..Although the U.S. has given funds to Ukraine, there is no doubt, what, exactly, is the strategic benefit to America in funding NGO's, think tanks, and the foundations of democracy in Ukraine?...
But the U.S. can achieve all of that without giving a cent to Ukraine.
..I just don't buy the theory that the US is an evil empire, intent on world rule. I think past funding has mostly been to aid in establishing the foundations of democracy.
Really? Do you honestly believe we poured billions of dollars (translation: stole our tax monies since these things are NEVER in our fiscal budgets) out of the kindness of our collective, albeit ignorant, hearts?
Funny how these things change. Not too long ago Bush was demonize for his infamous *Bush Doctrine*. Now that there has not only been far more unrest and hostilities the world over - center to it all is the US - it has all been intensified and all of the sudden, all of that is ignored and you instantly can't believe we, as a nation, can't possibly be this conniving?
You can't see things objectively looking away Boethius.
...The problem with the Bush doctrine was not the promotion of democracy, but the desire to impose it. Democracy cannot be imposed on a country.
But the U.S. can achieve all of that without giving a cent to Ukraine.
I just don't buy the theory that the US is an evil empire, intent on world rule. I think past funding has mostly been to aid in establishing the foundations of democracy.
Yet again, you miss the point. I am not referring to Crimea. If you wish to discuss Crimea, do so in one of the 999 threads devoted to that particular topic.
This is about the $5 billion the United States has sent to Ukraine over two decades plus. Others have stated this is so that the U.S. gains control of Ukraine. I don't believe that.
The funding and support of terrorists in the Eastern regions has caused more anti Russian sentiment in Ukraine than anything I can think of.
But the U.S. first started sending funds to Ukraine when it was also aiding Russia. Russia eventually viewed foreign NGO's as handmaidens of thedevilU.S., and prohibited many from working on Russian soil. So, if the intent was to put a distance between the countries, I think they went about it the wrong way.
Russia has interfered in Ukrainian politics since its independence. However, it is Ukrainian oligarchs who have the most influence on Ukrainian internal affairs.
I think the influence of diaspora Ukrainians, who flocked there after the Soviet collapse, aided in Ukraine having more of a Western outlook. They used funds from the Soros Foundation and the U.S. to help establish democratic institutions.
I just don't buy the narrative that the U.S. is interested in moving Ukraine from the Russian sphere. Further, I believe Russia, not the U.S., achieved this. The funding and support of terrorists in the Eastern regions has caused more anti Russian sentiment in Ukraine than anything I can think of.
My view is, there is very little strategic benefit to the U.S., beyond opening a limited market for U.S. corporations.
But the U.S. first started sending funds to Ukraine when it was also aiding Russia.
What do you call a democracy?
I think it is American interests for European countries, and Russia, or that matter, to be democracies.
The problem with the Bush doctrine was not the promotion of democracy, but the desire to impose it. Democracy cannot be imposed on a country.
If your definition of free is that America has to be followed, it differs from mine.
Yes, America aided Russia in it time of need but also hoping we can create a friend and business partner instead of an enemy. When the Soviet Union or any nation collapses and in it's time of weakness, there can be power grabs. People who hate the free world in control of nukes is not a good thing.
as soon as the president does not follow the will of some countries, he becomes a dictator in international press. How is that democratic?
If your definition of free is that America has to be followed, it differs from mine.
I understand some people are upset with America giving nations money to influence their decisions and outcomes but money talks. Even as individuals, the amount of money offered to us determines if we will go to work or not. We're not immune. Money alters our behavior just as it does nations. Some people see this as evil. I don't.
Yes I'm sure we both realize that money is used for rather evil deeds...and I sure don't think all of our deals (THe USA) are analogous to example A. Some people seem up in arms over Russia strengthening their position with their invasion of Crimea...considering the types of deals we have done, I think we shouldn't complain...Crimea has a great deal of strategic importance to SOMEBODY, or Russia would not have made such a brazen move to capture it and only it....to this point
Fathertime!
How many times does it need to be pointed out--- it is NOT about the USA .Regardless of assessments of the past-it has zero to do with the Russian invasion of Ukraine.Russia has invaded another country after pledging respect for its borders and sovereignty.
You are so USA centric that you cannot empathise with a nation left nearly on it's own to face the might of Russia-- where good Ukrainians are being killed because of Putin's machinations--- that is zero to do with the US or anything the US created.
Strategic importance? Is that militarily? Economic? Sphere of influence? Geographical?
Whatever-- Putin has created a situation where Russia will never be trusted by Ukraine again-- or at least while the old soviet attitudes and corruption prevails.
Because he refused to sign a treaty with the EU.
A president can't do anything he wants. He has to follow the will of his people, not steal, imprison and kill those in his way. Have you ever given any thought on why the international press ruled Yanukovych a dictator?
My definition of free is the same as in the dictionary. Of course even free nations have laws and some people feel they are slaves to these laws. Can't please everyone.First of all, free means that they should make their own choices, and if some other country does not like that choice that country has zero right to interfere. Neither by open or hidden acts, nor by blackpainting the country through press.
Shadow, you talk about the problems of the free world yet you're fine with Russia controlling or annexing Ukraine. What is your solution? YOUR world is influenced by outside sources. YOUR security and existence is dependent on other nations besides your own. Do you prefer Putin/Russia having more influence on your nation than the EU and America?
I don't think the statements are contradictory. Ukraine was not invaded in an effort to spread democracy to the region. The Bush doctrine, which really is a regurgitation of the PNAC manifesto, is that invading a country and imposing democratic structures would lead to a change in the Middle East...
...The Arab uprisings likely would have occurred whether or not the US had invaded Iraq.
That's not the Bush Doctrine, Boethius.
That depends on what definition you adopt. If it is the Krauthammer definition, then I agree. If it is preemptive strikes, then I also agree. If it is the PNAC solution, which Bush himself referred to (though not the PNAC document), then I disagree.
As for Ukraine, you will never convince me the US was behind Euromaidan.
... don't see how providing funds to ensure Ukraine (and Russia, as the US provided funds to Russia after the collapse of the USSR as well) succeeds in its quest to establish democratic institutions is an exercise of hegemonic power.
Although the U.S. has given funds to Ukraine, there is no doubt, what, exactly, is the strategic benefit to America in funding NGO's, think tanks, and the foundations of democracy in Ukraine?
Spreading *democracy* one nation at a time under the new face of hegemony. ;)
Now don't get me wrong. The underlying ambition is wonderful, and I love this part of the best country in the world - my country. It's just that at some point, certain countries or regions are simply NONE of our business, nor do we understand them (it) enough to have us in there meddling with their politics, culture, religion, or beliefs.
The Middle East is a wonderful theater with this point.
If it is the Krauthammer definition, then I agree.
The problem with this guy is that his wheelchair has a hot nail up his ass.
Seriously. He reminds me of Dr. Strangelove.
A. Sally gives Peter 400 dollars because she genuinely wants to help Peter and doesn't care to get anything in return aside from normal behavior and treatment
B. Sally (the contractor) gives Peter 400 dollars because she wants to assure that Peter chooses her bid over her competition's bids...her work is not better, but by bribing the right person she gets the work. The other contractor starves because he didn't think it was necessary to bribe or simply didn't have the money to bribe Peter.
C. Sally (the upset housewife) gives Peter 400 dollars because she doesn't like Sam for various reasons. She wants Peter to not speak with Sam again and hire somebody to rough Sam up. Peter wouldn't normally do this sort of thing, but he has been losing a lot of work lately and is rather desperate for money.
Because he refused to sign a treaty with the EU.
As for Putin having influence in Holland, he could not do much worse as the clowns we have.... in fact many things might improve.
What do you call a democracy?
A country where a president is chosen, and observers have agreed with the elections being fair does seem a democracy to me. Still as soon as the president does not follow the will of some countries, he becomes a dictator in international press. How is that democratic?
I have long ignored your advocacy of Putin. However, you have reached a new high of ludicrousness with this statement.
Russia is a democracy? A democracy is based only in part on the election process. More important are the actions upon taking office and whether they adhere to democratic principles. How can you consider a country a democracy if characterized by widespread corruption, restricted press freedoms, unequal and unfair application of the rule of law, no open dissent, autocratic decisions, imprisonment of opposing political candidates, etc????
I am sure at this moment you are watching your football team, gleefully awaiting for Robben to take a dive. May the better team win.
All that being said..I get it that this is how the world runs currently...rather unfairly, but nothing is perfect.... I just find it interesting that several posters were so "Appalled" and began figuratively clutching their pearls, because Russia is playing the same game, albeit in their own fashion, as they don't have the resources *Yet* to do it as neatly/discreetly as we do. It seems like it is either incredibly hypocritical or straight ignorance that people are unable/unwilling to see things for the way they are.....and will demonize Russia while excusing the USA.
Fathertime!
This is where your "US-centric" blinkers prevent you from seeing outside your own country. Unlike the Americans that you are presumably referring to, we (the rest of the world) don't excuse the USA when it does these things. We're therefore not hypocrites - we will blame anybody (or any country) that acts in this way.Ha! You got me there Kiwi.
Of course, according to GQBlues, everybody outside America is so insignificant :'( that nobody will see or hear our opinions (or take any notice of them if they do). :D
Anotherkiwi - Did you say something?
Ha! You got me there Kiwi.
I don't hear much out if New Zealand, I assume you tend to your own business. Hey what would you say is the biggest problem your country faces currently?
Fathertime!
I have long ignored your advocacy of Putin. However, you have reached a new high of ludicrousness with this statement.The properties you name can be found in any country, including the US and the Netherlands.
Russia is a democracy? A democracy is based only in part on the election process. More important are the actions upon taking office and whether they adhere to democratic principles. How can you consider a country a democracy if characterized by widespread corruption, restricted press freedoms, unequal and unfair application of the rule of law, no open dissent, autocratic decisions, imprisonment of opposing political candidates, etc????
I am sure at this moment you are watching your football team, gleefully awaiting for Robben to take a dive. May the better team win.
A little injection of reality here, Shadow... ;)
A democracy isn't shown on a nation for having the ability of its citizens to choose their own leaders from *multiple political groups*. Case in point, Ukraine already have that and had done just that - but our presence there in the midst of this crisis is supposed to help them established real democracy according to *our* version. Did you miss this very simple fact?
A real democratic nation is a nation who can orchestrate Trojan horse-like programs, like USAid for example, built to spread kindness and assistance upon a nation's populace so that its citizens can clearly see the benevolent actions Americans are capable of doing. Their people begin to see how wonderful our system is. Then when that starts to work, we begin to inject monetary support to that country's political opposition and soon we not only have a *political party within that country who we feel have the same *values* we do, we also got the populace support(we've really worked hard to get that).
What will start as a small, harmless, protest will slowly creep-up to masses that can occupy squares, centers, etc...next thing you know, you have unrest of epic national proportions, then whammo baby! It's a riot!!!! The people raises their arms and scream *WE WANT DEMOCRACY!!!* in unison! Same movie shown over and over again in any national theaters near you..
Then bang...the next step is open that country's doors to our bankers, investors, capitalist cronies, KFC, Starbuck, MikiDees, AA, Delta, USAir, Chase, Visa, MC,
USA-USA-USA!!!
A country didn't even have to have any military significance. There can be 11 people in that country and it won't matter. All they have to do is sign-up and subscribe to our wonderful NATO program with no annual fees. Sort of like Russia's *roof* but without the annoying mob fees, you know...that nation will be just fine as long as they maintain the program *we* designed for them and they do everything *we* say...
That's democracy baby; and no one on our planet is better at exercising this than yours truly.
Spreading *democracy* upon our world one nation at a time...
Speaking of strategic significance and how nations love/inviting USA unto their lands....so much so they overthrow presiding governments to make this happen.You can point this out again and again, and provide example after example (some modern)… Now that ‘we got ours’ of all people we shouldn't be pointing fingers at other nation's 'barbarism'.
Spreading democracy unto our world one nation at a time (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/native-hawaiians-federal-government-give-us-back-our-kingdom-n151801)
"...The 1993 Apology Resolution publicly acknowledged and apologized for the United States’ involvement in the illegal overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani and the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893, admitting that the United States violated Native Hawaiians’ right to self-determination and international law...."
LOL. *invites the US*... :rolleyes:
The funding and support of terrorists in the Eastern regions has caused more anti Russian sentiment in Ukraine than anything I can think of.
While the good ole' US of A exports all types of business and commercial activity into other countries, we have a very generous attitude towards countries coming into our lands. Toyota; Samsung; Volkswagon; there are countless imports. But the US maintains control over many sectors of the financials markets, both through the Dollar and through bond trading. Still, this financial sector influence doesn't stop the Euro or European or Asian bond markets.
Time to take off your rose colored glasses, GQ. The greatest beneficiary of the most recent political struggles is China. Anyone disputing that needs to take a lesson in basic international politics. So, GQ, as you go on crying to everyone how abusive the US is, it is a two way street. That is one of the great things about Los Angeles. Our property values increase on an ever increasing basis due to the great influx of Chinese real estate investors.
All-in-all, GQ, your mind plays in a mud puddle and calls it an ocean. The real world operates in exchange of trade and it is in the best interest of the US or any civilized nation to pursue that trade through civilized notions. It is in the interest of the United States to maintain a balance of trade. Your isolationist tendencies and that of your little band of follower(s) would have the US not only pull back on strategic development of trade partners, but allow the US to widen the trade deficit. Or perhaps you would like to reduce the standard of (your) living to accommodate your ideas that the US should not develop foreign markets?
We had a generation that would consider the inaction of the world, right now, foolishness and history repeating itself. Our fathers and grandfathers are rolling in their graves at the thought of allowing a new cold war to evolve without even a gesture of defiance.
While I don't believe in sending troops or military supplies to Ukraine's situation in Eastern Europe, I'm 'all in' in using every economic tool available to make Russia's life unbearable until Putin is relegated to the size of his economy, not the size of his ego.
Yes, the US has had their history of abusing countries. I know of no powerful country that hasn't. But if we are to freeze the economy of the world by proceeding into another cold war, then we better do it with our eyes wide open, and not because we have some forum pansy claiming that the US is interfering in other nation's affairs.
The US is the world's strongest economy. With that moniker comes the ability to use economic might to maintain standards of civilization. It is still our responsibility to demonstrate to the rest of the world that we aren't going to let everything be flushed down the toilet because we don't have the cajones to make a tough call on economic warfare.
The true strategic importance of US involvement in Ukraine is not the individual fight between Russia and her former vassal state. The importance of Eastern Europe is that the US and Europe can ill afford to be caught asleep at the wheel. We have a demonstrated foreign policy that does nothing but appeasement. If that is to continue, we can expect more of the same challenges, not only in Ukraine but in the Middle East, South America and our own back yard.
You are right, GQ. You are sexy.
As for what I write, at 2AM and without any edits, I may make a typo or two. You, on the other hand, are constantly massaging your posts.
While I disagree that the US directly interfered with the Maidan change of President. My argument was for the need for future economic, not military warfare.
My vision is forward thinking. Yours appears to look backwards and dwell on things past. Get over yourself. The forum members that I know are rather tired of your constant single minded perspective. Even if the US did involve itself in the removal of Yanukovich, that card was played six months ago and we are now in a different world.
I listened to your arguments then and those of Live from Ukraine. I gave the idea of 'oil development' some credence. But it is sheer speculation. It is not something to build a five month diatribe that we see from you day in and day out.
Join the current conversation.
There isn't any freaking conversation because your premise is erroneous.
For example, those automakers are not here IN the US because of our generous attitude. They are here because we 'forced' them to because we (our automakers) couldn't compete with their *labor market cost*, and our competing products were dying a very ugly death commercially. They were coming up with Celicas, 240Zs, Rabbits and Beetles; we were coming up with Pintos and Pacers.
So you see, your elementary knowledge of what actually happened illustrate your elementary understanding of what is going on.
Have you looked up the word *feminist* yet?
While I disagree that the US directly interfered with the Maidan change of President. My argument was for the need for future economic, not military warfare.
My vision is forward thinking. Yours appears to look backwards and dwell on things past.
We had a generation that would consider the inaction of the world, right now, foolishness and history repeating itself. Our fathers and grandfathers are rolling in their graves at the thought of allowing a new cold war to evolve without even a gesture of defiance.
...Celicas and 240Zs. Boy, do I remember those. Love 'em..
If you haven't figured your pretty little head around this and other moves he has made, then you aren't getting the big picture either. Putin already believes he is in an economic war. He's giving himself options in the event that the US gets its act together and begins selling natural gas and oil to the Europeans.
I am 'All In' for an economic war with Russia. The US should immediately be building facilities for distribution of Natural Gas to our friends in Europe. In cooperation for such a commitment, we can then request that the Mistrals not be sold by France. We can request that Holland not have an 80% commitment to buying natural gas from Russia. Oh, and did I mention that such a move would narrow significantly the balance of trade?
We're sitting there playing mumblety peg with the Keystone Pipeline. One set of serious moves by the US government to push oil through such a pipeline and natural gas depots on the East Coast and all of a sudden Europe has no problems confronting Russia in a fashion that will make Putin's head spin. Unless, of course, he's already anticipated all of this because his plans go much further than Ukraine.
You, on the other hand, are constantly massaging your posts.
It has nothing to do with the brawl. There have been negotiations on various undisclosed matters for weeks, and those talks collapsed.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-24/ukraine-coalition-government-collapses-as-2-parties-quit.html (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-24/ukraine-coalition-government-collapses-as-2-parties-quit.html)
...and what they may be, do yo know?
I'm inclined to agree with FT that this may *partially* have to do with the usual theatrics displayed during their session which isn't too comforting to their new overlords' eyes these days. For a minority party, Svodoba is certainly in the thick and middle of it all, don't they?
Heh, you say it as if something bad happened.
Well, sometimes *bad* is *good*. I just don't think it is so with this one. I hope it is, for the sake of everyone involved in the country.
It appears the coalition actively engaged in the Kiev protest/coup/movement/Euromaidan or what ever anyone may want to call it; are quitting.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-24/eu-floats-russian-bank-finance-ban-as-ukraine-vote-nears.html (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-24/eu-floats-russian-bank-finance-ban-as-ukraine-vote-nears.html)
Well Sexy Man (you don't mind, do you?) I think there has been some pressure to wipe the slate clean. I believe Klitchko and Poroshenko made a deal. In addition, Poroshenko is taking advantage of the situation and trying to shed some of the dead wood (AKA Party of Region loyalist of Yanukonvict) and bring new blood to the Rada. That is what is being hoped for. Time will tell.
Anyway, just for you dude
(http://i894.photobucket.com/albums/ac150/clmontes/batman_zps1b9a75a1.jpg)
Oh-man! That's right! I AM the Batman! LMAO...cool cat though. We have a few strays (20) in our boneyard that I've been taking care of the past year as no one else have or will...they have a new kitty same age as the pic, I call him *lil Johnny Wooly*.
Anyway, yeah I hear you. In NYT's report however, it sounds as though PM warns that any early election risks further paralyzing the government and escalate neglecting to adopt crucial amendments to the current budget, thereby further endangering civil/military salary payments. Sounds as though *he* doesn't think such an election is a good idea..dunno
Bane Cat