Let's say Russia launches a full-scale invasion of all Ukraine.

Just thought I’d add…you know that whole “top AIDS researchers” thing turned out to be bogus right? At one point it was half the plane… now only like 5 or so AIDS research related victims are confirmed.

I don’t know if it’s a good thing to kill even mediocre AIDS researchers.

It’s a nice way of saying I’ve had utter contempt for those ‘democracy protesters’ ever since they started doing their thing earlier this year, and I’d be glad to see them get their comeuppance.

That’s right, shame on them for supporting democracy.

Sorry, but that’s not really clearing it up for me. What was the problem with the protesters?

I’m not a liberal democrat, and I especially think it’s an inappropriate form of government for the former Russosphere.

What in hell do you think ‘unarmed’ military personnel forming a ‘human chain’ could accomplish against a Russian army?

Not that I really mind your suggestion- if we must have inane Bush-era interventionism and global crusading, I’d rather it be ham-handed and ineffective than it be effective.

Dictatorship all the way, then?

What form of government would you consider appropriate?

Voted “Other”. Ukraine is not NATO, and we do not owe them defense. However, Ukraine borders several NATO countries. I think that moving large, combat ready forces to those countries to back up the crippling sanctions we should impose would send the message that naked aggression will not be tolerated.

And, on another note, I still have 7 years left on my Fleet Reserve time before I officially retire from the Navy. I wonder what my odds of being recalled to Active Duty would be in an all out war with Russia.

Like I mentioned in another topic, I don’t think of Ukraine’s existence as something that absolutely has to happen, like Japan. If Russia attacks, I would take umbrage at the geopolitical chaos its causing and the humanitarian crises, but I won’t go to bat for Ukraine. I’d sanction them but do nothing more. If Ukraine is reabsorbed, so what?

I heard it was six, but one of them was a top AIDS researcher, Joep Lange. Don’t really know about the others.

Nothing. That’s kind of the point.

I just saw a Breaking News banner saying Russia is shelling Ukrainian military targets!

This question might have suddenly become more than just theoretical! :eek:

I think that it’s in our best interest for everyone to believe that option 1: Direct Military Involvement is very possible. . . I think we could make several strong military “statements” that might give the Russian’s pause. . . and I think that we should be establishing that positioning right now. We should be negotiating with Ukraine right now about providing military support. . . basically I think we should move into Ukraine before the Russians do. . . If Ukraine would support that. (They probably wouldn’t.)

Hopefully someone’s working on this besides us!

I read a news story earlier today that says the Ukrainian Prime Minister resigned today because the ruling coalition fell apart. And then a few hours later Russia apparantly starts a war with Ukraine.

Frankly, I’m starting to wonder if there some negotiations going on already. Just not the ones we would have hoped for, if you get my drift…

Then what’s the point? Simply to be an annoyance?

According to the BBC, the US is saying that they have intelligence evidence that Russia has fired rockets into Ukraine in the recent past-not that they are currently firing. The US also is saying they aren’t going to give out more detail to avoid compromising sources.

Pretty much this.

Treat 'em like we treat North Korea.

Please God, tell me the OP is not our President seeking online advice.

Seriously though, I just worry about the truthfulness of what we’re being told. I don’t want another WMD style tale triggering unnecessary action. And why do we always have to cross an ocean to help people out? Shouldn’t their immediate neighbors jump in first?

I think this time it’s Europes problem.