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.

(NBC News)   Russian forces have disappeared from Simferopol, huge pro-Russian crowds are no longer present, and the Crimean peninsula returns to normal. Can we stop waxing the tadpole about WWIII now?   (nbcnews.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Russian forces, peninsula  
•       •       •

11195 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Mar 2014 at 6:39 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



235 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-02 10:26:02 AM  

El Dudereno: jakomo002: czetie: However, only one country involved here has tanks and troops openly operating in another country's sovereign territory; and I'm still fascinated to hear how you intend to justify military force as the appropriate way to resolve a political and economic dispute?

Justify military force?  I wasn't aware the Russian troops had attacked or even wounded anyone.  It's a show of force, hardly the application of it.  And the Crimea PM (PM of the AUTONOMOUS REGION OF CRIMEA) did in fact invite the Russians in, no??

The irony here is that it's precisely Russia's bullying, racist, nationalist, militaristic, censorious descent into near-dictatorship that is pushing the countries of central Europe into the arms of Europe. (And incidentally, several of them have centuries of ties with Europe long before they spent 50 years in the freezer of the Cold War.)

Completely agree.  And the EU/IMF clusterfarks in Spain, Greece, Latvia, etc, make Ukraine very wary to trust either the EU, or anyone who supports IMF policies.  Lot of distrust on both sides, and justifiably

Those countries should start their own economic union... With blackjack! And hookers!


This!

As a matter of fact, forget the blackjack!
 
2014-03-02 10:26:41 AM  

jakomo002: Fail in Human Form: The Ukrainian prime minister, Arseny Yatsenyuk, said Russia has declared war on Ukraine and that it is not just a threat from Moscow.He warned: "We are on the brink of disaster".

Yatsenyuk is hardly an honest broker here.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2014/02/27/washingtons-man-yat se nyuk-setting-ukraine-up-for-ruin/

"Recall the phone exchange between the Ukraine ambassador and Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs) that got leaked out, where she basically said 'we want Yats in there.' They like him because he's pro Western," says Vladimir Signorelli, president of boutique investment research firm Bretton Woods Research LLC in New Jersey. "Yatsenyuk is the the kind of technocrat you want if you want austerity, with the veneer of professionalism," Signorelli said. "He's the type of guy who can hobnob with the European elite. A Mario Monti type: unelected and willing to do the IMFs bidding," he said.

...

Also today, Yatsenyuk promised to implement "very unpopular measures" to stabilize the country's finances. The government said it needs $35 billion to support the country over the next two years. His language in a news report broadcast by Bloomberg today indicates he is heading toward a potentially destabilizing austerity campaign:

"The treasury is empty. We will do everything not to default. If we get the financial support from the IMF, the U.S., we will do it. I'm going to be the most unpopular prime minister in the history of my country," he said. "But this is the only solution. I would never promise any kind of huge achievements. First and the most important issue is to stabilize the situation."

Yatsenyuk is "your guy", America, and nobody trusts you.


So, a country where political corruption runs rampant has a *shock* corrupt politician?! Say it ain't so!
 
2014-03-02 10:27:33 AM  

Animatronik: JonnyG: Behind all the smokescreens, this is quite simple and the US is far from clean. The US has installed a leader sympathetic to them. If that leader takes hold, it means very bad things for Russia. Russia does not want that leader because, well, it would be very bad for them (financially). This is a battle over money and nothing more. The US is just as guilty in this situation - they just choose their words more carefully so that the peoples can absorb them with less guilt.

Where do you live?


I was shocked to discover that there are a number of Russia expats who really believed that Stalin was a nice guy, a strong leader who took charge. That all the propaganda wasn't true, that he didnt murder 10s of millions in the 30s.

It's quite plausible that many Russiansfeel the same way about Putin, who is mild in comparison

The stuff you are saying here is pure garbage and Russian propaganda. It doesn't fool anybody. I'll see what else you post before flagging you.


So, I'm not the only one thinking this guy is full if shiat?
 
2014-03-02 10:30:35 AM  

Rhino_man: youmightberight: You're blind if you couldn't see Putins desire for power - the man has been pm or president for almost 15 years - he "won" 99% of the vote in Chechnya - you know that place that has been fighting Russia for almost a decade now?

For an informed person your lack of information on this topic makes me sad - go study and come back to the conversation later.

You're a damned fool if you think I'm not aware of Putin's desire for power.  brimed03 said it very well:

brimed03: This. As I said in the previous Crimea thread, perhaps Obama saw the threat just as clearly as Mittens, but was smart enough to prevent limiting our diplomatic options by not making an open enemy of Putin.
You know, not hamstringing a decade of national policy for a couple of temporary poll points. Thinking presidentially, one might say.

When Russia's behaving in public, YOU DON'T WAVE YOUR DICK AT THEM.  If you wave your dick at Russia, Russia acts a fool.  So once again, good job Romney.


So we agree that Putin is after as much power and land as possible starting small with Georgia and now taking bits of Ukraine - but you are failing to recognize that Putin would use anything as an excuse to take more land/power.

We're litterally watching a defacto dictator pull a hitler and even WITH histories example you're siding with the dictator.
 
2014-03-02 10:31:37 AM  

jakomo002: What people tend to forget is that a lot of Ukrainians want nothing to do with the EU.

Their fear is that once the EU calls in the IMF and World Bank, they'll shove "austerity" down people's throats and they'll be thoroughly farked. Or Latvia-ed.


True, but a lot of those same people don't want to have a President that's a corrupt puppets of Putin.
 
2014-03-02 10:32:00 AM  

K3rmy: bah, it was nothing more than an attempted land grab.  Putin had no muscle behind it and he knew it.  He withdrew the troops as he knew that they could not withstand  a wayward wind blowing to hit them and Hopey McChange was not a person he could show his face in the world after (appearing to be) punked down.  This is not to say that Russia has no forces worth reckoning with - they simply did not send any to play in Crimea.

Putin is not done there yet.  He is plotting. . .scheming.  The US may currently have a helmet-headed special needs child as president but those types tend to hit hard.  (The exception was Chimpy McFlightsuit who was too busy spending time at his ranch at the beginning of his first term to do anything of consequence)


Except for everything you wrote, you're exactly right.
 
2014-03-02 10:37:35 AM  
So let's see here.  Russia sends in unmarked commandos as "gunmen" and has them "occupy" a government building.  Then he sends in marked troops in order to "protect" the russian speaking population from the "gunmen" occupying the government building.  Suddenly lo and behold the gunmen are nowhere to be seen, the "protestors" are gone, and all is suddenly safe.

Does that about sum things up?
 
2014-03-02 10:39:30 AM  

hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.


Nobody batted an eye when France decided to invade the Maldives last year...and nobody gave to shiats that Ethiopia got tired of Somalia's crap and invaded them either.  But when Russia moves troops into a part of Ukraine that already has a huge Russian military presence like their entire Black Sea naval fleet it's all hands on deck.  Not like the US ever "invaded" a country to protect "it's interests."
 
2014-03-02 10:40:46 AM  

czetie: hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.

If Putin insists that sending troops into another country is "legitimately protecting Russia's interests" just because some of them are ethnically Russian, then I have a horrible feeling that we're all about to learn the Russian words for "Lebensraum" and "Volksdeutsche".

Also noteworthy that Putin doesn't feel at all the same way about ethnic non-Russians who want to break away from Russia...


Exactly.  What's to stop Putin from suggesting large portions of his population start moving into Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc?  There are some in each country already, he just needs to get a big enough minority.  Then if there is a (manufactured) political struggle, he can send in troops to "protect his people".  He will already have set precedent in Georgia and Crimea.
 
2014-03-02 10:42:21 AM  

DanInKansas: Rhino_man:
Thanks for making a foe where there wasn't one before, Romney. Good farkin' job.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!  That was funny.  Yes, Putin, the former KGB op and mob boss, was a Russian Pope Francis and general good buddy to the Free World before Mitt Romney hurt his feelings.

Go back to Theodore Roosevelt and the end of the Russian-Japanese war.  Russians have not particularly had warm feelings about America or its intentions towards them for at least 110 years now. Probably didn't help when we invaded in 1919, considering Americans are still carrying paper on the English for burning down the White House in 1812.


Don't be naive.

Diplomatically, there's a *vast* difference between seeing someone as a bad guy and formally, publicly stating it. Witness Dubya's top-late backpedaling on his "axis of evil" speech. A secret but budding rapprochement with Iran, including active cooperation on hunting terrorists, was stopped cold and in fact reversed as a result.

No one is saying Putin was a good guy. But once a President publicly declares him to be evil-- even if that declaration happens only while a nominee-- a lot of diplomatic options get pulled off the table.

Only an idiot voluntarily reduces his own room for maneuver. Only an ignorant fool-- or a selfish, politicking one-- reduces the country's diplomatic options. Mittens was all these things.

Obama almost certainly knew what Putin was. But he, or at least the advisors he listened to, were smart enough to finesse it and leave as many cards to play as possible.
 
2014-03-02 10:43:21 AM  

hotrod2001: hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.

Nobody batted an eye when France decided to invade the Maldives last year...and nobody gave to shiats that Ethiopia got tired of Somalia's crap and invaded them either.  But when Russia moves troops into a part of Ukraine that already has a huge Russian military presence like their entire Black Sea naval fleet it's all hands on deck.  Not like the US ever "invaded" a country to protect "it's interests."


So only the US' actions are worthy of protest. Gotcha. Anyone else, and we're supposed to support it.

/I protested the Iraq War, too
 
2014-03-02 10:44:39 AM  

hotrod2001: hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.

Not like the US ever "invaded" a country to protect "it's interests."




Oh yeah? Name 75-80 examples.
 
2014-03-02 10:47:20 AM  
From here:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10669670/Ukr a ine-live.html

There 's one adult, one troll, and one person with their underpants pulled over their head. Try to guess which is which.

15.01 John Kerry has appeared on the Sunday morning political show "Face the Nation," on CBS.
He said: "You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text."

15.13 Buzzfeed's foreign editor  Miriam Elder breaks news that sanctions have already started - but Russia against the US: "Now it's serious. Russia's state-run Channel One says it won't air the Oscars tonight because of events in Ukrainehttp://t.co/K2obfcH0Wt"

15.14 Dmitry Peskov, Putin's spokesman, was asked what he thought of John Kerry condemning Russia's "incredible act of aggression" and "19th century" behaviour: "No comment at the moment."
 
2014-03-02 10:47:52 AM  

hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.


That's because if you look into Putin's soul, he's a real Man's man- someone to be admired. He's a true leader, not like the Socialist/Marxist we have.
 
2014-03-02 10:48:29 AM  

the_end_is_rear: In the Conservative bastion of Placer County.
We have a few mega evangelical churches here.
I have relatives that attend one.
They are so hoping this is the big one.

Me, I am the agnostic liberal black sheep of the family.


Haha, Bayside?
 
2014-03-02 10:50:30 AM  
So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?
 
2014-03-02 10:53:46 AM  

youmightberight: Rhino_man: youmightberight: You're blind if you couldn't see Putins desire for power - the man has been pm or president for almost 15 years - he "won" 99% of the vote in Chechnya - you know that place that has been fighting Russia for almost a decade now?

For an informed person your lack of information on this topic makes me sad - go study and come back to the conversation later.

You're a damned fool if you think I'm not aware of Putin's desire for power.  brimed03 said it very well:

brimed03: This. As I said in the previous Crimea thread, perhaps Obama saw the threat just as clearly as Mittens, but was smart enough to prevent limiting our diplomatic options by not making an open enemy of Putin.
You know, not hamstringing a decade of national policy for a couple of temporary poll points. Thinking presidentially, one might say.

When Russia's behaving in public, YOU DON'T WAVE YOUR DICK AT THEM.  If you wave your dick at Russia, Russia acts a fool.  So once again, good job Romney.

So we agree that Putin is after as much power and land as possible starting small with Georgia and now taking bits of Ukraine - but you are failing to recognize that Putin would use anything as an excuse to take more land/power.

We're litterally watching a defacto dictator pull a hitler and even WITH histories example you're siding with the dictator.


You're a farking idiot.
 
2014-03-02 10:54:09 AM  

Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?


Have you LOOKED at Mexico over the past 50 years?
 
2014-03-02 10:55:36 AM  

utah dude: Rhino_man: utah dude: don't worry, Russia's not a threat according to BlackJesus. HeavenForbid RichMormon had something to say about this months ago,

MR. ROMNEY: Excuse me. It's a geopolitical foe. And I said in the same - in the same paragraph, I said, and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I'm not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin, and I'm certainly not going to say to him, I'll give you more flexibility after the election. After the election he'll get more backbone.

... and after that comment, Putin stepped up his sabre-rattling because he suddenly realized that 47% of voting Americans agreed with a guy who wanted to wave his dick at Russia on TV.

Thanks for making a foe where there wasn't one before, Romney. Good farkin' job.

of course BlackJesus is the only begotten sent free of sin to save us all. of course. drop me a phat bassline for some dance competition, brother.


You're a racist, an idiot, a poor troll, and a pitiful excuse of an aglet.
 
2014-03-02 10:57:49 AM  

jayphat: Animatronik: JonnyG: Behind all the smokescreens, this is quite simple and the US is far from clean. The US has installed a leader sympathetic to them. If that leader takes hold, it means very bad things for Russia. Russia does not want that leader because, well, it would be very bad for them (financially). This is a battle over money and nothing more. The US is just as guilty in this situation - they just choose their words more carefully so that the peoples can absorb them with less guilt.

Where do you live?


I was shocked to discover that there are a number of Russia expats who really believed that Stalin was a nice guy, a strong leader who took charge. That all the propaganda wasn't true, that he didnt murder 10s of millions in the 30s.

It's quite plausible that many Russiansfeel the same way about Putin, who is mild in comparison

The stuff you are saying here is pure garbage and Russian propaganda. It doesn't fool anybody. I'll see what else you post before flagging you.

So, I'm not the only one thinking this guy is full if shiat?


He is full of shiat.

If you think clearly about what has happened, Russia tried to bribe Ukraine with 15 billion into accepting closer ties, and it didn't work.

Whereas the U.S. only recently offered 1 billion in loan guarantees. The Russian puppet killed more than 100 demonstrators before running away, people who were demonstrating for what they believe in. So with no puppet Moscow sends in troops. The Soviet Union has been dissolved, Ukraine is yours no more, Russia. Get over it.

Ukraine historically had the misfortune of sitting between th hammer and the anvil, but they should be allowed to choose their own destiny rather than be a satellite of Moscow controlled by Russian bureaucrats.
 
2014-03-02 10:58:14 AM  
generallyso: hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.

Maybe the Russian public isn't stupid enough to swallow such ham-fisted propaganda.

You haven't been watching much Russian media then recently.  Russian propaganda today is so blatant it would make goebbels blush.  I watche a video a few days ago where they had quite literally shown pictures of Berkut riot police shooting protesters in kiev where they had crudely photoshopped out the word "berkut" from the back of their uniforms and claimed that it was fascist-neo-nazi-EU death squads gunning down passersby.   "shameless propaganda" is too kind.

Folks, the US may have a lot of problems, but other places are far worse.  Putin's Russia is one of them.
 
2014-03-02 10:59:09 AM  
If Russia get's to invade Ukraine, then America should be allowed to Annex Canada.  At least the good parts.  I mean what's good for the goose and all...
 
2014-03-02 10:59:40 AM  
From http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-kerry-warns-of-consequences-for-russ i a-after-ukraine-invasion/

Kerry said on "Face the Nation" Sunday, adding that Russia has violated Ukraine's sovereignty and several of its obligations under international agreements. "You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext."

Satire is truly dead.
 
2014-03-02 11:00:10 AM  

vygramul: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

Have you LOOKED at Mexico over the past 50 years?


Exactly, the U.S. could have invaded Mexico with all sorts of pretexts. Political instability, murder of citizens in Ciudad Juarez, etc.
 
2014-03-02 11:03:51 AM  
Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: what russia has done is basically invaded and taken over cozumel while there was some unrest in Mexico city.  Do you think that an appropriate response to any sort of political disturbance in mexico city would be to suddenly invade cancun or cozumel and attach it to the USA?

Please, stop trying to justify the unjustifiable and don't even think of that ludicrous "protecting their base" excuse (protecting from what?)   Russia's actions are reprehensible here.
 
2014-03-02 11:05:33 AM  
Bomb Head Mohammed:
You haven't been watching much Russian media then recently.  Russian propaganda today is so blatant it would make goebbels blush.  I watche a video a few days ago where they had quite literally shown pictures of Berkut riot police shooting protesters in kiev where they had crudely photoshopped out the word "berkut" from the back of their uniforms and claimed that it was fascist-neo-nazi-EU death squads gunning down passersby.   "shameless propaganda" is too kind.

Folks, the US may have a lot of problems, but other places are far worse.  Putin's Russia is one of them.


I caught RT overseas in Laos and they had a two hour long talk show seriously discussing if 9/11 and Sandy Hook were false flag operations and had some blubbering vagina from infowars sharing his "thoughts."

I would mock it but I know some underprivileged, uneducated Russia in some far off province is taking it seriously because that is the only news they can get.  Absurd.
 
2014-03-02 11:06:59 AM  
I know who's responsible for this...
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-02 11:07:18 AM  

hobbes0022: This doesn't even feel real, major modern countries like Russia still invade their neighbors?  They didn't even call them an axis of evil.


Bush and Pooty were such great friends!
 
2014-03-02 11:07:48 AM  

lobotomy survivor: From http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-kerry-warns-of-consequences-for-russ i a-after-ukraine-invasion/

Kerry said on "Face the Nation" Sunday, adding that Russia has violated Ukraine's sovereignty and several of its obligations under international agreements. "You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext."

Satire is truly dead.


If by that you mean the U.S. invasion of Iraq, you must be forgetting the truce after the first gulf war and Hussein's violations of agreements. While it's true that we should have stayed out of Iraq, there was legal justification. In the case of Afghanistan, the U.S. was attacked first, it's as simple as that.

And finally, anyone can see that there is no annexation going on in those places.

Unfortunately, a lie sounds the same as the truth if you don't have all the facts.
 
2014-03-02 11:09:42 AM  

Bomb Head Mohammed: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: what russia has done is basically invaded and taken over cozumel while there was some unrest in Mexico city.  Do you think that an appropriate response to any sort of political disturbance in mexico city would be to suddenly invade cancun or cozumel and attach it to the USA?

Please, stop trying to justify the unjustifiable and don't even think of that ludicrous "protecting their base" excuse (protecting from what?)   Russia's actions are reprehensible here.


Russia's actions are pertnear exactly what even the dimmest of farkers were predicting a few days ago. She hasn't even done anything but move some troops around.

I mean, yeah, it's an unusual situation, but nobody's combating.
 
2014-03-02 11:12:01 AM  

Some Coke Drinking Guy: If Russia get's to invade Ukraine, then America should be allowed to Annex Canada.  At least the good parts.  I mean what's good for the goose and all...


The parts with maple syrup and mustard pickles. And maybe rhubarb jam. Oh yeah, and we get our pick of the hockey players. And they have to waive the visitors fee for camping in Banff.
 
2014-03-02 11:12:59 AM  
as posted on https://www.facebook.com/euromaidanpr

Historical parallells...
"More than 10 million Germans are living in countries, situated close to our borders. There should be no doubts that political separation from the Reich should not lead to the abolishment of their rights, and particularly, their main right - the right of self-determination. The great German state is intolerant to understanding, that our blood-brethren, who support us with all hearts, undergo cruel persecution and tortures for their desire to be united with our nation, to share its destiny. The interests of the German Reich include protection of those Germans, who continue to live along our borders, but who cannot independently protect own political and spiritual freedom." 
A. Hitler, February 20th 1938.
 
2014-03-02 11:13:26 AM  

Some Coke Drinking Guy: If Russia get's to invade Ukraine, then America should be allowed to Annex Canada.  At least the good parts.  I mean what's good for the goose and all...


They can keep Quebec. The rest, sounds OK to me.
 
2014-03-02 11:14:29 AM  
Nervous smiles, waving Russian flags.

/still betting on Monday.
 
2014-03-02 11:16:12 AM  

ransack.: Bomb Head Mohammed: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: what russia has done is basically invaded and taken over cozumel while there was some unrest in Mexico city.  Do you think that an appropriate response to any sort of political disturbance in mexico city would be to suddenly invade cancun or cozumel and attach it to the USA?

Please, stop trying to justify the unjustifiable and don't even think of that ludicrous "protecting their base" excuse (protecting from what?)   Russia's actions are reprehensible here.

Russia's actions are pertnear exactly what even the dimmest of farkers were predicting a few days ago. She hasn't even done anything but move some troops around.

I mean, yeah, it's an unusual situation, but nobody's combating.


Make no mistake, cornering an outnumbered military on their own home soil and demanding their unconditional surrender is far more than just moving some troops around.  Nobody's fired yet because the Russians first moved through areas where they knew there was no Ukrainian presence, then besieged Ukrainian positions with vastly superior numbers.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/russian-troops-swarm-crimea
 
2014-03-02 11:17:17 AM  

ransack.: Bomb Head Mohammed: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: what russia has done is basically invaded and taken over cozumel while there was some unrest in Mexico city.  Do you think that an appropriate response to any sort of political disturbance in mexico city would be to suddenly invade cancun or cozumel and attach it to the USA?

Please, stop trying to justify the unjustifiable and don't even think of that ludicrous "protecting their base" excuse (protecting from what?)   Russia's actions are reprehensible here.

Russia's actions are pertnear exactly what even the dimmest of farkers were predicting a few days ago. She hasn't even done anything but move some troops around.

I mean, yeah, it's an unusual situation, but nobody's combating.


Well at least Obama woke up if folks like you haven't. Russia is moving tanks out of Sebastopol and Ukraine is mobilizing. Russia has voted to use force anywhere in Ukraine and there is much talk there about threats against Russians in Ukraine. If Russia moves out of Crimea, this will escalate and the U.S. will essentially cease negotiating with Russia on friendly terms. Beyond that, who can say, but it will be the start of a new cold war. It won't even matter if the Russians don't annex all of Ukraine, they'll be a pariah, an outcast to Europe and the West.
 
2014-03-02 11:18:14 AM  

Animatronik: lobotomy survivor: From http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-kerry-warns-of-consequences-for-russ i a-after-ukraine-invasion/

Kerry said on "Face the Nation" Sunday, adding that Russia has violated Ukraine's sovereignty and several of its obligations under international agreements. "You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext."

Satire is truly dead.

If by that you mean the U.S. invasion of Iraq, you must be forgetting the truce after the first gulf war and Hussein's violations of agreements. While it's true that we should have stayed out of Iraq, there was legal justification. In the case of Afghanistan, the U.S. was attacked first, it's as simple as that.

And finally, anyone can see that there is no annexation going on in those places.

Unfortunately, a lie sounds the same as the truth if you don't have all the facts.


I have a hard time understanding people using the term "legal" in relation to international events.

All sovereign nations are free to do as they please, in reality. An act being considered "illegal" means that you will be punished by your government if you are proven to have done this. There is no government of international events. These things are controlled by worthless promises made in the past, and weapons. Every government must ultimately be expected to do what is most beneficial to its population, if it's a decent government.

I would not expect or desire my government to do something that was ultimately not in the best interests of the majority of the citizenry, treaties be damned.
 
2014-03-02 11:22:57 AM  

Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?


So serious answer: HELL NO. The U.S.would not invade either unless a foreign power intervened.

Serious question: Did we ever make a serious attempt to invade Cuba, which is 200 miles from the U.S.??
 
2014-03-02 11:24:07 AM  

ransack.: All sovereign nations are free to do as they please, in reality. An act being considered "illegal" means that you will be punished by your government if you are proven to have done this. There is no government of international events. These things are controlled by worthless promises made in the past, and weapons. Every government must ultimately be expected to do what is most beneficial to its population, if it's a decent government.


You sound Israeli.

There is the UN, the ICC, treaty organizations and this strange thing called International Law.  Countries can break those laws with impunity (like the US, Russia, DKRP), but it is still illegal and contrary to international law.
 
2014-03-02 11:24:33 AM  

Animatronik: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: HELL NO. The U.S.would not invade either unless a foreign power intervened.

Serious question: Did we ever make a serious attempt to invade Cuba, which is 200 miles from the U.S.??


And by intervene, I mean send an army in, not attempt to influence. Or if there was an invasion of U.S. territory.
 
2014-03-02 11:27:20 AM  

Animatronik: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: HELL NO. The U.S.would not invade either unless a foreign power intervened.

Serious question: Did we ever make a serious attempt to invade Cuba, which is 200 miles from the U.S.??


You might want to add some qualifiers there... like... did we ever make a serious attempt to invade  Communist Cuba?

Cause, as worded, that question doesn't support your point.

/1895, 1912, 1916.  Especially 1916.
 
2014-03-02 11:27:59 AM  
I fear for the "journalists" at Fox News if this all turns out to be a big nothing, especially if it turns out that U.S. diplomacy helped resolve it peacefully. Can you die of blue balls?
 
2014-03-02 11:31:30 AM  

jakomo002: ransack.: All sovereign nations are free to do as they please, in reality. An act being considered "illegal" means that you will be punished by your government if you are proven to have done this. There is no government of international events. These things are controlled by worthless promises made in the past, and weapons. Every government must ultimately be expected to do what is most beneficial to its population, if it's a decent government.

You sound Israeli.

There is the UN, the ICC, treaty organizations and this strange thing called International Law.  Countries can break those laws with impunity (like the US, Russia, DKRP), but it is still illegal and contrary to international law.


Born and raised Hoosier, actually. Except for July 30-August 1 2004, I've been in America my whole life.

There's no law without enforcement. Who do you think has the most power to enforce?
 
2014-03-02 11:31:36 AM  

Animatronik: Animatronik: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: HELL NO. The U.S.would not invade either unless a foreign power intervened.

Serious question: Did we ever make a serious attempt to invade Cuba, which is 200 miles from the U.S.??

And by intervene, I mean send an army in, not attempt to influence. Or if there was an invasion of U.S. territory.


www.voltairenet.org
If that damn Kennedy hadn't been in the way......
 
2014-03-02 11:39:20 AM  

lobotomy survivor: From http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-kerry-warns-of-consequences-for-russ i a-after-ukraine-invasion/

Kerry said on "Face the Nation" Sunday, adding that Russia has violated Ukraine's sovereignty and several of its obligations under international agreements. "You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext."

Satire is truly dead.


You know why the UN never sanctioned the U.S. for Iraq? Not because of our Security Council veto; they never VOTED to sanction the U.S. Because even without WMDs, Iraq had been violating UN post-Gulf-War resolutions since the early '90s, and the U.S. invaded in pursuit of enforcing those resolutions. The U.S. invasion of Iraq was unnecessary and ill-advised, and the occupation was utterly incompetent, but it wasn't illegal.

Russia doesn't even have a fig leaf here, and if they don't cut it out, the international response to their invasion of Afghanistan is going to look like a loving hug. Russia can't afford to be cut off from international trade; their entire economy is dependent on exporting oil and gas to Europe.
 
2014-03-02 11:40:03 AM  

Animatronik: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: HELL NO. The U.S.would not invade either unless a foreign power intervened.

Serious question: Did we ever make a serious attempt to invade Cuba, which is 200 miles from the U.S.??


www.forensicgenealogy.info
 
2014-03-02 11:43:07 AM  

Animatronik: Animatronik: Oldiron_79: So serious question, if Canada or Mexico was having the sort of instability verging on a civil war that the Ukraine is having right now, who in here thinks the US would not get involved?

So serious answer: HELL NO. The U.S.would not invade either unless a foreign power intervened.

Serious question: Did we ever make a serious attempt to invade Cuba, which is 200 miles from the U.S.??

And by intervene, I mean send an army in, not attempt to influence. Or if there was an invasion of U.S. territory.


Plotting multiple times to actually assassinate Castro, Cuba's leader, surely counts as influence.

Militarily, financially, and diplomatically supporting countless Central and South American BRUTAL dictatorships surely counts as influence.  It's also the main reason C & SA keep electing leftist leaders with huge public support and why the US is almost entirely omitted from trade deals in the region.

US hypocrisy is particularly hilarious when they tell Russia to stop meddling in Ukraine, because we already know full well the US has been meddling for months.  Directly and by proxy.
 
2014-03-02 11:44:32 AM  

Animatronik: JonnyG: Behind all the smokescreens, this is quite simple and the US is far from clean. The US has installed a leader sympathetic to them. If that leader takes hold, it means very bad things for Russia. Russia does not want that leader because, well, it would be very bad for them (financially). This is a battle over money and nothing more. The US is just as guilty in this situation - they just choose their words more carefully so that the peoples can absorb them with less guilt.

Where do you live?


I was shocked to discover that there are a number of Russia expats who really believed that Stalin was a nice guy, a strong leader who took charge. That all the propaganda wasn't true, that he didnt murder 10s of millions in the 30s.

It's quite plausible that many Russiansfeel the same way about Putin, who is mild in comparison

The stuff you are saying here is pure garbage and Russian propaganda. It doesn't fool anybody. I'll see what else you post before flagging you.


i59.tinypic.com
 
2014-03-02 11:46:15 AM  

jakomo002: Except their former satellites were actively and aggressively recruited into NATO by the West.
I mean, how is it that  ALL these countries suddenly get membership into NATO between 1999 and 2004?  The NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty Organization.

Czech Republic  Warsaw Pact 1955-1991
 Hungary Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991.
 Poland Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1990.
 Bulgaria Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991.
 Estonia Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991
 Latvia Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991
 Lithuania Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991
 Romania Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991.
 Slovakia Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955-1991 as part of Czechoslovakia.
 Slovenia Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945-1991 (Non-aligned)


There's nothing like being afraid of Russia invading you again to motivate you join an alliance that hasn't invaded you, given the Russian Empire's history.
 
2014-03-02 11:48:48 AM  

ransack.: There's no law without enforcement. Who do you think has the most power to enforce?


That's the joke.  The US has the most power to enforce, and is also the world's greatest aggressor and biggest threat to world peace... Also not a member of the ICC.

Do you think Russia would get the okay to uses drones to kill "suspected Chechen terrorists" in, say, Guatemala?
 
Displayed 50 of 235 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report