Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSN) NewsFlash Russian troops invade the Crimean region of Ukraine. This will not end well   (news.msn.com) divider line 502
    More: NewsFlash, Crimean, Carnegie Moscow Center, Russians, Ukraine, Vladimir Putin, South Ossetia, Russian troops, Yulia Tymoshenko  
•       •       •

9444 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Mar 2014 at 5:59 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

502 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-01 05:21:35 PM  
They will be welcomed as liberators.
 
2014-03-01 05:24:27 PM  
Crimea a river.
 
2014-03-01 05:27:56 PM  
I guess the speech didn't work.
 
2014-03-01 05:30:49 PM  

texdent: Crimea a river.


You messed up the pun.
 
2014-03-01 05:32:17 PM  
Crimean Tatars, the historic hosts of the land who make up 12 percent of the island's population and stand strongly for Crimea remaining part of Ukraine, didn't put up any visible resistance Saturday.

media.fooducate.com

RIP if you're not careful!
 
2014-03-01 05:32:44 PM  

texdent: Crimea a river.


No one has used this pun in the past 1500000000 threads on this

You get a gold star
 
2014-03-01 05:51:31 PM  

Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.


What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?
 
2014-03-01 05:54:52 PM  
How does the United States credibly object to this when the United States congress voted to authorize President Bush to invade a country half a world away from the United States.

/reap what you sow...
 
2014-03-01 05:56:20 PM  

ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?


Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...
 
2014-03-01 06:02:13 PM  
*sigh*
 
2014-03-01 06:02:33 PM  

ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...


I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-03-01 06:02:39 PM  
Crimea is gone, but we should make sure Putin knows if Kiev is threatened there will be a cruise missile with his name on it.
 
2014-03-01 06:02:46 PM  

ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?


I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?
 
2014-03-01 06:02:59 PM  
Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.
 
2014-03-01 06:03:10 PM  
You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.
 
2014-03-01 06:03:40 PM  
F*ck
 
2014-03-01 06:03:55 PM  
I'm singing in Russian at a concert tomorrow in DC, so I'm getting a kick out of these developments.
 
2014-03-01 06:03:56 PM  
c1.soap.com
 
2014-03-01 06:04:26 PM  

ksdanj: How does the United States credibly object to this when the United States congress voted to authorize President Bush to invade a country half a world away from the United States.

/reap what you sow...


well the Ukraine had been firing repeatedly on Russian jets flying UN sanctioned air patrols and has refused to follow proscriptions levied against them by the UN
 
2014-03-01 06:04:27 PM  
Putey doesn't give 2 farks about obamas warning, russians never fear strongly worded letters.
 
2014-03-01 06:04:54 PM  
Putin, you fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this!

Oh never mind, that was the one.
 
2014-03-01 06:05:03 PM  
Well at least Obama gave him a call and they talked it over.
 
2014-03-01 06:05:39 PM  

abiigdog: Putey doesn't give 2 farks about obamas warning, russians never fear strongly worded letters.


That's because most can't read.
 
2014-03-01 06:05:44 PM  
Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.
 
2014-03-01 06:05:46 PM  

ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?


More importantly, was President Obama answering his phone when this was happening. I was assured he wouldn't be.
 
2014-03-01 06:05:50 PM  

ZAZ: Crimea is gone, but we should make sure Putin knows if Kiev is threatened there will be a cruise missile with his name on it.


that's probably the best thing we can do. We all knew Russia wanted Crimea because of the strategic value to them. Hopefully, they don't give a damn about Kiev. Hopefully Kiev isn't stupid enough to try and take them on.
 
2014-03-01 06:05:54 PM  
We need to stay as far away from this as possible. Let Russia and the Ukraine have it out, keep it from spreading, and do nothing else. This is straight from the Bad Old Days, and I for one don't really want to get nuked. Except for Philadelphia, they're fair game.
 
2014-03-01 06:06:07 PM  

ksdanj: How does the United States credibly object to this when the United States congress voted to authorize President Bush to invade a country half a world away from the United States.

/reap what you sow...


Do what I say, not what I do
 
2014-03-01 06:06:22 PM  

LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.


As long as they respect the sovereignty of the region, I can't complain. If they try to claim it as Russian soil, then I have an issue.
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-03-01 06:06:28 PM  

LordJiro: And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?


When Russia hasn't had a warm water port, it desperately wanted one.  When it has one, it wants another.  I can't blame them, but condoning the actions to get one is another thing entirely.  These events, however, are some upon which I feel I do not need to hold an empassioned opinion.
 
2014-03-01 06:06:29 PM  

willfullyobscure: The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia"


Ukraine is in Europe.
 
2014-03-01 06:06:58 PM  
Blood bath.
 
2014-03-01 06:07:22 PM  
This won't end well?  Frankly, it will end just fine.  Russia will take what it wants or doesn't want and the rest of the world will spout tough words for a few days but ultimately do nothing.

And ImOKwithThis.jpg
 
2014-03-01 06:07:28 PM  
Good news: The Russians aren't any smarter than we are.
Bad news: Another goddamn war.
 
2014-03-01 06:07:28 PM  

rnatalie: [c1.soap.com image 850x399]


I crown thee TEH WINNAR!
 
2014-03-01 06:07:32 PM  

MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.


Would we? Would we really invade Cuba?

One of these things is not like the other.
 
2014-03-01 06:07:50 PM  
"Oh GODDAMMIT!"

- Barrack Obama
 
2014-03-01 06:08:06 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.


If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.
 
2014-03-01 06:08:06 PM  

texdent: Crimea a river.


Sooo, this thread yesterday when they took over the airports isn't considering that an invasion?
 
2014-03-01 06:08:25 PM  

ksdanj: How does the United States credibly object to this when the United States congress voted to authorize President Bush to invade a country half a world away from the United States.

/reap what you sow...


The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances.
 
2014-03-01 06:08:26 PM  

MisterLoki: *sigh*


Yeah. All I can say is that I hope there is some type of grand bargain with Russia about Syria regarding the navel bases but I think that is wishful thinking. I think Putin is mucho macho and this spells trouble long-term.
 
2014-03-01 06:08:27 PM  
Oh we've gotten to an exciting bit in the stage play. Now more of the audience will pay attention instead of sticking popcorn in their noses. Some will become experts.
 
2014-03-01 06:08:30 PM  
I hate when this happens.
 
2014-03-01 06:08:45 PM  
Russia, I am disappoint.
 
2014-03-01 06:08:48 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: We need to stay as far away from this as possible. Let Russia and the Ukraine have it out, keep it from spreading, and do nothing else. This is straight from the Bad Old Days, and I for one don't really want to get nuked. Except for Philadelphia, they're fair game.


/I agree, we have no business in their internal affairs.  We already have our dirty mitts in enough peoples pies already to go out on another limb.
 
2014-03-01 06:09:42 PM  
Oh criminey.
 
2014-03-01 06:09:46 PM  

Boojum2k: willfullyobscure: The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia"

Ukraine is in Europe.


Fun fact: the Ural mountains, which are west of (The) Ukraine, divide Europe and Asia.
One of the few things I recall from sixth grade.
 
2014-03-01 06:10:01 PM  
So for Sarah Palin.... do we start calling calling her "Nostradumbass"... or is just a blind squirrel thing?
 
2014-03-01 06:10:08 PM  
Finally time to kick some ruskies.
 
2014-03-01 06:10:25 PM  
I suspect a sternly-worded letter with strenuous objections is on its way.
 
2014-03-01 06:11:10 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.

Would we? Would we really invade Cuba?

One of these things is not like the other.


Cuba wasn't part of the United States for centuries, then part of a separate country for only a couple of decades. Cuba doesn't identify as mostly American. Cuba probably wouldn't ask for American military intervention.
 
2014-03-01 06:11:20 PM  
fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net
 
2014-03-01 06:11:22 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.


Tumblr will care.
 
2014-03-01 06:11:39 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: We need to stay as far away from this as possible. Let Russia and the Ukraine have it out, keep it from spreading, and do nothing else. This is straight from the Bad Old Days, and I for one don't really want to get nuked. Except for Philadelphia, they're fair game.


HEY! Do you know how much that would screw up my commute when I have to go to NYC??
 
2014-03-01 06:12:18 PM  
I don't know if they're going to bother with the rest of the Ukraine, but I know they aren't going to be giving up their naval and air assets in the Black Sea fleet. Not without a fight, and they have more military might than the Ukraine does, especially if it's in turmoil right now.

What are the Europeans going to do about it? They should certainly make sure Putin doesn't pull another Georgia, but I don't know if they really want to escalate militarily and risk global or regional war. But they certainly shouldn't just stand by and watch poor Ukraine get stomped on. Maybe they support Ukraine's military with European forces in the rest of the country while staying out of Crimea and offering Putin a bit of a diplomatic olive branch in the meantime. Like, "Hey, we understand this mess has you nervous about your bases in Crimea. We know they're very important to you, so how about you keep peace there, we keep peace here - just until the Ukrainians get their shiat together with their new government and reaffirm their commitment to you in regard to their bases there. Then once everything's settled we all pull our forces out, deal?"
 
2014-03-01 06:12:38 PM  
jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control, and we will be lucky to live through it.
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-03-01 06:13:20 PM  
Ha!  A slight disturbance in the force, as if a dozen or so voices cried out and were silenced.

And now it is as if it had never happened...
 
2014-03-01 06:13:23 PM  

Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.



Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?



Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."
 
2014-03-01 06:13:28 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.


Really, that's what you're going with?  I guess dead men don't suffer.
 
2014-03-01 06:13:37 PM  

ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?


We have a treaty obligation to help the Ukraine protect their border.  I personally don't want us involved in another war, but if we don't do something our international standing will be turned to shiat (more than it is now).

We could start by immediately declaring an embargo on all business with Russia.  If we can get the other NATO members involved, it might actually get Putin's attention.  What to do next, I don't know.  But I'm a system administrator, not a diplomat who is supposed to know what to do.  I do know, however, that doing nothing is not going to help.
 
2014-03-01 06:13:46 PM  

rkiller1: Boojum2k: willfullyobscure: The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia"

Ukraine is in Europe.

Fun fact: the Ural mountains, which are west EAST of (The) Ukraine, divide Europe and Asia.
One of the few things I recall from sixth grade.


Look at a map.
 
2014-03-01 06:14:32 PM  
 
2014-03-01 06:14:36 PM  

Cataholic: I suspect a sternly-worded letter with strenuous objections is on its way.


Not a whole lot America can do about this, unless we want to fight a war with Russia (and we don't since both sides still have enough nukes to make MAD a thing).
 
2014-03-01 06:14:36 PM  

Livinglush: Finally time to kick some ruskies.


When is your flight? You certainly wouldn't suggest getting into a fight without being willing to be one of the first casualties, *right*?
 
2014-03-01 06:14:36 PM  
www.epiccarnage.com

RIP Your Crane
Too early?
 
2014-03-01 06:15:10 PM  

rkiller1: This won't end well?  Frankly, it will end just fine.  Russia will take what it wants or doesn't want and the rest of the world will spout tough words for a few days but ultimately do nothing.

And ImOKwithThis.jpg


The one thing I'm wondering about is this.  Ukraine apparently controls Crimea's access to power, water, and most of its food (88 percent of its energy and 75 percent of its food come from the mainland).  What's to stop Ukraine from just shutting off the lights to Crimea and then Putin using that as an excuse to go into Ukraine, too?  Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I don't know that this is a situation that will just resolve itself itself nicely.
 
2014-03-01 06:15:38 PM  
Finally. A crisis worthy of establishing common ground between Gen Xers and Millennials. I'm going to go out tonight and comfort a 22-year-old smoking hot blond with my Cold War stories of survival.
 
2014-03-01 06:15:55 PM  
The GOP has wasted no time painting this as Obama's fault:

The ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, said Obama must "lead a meaningful, unified response" to the crisis, something he has thus far failed to do.  "The Russian government has felt free to intervene militarily in Ukraine because the United States," Corker said in a statement, "along with Europe, has failed to make clear there would be serious, potentially irreparable consequences to such action."
 
2014-03-01 06:16:12 PM  

OgreMagi: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

We have a treaty obligation to help the Ukraine protect their border.  I personally don't want us involved in another war, but if we don't do something our international standing will be turned to shiat (more than it is now).

We could start by immediately declaring an embargo on all business with Russia.  If we can get the other NATO members involved, it might actually get Putin's attention.  What to do next, I don't know.  But I'm a system administrator, not a diplomat who is supposed to know what to do.  I do know, however, that doing nothing is not going to help.


Wait, what? We have a treaty with them? They're in NATO?
 
2014-03-01 06:19:49 PM  

rkiller1: Fun fact: the Ural mountains, which are west of (The) Ukraine, divide Europe and Asia.One of the few things I recall from sixth grade.


Go back to 6th grade. They are in fact East of Ukraine.
http://www.freeworldmaps.net/europe/index.html
http://www.freeworldmaps.net/russia/ural-mountains/map.html

They run roughly north-south through Russia, ending south in Kazakhstan.
 
2014-03-01 06:21:57 PM  

stratagos: We have a treaty with them?


Yes. From 1996, in order to convince them to eliminate their Soviet-era nuclear weapons.

stratagos: They're in NATO?


No. Not all U.S. treaties are through NATO.
 
2014-03-01 06:22:47 PM  

stratagos: OgreMagi: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

We have a treaty obligation to help the Ukraine protect their border.  I personally don't want us involved in another war, but if we don't do something our international standing will be turned to shiat (more than it is now).

We could start by immediately declaring an embargo on all business with Russia.  If we can get the other NATO members involved, it might actually get Putin's attention.  What to do next, I don't know.  But I'm a system administrator, not a diplomat who is supposed to know what to do.  I do know, however, that doing nothing is not going to help.

Wait, what? We have a treaty with them? They're in NATO?


In 1994 the US and the UK, as part of NATO, signed a treaty with the Ukraine to help them defend their borders.  In exchange, the Ukraine gave up all their nukes.  It seemed like a good idea at the time.  That treaty is still valid.
 
2014-03-01 06:24:10 PM  

OgreMagi: In 1994


Oops, I was off.
 
2014-03-01 06:26:48 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.

Would we? Would we really invade Cuba?

One of these things is not like the other.


Considering the unrest in the Ukraine and the strategic importance of their naval base in that area? Them moving troops in to secure it is not surprising.

Cuba is not in the least bit similar. We have a ton of naval bases we can use so losing access to Cuba wouldn't cripple our navy. Russia doesn't have the same options. They need that base a lot more than we need Cuba. And yeah, if we were in a similar situation you're damn right we'd do the same thing.
 
2014-03-01 06:28:08 PM  
Ukraine is Weak!
 
2014-03-01 06:29:40 PM  

MechaPyx: Adolf Oliver Nipples: MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.

Would we? Would we really invade Cuba?

One of these things is not like the other.

Considering the unrest in the Ukraine and the strategic importance of their naval base in that area? Them moving troops in to secure it is not surprising.

Cuba is not in the least bit similar. We have a ton of naval bases we can use so losing access to Cuba wouldn't cripple our navy. Russia doesn't have the same options. They need that base a lot more than we need Cuba. And yeah, if we were in a similar situation you're damn right we'd do the same thing.


Why doesn't Russia adopt the Cuba solution? Work out with Ukraine a lease on the Crimean ports. They'd whine as much as Cuba, and get as much response, but it works.
 
2014-03-01 06:31:18 PM  
And the chicken hawk brigade is out in force

This will be good
 
2014-03-01 06:32:10 PM  

Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."


That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.
 
2014-03-01 06:32:33 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 06:33:57 PM  
That article read like it was written by a dyslexic Hottentot.  On drugs.
 
2014-03-01 06:34:07 PM  

macross87: Ukraine is Weak!


img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 06:34:09 PM  
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-01 06:34:26 PM  

Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.


Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.
 
2014-03-01 06:34:33 PM  
The chicken hawk rage on Monday morning is going to be deafening. It'll be be fin reminding them how Putin was their hero just a week ago.
 
2014-03-01 06:36:07 PM  
Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.
 
2014-03-01 06:36:21 PM  
Of course, in this, Obama stands alone. Not like has an NFL team of advisors both civilan and military. He's just sorta sitting around that Oval Office watching this go down on CNN, blustering "errr well I don't know what to do! Maybe I should go ask a data-entry monkey on one of those websites, they always know what to do."
 
2014-03-01 06:36:33 PM  

Boojum2k: MechaPyx: Adolf Oliver Nipples: MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.

Would we? Would we really invade Cuba?

One of these things is not like the other.

Considering the unrest in the Ukraine and the strategic importance of their naval base in that area? Them moving troops in to secure it is not surprising.

Cuba is not in the least bit similar. We have a ton of naval bases we can use so losing access to Cuba wouldn't cripple our navy. Russia doesn't have the same options. They need that base a lot more than we need Cuba. And yeah, if we were in a similar situation you're damn right we'd do the same thing.

Why doesn't Russia adopt the Cuba solution? Work out with Ukraine a lease on the Crimean ports. They'd whine as much as Cuba, and get as much response, but it works.


I don't know. I'm not Russian. I could see Russia making a case for succession for Crimea and the surrounding area though.
 
433 [TotalFark]
2014-03-01 06:36:58 PM  
They're just setting up for the infrastructure needed for the Russian Olympic victory parade.
 
2014-03-01 06:37:07 PM  

SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.


So what should he have done, O Great Armchair General?
 
2014-03-01 06:37:38 PM  
Why do I have a feeling that if Obama announced tomorrow that he was sending troops into Ukraine to help protect its borders that the Republicans would suddenly be the biggest Pacifists on the face of the earth?
 
2014-03-01 06:37:46 PM  
Nothing in the article says that Russia has 'invaded' the Crimea. The news from some time ago that the parliament (lol, rubber stamp) have given putin approval to move troops there is not the same as actually moving troops there. There is hyperbole and then there is this headline..
 
2014-03-01 06:38:02 PM  

StanTheMan: [fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 599x576]


Until the US and Russia eliminate their vast stockpiles of thermonuclear warheads, any tension between the two countries is a great threat to the entire planet. With that said, this action by Russia is really no threat to the US whatsoever.
 
2014-03-01 06:38:07 PM  
Damn it, Russia.
 
2014-03-01 06:38:13 PM  

AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.


Conversely, it could be said that you've just made an argument for marginalizing the problem.

I wonder how the women in Bosnia would have appreciated your indifference.
 
jvl
2014-03-01 06:38:19 PM  

ManateeGag: What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?


Difficulty: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

The Russians wouldn't be invading a nuke-armed Ukraine. This is our fault, so hand-wringing won't cut it.

The Russians will probably try to play this as "the old gov't is legit, so the US should invade the rest of the Ukraine and force them to unify with the legitimate Ukraine."  Motherbearfarkers.
 
2014-03-01 06:39:05 PM  
Chimea has a decent amount of Muslims if I remember right so there's another -5 penalty to the stability/civility roll.
 
2014-03-01 06:39:16 PM  

Pincy: Why do I have a feeling that if Obama announced tomorrow that he was sending troops into Ukraine to help protect its borders that the Republicans would suddenly be the biggest Pacifists on the face of the earth?


'Why is Obama risking World War 3 over people who WANT to join Russia?! On behalf of the MUSLIM Tartars?! IMPEACH!"
 
2014-03-01 06:39:59 PM  

SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.


Nothing ensures stability and peace like a superpower nation constantly throwing itself into unrelated conflicts on the other side of the world, where no one is threatening us or our citizens, and ignoring the immediate and long-term financial and political negative effects. If only today, right now, we can show footage of american steel and brawn touching down in a country most people can't find on a map, we could be a better nation forever. Because Murica.
 
2014-03-01 06:41:00 PM  

Boojum2k: OgreMagi: In 1994

Oops, I was off.


Close enough.  Actually, I was wondering if I was the one who got the year wrong.
 
2014-03-01 06:42:02 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: We need to stay as far away from this as possible. Let Russia and the Ukraine have it out, keep it from spreading, and do nothing else. This is straight from the Bad Old Days, and I for one don't really want to get nuked. Except for Philadelphia, they're fair game.


And Detroit.
 
2014-03-01 06:42:06 PM  

LordJiro: Pincy: Why do I have a feeling that if Obama announced tomorrow that he was sending troops into Ukraine to help protect its borders that the Republicans would suddenly be the biggest Pacifists on the face of the earth?

'Why is Obama risking World War 3 over people who WANT to join Russia?! On behalf of the MUSLIM NAZI Tartars?! IMPEACH!"


FOTFY
 
2014-03-01 06:42:09 PM  

StanTheMan: [fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 599x576]


And of course the left ridiculed Romney since alinsky is way up inside their ass tickling them and making their zombie brains follow absurd nasty direction.
 
2014-03-01 06:42:11 PM  

jvl: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.


Hopefully the language of that treaty is very vague.
 
2014-03-01 06:42:16 PM  

SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.


Why won't Obama lead us to war in order to build peace??!!
i13.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-01 06:42:17 PM  

Pincy: Why do I have a feeling that if Obama announced tomorrow that he was sending troops into Ukraine to help protect its borders that the Republicans would suddenly be the biggest Pacifists on the face of the earth?


I'm sure someone would play the "Why is Obama helping the bro-Nazi rioters who overthrew a legitimately elected president?" card.
 
2014-03-01 06:43:15 PM  
www.laweekly.com

Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue....
 
2014-03-01 06:44:35 PM  
Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this
 
2014-03-01 06:45:36 PM  

jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this


Is that sort of like saying "the blacks" in a way?
 
2014-03-01 06:45:41 PM  

jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this


What is it?
 
2014-03-01 06:47:03 PM  
I think we should do nothing.

Do not speak in specifics or generality.

Just keep out of it.

But if the President does have to do something, send over a group of diplomats to try and resolve the issue as peacefully as possible.

And make sure that the diplomats are gay - that way, we rub Putin's face in it and make sure that the most important issue in the world is resolved.
 
2014-03-01 06:47:10 PM  

IronTom: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

What is it?


Ukraine, according to the people living there. Apparently "The Ukraine" was the approved term by the U.S.S.R., to establish it as a region, not a nation.
 
2014-03-01 06:48:07 PM  

SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.


But enough about Bush.
 
2014-03-01 06:48:14 PM  
We have about as much control over Russia invading Crimea as Russia would have over us invading Juarez, Mexico. And about as much of an interest in stopping it as they would, too.

I know the chicken hawk neocons in this country go absolutely apeshiat whenever another country does something militarily because in their world America must ALWAYS do something to stop it. But most of those nutjobs couldn't point Crimea out on a map, so they can eff off as always.
 
2014-03-01 06:48:37 PM  
Well, it is March.

They should have waited a month.  Then if their invasion failed, they could pass it off as an April Fool's prank.
 
2014-03-01 06:49:26 PM  

jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this


Also, these invaders are not thugs, teabaggers.
 
2014-03-01 06:49:30 PM  
In short, since I've posted it in other threads about this. "The Ukraine" is a rough English translation of the Russian practice of treating Ukraine as a region and not a country. The Russian language has no articles, but they use prepositions in a similar manner. There is a preposition you use to say that you are in a country, but you use a different on with Ukraine. And it's the only country in the world where you do.
 
2014-03-01 06:50:02 PM  

Boojum2k: IronTom: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

What is it?

Ukraine, according to the people living there. Apparently "The Ukraine" was the approved term by the U.S.S.R., to establish it as a region, not a nation.


Odd since Russian (along with all other slavic languages) doesn't use articles. Surely there's an equivalent word ending.
 
2014-03-01 06:50:13 PM  

SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.


You can always tell a chickenhawk
 
2014-03-01 06:50:52 PM  

Lord_Baull: SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.

Why won't Obama lead us to war in order to build peace??!!
[i13.photobucket.com image 360x195]


dronewarsuk.files.wordpress.com

Obama's gonna appease the sh*t out of you.
 
ecl
2014-03-01 06:51:00 PM  
Borock Oblahmah is powerless to stop PUTIN ON THE RITZ!
<Cue music from Enemy at the Gates>

cdn.gifbay.com
 
2014-03-01 06:51:41 PM  

Lord_Baull: The ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, said Obama must "lead a meaningful, unified response"



Have any of these warmongers suggested what, EXACTLY, we should do about this? And would any of their suggestions NOT end in a real life replay of the end of War Games?
 
2014-03-01 06:51:47 PM  

jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this


I'll try, but if I slip, it's not because I'm pro-Russian here.  "The Ukraine" just sounds normal, like "the United States".
 
2014-03-01 06:52:03 PM  

ZAZ: Crimea is gone, but we should make sure Putin knows if Kiev is threatened there will be a cruise missile with his name on it.


If their entire presence in Ukraine is to see how far they can go before meeting resistance, Russia has some experience in surrounding and blockading capital cities.
 
2014-03-01 06:53:15 PM  

KeatingFive: SlothB77: Nothing leads to sustainable peace like a weak president unwilling to be a force for good in the world.

You can always tell a chickenhawk


You just can't tell him much.
 
2014-03-01 06:53:19 PM  

jigger: Boojum2k: IronTom: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

What is it?

Ukraine, according to the people living there. Apparently "The Ukraine" was the approved term by the U.S.S.R., to establish it as a region, not a nation.

Odd since Russian (along with all other slavic languages) doesn't use articles. Surely there's an equivalent word ending.


It's done with prepositions in Russian
 
2014-03-01 06:53:58 PM  

Cataholic: I suspect a sternly-worded letter with strenuous objections is on its way.



And I suspect that you still don't know whether the GOP was for or against our actions in Libya.
 
2014-03-01 06:54:12 PM  
Just divide the country in half and be done with it.  Obviously the people in the east don't want to be under western influence any more than people in the west want to be under Russian influence, so don't make them.

And, as a side benefit, all dumbasses who say "the Ukraine" won't be able to do that any more.
 
2014-03-01 06:54:34 PM  

jchuffyman: jigger: Boojum2k: IronTom: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

What is it?

Ukraine, according to the people living there. Apparently "The Ukraine" was the approved term by the U.S.S.R., to establish it as a region, not a nation.

Odd since Russian (along with all other slavic languages) doesn't use articles. Surely there's an equivalent word ending.

It's done with prepositions in Russian


In Russia, prepositions do you!
 
2014-03-01 06:54:48 PM  
Place your money on the table!

img.fark.net

VS

img.fark.net

Winner takes all!
 
2014-03-01 06:55:43 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: Lord_Baull: The ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, said Obama must "lead a meaningful, unified response"


Have any of these warmongers suggested what, EXACTLY, we should do about this? And would any of their suggestions NOT end in a real life replay of the end of War Games?


Obama needs to rattle his saber HARDER!!1
 
2014-03-01 06:56:54 PM  

PunGent: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

I'll try, but if I slip, it's not because I'm pro-Russian here.  "The Ukraine" just sounds normal, like "the United States".


Alright, if you think "The America" sounds normal
 
2014-03-01 06:56:58 PM  
Once the Russians take control of the surface they will take control of you.
 
2014-03-01 06:57:36 PM  
In before all the armchair quarterbacks.

Oh wait...
 
2014-03-01 06:57:56 PM  
This will end very quietly with the partition of the Ukraine.
 
2014-03-01 06:59:08 PM  

aerojockey: Just divide the country in half and be done with it.  Obviously the people in the east don't want to be under western influence any more than people in the west want to be under Russian influence, so don't make them.


Maybe build a big wall?  Some sort of metallic drape?
 
2014-03-01 07:00:08 PM  

Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.


I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.
 
2014-03-01 07:00:37 PM  
Wouldn't have this problem if we would just fund XCOM. Those units can be deployed anywhere on the map. Just spam them for the next few turns and the asian land issue is pretty much solved. Thanks nanotechnology!
 
2014-03-01 07:01:29 PM  

jvl: ManateeGag: What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Difficulty: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

The Russians wouldn't be invading a nuke-armed Ukraine. This is our fault, so hand-wringing won't cut it.

The Russians will probably try to play this as "the old gov't is legit, so the US should invade the rest of the Ukraine and force them to unify with the legitimate Ukraine."  Motherbearfarkers.


No it didn't. The agreement was that the U.S, UK and Russia would respect its borders and stay out of its business. As far as I know there isn't any provision saying the U.S has to be Captain Save a Hoe, especially when it seems that an area of the country is cozying up to Russia
 
2014-03-01 07:01:56 PM  
Send Cossacks.
 
2014-03-01 07:02:04 PM  
Absolute nonsense. Does Putin expect anyone to believe that he's rolling tanks into a sovereign nation out of concern that a few Russian citizens might be lynched? Can anyone point to a single example of mob violence against Russian nationals in Ukraine? This is nothing more than Russia viewing Ukraine as a colony. Putin intends to invade and conquer the nation, oust the democratic leadership, and forcefully install a puppet dictator of his choosing.
 
2014-03-01 07:02:23 PM  

fusillade762: aerojockey: Just divide the country in half and be done with it.  Obviously the people in the east don't want to be under western influence any more than people in the west want to be under Russian influence, so don't make them.

Maybe build a big wall?  Some sort of metallic drape?


You sir get 2 free hours of Internet
 
2014-03-01 07:03:01 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.



Realistically? What can be done? Any military action is likely to escalate very quickly into all-out nuclear war. We're not dealing with a dipshiat like Saddam Hussein here. We're dealing with the country with the 2nd largest number of nuclear missiles on the planet.
 
2014-03-01 07:03:06 PM  

stratagos: Livinglush: Finally time to kick some ruskies.

When is your flight? You certainly wouldn't suggest getting into a fight without being willing to be one of the first casualties, *right*?


14 years and counting in the USAF. Shut the hell up.
 
2014-03-01 07:03:12 PM  
Subby, and for that matter, most of the US and US news outlets don't seem to realize that Russia did not in fact invade the Crimea, it's hard to invade something when, you know, your military has been there for almost 100 years or so. The treaties between Russia and Ukraine actually allow for free movement of Russian forces within the Crimean peninsula, legally, these guys are just out taking a stroll and loitering until they forcibly wrest control of something from the Ukrainian gov't, which they haven't. Pro-Russian Ukrainians haven't resisted, shots haven't been fired, they're essentially "occupying" the space by loitering.

Now, where things will get interesting is if they move OUT of the Crimea and into areas where they aren't allowed. Then, and only then, is there reason to expect shiat to go down in a bad way.
 
2014-03-01 07:03:17 PM  

hi13760: Place your money on the table!

[img.fark.net image 263x179]

VS

[img.fark.net image 263x177]

Winner takes all!


One question so I know which way to go:  will this fight happen in the rain?
 
2014-03-01 07:03:28 PM  

CreampuffCasperMilktoast: So for Sarah Palin.... do we start calling calling her "Nostradumbass"... or is just a blind squirrel thing?


If history is any guide, she would have declared a war and then quit halfway through.
 
2014-03-01 07:03:55 PM  

IronTom: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

What is it?


It's a country on tne Black Sea, but that's not important right now.
 
2014-03-01 07:04:11 PM  

Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.


Yes, yes they do expect an immediate answer.

This is their life - the people on here are their society.

They have nothing else.

And eating dinner? - Doesn't Mom just bring the mac and cheese down to you?
 
2014-03-01 07:04:35 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: Chimea has a decent amount of Muslims if I remember right so there's another -5 penalty to the stability/civility roll.


The Crimean Tartars are the folks actually native to the area, and were the majority until the Soviets starved 100,000 of them to death in the 1920's and then forcibly removed most of the remainder during WWII, which resulted in another mass starvation. They are the ones most likely to resist integration with Russia.
 
2014-03-01 07:04:57 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: We need to stay as far away from this as possible. Let Russia and the Ukraine have it out, keep it from spreading, and do nothing else. This is straight from the Bad Old Days, and I for one don't really want to get nuked. Except for Philadelphia, they're fair game.


Oh f*ck that. If Russia were to nuke us in retaliation for taking part in a UN defense of a sovereign state, we would end all life in Russia post haste. We could point over 400 nuclear devices at them within a moment's notice.
 
2014-03-01 07:05:25 PM  

dukeblue219: The Crimean Tartars Tatars


FTFM.
 
2014-03-01 07:06:29 PM  

jchuffyman: PunGent: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

I'll try, but if I slip, it's not because I'm pro-Russian here.  "The Ukraine" just sounds normal, like "the United States".

Alright, if you think "The America" sounds normal


To clarify, standard English practice is to only have the article "the" in the name of a country when it starts with an adjective or a noun that is not the actual name of the country. The Russian Federation versus Russia. The People's Republic of China versus China. Notable exceptions include The Netherlands (which is mostly historical), but beyond that, it is very rare when referring to an independent country by name
 
2014-03-01 07:06:52 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: This will end very quietly with the partition of the Ukraine.


Most likely.

I wonder what name the Eastern Ukraine will pick for itself....Russo-Crimea?
 
2014-03-01 07:07:17 PM  
You couldn't pay me enough to be president. Not that anyone is exactly clamoring for that...
 
2014-03-01 07:07:22 PM  
This will be Obama's Benghazi.
 
2014-03-01 07:07:29 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.

Yes, yes they do expect an immediate answer.

This is their life - the people on here are their society.

They have nothing else.

And eating dinner? - Doesn't Mom just bring the mac and cheese down to you?


Sometimes. Tonight we ordered Chinese.
 
2014-03-01 07:07:57 PM  

MisterLoki: You couldn't pay me enough to be president. Not that anyone is exactly clamoring for that...


You and me both.
 
2014-03-01 07:08:08 PM  
The Crimea was historically not a part of Ukraine. This is a recent development (1954) and disputed. Ask yourself what business is it of ours (the US) that a Russian state is protecting ethnic Russians in a traditionally Russian territory. Russia has the Black Sea Fleet based in Crimea.

I was in Ukraine when the USSR fell apart. Hungarian flags were being hoisted in the Hungarian majority areas in the west. The former USSR is a polyglot of peoples and loyalties and Ukraine is no exception.
 
2014-03-01 07:08:20 PM  
ManateeGag [TotalFark]

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?


I want a commander in chief who attends national security briefings*. That too much to ask?


* especially in "delicate times".
 
2014-03-01 07:08:39 PM  

100 Watt Walrus: It's complicated.

Ukrainian presidential election, 2010
[i.imgur.com image 850x478]


If cooler heads may prevail, cutting the country in half seems like a very sensible choice. Won't everyone be happy then? Or is the west the major economic producer, and therefore a target for Russia to maintain control over?
 
2014-03-01 07:08:48 PM  

Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.



I fail to see where anyone demanded anything. But man, you sure got your panties waddified, didn't you. Rowl, kitten!
 
2014-03-01 07:09:03 PM  
I wonder how Poland is feeling right about now.
 
2014-03-01 07:09:17 PM  

sleeps in trees: Can I just say this was probably the most balanced comment I've read all day.  The US has enough on it's plate.  Let someone on the other side of the pond deal with it.  If it really is offensive, sanctions would be in order.  Stop being the world police and look after your own country.  We need a strong, united US that does not have its politicians willing to let it burn to make a point.


If it's really that big of a problem, the rest of Europe should be able to handle it just fine. Why can't we just be the big guy standing in the back of the room? Even the Ukrainians aren't resisting this yet -- why in the world should the US be deploying troops to the region unless it's just to pick a fight?

If it's about Russian expansion to their former subjects, let the Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians, and hell maybe even the Finns be the first line of defense here. If the Russians are threatening all of Europe I'm pretty sure the British, French, and German armies can still put up a fight. The US cannot be the ones leading the charge here. And I'm not exactly a pacifist by any means.
 
2014-03-01 07:09:40 PM  

LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.


Pretty much this. People demanding that we rush in to liberate the Ukraine completely over-estimate the amount of leverage we have in that region.

/this is really the EU's tangle to try to figure out
//which makes me even less optimistic
 
2014-03-01 07:09:55 PM  

Krymson Tyde: MisterLoki: You couldn't pay me enough to be president. Not that anyone is exactly clamoring for that...

You and me both.


This is one time I don't envy the guy. No one wants to get in an armed conflict with Russia over this, at least not me. Ukraine will press the US to act under its treaty obligations. Good luck with that one.
 
2014-03-01 07:10:21 PM  

jchuffyman: jchuffyman: PunGent: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

I'll try, but if I slip, it's not because I'm pro-Russian here.  "The Ukraine" just sounds normal, like "the United States".

Alright, if you think "The America" sounds normal

To clarify, standard English practice is to only have the article "the" in the name of a country when it starts with an adjective or a noun that is not the actual name of the country. The Russian Federation versus Russia. The People's Republic of China versus China. Notable exceptions include The Netherlands (which is mostly historical), but beyond that, it is very rare when referring to an independent country by name


I've heard "The Sudan"....but now it's in two pieces so it's Sudan and South Sudan.
 
2014-03-01 07:10:38 PM  

Tommy Moo: 100 Watt Walrus: It's complicated.

Ukrainian presidential election, 2010
[i.imgur.com image 850x478]

If cooler heads may prevail, cutting the country in half seems like a very sensible choice. Won't everyone be happy then? Or is the west the major economic producer, and therefore a target for Russia to maintain control over?


I agree - it's worked so well in Korea it should be the go to move in times like this.
 
2014-03-01 07:10:42 PM  
figured this would happen if Czar Putin wants the Crimea he gets the Crimea and the Russian parliament is a rubber stamp.


Things could get real messy.

That said in terms of military equip and tech the Russians are way behind the west save perhaps in fighter jets but even there i think they are in large out classed.

Putin most likely is hoping to avoid  a shooting war with any one besides Ukraine who he knows he can best, NATO he knows is another matter and the Russian Navy is a joke compared to the US and other than in subs it always was.

If it came to war and assuming it stayed on nuclear and China stayed out and Best Korea did not try any shenanigans NATO would likely drive the Russians out of the Ukraine it would be bloody on both sides.

As for Putin wanting to protect  those ethnic Russians in Ukraine if they want to be Russian so much let Putin relocate them back to Russia seeing as they were sent from Russia  in the first place.

For bonus points kick the Russians out of the black sea base and lease it to the US and watch Putin lose his shiat.
 
2014-03-01 07:11:13 PM  

volodya: The Crimea was historically not a part of Ukraine. This is a recent development (1954) and disputed. Ask yourself what business is it of ours (the US) that a Russian state is protecting ethnic Russians in a traditionally Russian territory. Russia has the Black Sea Fleet based in Crimea.

I was in Ukraine when the USSR fell apart. Hungarian flags were being hoisted in the Hungarian majority areas in the west. The former USSR is a polyglot of peoples and loyalties and Ukraine is no exception.


Despite all my grammar spamming of these threads, I agree. The Crimea is a strange case, and it maybe should be Russian. The question remains whether Russia will respect the rights of the rest of Ukraine or not, however.
 
2014-03-01 07:11:51 PM  
Don't you get it? We have to kill. As a nation, we simply must murder. NOBAMA should stop flip-flopping and  press the button already.ICBMs should be hurtling through the sky.  Our children should bathe in the searing rays of radiation as their skin peels and their faces melt and they die in fire or slowly over a few days. Millions upon millions must die horribly and the world must be reduced to ashes. When will SLOWBAMA act??? Why must we continue to live and breath normally? WHY OSAMA BIN BONGO? WHHHYYY??
 
2014-03-01 07:12:15 PM  

Bonzo_1116: jchuffyman: jchuffyman: PunGent: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

I'll try, but if I slip, it's not because I'm pro-Russian here.  "The Ukraine" just sounds normal, like "the United States".

Alright, if you think "The America" sounds normal

To clarify, standard English practice is to only have the article "the" in the name of a country when it starts with an adjective or a noun that is not the actual name of the country. The Russian Federation versus Russia. The People's Republic of China versus China. Notable exceptions include The Netherlands (which is mostly historical), but beyond that, it is very rare when referring to an independent country by name

I've heard "The Sudan"....but now it's in two pieces so it's Sudan and South Sudan.


Yeah, me too. I bet you could find some sort of regional basis for that as well
 
2014-03-01 07:12:25 PM  
Obama knows his options, and his options are crap. Putin was bound to go in if his puppet government fell.  Obama and the Joint Chiefs have known it for months. The DOD war plans for this exact eventuality were probably written up 20 years ago.

Our options suck. The nearest NATO ground forces are close to 1000 miles away from the Crimea. The Russians are marching distance.  We cannot stop him from taking eastern Ukraine.  We'd could hit him with air power, but then he'd just invade the rest of the country.  We'd eventually have to push him out at tremendous expense of lives and resources.

There is nothing President Obama, a President McCain, or a President Romney could, or would do.  Ukraine had a chance to join the EU, maybe NATO.  They voted in the wrong asshole.  It's mostly their own damn fault.

Long term though, it's not all bad. Western Ukraine will be fast tracked for EU and NATO membership. Russia will suffer harsh sanctions. Europe will accelerate their moves to wean themselves off Russian gas and oil. Russia makes almost all their money from petro dollars, this will be devastating to Russia's long-term economic prospects.

Looking back a decade from now, this will be seen as a very shortsighted move by Putin. He'll have lost a lot more than he gained.
 
2014-03-01 07:12:33 PM  
I can almost see the phone call.....

Obama: You are violating international law. Pull back to your bases.
Putin (hand over phone): Advance the attack!
 
2014-03-01 07:12:36 PM  

Tommy Moo: If cooler heads may prevail, cutting the country in half seems like a very sensible choice. Won't everyone be happy then? Or is the west the major economic producer, and therefore a target for Russia to maintain control over?


No, it's the other way around from the information I've seen -- the western (pro-EU, if you will) portions won't want to give up the wealthier eastern part of the country for nothing.

I know energy has been discussed as well, but even though the major European gas pipelines traverse Ukraine, they originate in Russia anyway, so I the Russians already have enough control over that. Not sure why they'd need to control more of the pipeline.
 
2014-03-01 07:13:16 PM  
It'll end up okay, it's not like we are actually going to do anything about it.
 
2014-03-01 07:13:24 PM  

jchuffyman: Bonzo_1116: jchuffyman: jchuffyman: PunGent: jchuffyman: Once again, do not call the country "the Ukraine" unless you are actually pro-Russian in all of this

I'll try, but if I slip, it's not because I'm pro-Russian here.  "The Ukraine" just sounds normal, like "the United States".

Alright, if you think "The America" sounds normal

To clarify, standard English practice is to only have the article "the" in the name of a country when it starts with an adjective or a noun that is not the actual name of the country. The Russian Federation versus Russia. The People's Republic of China versus China. Notable exceptions include The Netherlands (which is mostly historical), but beyond that, it is very rare when referring to an independent country by name

I've heard "The Sudan"....but now it's in two pieces so it's Sudan and South Sudan.

Yeah, me too. I bet you could find some sort of regional basis for that as well


The Gambia
 
2014-03-01 07:13:44 PM  
Paging spawn73, spawn73...

Cleanup on aisle 73, reality is all over the place.
 
2014-03-01 07:13:45 PM  

grimlock1972: figured this would happen if Czar Putin wants the Crimea he gets the Crimea and the Russian parliament is a rubber stamp.


Things could get real messy.

That said in terms of military equip and tech the Russians are way behind the west save perhaps in fighter jets but even there i think they are in large out classed.

Putin most likely is hoping to avoid  a shooting war with any one besides Ukraine who he knows he can best, NATO he knows is another matter and the Russian Navy is a joke compared to the US and other than in subs it always was.

If it came to war and assuming it stayed on nuclear and China stayed out and Best Korea did not try any shenanigans NATO would likely drive the Russians out of the Ukraine it would be bloody on both sides.

As for Putin wanting to protect  those ethnic Russians in Ukraine if they want to be Russian so much let Putin relocate them back to Russia seeing as they were sent from Russia  in the first place.

For bonus points kick the Russians out of the black sea base and lease it to the US and watch Putin lose his shiat.


Crimea, until the 50s, was Russian, not Ukrainian. And, until '91, it was still under Russian control as part of the USSR.

They weren't 'sent' from Russia. They were BORN there, the land just changed hands.
 
2014-03-01 07:13:56 PM  
Meanwhile

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-03-01 07:14:59 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 07:16:08 PM  

johnny_vegas: Meanwhile

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 800x448]


Jebus, what won't people stuff in their maws?
 
2014-03-01 07:16:24 PM  

jchuffyman: I've heard "The Sudan"....but now it's in two pieces so it's Sudan and South Sudan.

Yeah, me too. I bet you could find some sort of regional basis for that as well


Wikipedia comes through with the infos


The Sudan is the name given to a geographic region to the south of the Sahara, stretching from Western to eastern Central Africa. The name derives from the Arabic bilād as-sūdān ( ) or "land of the Blacks" (an expression denoting West and Northern-Central Africa[1]). The phrase "The Sudan" is also used to refer specifically to the modern-day country of Sudan, the western part of which forms part of the larger region, and from which South Sudan gained its independence in 2011.
 
2014-03-01 07:18:22 PM  

Bonzo_1116: jchuffyman: I've heard "The Sudan"....but now it's in two pieces so it's Sudan and South Sudan.

Yeah, me too. I bet you could find some sort of regional basis for that as well

Wikipedia comes through with the infos


The Sudan is the name given to a geographic region to the south of the Sahara, stretching from Western to eastern Central Africa. The name derives from the Arabic bilād as-sūdān ( ) or "land of the Blacks" (an expression denoting West and Northern-Central Africa[1]). The phrase "The Sudan" is also used to refer specifically to the modern-day country of Sudan, the western part of which forms part of the larger region, and from which South Sudan gained its independence in 2011.


You know, like The Iraq and such as.
 
2014-03-01 07:18:58 PM  

bobothemagnificent:


Haha yep. The enemy actually escalates DURING a call from the President warning them to stand down.

NOW you're a biatch.
 
2014-03-01 07:19:32 PM  

AlgertMan: abiigdog: Putey doesn't give 2 farks about obamas warning, russians never fear strongly worded letters.

That's because most can't read.


Yeah. Maybe Obama didn't use enough of those crazy backward Rs.
 
2014-03-01 07:20:05 PM  

cchris_39: bobothemagnificent:

Haha yep. The enemy actually escalates DURING a call from the President warning them to stand down.

NOW you're a biatch.


You sound happy about this.
 
2014-03-01 07:22:16 PM  

LordJiro: Crimea, until the 50s, was Russian, not Ukrainian. And, until '91, it was still under Russian control as part of the USSR.



It was part of the Russian Empire since the 18th century, sure, but not strictly "Russian" ethnically. Until the 1900's the ethnic Russians were a minority in Crimea. The Soviets either killed or deported everyone else in the 1920's-1940's and then the land was given to Ukraine in 1954.
 
2014-03-01 07:22:59 PM  

Keith Dudemeister: cchris_39: bobothemagnificent:

Haha yep. The enemy actually escalates DURING a call from the President warning them to stand down.

NOW you're a biatch.

You sound happy about this.


They get to portray Obama as 'weak', make their fascist, corrupt, homophobic, oligarch-loving buddy Putin look like a badass, and pretend they know more about foreign policy than the Commander-in-chief of the US military and all of his advisors.

Of course they're happy.
 
2014-03-01 07:24:18 PM  
Yeah, in the wake of the GWBush/Cheney disgrace, I'm not really in a mood to call out anyone on where their tank commanders sleep at night.

Just try not to massacre any women and children, Mr. Putin. Looks bad on the resume'.
 
2014-03-01 07:24:24 PM  

volodya: The Crimea was historically not a part of Ukraine. This is a recent development (1954) and disputed. Ask yourself what business is it of ours (the US) that a Russian state is protecting ethnic Russians in a traditionally Russian territory. Russia has the Black Sea Fleet based in Crimea.


Traditionally as in 'since the Soviet Union, within the lifetime of a large part of the population, patriated large numbers of people there in order to confirm
their dominance while deporting the locals to labour camps'? Crimea is traditionally Crimean not Russian. It makes a LOT of sense for it to be an autonomous region but none at all for it to be Russian. Not for Crimea anyway.. it makes sense for Russia.
 
2014-03-01 07:25:36 PM  

RandomRandom: Obama knows his options, and his options are crap. Putin was bound to go in if his puppet government fell.  Obama and the Joint Chiefs have known it for months. The DOD war plans for this exact eventuality were probably written up 20 years ago.

Our options suck. The nearest NATO ground forces are close to 1000 miles away from the Crimea. The Russians are marching distance.  We cannot stop him from taking eastern Ukraine.  We'd could hit him with air power, but then he'd just invade the rest of the country.  We'd eventually have to push him out at tremendous expense of lives and resources.

There is nothing President Obama, a President McCain, or a President Romney could, or would do.  Ukraine had a chance to join the EU, maybe NATO.  They voted in the wrong asshole.  It's mostly their own damn fault.

Long term though, it's not all bad. Western Ukraine will be fast tracked for EU and NATO membership. Russia will suffer harsh sanctions. Europe will accelerate their moves to wean themselves off Russian gas and oil. Russia makes almost all their money from petro dollars, this will be devastating to Russia's long-term economic prospects.

Looking back a decade from now, this will be seen as a very shortsighted move by Putin. He'll have lost a lot more than he gained.


I think the last part of this post is especially true.  Few wingers are recognizing how weak Putin is right now.  Russia is nearly a backwater (again), and it's only their natural resources keeping them in the game.  Western Europe finding other fuel sources or turning away in any way is a big risk for them.
 
2014-03-01 07:26:09 PM  

LordJiro: Keith Dudemeister: cchris_39: bobothemagnificent:

Haha yep. The enemy actually escalates DURING a call from the President warning them to stand down.

NOW you're a biatch.

You sound happy about this.

They get to portray Obama as 'weak', make their fascist, corrupt, homophobic, oligarch-loving buddy Putin look like a badass, and pretend they know more about foreign policy than the Commander-in-chief of the US military and all of his advisors.

Of course they're happy.


Republicans: expecting diplomatic calls to accomplish immediate results, but invade countries rather than try diplomacy.
 
2014-03-01 07:27:19 PM  

Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.


I fail to see where anyone demanded anything. But man, you sure got your panties waddified, didn't you. Rowl, kitten!


This is funny, it is like nabb threadshiat and splashed all over himself.
 
2014-03-01 07:27:53 PM  
The only thing surprising to me so far is how surprised some people are by Russian troops in the Crimea in this interregnum or that western influence in any way would change that.  The willingness some folks have to start a war or seemingly a desire to see one develop from this is irrational.  I don't even think we're going to see an annexing of Crimea but quite likely a very strong camp and voice for this region in the coming dialogues on the Ukraine's future.
 
2014-03-01 07:27:53 PM  

Bonzo_1116: jchuffyman: I've heard "The Sudan"....but now it's in two pieces so it's Sudan and South Sudan.

Yeah, me too. I bet you could find some sort of regional basis for that as well

Wikipedia comes through with the infos


The Sudan is the name given to a geographic region to the south of the Sahara, stretching from Western to eastern Central Africa. The name derives from the Arabic bilād as-sūdān ( ) or "land of the Blacks" (an expression denoting West and Northern-Central Africa[1]). The phrase "The Sudan" is also used to refer specifically to the modern-day country of Sudan, the western part of which forms part of the larger region, and from which South Sudan gained its independence in 2011.


Nice, Thanks! I really have no idea why I've been on a grammar crusade in all of these threads, but as an American currently living in Russia (soon leaving), I have heard so much bullshiat on this matter. And some of it boils down to the grammar of the Russian language. There is seriously a difference in prepositions if you are pro-Russian or pro-Ukrainian.
 
2014-03-01 07:28:19 PM  

Lord_Baull: LordJiro: Keith Dudemeister: cchris_39: bobothemagnificent:

Haha yep. The enemy actually escalates DURING a call from the President warning them to stand down.

NOW you're a biatch.

You sound happy about this.

They get to portray Obama as 'weak', make their fascist, corrupt, homophobic, oligarch-loving buddy Putin look like a badass, and pretend they know more about foreign policy than the Commander-in-chief of the US military and all of his advisors.

Of course they're happy.

Republicans: expecting diplomatic calls to accomplish immediate results, but invade countries rather than try diplomacy.


Hey, they need SOME excuse to keep paying their defense contractor buddies billions for shiat the military doesn't want.
 
2014-03-01 07:28:55 PM  

ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...


I want them to send a letter that says they are very cross... very cross INDEED!
 
2014-03-01 07:29:05 PM  

Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.


I fail to see where anyone demanded anything. But man, you sure got your panties waddified, didn't you. Rowl, kitten!



It's that strange irritable time between eating a large Chinese dinner, and having to go take a massive dump.  About thirty minutes.
 
2014-03-01 07:29:23 PM  

AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.


It's a legitimate concern. Just because it's never been your radar doesn't negate that.
 
2014-03-01 07:29:41 PM  
Meh,  Russia will protect their interests and bases in Crimea over the next months.    Obama will golf.

Russia will kind of bend some arms back and make sure Ukraine buckles under and there is a moderately pro Russia Government in place by summer.    The process will allow them to flex a bit and show off some hardware.

After things settle down, Obama will claim he brought peace to the whole Black Sea region single handed.
 
2014-03-01 07:30:42 PM  
What should Obama do?

Stop making threats he can't back up, and stop making promises he can't keep.

Unfortunately, his political base would shiat a brick if he didn't get up there and make those empty threats and promises, because as liberal progressives will tell you, words mean everything and actions mean nothing.

/even expecting a promise to be kept is racist
 
2014-03-01 07:33:03 PM  

LordJiro: Keith Dudemeister: cchris_39: bobothemagnificent:

Haha yep. The enemy actually escalates DURING a call from the President warning them to stand down.

NOW you're a biatch.

You sound happy about this.

They get to portray Obama as 'weak', make their fascist, corrupt, homophobic, oligarch-loving buddy Putin look like a badass, and pretend they know more about foreign policy than the Commander-in-chief of the US military and all of his advisors.

Of course they're happy.


Lol yeah we're all secret Bolsheviks.
 
2014-03-01 07:33:11 PM  

Tatterdemalian: What should Obama do?

Stop making threats he can't back up, and stop making promises he can't keep.

Unfortunately, his political base would shiat a brick if he didn't get up there and make those empty threats and promises, because as liberal progressives will tell you, words mean everything and actions mean nothing.

/even expecting a promise to be kept is racist


This is pretty solid. You hit most of the speaking points without actually offering a solution, and even managed to squeeze in race. Impressive! One tip -- next time use "libtards" instead of "liberal progressives." It's zippier.
 
2014-03-01 07:34:03 PM  

Tatterdemalian: because as liberal progressives will tell you, words mean everything and actions mean nothing.



You're thinking of today's American Christian.
 
2014-03-01 07:34:04 PM  

OgreMagi: stratagos: OgreMagi: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

We have a treaty obligation to help the Ukraine protect their border.  I personally don't want us involved in another war, but if we don't do something our international standing will be turned to shiat (more than it is now).

We could start by immediately declaring an embargo on all business with Russia.  If we can get the other NATO members involved, it might actually get Putin's attention.  What to do next, I don't know.  But I'm a system administrator, not a diplomat who is supposed to know what to do.  I do know, however, that doing nothing is not going to help.

Wait, what? We have a treaty with them? They're in NATO?

In 1994 the US and the UK, as part of NATO, signed a treaty with the Ukraine to help them defend their borders.  In exchange, the Ukraine gave up all their nukes.  It seemed like a good idea at the time.  That treaty is still valid.


Ah, the Budapest Memorandum. Let's see...
FTF treaty:
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

Looks like there is some wiggle-room there. "Respect" as in commitment but it's no oath to defend the borders. The West is going to look pretty bad if they let Russia walk allover the place unchallenged though. This is FAR worse than the Georgia situation.
 
2014-03-01 07:34:11 PM  
Place your money on the table

justafewthoughts.com
VS
www.armyrecognition.com

Winner takes all!!
 
rmz
2014-03-01 07:35:02 PM  

Tatterdemalian: What should Obama do?

Stop making threats he can't back up, and stop making promises he can't keep.

Unfortunately, his political base would shiat a brick if he didn't get up there and make those empty threats and promises, because as liberal progressives will tell you, words mean everything and actions mean nothing.

/even expecting a promise to be kept is racist


Yeah, because we all remember how much the GOP was in support of his decisive action in Libya. "Whoa, slow down! Let's not be too hasty!"
 
2014-03-01 07:35:47 PM  
I'm just afraid that the West will ignore the NATO pact and Kiev in.
 
2014-03-01 07:37:25 PM  

oxnard_montalvo: Place your money on the table

[justafewthoughts.com image 850x411]
VS
[www.armyrecognition.com image 850x640]

Winner takes all!!


A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.
 
2014-03-01 07:37:52 PM  

oxnard_montalvo: Place your money on the table

[justafewthoughts.com image 850x411]
VS
[www.armyrecognition.com image 850x640]

Winner takes all!!


Can't we just cede it back to the Mongolians?
 
2014-03-01 07:38:58 PM  
http://twitchy.com/2014/02/28/flashback-candidate-mitt-romney-ridicule d-for-cold-war-thinking/
 
2014-03-01 07:39:18 PM  

hi13760: Place your money on the table!

[img.fark.net image 263x179]

VS

[img.fark.net image 263x177]

Winner takes all!


No contest.
 
2014-03-01 07:39:24 PM  

rmz: Tatterdemalian: What should Obama do?

Stop making threats he can't back up, and stop making promises he can't keep.

Unfortunately, his political base would shiat a brick if he didn't get up there and make those empty threats and promises, because as liberal progressives will tell you, words mean everything and actions mean nothing.

/even expecting a promise to be kept is racist

Yeah, because we all remember how much the GOP was in support of his decisive action in Libya. "Whoa, slow down! Let's not be too hasty!"


And the support of his actions in Syria.

"Obama isn't doing anything about the Syrian government slaughtering civilians! Wait, but he can't help the rebels, either, because they're all terrorists. But he can't just send a strongly-worded letter, because that just makes America look weak!"
 
2014-03-01 07:40:05 PM  

Lord_Baull: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

More importantly, was President Obama answering his phone when this was happening. I was assured he wouldn't be.



Maybe he was on the phone with the pope and received Nun of the updates.
 
2014-03-01 07:40:36 PM  

rmz: Tatterdemalian: What should Obama do?

Stop making threats he can't back up, and stop making promises he can't keep.

Unfortunately, his political base would shiat a brick if he didn't get up there and make those empty threats and promises, because as liberal progressives will tell you, words mean everything and actions mean nothing.

/even expecting a promise to be kept is racist

Yeah, because we all remember how much the GOP was in support of his decisive action in Libya. "Whoa, slow down! Let's not be too hasty!"



Obama's decision to invade Libya with the army he had rather than the army he wanted cost 4000+ American lives. His unkept promise to deliver Osama Bin Laden dead or alive was just an empty threat as well.

I pine for the decisive actions of Bush.
 
2014-03-01 07:40:51 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 07:41:04 PM  
soepic.pl
 
2014-03-01 07:41:09 PM  

Krymson Tyde: This will be Obama's Benghazi.


replygif.net
 
2014-03-01 07:42:23 PM  

SlothB77: http://twitchy.com/2014/02/28/flashback-candidate-mitt-romney-ridicul e d-for-cold-war-thinking/


A heartfelt 'thank you' for reminding us that Romney is not president.
 
2014-03-01 07:43:51 PM  

Lord_Baull: SlothB77: http://twitchy.com/2014/02/28/flashback-candidate-mitt-romney-ridicul e d-for-cold-war-thinking/

A heartfelt 'thank you' for reminding us that Romney is not president.


Oh, great - now we have Russians posting on Fark
 
2014-03-01 07:44:29 PM  

Boojum2k: MechaPyx: Adolf Oliver Nipples: MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.

Would we? Would we really invade Cuba?

One of these things is not like the other.

Considering the unrest in the Ukraine and the strategic importance of their naval base in that area? Them moving troops in to secure it is not surprising.

Cuba is not in the least bit similar. We have a ton of naval bases we can use so losing access to Cuba wouldn't cripple our navy. Russia doesn't have the same options. They need that base a lot more than we need Cuba. And yeah, if we were in a similar situation you're damn right we'd do the same thing.

Why doesn't Russia adopt the Cuba solution? Work out with Ukraine a lease on the Crimean ports. They'd whine as much as Cuba, and get as much response, but it works.


They already did, their lease on the ports in Sevastopol run all the way through 2042.
 
2014-03-01 07:44:47 PM  

bobothemagnificent: [img.fark.net image 750x574]


With what, his empty bottle of geritol?
 
2014-03-01 07:45:00 PM  
As with the Cuban Missile Crisis, the danger isn't in the US capability, or President Obama's policies and willingness to use force if he deems it necessary.  It's Putin's impression of Obama's and the US's resolve and ability.  Say what you will about having a crazy old man with his finger on the button in the White House, but you don't mess with the crazy.  Crazy will kill you.  Reasonable people trying to reason with unreasonable people are going be as successful as an internet argument.
 
2014-03-01 07:45:15 PM  
Hahahaha.http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/obama-mitt-80s-calle d-they-want-theirhttp://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d43_1393643012&utm_s ource=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitterhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1 0/22/obama-romney-russia_n_2003927.html
 
2014-03-01 07:46:25 PM  

LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.


Not really mostly, but about half.  What about the half that want to stay part of Ukraine?
 
2014-03-01 07:47:12 PM  
Dammit. My iPad is messing up the formatting.
 
2014-03-01 07:47:14 PM  

jigger: jvl: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

Hopefully the language of that treaty is very vague.


It's not.
 
2014-03-01 07:47:26 PM  
IronTom:

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

Ignoring the jab at social services, does the A-10 still serve a purpose today? Legitimate question, I have no idea.
 
2014-03-01 07:47:37 PM  
I was reading the Crimean wiki page .... complicated history.  It seems everyone has tried hanging out on that particular piece of real estate over the past 3000 years.
 
2014-03-01 07:48:11 PM  

ksdanj: How does the United States credibly object to this when the United States congress voted to authorize President Bush to invade a country half a world away from the United States.

/reap what you sow...


Last I checked, Russia wasn't at a state of war and operating under a cease fire agreement with Ukraine; it's not like the US just arbitrarily invaded another country.
 
2014-03-01 07:48:42 PM  
And just so I have it straight, it is "Ukraine"  but  we still prefer, "THE Ohio State University", right?
 
2014-03-01 07:48:55 PM  
 
2014-03-01 07:49:48 PM  

IronTom: oxnard_montalvo: Place your money on the table

[justafewthoughts.com image 850x411]
VS
[www.armyrecognition.com image 850x640]

Winner takes all!!

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.


It won't get cut, but nice try.  It's on the table because of all the other stuff that needs to get cut.
 
2014-03-01 07:50:38 PM  
One of the most under-reported aspects of this whole thing is the fact that there are Russian troops in Balaklava, WEARING BALACLAVAS. Come on, that is awesome.
 
2014-03-01 07:51:53 PM  
To lord_baull shiat. I'd rather have the guy with the unoriginal comeback line than the guy who was right too.
 
2014-03-01 07:52:24 PM  
images.ezgif.com
 
2014-03-01 07:52:35 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: IronTom: oxnard_montalvo: Place your money on the table

[justafewthoughts.com image 850x411]
VS
[www.armyrecognition.com image 850x640]

Winner takes all!!

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

It won't get cut, but nice try.  It's on the table because of all the other stuff that needs to get cut.



Last week it was getting cut, today.... probably not so much.
 
2014-03-01 07:52:59 PM  

Keith Dudemeister: One of the most under-reported aspects of this whole thing is the fact that there are Russian troops in Balaklava, WEARING BALACLAVAS. Come on, that is awesome.


Well, they're usually not called balaclavas in the US.
 
2014-03-01 07:53:17 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 07:53:23 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: Ignoring the jab at social services, does the A-10 still serve a purpose today? Legitimate question, I have no idea.


Yes, they give me something to look at in the sky other than blue. Besides, they've been flying overhead multiple times a day, every day, for decades.
What they're doing I don't know but there they are.
 
2014-03-01 07:53:32 PM  
obama needs to be involved...


...to ensure the russian women's curling team is kept safe.


perhaps they should shelter at my home.
 
2014-03-01 07:53:40 PM  

oxnard_montalvo: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: IronTom: oxnard_montalvo: Place your money on the table

[justafewthoughts.com image 850x411]
VS
[www.armyrecognition.com image 850x640]

Winner takes all!!

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

It won't get cut, but nice try.  It's on the table because of all the other stuff that needs to get cut.


Last week it was getting cut, today.... probably not so much.


No, it never was.  That's how negotiations work.
 
2014-03-01 07:53:42 PM  

oldernell: They will be welcomed as liberators.


The Ukraine should have kept all the nukes they had from the old Soviet Union.
 
2014-03-01 07:56:37 PM  

Land Ark: texdent: Crimea a river.

Sooo, this thread yesterday when they took over the airports isn't considering that an invasion?



You're saying that the Ukrainians had Russian troops in plane sight yesterday but the Americans kept their troops in Barrack's??? Jumpin' Jiminy Crimea, the U.N. should crest the wave of world outrage and fight tooth and nail to remove this plaque. Un-orthodox actions call for Orthodox plans.

On the other hand, U2 probably think it's a good idea that O-bomb-a didn't russian to anything; sometimes, it never ukRains, but it pours.
 
2014-03-01 07:58:13 PM  
img.fark.net
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 07:58:20 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: IronTom:

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

Ignoring the jab at social services, does the A-10 still serve a purpose today? Legitimate question, I have no idea.


It conducts over 30% of all air support missions in Afghanistan/Iraq to date and is the aircraft the troops most like to see rolling in. Was also the most useful aircraft in Desert Storm and has a 95% mission ready rate.

Totally worthless.
 
2014-03-01 07:59:07 PM  

Saturn5: As with the Cuban Missile Crisis, the danger isn't in the US capability, or President Obama's policies and willingness to use force if he deems it necessary.  It's Putin's impression of Obama's and the US's resolve and ability.  Say what you will about having a crazy old man with his finger on the button in the White House, but you don't mess with the crazy.  Crazy will kill you.  Reasonable people trying to reason with unreasonable people are going be as successful as an internet argument.


Two different times, and two different power structures in Europe. The US is no longer a the solitary giant straddling the globe and this particular brawl is between Russia and the European Union. I don't know why so many people are bagging on President Obama; there's really very little aside from Saber rattling, suggestions and threatening trade embargos that he can do. The European Union needs to lead on this one and I think Putin is reacting more because of his impression on what *they* will do, not so much what Obama will do.

I disagree with most, if not all of Obama's domestic policies, but aside from a few mis-steps here and there, I have to say, he's done well on the foriegn policy front.

We do have a vested interest in this, but only so much as America has always had a vested interest in Eastern Europe and the balance of power accross the pond. I'm curious to see Europes reaction now that International Forces have been offered to protect Ukrainian Russians and Putin said no thanks; that's the more telling signal than the fact that Russian troops crossed the border.
 
2014-03-01 07:59:18 PM  

ongbok: jvl: ManateeGag: What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Difficulty: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

The Russians wouldn't be invading a nuke-armed Ukraine. This is our fault, so hand-wringing won't cut it.

The Russians will probably try to play this as "the old gov't is legit, so the US should invade the rest of the Ukraine and force them to unify with the legitimate Ukraine."  Motherbearfarkers.

No it didn't. The agreement was that the U.S, UK and Russia would respect its borders and stay out of its business. As far as I know there isn't any provision saying the U.S has to be Captain Save a Hoe, especially when it seems that an area of the country is cozying up to Russia


Then what do we tell all the other non-nuclear signatories of the NPT? Ukraine had the third largest stockpile in the world. Russia would NOT have done this had Ukraine decided to accede as a nuclear power. We promised them autonomy and secure borders in exchange for surrender of their stockpile.

If we back out of that agreement, we're basically telling all the other signatories in the ex bloc that the treaty isn't worth the toilet paper they wipe their asses with. What leg would we have to stand on if other ex-bloc countries decide it's not worth it and backs out of the NPT and starts developing arms to stave off aggression?
 
2014-03-01 07:59:29 PM  

oxnard_montalvo: Place your money on the table

[justafewthoughts.com image 850x411]
VS
[www.armyrecognition.com image 850x640]

Winner takes all!!


that fight has already been fought , see the Highway of death  in desert storm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death
 
2014-03-01 07:59:57 PM  
damnit. Russia is an issue. Mitt Romney told you so. but you voted for the other guy. gosh. now we need more bayonets for our horses and binders full of women. what is wrong with you people?
 
2014-03-01 08:00:13 PM  

Gleeman: God-is-a-Taco: IronTom:

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

Ignoring the jab at social services, does the A-10 still serve a purpose today? Legitimate question, I have no idea.

It conducts over 30% of all air support missions in Afghanistan/Iraq to date and is the aircraft the troops most like to see rolling in. Was also the most useful aircraft in Desert Storm and has a 95% mission ready rate.

Totally worthless.


img.fark.net
Begs to differ.
 
2014-03-01 08:01:34 PM  

LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.


 Exactly.  When they invade Kiev, then shiat goes down.  Until then, let's keep our noses out of this one...
 
2014-03-01 08:02:59 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: IronTom:

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

Ignoring the jab at social services, does the A-10 still serve a purpose today? Legitimate question, I have no idea.


There are few systems more adept at killing ground armor and providing CAS than the A-10.

Too slow to do much else, but damn good at what it does.
 
2014-03-01 08:03:31 PM  

CanisNoir: Two different times, and two different power structures in Europe. The US is no longer a the solitary giant straddling the globe and this particular brawl is between Russia and the European Union. I don't know why so many people are bagging on President Obama; there's really very little aside from Saber rattling, suggestions and threatening trade embargos that he can do. The European Union needs to lead on this one and I think Putin is reacting more because of his impression on what *they* will do, not so much what Obama will do.

I disagree with most, if not all of Obama's domestic policies, but aside from a few mis-steps here and there, I have to say, he's done well on the foriegn policy front.

We do have a vested interest in this, but only so much as America has always had a vested interest in Eastern Europe and the balance of power accross the pond. I'm curious to see Europes reaction now that International Forces have been offered to protect Ukrainian Russians and Putin said no thanks; that's the more telling signal than the fact that Russian troops crossed the border.


Dude, stop being reasonable and realistic about this whole thing. You rational summary is ruining it for everyone.
 
2014-03-01 08:04:18 PM  
Obama will meet with Putin,and come back waving a treaty and say something about "peace in our time...."
 
2014-03-01 08:05:18 PM  
theflickcast.com
WHO HAS THE CON?

/grabbing popcorn
//and vodka
///and possibly a flak jacket
 
2014-03-01 08:05:21 PM  
thenypost.files.wordpress.com
It used to be so funny
 
2014-03-01 08:05:33 PM  
Cry me a Crimean River
 
2014-03-01 08:06:44 PM  

StickyBunBandit: Obama will meet with Putin,and come back waving a treaty and say something about "peace in our time...."


Is there a word for hyperbole that is so hyperbolic that it almost tears a rift in the space-time continuum?
 
2014-03-01 08:07:12 PM  

SlothB77: To lord_baull shiat. I'd rather have the guy with the unoriginal comeback line than the guy who was right too.



Good thing this isn't middle school.
 
2014-03-01 08:07:39 PM  

iron_city_ap: LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.

As long as they respect the sovereignty of the region, I can't complain. If they try to claim it as Russian soil, then I have an issue.


At that point, it's too late
 
2014-03-01 08:07:55 PM  

CreampuffCasperMilktoast: So for Sarah Palin.... do we start calling calling her "Nostradumbass"... or is just a blind squirrel thing?


Well, since she actually got something right (out of the several hundred times she's been wrong), the Republitrolls are hailing her as the new Henry Kissinger.
 
2014-03-01 08:08:22 PM  

Keith Dudemeister: StickyBunBandit: Obama will meet with Putin,and come back waving a treaty and say something about "peace in our time...."

Is there a word for hyperbole that is so hyperbolic that it almost tears a rift in the space-time continuum?


What happens when the devil loses?
 
2014-03-01 08:08:36 PM  

Tarl3k: LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.

 Exactly.  When they invade Kiev, then shiat goes down.  Until then, let's keep our noses out of this one...


By then there'll be no point to putting our noses in.
They've got boots on the ground in all the major ports and outer cities. Its a matter of hours, if it isn't over already.


/The cameras go out, the parlement and protesters disappear.
/You'll see nothing but nervously smiling Ukrainians waving Russian flags by monday.
 
2014-03-01 08:12:02 PM  

Boojum2k: rkiller1: Fun fact: the Ural mountains, which are west of (The) Ukraine, divide Europe and Asia.One of the few things I recall from sixth grade.

Go back to 6th grade. They are in fact East of Ukraine.
http://www.freeworldmaps.net/europe/index.html
http://www.freeworldmaps.net/russia/ural-mountains/map.html

They run roughly north-south through Russia, ending south in Kazakhstan.



Good job 'Spainin' to him...... the Moor you know!
:-)
 
2014-03-01 08:13:00 PM  

mongbiohazard: I don't know if they're going to bother with the rest of the Ukraine, but I know they aren't going to be giving up their naval and air assets in the Black Sea fleet. Not without a fight, and they have more military might than the Ukraine does, especially if it's in turmoil right now.

What are the Europeans going to do about it? They should certainly make sure Putin doesn't pull another Georgia, but I don't know if they really want to escalate militarily and risk global or regional war. But they certainly shouldn't just stand by and watch poor Ukraine get stomped on. Maybe they support Ukraine's military with European forces in the rest of the country while staying out of Crimea and offering Putin a bit of a diplomatic olive branch in the meantime. Like, "Hey, we understand this mess has you nervous about your bases in Crimea. We know they're very important to you, so how about you keep peace there, we keep peace here - just until the Ukrainians get their shiat together with their new government and reaffirm their commitment to you in regard to their bases there. Then once everything's settled we all pull our forces out, deal?"


I believe they will try to annex the rest of Ukraine unless more forceful measures are threaten. Yes Crimea is the immediate goal however russia wil NOT allow Ukraine to become a EU state nevermind NATO say 10-15 yrs the road. I can guarantee you Putin will NEVER allow the US to say put an  ABM shield or have NATO bases in Ukraine. It's akin to Russia putting something similar in Mexico. Even the most liberal and pacifist POTUS will not allow that.

For some reason no one here has brought those points up.
 
2014-03-01 08:13:41 PM  

FuryOfFirestorm: CreampuffCasperMilktoast: So for Sarah Palin.... do we start calling calling her "Nostradumbass"... or is just a blind squirrel thing?

Well, since she actually got something right (out of the several hundred times she's been wrong), the Republitrolls are hailing her as the new Henry Kissinger.


actually, we should find whoever fed her that line and bring him or her into the war room.

Still wondering what people think Messrs McCain and Romney would have done differently.

/I already know the answer - it will be some bullshiat about being clearly tougher so Putin would have toed the line
 
2014-03-01 08:15:10 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: mongbiohazard: I don't know if they're going to bother with the rest of the Ukraine, but I know they aren't going to be giving up their naval and air assets in the Black Sea fleet. Not without a fight, and they have more military might than the Ukraine does, especially if it's in turmoil right now.

What are the Europeans going to do about it? They should certainly make sure Putin doesn't pull another Georgia, but I don't know if they really want to escalate militarily and risk global or regional war. But they certainly shouldn't just stand by and watch poor Ukraine get stomped on. Maybe they support Ukraine's military with European forces in the rest of the country while staying out of Crimea and offering Putin a bit of a diplomatic olive branch in the meantime. Like, "Hey, we understand this mess has you nervous about your bases in Crimea. We know they're very important to you, so how about you keep peace there, we keep peace here - just until the Ukrainians get their shiat together with their new government and reaffirm their commitment to you in regard to their bases there. Then once everything's settled we all pull our forces out, deal?"

I believe they will try to annex the rest of Ukraine unless more forceful measures are threaten. Yes Crimea is the immediate goal however russia wil NOT allow Ukraine to become a EU state nevermind NATO say 10-15 yrs the road. I can guarantee you Putin will NEVER allow the US to say put an  ABM shield or have NATO bases in Ukraine. It's akin to Russia putting something similar in Mexico. Even the most liberal and pacifist POTUS will not allow that.

For some reason no one here has brought those points up.


On the other hand, we haven't tried repeatedly in the previous 200 years to wipe the Mexican people off the face of the earth. Sure, we had a couple wars, but we didn't try to go all Final Solution on them like Russia has tried to do repeatedly with both the Crimean Tatars and Ukrainian people.
 
2014-03-01 08:18:07 PM  
 
2014-03-01 08:19:07 PM  

Keith Dudemeister: Dude, stop being reasonable and realistic about this whole thing. You rational summary is ruining it for everyone.


Sorry, but the narcassim of Superpower Hangover combined with pure partisan hackery really bothers me. I guess part of the problem is that us Americans have not had a form of "Ethnic Nationalism" since the Civil War so it's difficult for a lot of us to wrap our noggins around the way Europe sees itself.
Russia crossing the border to protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine is not an anomoly in world history, in fact, that kind of action is fairly common. I though Obama's offer of International Forces was a smart choice; it makes Putin rightly look like "the bad guy" for refusing the help in favor of increasing tensions and looking like an aggressor.
Now we just need to take a step back, a little breather and see which way our allies are going to move and then do what we can to assist them. I'm far from an expert in that region, but from where I'm sitting, I don't see any reason why the US should be taking a "leadership" role in trying to solve this problem.
 
2014-03-01 08:20:14 PM  

sleeps in trees: shower_in_my_socks: We have about as much control over Russia invading Crimea as Russia would have over us invading Juarez, Mexico. And about as much of an interest in stopping it as they would, too.

I know the chicken hawk neocons in this country go absolutely apeshiat whenever another country does something militarily because in their world America must ALWAYS do something to stop it. But most of those nutjobs couldn't point Crimea out on a map, so they can eff off as always.


Can I just say this was probably the most balanced comment I've read all day.  The US has enough on it's plate.  Let someone on the other side of the pond deal with it.  If it really is offensive, sanctions would be in order.  Stop being the world police and look after your own country.  We need a strong, united US that does not have its politicians willing to let it burn to make a point.


SOMUCHTHIS. We don't need to deploy troops and act like the World Police every time Putin waves his penis around - let's concentrate on our own sh*t for the time being.
 
2014-03-01 08:22:32 PM  

OgreMagi: stratagos: OgreMagi: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

We have a treaty obligation to help the Ukraine protect their border.  I personally don't want us involved in another war, but if we don't do something our international standing will be turned to shiat (more than it is now).

We could start by immediately declaring an embargo on all business with Russia.  If we can get the other NATO members involved, it might actually get Putin's attention.  What to do next, I don't know.  But I'm a system administrator, not a diplomat who is supposed to know what to do.  I do know, however, that doing nothing is not going to help.

Wait, what? We have a treaty with them? They're in NATO?

In 1994 the US and the UK, as part of NATO, signed a treaty with the Ukraine to help them defend their borders.  In exchange, the Ukraine gave up all their nukes.  It seemed like a good idea at the time.  That treaty is still valid.


Yes it's still valid but it's not a treaty.  It's a memorandum, but it still caries the weight international law.   Not that that caries much actual weight.
 
2014-03-01 08:27:13 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: Yes Crimea is the immediate goal however russia wil NOT allow Ukraine to become a EU state


Exactly the issue. It's up in the air what happens to Ukraine 'proper', but that warm port at Sevastopol and the navy presence in the Black Sea are...how you say in American?...not negotiable.
 
2014-03-01 08:27:29 PM  
I always wake up first thing and wonder 'Whats Happening in Crimea?'
 
2014-03-01 08:31:49 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.

Conversely, it could be said that you've just made an argument for marginalizing the problem.

I wonder how the women in Bosnia would have appreciated your indifference.


I''m not marginalizing anything.  If bullets, shells, and bombs start flying in the middle of Europe there will be more lethal threats to worry about and I assure you it will be gender indiscriminate.
 
2014-03-01 08:33:10 PM  

FuryOfFirestorm: sleeps in trees: shower_in_my_socks: We have about as much control over Russia invading Crimea as Russia would have over us invading Juarez, Mexico. And about as much of an interest in stopping it as they would, too.

I know the chicken hawk neocons in this country go absolutely apeshiat whenever another country does something militarily because in their world America must ALWAYS do something to stop it. But most of those nutjobs couldn't point Crimea out on a map, so they can eff off as always.


Can I just say this was probably the most balanced comment I've read all day.  The US has enough on it's plate.  Let someone on the other side of the pond deal with it.  If it really is offensive, sanctions would be in order.  Stop being the world police and look after your own country.  We need a strong, united US that does not have its politicians willing to let it burn to make a point.

SOMUCHTHIS. We don't need to deploy troops and act like the World Police every time Putin waves his penis around - let's concentrate on our own sh*t for the time being.


And it'll die down soon.  I guarantee 100% that Russia has ZERO interest in invading or annexing Ukraine, they'll keep them at arm's length.  Ukraine has the Tatars, who are Russia-hating Muslims, and about 12% of the population.  The last thing Russia wants is another Muslim group causing as many headaches as the Chechens.
 
2014-03-01 08:33:47 PM  
I still think we should send in the Light Brigade.
 
2014-03-01 08:35:56 PM  
Place you bottlecaps on the table!
upload.wikimedia.org
VS
upload.wikimedia.org
Winner takes all!
 
2014-03-01 08:35:58 PM  

AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.

Conversely, it could be said that you've just made an argument for marginalizing the problem.

I wonder how the women in Bosnia would have appreciated your indifference.

I''m not marginalizing anything.  If bullets, shells, and bombs start flying in the middle of Europe there will be more lethal threats to worry about and I assure you it will be gender indiscriminate.


Couldn't possibly hit the fan that hard could it?
I have only been half paying attention...
No shots fired yet?
Are you expecting bloodshed?
 
2014-03-01 08:41:52 PM  

tallen702: Subby, and for that matter, most of the US and US news outlets don't seem to realize that Russia did not in fact invade the Crimea, it's hard to invade something when, you know, your military has been there for almost 100 years or so. The treaties between Russia and Ukraine actually allow for free movement of Russian forces within the Crimean peninsula, legally, these guys are just out taking a stroll and loitering until they forcibly wrest control of something from the Ukrainian gov't, which they haven't. Pro-Russian Ukrainians haven't resisted, shots haven't been fired, they're essentially "occupying" the space by loitering.

Now, where things will get interesting is if they move OUT of the Crimea and into areas where they aren't allowed. Then, and only then, is there reason to expect shiat to go down in a bad way.


It's primarily about influence over resource streams and pricing - natural gas:   http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42405.pdf  (2013 precis)  Ukraine owes the Russians at least 7 billion (take-or-pay contracts for nat gas).  Ukraine has aging nat gas pipeline infrastructure and the Russians have already completed one line directly to Germany and are planning another to the South (both bypass Ukraine).  Ukraine needs the money to keep their pipelines up to snuff -but Russia pretty much will have them begging (don't think the West will pony up - do you?).  And, let's say, the longer the tension goes on, the more money there is to be made by `speculators' who knew when the Crimea would be occupied (probably Vlad & friends are playing with the market). Think of Russia's Gazprom standing in relation to several of our NATO allies, as OPEC was to the U.S. in the early`70's.

If I was Putin, I'd take a page from Adolph's Czech trick and arrange for Spetsnaz, posing as rabid Ukranian Nationalists, to damage gas pipelines passing through Western Ukraine, that move Russian Gas directly to their Western European customers (unhappy EU rate payers & savior Russians, eh?).
 
2014-03-01 08:43:15 PM  

Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.



It's not much, but how about keeping our $70 million in Foreign Aid we give Russia? How about playing hardball with ANYTHING Russia wants at the UN? This should also be about Russia's human rights record and their anti homosexual bigotry.Let's do something. Saying Russia is gonna make people upset in a speech is utterly useless...
 
2014-03-01 08:43:25 PM  

johnny_vegas: Meanwhile

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 800x448]


Mother of God.  It's Beautiful.
 
2014-03-01 08:44:18 PM  
Deny them our precious bodily fluids
static.yts.re
 
2014-03-01 08:46:59 PM  

Crazy Lee: tallen702: Subby, and for that matter, most of the US and US news outlets don't seem to realize that Russia did not in fact invade the Crimea, it's hard to invade something when, you know, your military has been there for almost 100 years or so. The treaties between Russia and Ukraine actually allow for free movement of Russian forces within the Crimean peninsula, legally, these guys are just out taking a stroll and loitering until they forcibly wrest control of something from the Ukrainian gov't, which they haven't. Pro-Russian Ukrainians haven't resisted, shots haven't been fired, they're essentially "occupying" the space by loitering.

Now, where things will get interesting is if they move OUT of the Crimea and into areas where they aren't allowed. Then, and only then, is there reason to expect shiat to go down in a bad way.

It's primarily about influence over resource streams and pricing - natural gas:   http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42405.pdf  (2013 precis)  Ukraine owes the Russians at least 7 billion (take-or-pay contracts for nat gas).  Ukraine has aging nat gas pipeline infrastructure and the Russians have already completed one line directly to Germany and are planning another to the South (both bypass Ukraine).  Ukraine needs the money to keep their pipelines up to snuff -but Russia pretty much will have them begging (don't think the West will pony up - do you?).  And, let's say, the longer the tension goes on, the more money there is to be made by `speculators' who knew when the Crimea would be occupied (probably Vlad & friends are playing with the market). Think of Russia's Gazprom standing in relation to several of our NATO allies, as OPEC was to the U.S. in the early`70's.

If I was Putin, I'd take a page from Adolph's Czech trick and arrange for Spetsnaz, posing as rabid Ukranian Nationalists, to damage gas pipelines passing through Western Ukraine, that move Russian Gas directly to their Western European customers (unhappy EU rate payers & savior ...


+1 tin foil
 
2014-03-01 08:47:27 PM  

p4p3rm4t3: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.

Conversely, it could be said that you've just made an argument for marginalizing the problem.

I wonder how the women in Bosnia would have appreciated your indifference.

I''m not marginalizing anything.  If bullets, shells, and bombs start flying in the middle of Europe there will be more lethal threats to worry about and I assure you it will be gender indiscriminate.

Couldn't possibly hit the fan that hard could it?
I have only been half paying attention...
No shots fired yet?
Are you expecting bloodshed?


Russia has occupied Crimea without provocation
Ukraine has appealed to NATO to honor its 94 treaty guaranteeing their borders
UN, EU, and NATO have denounced Russia
Russian presence has increased to 6,000 troops
Ukraine has mobilized
Russian "wargames" are being conducted on the Ukraine border with 150,000 troops
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia have invoked article 4 of the NATO treaty only invoked 4 times in history.

It's pretty bad.  Any match in this powderkeg could lead to very nasty outcomes.
 
2014-03-01 08:50:11 PM  
If only Sarah Palin were President, this wouldn't be happening!
 
2014-03-01 08:51:06 PM  
Attempt no landing on Europa.
 
2014-03-01 08:51:10 PM  

Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.



i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-01 08:51:55 PM  
I don't know hoe I forgot all the Simpson references. Thank you for the animated GIFs!
 
2014-03-01 08:52:52 PM  

AngryDragon: Russia has occupied Crimea without provocationUkraine has appealed to NATO to honor its 94 treaty guaranteeing their bordersUN, EU, and NATO have denounced RussiaRussian presence has increased to 6,000 troopsUkraine has mobilizedRussian "wargames" are being conducted on the Ukraine border with 150,000 troopsLatvia, Lithuania, Estonia have invoked article 4 of the NATO treaty only invoked 4 times in history.It's pretty bad. Any match in this powderkeg could lead to very nasty outcomes.


NATO made no agreement with Ukraine that's applicable in this situation.  Contrary to popular news sites neither has any country in the west.  The only thing that is applicable is the Budapest Memorandum, in which the U.S., Britain and Russia promised to not mess with Ukraine in trade for denuclearizing.  That ship has sailed, Russia broke the agreement.  Now Ukraine has legal right to re-arm.

If they make it through this rotation, it would be stupid not to.
 
2014-03-01 08:53:14 PM  

rwhamann: Still wondering what people think Messrs McCain and Romney would have done differently.


Cut taxes and invaded Syria.
 
2014-03-01 08:55:22 PM  
This is the end.

Not because of this. Because some dumbass god left people in charge. The planet would have been better off left to llamas.

I honestly don't know why people bother fighting. Human stupidity is universal. Hug it out until you suffocate.
 
2014-03-01 08:55:52 PM  

AngryDragon: p4p3rm4t3: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.

Conversely, it could be said that you've just made an argument for marginalizing the problem.

I wonder how the women in Bosnia would have appreciated your indifference.

I''m not marginalizing anything.  If bullets, shells, and bombs start flying in the middle of Europe there will be more lethal threats to worry about and I assure you it will be gender indiscriminate.

Couldn't possibly hit the fan that hard could it?
I have only been half paying attention...
No shots fired yet?
Are you expecting bloodshed?

Russia has occupied Crimea without provocation
Ukraine has appealed to NATO to honor its 94 treaty guaranteeing their borders
UN, EU, and NATO have denounced Russia
Russian presence has increased to 6,000 troops
Ukraine has mobilized
Russian "wargames" are being conducted on the Ukraine border with 150,000 troops
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia have invoked article 4 of the NATO treaty only invoked 4 times in history.

It's pretty bad.  Any match in this powderkeg could lead to very nasty outcomes.

A few 20 year old signatures... Nice...
Does Russia have any treaties with Ukraine?

 
2014-03-01 08:56:49 PM  
Now that I reflect, actually Romney would have cut taxes and gone yachting while his "blind" trusts gutted a few more companies and laid off a few hundred thousand more people, and his gang of Viziers ran the Syria invasion in his name.
 
2014-03-01 09:00:03 PM  
Place your napkins on the table

i.telegraph.co.uk
vs
www.sargento.com

Winner takes all!!
 
2014-03-01 09:09:25 PM  

Shadowtag: This is the end.

Not because of this. Because some dumbass god left people in charge. The planet would have been better off left to llamas.

I honestly don't know why people bother fighting. Human stupidity is universal. Hug it out until you suffocate.


Battery operated llamas or Mexican llamas?
 
2014-03-01 09:12:00 PM  

oxnard_montalvo: Place your napkins on the table

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x387]
vs
[www.sargento.com image 525x350]

Winner takes all!!


My bet's on the one on the bottom.  It's definitely more dangerous and harder to detect.
 
2014-03-01 09:12:25 PM  
Oh boy the same thread morning and evening. Is this one filled weal Farbama,s weak and we should totes go to war with Russia over this.
 
2014-03-01 09:12:46 PM  

p4p3rm4t3: AngryDragon: p4p3rm4t3: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: AngryDragon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Nope, and it'll be the women who suffer the most. As usual.

There will be international outrage over all the rape and murder that will ensue.

And not a damn thing will change or be done about it.

If this is your biggest concern in this particular scenario, you may want to widen your blinders just a tad.

Conversely, it could be said that you've just made an argument for marginalizing the problem.

I wonder how the women in Bosnia would have appreciated your indifference.

I''m not marginalizing anything.  If bullets, shells, and bombs start flying in the middle of Europe there will be more lethal threats to worry about and I assure you it will be gender indiscriminate.

Couldn't possibly hit the fan that hard could it?
I have only been half paying attention...
No shots fired yet?
Are you expecting bloodshed?

Russia has occupied Crimea without provocation
Ukraine has appealed to NATO to honor its 94 treaty guaranteeing their borders
UN, EU, and NATO have denounced Russia
Russian presence has increased to 6,000 troops
Ukraine has mobilized
Russian "wargames" are being conducted on the Ukraine border with 150,000 troops
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia have invoked article 4 of the NATO treaty only invoked 4 times in history.

It's pretty bad.  Any match in this powderkeg could lead to very nasty outcomes.

A few 20 year old signatures... Nice...
Does Russia have any treaties with Ukraine?


Not as of two days ago.
 
2014-03-01 09:16:32 PM  

CreampuffCasperMilktoast: So for Sarah Palin.... do we start calling calling her "Nostradumbass"... or is just a blind squirrel thing?


Well a broken clock is right twice a day.
 
2014-03-01 09:18:14 PM  
We need to stay out of this. Let them sort it out.
 
2014-03-01 09:19:43 PM  

iq_in_binary: ongbok: jvl: ManateeGag: What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Difficulty: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

The Russians wouldn't be invading a nuke-armed Ukraine. This is our fault, so hand-wringing won't cut it.

The Russians will probably try to play this as "the old gov't is legit, so the US should invade the rest of the Ukraine and force them to unify with the legitimate Ukraine."  Motherbearfarkers.

No it didn't. The agreement was that the U.S, UK and Russia would respect its borders and stay out of its business. As far as I know there isn't any provision saying the U.S has to be Captain Save a Hoe, especially when it seems that an area of the country is cozying up to Russia

Then what do we tell all the other non-nuclear signatories of the NPT? Ukraine had the third largest stockpile in the world. Russia would NOT have done this had Ukraine decided to accede as a nuclear power. We promised them autonomy and secure borders in exchange for surrender of their stockpile.

If we back out of that agreement, we're basically telling all the other signatories in the ex bloc that the treaty isn't worth the toilet paper they wipe their asses with. What leg would we have to stand on if other ex-bloc countries decide it's not worth it and backs out of the NPT and starts developing arms to stave off aggression?


That may be the most reasonable argument I've heard all day promoting a strong US response but Russia is not threatening the integrity of Ukrain., and truthfully they brook that treaety way back when they cut of the oil to Ukraine and hence Europe to influence politics but the US was occupoed and didn't notice but we don't want our insurgancy buget to go to waste do we US? or Russia? Because on this all sides are full of shiat.
 
2014-03-01 09:19:53 PM  

CanisNoir: Keith Dudemeister: Dude, stop being reasonable and realistic about this whole thing. You rational summary is ruining it for everyone.

Sorry, but the narcassim of Superpower Hangover combined with pure partisan hackery really bothers me. I guess part of the problem is that us Americans have not had a form of "Ethnic Nationalism" since the Civil War so it's difficult for a lot of us to wrap our noggins around the way Europe sees itself.
Russia crossing the border to protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine is not an anomoly in world history, in fact, that kind of action is fairly common. I though Obama's offer of International Forces was a smart choice; it makes Putin rightly look like "the bad guy" for refusing the help in favor of increasing tensions and looking like an aggressor.
Now we just need to take a step back, a little breather and see which way our allies are going to move and then do what we can to assist them. I'm far from an expert in that region, but from where I'm sitting, I don't see any reason why the US should be taking a "leadership" role in trying to solve this problem.


Yep, there's a huge question that no one seems to be asking, which, in Fark terms, is "WHAR EUROPE?" The silence from Western Europe is deafening. There are lots of fingers being pointed at Obama but it seems like Germany (one country away from Ukraine), for example, has a much more vested interest in resolving this peacefully.
 
2014-03-01 09:21:03 PM  

rohar: oxnard_montalvo: Place your napkins on the table

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x387]
vs
[www.sargento.com image 525x350]

Winner takes all!!

My bet's on the one on the bottom.  It's definitely more dangerous and harder to detect.


I've been told it's the bottom that is in control.
/Wait wut?
: )
 
2014-03-01 09:22:38 PM  
We shouldn't be Russian to conclusions. I don't care if the nazi dickweasels who prompted the Kiev takeover get Puti-stomped. Ain't none of 'Murica's biz nohow.
 
2014-03-01 09:23:05 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: rohar: oxnard_montalvo: Place your napkins on the table

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x387]
vs
[www.sargento.com image 525x350]

Winner takes all!!

My bet's on the one on the bottom.  It's definitely more dangerous and harder to detect.

I've been told it's the bottom that is in control.
/Wait wut?
: )


Gay jokes while discussing submariners?  Well I never...
 
2014-03-01 09:23:14 PM  
 
2014-03-01 09:28:26 PM  
None of this would be happening if the USA had got a medal in hockey.
 
2014-03-01 09:29:23 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 09:31:32 PM  
We need healthcare army.
 
2014-03-01 09:33:29 PM  
I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.
 
2014-03-01 09:34:03 PM  

rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: rohar: oxnard_montalvo: Place your napkins on the table

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x387]
vs
[www.sargento.com image 525x350]

Winner takes all!!

My bet's on the one on the bottom.  It's definitely more dangerous and harder to detect.

I've been told it's the bottom that is in control.
/Wait wut?
: )

Gay jokes while discussing submariners?  Well I never...


I thought they double bunked : )
 
2014-03-01 09:36:32 PM  

Oldiron_79: I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.


Wise quote from a wise man., and I don't thing he even knew about EMP at the time.
 
2014-03-01 09:37:33 PM  
Any thread with the headline "this will not end well" is implicitly laying down the last post gauntlet.
 
2014-03-01 09:43:25 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Oh boy the same thread morning and evening. Is this one filled weal Farbama,s weak and we should totes go to war with Russia over this.


It is rather tiresome.
 
2014-03-01 09:44:49 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )


It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.
 
2014-03-01 09:45:26 PM  
I suspect that anything done, any action taken by foreign powers in Ukraine, will come back to haunt them.

Putin won't listen to "dissenters", though.
 
2014-03-01 09:45:33 PM  

vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: Oh boy the same thread morning and evening. Is this one filled weal Farbama,s weak and we should totes go to war with Russia over this.

It is rather tiresome.


I'll drink to that.
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2014-03-01 09:46:37 PM  
The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.
 
2014-03-01 09:47:03 PM  

vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )

It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.


Oh my would there be video of this?
: )
 
2014-03-01 09:49:22 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: ongbok: jvl: ManateeGag: What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Difficulty: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

The Russians wouldn't be invading a nuke-armed Ukraine. This is our fault, so hand-wringing won't cut it.

The Russians will probably try to play this as "the old gov't is legit, so the US should invade the rest of the Ukraine and force them to unify with the legitimate Ukraine."  Motherbearfarkers.

No it didn't. The agreement was that the U.S, UK and Russia would respect its borders and stay out of its business. As far as I know there isn't any provision saying the U.S has to be Captain Save a Hoe, especially when it seems that an area of the country is cozying up to Russia

Then what do we tell all the other non-nuclear signatories of the NPT? Ukraine had the third largest stockpile in the world. Russia would NOT have done this had Ukraine decided to accede as a nuclear power. We promised them autonomy and secure borders in exchange for surrender of their stockpile.

If we back out of that agreement, we're basically telling all the other signatories in the ex bloc that the treaty isn't worth the toilet paper they wipe their asses with. What leg would we have to stand on if other ex-bloc countries decide it's not worth it and backs out of the NPT and starts developing arms to stave off aggression?

That may be the most reasonable argument I've heard all day promoting a strong US response but Russia is not threatening the integrity of Ukrain., and truthfully they brook that treaety way back when they cut of the oil to Ukraine and hence Europe to influence politics but the US was occupoed and didn't notice but we don't want our insurgancy buget to go to waste do we US? or Russia? Because on this all sides are full of shiat.


We did take notice. Hence our reaffirmation of security back in '09 after the shuffle in Georgia. The UN and EU (spurred along by the UK) HAVE reacted to Russia's actions with Ukraine by saying they're going to start looking for other sources of energy, and actively pursuing such.

This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

If we don't get Russian troops out of Ukraine there is a very strong possibility that we go from 4 NWSs in the NPT to a number twice that large or we end up having to watch hopelessly as the NPT falls apart completely because all guarantees are off and non NWS states don't have any incentive to stay signatory.

We don't have to be world police any more, but we do have to preserve the integrity of our treaties and agreements. Our backing and force is the primary stabilizing and enforcement influence behind both the UN and NATO. When that goes out the window, so do they. Trade will suffer, commerce will suffer, everybody will suffer.

There's no "all sides are full of shiat" on this one. Russia is not playing by the rules and we're playing hopscotch while the only side who isn't full of shiat suffers. The only problem is that letting them suffer gives them reason to act in ways we really don't want them to.
 
2014-03-01 09:49:44 PM  

Oldiron_79: I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.

good Einstein quote, I'll answer with

WWI was the chemist's war
WWII was the physicist's war
WWW III with be fought by mathematicians
 
2014-03-01 09:54:09 PM  

bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.


See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.
 
2014-03-01 09:56:54 PM  

bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.


Just out of curiosity, what consequences would those be?  That's the god damned Black Sea fleet siting right in the middle of this mess.  If this becomes violent, it'll be a naval war.  That fleet is old, but it's still got a lot of teeth and there's soviet sensor arrays all over that piece of water.  It's doable, but losses on our side won't be subtle.
 
2014-03-01 09:57:44 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.


Just last week they were saying US v  China was the new cold war: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html

Russia makes a much better foe.  China just sounds cheap, needs better PR people.
 
2014-03-01 09:58:17 PM  

iq_in_binary: tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: ongbok: jvl: ManateeGag: What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Difficulty: As a condition for Ukraine giving up its Nukes, the US promised to do something about it.

The Russians wouldn't be invading a nuke-armed Ukraine. This is our fault, so hand-wringing won't cut it.

The Russians will probably try to play this as "the old gov't is legit, so the US should invade the rest of the Ukraine and force them to unify with the legitimate Ukraine."  Motherbearfarkers.

No it didn't. The agreement was that the U.S, UK and Russia would respect its borders and stay out of its business. As far as I know there isn't any provision saying the U.S has to be Captain Save a Hoe, especially when it seems that an area of the country is cozying up to Russia

Then what do we tell all the other non-nuclear signatories of the NPT? Ukraine had the third largest stockpile in the world. Russia would NOT have done this had Ukraine decided to accede as a nuclear power. We promised them autonomy and secure borders in exchange for surrender of their stockpile.

If we back out of that agreement, we're basically telling all the other signatories in the ex bloc that the treaty isn't worth the toilet paper they wipe their asses with. What leg would we have to stand on if other ex-bloc countries decide it's not worth it and backs out of the NPT and starts developing arms to stave off aggression?

That may be the most reasonable argument I've heard all day promoting a strong US response but Russia is not threatening the integrity of Ukrain., and truthfully they brook that treaety way back when they cut of the oil to Ukraine and hence Europe to influence politics but the US was occupoed and didn't notice but we don't want our insurgancy buget to go to waste do we US? or Russia? Because on this all sides are full of shiat.

We did take notice. Hence our reaffirmation of security back in '09 after the shuffle in Georgia. The UN and EU (spurred along by the ...


Well we'll see if upholding treaties is a good thing the world does love to follow that bloody path and well not now but sooner rather than later I would think.
 
2014-03-01 09:58:55 PM  

Free Radical: If only Sarah Palin were President, this wouldn't be happening!


She'd see it comming
 
2014-03-01 10:02:14 PM  

uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Just last week they were saying US v  China was the new cold war: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html

Russia makes a much better foe.  China just sounds cheap, needs better PR people.


Those in power will do and say anything to keep the military budget high. Biggest welfare for the rich program there is.
 
2014-03-01 10:04:49 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Just last week they were saying US v  China was the new cold war: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html

Russia makes a much better foe.  China just sounds cheap, needs better PR people.

Those in power will do and say anything to keep the military budget high. Biggest welfare for the rich program there is.


Keeps the poor working, too.
 
2014-03-01 10:05:19 PM  

iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.


I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.
 
2014-03-01 10:06:26 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.


Russia needs trade w/Europe and the US as well as the former Soviet Bloc countries. Would it kill them to be hit by sanctions? No, we aren't talking North Korea 2.0. But it would deeply hurt them economically. Not to mention the kinds of stuff the US and Europe could do with monies many of its Russian nationals have invested in the West. Obviously it would hurt us too, but not nearly as much.

Putin's popularity is barely hovering over 50% within his own country. Starting a war and at the same time subjecting his country to economic harm is a huge deterrent to him. He knows this.

Will Ukraine cede Crimea to Russia? Will the Ukraine split? That's the big question. It's pretty obvious that the populace is split and Russia invading Ukraine at some point will cause war and no one wants to see that. Both the US and Russia have enough problems with terrorist organizations and Syria to really want another conflict.

In other words, Putin talks a big game and walks some fine lines, but he's no idiot.
 
2014-03-01 10:09:03 PM  

rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.


Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!
 
2014-03-01 10:10:53 PM  
LordJiro:  And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

Why don't the Russians just build another port? It's been 25 years or so since the USSR fell apart. They cold have build and fancy naval station by now.

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.

It just might be a big issue in the very near future.
Budapest Memorandum

Btw: all you kids who grew up in the 60s and 70s, still remember your duck and cover routines?
Take a refresher. You might need it by next week.
 
2014-03-01 10:11:30 PM  
Typical right wing knuckledragger: "A meteorite the size of a car hit the Moon this week! Why did you sit there and do nothing, Obama!?"
 
2014-03-01 10:12:35 PM  

uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Just last week they were saying US v  China was the new cold war: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html

Russia makes a much better foe.  China just sounds cheap, needs better PR people.

Those in power will do and say anything to keep the military budget high. Biggest welfare for the rich program there is.

Keeps the poor working, too.


Whats, funny is so many of the weapons in the US are still built where that Libby socialist FDR had things like TVA that provide lots of electricity built and I believe their was a similar project in Washington state.

Damn libby socialist and their infrastructure helping win wars.
 
2014-03-01 10:13:14 PM  

bdub77: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Russia needs trade w/Europe and the US as well as the former Soviet Bloc countries. Would it kill them to be hit by sanctions? No, we aren't talking North Korea 2.0. But it would deeply hurt them economically. Not to mention the kinds of stuff the US and Europe could do with monies many of its Russian nationals have invested in the West. Obviously it would hurt us too, but not nearly as much.

Putin's popularity is barely hovering over 50% within his own country. Starting a war and at the same time subjecting his country to economic harm is a huge deterrent to him. He knows this.

Will Ukraine cede Crimea to Russia? Will the Ukraine split? That's the big question. It's pretty obvious that the populace is split and Russia invading Ukraine at some point will cause war and no one wants to see that. Both the US and Russia have enough problems with terrorist organizations and Syria to really want another conflict.

In other words, Putin talks a big game and walks some fine lines, but he's no idiot.


Russian petroleum account for about 12-15% of world production.  By contrast Iran accounts for about 5%

Russia doesn't export much else besides weapons.  And China would buy the petrol.

By my estimation, anyways
 
2014-03-01 10:14:15 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Just last week they were saying US v  China was the new cold war: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html

Russia makes a much better foe.  China just sounds cheap, needs better PR people.

Those in power will do and say anything to keep the military budget high. Biggest welfare for the rich program there is.

Keeps the poor working, too.

Whats, funny is so many of the weapons in the US are still built where that Libby socialist FDR had things like TVA that provide lots of electricity built and I believe their was a similar project in Washington state.

Damn libby socialist and their infrastructure helping win wars.


Onward! Red brothers!
 
2014-03-01 10:16:53 PM  

iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!


We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.
 
2014-03-01 10:17:04 PM  

MechaPyx: Eh, it's in their backyard and they have a huge naval base there. I'd be surprised if they didn't move troops in. We'd do the same thing in that situation.


Its not just their backyard.  Crimea is part of Russia and has been Russian since before the USA was the USA. The idea that Sevastopol was Ukrainian is laughable when you consider that it was founded 300 years ago by Russians and 90% of the population speaks Russian as their mother tongue.  Anyone that had occasion to consider what would happen if Kiev split from Moscow already knew this would happen... it is so blatantly obvious that a blind squirrel could find this nut.
 
2014-03-01 10:17:55 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )

It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.

Oh my would there be video of this?
: )


I'm surprised there isn't an upload from some carrier or another by now. Tens of thousands of former enlisted and not one has a video of this?
 
2014-03-01 10:19:15 PM  

iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!


Sadly, yup.  Welcome to international law.
 
2014-03-01 10:21:15 PM  

hi13760: [img.fark.net image 350x252]


You keep telling yourself that.
Underestimating your enemy always works out in the end.
 
2014-03-01 10:21:57 PM  

uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: uber humper: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Just last week they were saying US v  China was the new cold war: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/78920b2e-99ba-11e3-91cd-00144feab7de.html

Russia makes a much better foe.  China just sounds cheap, needs better PR people.

Those in power will do and say anything to keep the military budget high. Biggest welfare for the rich program there is.

Keeps the poor working, too.

Whats, funny is so many of the weapons in the US are still built where that Libby socialist FDR had things like TVA that provide lots of electricity built and I believe their was a similar project in Washington state.

Damn libby socialist and their infrastructure helping win wars.

Onward! Red brothers!


encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
/And now the National anthem
//Vodak for everyone ; )
 
2014-03-01 10:22:41 PM  

vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )

It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.

Oh my would there be video of this?
: )

I'm surprised there isn't an upload from some carrier or another by now. Tens of thousands of former enlisted and not one has a video of this?


Carriers are big, generally  no need to hot rack.  Submarines are small and secure, need for hotracks, no possibility to record a damned thing.
 
2014-03-01 10:24:35 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.


The International Court only has teeth when everybody respects it. If the NPT goes up in smoke, so does the UN. No UN? No ICJ.

That's not what we want to happen. That's now what anybody wants to happen, including Russia.
 
2014-03-01 10:24:39 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.


Sure we do. Just like any community can decide, like we in the U.S. have, that if you're batshiat insane you can't buy a firearm. The community of nations have decided that they're going to do some limited amount to prevent the idiots from getting nukes.

And, frankly, nukes are a really hard problem. 1) They're kind of hard to make; 2) They're preposterously expensive to maintain; 3) Without assured second-strike capability, you're actually making the possibility of nuclear war with a nuclear neighbor quite high; 4) once you have the nuclear tiger by the tail, can you really let go? The only nation to disarm did so for purely racist reasons. (I don't count Ukraine.)

So when everyone who had to actually DEAL with those problems decided they're going to try to keep anyone else from getting them, it really wasn't for purely selfish reasons.

/Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia did not want nukes and haven't a way to ensure second-strike capability, making them very dangerous.
//Ukraine probably didn't want to pay the cost.
 
2014-03-01 10:25:39 PM  
It will end just fine as long as Russia doesn't push too far north.

Geesh.  It's not like Crimea are full of ethnic Russians or something....
 
2014-03-01 10:26:37 PM  
Russia has made their move.  Now it is up to the Ukraine to respond.  Do they push their military to the east to challenge Russia and prevent any other regions from being annexed?  Not directly confronting the forces in Crimea but contesting what is going on and potentially provoking Russia into a conflict.  It is a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario as doing nothing may mean losing more of the eastern portion of Ukraine, but pushing forward could cause an armed struggle that Ukraine can't win and could lose everything.
 
2014-03-01 10:26:53 PM  

rohar: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )

It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.

Oh my would there be video of this?
: )

I'm surprised there isn't an upload from some carrier or another by now. Tens of thousands of former enlisted and not one has a video of this?

Carriers are big, generally  no need to hot rack.  Submarines are small and secure, need for hotracks, no possibility to record a damned thing.


The hot-action happens a lot on carriers. It's done despite the lack of necessity. Although, to be fair, a CVN isn't exactly swimming in berthing. Otherwise, my Lt. Cmdr. equivalent wouldn't have landed me in enlisted like it always did.
 
2014-03-01 10:27:36 PM  

vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )

It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.

Oh my would there be video of this?
: )

I'm surprised there isn't an upload from some carrier or another by now. Tens of thousands of former enlisted and not one has a video of this?


Well I seen lots of movies of guys in army camo have happy fun time but no sailers and those Russian sailors in the blue and white tank tops look really like the could be that kind of friends but I sure its not gay to them : )
 
2014-03-01 10:29:21 PM  

iq_in_binary: tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.

The International Court only has teeth when everybody respects it. If the NPT goes up in smoke, so does the UN. No UN? No ICJ.

That's not what we want to happen. That's now what anybody wants to happen, including Russia.


NPT treaties with Russia are still secure as they were no stipulation on the treaty limiting which countries Russia could invade etc and none of the signatory parties have broken any part of those treaties.  The nuclear agreement we had with Ukraine was dependent on the US, England and Russia respecting Ukraine as an autonomous country.  Russia broke that, the treaty is dead.
 
2014-03-01 10:29:55 PM  
So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.
 
2014-03-01 10:32:07 PM  

vygramul: rohar: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: I thought they double bunked : )

It's called "hot-racking".

For a reason.

Oh my would there be video of this?
: )

I'm surprised there isn't an upload from some carrier or another by now. Tens of thousands of former enlisted and not one has a video of this?

Carriers are big, generally  no need to hot rack.  Submarines are small and secure, need for hotracks, no possibility to record a damned thing.

The hot-action happens a lot on carriers. It's done despite the lack of necessity. Although, to be fair, a CVN isn't exactly swimming in berthing. Otherwise, my Lt. Cmdr. equivalent wouldn't have landed me in enlisted like it always did.


I wouldn't know.  I served on an effective fighting vessel.  :)
 
2014-03-01 10:32:48 PM  

vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.


What's your solution?
 
2014-03-01 10:33:29 PM  

rohar: iq_in_binary: tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.

The International Court only has teeth when everybody respects it. If the NPT goes up in smoke, so does the UN. No UN? No ICJ.

That's not what we want to happen. That's now what anybody wants to happen, including Russia.

NPT treaties with Russia are still secure as they were no stipulation on the treaty limiting which countries Russia could invade etc and none of the signatory parties have broken any part of those treaties.  The nuclear agreement we had with Ukraine was dependent on the US, England and Russia respecting Ukraine as an autonomous country.  Russia broke that, the treaty is dead.


Exactly. The treaty that established Ukraine's signatory status to the NPT as a non NWS.

The NPT is now a roll of toilet paper to all non NWS states.

Congrats.
 
2014-03-01 10:35:41 PM  

rohar: iq_in_binary: tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.

The International Court only has teeth when everybody respects it. If the NPT goes up in smoke, so does the UN. No UN? No ICJ.

That's not what we want to happen. That's now what anybody wants to happen, including Russia.

NPT treaties with Russia are still secure as they were no stipulation on the treaty limiting which countries Russia could invade etc and none of the signatory parties have broken any part of those treaties.  The nuclear agreement we had with Ukraine was dependent on the US, England and Russia respecting Ukraine as an autonomous country.  Russia broke that, the treaty is dead.


Intresting to see there have been about 100 changes to the Budapest Memorandum's page on wikipedia in the last 2 days
 
2014-03-01 10:37:58 PM  

Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?


Good question. I'm not sure. To be honest, part of it depends on intel to which I do not have access. One thing I found out today was that Russia's actually been planning this since the protests started. They held some exercises near Ukraine and then sent the units home, but left the supplies forward-deployed. They anticipated this.

But what to do about it can only be effectively discussed if everyone agrees it's a problem. We're not there yet, as some people don't see a problem here at all.
 
2014-03-01 10:37:58 PM  
Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.
 
2014-03-01 10:38:35 PM  

uber humper: bdub77: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Russia needs trade w/Europe and the US as well as the former Soviet Bloc countries. Would it kill them to be hit by sanctions? No, we aren't talking North Korea 2.0. But it would deeply hurt them economically. Not to mention the kinds of stuff the US and Europe could do with monies many of its Russian nationals have invested in the West. Obviously it would hurt us too, but not nearly as much.

Putin's popularity is barely hovering over 50% within his own country. Starting a war and at the same time subjecting his country to economic harm is a huge deterrent to him. He knows this.

Will Ukraine cede Crimea to Russia? Will the Ukraine split? That's the big question. It's pretty obvious that the populace is split and Russia invading Ukraine at some point will cause war and no one wants to see that. Both the US and Russia have enough problems with terrorist organizations and Syria to really want another conflict.

In other words, Putin talks a big game and walks some fine lines, but he's no idiot.

Russian petroleum account for about 12-15% of world production.  By contrast Iran accounts for about 5%

Russia doesn't export much else besides weapons.  And China would buy the petrol. ...


China needs 6 million barrels of oil per day. much of its oil needs are already covered by long term contracts.

so while China wouldn't take part in sanctions, it has a limited ability to absorb Russia's production of over 10 million barrels a day.

there is also a factor of the Saudis, who already contribute a significant amount to China's oil needs. It costs the Saudis just $6 to produce a barrel of oil, and the Saudis don't like Putin at all.
 
2014-03-01 10:39:01 PM  

Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?


A couple dozen nukes in the Russian Hinterland to get their attention.
 
2014-03-01 10:41:12 PM  

TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.


wat
 
2014-03-01 10:41:28 PM  
So Russia invades a majority Russian suburb of Russia. I hope all the Russians in Crimea are okay with seeing Russians. Of course some of them are probably related. Oh how are we going to liberate the Russian citizens from the Russian invasion?

/ it's a puzzlement
 
2014-03-01 10:42:10 PM  
 
2014-03-01 10:42:47 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.


The central Asian republics would love a western embargo on agricultural goods. That would bring them back to the glory days of the Soviet Union when they had a guaranteed market for their goods. Or at least that what my Kyrgyz friends told me.
 
2014-03-01 10:43:26 PM  
Why does it seem everyone is assuming this will end with Russia fully annexing the area. Doesn't that seem like a leap?
 
2014-03-01 10:44:49 PM  

tinyarena: So Russia invades a majority Russian suburb of Russia. I hope all the Russians in Crimea are okay with seeing Russians. Of course some of them are probably related. Oh how are we going to liberate the Russian citizens from the Russian invasion?

/ it's a puzzlement


Neville Chamberlain might have asked the same question regarding saving German Sudetans from German annexation. All this time I was told that was wrong. Is it no longer? Are we now changing the judgment of history to, "You know, some of these invasions are really ok."
 
2014-03-01 10:45:07 PM  

dumbobruni: uber humper: bdub77: tinfoil-hat maggie: bdub77: The US does have retaliatory capability without going full retard. Sanctions w/European allies. The missile shield in Poland. Actions related to Syria. Maybe just threaten to send the Finnish hockey team to Moscow.

However I do think it's completely overblown. I think the US response has been pretty good so far, diplomatic in recognizing Russia's ties w/Ukraine while also making sure that if a war or violence breaks out between Russia and Ukraine, there will be consequences.

See that a reasonable response but the American media and war machine want this to be cold war 2.0 and the crazies want hot war 1.03.

Although I don't know how much Russia needs or grain and such anymore but an embargo on that kills the Ukrainian autonomy if it's like it used to be.

Russia needs trade w/Europe and the US as well as the former Soviet Bloc countries. Would it kill them to be hit by sanctions? No, we aren't talking North Korea 2.0. But it would deeply hurt them economically. Not to mention the kinds of stuff the US and Europe could do with monies many of its Russian nationals have invested in the West. Obviously it would hurt us too, but not nearly as much.

Putin's popularity is barely hovering over 50% within his own country. Starting a war and at the same time subjecting his country to economic harm is a huge deterrent to him. He knows this.

Will Ukraine cede Crimea to Russia? Will the Ukraine split? That's the big question. It's pretty obvious that the populace is split and Russia invading Ukraine at some point will cause war and no one wants to see that. Both the US and Russia have enough problems with terrorist organizations and Syria to really want another conflict.

In other words, Putin talks a big game and walks some fine lines, but he's no idiot.

Russian petroleum account for about 12-15% of world production.  By contrast Iran accounts for about 5%

Russia doesn't export much else besides weapons.  And China would bu ...


Oil is a worldwide market.  Even with sanctions, it's bought somewhere and affects the price world wide.  I don't totally disagree, but Russia ranks pretty low on any globalization comparison.  Their largest trading parter is like The Netherlands, or something.

They'd feel sanctions, but not as much as other countries.
 
2014-03-01 10:45:22 PM  

SurelyShirley: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

A couple dozen nukes in the Russian Hinterland to get their attention.


Proving once again, the only thing more dangerous than nuclear weapons are crazy idiots and their terrible ideas.
 
2014-03-01 10:45:25 PM  

SurelyShirley: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

A couple dozen nukes in the Russian Hinterland to get their attention.


That's probably unadvisable.
 
2014-03-01 10:45:57 PM  

iq_in_binary: tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.

The International Court only has teeth when everybody respects it. If the NPT goes up in smoke, so does the UN. No UN? No ICJ.

That's not what we want to happen. That's now what anybody wants to happen, including Russia.


I just don't believe Russia will go too far on this. They've secured the interest and well I would be surprised if they did further move without cause.
You do seem worried about the NPT but well, 20 years of the US attacking countries without nukes ended that more than anything Russia could do in the present. It's not that I don't feel for those Cossack Uke bastards but this isn't our fight What would you say if Poland annexed Lviv? It was part of Poland at one time. These problems are rampant throughout eastern Europe and the US Americans were stupid for trying to bring old Tsarists Muscovite control into the west and/or NATO.
 
2014-03-01 10:46:02 PM  

TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.


Kind of like Germany's historical interest in Alsace.
 
2014-03-01 10:46:39 PM  

DamnYankees: Why does it seem everyone is assuming this will end with Russia fully annexing the area. Doesn't that seem like a leap?


Not if you listen to what the Russian protesters in the Crimean are saying.
 
2014-03-01 10:47:18 PM  
Anyone read Tom Clancy's last book "Command Authority?".... It's basically this situation. Funny.
 
2014-03-01 10:47:42 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: IronTom:

A-10 Warthog?  We are cancelling them all and getting rid of them so EBT users can have more lobster.

Ignoring the jab at social services, does the A-10 still serve a purpose today? Legitimate question, I have no idea.


It's surprisingly affordable for its effectiveness compared to more "advanced" weapons.

Bang for buck etc.
 
2014-03-01 10:48:27 PM  

oxnard_montalvo: Place your napkins on the table

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x387]
vs
[www.sargento.com image 525x350]

Winner takes all!!


Ok. Now stop that. They're being serious here.
 
2014-03-01 10:49:21 PM  

xanadian: It will end just fine as long as Russia doesn't push too far north.

Geesh.  It's not like Crimea are full of ethnic Russians or something....


Yep, the Russians don't want the Ukraine they want it on their side and not NATO's but don't wanna do the administration bit.
 
2014-03-01 10:50:21 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: tinfoil-hat maggie: iq_in_binary: rohar: iq_in_binary: This time there's troops on the ground and ground forces are amassing at the border. The provisional government of Ukraine has already invoked the Budapest Memorandum and many parties within their government have actively been calling for accession to Nuclear Weapon State, and our failure to recognize sections 1, 2, 3, and 6 of the Budapest Memorandum gives them standing to do so.

I would suggest that last section is utter and complete bullshiat.  As of this point, we've acted incomplete accord with the Budapest Memorandum.  Suggesting we haven't is wishing it read something that it does not.

That said, Russia was a signatory as well.  In any multilateral treaty, when one party breaks the rules, the treaty is over.  Even if we were bound to act, a signatory breached it before we could.  We're off the hook and can make any decision we damned well please.

Then we have absolutely no leg to stand on telling non NWS states that they can't develop nuclear weapons. Nuclear Estonia! YAY!

We never did but we didn't let that stop us. The International Court has not appointed the US as Sheriff and many debate it's standing.

The International Court only has teeth when everybody respects it. If the NPT goes up in smoke, so does the UN. No UN? No ICJ.

That's not what we want to happen. That's now what anybody wants to happen, including Russia.

I just don't believe Russia will go too far on this. They've secured the interest and well I would be surprised if they did further move without cause.
You do seem worried about the NPT but well, 20 years of the US attacking countries without nukes ended that more than anything Russia could do in the present. It's not that I don't feel for those Cossack Uke bastards but this isn't our fight What would you say if Poland annexed Lviv? It was part of Poland at one time. These problems are rampant throughout eastern Europe and the US Americans were stupid for trying to ...


Speaking of Cossacks, you see this one putting a whip to Pussy Riot members? F'n ridiculous. But my god, doesn't this look like the set of a 60s variety show:

static.guim.co.uk
 
2014-03-01 10:57:45 PM  

Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.
 
2014-03-01 11:04:40 PM  

TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.


The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

And whether or not Russian sees it as an invasion, it is one.  This is not a peacekeeping mission.  If it was, they'd have gone through the UN just like we did.

It wouldn't have been hard at this point.  Putin could have even looked like a big diplomatic hero.

This is an opportunistic invasion.  It doesn't matter how many of the people in Crimea are Russian speaking (you know, after the whole purges during the Soviet Era of non-Russian speakers).  It's part of the Ukraine now.

Sadly, there's not a lot of unity in the West to make any sort of deterrent to Russia doing things like this.
 
2014-03-01 11:04:41 PM  

Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?


This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.
 
2014-03-01 11:06:18 PM  

LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.


Lulz ; )
 
2014-03-01 11:06:33 PM  

LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.


Ha, ha, ha - you said rape a couple of times.

That just shouts "Fark funny person" because rape is the second funniest thing on this web site next to down syndrome children.

You sir, are cutting edge hilarious.
 
2014-03-01 11:06:43 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: We need to stay as far away from this as possible. Let Russia and the Ukraine have it out, keep it from spreading, and do nothing else. This is straight from the Bad Old Days, and I for one don't really want to get nuked. Except for Philadelphia, they're fair game.


img.fark.net
 
2014-03-01 11:07:07 PM  

uber humper: Oil is a worldwide market.  Even with sanctions, it's bought somewhere and affects the price world wide.  I don't totally disagree, but Russia ranks pretty low on any globalization comparison.  Their largest trading parter is like The Netherlands, or something.

They'd feel sanctions, but not as much as other countries.


the oil industry makes up 20% of Russia's economy, and  50% of Russia's government budget.

sanctions would also damage Russians' health, as 75% of their pharmaceuticals are imported (nearly all from the EU).
 
2014-03-01 11:08:51 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.


I'm sorry, Maggie, I love you but,

24.media.tumblr.com31.media.tumblr.com25.media.tumblr.com
I want to equate it, in this narrow case, because Germany lost, against its will, large parts of its territory dominated by Germans, and when it wanted them back, history looks back on it and says they were farktards for forcing it. I don't see why Russia, which has hardly been innocent, gets a pass on this issue.
 
2014-03-01 11:10:18 PM  

LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

And whether or not Russian sees it as an invasion, it is one.  This is not a peacekeeping mission.  If it was, they'd have gone through the UN just like we did.

It wouldn't have been hard at this point.  Putin could have even looked like a big diplomatic hero.

This is an opportunistic invasion.  It doesn't matter how many of the people in Crimea are Russian speaking (you know, after the whole purges during the Soviet Era of non-Russian speakers).  It's part of the Ukraine now.

Sadly, there's not a lot of unity in the West to make any sort of deterrent to Russia doing things like this.


Your panties seem wadded. When was the first time you heard about the Ukraine?
 
2014-03-01 11:10:53 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.

Ha, ha, ha - you said rape a couple of times.

That just shouts "Fark funny person" because rape is the second funniest thing on this web site next to down syndrome children.

You sir, are cutting edge hilarious.


Funny or not, it's factually accurate.
 
2014-03-01 11:11:01 PM  

LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?


Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?
 
2014-03-01 11:12:52 PM  

dumbobruni: uber humper: Oil is a worldwide market.  Even with sanctions, it's bought somewhere and affects the price world wide.  I don't totally disagree, but Russia ranks pretty low on any globalization comparison.  Their largest trading parter is like The Netherlands, or something.

They'd feel sanctions, but not as much as other countries.

the oil industry makes up 20% of Russia's economy, and  50% of Russia's government budget.

sanctions would also damage Russians' health, as 75% of their pharmaceuticals are imported (nearly all from the EU).


Russia meets it's budget with $60 oil. Oil is around $100. Not very many countries would put sanctions against. If Russia offered just a little cheaper than $100, there would be buyers.

Yes, Russia does need imports.  But not as much as other countries.
 
2014-03-01 11:12:52 PM  

LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.

Ha, ha, ha - you said rape a couple of times.

That just shouts "Fark funny person" because rape is the second funniest thing on this web site next to down syndrome children.

You sir, are cutting edge hilarious.

Funny or not, it's factually accurate.


Of course it is.
 
2014-03-01 11:14:33 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?


whatthefarkamireading.jpg
 
2014-03-01 11:15:31 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.

Ha, ha, ha - you said rape a couple of times.

That just shouts "Fark funny person" because rape is the second funniest thing on this web site next to down syndrome children.

You sir, are cutting edge hilarious.

Funny or not, it's factually accurate.

Of course it is.


Can you name a position taken by Republicans/Teabaggers that isn't reactionary or entirely abhorrent?
 
2014-03-01 11:16:04 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.


English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.
 
2014-03-01 11:16:23 PM  

uber humper: dumbobruni: uber humper: Oil is a worldwide market.  Even with sanctions, it's bought somewhere and affects the price world wide.  I don't totally disagree, but Russia ranks pretty low on any globalization comparison.  Their largest trading parter is like The Netherlands, or something.

They'd feel sanctions, but not as much as other countries.

the oil industry makes up 20% of Russia's economy, and  50% of Russia's government budget.

sanctions would also damage Russians' health, as 75% of their pharmaceuticals are imported (nearly all from the EU).

Russia meets it's budget with $60 oil. Oil is around $100. Not very many countries would put sanctions against. If Russia offered just a little cheaper than $100, there would be buyers.

Yes, Russia does need imports.  But not as much as other countries.


Correcting myself:  Looks like breakeven is close to $117

~
 
2014-03-01 11:17:04 PM  

LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?

whatthefarkamireading.jpg


News, reality, non-internet bullshiat, your mother's diary?

How do you expect us to know?
 
2014-03-01 11:18:11 PM  
 
2014-03-01 11:18:40 PM  

rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.


Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.
 
2014-03-01 11:19:19 PM  

rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.


I agree with you.  But what Russia has right now is cutzpah.  So it seems like they are going to see how far they can push it.  They need the Russians they lost when the USSR broke apart.

They are a developing country, nothing like the econ of the US.  But they are playing the hand they have.
 
2014-03-01 11:19:41 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?

whatthefarkamireading.jpg

News, reality, non-internet bullshiat, your mother's diary?

How do you expect us to know?


Dude you seriously posited that Obama is controlling the media.

Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that most of the media has been dominated for his entire presidency with inane attacks against him that all turn out to be nothing piled on nothing. Benghazi, Reverend Wright, etc, etc, etc.
 
2014-03-01 11:21:18 PM  

vygramul: tinyarena: So Russia invades a majority Russian suburb of Russia. I hope all the Russians in Crimea are okay with seeing Russians. Of course some of them are probably related. Oh how are we going to liberate the Russian citizens from the Russian invasion?

/ it's a puzzlement

Neville Chamberlain might have asked the same question regarding saving German Sudetans from German annexation. All this time I was told that was wrong. Is it no longer? Are we now changing the judgment of history to, "You know, some of these invasions are really ok."


Shocking I know. You may need to sit down for this but as a matter of fact, yes, some of these 'invasions' are tolerable.

And what an invasion it is!

They've invaded their own decrepit naval bases and they're old armories. And they patrol the streets, waving to their cousins, aunts, and in-laws. The Horror.

And just what do you propose we do about it? I suppose you think the majority Russian population of Crimea will welcome us as liberators?

Russia is a damaged brand and even their oldest allies and neighbors basically want nothing to do with them now. They will probably cling to the Crimea, for all the good it'll do them.
 
2014-03-01 11:22:11 PM  
The Russians have really good missiles now.
 
2014-03-01 11:23:05 PM  

LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.

Ha, ha, ha - you said rape a couple of times.

That just shouts "Fark funny person" because rape is the second funniest thing on this web site next to down syndrome children.

You sir, are cutting edge hilarious.

Funny or not, it's factually accurate.

Of course it is.

Can you name a position taken by Republicans/Teabaggers that isn't reactionary or entirely abhorrent?


Man on woman.

I know, it's reactionary and abhorrent to you but it's been around awhile.

But you're asking a question that is nonsensical without an answer because whatever the answer is you will say you disagree so it is reactionary and entirely abhorrent so go and poke somebody else.
 
2014-03-01 11:23:24 PM  

vygramul: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

I'm sorry, Maggie, I love you but,

[24.media.tumblr.com image 160x250][31.media.tumblr.com image 160x250][25.media.tumblr.com image 160x250]
I want to equate it, in this narrow case, because Germany lost, against its will, large parts of its territory dominated by Germans, and when it wanted them back, history looks back on it and says they were farktards for forcing it. I don't see why Russia, which has hardly been innocent, gets a pass on this issue.

Okay, cute gifs BTW, I'm trying to say Putin/Russia will secure it's interest same as we would same as France would, same as Briton would.
\Oh and really Germany did lose a bit not sure on the Eastern front how that went so much but but well Red revolution an d all that and theTsar trained them and armed them was more interesting.
 
2014-03-01 11:23:38 PM  

tinyarena: vygramul: tinyarena: So Russia invades a majority Russian suburb of Russia. I hope all the Russians in Crimea are okay with seeing Russians. Of course some of them are probably related. Oh how are we going to liberate the Russian citizens from the Russian invasion?

/ it's a puzzlement

Neville Chamberlain might have asked the same question regarding saving German Sudetans from German annexation. All this time I was told that was wrong. Is it no longer? Are we now changing the judgment of history to, "You know, some of these invasions are really ok."

Shocking I know. You may need to sit down for this but as a matter of fact, yes, some of these 'invasions' are tolerable.

And what an invasion it is!

They've invaded their own decrepit naval bases and they're old armories. And they patrol the streets, waving to their cousins, aunts, and in-laws. The Horror.

And just what do you propose we do about it? I suppose you think the majority Russian population of Crimea will welcome us as liberators?

Russia is a damaged brand and even their oldest allies and neighbors basically want nothing to do with them now. They will probably cling to the Crimea, for all the good it'll do them.


There's a difference between the rest of the world justifying our invasion of Iraq for us and telling us we're wrong for having done it. Neither would have stopped us. But one was honest and honorable.

Simply deciding that we won't do anything about Crimea should not preclude admitting to ourselves (much less saying to anyone else) that this isn't kosher.
 
2014-03-01 11:23:53 PM  

vygramul: rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.

Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.


Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar.  Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best.  Loud, easy to find and fragile.  To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure.  Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite.  Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.
 
2014-03-01 11:24:12 PM  

studebaker hoch: The Russians have really good missiles now.


Apparantly they've been trying out their mid-range nukes: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-25964387
 
2014-03-01 11:27:46 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Agent Nick Fury: LavenderWolf: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.

That's just patently false!

They also take positions that are so extraordinarily abhorrent and objectionable that no sane person would agree. Like rape rape.

Ha, ha, ha - you said rape a couple of times.

That just shouts "Fark funny person" because rape is the second funniest thing on this web site next to down syndrome children.

You sir, are cutting edge hilarious.

Funny or not, it's factually accurate.

Of course it is.

Can you name a position taken by Republicans/Teabaggers that isn't reactionary or entirely abhorrent?

Man on woman.

I know, it's reactionary and abhorrent to you but it's been around awhile.

But you're asking a question that is nonsensical without an answer because whatever the answer is you will say you disagree so it is reactionary and entirely abhorrent so go and poke somebody else.


Yeah, abhorrent.

You know, I'll give you this one. Their recent tax proposal is literally the first non-reactive, non-abhorrent piece of legislation the Republicans have proposed in the last 5+ years.
 
2014-03-01 11:29:00 PM  

Oldiron_79: I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.


-Rand Paul
 
2014-03-01 11:29:43 PM  

vygramul: rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.

Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.


No. They just recently (as in, LAST YEAR) regained the ability to patrol south of the equator subsurface. Their sub fleet is for the most part in disrepair and disarray. They've barely got 3 Borei class subs up and running and their Delta IVs practically need tug boats. The idea that their subsurface fleet is anywhere near the same capability as the Cold War days is just plain false.
 
2014-03-01 11:32:53 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

And whether or not Russian sees it as an invasion, it is one.  This is not a peacekeeping mission.  If it was, they'd have gone through the UN just like we did.

It wouldn't have been hard at this point.  Putin could have even looked like a big diplomatic hero.

This is an opportunistic invasion.  It doesn't matter how many of the people in Crimea are Russian speaking (you know, after the whole purges during the Soviet Era of non-Russian speakers).  It's part of the Ukraine now.

Sadly, there's not a lot of unity in the West to make any sort of deterrent to Russia doing things like this.

Your panties seem wadded. When was the first time you heard about the Ukraine?


Ukraine as a country?  No clue. How does one remember when they learned about the existence of a country?

The Euromaidan Protests in Ukraine that started this whole thing? Probably back in the end of November.
 
2014-03-01 11:33:22 PM  
To be clear, if Putin wants the entirety of Eastern Ukraine, no one can stop him.  It is Putin's. NATO has the forces to damage the Russians, even to eventually push them out.  NATO cannot stop Putin from taking the territory.

The only question is whether Putin wants to pay the political price, and there are some mighty big price tags on this conquest.  Obama's 90 minute chat with Putin earlier today must have mentioned a few of them.

-The G8?  Yeah, it's called the G7 again.

-Oil and gas exports to Europe?   Petro dollars are the only thing keeping Russia from turning into Kyrgyzstan.  The Russian economy collapses if Europe stops buying gas and oil.  If he takes eastern Ukraine, the EU will move heaven and earth to wean themselves from the bear.

-This new nation of West Ukraine?  It's getting automatic admission to the EU and NATO, with full protections and US military basing rights.

That's before we even get to the sanctions, and there will be sanctions.  Putin's wealth and that of his cronies will be locked down.  Travel restrictions.  No more oligarch villa's in Monaco and Cyprus.  Imports of goods to Russia will be slowed and stopped, especially luxury goods preferred by Putin and his cronies.  Trade with Russia will be greatly diminished, in both directions.

Putin's best move right now?  Use his show of force negotiate more autonomy for Crimea and the east of Ukraine.  Then, send his troops home and declare Mission Accomplished.  He probably won't do that.  He'll probably take the entire east of Ukraine, then suffer some mighty consequences.
 
2014-03-01 11:33:51 PM  

ecl: Borock Oblahmah is powerless to stop PUTIN ON THE RITZ!
<Cue music from Enemy at the Gates>

[Putin On A Rollin' Rollin' Rollin', RAWWWW HIIIIIDE Ritz *whip crack*.jpg]


OW MY BALLS, Pooty screamed, out of earshot of everyone else on the planet.
 
2014-03-01 11:34:55 PM  

Keith Dudemeister: CanisNoir: Keith Dudemeister: Dude, stop being reasonable and realistic about this whole thing. You rational summary is ruining it for everyone.

Sorry, but the narcassim of Superpower Hangover combined with pure partisan hackery really bothers me. I guess part of the problem is that us Americans have not had a form of "Ethnic Nationalism" since the Civil War so it's difficult for a lot of us to wrap our noggins around the way Europe sees itself.
Russia crossing the border to protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine is not an anomoly in world history, in fact, that kind of action is fairly common. I though Obama's offer of International Forces was a smart choice; it makes Putin rightly look like "the bad guy" for refusing the help in favor of increasing tensions and looking like an aggressor.
Now we just need to take a step back, a little breather and see which way our allies are going to move and then do what we can to assist them. I'm far from an expert in that region, but from where I'm sitting, I don't see any reason why the US should be taking a "leadership" role in trying to solve this problem.

Yep, there's a huge question that no one seems to be asking, which, in Fark terms, is "WHAR EUROPE?" The silence from Western Europe is deafening. There are lots of fingers being pointed at Obama but it seems like Germany (one country away from Ukraine), for example, has a much more vested interest in resolving this peacefully.


Germany & Russia just completed the second nat.gas pipeline (Nord Stream) that, per Russian requirements, pass North of Ukrainian territory (Russia is also considering similar Southern pipeline that skirts the Ukraine, this is Russia's means of pressuring the Ukraine to stay on board - Ukraine's gas pipeline infrastructure is getting very old and will be very expensive to upgrade - Russia is also owed 7 billion from the Ukraine for Nat gas contracts (take-or-pay).  That's 2 trillion cubic feet per year to Germany, as of 2012.  Germans can't run their economy on solar & wind (what nuclear?) - guess thinking about shoveling coal will keep them quiet.

i30.photobucket.com

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42405.pdf
 
2014-03-01 11:37:15 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?


d.ibtimes.co.uk
 
2014-03-01 11:37:25 PM  

rohar: vygramul: rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.

Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.

Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar.  Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best.  Loud, easy to find and fragile.  To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure.  Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite.  Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.


Y ou didn't mention years and it always been known the west sonar gear and stealthy armor wasthe tops but the existing Russian fleet well we haven't gone to war with a country like it. Also any one thinking of doing so is doing what the Russians feared would happen all along and with good reason.
 
2014-03-01 11:40:24 PM  

Crazy Lee: Germany & Russia just completed the second nat.gas pipeline (Nord Stream) that, per Russian requirements, pass North of Ukrainian territory


And if he takes Eastern Ukraine, Germany and the EU are going to do everything in their power to wean themselves of Russian gas.  If that means fracking, imported tankers of CNG, even nuclear, they'll do it.

Without petro dollars, Russia becomes a complete third world shiathole.  In the parts of Russia that aren't Moscow and St Petersburg, they're mostly there already.
 
2014-03-01 11:43:29 PM  

LograyX: Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?

[d.ibtimes.co.uk image 513x380]


Well now you totally got me there.

An internet picture of people shooting totally proves the Russians Ukrainians Syrians Rebels Jason Bournepeople are guilty of crimes against humanity and need to be punished.
 
2014-03-01 11:45:48 PM  
Peace
 
2014-03-01 11:47:12 PM  

LograyX: tinfoil-hat maggie: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

And whether or not Russian sees it as an invasion, it is one.  This is not a peacekeeping mission.  If it was, they'd have gone through the UN just like we did.

It wouldn't have been hard at this point.  Putin could have even looked like a big diplomatic hero.

This is an opportunistic invasion.  It doesn't matter how many of the people in Crimea are Russian speaking (you know, after the whole purges during the Soviet Era of non-Russian speakers).  It's part of the Ukraine now.

Sadly, there's not a lot of unity in the West to make any sort of deterrent to Russia doing things like this.

Your panties seem wadded. When was the first time you heard about the Ukraine?

Ukraine as a country?  No clue. How does one remember when they learned about the existence of a country?

The Euromaidan Protests in Ukraine that started this whole thing? Probably back in the end of November.


Well, good for you pay a bit of attention.
The Trooper
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2014-03-01 11:47:56 PM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: rohar: vygramul: rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.

Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.

Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar.  Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best.  Loud, easy to find and fragile.  To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure.  Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite.  Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.

Y ou didn't mention years and it always been known the west sonar gear and stealthy armor wasthe tops but the existing Russian fleet well ...


You're right, we haven't gone to war with a country like it.  But we go play with them for months on end every year in the north sea.  We've been playing this game for decades.  We know their equipment, capabilities and maneuvers inside out.

If there was a full on conflict between these two subsurface navys, there would be casualties on both sides.  Sometimes luck beats ability.  But it'd be over in days rather than weeks and the soviet submarines would be a memory.
 
2014-03-01 11:47:58 PM  

rohar: Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar. Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best. Loud, easy to find and fragile. To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure. Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite. Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.


Thanks for the insight.

If it got to be a full out shooting war, you think they'd be almost no chance of Ivan's sub launched cruise missiles hitting a US domestic target?  Conventional warhead of course.
 
2014-03-01 11:49:26 PM  
I thought the Ukraine was in the USSR?  WTF?  You can't attack your own people.
 
2014-03-01 11:51:09 PM  

Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?

[d.ibtimes.co.uk image 513x380]

Well now you totally got me there.

An internet picture of people shooting totally proves the Russians Ukrainians Syrians Rebels Jason Bournepeople are guilty of crimes against humanity and need to be punished.


http://metro.co.uk/2014/02/20/kiev-sniper-video-shows-ukraine-protes te rs-being-picked-off-by-police-4311768/

And that's just the first one I found that said "video" in the title.
 
2014-03-01 11:51:41 PM  

RandomRandom: rohar: Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar. Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best. Loud, easy to find and fragile. To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure. Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite. Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.

Thanks for the insight.

If it got to be a full out shooting war, you think they'd be almost no chance of Ivan's sub launched cruise missiles hitting a US domestic target?  Conventional warhead of course.


Meh, I'm probably not the absolute expert, but I've spend a few years working out the abilities of both fleets.  I'd suggest at least a 10/1 kill ratio in America's favor.  Half of theirs, we wouldn't even have to shoot.  Their metallurgy sucks and their captains are idiots.  We could take about half of them out chasing us to the bottom.
 
2014-03-01 11:52:08 PM  

RandomRandom: Crazy Lee: Germany & Russia just completed the second nat.gas pipeline (Nord Stream) that, per Russian requirements, pass North of Ukrainian territory

And if he takes Eastern Ukraine, Germany and the EU are going to do everything in their power to wean themselves of Russian gas.  If that means fracking, imported tankers of CNG, even nuclear, they'll do it.

Without petro dollars, Russia becomes a complete third world shiathole.  In the parts of Russia that aren't Moscow and St Petersburg, they're mostly there already.


Um, what? Putin can't attack Germany . You may need maps and such.

0.tqn.com
 
2014-03-02 12:02:08 AM  

RandomRandom: Crazy Lee: Germany & Russia just completed the second nat.gas pipeline (Nord Stream) that, per Russian requirements, pass North of Ukrainian territory

And if he takes Eastern Ukraine, Germany and the EU are going to do everything in their power to wean themselves of Russian gas.  If that means fracking, imported tankers of CNG, even nuclear, they'll do it.

Without petro dollars, Russia becomes a complete third world shiathole.  In the parts of Russia that aren't Moscow and St Petersburg, they're mostly there already.


I'll believe the EU will do that when I see it.  I remember all the froth and fury generated by the `73  oil embargo - oh! de independence!!  Nixon floated his Operation Independence (start with 1000 fast breeder reactors - with sufficient electricity both synfuel & hydrogen production on industrial scale becomes a reality).  Had we actually been serious - Israel would toe the line and U.S. would have avoided nearly all its subsequent Middle East related problems, as we would have had no compelling use for that part of the world.

Putin's not stupid (he knows where the money is) but there are plenty of ancillary players in this bit of theater that might improvise their lines.
 
2014-03-02 12:02:23 AM  

LograyX: Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: Agent Nick Fury: LograyX: TheWhoppah: Some of you need to take off your RedWhiteAndBlue blinders and figure out how to unfark yourselves.

Unrest in Ukraine has forced the legitimate government into hiding.  Amid the chaos, Russian interests were threatened by the extremists that have taken over Kiev.  Russia moves in to protect their legitimate historical interest in the region.   Russia doesn't even see this as an invasion... more of a peacekeeping exercise.

The legitimate government.  You mean the president that the Ukrainian Parliament voted to remove from power?  The one that was violently repressing the protestors (including using snipers to just randomly pick off people)?

Really?

After Obama backed down on Syria the media suddenly found that it wasn't Assad that used chemical weapons but the rebels themselves and Obama made a wise decision.

Now did they some how just find this fact out after Obama backed down or was the media misleading us on purpose?

[d.ibtimes.co.uk image 513x380]

Well now you totally got me there.

An internet picture of people shooting totally proves the Russians Ukrainians Syrians Rebels Jason Bournepeople are guilty of crimes against humanity and need to be punished.

http://metro.co.uk/2014/02/20/kiev-sniper-video-shows-ukraine-protes te rs-being-picked-off-by-police-4311768/

And that's just the first one I found that said "video" in the title.


Not saying it's happening or not but the video shows the same people in your still picture firing guns and was released by the current Ukrainian regime.

It shows nothing more than the Muslim Brotherhood videos during the Arab Spring.

Politics is ugly and people who want to advance politically will do whatever it takes to do so.

I have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.
 
2014-03-02 12:03:05 AM  
www.theplacewithnoname.com
 
2014-03-02 12:03:38 AM  

LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.


Pretty Gottverdammt much. This is an issue that folks are leaping upon, because they want to make waves, and see who jumps back. These news reports have been essentially hoping for something beyond the securing of assets, putting troops into position, and oddly enough, being turned away from a few airports that they'd like to have secured, but DIDN'T FILL THE "DEFENDERS" FULL OF HOLES FOR. This is a lot of hand wringing, to make sure that folks in a region that is full of flux, full of folks who are pissed and who are looking to vent their spleen upon, and making for damn sure that their bases are stocked, manned, and defended.

THIS is the DREAM action that folks WANTED in Benghazi. Just magically making troops appear, and airlifting material for an embassy staff, as opposed to securing local naval operations base and area. THIS is what they dreamed would happen, and this is likewise the reaction that would have gotten, save several hours later, and utterly too late to make a damn bit of difference there, but in this case, it makes it for damn sure known that the Russians are ready if things go pear shaped and the Ukraine decides, "Civil war it is then."

Will they accept the Crimea into Russia if they ask? For damn sure. That is a lot less paper work for people going to and fro, and a valuable piece of land and sea. Would they like to take advantage of the chaos sown? About as much as Texans would consider a civil war in Mexico, and wonder if they couldn't just scootch the border a few miles south?

This is less WWIII than Bosnia II, only without the ethnic cleansing, and with actual assets worth holding, and quasi-legitimate claims to the use of troops before the populace starts shooting up the joint.

The hand wringing and finger pointing is just so much opportunism to place blame anywhere else but on the folks who are watching each other closely, by folks who willfully disabuse themselves that the US has any f*cking interest in the damn region, save that there are a fair number of Russian naval vessels based from there...
 
2014-03-02 12:04:00 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Um, what? Putin can't attack Germany . You may need maps and such.


That was not what I was saying, though I can see how you read that way.

To rephrase.  Here are the consequences were Putin to take Eastern Ukraine.  Germany and the EU would do everything in their power to wean themselves of Russian gas.  If that means fracking, imported tankers of CNG, even nuclear, they would do it.

The EU has a lot more money than Russia.  They'd much rather spend money to stop a belligerent Russia than fight a war.  Europe has the money to do it.  They can afford to forgo Russian petroleum.  It will cost them, but if Russia takes Eastern Ukraine, it's a price most of Europe will be willing to pay.
 
2014-03-02 12:05:59 AM  

rohar: If there was a full on conflict between these two subsurface navys, there would be casualties on both sides.  Sometimes luck beats ability.  But it'd be over in days rather than weeks and the soviet submarines would be a memory.


In days no, in a war situation you would see more, but the smart boat would disappear. I completely understand the US sub fleet is bar none but well it all dependes on mission objectives.
 
2014-03-02 12:08:50 AM  

Agent Nick Fury: have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.


Wow, you're still in this?
 
2014-03-02 12:10:45 AM  

rohar: Meh, I'm probably not the absolute expert, but I've spend a few years working out the abilities of both fleets. I'd suggest at least a 10/1 kill ratio in America's favor. Half of theirs, we wouldn't even have to shoot. Their metallurgy sucks and their captains are idiots. We could take about half of them out chasing us to the bottom.


That's about what I was thinking.  At the end of a shooting war, the Russian air force and Russian fleet would be effectively gone.

Putin would try to gut-check the US by shooting missiles at US cities.  It would be all the US media talked about, tens of thousands could be dying in Europe, but the 47 souls lost in San Francisco would be the new Pearl Harbor and 9/11 wound up in one.
 
2014-03-02 12:11:40 AM  
Agent Nick Fury: It shows nothing more than the Muslim Brotherhood videos during the Arab Spring.

I have no idea what I am watching


OK, um, you don't know what you are watching, so it's DEFINITELY the M*zzies.

Gotcha.
 
2014-03-02 12:14:11 AM  

hubiestubert: LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.

Pretty Gottverdammt much. This is an issue that folks are leaping upon, because they want to make waves, and see who jumps back. These news reports have been essentially hoping for something beyond the securing of assets, putting troops into position, and oddly enough, being turned away from a few airports that they'd like to have secured, but DIDN'T FILL THE "DEFENDERS" FULL OF HOLES FOR. This is a lot of hand wringing, to make sure that folks in a region that is full of flux, full of folks who are pissed and who are looking to vent their spleen upon, and making for damn sure that their bases are stocked, manned, and defended.

THIS is the DREAM action that folks WANTED in Benghazi. Just magically making troops appear, and airlifting material for an embassy staff, as opposed to securing local naval operations base and area. THIS is what they dreamed would happen, and this is likewise the reaction that would have gotten, save several hours later, and utterly too late to make a damn bit of difference there, but in this case, it makes it for damn sure known that the Russians are ready if things go pear shaped and the Ukraine decides, "Civil war it is then."

Will they accept the Crimea into Russia if they ask? For damn sure. That is a lot less paper work for people going to and fro, and a valuable piece of land and sea. Would they like to take advantage of the chaos sown? About as much as Texans would consider a civil war in Mexico, and wonder if they couldn't just scootch the border a few miles south?

This is less WWIII than Bosnia II, only without the ethnic cleansing, and with actual assets worth holding, and quasi-legitimate claims to the use of troops before the populace starts ...


I still think you'r the smartest farker I kow cause you said all that so well and well we maybe should talk again soonish but not right now,
 
2014-03-02 12:15:36 AM  

Kittypie070: Agent Nick Fury: It shows nothing more than the Muslim Brotherhood videos during the Arab Spring.

I have no idea what I am watching

OK, um, you don't know what you are watching, so it's DEFINITELY the M*zzies.

Gotcha.


Don't crop my post to make yourself feel superior.

This is why you posted in the other thread and then posted a gif about how funny the post was and then commented on your own gif about how funny that was in relationship to your post.

Fark is a wasteland but it does notice when one is screaming for attention.
 
2014-03-02 12:17:27 AM  

Kittypie070: Agent Nick Fury: It shows nothing more than the Muslim Brotherhood videos during the Arab Spring.

I have no idea what I am watching

OK, um, you don't know what you are watching, so it's DEFINITELY the M*zzies.

Gotcha.


Hiya hon, good to see you here . So start awar over Ukkraine yea or nea?
 
2014-03-02 12:17:35 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.

Wow, you're still in this?


In what?
 
2014-03-02 12:21:24 AM  
The best part of this thread was when Nabb1 threadshat, got called on it, and then promptly exited while yelling "lol i troll u lol lol"
 
2014-03-02 12:21:26 AM  

rohar: Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar.  Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best.  Loud, easy to find and fragile.  To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure.  Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite.  Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.


Former analyst for the Operations Evaluation Group over at the Navy's FFRDC.

I stand by my assessment. You must be thinking of the Chinese fleet.
 
2014-03-02 12:21:48 AM  

Agent Nick Fury: tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.

Wow, you're still in this?

In what?


You've been here all day from my perspective. No worry's .
 
2014-03-02 12:22:42 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: Cataholic: I suspect a sternly-worded letter with strenuous objections is on its way.


And I suspect that you still don't know whether the GOP was for or against our actions in Libya.


Defend the ineptitude all you want, Obama still isn't having sex with you.
 
2014-03-02 12:26:15 AM  

iq_in_binary: vygramul: rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.

Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.

No. They just recently (as in, LAST YEAR) regained the ability to patrol south of the equator subsurface. Their sub fleet is for the most part in disrepair and disarray. They've barely got 3 Borei class subs up and running and their Delta IVs practically need tug boats. The idea that their subsurface fleet is anywhere near the same capability as the Cold War days is just plain false.


I didn't say it's the same as the Cold War days, I said it was world-class. And I'd check again - 15 years ago you'd be right. Heck, 10 years ago. But they decided they needed to do SOMETHING right and it's good again.
 
2014-03-02 12:28:29 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.

Wow, you're still in this?

In what?

You've been here all day from my perspective. No worry's .


I can say I have less than 50 posts the last three years.

I was here @ 11:00 to see what was going on and then left to work on my car - I was called a pussy for leaving.

I came back @ 4:00 to refute these allegations.

Then, after the Penguins lost to the cheating Blackhawks I come back again.

I'm sure G.M. can confirm my activity because they do that on Total Fark.
 
2014-03-02 12:33:26 AM  

vygramul: rohar: Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar.  Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best.  Loud, easy to find and fragile.  To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure.  Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite.  Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.

Former analyst for the Operations Evaluation Group over at the Navy's FFRDC.

I stand by my assessment. You must be thinking of the Chinese fleet.


And the plot thickens as two sub geeks face off.

Granted I'm not up on the latest but well I doubt we know where all the Russian subs are sure we see them when they leave port nut once they dive. Unless their is a sub tracking it well...
 
2014-03-02 12:33:37 AM  

rohar: You're right, we haven't gone to war with a country like it.  But we go play with them for months on end every year in the north sea.  We've been playing this game for decades.  We know their equipment, capabilities and maneuvers inside out.

If there was a full on conflict between these two subsurface navys, there would be casualties on both sides.  Sometimes luck beats ability.  But it'd be over in days rather than weeks and the soviet submarines would be a memory.


Our surface ASW capability has gone downhill since the Soviets stopped dogging us everywhere. We no longer have that fine, practiced edge.

Our subsurface guys are pretty darn good, though. You know who else is really good? The Japanese.
 
2014-03-02 12:33:45 AM  
If you like your warm water port in Crimea, you can keep your warm water port in Crimea.
 
2014-03-02 12:34:03 AM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Oldiron_79: I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.

-Rand Paul


Not even close, that one was from Albert farking Einstein.
 
2014-03-02 12:34:42 AM  
tinfoil-hat maggie:  I still think you'r the smartest farker I kow cause you said all that so well and well we maybe should talk again soonish but not right now,

You know where I'm at, you. Be the best you, you can be. There will be a lot of posturing, and grandstanding in the rest of this, and it will come, essentially, to naught. Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast. The Russians don't play at "warning shots" and it will certainly play into their narrative.

The Russians aren't exactly innocents, but they ARE doing exactly what folks who have assets in the region would do, and if they come under fire, they won't hesitate to render that particular section that shots came from to rubble and quietly outgassing corpses that they can then claim did all manner of mischief. I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t, because the Russians WILL end it, and fast. And that will only give them greater claims and greater credibility about their looking to protect their interests.
 
2014-03-02 12:36:49 AM  

hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie:  I still think you'r the smartest farker I kow cause you said all that so well and well we maybe should talk again soonish but not right now,

You know where I'm at, you. Be the best you, you can be. There will be a lot of posturing, and grandstanding in the rest of this, and it will come, essentially, to naught. Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast. The Russians don't play at "warning shots" and it will certainly play into their narrative.

The Russians aren't exactly innocents, but they ARE doing exactly what folks who have assets in the region would do, and if they come under fire, they won't hesitate to render that particular section that shots came from to rubble and quietly outgassing corpses that they can then claim did all manner of mischief. I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t, because the Russians WILL end it, and fast. And that will only give them greater claims and greater credibility about their looking to protect their interests.


Seriously, isn't there a TF halloween costume thread you poor, pathetic lowlifes can go to?
 
2014-03-02 12:37:24 AM  

vygramul: iq_in_binary: vygramul: rohar: tinfoil-hat maggie: Mentat: vygramul: So Neville Chamberlain is considered to have made a huge mistake to let Germany annex the part of Czechoslovakia that was mostly German. But the right move here is to let Russia annex the part of Ukraine that is mostly Russian?

What an odd system of logic.

What's your solution?

This is curious, why do people wanna equate Putin-Russia, with Germany-Hitler. Wow the uneducated mouth breathers get a voice ,well, Even the PNAC crew new Russia would be back on it's feet in 10-15 years from the collapse of the USSR. Well US america got to run rampage where and when they wanted but the time is up on that. Russia is standing up for itself again and IMHO you should read about past Tsars since that seems where this is going.

English, you should learn it.  Papers please?

Beyond that, your premise is flawed.  Russia is no more a power today than it was 10 years ago.  Honestly, it's been slipping further and further into third world shiat hole status since the Soviet Union dissolved and even that wasn't great shakes.  If it wasn't for those pesky nukes, they'd be at terrible risk of occupation themselves.  Many nations have much stronger militaries.  Almost all modern nations have much stronger and more diversified economies.

Their sub-surface fleet is world-class, though. The surface navy doesn't like going far without an ocean-going tug accompanying them. But they got their shiat together under the waves.

No. They just recently (as in, LAST YEAR) regained the ability to patrol south of the equator subsurface. Their sub fleet is for the most part in disrepair and disarray. They've barely got 3 Borei class subs up and running and their Delta IVs practically need tug boats. The idea that their subsurface fleet is anywhere near the same capability as the Cold War days is just plain false.

I didn't say it's the same as the Cold War days, I said it was world-class. And I'd check again - 15 years ago you'd b ...


You didn't actually read my post then. You're right, they did decide to get something going in the subsurface fleet.

The result is 2 SSBNs capable of getting south of the equator in the Pacific, and 1 in the Atlantic. That's it.

Everything else is either out of the water, under repair, or dragging on the sea floor unless it has a tug boat. Their subsurface fleet isn't world class, it's outclassed by France.
 
2014-03-02 12:37:50 AM  

Oldiron_79: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Oldiron_79: I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.

-Rand Paul

Not even close, that one was from Albert farking Einstein.


Rand Paul has been plagiarizing a shiatload recently, so it's become a fark meme to attribute all quotes to Rand Paul.
 
2014-03-02 12:38:23 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: vygramul: rohar: Hi there! I'm former RM1(SS) rohar.  Their subsurface fleet is questionable at best.  Loud, easy to find and fragile.  To make up for it, their targeting range is extremely limited and firing is prone to failure.  Sorry buddy, but that's what they've got.

Seriously, we can see their nuclear boats from satellite.  Shielding is an important thing if you want to be stealthy.

Former analyst for the Operations Evaluation Group over at the Navy's FFRDC.

I stand by my assessment. You must be thinking of the Chinese fleet.

And the plot thickens as two sub geeks face off.

Granted I'm not up on the latest but well I doubt we know where all the Russian subs are sure we see them when they leave port nut once they dive. Unless their is a sub tracking it well...


It's called the IUSS. And while being used for research now, it is still under Naval control.
 
2014-03-02 12:42:06 AM  

Agent Nick Fury: tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.

Wow, you're still in this?

In what?

You've been here all day from my perspective. No worry's .

I can say I have less than 50 posts the last three years.

I was here @ 11:00 to see what was going on and then left to work on my car - I was called a pussy for leaving.

I came back @ 4:00 to refute these allegations.

Then, after the Penguins lost to the cheating Blackhawks I come back again.

I'm sure G.M. can confirm my activity because they do that on Total Fark.


Alright dude, it's cool.As-salamu alaykum
 
2014-03-02 12:43:03 AM  
I hate to say I told you so.

Who am I kidding?! I love saying I told you so.


I told you so
 
2014-03-02 12:43:33 AM  

vygramul: Oldiron_79: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Oldiron_79: I have no idea with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones.

-Rand Paul

Not even close, that one was from Albert farking Einstein.

Rand Paul has been plagiarizing a shiatload recently, so it's become a fark meme to attribute all quotes to Rand Paul.


Live long and prosper- Rand Paul
 
2014-03-02 12:43:42 AM  

Agent Nick Fury: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie:  I still think you'r the smartest farker I kow cause you said all that so well and well we maybe should talk again soonish but not right now,

You know where I'm at, you. Be the best you, you can be. There will be a lot of posturing, and grandstanding in the rest of this, and it will come, essentially, to naught. Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast. The Russians don't play at "warning shots" and it will certainly play into their narrative.

The Russians aren't exactly innocents, but they ARE doing exactly what folks who have assets in the region would do, and if they come under fire, they won't hesitate to render that particular section that shots came from to rubble and quietly outgassing corpses that they can then claim did all manner of mischief. I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t, because the Russians WILL end it, and fast. And that will only give them greater claims and greater credibility about their looking to protect their interests.

Seriously, isn't there a TF halloween costume thread you poor, pathetic lowlifes can go to?


It is terrible when folks show a modicum of civility and connection, isn't it? How it must gnaw at a soul...
 
2014-03-02 12:43:57 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: tinfoil-hat maggie: Agent Nick Fury: have no idea what I am watching an neither does our government so they need to stay the hell out.

Wow, you're still in this?

In what?

You've been here all day from my perspective. No worry's .

I can say I have less than 50 posts the last three years.

I was here @ 11:00 to see what was going on and then left to work on my car - I was called a pussy for leaving.

I came back @ 4:00 to refute these allegations.

Then, after the Penguins lost to the cheating Blackhawks I come back again.

I'm sure G.M. can confirm my activity because they do that on Total Fark.

Alright dude, it's cool.As-salamu alaykum


Wow, you still here?
 
2014-03-02 12:44:25 AM  

iq_in_binary: You didn't actually read my post then. You're right, they did decide to get something going in the subsurface fleet.

The result is 2 SSBNs capable of getting south of the equator in the Pacific, and 1 in the Atlantic. That's it.

Everything else is either out of the water, under repair, or dragging on the sea floor unless it has a tug boat. Their subsurface fleet isn't world class, it's outclassed by France.


You're substantially under-counting. They decommed (read: allowed to rust into oblivion) or sold off most of what they had, but you're off by an order of magnitude for their nuclear attack subs in the Northern Fleet. And the Severodvinsk is a huge leap forward for them as far as design goes.

And they still have half a dozen Kilos in their Pacific Fleet.
 
2014-03-02 12:47:13 AM  

hubiestubert: I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t


As far as I can judge, any Ukraine commanders who try to keep "their people" (and by that I mean Right Sector and similar armed paramilitary groups) is declared the Enemy of the People and put under arrest. Currently Maidan pretty much has the power to dismiss the new Kiev's government at will, so it's not as if there is somebody who can control them.

"Self-defense brigades" have more power than local police, and we all know how disciplined and cold-headed self-defense brigades are, in a revolutionary situation.

As for Ukrainian military proper, they certainly aren't going to start shooting at Russian troops now. But it's pretty hard to say what the self-appointed defenders will do, especially if they suffer from delusions of grandeur.
 
2014-03-02 12:48:45 AM  
i think deep down inside (and perhaps not so deep down), many of you are drooling in anticipation of conflict.
 
2014-03-02 12:49:31 AM  

hubiestubert: Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast.


That's the worry.

A larger conflict is certainly not in Putin's game plan, but the game could get away from him.  If shooting starts between his forces and that of the Ukraine, Putin won't easily be able to back down.

There are conflicting reports on how able the Ukrainian military is.  Some analysts think the Russian ground forces are too hollowed out to take on Western Ukraine's military.  Some think the same of Ukraine's forces.  It's probably both.  We've saw the best of what Russia has in Crimea and Georgia.  That level of professionalism probably doesn't run very deep on either side.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/world/europe/ukraine-finds-its-for ce s-are-ill-equipped-to-take-crimea-back-from-russia.html?hp

If a war does start between Ukraine and Russia, the west could funnel tremendous assets to the battle.  Unlike the Syrian opposition, we'd probably trust Western Ukraine with anti-aircraft weaponry.  The Russians would have a tough time.
 
2014-03-02 12:50:51 AM  

hubiestubert: Agent Nick Fury: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie:  I still think you'r the smartest farker I kow cause you said all that so well and well we maybe should talk again soonish but not right now,

You know where I'm at, you. Be the best you, you can be. There will be a lot of posturing, and grandstanding in the rest of this, and it will come, essentially, to naught. Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast. The Russians don't play at "warning shots" and it will certainly play into their narrative.

The Russians aren't exactly innocents, but they ARE doing exactly what folks who have assets in the region would do, and if they come under fire, they won't hesitate to render that particular section that shots came from to rubble and quietly outgassing corpses that they can then claim did all manner of mischief. I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t, because the Russians WILL end it, and fast. And that will only give them greater claims and greater credibility about their looking to protect their interests.

Seriously, isn't there a TF halloween costume thread you poor, pathetic lowlifes can go to?

It is terrible when folks show a modicum of civility and connection, isn't it? How it must gnaw at a soul...


Yes, making fun of children with Down Syndrome, slobbering over slightly less than totally obese TFers, and how to come down down from a heroin high is definitely the modicum of civility and connection.
 
2014-03-02 12:51:31 AM  

RandomRandom: hubiestubert: Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast.

That's the worry.

A larger conflict is certainly not in Putin's game plan, but the game could get away from him.  If shooting starts between his forces and that of the Ukraine, Putin won't easily be able to back down.

There are conflicting reports on how able the Ukrainian military is.  Some analysts think the Russian ground forces are too hollowed out to take on Western Ukraine's military.  Some think the same of Ukraine's forces.  It's probably both.  We've saw the best of what Russia has in Crimea and Georgia.  That level of professionalism probably doesn't run very deep on either side.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/world/europe/ukraine-finds-its-for ce s-are-ill-equipped-to-take-crimea-back-from-russia.html?hp

If a war does start between Ukraine and Russia, the west could funnel tremendous assets to the battle.  Unlike the Syrian opposition, we'd probably trust Western Ukraine with anti-aircraft weaponry.  The Russians would have a tough time.


If there's one universal truth of international relations it's that there is plenty of opportunity for miscalculation.
 
2014-03-02 12:53:06 AM  

vygramul: iq_in_binary: You didn't actually read my post then. You're right, they did decide to get something going in the subsurface fleet.

The result is 2 SSBNs capable of getting south of the equator in the Pacific, and 1 in the Atlantic. That's it.

Everything else is either out of the water, under repair, or dragging on the sea floor unless it has a tug boat. Their subsurface fleet isn't world class, it's outclassed by France.

You're substantially under-counting. They decommed (read: allowed to rust into oblivion) or sold off most of what they had, but you're off by an order of magnitude for their nuclear attack subs in the Northern Fleet. And the Severodvinsk is a huge leap forward for them as far as design goes.

And they still have half a dozen Kilos in their Pacific Fleet.


All of which have to go over IUSS because they can't get south of the Equator. We'd see them coming.

My point still stands.
 
2014-03-02 12:56:07 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Kittypie070: Agent Nick Fury: It shows nothing more than the Muslim Brotherhood videos during the Arab Spring.

I have no idea what I am watching

OK, um, you don't know what you are watching, so it's DEFINITELY the M*zzies.

Gotcha.


Hiya hon, good to see you here . So start awar over Ukkraine yea or nea?


Um, Hell no.

The troops just spent way too long in the sandbox and the sh*tbox under the stop-loss policy, and have a shiatty, fractured and underfunded VA to come home to.
 
2014-03-02 12:56:13 AM  

Grahor: hubiestubert: I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t

As far as I can judge, any Ukraine commanders who try to keep "their people" (and by that I mean Right Sector and similar armed paramilitary groups) is declared the Enemy of the People and put under arrest. Currently Maidan pretty much has the power to dismiss the new Kiev's government at will, so it's not as if there is somebody who can control them.

"Self-defense brigades" have more power than local police, and we all know how disciplined and cold-headed self-defense brigades are, in a revolutionary situation.

As for Ukrainian military proper, they certainly aren't going to start shooting at Russian troops now. But it's pretty hard to say what the self-appointed defenders will do, especially if they suffer from delusions of grandeur.


Those are good poin mikilitatarym most of the military finally went with the rebels but it's not so clear
 
2014-03-02 01:00:59 AM  
You apologists are starting to sound like Jon Lovitz.

"Why yeah, Putin sent the army in to protect Russian immigrants. That's the ticket. It's a humanitarian mission! And you know what else (low voice)...Ukraine has been secretly part of Russia this whole time. (loud voice) So see, they aren't invading anybody!"

By Monday you will have rationalized another Nobel for Obama and his great vision to liberate Ukraine.
 
2014-03-02 01:02:40 AM  

Kittypie070: tinfoil-hat maggie: Kittypie070: Agent Nick Fury: It shows nothing more than the Muslim Brotherhood videos during the Arab Spring.

I have no idea what I am watching

OK, um, you don't know what you are watching, so it's DEFINITELY the M*zzies.

Gotcha.

Hiya hon, good to see you here . So start awar over Ukkraine yea or nea?

Um, Hell no.

The troops just spent way too long in the sandbox and the sh*tbox under the stop-loss policy, and have a shiatty, fractured and underfunded VA to come home to.


Welp, good, enough doe me Kitty has spoken adn you warmonger types were probably abused and well ...
 
2014-03-02 01:06:09 AM  
The people who govern Russia just make you want to give yourself an atomic facepalm. I once read a newspaper article from the late 1950s where the USSR had developed a weapons system which could hit any spot on Earth, and they were not afraid to use it. Remember this was less than 15 years after the world witnessed the most brutal war in history, a war in which the Russians played a significant role to end it.

Now here we are, about 15 days after Russia welcomed the international community to its land for the Winter Olympics, and they are going after the Ukraine?! Like seriously, most of the population is on the European side, you would think that would rub off a bit to bring the nation to its senses.
 
2014-03-02 01:06:17 AM  

Agent Nick Fury: hubiestubert: Agent Nick Fury: hubiestubert: tinfoil-hat maggie:  I still think you'r the smartest farker I kow cause you said all that so well and well we maybe should talk again soonish but not right now,

You know where I'm at, you. Be the best you, you can be. There will be a lot of posturing, and grandstanding in the rest of this, and it will come, essentially, to naught. Well, up until some Ukrainian decides to take a potshot at the Russians, and then sh*t will get real, fast. The Russians don't play at "warning shots" and it will certainly play into their narrative.

The Russians aren't exactly innocents, but they ARE doing exactly what folks who have assets in the region would do, and if they come under fire, they won't hesitate to render that particular section that shots came from to rubble and quietly outgassing corpses that they can then claim did all manner of mischief. I only hope that the Ukraine commanders can keep their people in control enough to NOT start some sh*t, because the Russians WILL end it, and fast. And that will only give them greater claims and greater credibility about their looking to protect their interests.

Seriously, isn't there a TF halloween costume thread you poor, pathetic lowlifes can go to?

It is terrible when folks show a modicum of civility and connection, isn't it? How it must gnaw at a soul...

Yes, making fun of children with Down Syndrome, slobbering over slightly less than totally obese TFers, and how to come down down from a heroin high is definitely the modicum of civility and connection.


I'm not sure what thread you've been reading, but it sounds like a party.
 
2014-03-02 01:09:33 AM  

vygramul: rohar: You're right, we haven't gone to war with a country like it.  But we go play with them for months on end every year in the north sea.  We've been playing this game for decades.  We know their equipment, capabilities and maneuvers inside out.

If there was a full on conflict between these two subsurface navys, there would be casualties on both sides.  Sometimes luck beats ability.  But it'd be over in days rather than weeks and the soviet submarines would be a memory.

Our surface ASW capability has gone downhill since the Soviets stopped dogging us everywhere. We no longer have that fine, practiced edge.

Our subsurface guys are pretty darn good, though. You know who else is really good? The Japanese.


surface asw has gotten a lot better in the last 10 years.....orders of magnitude improvements ( with a lot more needs, true)
 
2014-03-02 01:13:40 AM  

Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Nabb1: Lord_Baull: Hobodeluxe: ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...

I'm going to guess he wants exactly the opposite of whatever Obama does.

they're reactionary. they don't take positions before Obama does.


Nabb1: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

I don't know, yet. Did you expect the speech to work?


Lolz. "I don't know what Obama should do, I'm just against everything he's done so far."

That's what you got out of that? Man, you guys are too sensitive about that guy.

Numerous calls for you to explain post. No response. I'm open ears.

I was eating dinner with my wife and kids. Do you really expect me to drop that to meet your demand for me to explain myself? Who the f*ck do you think you are? You think you're so goddamned special that you DEMAND an explanation for every little sarcastic remark that offends your delicate political sensibilities and then feign indignation because they don't immediately drop everything and cater to your whims? Here's my explanation: get over yourself.


Changing the topic. Classy, understated retreat with a hint of rage on the nose. Great with hard cheeses and internet arguments.
 
2014-03-02 01:15:25 AM  

Electrify: The people who govern Russia just make you want to give yourself an atomic facepalm. I once read a newspaper article from the late 1950s where the USSR had developed a weapons system which could hit any spot on Earth, and they were not afraid to use it. Remember this was less than 15 years after the world witnessed the most brutal war in history, a war in which the Russians played a significant role to end it.

Now here we are, about 15 days after Russia welcomed the international community to its land for the Winter Olympics, and they are going after the Ukraine?! Like seriously, most of the population is on the European side, you would think that would rub off a bit to bring the nation to its senses.


I don't get the logic. What does it matter if it's just 15 days since? The situation in Ukraine doesn't go by anyone's schedule, and if Putin thinks that Russia should get involved at least in Crimea, and apparently he does, what does it matter how long ago Olympics happened?

As for the sides, the population of at least Crimea is on the side of order, and since they've officially invited Russia, they thing it's in their interests. And they have such right - you know, the right of self-determination, et cetera?
 
2014-03-02 01:18:42 AM  

cchris_39: You apologists are starting to sound like Jon Lovitz.

"Why yeah, Putin sent the army in to protect Russian immigrants. That's the ticket. It's a humanitarian mission! And you know what else (low voice)...Ukraine has been secretly part of Russia this whole time. (loud voice) So see, they aren't invading anybody!"

By Monday you will have rationalized another Nobel for Obama and his great vision to liberate Ukraine.


Dude you just contradicted the fk outta yourself.
 
2014-03-02 01:23:40 AM  

threadjackistan: Place you bottlecaps on the table!

VS

Winner takes all!


Well, winner at least takes what's left.
 
2014-03-02 01:25:50 AM  

ZAZ: Crimea is gone, but we should make sure Putin knows if Kiev is threatened there will be a cruise missile with his name on it.


Seriously?  Do you have ANY farking clue how he'd respond?
 
2014-03-02 01:28:13 AM  
Sorry I quoted the dude, y'all, but the contradiction was just too obvious.
 
2014-03-02 01:48:00 AM  

LordJiro: Pincy: Why do I have a feeling that if Obama announced tomorrow that he was sending troops into Ukraine to help protect its borders that the Republicans would suddenly be the biggest Pacifists on the face of the earth?

'Why is Obama risking World War 3 over people who WANT to join Russia?! On behalf of the MUSLIM Tartars?! IMPEACH!"


Conversely if he does nothing, the GOP will be calling for his head.

Again, I fail to see why we should be involved at all.
 
2014-03-02 02:47:54 AM  

Tommy Moo: 100 Watt Walrus: It's complicated.

Ukrainian presidential election, 2010
[i.imgur.com image 850x478]

If cooler heads may prevail, cutting the country in half seems like a very sensible choice. Won't everyone be happy then? Or is the west the major economic producer, and therefore a target for Russia to maintain control over?


ok you cut the country in half.  one half is pro russian and the other is well.....pro eu, probably more pro eu than ever before.  putin is not going to be happy with that, the more pro eu part.  he then starts slowly expanding.  ukraine becomes something akin to east/west germany.

it cant be all about the black sea fleet.  putin will never accept ukraine turning more towards the eu.  outside of sending aid to ukraine and diplomatic actions, what could be done militarily?

doubtful we would send us troops there.  probably support the Ukrainian armed forces but that is about it.
 
2014-03-02 03:11:01 AM  

echomike23: putin will never accept ukraine turning more towards the eu.


Putin won't have a choice.

If he takes Eastern Ukraine, Western Ukraine will be fast tracked for EU and NATO admission, with the full treaty protection those organizations provide.

Putin's best move now would be to negotiate greater autonomy in eastern Ukraine, though It may be getting too late for that.

Ukraine is putting a few hundred thousand men in the field.  With armies in the field, anything can happen.  If it gets to shooting, the west will supply Western Ukraine and the Russians will have a hell of a fight on their hands.
 
2014-03-02 03:24:42 AM  

ksdanj: ManateeGag: Nabb1: I guess the speech didn't work.

What, exactly, do you want the US to do about it?

Yes, please elaborate Nabb1...


Pretty simple....
Give a speech that works.

No red lines that aren't going to be enforced, please.
 
2014-03-02 03:44:38 AM  

gnadfly: No red lines that aren't going to be enforced, please.


What red line did Obama draw that isn't going to be enforced?

Obama did not say Russia was risking US military retaliation.   He said Russia would "face costs".

How is that a red line that isn't going to be enforced?
 
2014-03-02 03:56:32 AM  

RandomRandom: echomike23: putin will never accept ukraine turning more towards the eu.

Putin won't have a choice.

If he takes Eastern Ukraine, Western Ukraine will be fast tracked for EU and NATO admission, with the full treaty protection those organizations provide.

Putin's best move now would be to negotiate greater autonomy in eastern Ukraine, though It may be getting too late for that.

Ukraine is putting a few hundred thousand men in the field.  With armies in the field, anything can happen.  If it gets to shooting, the west will supply Western Ukraine and the Russians will have a hell of a fight on their hands.


it would be warsaw pact doctrine vs warsaw pact doctrine as well as equipment.  btr80's against btr 80's.  although the russians would have a much larger force.
 
2014-03-02 04:06:35 AM  

echomike23: it would be warsaw pact doctrine vs warsaw pact doctrine as well as equipment. btr80's against btr 80's. although the russians would have a much larger force.


Were Russia to try moving west, Ukraine would have defenders advantage, plus real time intelligence from western reconnaissance.

Ukraine would also receive aid from the west, supplies, probably weapons including the latest anti-aircraft.  Russia would have a hard time maintaining air superiority.  Ukraine has up to 1 million trained reservists.  The Russians could field more, but moving and supplying them would be a real struggle.

If the Russians move west, Ukraine would have a reasonable shot of pushing them out, maybe even routing them.
 
2014-03-02 04:29:26 AM  

RandomRandom: echomike23: it would be warsaw pact doctrine vs warsaw pact doctrine as well as equipment. btr80's against btr 80's. although the russians would have a much larger force.

Were Russia to try moving west, Ukraine would have defenders advantage, plus real time intelligence from western reconnaissance.

Ukraine would also receive aid from the west, supplies, probably weapons including the latest anti-aircraft.  Russia would have a hard time maintaining air superiority.  Ukraine has up to 1 million trained reservists.  The Russians could field more, but moving and supplying them would be a real struggle.

If the Russians move west, Ukraine would have a reasonable shot of pushing them out, maybe even routing them.


the advantage i see that the russians have is the networks that the fsb have layed out in the crimea.  the russians moved extremely fast to take the airport in simerfopol in a similar style to the afghan invasion by securing the airports as civilian disguised aircraft carrying soviet paratroopers.

i believed what happened is that the fsb took some pro russia militias, told them to storm the government buildings and hold them.  then the army took...let say a batalion of russian paratroops and had them tear off their patches, names and ranks from their uniforms,  then sent them to the simerfopol airport to secure it and pave the way for large aircraft with more troops to land and take more territory.  you have the pro russia groups ask for help from russia and voila, instant takeover before the international community could respond.

from the videos i have seen there were no tanks or artillery pieces (i could be wrong) mostly soldiers wearing russian camo with russian equipment and standard ak's (paratroopers are issued folding stock models to better fit with their jump equipment)  along btr 80's and trucks.

global.fncstatic.com

i.telegraph.co.uk
 
2014-03-02 04:33:36 AM  
i forgot to post this for reference
en.ria.ru
 
2014-03-02 05:08:54 AM  

echomike23: the advantage i see that the russians have is the networks that the fsb have layed out in the crimea.


Crimea is a pro-Russia, Russian speaking region.  There are also multiple Russian military bases there.  It's not surprising the Russians had the run of the place.

The FSB would not have that advantage in western Ukraine.  If the Russians move west, they'll be opposed.
 
2014-03-02 05:15:45 AM  

RandomRandom: echomike23: the advantage i see that the russians have is the networks that the fsb have layed out in the crimea.

Crimea is a pro-Russia, Russian speaking region.  There are also multiple Russian military bases there.  It's not surprising the Russians had the run of the place.

The FSB would not have that advantage in western Ukraine.  If the Russians move west, they'll be opposed.


absolutely they would be opposed.  not without syria 2: electric boogalo breaking out.
 
2014-03-02 06:23:28 AM  
Not our problem.
 
2014-03-02 06:26:59 AM  

iron_city_ap: LordJiro: You mean like the mostly-Russian populace of Crimea asked them to?

And really, you're surprised that the Russians want to make sure they don't lose their main port on the Black Sea?

I'm no fan of Pooty-Poot, but this is not nearly as big an issue as people are whining about.

As long as they respect the sovereignty of the region, I can't complain. If they try to claim it as Russian soil, then I have an issue.


I shall pass along your concerns to Putin.

No one gives a fark what you have a issue with..
 
2014-03-02 06:33:47 AM  
 
2014-03-02 08:53:46 AM  

iq_in_binary: vygramul: iq_in_binary: You didn't actually read my post then. You're right, they did decide to get something going in the subsurface fleet.

The result is 2 SSBNs capable of getting south of the equator in the Pacific, and 1 in the Atlantic. That's it.

Everything else is either out of the water, under repair, or dragging on the sea floor unless it has a tug boat. Their subsurface fleet isn't world class, it's outclassed by France.

You're substantially under-counting. They decommed (read: allowed to rust into oblivion) or sold off most of what they had, but you're off by an order of magnitude for their nuclear attack subs in the Northern Fleet. And the Severodvinsk is a huge leap forward for them as far as design goes.

And they still have half a dozen Kilos in their Pacific Fleet.

All of which have to go over IUSS because they can't get south of the Equator. We'd see them coming.

My point still stands.


And despite the magical infallibility of IUSS, that didn't stop the first sensor to detect the Chinese diesel boat that surfaced near Kitty Hawk from being the Mk-1 eyeball.

But as everyone knows, the Chinese diesel boats are way more quiet than anything the Russians have.
 
2014-03-02 08:57:16 AM  

johnny_vegas: vygramul: rohar: You're right, we haven't gone to war with a country like it.  But we go play with them for months on end every year in the north sea.  We've been playing this game for decades.  We know their equipment, capabilities and maneuvers inside out.

If there was a full on conflict between these two subsurface navys, there would be casualties on both sides.  Sometimes luck beats ability.  But it'd be over in days rather than weeks and the soviet submarines would be a memory.

Our surface ASW capability has gone downhill since the Soviets stopped dogging us everywhere. We no longer have that fine, practiced edge.

Our subsurface guys are pretty darn good, though. You know who else is really good? The Japanese.

surface asw has gotten a lot better in the last 10 years.....orders of magnitude improvements ( with a lot more needs, true)


You must have been involved in different USWEXes than I was.
 
2014-03-02 11:14:52 AM  
I'm torn. They're kinda white so I should probably care. But they were the bad guys in a lot of movies growing up. And they have a weird alphabet.

So can someone tell me how I should feel about this as a generally disinterested American?

/kthxby
 
ecl
2014-03-02 12:29:28 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm torn. They're kinda white so I should probably care. But they were the bad guys in a lot of movies growing up. And they have a weird alphabet.

So can someone tell me how I should feel about this as a generally disinterested American?

/kthxby


Putin wants to outlaw gays and then pals around with them on camera.  America hates Flip-Floppers.
 
2014-03-02 12:40:06 PM  

ecl: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm torn. They're kinda white so I should probably care. But they were the bad guys in a lot of movies growing up. And they have a weird alphabet.

So can someone tell me how I should feel about this as a generally disinterested American?

/kthxby

Putin wants to outlaw gays and then pals around with them on camera.  America hates Flip-Floppers.


I kinda hate flip-flops too. Maybe on the beach. Or if it's too warm for slippers.

So I'm still in a quandary.
 
2014-03-02 12:44:02 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: ecl: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm torn. They're kinda white so I should probably care. But they were the bad guys in a lot of movies growing up. And they have a weird alphabet.

So can someone tell me how I should feel about this as a generally disinterested American?

/kthxby

Putin wants to outlaw gays and then pals around with them on camera.  America hates Flip-Floppers.

I kinda hate flip-flops too. Maybe on the beach. Or if it's too warm for slippers.

So I'm still in a quandary.


i799.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-02 02:29:37 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: ecl: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm torn. They're kinda white so I should probably care. But they were the bad guys in a lot of movies growing up. And they have a weird alphabet.

So can someone tell me how I should feel about this as a generally disinterested American?

/kthxby

Putin wants to outlaw gays and then pals around with them on camera.  America hates Flip-Floppers.

I kinda hate flip-flops too. Maybe on the beach. Or if it's too warm for slippers.

So I'm still in a quandary.


it can be dangerous if somebody steps on your flip-flop from behind while you're walking.
 
2014-03-02 03:15:54 PM  
jchuffyman: In short, since I've posted it in other threads about this. "The Ukraine" is a rough English translation of the Russian practice of treating Ukraine as a region and not a country. The Russian language has no articles, but they use prepositions in a similar manner. There is a preposition you use to say that you are in a country, but you use a different on with Ukraine. And it's the only country in the world where you do.

Like "The Ohio State University"?
 
2014-03-02 04:25:54 PM  

jchuffyman: In short, since I've posted it in other threads about this. "The Ukraine" is a rough English translation of the Russian practice of treating Ukraine as a region and not a country. The Russian language has no articles, but they use prepositions in a similar manner. There is a preposition you use to say that you are in a country, but you use a different on with Ukraine. And it's the only country in the world where you do.


The Netherlands.

But it is highly unusual.
 
2014-03-03 03:25:20 AM  

Triumph: Any thread with the headline "this will not end well" is implicitly laying down the last post gauntlet.


www.godlikeproductions.com
 
Displayed 502 of 502 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media