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.

(Yahoo)   Putin begins his liberation of villages neighboring the Crimea from non-Russian control   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 206
    More: Obvious, Crimean, Russians, Ukraine, Russian control, Russian forces, East-West, helicopter gunships, Long-distance track event  
•       •       •

4537 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Mar 2014 at 6:01 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-16 11:15:43 AM  

steam_cannon: shower_in_my_socks: There is still a strong neocon thread running through this country that has a lot of people convinced that every single thing that happens in the world should warrant US involvement.

Blaming neocons for treaties liberals made is bass-ackward. The Budapest Memorandum was signed by President Bill Clinton, was he a "strong neocon"? I don't think he was a "strong neocon".

Where things stand today, the US and Britain have a treaty with Ukraine, so we are involved. This is not a political right or left issue, if anything this is a political left issue. But we are all involved now. There is no question of that. Yes it's true that we can ignore any treaty we like. It's also true this treaty was not voted on by the senate, so that gives us more leeway to ignore it. But keep in mind, the treaty to defend Ukraine's sovereignty was in exchange for them to denuclearize. That was on the liberal agenda that I support. Now Russia is testing our treaty. If the liberals do nothing, they are undermining their previous goals and that voids all the similar treaties we made for countries to denuclearize. That's a huge international problem, small countries making nukes is a problem for US security and we are directly involved.

Acting now with whatever means are necessary to prevent Russian expansion into Ukraine is the most reasonable course of action. I favor taking as limited action as necessary. Economic sanctions and even cutting off gas sales with Russia would be reasonable first steps. And I know that any action is going to be awful economically for the European gas situation and awful for troops if they become involved. The fact is our best choice may be to put troops on the ground. But if we don't take action we will be encouraging every small country to develop nukes because if our treaties are meaningless then that will be their only choice. And chances are some of those small countries will use their nukes from time to time.

President Clinton signed tha ...


Here's what the treaty has us do.

Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.
Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine. 
Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments.

Which of these have we violated or not upheld?
 
2014-03-16 11:43:29 AM  

eurotrash: thehobbes: eurotrash: There is no need to get Ukraine in NATO, the Budapest memorandum is enough of a casus belli if US and UK would want it to be. Ukraine actually has a good international legal case against Russia on this alone.

I'm not saying we have to accept them as full members, just allow NATO observers in country/joint exercises. Show of force all to prevent a war. Make Putin slow his expansion and give sanctions and the UN time to put more pressure on Russia. Dissidents and protesters are picking up steam in the Russian homeland. Do it  under the pretense of an evaluation period for the new government and make it get it to be at their request.

No need to involve NATO, send OSCE observers and go for a UN General Assembly vote to put observers in, the Ukraine can go to both Brussels and to the tribunal in Hague to argue cases they will win.
The whole point here is to pile on pressure on Putin so his cleptocratric pals will oust him from Kremlin.

Losing Crimea is not a huge thing for Ukraine, it's a poor area and for Russia to support it with gas, electricity and resources will be a logistical nightmare, there was a reason for Russia to give it to Ukraine before. Let Russia spend millions to get that going, Ukraine can cut support with the blessing of UN and Brussel later, they're doing the right thing now by keeping the support on.

This whole thing will be a decade long "battle", but the biggest mistake by Putin is that he can forget about his eastern alliance, even belarus is quietly pulling away...


Great insight to the whole mess- it is appreciated.
 
2014-03-16 12:50:26 PM  

eurotrash: Losing Crimea is not a huge thing for Ukraine, it's a poor area and for Russia to support it with gas, electricity and resources will be a logistical nightmare, there was a reason for Russia to give it to Ukraine before. Let Russia spend millions to get that going, Ukraine can cut support with the blessing of UN and Brussel later, they're doing the right thing now by keeping the support on.


Ukraine is going to lose a huge chunk of its Navy and most of it's Black Sea ports.  That's kind of a big deal, especially when you've lost them to a country that considers you a breakaway province.
 
2014-03-16 01:35:32 PM  

soseussme: BigNumber12: Russia invades a Russian village?

EVERYONE PANIC

I like it but it's a little nuanced for the Wal-Mart crowd. Can you make it even stupider?


Read explanation above. Attention-demanding 3-year-old, plus twins due tomorrow. I'm not my usual self.
 
2014-03-16 02:05:51 PM  

BigNumber12: soseussme: BigNumber12: Russia invades a Russian village?

EVERYONE PANIC

I like it but it's a little nuanced for the Wal-Mart crowd. Can you make it even stupider?

Read explanation above. Attention-demanding 3-year-old, plus twins due tomorrow. I'm not my usual self.


If it's boys you should name them Vlad and Viktor
 
2014-03-16 02:48:47 PM  

Bonzo_1116: BigNumber12: soseussme: BigNumber12: Russia invades a Russian village?

EVERYONE PANIC

I like it but it's a little nuanced for the Wal-Mart crowd. Can you make it even stupider?

Read explanation above. Attention-demanding 3-year-old, plus twins due tomorrow. I'm not my usual self.

If it's boys you should name them Vlad and Viktor


I'm already naming them Paddy and Paddy.

/ they do have Russian ancestry, though
// maybe I'll go with your suggestion
/// third slashy
 
Displayed 6 of 206 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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