetsnaz forces deployed in Eastern Ukraine to help the "rebels"?

3) is that an invasion? 

4) If NATO mirrored Russian involvement deployment of NATO-US SOF forces in Western & Central Ukraine, is that an invasion?

5) Would you oppose such an escalation?

Thank you in advance.

I don’t want to get involved with a hypothetical like that...one reason is each situation is unique and it wouldn't be an apples to apples comparison.


  The position I’m holding is that Russia has not invaded mainland Ukraine at this point but it is quite likely they are meddling.  If you feel what has happened at this point is a mainland invasion, then perhaps you should state your case as I've already done from my pov.


Fathertime!

[lordtiberius]

You know what I believe and what I think we should do.  But I don't trust Obama to lead or order men to battle.  Until we fix that, there is not much we can do.  Even sending SOF into, means Obama MIGHT hang them out to dry aka Extortion 17.  I am willing to accept your hands off policies as long as you accept that this will be a proxy war and that the West has a right to arm the anti-Putin Ukrainians (the fascists), deal?