When fighting first broke out in the Ukraine, Putin swore up and down that the rebels had no connection with Russia.
This is common knowledge, but since one of our favorite games here at the SD is yelling “Cite!” for common knowledge, here is one example.
Back then, I wasn’t sure what the US should do for Ukraine. But I’ve come to believe that we should have intervened much more forcefully.
Some people were afraid that intervening would have risked war between the US and Russia. I say that we should have taken Putin at his word. “Since there are no Russian troops in the Ukraine, you certainly won’t mind if we kill those rebels that have no ties to you.”
Now, pretty much everybody knew or at least strongly suspected that Russian troops were involved from the beginning. But if we had taken Putin at his word, I don’t think that there would have been anything significant that he could have done without losing face. “Oops–I forgot where my soldiers were” doesn’t have a very good ring to it.
I have come to believe that we lost a golden opportunity to paint Putin into a corner. This is the second country in Eastern Europe that we could–and should–have helped in a major way but didn’t. I greatly fear the repercussions of our inaction in future years.
Putin, and those who carry his water in the West, did such a good job of smearing the Ukranians who opposed the “separatists” as fascists that our chickenshit politicians just sat on their hands for fear of sullying their reputations. Putin, and Russia in general, needs to be kept in a box. Their dreams of empire have never faded.
Honestly, I don’t think the United States has a moral obligation to stop every bad thing in the world. Ukraine was never an American ally and despite what some people think we had no treaty obligation to defend Ukraine.
Ukraine thought they could placate Putin and make deals with him. They misread his greed.
I don’t think anyone who wasn’t brain washed really believed that, especially after Russia seized…er, liberated…the Crimea.
I disagree. I think we took the best course we could. We supported our NATO allies in Eastern Europe, we supported the Ukrainians with non-military aid and political support, and we slapped increasingly tightening sanctions on the Russians and tossed them out of the G8 (which is not the G7 again). We applied non-military pressure on the Russians in such a way as to demonstrate our displeasure but not anything that the Russians can point to and say we were militarily escalating the situation (they have, of course TRIED to do this, but outside of those folks who believed Putin et al about the no Russian troops thing I don’t think they are getting much traction with that narrative).
Yes, the Ukrainian people are suffering, but considering the trainwreck their ‘nation’ was already in, that was probably inevitable, unfortunately. This is costing Russia big time, however, and it gets worse for them every month that this goes on. In the end, if Russia decides to take the plunge and directly and openly attack the Ukraine then the cost of all of this will far outweigh any benefit Putin would or will get. At the same time, the US has underscored the danger of the Russians, as well as reassuring our actual allies in the region (we’ve moved troops to our NATO allies, we’ve done training and exercises and generally done everything we should and could to reassure them we are there for them). We have come off looking measured and strong, while the Russians have come across as looking like bullies…and really inept and weak bullies at that.
Huh. And I see it exactly the opposite. I think that the US had slowly been losing influence and even relevance in the region for a while now since the USSR had failed. This, to me, has brought back the importance of NATO and of the US’s continued role in the region. I think we’ve come off really good in all of this, all things considered. I shudder to think what would have happened had this gone down on GW’s watch instead of Obama’s. :eek:
Interesting. But you seem to have forgotten how Bush acted during Russia vs. Georgia.
Russia seems to be resuming its traditional imperialistic tendencies in Eastern Europe. What I’m concerned about is how our actual allies may begin to view our treaties of aid. The US more or less stood idle during the affair with Georgia; we’re providing only fairly minimal aid to the Ukraine. I’m afraid that Poland, the Baltic states, etc. may begin to say, “They talk a good talk, but when Russia invades, they don’t actually do anything.”
And Poland, more than most countries, has bitter experience with empty promises of aid. Poland still trusts us for the moment, but I’m genuinely concerned how much longer that trust may last. And without them, we cannot build any sort of solid bulwark in Eastern Europe against Russia.
Georgia and Ukraine are not and were not formal allies of the United States. Technically speaking the U.S. owes them exactly nothing.
This is not the case with Poland and the Baltic states. The odds of Russia invading Poland and the United States ( and NATO generally ) standing by and doing nothing are approximately zero. Of course the odds of Russia being stupid enough to invade Poland is also probably pretty close to zero.
It’s easy to say what we should have done as if this were some sort of game, but the consequence of intervention is actual human lives that will be spent for no good reason. This is the same sort of thinking that led to WWI, and if we don’t learn from our mistakes (this one, being that we should spend american lives to keep from having to redraw maps), as the cliche goes, we’re doomed to repeat them. Even if Russia succeeds in controlling Ukraine, Colonialism has been shown time and time again to collapse under it’s own weight, so I don’t think there is some long-term threat to America’s sovereignty over this. Any US citizen getting their panties in a wad over this has a pretty good life without much else to worry about.
Put another way, the USA can fuck right off - it caused this crisis by engineering the removal of a legitimate democratic gov, and now responsible parties are doing their best to try and find a way out of it - you’ll notice who is excluded from the meeting. Witness:
This is not the Inner German border in the Cold War. Nor do they have to undertake a formal invasion. Just a bunch of “volunteers” and freedom fighters can do the job handily thank you very much.
Plus everyone is forgetting the 9000 kg dragon in the room; China.
This is exactly the position the US should take when Putin annexes the Ukraine. The US needs to focus any objection to continuing economic pressure and boycotts, nothing more.
Not against Poland. Poland is not the same as when they Berlin fall fell. They are well equipped, professional and have a number of of combat veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan in their ranks. They can handle a hybrid approach. They could hurt Russia on the defense unless an invasion included the bulk of the Russian armed forces. That of course would raise the spectre of the Chinese dragon. If most of eh Russian military were committed to Eastern Europe there’s the long disputed border with China. The threat of a couple divisions of “border negotiators” makes massing in the west riskier.
A “bunch of volunteers” would still be enough to Poland or the Baltics to ask for NATO assistance under Article 5 of the Treaty. That technique works best when they’re nibbling off chunks of non-allied border countries.
Yes, that bastion of Pro-Kremlin propoganda, the BBC.
It’s hard to believe that people are still buying the U.S. government’s bullshit, but I guess ultra-nationalism is something we have to live with here now.
For example, NATO expansion into Central Europe is not questioned at home.
US officials caught on tape discussing the details of a coup is only a subject of conversation because of mean language, and the supposed “tradecraft” of tapping an unsecured phone line.
The U.S. instigation of Georgia’s quixotic attempt to attack Russia is spun into a tale of Russian aggression.
Russia, with no major military bases outside it borders, has not invaded a country recently, and has a history of allowing peaceful secession, has “imperial ambitions” but the U.S. is a “peacekeeper” who invades countries, rains death from on high on a daily basis in obscure corners of the world, ushers in what will probably be decades of turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa due to politically expedient interventions, jockeys for position in East Asian seas, and holds multi-generational garrisons from Europe and the Middle East to Asia.
Well, what do you expect?
Do you think it is easy to accept that your country is a force of evil?
That would automatically mean that you would have to try and do something about it.
Otherwise you are complicit, are you not?
Much easier to close your eyes and go with the flow.