# Russia has invaded Ukraine. How will the West respond? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Tags:** ukraine-invasion\ **Created:** [February 28, 2014, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513 "2014-02-28T15:06:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 114
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2261 "2014-04-04T23:59:33Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Sending an army into a country isn’t an invasion? Well, what do you know!! Are you suggesting that I have made such a claim? If you are you are wrong. Do you disagree with the EU Commissioned Report here: “21.) When considering the legality of Russian military force against Georgia, the answer needs to be differentiated. The Russian reaction to the Georgian attack can be divided into two phases: first, the immediate reaction in order to defend Russian peacekeepers, and second, the invasion of Georgia by Russian armed forces reaching far beyond the administrative boundary of South Ossetia.” Do you agree with the EU Commission finding that the immediate reaction by Russia under President Medvedev to defend Russian peacekeepers was legal? Here is a another quote from the EU Commission report on the legality Medvedev’s decision to send the Russian Army into Georgian territory: "In the first instance, there seems to be little doubt that if the Russian peacekeepers were attacked, Russia had the right to defend them using military means proportionate to the attack. Hence the Russian use of force for defensive purposes during the first phase of the conflict **would be legal**. Do you agree or disagree with both of those statements? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2262 "2014-04-05T00:05:16Z")
Why don’t you explain your point from post 2252 instead of asking another question. What is the distinction you draw between those two statements? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2263 "2014-04-05T00:12:38Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > A madman is someone [who’s insane](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/madman?s=t), not someone who disagrees with you as to what sort of events justify a military attack. You called Bush a madman as well, IIRC. Words mean things. Have you ever heard of temporary insanity? In both cases that you’ve mentioned, a nation’s leader \*\*‘decided’ to attack \*\*human beings with heavy and disproportionate use of military force at a time when no one in the attacked territory and heavily populated areas were a threat to the ‘attacking’ nation. I certainly see no ‘lick’ of ‘sanity’ in purposely and deliberately ordering a massive military attack on innocent human beings that were doing nothing that could possibly justify indiscriminately killing, wounding and destroying their personal property and lives. You must think both leaders made a ‘sane’ decision then? Is that right? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2264 "2014-04-05T00:16:45Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Why don’t you explain your point from post 2252 instead of asking another question. What is the distinction you draw between those two statements? See 2258 and you may begin to see the distinction. I’d like you and the others to commit to whether you and they agree with the EU Commission that, _“The Russian reaction to the Georgian attack can be divided into two phases”_. Do you agree with that underlined statement? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2265 "2014-04-05T00:21:59Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Have you ever heard of temporary insanity? In both cases that you’ve mentioned, a nation’s leader \*\*‘decided’ to attack \*\*human beings with heavy and disproportionate use of military force at a time when no one in the attacked territory and heavily populated areas were a threat to the ‘attacking’ nation. > I certainly see no ‘lick’ of ‘sanity’ in purposely and deliberately ordering a massive military attack on innocent human beings that were doing nothing that could possibly justify indiscriminately killing, wounding and destroying their personal property and lives. I was unaware that you had a [nineteenth century conception of insanity.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_insanity) What you’re describing is _immorality_, not _insanity_. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You must think both leaders made a ‘sane’ decision then? Is that right? In the absence of any evidence of insanity, yes; it was just politicians making political decisions. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2266 "2014-04-05T00:24:30Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I never know what’s the result of a language barrier, what’s ignorance, and what’s frantic back-pedaling to avoid ever admitting error. None of the above. I do not think that a country can’t “invade” another country as an act of self-defense. I do not probably think that a country can’t “invade” another country as an act of self-defense. John Mace is wrong again. Why do you put any stock in John Mace’s imagination about what I probably think? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2267 "2014-04-05T00:41:06Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > See 2258 and you may begin to see the distinction. I’d like you and the others to commit to whether you and they agree with the EU Commission that, _“The Russian reaction to the Georgian attack can be divided into two phases”_. > > Do you agree with that underlined statement? Don’t play Socrates to me, buddy. Just explain yourself. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2268 "2014-04-05T00:49:01Z")
Sane: 1. **Reasonable** based on sensible, reasonable, or rational thinking. Got it. Human Action is on the quibbling kick again. He objects to my viewpoint that both Bush and Sakaashvili’s decisions to use the massive use of military force on populated areas that were no threat or engaged in any hostile act were deliberate decisions _ **NOT** _ based on sensible, reasonable, or rational thinking. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2269 "2014-04-05T00:51:41Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Don’t play Socrates to me, buddy. Just explain yourself. If you can’t tell me if you agree with the EU Commission’s statement, I am not sure that you want me to explain myself? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2270 "2014-04-05T00:57:48Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > If you can’t tell me if you agree with the EU Commission’s statement, I am not sure that you want me to explain myself? You can explain yourself by saying whether you agree with it and go from there. Pretty simple, really. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2271 "2014-04-05T01:06:52Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > None of the above. I do not think that a country can’t “invade” another country as an act of self-defense. > > I do not probably think that a country can’t “invade” another country as an act of self-defense. John Mace is wrong again. > > Why do you put any stock in John Mace’s imagination about what I probably think? It’s that or consult tea leaves or sheep’s knuckles. Your actual posts have, at best, a vague, temporary, commonality with your points. I remain bewildered by the difference you see between “invading Georgia” and “sending the army in Georgia”, if it’s not the idea that the latter precludes self-defense. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Sane: > > 1. **Reasonable** based on sensible, reasonable, or rational thinking. > Got it. Human Action is on the quibbling kick again. He objects to my viewpoint that both Bush and Sakaashvili’s decisions to use the massive use of military force on populated areas that were no threat or engaged in any hostile act were deliberate decisions _ **NOT** _ based on sensible, reasonable, or rational thinking. There was a threat to Georgia: persistent artillery, small arms, and IED attacks, combined with Russian military aircraft violating their airspace. The invasion was a rational response to the attacks, if an illegal, and poorly thought out one. Also, the target wasn’t civilians, though civilians were killed, the target was South Ossetian militia: > [@](#): > > It is not contested that the Georgian armed forces started an armed offensive in South Ossetia on the basis of President Saakashvili’s order given on 7 August 2008 at 23.35.38 It is also uncontested that this offensive was directed – at least among other aims – against South Ossetian militia. There wasn’t a threat to the United States, but, as I’ve argued with you before, just enough evidence to make a case that there was, if evidence to the contrary was marginalized or ignored - which is confirmation bias, not insanity. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2272 "2014-04-05T01:20:56Z")
On 04-04-2014 at 07:06 PM Human Action asked me: > [@](#): > > Do you have a source that says the invasion of Georgia didn’t, in fact, increase the popularity of Medvedev? Did the ‘event’ of the 09/11/01 immediately increase the popularity of George W. Bush? Or did Americans wait until Bush sent the US Military to ‘defensively’ invade Afghanistan before they decided to rally behind and fully support the President? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2273 "2014-04-05T01:29:25Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > On 04-04-2014 at 07:06 PM Human Action asked me: Sure would be nice if you’d answer a question sometime, instead of responding with more questions. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Did the ‘event’ of the 09/11/01 immediately increase the popularity of George W. Bush? Or did Americans wait until Bush sent the US Military to ‘defensively’ invade Afghanistan before they decided to rally behind and fully support the President? The former. [Per Gallup](http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx), Bush’s approval ratings, in the format of approve/disapprove/no opinion: 2001 Oct 11-14 89 8 3 2001 Oct 5-6 87 10 3 2001 Sep 21-22 90 6 4 2001 Sep 14-15 86 10 4 2001 Sep 7-10 51 39 10 2001 Aug 24-26 55 36 9 Operation Enduring Freedom began on October 7th. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2274 "2014-04-05T02:14:10Z")
On 04-04-2014 at 05:34 AM I posted a part of the EU Commission report that included this: {"In the first instance, there seems to be little doubt that if the Russian peacekeepers were attacked, Russia had the right to defend them using military means proportionate to the attack. Hence the Russian use of force for defensive purposes during the first phase of the conflict would be legal. On the second item, it must be ascertained whether the subsequent Russian military campaign deeper into Georgia was necessary and proportionate in terms of defensive action against the initial Georgian attack. **Although it should be admitted that it is not easy to decide where the line must be drawn,** it seems, however, that much of the Russian military action went far beyond the reasonable limits of defence."} It should be noted that so many here seem to know exactly where ‘the line must be drawn’. I refuse to criticize the Russian public upon learning that their soldiers had been viciously attacked and some killed, when they approve that the ‘line should be drawn’ much farther into Georgia that those living in western countries think the line for Russian restraint should have been drawn. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2275 "2014-04-05T02:15:17Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You can’t see the difference in these two statements? > “\*\*That event \*\*had lifted his popularity greatly, and each anniversary he reminisced on television about the tough, solitary decision he made to \*\*send the army \*\*into Georgia while Mr. Putin was away in Beijing.” > “The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin.” So, basically you are down to a semantic issue with the wording. Good grief, that’s really lame. So, putting this into the perspective of what originally kicked off this whole ridiculous series of antics on your part, your actual problem with that opinion piece I posted was with the wording of one word in one sentence, and this, in your opinion, rendered the entire thing ‘obviously so biased against Russia its worthless’? There really aren’t enough 😛 to show how silly your contortions are. Of course, you COULD have started off this side discussion by stating, clearly (for a change) that your actual issue was with the word ‘invasion’, and that by saying ‘invasion’ instead of whatever your contorted logic is for one country invading another, regardless of the pretext (‘dynamic defense’? ‘retaliatory and patriotic movement into the country and territory of the vicious attackers’?)…but it would be too much to ask for you to be clear, concise and attempt to actually debate in good faith, wouldn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2276 "2014-04-05T03:13:40Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > On 04-04-2014 at 05:34 AM I posted a part of the EU Commission report that included this: > {"In the first instance, there seems to be little doubt that if the Russian peacekeepers were attacked, Russia had the right to defend them using military means proportionate to the attack. Hence the Russian use of force for defensive purposes during the first phase of the conflict would be legal. > > On the second item, it must be ascertained whether the subsequent Russian military campaign deeper into Georgia was necessary and proportionate in terms of defensive action against the initial Georgian attack. **Although it should be admitted that it is not easy to decide where the line must be drawn,** it seems, however, that much of the Russian military action went far beyond the reasonable limits of defence."} > It should be noted that so many here seem to know exactly where ‘the line must be drawn’. I refuse to criticize the Russian public upon learning that their soldiers had been viciously attacked and some killed, when they approve that the ‘line should be drawn’ much farther into Georgia that those living in western countries think the line for Russian restraint should have been drawn. Unsurprisingly, you have _completely_ missed the point of the portion of the article you are criticizing. It is in no way a criticism of the Russian public, or even Putin. Rather, it is the observation that previous military action worked to Putin (and his crony Medvedev)'s benefit, coupled with a prediction that this one would not, and a discussion of why that would be the case (that is, the difference between then and now). Your critiques are directed at a strawman. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2277 "2014-04-05T03:20:14Z")
> [@XT](#): > > So, basically you are down to a semantic issue with the wording. Nope. That is a cop-out. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2278 "2014-04-05T04:03:15Z")
> [@XT](#): > > So, basically you are down to a semantic issue with the wording. Good grief, that’s really lame. So, putting this into the perspective of what originally kicked off this whole ridiculous series of antics on your part, your actual problem with that opinion piece I posted was with the wording of one word in one sentence, and this, in your opinion, rendered the entire thing ‘obviously so biased against Russia its worthless’? There really aren’t enough 😛 to show how silly your contortions are. Of course, you COULD have started off this side discussion by stating, clearly (for a change) that your actual issue was with the word ‘invasion’, and that by saying ‘invasion’ instead of whatever your contorted logic is for one country invading another, regardless of the pretext (‘dynamic defense’? ‘retaliatory and patriotic movement into the country and territory of the vicious attackers’?)…but it would be too much to ask for you to be clear, concise and attempt to actually debate in good faith, wouldn’t it? This post just needs a conga line behind it to be a cheesy Hollywood Musical. Because, as we all know, the US of A was clearly transparent in their Iraq invasion. And YES it’s obviously going to come up again and again. What’s that you you say? Ignore the hypocrisy? Hmmm…not going to happen, my dear CA disaffiliate. Not in a thousand years. You must be one funny guy, **XT** – amongst family and close friends. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2279 "2014-04-05T07:31:55Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > This post just needs a conga line behind it to be a cheesy Hollywood Musical. Because, as we all know, the US of A was clearly transparent in their Iraq invasion. And YES it’s obviously going to come up again and again. What’s that you you say? Ignore the hypocrisy? Hmmm…not going to happen, my dear CA disaffiliate. Not in a thousand years. > > You must be one funny guy, **XT** – amongst family and close friends. On 03-28-2014 at 03:34 PM \*\*XT complained \*\*that past U.S. transgressions should have NOTHING to do with the Crimea situation and debate: > [@](#): > > I’m still unclear as to why if the US does something wrong that means Russia is in the right for doing what they are doing…or really, what past US transgressions have to do with this situation where the US is only peripherally involved have to do with the right or wrong of what Russia is doing in this particular situation. And then three days later on 03-31-2014 at 05:53 PM \*\*XT posts a CNN opinion \*\*that falsely claims that Russia 'STARTED" three wars in the past “to solve domestic problems” and then brings up the “HITLER” refrain against the ‘war-starting’ Putin. > [@](#): > > I thought I’d post this opinion piece from CNN here, since it’s again another interesting (to me) view point on an aspect that has been handwaved away by both those who support Russia’s viewpoint and those who just seem to want to bash Obama/US/Western Europe for the supposed tepid and silly/ridiculous sanctions: > > > [@](#): > > > > Starting a war to solve a domestic problem is now a Russian tradition. The first and second Chechen wars had political motives. Both were intended to distract attention from the consequences of privatization and the second brought Putin to power. The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin. > > > > The earlier acts of aggression, however, did not evoke a strong international response. This time, Russia faces full scale war if it invades eastern Ukraine and, at the very least, sanctions if it does not withdraw from Crimea. It is ill equipped to handle either of these challenges. > > > > Putin has used rhetoric reminiscent of Adolf Hitler in the 1930s, insisting in his speech on March 18 that “Russia was not simply robbed, it was plundered” and denouncing “national traitors.” The regime he heads, however, is tied to the West inextricably. In the midst of the past couple dozen posts anyone can see that XT and his chums admit that the 2008 war was NOT STARTED by Putin or Medvedev according to the EU Commission that investigated which side started the five day war amid the Olympic games. And more importantly Russia was found by that commission to be legally justified in defending Russia Troops who were sitting ducks to Georgia’s murderous ‘massive artillery assault’ on Tskhinvali civilians on the night of August 7, 2008. It’s a clear cut case where XT says we can’t bring up US/UK transgressions of the past but it’s quite alright to post opinions that go back further to bring up actually phony easily debunked opinions about Putin/Russia’s \*\*WAR-STARTING \*\*past. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2014, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2280 "2014-04-05T08:18:52Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > In the midst of the past couple dozen posts anyone can see that XT and his chums admit that the 2008 war was NOT STARTED by Putin or Medvedev according to the EU Commission that investigated which side started the five day war amid the Olympic games. And more importantly Russia was found by that commission to be legally justified in defending Russia Troops who were sitting ducks to Georgia’s murderous ‘massive artillery assault’ on Tskhinvali civilians on the night of August 7, 2008. The war was not started by Putin. I don’t think anyone here has argued against that. What we argue about is the proportionality of Russia’s response. Read your favourite Commission report and you’ll see that Russia’s invasion was not proportional, and thus illegal. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=113) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=115)