# 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:** 121
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2401 "2014-04-09T16:13:56Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > How does the belief that Germany lost WWI because of citizens of various ethnic groups and political ideologies have anything to do with what I said? If your only model of explanation is based on something to do with some exterior sinister cloak and dagger forces you’ll completely miss the point and never be able to understand the events. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > In this quoted passage you essentially say these countries are an unsolvable mess and propose a solution that will never work. Yet it is obvious that the whole mess can be put back together again by respecting the sovereignty of Ukraine. That’s all that is necessary. If there is a real push from within the country to be more federal or to secede then it will reveal itself. It won’t need Russian troops and spies helping it along. Which reflects the above. The events in eastern Ukraine are not driven by Russian troops or spies. I doubt Putin-land even desires it very much. It is an internal Ukrainian division which has grown over the last decade or more. Also seen in the tit-for-tat events of the so-called Orange revolution, the election of Yanukovitch, the recent Maidan uprising, the so-called Russian Spring, etc. It used to be nobody gave a damn what language you spoke; nowadays you’re likely to get beaten up for speaking the wrong language in the wrong part of the country. I think it would work, although it would require a historic commitment by the rest of the EU and a will to go way out of your comfort zone; but it’d leave the EU stronger and relevant again. The alternative is a divided Ukraine and probably Belarus too. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2402 "2014-04-09T17:08:37Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Well, to be fair to me, I have evidence for that conclusion, which I’ve already presented: Medvedev took to the airwaves every year to reminisce about the tough, solitary decision to send Russian forces into Georgia. Naturally, the other decision he could have made would be to repulse the immediate attack, and then stop. So, at least in Medvedev’s own opinion, his accomplishment was to not stop there, but instead invade Georgia. Your assertion that you have evidence that Medvedev’s popularity would not go up tremendously at the very moment that Russian troops were under attack by a foreign army under the orders of that nation’s president. You, in no factual way are entitled to presume and assert that Russian public opinion to support Medvedev after Russia had been attacked was solely or primarily because he went further across the proverbial proportionality line that was set by the EU in the EU’s ‘difficult’ judgment. If you must quote Medvedev then quote Medvedev in context. He sees the actions he sent the military to do as defensive and to punish the aggressor: > [@](#): > > Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, speaking in Moscow, said Georgia had paid enough for its attack on South Ossetia, a separatist region along the Russian border with close ties to Russia. > > “The aggressor has been punished and suffered very significant losses. Its military has been disorganized,” Medvedev said. [http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/118482](http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/118482) You have no support for your case that the citizens of Russia would support their leaders had they in fact initiated the assault into Georgia and then Georgia attempted to stop Russian aggression as the originating invading army. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2403 "2014-04-09T17:24:16Z")
Of course we all know that had Russia been attacked, and Mededev didn’t respond at all, his popularity would have soared. It was the attack, and not the response to the attack that boosted his popularity. That makes total sense. ---
**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 9, 2014, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2404 "2014-04-09T17:49:56Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Your assertion that you have evidence that Medvedev’s popularity would not go up tremendously at the very moment that Russian troops were under attack by a foreign army under the orders of that nation’s president. Sigh. I never said that. I did say this: > [@Human Action](#): > > Seriously, pal, when you attempt to address other posters’ argument, you are wrong about what they are saying about 90% of the time. It’s a real problem. Maybe re-read previous posts before replying? Maybe assume the most moderate interpretation, instead of the most extreme? Try something different, please. Moving on: > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You, in no factual way are entitled to presume and assert that Russian public opinion to support Medvedev after Russia had been attacked was solely or primarily because he went further across the proverbial proportionality line that was set by the EU in the EU’s ‘difficult’ judgment. Third lap around this: > [@](#): > > 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. Evidently, Mr. Medvedev thought the decision to invade was worthy of singling out and commemorating, and did so in order to boost his popularity (until Putin undermined him, but that’s another story). > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > If you must quote Medvedev then quote Medvedev in context. He sees the actions he sent the military to do as defensive and to punish the aggressor: > > [http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/118482](http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/118482) I bet he does, and that is entirely compatible with stating that the “tough, solitary” decision to punish the aggressor boosted Medvedev’s popularity. There’s no dilemma here. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You have no support for your case that the citizens of Russia would support their leaders had they in fact initiated the assault into Georgia and then Georgia attempted to stop Russian aggression as the originating invading army. That’s not now, nor has it ever been, my case, though it’s not inconceivable; support for national leaders has been known to increase once bullets are being fired, even if it was aggressive action (like the U.S. in Iraq; [Bush got a nice 13-point bump in approval rating when the invasion began](http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx)). What we _do_ know is that Russian leaders didn’t have to initiate an assault into Georgia. The situation was a powder keg, all Russia and South Ossetia had to do was toss matches at it (which Georgia joined them in doing) until it exploded, then they got the outcome they wanted, without having to fire the first shots. Win-win, frankly. It’s really strange that you can’t see this: you write that Medvedev’s popularity would go up just from being attacked, and you have a situation where Russia is contributing to serious escalation of a crisis (and preparing a counter-attack), and where they have policy goals that aren’t being met through negotiation…why can’t you see that _trying to provoke an attack_ is thus in Russia’s best interests? ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2405 "2014-04-09T22:06:53Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > That’s not now, nor has it ever been, my case, though it’s not inconceivable; support for national leaders has been known to increase once bullets are being fired, even if it was aggressive action (like the U.S. in Iraq; [Bush got a nice 13-point bump in approval rating when the invasion began](http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx)). For what it’s worth, this is [a well-established concept](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rally_%27round_the_flag_effect) in political science. Same goes, of course, for Russia ---
**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 9, 2014, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2406 "2014-04-09T23:09:58Z")
> [@Batistuta](#): > > For what it’s worth, this is [a well-established concept](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rally_%27round_the_flag_effect) in political science. Same goes, of course, for Russia I didn’t know the concept had a name, thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2407 "2014-04-10T00:19:23Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > If your only model of explanation is based on something to do with some exterior sinister cloak and dagger forces you’ll completely miss the point and never be able to understand the events. I am addressing this discrete set of events characterized by some of the citizenry of Ukraine taking over government buildings and requesting Russia to invade. Why might they be doing that? Simple, it worked in the Crimea. These individuals desiring secession are using the Crimea as a model. What’s the most important element for the result in the Crimea? Why it’s none other than Russian troops and provocateurs. Without them the Crimea would currently be a very angry part of Ukraine; not a part of Russia with “97% approval”. That said, I thank you for your placing these events in context. I had not thought of the last 10+ years in that way you do but I see it as orthogonal to what I said. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2408 "2014-04-10T02:26:14Z")
On 04-09-2014 at 01:24 PM John Mace wrote: > [@](#): > > Of course we all know that had Russia been attacked, and Mededev didn’t respond at all, his popularity would have soared. It was the attack, and not the response to the attack that boosted his popularity. That makes total sense. If Medvedev did not respond \*‘at all’ \*to the massive artillery and tank attack by Georgia he would not have been doing his job as President to defend the soldiers he commands. So we cannot know what Russian public opinion would have been if their president did nothing about the shedding of Russian blood under a foreign attack. Every people with national and patriotic pride would demand a response to a foreign attack\> So there is no factual basis to conclude that patriotic people can divorce themselves from supporting their president if he justifiably responds but then orders a deeper disproportionate response to the attack that perhaps went too far. That FACT means there is no credible means to establish as XT’s CNN dude has done that the Russian people greatly support their presidents when they start wars. All that can be stated as fact in the case of the unjustified Georgia massive attack resulting in the deaths of Russian soldiers is that the attack immediately provoked the people of Russia to support their President along with the response that he felt justified to make. It is a fact that the Russian people supported Russian ‘self-defense’ and a Russian retaliatory counter attack. There is no evidence from the 2008 open hostilities that Georgia started that supports any notion that the prople of Russia have established a ‘tradition’ of supporting their leaders when they ‘start wars’. Russia did not start the 2008 war in Georgia. The EU Commission confirms that Georgia launched the heavily armed assault on South Ossetia which led to started the ‘open hostilities’ directly between Russian and Georgian Forces known as the Five Day War. From the EU Commission: “when Georgia started to apply military force” > [@](#): > > IV. **Conclusions: no self-defence until Russian military action extending into Georgia** > > The Georgian military operation in Tskhinvali on 7/8 August 2008 cannot be justified as self defence. > > There was no clear proof of an on-going or imminent Russian armed attack against > Georgia **when Georgia started to apply military force**. Although Russia did use force against Georgia, this occurred later. Self-defence against a putative Russian attack was not permitted. > > Minor breaches by Russia of the stationing of forces agreements between Russia and Georgia did not constitute an armed attack suited to warrant Georgian self-defence. > > Military operations by South Ossetia could not be imputed to Russia as constituting a Russian armed attack. > > Only later, to the extent that extended Russian military action reached out into Georgia and was conducted in violation of international law (see below Part 4), were Georgian military forces acting in legitimate self-defence under Art 51 of the UN Charter. Many here are arguing in essence that the Russian people would be justified at first to support their President when Russian soldiers were attacked and a counter-offensive was launched, but they had to figure out within a few days time what the EU Commission _‘difficultly’_ assessed a year later that Russia’s response was not proportional. Have any Americans ever supported their president for starting an air and ground invasion to remove a government that was not committing any threats to any nation or people at the time the invasion was launched. I believe Human Action just brought that up a few posts ago. On 04-09-2014 at 01:49 PM Human Action points out that Americans give their President an approval bounce when he ‘starts a war’. > [@](#): > > That’s not now, nor has it ever been, my case, though it’s not inconceivable; support for national leaders has been known to increase once bullets are being fired, even if it was aggressive action (like the U.S. in Iraq; Bush got a nice 13-point bump in approval rating when the invasion began). Perhaps XT’s CNN dude meant to be speaking about Americans and their President’s … when it comes to ‘starting a war’. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2409 "2014-04-10T04:38:13Z")
On 04-08-2014 at 10:33 PM I asked: > [@](#): > > Do you accept that Russia was justified to invade Georgia in order to stop Russian military personnel from being killed by the massive artillery and tank assault on South Ossetia? On 04-09-2014 at 08:27 AM \*\*Human Action replied: > [@](#): > > \*\*: Only to the limits of the Caroline test. That said, the proportionality or lack thereof of the Russian response isn’t part of my argument, which only concerns Russian actions before August 7th. I take your answer to be then that Russia was justified to invade Georgia up to a specific but very limited point where the matter of a proportionality kicked in. I believe you are saying that Russia was justified to invade Georgia until Georgian advances and attacks had been stopped. What changed on August 7 that your argument is only concerned about Russia’s actions before August 7? ---
**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 10, 2014, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2410 "2014-04-10T12:33:10Z")
This part was directed at **John Mace** , but I’ll chime in a bit: > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Many here are arguing in essence that the Russian people would be justified at first to support their President when Russian soldiers were attacked and a counter-offensive was launched, but they had to figure out within a few days time what the EU Commission _‘difficultly’_ assessed a year later that Russia’s response was not proportional. No, they are not. You, and only you, have raised the issue of Russian people being justified in feeling one way or another about it. No one else is arguing the morality of the Russian people. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Have any Americans ever supported their president for starting an air and ground invasion to remove a government that was not committing any threats to any nation or people at the time the invasion was launched. I believe Human Action just brought that up a few posts ago. > > On 04-09-2014 at 01:49 PM Human Action points out that Americans give their President an approval bounce when he ‘starts a war’. > > Perhaps XT’s CNN dude meant to be speaking about Americans and their President’s … when it comes to ‘starting a war’. Ah, progress! Follow me here: 1. People, be they Russian or American, have a tendency to stand by their governments during wartime (at least at first, see the Vietnam War). **Batistuta** informs us that the phenomenon even has a name and a scholarly definition. 2. Therefore, a national leader can have a perverse incentive to engage in war, particularly if the circumstances can be arranged so that they didn’t order the first shot, and the war will be short and decisive. 3. Given 1 and 2 above, Russia’s actions in the South Ossetia crisis can be credibly argued as an attempt to engage in war. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > On 04-08-2014 at 10:33 PM I asked: > On 04-09-2014 at 08:27 AM \*\*Human Action replied: > I take your answer to be then that Russia was justified to invade Georgia up to a specific but very limited point where the matter of a proportionality kicked in. I believe you are saying that Russia was justified to invade Georgia until Georgian advances and attacks had been stopped. Correct. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > What changed on August 7 that your argument is only concerned about Russia’s actions before August 7? The Georgian offensive against South Ossetian militia, which also struck Russian troops, began. Since we are discussing the causes of that offensive, only events that precede it are germaine. Now, I promised to wrap up this hijack soon. I’ve laid out my case, with supporting evidence in the form of the EU report, the NYT article, and the rally 'round the flag effect. Your rebuttals are focused instead on claims that aren’t being made, such as that an attack by itself wouldn’t increase Medvedev’s popularity, that Russia alone is to blame for the war, and that the Russian people were wrong to support Medvedev. Because of this, minimal progress is being made. I’ll let you have the last word, but my posts to this point make my case to my satisfaction, so I feel this is a good point to return to the Crimean crisis. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2411 "2014-04-10T13:38:54Z")
Today at 08:33 AM Human Action wrote: > [@](#): > > 1. Therefore, a national leader can have a perverse incentive to engage in war, particularly if the circumstances can be arranged so that they didn’t order the first shot, and the war will be short and decisive. Under your theory of leaders having perverse incentives to engage in warfare, is there ever the possibilty that a defensive and retaliatory response is nothing more than that? ---
**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 10, 2014, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2412 "2014-04-10T13:40:56Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Today at 08:33 AM Human Action wrote: > > Under your theory of leaders having perverse incentives to engage in warfare, is there ever the possibilty that a defensive and retaliatory response is nothing more than that? I’ll answer this, because it’s so short: Yes, there is. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2413 "2014-04-10T17:24:33Z")
Today at 12:38 AM I wrote: > [@](#): > > I take your answer to be then that Russia was justified to invade Georgia up to a specific but very limited point where the matter of a proportionality kicked in. I believe you are saying that Russia was justified to invade Georgia until Georgian advances and attacks had been stopped. Today at 08:33 AM Human Action wrote that the abive correct. Understanding that the act of sending Russian forces into Georgia was a justified defensive measure sometime in the morning/afternoon of August 8, it is quite implausible to suggest that Russia started the ‘open hostilities’ between Russian and Geogia. Since Georgia initiated a major heavy armed assault on the territory of South Ossetia there is no doubt that the EU Commission found that it was Georgia that started, launched and is fully responsible for the outbreak of open hostilities between Russia and Georgian armies. Open hostilities is the phrase the EU report’s authors use for the term war. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2414 "2014-04-10T17:27:19Z")
I really think that the Georgia debate has been taken too far. Plus, things might be getting more interesting in Ukraine soon ---
**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 10, 2014, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2415 "2014-04-10T17:36:46Z")
> [@Batistuta](#): > > I really think that the Georgia debate has been taken too far. Plus, things might be getting more interesting in Ukraine soon Indeed. I’ve made my case, and **NotfooledbyW** again insists upon addressing only claims I haven’t made, so it has seemingly run its course. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2416 "2014-04-11T18:01:02Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Indeed. I’ve made my case, and **NotfooledbyW** again insists upon addressing only claims I haven’t made, so it has seemingly run its course. This sub-plot is relevant because it illustrates the extent of negative western reporting and commentary about Russia. You have not come close to defending XT’s CNN dude’s claim that Russia now has a ‘tradition’ of starting wars to cover up domestic problems. Russia did not start the 'open hostilities, (Five Day War) in Georgia on August 2008. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2417 "2014-04-11T18:05:50Z")
Does anyone think that Russia is wrong to not give Ukraine their ‘currently’ only only duly elected presudent back to Ukraine? Does anyone think Russia is wrong to demand overdue payments (in $tens of billions) for Ng or it gets shut off until payments are made? ---
**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 11, 2014, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2418 "2014-04-11T18:10:22Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > This sub-plot is relevant because it illustrates the extent of negative western reporting and commentary about Russia. > > You have not come close to defending XT’s CNN dude’s claim that Russia now has a ‘tradition’ of starting wars to cover up domestic problems. Russia did not start the 'open hostilities, (Five Day War) in Georgia on August 2008. I respectfully disagree. That said, I don’t expect you to see things my way, given that a) it’s you, and b) you’re _still_ ignoring my actual argument, after a few pages of back-and-forth. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2419 "2014-04-11T18:24:35Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Does anyone think that Russia is wrong to not give Ukraine their ‘currently’ only only duly elected presudent back to Ukraine? It was rumoured that he was in Donetsk a few days back. That’d set an interesting legal problem for those legal sharks that seem to think illegality matters a damn thing. Anyway, the guy is a useless corrupt nobody. A captain that abandons ship should be fed to the sharks. Even Stalin knew that. It doesn’t matter that all the others are also corrupt; doesn’t make this guy any better. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Does anyone think Russia is wrong to demand overdue payments (in $tens of billions) for Ng or it gets shut off until payments are made? Yes. The Ukrainian people have enough problems as is, and it’s still their brothers. Russia should show greatness not pettiness. Btw. they started handing back Ukrainian naval vessels from Sevastopol. [Youtube: Here’s the other evening in Lugansk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8yirJeDWQk) - The idiot should shut up. He’s ruining the best national anthem. [Youtube: Russian troops moving towards Donetsk are enthusiastically received by the people](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQRzfetndJg) The IMF winning hearts and minds in Kiev: [Came. “You have a 60 billion deficit. Fix it no matter how.” Left.](http://finance.rbc.ua/rus/mvf-otsenil-disbalans-gosbyudzheta-ukrainy-v-60-mlrd-grn---shlapak-09042014143700) ---
**Author:** ![kurtisokc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbce88/32.png) [@kurtisokc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kurtisokc)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2014, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2420 "2014-04-12T14:40:41Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Does anyone think Russia is wrong to demand overdue payments (in $tens of billions) for Ng or it gets shut off until payments are made? Nothing inherintly wrong in demanding overdue payments, but it is curioius that Russia never demands that Ukraine pay its bills whenever there is a compliant (i.e. pro-Russian) government in Kiev. It is only when the Ukrainian authorities start acting independently of Moscow that Russia suddenly remembers that the bill is past due. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=120) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=122)