# 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:** 94
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1861 "2014-03-25T12:55:51Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > @ John Mace > I don’t think we have much difference in thinking on what is legal, just on how important we think “legal” is. > > Now I know everyone thinks NFBW is nutty but has anyone really rebutted what he’s claimed vis a vis the constitution requiring a nationwide vote for Crimea to separate? Or any argument against his article 157 quote? > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You will note that XT is asking for a cite where the Ukraine Constitution actually ‘forbids Crimea’ from seceding. I don’t put much stock in it when the folks around here think I’m nutty. > If this is is not good enough for XT nothing is. > > Article 134. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea shall be an integral constituent part of Ukraine and shall resolve issues relegated to its authority within the frame of its reference, determined by the Constitution of Ukraine. > > and > > Article 157. **The Constitution of Ukraine shall not be amended** , if the amendments foresee the abolition or restriction of human and citizen rights and freedoms, or if they are aimed at the liquidation of the independence or violation of the territorial integrity of Ukraine Article 73: > [@](#): > > Issues of altering the territory of Ukraine are resolved exclusively by an All-Ukrainian referendum. Article 157 forbids the territory of Ukraine from being altered via a constitutional amendment, which in Ukraine is voted on exclusively by the legislature. Article 73 specifies that alterations to the territory of Ukraine are to be conducted via an All-Ukrainian referendum. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1862 "2014-03-25T13:40:02Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > You (“we”) as in the US government? Why should the Crimeans, or anyone else for that matter, care what you guys sanction except for the naked power you bring to the table in one form or the other?. No, not jus the US. I posted this several posts up from the one you quoted, so it’s possible you missed it: > [@JM](#): > > I guess we have a different idea of what is legal and what is not. What you would do is illegal, just as what Russia did was illegal. I agree with what was posted above that there would have been a legal and internationally acceptable process for Crimea to exit Ukraine and join Russia. What we just saw was neither. Emphasis re-added in a more visible form. If Crimeans don’t care whether their secession actions are recognized internationally, then good for them. But Crimea River if companies don’t want to do business there, people don’t want to travel there, and countries don’t want offer them economic assistance when needed. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1863 "2014-03-25T14:19:53Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > It seems like you are completely ignoring any pro-russian sentiment in large sections of Ukraine and the well documented Western work with the opposition groups behind the scenes. Baffling. It seems you are ignoring that the only valid opinion poll of actual Crimean opinion, undertaken less than a month prior to Russian invasion, put “pro-joining-Russia” sentiment at far below half. Baffling. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1864 "2014-03-25T14:48:53Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Article 73: > Article 157 forbids the territory of Ukraine from being altered via a constitutional amendment, which in Ukraine is voted on exclusively by the legislature. Article 73 specifies that alterations to the territory of Ukraine are to be conducted via an All-Ukrainian referendum. Good catch, **HA**. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1865 "2014-03-25T16:18:17Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > It seems you are ignoring that the only valid opinion poll of actual Crimean opinion, undertaken less than a month prior to Russian invasion, put “pro-joining-Russia” sentiment at far below half. Baffling. No, I’m not ignoring that and I’m not saying the Crimean referendum was valid. But I have no doubt that the Kiev coup/whatever and perceived Western meddling would have pushed that number up higher. Western meddling helped bring this crisis to a head and wasn’t “praiseworthy”. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1866 "2014-03-25T16:39:45Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > No, I’m not ignoring that and I’m not saying the Crimean referendum was valid. But I have no doubt that the Kiev coup/whatever and perceived Western meddling would have pushed that number up higher. Western meddling helped bring this crisis to a head and wasn’t “praiseworthy”. I have no doubt that my party will win the next election, too. Which is why I think we should not bother holding it. Since I already know. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1867 "2014-03-25T16:50:51Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Article 157 forbids the territory of Ukraine from being altered via a constitutional amendment, which in Ukraine is voted on exclusively by the legislature. Article 73 specifies that alterations to the territory of Ukraine are to be conducted via an All-Ukrainian referendum And how are 1.5 million Crimeans going to demand the legislature to issue a referendum for seccession in the first place let alone win one. There’s no way that 'ALL of Ukraine" would vote to let Crimea go back to Russia or become fully independent. You might want to recall the Crimea perspective that developed ‘after’ the legislative coup as a result of the popular uprising and violent protests taking place in Kiev. The chain of events and crisis allowed Crimeans to consider their legal bondage to the broken Ukrainen Constitution to be dissolved. Not having a constitutional and practical path to independence, Crimea sought independence by defiant and illegal declaration plus requested Russian military assistance to back them up. And they have succeeded in that declaration. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1868 "2014-03-25T16:52:21Z")
[QUOTE=Batistuta] Is it so hard to understand that some of us are against large military invasions of innocent countries, regardless of who invades whom? Iraq was wrong, yes. Crimea is essentially blood-less, but still wrong. [/quote] I’m unclear what the position posters such as **RedFury** and **Rune** actually hold on invasions. Perhaps they can elucidate, rather than crowing about the actions of their favourite Slavic strongman? I’d have thought stated opposition to the Iraq invasion would have been based around some deep-seated moral principle, presumably also applying to Crimea and hence expressed in the same vigorous terms they reserved for the Iraq invasion, not mere opposition to invasions carried out by the West, with news of a Russian annexation being joked away with accusations of Western hypocrisy and impotency with regards an expansionist kleptocracy on the edge of Europe. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1869 "2014-03-25T17:18:56Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > And how are 1.5 million Crimeans going to demand the legislature to issue a referendum for seccession in the first place let alone win one. There’s a process for it in the Constitution: > [@](#): > > Article 72 > > An All-Ukrainian referendum is designated by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine or by the President of Ukraine, in accordance with their authority established by this Constitution. > > An All-Ukrainian referendum is called on popular initiative on the request of no less than three million citizens of Ukraine who have the right to vote, on the condition that the signatures in favor of designating the referendum have been collected in no less than two-thirds of the oblasts, with no less than 100 000 signatures in each oblast. I don’t see a mechanism there for the legislature to block a referendum. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > There’s no way that 'ALL of Ukraine" would vote to let Crimea go back to Russia or become fully independent. Any particular evidence for that view? I’m not taking it on faith. Letting the nation have a say in what happens to the nation is hardly oppressive or unreasonable; it’s how the United States, and other federal systems, are set up. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You might want to recall the Crimea perspective that developed ‘after’ the legislative coup as a result of the popular uprising and violent protests taking place in Kiev. The chain of events and crisis allowed Crimeans to consider their legal bondage to the broken Ukrainen Constitution to be dissolved. > > Not having a constitutional and practical path to independence, Crimea sought independence by defiant and illegal declaration plus requested Russian military assistance to back them up. And they have succeeded in that declaration. That might _a_ Crimean perspective, but it’s not _the_ perspective. Recall what’s been proferred in this thread: Russian intervention preceding an official request, the sharp contrast in the earlier polling data and the referendum result, the suspect nature of the referendum (no status quo option, some observers filtered out, reports of 2.5 million ballots printed for 1.5 million voters, etc), that new elections for Ukraine are scheduled for May…they point to an alternative perspective, in which Russia used a pretext to seize a strategically useful region. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1870 "2014-03-25T17:26:04Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > I have no doubt that my party will win the next election, too. Which is why I think we should not bother holding it. Since I already know. OK, that’s not remotely what I said. Have fun locked in the old my side-your side mindset. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1871 "2014-03-25T17:40:09Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > There’s a process for it in the Constitution: > > > [@](#): > > > > Article 72 > > > > An All-Ukrainian referendum is designated by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine or by the President of Ukraine, in accordance with their authority established by this Constitution. > > > > An All-Ukrainian referendum is called on popular initiative on the request of no less than three million citizens of Ukraine who have the right to vote, on the condition that the signatures in favor of designating the referendum have been collected in no less than two-thirds of the oblasts, with no less than 100 000 signatures in each oblast. > > I don’t see a mechanism there for the legislature to block a referendum. You can see that this doesn’t allow Crimea to initiate a referendum on it’s own though, right? Even if every single person in Crimea signed the petition. Canada and the UK have a much lower threshold for separation. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1872 "2014-03-25T18:12:22Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You can see that this doesn’t allow Crimea to initiate a referendum on it’s own though, right? Even if every single person in Crimea signed the petition. Canada and the UK have a much lower threshold for separation. Yes. I posted it because **NotfooledbyW** offered Articles 134 and 157 as “a cite where the Ukraine Constitution actually ‘forbids Crimea’ from seceding”. It does no such thing, as Article 72 makes clear. The U.S. threshold is higher, as a state seceding would require a Constitutional amendment: Either a supermajority vote by Congress, or a national convention requested by at least 34 states, then ratification by at least 38 states. Is there some level of difficulty where the whole process can be justifably skipped, without any sort of honest attempt made? How are we to know what that level is? Say what you will about the Ukranian parliament’s removal of Yanukovych, while the procedure was only partially followed, at least it’s a power the parliament has, and they made an effort to exercise it legitimately. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1873 "2014-03-25T18:28:40Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > OK, that’s not remotely what I said. Have fun locked in the old my side-your side mindset. I am pointing out that your “no doubt” isn’t worth anything as evidence. What is? Actual polling data, and actual, unbiased voting results. The former is against you and the latter does not exist. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1874 "2014-03-25T18:35:39Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You can see that this doesn’t allow Crimea to initiate a referendum on it’s own though, right? Even if every single person in Crimea signed the petition. Canada and the UK have a much lower threshold for separation. I think the ‘it is hard for Crimea to legally go its own way so Russia had to step in and help’ is the most appealing argument of the pro-Russian bloc. However, it doesn’t fully convince me. Catalonia and the Basque Country arguably have pro-independence majorities, but the Spanish constitution does not allow for a self-determination vote. Would that allow France to send its tanks across the border? I have to say no. Internal issues should be solved internally ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1875 "2014-03-25T18:36:01Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Is there some level of difficulty where the whole process can be justifably skipped, without any sort of honest attempt made? Is your answer to that “No”? I could see it being pointless to try at some point, though I would hope for some jostling for changes to make it less difficult before any unilateral action. Let me be clear, the referendum in Crimea wasn’t legit, imho. This wasn’t the culmination of years of popular calls for separation. It was held under foreign occupation. It didn’t allow a vote for the status quo. However, the events in Kiev emboldened and in all likelihood swelled the ranks of pro-russian elements. This made it easier for Russia to make their move. Both of these things were made easier by the West’s stirring of the pot. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1876 "2014-03-25T18:42:53Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > You can see that this doesn’t allow Crimea to initiate a referendum on it’s own though, right? Even if every single person in Crimea signed the petition. Canada and the UK have a much lower threshold for separation. Canada’s laws ain’t that different. > **[Clarity Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarity_Act)** > > Canada portal > > The Clarity Act (French: Loi sur la clarté référendaire, known as Bill C-20 before it became law) is legislation passed by the Parliament of Canada that established the conditions under which the Government of Canada would enter into negotiations that might lead to secession following such a vote by one of the provinces. The Clarity Bill (C-20) was tabled for first reading in the House of Commons on 13 December 1999. It was passed by the House on 15 March 2000, and by the Sen... > [@](#): > > Giving the House of Commons the power to decide whether a proposed referendum question was considered clear before the public vote; > > Specifically stating that any question not solely referring to secession was to be considered unclear; > > Giving the House of Commons the power to determine whether or not a clear majority had expressed itself following any referendum vote, implying that some sort of supermajority is required for success; > > Stating that all provinces and the First Nations were to be part of the negotiations; > > Allowing the House of Commons to override a referendum decision if it felt the referendum violated any of the tenets of the Clarity Act; > > The secession of a province of Canada would require an amendment to the Constitution of Canada. It is clear a province cannot do it on its own - only with the supervision of federal parliament, who vets the questions, engages in negotiations, requires a “supermajority” in any referendum, can veto the results if the Act is not followed, etc. From the Act itself: > [@](#): > > 1. (1) Where the government of a province, following a referendum relating to the secession of the province from Canada, seeks to enter into negotiations on the terms on which that province might cease to be part of Canada, the House of Commons shall, except where it has determined pursuant to section 1 that a referendum question is not clear, consider and, by resolution, set out its determination on whether, in the circumstances, there has been a clear expression of a will by a clear majority of the population of that province that the province cease to be part of Canada. > > Factors for House of Commons to take into account > > (2) In considering whether there has been a clear expression of a will by a clear majority of the population of a province that the province cease to be part of Canada, the House of Commons shall take into account > > (a) the size of the majority of valid votes cast in favour of the secessionist option; > > (b) the percentage of eligible voters voting in the referendum; and > > (c) any other matters or circumstances it considers to be relevant. > > Other views to be considered > > (3) In considering whether there has been a clear expression of a will by a clear majority of the population of a province that the province cease to be part of Canada, the House of Commons shall take into account the views of all political parties represented in the legislative assembly of the province whose government proposed the referendum on secession, any formal statements or resolutions by the government or legislative assembly of any province or territory of Canada, any formal statements or resolutions by the Senate, any formal statements or resolutions by the representatives of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, especially those in the province whose government proposed the referendum on secession, and any other views it considers to be relevant. > > No negotiations unless will clear > > (4) The Government of Canada shall not enter into negotiations on the terms on which a province might cease to be part of Canada unless the House of Commons determines, pursuant to this section, that there has been a clear expression of a will by a clear majority of the population of that province that the province cease to be part of Canada. > **[SC 2000, c 26 | An Act to Give Effect to the Requirement for Clarity as Set...](https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/sc-2000-c-26/latest/sc-2000-c-26.html)** > > Access all information related to this legislation on CanLII. All a referendum does is trigger a review by parliament. It is up to parliament te decide if the evidence (including referendum results) justifies “negotiations”. In short, in both Canada and Ukraine what is necessary for seperation is the consent of the country as a whole. A constituent part cannot do it by itself: all a local referendum does, is start the process. That consent is determined differently: in Canada, it is through parliament; in Ukraine, through an all-Ukraine referendum. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1877 "2014-03-25T18:45:22Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Is your answer to that “No”? As long as there is some sort of democratic process, then my answer is indeed “No”. > [@CarnalK](#): > > I could see it being pointless to try at some point, though I would hope for some jostling for changes to make it less difficult before any unilateral action. Let me be clear, the referendum in Crimea wasn’t legit, imho. This wasn’t the culmination of years of popular calls for separation. It was held under foreign occupation. It didn’t allow a vote for the status quo. > > However, the events in Kiev emboldened and in all likelihood swelled the ranks of pro-russian elements. This made it easier for Russia to make their move. Both of these things were made easier by the West’s stirring of the pot. I don’t disagree with any of that, except to note that the pot-stirring was pretty weak stuff, as far as these things go. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2014, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1878 "2014-03-25T19:05:20Z")
Different countries have different processes to allow a region to break off. I don’t see that the Ukrainian process is particularly more onerous. And I can’t see that “Russian Speakers” were horribly oppressed in Crimea so that they had to exit ex-constitutionally. Does anyone here really _not_ see this as basically a blatant land grab by Russia? Whether they had fears of encroaching NATO or not. It was an illegal land grab with absolutely no attempt to pursue a legal avenue. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1879 "2014-03-25T19:53:57Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > I’m unclear what the position posters such as **RedFury** and **Rune** actually hold on invasions. Perhaps they can elucidate, rather than crowing about the actions of their favourite Slavic strongman? I’d have thought stated opposition to the Iraq invasion would have been based around some deep-seated moral principle, presumably also applying to Crimea and hence expressed in the same vigorous terms they reserved for the Iraq invasion, not mere opposition to invasions carried out by the West, with news of a Russian annexation being joked away with accusations of Western hypocrisy and impotency with regards an expansionist kleptocracy on the edge of Europe. My deep seated principle in opposition to the US invasion of Iraq is that international law was working in perfect order to deter and remove any need or pretext for invasion. There have been few examples of diplomatic means such as the obvious case of disarming Iraq by the peaceful means of UN inspections. The flagrant violation of international law and disregard for peaceful diplomacy backed by the threat of military force that was demonstrated in 2003 is an atrocity of historical significance. And that atrocity should not be compared to the military backing of a bid for independence or separation that took place in Crimea. There is little if anything in common between the two events that can or should be compared. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2014, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/1880 "2014-03-25T21:07:12Z")
To **Capt S Party** : I thought I made it perfectly clear that I don’t want to live in a unipolar World. One where the US & its allies go romping around and basically do as they please; international law or not. And as **NfBW** , makes it clear in his last post, there’s simply no comparison in what the US did and what Russia has done in Crimea and what the US did – and mantains – in Iraq. “Illegitimacy” many times in the eyes of the beholder, and while, again, I don’t condone invasions, there’s a far cry from what Russia did in Crimea to what the US has done in the past decades all over the place. I simply want someone to stand-up to the worldly bully and make it think that they can’t “rule the world.” And as shown and proven, they can’t. Which, IMO, is a _good thing_. The end. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=93) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=95)