And a not totally unjustified chip on its shoulder.
Marx warns against state monopoly capitalism, using it to build his case in favor of (though poorly defined) communism; Russia ventures into communism after early 20th century upheavals, economic straits, etc., then gets out of it only to steer right into stamocap (“One of the most prominent current examples of Stamocap is the de facto economic system in modern day Russia under its current autocrat, Vladimir Putin.” (though grain of salt, from Wikipedia)) early in the next century, causing some to wax nostalgic for the old regime!? Communist conspiracy theories anyone?
Any chance of an un-ban of this character so he can participate in a status review of his Obama vs. Putin scorecard? I just hope he used pencil…
It’s not just ‘Russia’ who’s the actor in Eastern Ukraine (out of respect for tomndebb I will drop the definite article). A substantial amount of people in Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts don’t want to be part of Ukraine any more. What about their welfare?
It’s a lost cause. They’re not getting independence, Russia is not willing to walk the mile for them and those in the region feeling so strongly about it that they were willing to go to war for it were never a majority. Nothing is gained by continuing the current war except extend the misery. They should approach the Ukrainian government and negotiate the best deal they can.
Since you clearly want to use “the definite article” perhaps you could let us know why you hate the Ukrainians so much that you want to use a rather poorly chosen ethnic slur to refer to them.
Do you have family from the area or is there a particular reason you have a mad on against them due to Ukrainian history.
For the record, I myself don’t have strong feelings one way or the other unless you count not like ethnic states based on blood and soil nationalism and prefer large, cosmopolitan, multi-ethnic states. One reason I think breaking up the Ottoman Empire was bad idea.
Assuming you aren’t speaking with heavy irony there, what about it do you think is ‘surprisingly intelligent and balanced’, since it looks like a huge load of horse shit and historical revisionism to me?
So today in the news Merkel is saying the Ukraine situation can’t be solved militarily. Yet, militarily seems to be the precise way Russia is achieving its goals.
I don’t want to see Ukraine become a cold war proxy war with the West & Russia pumping weapons into Ukraine until the place is a cratered wasteland, but how can we sit back and let Russia roll in its tanks and take what it wants while the West sits back and takes a non-military stance?
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17159607&postcount=403
I repeat. Putin regards the West as soft, degenerate and greedy. He is sure that they will not inconvenience themselves for the sake of Ukraine. I am pretty sure he is correct.
I’m not sure what you mean by “not inconvenience themselves.”
Right now, Russia is the one spending all that money and getting nothing in return. Why should the West do anything?
Well Russia has got Crimea (seemingly permanently as no one seems to be seriously challenging them on it) and their separatist clients seem to be pretty much winning in the Eastern Ukraine.
Meanwhile the EU sanctions seem to be hurting European farmers more than the Russians and the Ukrainian government keeps coming back for more loans.
Looks to me like Russia seems to be doing pretty well out of the whole deal by comparison.
Neither Crimea nor an eastern breakoff is going to do much for Russia really. In what sense are they “doing well”? Not that I buy your uncited declaraton of who’s getting hurt most by Russian and EU sanctions.
There’s no money in conquest for the sake of conquest. Hasn’t been for over a century. Ukraine has no resources and no strategic value; if Russia conquers it, all they’ll end up with is Ukraine.
Putin doesn’t care about Ukraine, per se. He just doesn’t want it leaning Westward. So, it’s probably more in his interest to NOT gobble up the eastern part, but to keep tensions high. That makes other border countries nervous, too, about what happens in their own countries if they try and opt out of the Russian orbit.
This is probably true, but there’s an economic angle that Alessan and carnalk overlooked.
Controlling Ukraine would be extremely valuable. It’s a prize of 45 million men, women and children, has been locked under Russian control before, and has extensive agricultural sectors which could reduce Russian dependence on Europe. Further, controlling Crimea alone nets him a permanent warm-water port, something Russia still has issues with. Finally, it strengthens his negotiating position via-a-vis western Europe as much as it does strengthen his hand in Eastern Europe.
For Putin, there most certainly is wealth for conquest, even if there isn’t a pile of gold sitting around to be taken.
Yeah it’s amusing that someone actually considered that a balanced article.
An accusation that the EU funded anti-russian political groups (Even if true, so what? It’s not hard to find groups supported by the Kremlin).
“Since 1989 russia has peacefully ceded thousands of hectares of land”: of course all of it before Putin’s reign.
And “war is hell”, so we shouldn’t do anything to threaten conflict. Forget that fighting is happening already, and that Russia is involved. I’m sure those living in Eastern Ukraine can relate to the desperate living conditions his mother once experienced.
I have always thought this was more about perception within Russia than any actual concrete gain.
People are all the time making the comparison between Putin and Hitler. I think the far better ‘fit’ is the comparison between Putin and Mussolini (pre-WW2).
-
Picking off easy targets that are mostly militarily worthless - check.
-
Thumbing his nose at the international community for domestic applause - check
-
Looking backwards in a claim to re-create imperial glory - while lacking the economic and military ability to do more than pick off the weak - check.
-
Lots of useful idiots in the West admire his spunk in thumbing his nose at the West - check.
-
Western reaction weak, divided and feeble in the face of his provocations - check.
-
Targets of his aggression absorb piles of money, while producing little of actual economic value (except perhaps in some distant future) - check.
-
Tweaks the tails of his enemies in the West, but has no real interest in an all-out military confrontation with them - check.
Just like Mussolini, the real threat isn’t from him - it is from the damage he is doing to the international system, which may encourage others like China - who have real economic power behind them - into unwise adventures.
The British House of Lords has criticised the Government’s and the EU’s naive approach to relations with Russia: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31545744