Again, as I’ll state in the link you provided about the background before the 2008 conflict.
If you have a Russian president who wants to restore Russian prestige, and a Georgian president who refuses to be a Russian puppet, you get conflicts like these. Georgian aspirations to being in the EU and a NATO member are legitimate, irrespective of what Russia wants, and it’s also highly hypocritical considering the Baltic states are all NATO members (And have substantial Russian minorities) as well as Turkey which is Georgia’s neigbour.
He’s violating Ukranian terrtorial sovereignty because a government he doesn’t like will destroy his aims of a Eurasian Union run from Moscow, and as revenge he is now consolidating his position in the Crimea, again which he didn’t bother with too much before when Yanukovich was in power, and is inciting Russian speaking minorities in other parts of the Ukraine.
There are already reports that the new commander of the Ukrainian Navy, Admiral Denis Berezovsky, who was recently appointed by Turchinov (yesterday?), has already defected and pledged allegiance to Crimea.
Kiev does not seem to have full control of it’s own armed forces, and it’s difficult to know how many would actually follow orders in an actual war.
i’ll clear a couple of things up;
First of all I have mentioned ‘the west’ as a bloc at most times lined up in opposition against Russia. You are correct - France specifically stood in defiance to what Bush and Blair did… but France is not to blame but France is in the west… and they share the image problem I am speaking about because of what two nations in the west did…
And I did identify those two violators of international law in my post"
"Bush and Blair did not go into Iraq peacefully… they bombed and sent in tanks with guns ablazing… "
Putin thus far has not gone in with guns ablazing… It’s got to be the damdest most peaceful invasion of another country that I have ever seen.
Secondly when I wrote, “No world power can ‘stop’ Putin from flexing his muscle and violating a sovereign nation’s territory if that is what Putin decides to do and there is no military capability to stop him” … perhaps it was not clear… but my intent was twofold: First NATO could not stop PUtin from invading , if there is 'no military or sufficient capability within the 'invaded nation’s ability to resist an attack by the Russian Federation.
And secondly I think it is fair to say that NATO could not stop an ‘initial’ invasion if That is what Putin decided to do. NATO could definitely deploy Naval and Air assets to make life very difficult for him if he decided to send Russian Federation forces into a NATO member’s territory. But I don’t presume Putin doing such a suicidal attack could be stopped because if he did that he’s obviously gone nuts. … For example NATO surely could has the military capability to turn Putin back after he crossed some hypothetical border of a NATO member with military action. It might not take long to drive Russians out of that territory . But there is no capability to keep Putin from crossing the border with aggression in mind if he decides to do it.
Did Ryan_Liam cite this yesterday at 10:10 PM: http://www.michaeltotten.com/archive...th-about-1.php Quote: “Cite” Michael J Totten Virtually everyone is wrong. Georgia didn’t start it on August 7, nor on any other date. The South Ossetian militia started it on August 6 when its fighters fired on Georgian peacekeepers and Georgian villages with weapons banned by the agreement hammered out between the two sides in 1994. At the same time, the Russian military sent its invasion force bearing down on Georgia from the north side of the Caucasus Mountains on the Russian side of the border through the Roki tunnel and into Georgia. This happened before Saakashvili sent additional troops to South Ossetia and allegedly started the war. “Cite”
I take this to mean Ryan_Liam supports and believed this statement by Michael Totten: "The South Ossetian militia started it on August 6 … At the same time, the Russian military sent its invasion force bearing down on Georgia from the north side of the Caucasus Mountains on the Russian side of the border through the Roki tunnel and into Georgia. This happened before Saakashvili sent additional troops."
I think you make a good point, although quite contrived. Russia isn’t going to respect a President who can’t even keep his government from intermittently shutting down. Putin has clear and strong edict from his Legislative branch for military action. Obama couldn’t get a Legislative majority to come to the consensus that sky is blue, the ocean is wet, or that shit stinks. Putin is going to do what he wants because he has already read Obama as a pussy. This precisely how the Republicans back at home want him to be read.
IMO, it’s incumbent on Obama not to see the U.S back down. This isn’t about current politics or if the President is black or white or liberal or conservative, this is raw historical precedent on foreign policy with Russia: the U.S does not back down or capitulate. We should be sending out warships to show solidarity with our NATO allies in Europe. If Putin goes for Ukraine, Obama should sidestep the clowns in Congress and assert some Executive authoritah by forming a NATO coalition to drive out the Russians Desert Storm-style and liberate Crimea in the process. Immediately following driving out the Russians, Crimea should be forced to have their elections to determine if they want to be apart of Russia or Ukraine and let the chips fall what they may. What should not be tolerated are land grabs that violate international law.
For those who are scared of Russia, get outta here and buy a bunker. Do you think Russia wins against the entirety of NATO? Hahahahahahahaha. I know the neo-cons are dead, but damn it, we could use NATO to conquer and carve up Russia into Western style democracies. The gears of war and the fruits thereof will add a few logs into the dying camp fire of capitalism. I’m excited especially if we can get all of NATO. There’s no way Russia can beat US plus NATO. I hope we go in like Bush the Greater did in Kuwait. Yay. War + Capitalism = More jobs and lower unemployment with greater economic prosperity after we win (and we always win). Let’s go.
Ryan_Liam wrote on 03-02-2014 at 09:31 AM, “No, the argument isn’t as to whether the Russians were right to defend themselves from attack, no one is saying they are not, however, they did instigate the conflict in order to occupy Abkhazia and South Ossetia, …”
The problem with Ryan_Liam’s view and argument is that both Abkhazia and South Ossetia were breakaway territories from Georgian governance. The 1994 left them under Russian Federation influence and protection.
Russia did not have tanks and fighters in or above either breakaway state until after the Georgian armored units with tanks and Israeli made GRAD multiple rocket launchers reigning death down onto the capital of South Ossetia.
The Russians according to Ryan_Liam now sayst the Russians were justified in bringing those fighters and tanks and troops into South Ossetia and Abkhazia and into Georgia to eliminate all that armor that the west had supplied to a rather suspect “democratically elected” government run by Sakaashvilli… And Sakaashvilli was a prominent and wealthy NYC (Yes NYC in the US) lawyer prior to getting himself elected president of Georgia… How does that happen… Really?
So whatever provocations the Russians may have done… the Russians had a right and justification to send in tanks and bombers in order to destroy the Georgian military. The EU says Russian went too far after the initial response that drove back the Georgian armored units. But how far is too far when a murderous thug president orders GRAD rockets fired on civilians in buildings with no way to defend themselves unless the Russians moved to intervene and save them?
Backdown? Did Russia put nuclear missiles in Cuba or something? Wow, your plan sounds really expensive and involves much death and suffering, and WW III-ish. Putin’s plan is looking better all the time.
I’d have typed a “w” instead of a “c” there, my friend.
From what I’ve seen of the Sunday morning news shows today, there are quiet a few people who are overlooking the serious problems military action by NATO or the US would create. I expect it from idiots like Chuck Todd and David Gregory but Stephanopolous sounded like he was pushing Kerry to explicitly threaten a military response. Morons all.
IF true and I’m waiting to see some firm confirmation of Ukrainian defectors from the officer’s ranks and on down… IF true… does Putin have an argument in his favor that something needed to be done to stabilize the situation (at least in Crimea) when it was unknown what the status of military command and control in Ukraine’s Armed Forces after mob rule brought down the president?
There is some massive military firepower in other words in the hands and under the control of who knows who? Still to this day. And defections make it more questionable than it already was>
Here again is Putin’s stated intent and concerns during the 90 minute phone call with Obama yesterday:
Utter nonsense. After all the illegal wars and coups the US & its cronies have started over the past decades to confront Russia for defending its own legitimate interests – both military and their Russian brethen – on its own border is clearly delusional. If you think Russia/Putin are going to back down from such a confrontation I assure you you’ve got another thing coming.
As BobLibDem quite correctly states, you’d be looking right down the barrel of a WWIII. And I am fairly sure whose side China would take.
Who wins in such a conflict? No one. You can take that to the bank.
ETA: Don’t forget either that the Ukranian coup is illegitimate as well – as long as we’re talking about “International Law.” You know the one the US uses like toilet paper.
Bad enough coming from Fox News and what we’ll get from hate talk radio pundits on Monday… Putin slapping Obama around again. Such ignorance Obama has to deal with on top of everything else.
The part I bolded in your quote is the reason Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia have valid reasons to be concerned about Putin’s designs on their territory. They all have significant Russian minorities, mostly settled in the eastern part of their territory along the border with Russia. NATO membership may end up being what saves their butts should Putin feel emboldened by his Ukrainian adventure.
Why would you be bored with Georgia if you think as do I that Putin’s plan/actions on Ukraine are looking better all the time. Putin took the right and justifiable actions actions in 2008 to crush Georgia’s NATO hopes as it avenged the wanton murder of Russian troops legally in South Ossetia as well as the residents there. But you’d never know that if you rely mostly on Western media to bring you the truth.
When you say “Putin’s plan is looking better all the time” the Russophobes will shrug it off. A big part of their subjective mindset is that Putin was the aggressor in Georgia and that solidifies the massive accepted opinion on the right and on the left in the west and here in the states such as …
You underestimate the consequences. Economic sanctions through a coalition is the way to go, but I’m unsure how Europe will fare without Russia’s natural resources.
I was not arguing that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia wouldn’t have valid concerns, but you are right being members of NATO should definitely remove a great deal of concern that Putin has an intent to invade them because of the current Ukraine situation.
I have seen no hint that Putin is even thinking about invading Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and he’d be crazy if he is.
And it has been pointed out … This Russian ‘invasion’ of Crimea has been a quite tender invasion.
Ravenman’s point is still intact without a challenge. Do you think America’s biggest geopolitical threat is Russia and not al Qaeda right now?
Why not address that? If you did and I missed it, I apologize.
Why wouldn’t it be in Putins best interests to cloak what he’s doing with legality to get what he wants, why do you not understand this? Trying to paint what an authoritarian does as being ‘Russo-phobic’ is missing the important point, the countries on Russias western border want a relationship with the EU and want to limit Russian interference in their internal affairs, in other words, to be more independent. Considering Putin has a hard time grasping this concept, you will encounter further resistance to any machinations he has on them, hence the situation in the Ukraine.
IIRC, it was precisely Putin having Yanukovich dismiss EU negotiations back in November which has precipitated this entire crisis. So there ya go, a big pat on the back for his political maneuvering, an entire region is destabilized due to the majority of the Ukrainian population going in the opposite direction Putin wanted them to go.