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.

(War on the Rocks)   Putin is playing chess in Crimea... and losing   (warontherocks.com) divider line 240
    More: Interesting, Vladimir Putin, Crimean, Black Sea Fleet, al Assad, satellite state, Warsaw Pact, Cold War, Russian Bear  
•       •       •

13196 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Mar 2014 at 10:23 AM (23 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



240 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-19 09:41:00 AM
Putin had this site taken down. It was "insolent".

dailypicksandflicks.com

Your move, War on the Rocks.
 
2014-03-19 10:06:19 AM
He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll
 
2014-03-19 10:09:07 AM
that... was well-reasoned.
 
2014-03-19 10:12:21 AM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.
 
2014-03-19 10:25:25 AM

FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.


He'd ask why there were so many strawmen in front of him.
 
2014-03-19 10:25:27 AM
Putin needs a JDAM.
 
2014-03-19 10:25:47 AM
Losing? Really?
 
2014-03-19 10:26:17 AM
FTFA: "The Benghazi theater of the absurd will play well for a certain audience. For more serious observers. . ."

Some people actually believe this shiat, but for people without learning disabilities and head trauma. . .
 
2014-03-19 10:28:18 AM
Getting everything you want = a loss now?
 
2014-03-19 10:29:32 AM
Obama fiddled while the Ukraine burned.
 
2014-03-19 10:29:51 AM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


No kidding. Republicans have been hounding President Obama relentlessly from Bengazi to Syria to now Crimea. No wonder Putin felt improved to move on Crimea when the President isn't being supported by Republicans and others totally, to include left leaning Democrats.
 
2014-03-19 10:29:55 AM
Putin is, and always has been playing poker. He loves a good bluff.
 
2014-03-19 10:29:57 AM
So I see things this way:
The world has 2 options
1  Let putin have whatever portion of Ukraine he wants
2  Do not let him have it

Putin has 2 options:
1  Give it back
2  keep it

If both pick #2 we are going to shoot it out.

I will be investing in defense stocks.  Anyone know the ticker symbol for Halliburton?
 
2014-03-19 10:29:58 AM
Ever heard kids arguing on the playground when one of them says "well, I LET you win."
 
2014-03-19 10:30:15 AM
Just because

i.kinja-img.com
 
2014-03-19 10:31:19 AM
How is he losing?
 
2014-03-19 10:31:53 AM

FlashHarry: that... was well-reasoned.


Yeah, I was pleasantly surprised at how objective it was, considering the usual shiat that gets posted to Fark.
 
2014-03-19 10:32:08 AM

FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.


It does boggle the mind. But it does bring to mind an old cold-war era saying: If they don't like it, they can move the hell to Russia.
 
2014-03-19 10:32:14 AM
D'OH! I meant empowered, not improved.
 
2014-03-19 10:32:31 AM

KAVORKA: How is he losing?


He's plaing Czechers
 
2014-03-19 10:32:46 AM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll



I thought it was republicans who said that Russia was the greatest geopolitical threat during the debates?
 
2014-03-19 10:33:04 AM
A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.
 
2014-03-19 10:33:19 AM

svanmeter: Obama fiddled while the Ukraine burned.


Exactly what responsibility or authority does Obama have when it comes to Ukraine?
 
2014-03-19 10:34:04 AM
Peter von Nostrand:
He has legions of Republicans as fans,

...according to leftist Democrats, who can't ever seem to find any actual legions...
 
2014-03-19 10:34:25 AM

KAVORKA: How is he losing?


Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.
 
2014-03-19 10:34:28 AM
Sorry, libbos, but Putin is a global chessmaster.  Russia is a strong and proud nation and its robust and diversified economy cannot be damaged by your so-called "sanctions".  Once Putin takes over all of Europe, your "leader" Homobama will be begging for mercy.  This is what happens when you elect someone that wears momjeans.
 
2014-03-19 10:34:55 AM
dl.dropboxusercontent.com

"Putin's desperate, losing move will ultimately be overcome by the tides of history."


Translation: We're losing now, but someday it will look like we won.
History tends to not work that way.

/I want to see Putin go down in flames and I have no objection to Obama being the man who does it.
/But until we get a few W's up on the board I'm not convinced Obama can do it.
 
2014-03-19 10:35:21 AM

FLMountainMan: FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.

He'd ask why there were so many strawmen in front of him.


Clearly, you don't know what 'strawman' means.

Republicans have been saying Putin is a 'stronger' leader than Obama. They have said Obama should emulate his leadership style. They have been attacking Obama non-stop since day one of his Presidency. These are documented facts.

Really, why SHOULDN'T Republicans like Putin? He's strong,  corrupt as fark business-friendly, aggressive, anti-gay, pisses off 'libs'....If he was American rather than Russian, he'd be the GOP front-runner.
 
2014-03-19 10:35:46 AM
Surely, the Obama administration is adrift in a sea tossed by crises

So Putin is on the move while Obama has America adrift at sea, but it don't matter because the cold war is over.  Not a very convincing argument.
 
2014-03-19 10:36:19 AM
The exacts same "shell of a former self" argument could have been said about Germany before WWII.

The problem with carrying a chess analogy too far is that a Chess game has a definitive end.  In the article's metaphor, all the Chess pieces have been eliminated and can never return. Not true with real life.  You can always come back from almost nothing.  And it happens all through history.  Either through strange allies, an unexpected windfall of resources, or some other element.

I am not really well read on this issue enough to give an opinion on the whole, but articles like this certainly aren't helping.
 
2014-03-19 10:36:21 AM

Rapmaster2000: Sorry, libbos, but Putin is a global chessmaster.  Russia is a strong and proud nation and its robust and diversified economy cannot be damaged by your so-called "sanctions".  Once Putin takes over all of Europe, your "leader" Homobama will be begging for mercy.  This is what happens when you elect someone that wears momjeans.


Lots of win with this post.  I like it.
 
2014-03-19 10:36:46 AM

netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.


Struck straight to the corps of the issue with that post.
 
2014-03-19 10:36:56 AM

netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.


0/10

You said "core" twice.
 
2014-03-19 10:37:17 AM

cirby: Peter von Nostrand:
He has legions of Republicans as fans,

...according to leftist Democrats, who can't ever seem to find any actual legions...


Yeah this hasn't been a talking point on FOX News or anything.
 
2014-03-19 10:38:38 AM

way south: [dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 768x543]

"Putin's desperate, losing move will ultimately be overcome by the tides of history."

Translation: We're losing now, but someday it will look like we won.
History tends to not work that way.

/I want to see Putin go down in flames and I have no objection to Obama being the man who does it.
/But until we get a few W's up on the board I'm not convinced Obama can do it.


Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.
 
2014-03-19 10:38:58 AM

QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.


Counterpoint, NATO is powerless to actually do anything about this and similar actions. The fact that we have people not owning up to the fact that the nuclear option isn't real is just sad.
 
2014-03-19 10:39:17 AM

naptapper: Losing? Really?


Yes. The whole reason he invaded Crimea is that Russia can't have NATO so dam close. Essentially the same reason that the US has punished Cuba for 60 years is the reason that Russia is invading Crimea. Secondly Russia's economy is taking a beating. If the US turns up the economic pressure on Russia all it will take is time before Putin folds or is replaced.
 
2014-03-19 10:39:42 AM
crenshawcomm.com
 
2014-03-19 10:40:30 AM
I thought he was playing Risk....
 
2014-03-19 10:40:31 AM
Remember Putin, the Ukraine is weak!
 
2014-03-19 10:40:34 AM

KAVORKA: How is he losing?


Bilions of dollars lost in the Russian economy and sanctions have not even started. A faltering NATO suddenly finds some spine.
 
2014-03-19 10:41:10 AM
This is very similar to the argument I was making with the Mrs. last night about the Crimea crisis.  While the West has been coalescing around the self-determination ideals of modern Libralism, Russia has been trying to figure out how to best consolodate what power and influence it possibly can.  It just so happens that their fleet is parked in an ethnicly Russian place.  Military and cultural ties overlapped and historical claims (regardless of what we think about them) were sufficient to trust that such a move would stick.

The funny thing is that "the will of the people" across the world is straining existing borders of nation-states, leaving them succeptible to change to fit cultural and economic boudaries as opposed to lines on a map.  This is a much deeper issue for the world to grapple with than the political theater that orbits around an outdated cold war view.
 
2014-03-19 10:41:46 AM

LordJiro: way south: [dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 768x543]

"Putin's desperate, losing move will ultimately be overcome by the tides of history."

Translation: We're losing now, but someday it will look like we won.
History tends to not work that way.

/I want to see Putin go down in flames and I have no objection to Obama being the man who does it.
/But until we get a few W's up on the board I'm not convinced Obama can do it.

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


This
 
2014-03-19 10:42:01 AM

genner: I thought he was playing Risk....


SirEattonHogg: Remember Putin, the Ukraine is weak!


Onnnne second. Damn.
 
2014-03-19 10:42:28 AM

Rapmaster2000: Sorry, libbos, but Putin is a global chessmaster.  Russia is a strong and proud nation and its robust and diversified economy cannot be damaged by your so-called "sanctions".  Once Putin takes over all of Europe, your "leader" Homobama will be begging for mercy.  This is what happens when you elect someone that wears momjeans.


Hillary 2016
 
2014-03-19 10:42:31 AM

QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.


This. He was cornered and he reacted.
He has apparently bought himself some breathing space and is in a slightly better position today than he was yesterday... but he is still losing the long game (if you want to perceive geopolitics as a zero sum game).
 
2014-03-19 10:42:58 AM

FlashHarry: that... was well-reasoned.


Very; wouldn't be surprised if the President viewed Ukraine situation in the same way.
 
2014-03-19 10:43:04 AM
Russia has over a 600 year history of being occupied. So this comes as no surprise. Not a cold war, but really uncomfortable for others who may have interests in he area. Sure a lot of analists may fret, and your armchair Internet "scholars" may speculate, citing B.S. web postings as "truth". Those of us a bit "longer in the tooth" have seen this before. No need to try to "edumicate" us, Dubya.
 
2014-03-19 10:43:04 AM
LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.
 
2014-03-19 10:43:58 AM

LordJiro: Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


The question is whether the EU is really willing to go along with such sanctions, at the cost of losing access to Russian oil/gas.  Perhaps it will be more palatable in the short term since winter is coming to a close now, in the hope that the situation can be resolved before the end of the year.
 
2014-03-19 10:44:04 AM

netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.


So it's "a former Marine's blog" when it doesn't suit your worldview?
 
2014-03-19 10:44:24 AM

Yakk: Getting everything you want = a loss now?


KAVORKA: How is he losing?


I can tell you two didn't RTFA.
 
2014-03-19 10:44:38 AM

LordJiro: Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yep. Obama's a terrible president, has no respect for the rule of law, and has expanded on all of the worst evils of the Bush administration, but there's nothing he can do besides minor sanctions to make this any better.
 
2014-03-19 10:45:53 AM

Halli: cirby: Peter von Nostrand:
He has legions of Republicans as fans,

...according to leftist Democrats, who can't ever seem to find any actual legions...

Yeah this hasn't been a talking point on FOX News or anything.


Be honest, how much Fox News have you watched since the Crimean invasion?  And why?
 
2014-03-19 10:46:21 AM

LordJiro: Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Slaves2Darkness: Yes. The whole reason he invaded Crimea is that Russia can't have NATO so dam close. Essentially the same reason that the US has punished Cuba for 60 years is the reason that Russia is invading Crimea. Secondly Russia's economy is taking a beating. If the US turns up the economic pressure on Russia all it will take is time before Putin folds or is replaced.


Isn't the monkeywrench in all that the fact that Putin/Russia basically control the European continent's natural gas supply?

So we can sanction Russia, and risk them either jacking up the price on or simply stopping the NG supply altogether. It's my understanding (admittedly thin) that it'd take the US several weeks to a month at least to make up that lost supply.
 
2014-03-19 10:46:44 AM

FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.


He'd probably love it.  Reagan was a Republican asshole at heart.  His progeny didn't fall far from the tree.  The only difference is that he was somewhat pragmatic in governance, if super overheated in rhetoric.
 
2014-03-19 10:46:49 AM
Since we're all armchair experts on the intricacies of foreign affairs, here's my $0.02:

Putin is hoping he can wait out the world's outrage without anyone firing a shot. He basically annexed parts of Georgia because the world stopped caring, this is more serious, but not very different. As long as he can withstand the international outrage, and as long as nobody dies, the western part of Ukraine gets to side with the west, which is what it wanted, and Russia gets the Crimea, which helps Putin with his apparent dream of reforming the Soviet Union. The question is how much will Ukraine fight for its majority Russian populace? Because if they stop caring, the rest of the world isn't going to care for them. If Ukraine wants to start a shooting war over it, I think Putin has to quickly withdraw, because then it'll be much more costly than he is willing to endure.
 
2014-03-19 10:48:02 AM
Moar liek playing chest, amirite?
 
2014-03-19 10:48:08 AM

doyner: The funny thing is that "the will of the people" across the world is straining existing borders of nation-states, leaving them succeptible to change to fit cultural and economic boudaries as opposed to lines on a map. This is a much deeper issue for the world to grapple with than the political theater that orbits around an outdated cold war view.


No! The ONLY thing that matters is a narrative that says Obama is weak, weak, weak!!!!!1!

Because freedom, and furthermore.
 
2014-03-19 10:48:20 AM

LordJiro: Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Pretty much; it's amazing how Republicans/war hawks in general keep beating Obama with the "weak on foreign policy" stick.  Then, something like Bin Laden getting killed happens and they all look at each other and say (in unison) "We farked up here didn't we."

So, memo to the war hawks:  never stick your head into a hungry lion's mouth.
 
2014-03-19 10:48:33 AM

Yakk: Getting everything you want = a loss now?


He got a territory that is going to be a massive money sink, their stock prices have already taken a hit, and he's gonna push other nearby territories towards the EU that much faster.

He's also given the EU a huge imepetus to get off their ass and get their gas from somewhere else.
 
2014-03-19 10:49:10 AM

wxboy: LordJiro: Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.

The question is whether the EU is really willing to go along with such sanctions, at the cost of losing access to Russian oil/gas.  Perhaps it will be more palatable in the short term since winter is coming to a close now, in the hope that the situation can be resolved before the end of the year.


They can drill for their own dam oil and gas, rather than pretend that they are all enviro friendly while buying it all from their enemy.

Same with the rest of Ukraine.  They get ALL of their energy from Russia and then boycott every O&G company that has ever tried to drill.  They are going to end up back in the stone ages very soon where this is going.
 
2014-03-19 10:49:14 AM

FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.


"Help me out of this box, I can't breathe in here. Help, let me out."
 
2014-03-19 10:50:23 AM

JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.


Also:  Wouldn't be surprised if Obama is coordinating with the EU on a plan to make up for a potential loss of NG from Russia.
 
2014-03-19 10:51:04 AM

Gunny Highway: Just because

[i.kinja-img.com image 636x948]


Good enough for me.  I started to save it but couldn't come up with an indicative name.
 
2014-03-19 10:51:18 AM
Has Obama started working on the bomber gap yet?
 
2014-03-19 10:51:55 AM

KAVORKA: How is he losing?


He's stuck with Crimea?
 
2014-03-19 10:53:27 AM

QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.

Russia's economy is taking a beating


No. In fact, what's the opposite?

It's *Surging* on the fact that EU and the US are basically conducting business as normal.

Putin basically said "Your move, West," and we apparently decided to pass.
 
2014-03-19 10:54:38 AM

Rapmaster2000: Once Putin takes over all of Europe


You obviously have no understanding of the history of the USSR and Russia for the last 25 years.
 
2014-03-19 10:54:49 AM

stevetherobot: FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.

"Help me out of this box, I can't breathe in here. Help, let me out."


img.fark.net
 
2014-03-19 10:54:51 AM

FLMountainMan: Be honest, how much Fox News have you watched since the Crimean invasion? And why?


No one watches Fox News unless they wish to become dumber.
 
2014-03-19 10:55:10 AM
Putin's playing Rock, Scissors, Paper; we're playing Tiddly-WInks.
No, Putin's playing Bocci Ball, We're playing Scrabble.
Wait, no, PUTIN's playing Parcheesi , we're playing with our genitals.
 
2014-03-19 10:55:18 AM

Rwa2play: netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.

So it's "a former Marine's blog" when it doesn't suit your worldview?



A meme isn't as funny if I have to highlight it or point it out to you.

This isn't the Harvard debate club.   Don't ovethink things with perceptions of someones 'worldview'.

Welcome to Fark.
 
2014-03-19 10:56:12 AM

JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.


Yes yes. By all means Europe should threaten to stop buying gas. I wonder why Europe hasn't already fixed this obvious oversight. They should get right on it. I mean really. You would think they would have already done such a simple thing.
 
2014-03-19 10:56:24 AM

Yakk: Getting everything you want = a loss now?


Maybe he only got 98% of what he wanted....
 
2014-03-19 10:56:29 AM

Felgraf: Yakk: Getting everything you want = a loss now?

He got a territory that is going to be a massive money sink, their stock prices have already taken a hit, and he's gonna push other nearby territories towards the EU that much faster.

He's also given the EU a huge imepetus to get off their ass and get their gas from somewhere else.


Canada will be thrilled!
 
2014-03-19 10:56:46 AM

TheZorker: QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.

Russia's economy is taking a beating

No. In fact, what's the opposite?

It's *Surging* on the fact that EU and the US are basically conducting business as normal.

Putin basically said "Your move, West," and we apparently decided to pass.


Taking a beating?  Surging?

How is it possible that two people look at the same information and one comes up with "taking a beating" and the other "surging?"
 
2014-03-19 10:58:50 AM

brandent: JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.

Yes yes. By all means Europe should threaten to stop buying gas. I wonder why Europe hasn't already fixed this obvious oversight. They should get right on it. I mean really. You would think they would have already done such a simple thing.


Yes. Russia is the only exporter of oil/gas on the planet.
 
2014-03-19 10:59:14 AM

cirby: Peter von Nostrand:
He has legions of Republicans as fans,

...according to leftist Democrats, who can't ever seem to find any actual legions...


how many is enough for you ?
 
2014-03-19 10:59:26 AM

brandent: JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.

Yes yes. By all means Europe should threaten to stop buying gas. I wonder why Europe hasn't already fixed this obvious oversight. They should get right on it. I mean really. You would think they would have already done such a simple thing.


If the EU and the U.S. can move to quickly close that Iran deal and lift those sanctions, new oil will be flowing into the market and they can pivot to somewhat cut off their dependency on russia. then again, if I was the Iranian negotiator, I'd anticipate this potential move and try to leverage better conditions for my country, stalling the negotiations and trying to get the most from both the West and the ruskies.
 
2014-03-19 10:59:47 AM

Anayalator: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

He's plaing Czechers


Does he drive a Yugo?
 
2014-03-19 11:00:01 AM
He's lost both knights and a rook, while his opponents have lost two pawns.


Or something like that.
 
2014-03-19 11:00:08 AM

svanmeter: Obama fiddled while the Ukraine burned.


In your opinion, what should he be doing?
 
2014-03-19 11:00:20 AM

netcentric: Rwa2play: netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.

So it's "a former Marine's blog" when it doesn't suit your worldview?


A meme isn't as funny if I have to highlight it or point it out to you.


I can see that; I can also see that meme should've been retired years ago.
 
2014-03-19 11:00:28 AM
Alternate Title: "A Chess club Nerd's attempt to explain global politics using the only way he knows."
 
2014-03-19 11:01:04 AM

Hector Remarkable: Putin's playing Rock, Scissors, Paper; we're playing Tiddly-WInks.
No, Putin's playing Bocci Ball, We're playing Scrabble.
Wait, no, PUTIN's playing Parcheesi , we're playing with our genitals.


Well then, we are obviously winning!
 
2014-03-19 11:02:46 AM
Tacticians (like the author of that post) think that any hole requires that you insert your junk.  Strategists will make a hole, put a meat grinder behind it, and let nature take its course.
Putin understands Americans better than Americans understand Russians.   He has set this up so that as long as he doesn't lose, he wins.  Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place.  And if he leaves, he can claim the moral high ground, because of the inconsistency and selectively of NATO and US actions (cf. Kosovo and the territorial integrity of Serbia).  If Puton just sits tight, keeps a Crimean face on the tactical action there, and waits, he wins.  If we use military force, then we are sticking our dicks in the whirling blades.
 
2014-03-19 11:04:01 AM
"Putin is compelled to carry water for the lisping sociopath Bashar al Assad..."

Okay, that was beautiful. I like his analysis. But I am really worried about the population there. They have run out of cash. The tourism industry (all they have) is dead. And the Tatars are in serious danger. Russia doesn't have the money to support Crimea as a client state and they get nothing out of it. Putin's just insane and posturing for no good reason. Like when he shot a drugged and caged tiger so he could pose with it.
 
2014-03-19 11:05:16 AM

TheZorker: QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.

Russia's economy is taking a beating

No. In fact, what's the opposite?

It's *Surging* on the fact that EU and the US are basically conducting business as normal.

Putin basically said "Your move, West," and we apparently decided to pass.


You are incorrect, their stock market has lost BILLIONS, which his government has had to pump into his failing economy, and the sanctions haven't even hit yet.
 
2014-03-19 11:06:27 AM

Livinglush: Rapmaster2000: Once Putin takes over all of Europe

You obviously have no understanding of the history of the USSR and Russia for the last 25 years.


You need to go back a lot more than 25 years to really get this one.  If you don't appreciate the goals of Пётр Алексеевич, you don't understand what Putin is after.
 
2014-03-19 11:06:36 AM

lilbjorn: svanmeter: Obama fiddled while the Ukraine burned.

In your opinion, what should he be doing?


Taking notes.
 
2014-03-19 11:06:52 AM

LordJiro: brandent: JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.

Yes yes. By all means Europe should threaten to stop buying gas. I wonder why Europe hasn't already fixed this obvious oversight. They should get right on it. I mean really. You would think they would have already done such a simple thing.

Yes. Russia is the only exporter of oil/gas on the planet.


As far as Europe is concerned, it's them and Norway.  They don't have the import facilities to accept gas from anywhere else.

Oil can sort of be found elsewhere.  It's not actually fungible like everyone thinks it is.  And Russia is a MAJOR exporter of oil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports) good luck absorbing that supply shortage with prices alone.  They will go through the roof.

Refusing to purchase Russia's Oil & Gas would be so devastating as to not even really consider it an option.  Energy is their Queen.  Not Crimea like the article would like people to believe.  They have most of Europe, and especially Ukraine by the nut sack.  Ukraine has almost no production of their own and for the last couple of years keeps boycotting anyone who tries to drill on their bland wasteland.
 
2014-03-19 11:07:31 AM
img.fark.net

Medvedev: So, are things going well on the Western Front?

Putin:
Oh yes, very well. So far we've:
Lost the Ukraine
Invaded a country
Violated treaty agreements
Now Turkey is ready to lock our fleet up in the Black Sea
The world is freezing bank accounts, cutting trade
Ukraine and Europe will be buying a lot more fuel from the west
and nobody believes Russia will honor it's agreements anymore

In return we occupy an island the size of a postage stamp

Medvedev:
We really need to talk, Vlad.
 
2014-03-19 11:07:36 AM

Laobaojun: Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place.


This is silly.

"I punched you, and even though I need a doctor now, everyone knows that your face's weakness is fists. HAHAHA, I win."?
 
2014-03-19 11:09:26 AM

Colour_out_of_Space: cirby: Peter von Nostrand:
He has legions of Republicans as fans,

...according to leftist Democrats, who can't ever seem to find any actual legions...

how many is enough for you ?


you know, i too, was wondering where all of this suppose love of putin from the right was.
Thank you.
/These people are bat shiat crazy to like Putin.
 
2014-03-19 11:09:42 AM
"It started with Benghazi Georgia. "When you kill Americans annex your neighbors and nobody pays a price, you invite this kind of aggression. #Ukraine."

-Lindsey Graham
 
2014-03-19 11:10:32 AM

TheManMythLegend: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


I thought it was republicans who said that Russia was the greatest geopolitical threat during the debates?


Shush. Russia is our good friend. We pushed the big red "Reset" button on our relationship when Obama sent Hillary to Putin. With a literal big red button to pretend push.

That was how Obama told Putin that we were his good buddy now. Cause we're friends, and we trust him
 
2014-03-19 11:10:47 AM

FLMountainMan: FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.

He'd ask why there were so many strawmen in front of him.


We're assuming that the Reagan we're talking about was before the Alzheimers.
 
2014-03-19 11:11:00 AM
You are incorrect, their stock market has lost BILLIONS, which his government has had to pump into his failing economy, and the sanctions haven't even hit yet.

Hey this reminds me of someplace, hmmmm.
 
2014-03-19 11:11:42 AM

Rwa2play: netcentric: Rwa2play: netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.

So it's "a former Marine's blog" when it doesn't suit your worldview?


A meme isn't as funny if I have to highlight it or point it out to you.

I can see that; I can also see that meme should've been retired years ago.


It's the Marine Corpse. Get it right.
 
2014-03-19 11:12:52 AM

Dr Dreidel: Laobaojun: Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place.

This is silly.

"I punched you, and even though I need a doctor now, everyone knows that your face's weakness is fists. HAHAHA, I win."?


The Wimp-Lo strategy.

/
 
2014-03-19 11:13:03 AM

QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.


If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea?  Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons?   Having nuclear weapons matter.  That is the realpolitik lesson in all this.  Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.
 
2014-03-19 11:13:23 AM
The Russian stock market dropping isn't necessarily bad for Putin.  He could have easily anticipated it (since he instigated it) and sold off most of his stock and emptied his rivals pockets.  The ill will he would gain from a faltering economy could be offset by the nationalist furor over Crimea.
 
2014-03-19 11:13:25 AM

TheZorker: QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.

Russia's economy is taking a beating

No. In fact, what's the opposite?

It's *Surging* on the fact that EU and the US are basically conducting business as normal.

Putin basically said "Your move, West," and we apparently decided to pass.


Surging?
Surging?
Surging?
Surging?
 
2014-03-19 11:13:55 AM

plcow: LordJiro: brandent: JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.

Yes yes. By all means Europe should threaten to stop buying gas. I wonder why Europe hasn't already fixed this obvious oversight. They should get right on it. I mean really. You would think they would have already done such a simple thing.

Yes. Russia is the only exporter of oil/gas on the planet.

As far as Europe is concerned, it's them and Norway.  They don't have the import facilities to accept gas from anywhere else.

Oil can sort of be found elsewhere.  It's not actually fungible like everyone thinks it is.  And Russia is a MAJOR exporter of oil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports) good luck absorbing that supply shortage with prices alone.  They will go through the roof.

Refusing to purchase Russia's Oil & Gas would be so devastating as to not even really consider it an option.  Energy is their Queen.  Not Crimea like the article would like people to believe.  They have most of Europe, and especially Ukraine by the nut sack.  Ukraine has almost no production of their own and for the last couple of years keeps boycotting anyone who tries to drill on their bland wasteland.


Ukraine doesn't 'need' oil production.  They're one of the top producers and suppliers of agricultural goods in the world.  Just behind Canada and the US.

And Russia is still a net importer of food stuffs.  And no, Russia does not have Europe by the short and curlies.  The winter is ending and they're already arranged for alternate fuel supplies by way of Norway's oil and Germany's nuclear reactors.

Meanwhile, in America, we're frantically arranging legislation that will allow the US to sell LNG to Europe, while simultaneously arranging for experts to begin drafting plans for a LNG pipeline across the Atlantic.

Russia has farked itself well and proper this time, and for 'nothing.'
 
2014-03-19 11:14:08 AM

Gunny Highway: TheZorker: QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.

Russia's economy is taking a beating

No. In fact, what's the opposite?

It's *Surging* on the fact that EU and the US are basically conducting business as normal.

Putin basically said "Your move, West," and we apparently decided to pass.

Taking a beating?  Surging?

How is it possible that two people look at the same information and one comes up with "taking a beating" and the other "surging?"


At least one of them is deluded/trolling.
 
2014-03-19 11:16:02 AM
i1.ytimg.com
 
2014-03-19 11:16:37 AM

TedDalton: If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea? Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons? Having nuclear weapons matter. That is the realpolitik lesson in all this. Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.


Do you guys really believe that the situation would be better if a small, corrupt nation who just overthrew their President and was on the verge of a civil war had access to 20 year old nukes?
 
2014-03-19 11:17:23 AM

Plant Rights Activist: The Russian stock market dropping isn't necessarily bad for Putin.  He could have easily anticipated it (since he instigated it) and sold off most of his stock and emptied his rivals pockets.  The ill will he would gain from a faltering economy could be offset by the nationalist furor over Crimea.


There are Russians protesting against the Crimean invasion in Moscow.  There's 'some' enthusiasm for the invasion, but it's far from unanimous, even in Russia's heartland.
 
2014-03-19 11:17:47 AM
As Rachel Maddow pointed out, Putin is going to have a much harder time getting pro-Russia politicians to win in Ukraine without Crimea.  It would be roughly equivalent to how the US political landscape would change if Illinois left.
 
2014-03-19 11:18:05 AM

Vitamin Pb: TheManMythLegend: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


I thought it was republicans who said that Russia was the greatest geopolitical threat during the debates?

Shush. Russia is our good friend. We pushed the big red "Reset" button on our relationship when Obama sent Hillary to Putin. With a literal big red button to pretend push.

That was how Obama told Putin that we were his good buddy now. Cause we're friends, and we trust him


Its like staring into his soul but tackier because of the added prop comedy.
 
2014-03-19 11:18:06 AM

cirby: Peter von Nostrand:
He has legions of Republicans as fans,

...according to leftist Democrats, who can't ever seem to find any actual legions...


There's no need to find them. They write at many right wing sites, etc
 
2014-03-19 11:18:37 AM
We lost the instant we decided not to nuke Finland.
 
2014-03-19 11:19:11 AM
Also, you blog sucks and sounds super butthurt.
 
2014-03-19 11:19:43 AM

Mentat: TedDalton: If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea? Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons? Having nuclear weapons matter. That is the realpolitik lesson in all this. Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.

Do you guys really believe that the situation would be better if a small, corrupt nation who just overthrew their President and was on the verge of a civil war had access to 20 year old nukes?


Change 'small' to 'huge' and you'd be describing the collapse of the USSR.
 
2014-03-19 11:19:59 AM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


Huh?

/mutters into a microphone "after the election, I will have more flexibility"
 
2014-03-19 11:21:33 AM
Does anybody really think Russia can afford to stop gas exports?  That's pretty much the only revenue source they have going at this point.

A lot of people are saying that if large-scale hostilities break out, we can cripple Russia without firing a shot by releasing a small amount of our strategic oil reserves to disrupt the energy market.
 
2014-03-19 11:21:45 AM

ikanreed: No one watches Fox News unless they wish to become dumber.


Its good for comedy. Also it is important to see where your republican friends are getting their talking points.
 
2014-03-19 11:22:01 AM

TedDalton: QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.

If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea?  Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons?   Having nuclear weapons matter.  That is the realpolitik lesson in all this.  Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.


Dan Carlin argued that giving those former Soviet bloc countries may be the best solution. So like Poland and Ukraine have a handful of nukes - that they can't set off without the consent of the other and not enough to cause nuclear winter - with the understanding that if one country is invaded, the other will be up next. He argued that a few million dead Russians to grab something like Crimea would give pause to anybody.
 
2014-03-19 11:22:45 AM

Dr Dreidel: Laobaojun: Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place.

This is silly.

"I punched you, and even though I need a doctor now, everyone knows that your face's weakness is fists. HAHAHA, I win."?


Tactical success =/= strategic success.

Hypothetically, we park a carrier strike group in the Black Sea (despite the practical issues there) and the Russian Federation forces return to the numbers under the treaty or even a complete withdrawal.   The ethnic Russians in Crimea go full court on the oppression allegations against the Ukrainians, and in a few years we look like asshats for supporting thugs.  Again.
Putin still ends up with a measure of success.  But since he is not leaving, NATO is still dithering, and the UN hasn't really given a rat's rear end, this is all trivia next to the simple truth that Putin out thought us, and the US is the victim of its own failure to think past the next election or next Fox news cast.
 
2014-03-19 11:24:36 AM
The thing is, as badly as he wants to be militarily relevant, that's not Russia's role any more. It's an oil/natural gas economic powerhouse, but when it comes to Ukraine, they're losing much of their economic powerhouse status because they're gonna get the crap sanctioned out of them, and they'll end up losing more than they could possibly gain by controlling it. Even the Russian people don't want to deal with this, for what it's worth, peace has been profitable for most Russians, a return to Cold War alliances cuts off some of their largest buyers.

That said, I don't think this will be a long term problem. Everyone thinks Russia is a dictatorship (Putin), but it isn't. Not too dissimilar to the US, it is the money-men who make the decisions, and fwiw, Putin has power because the wealthy allow him to have it. If he starts wading into misadventures that cost them billions, I wouldn't expect him to be around much longer.
 
2014-03-19 11:25:35 AM
It really amuses me no end that the hyper-patriot numbnuts who cheered everything Bush did now clutch their pearls and run down a sitting president when America! is in danger. I thought we were supposed to rally 'round the flag when evildoers were at our doorstep?

Have a bowl of dicks on the house, you deserve it.
 
2014-03-19 11:26:17 AM

Anayalator: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

He's plaing Czechers


cdn.pastemagazine.com
 
2014-03-19 11:26:23 AM

Slaves2Darkness: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Bilions of dollars lost in the Russian economy and sanctions have not even started. A faltering NATO suddenly finds some spine. a reason to exist.

 
2014-03-19 11:26:47 AM

tommyl66: Dr Dreidel: Laobaojun: Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place.

This is silly.

"I punched you, and even though I need a doctor now, everyone knows that your face's weakness is fists. HAHAHA, I win."?

The Wimp-Lo strategy.

/


Im glad I'm not the only one that had that pop into my head when I read that.

/he just left
//with nuts
 
2014-03-19 11:27:45 AM

svanmeter: Obama fiddled while the Ukraine burned.


Obama is the leader of the Ukraine?
 
2014-03-19 11:27:50 AM

theorellior: It really amuses me no end that the hyper-patriot numbnuts who cheered everything Bush did now clutch their pearls and run down a sitting president when America! is in danger. I thought we were supposed to rally 'round the flag when evildoers were at our doorstep?

Have a bowl of dicks on the house, you deserve it.


Bush was not a big government pussy, Obama is.

Bowl of dicks prolly part of Obamacare plan requirements?
 
2014-03-19 11:28:00 AM

tommyl66: Dr Dreidel: Laobaojun: Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place.

This is silly.

"I punched you, and even though I need a doctor now, everyone knows that your face's weakness is fists. HAHAHA, I win."?

The Wimp-Lo strategy.

/


Again with the squeaky shoes!
 
2014-03-19 11:29:43 AM

Laobaojun: Livinglush: Rapmaster2000: Once Putin takes over all of Europe

You obviously have no understanding of the history of the USSR and Russia for the last 25 years.

You need to go back a lot more than 25 years to really get this one.  If you don't appreciate the goals of Пётр Алексеевич, you don't understand what Putin is after.


Peter would be a refreshing change from Putin.
 
2014-03-19 11:30:38 AM

LordJiro: way south: [dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 768x543]

"Putin's desperate, losing move will ultimately be overcome by the tides of history."

Translation: We're losing now, but someday it will look like we won.
History tends to not work that way.

/I want to see Putin go down in flames and I have no objection to Obama being the man who does it.
/But until we get a few W's up on the board I'm not convinced Obama can do it.

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.




He hasn't made a serious mistake yet, tho.
The sanctions are a joke and there is no threat of war. So Putin can stay in place and starve out the Ukrainians until his authority is accepted as fact.

Maybe someday Russia falls again. But if it outlasts both Obama and Putins presidencies, history won't record it as being the fault of either man.
 
2014-03-19 11:30:59 AM

Thunderpipes: Bush was not a big government pussy, Obama is.


This is what the GOP actually believes! The guy that turned a surplus into a deficit, started two wars that took 12 years to resolve, created the Patriot act and NSA spying programs IS NOT a big government "pussy"?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!
 
2014-03-19 11:32:04 AM

way south: He hasn't made a serious mistake yet, tho.
The sanctions are a joke and there is no threat of war


Yay, bare assertions.
 
2014-03-19 11:32:16 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: Bush was not a big government pussy, Obama is.

This is what the GOP actually believes! The guy that turned a surplus into a deficit, started two wars that took 12 years to resolve, created the Patriot act and NSA spying programs IS NOT a big government "pussy"?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!


He also created the largest bureaucracy in history. Then again you aren't responding to someone who is in touch with reality
 
2014-03-19 11:32:33 AM

QuesoDelicioso: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

Maybe read the article? Short answer: NATO and the EU have whittled down his sphere of influence to the point that he has no choice but to undertake this conflict. While he does retain a goodly amount of residual strength, he is not acting from a position of strength.


Well, that's not entirely true. There are other choices, ones that would be welcome by the majority of Europe, but he doesn't want to make them.

I see a lot of parallels between Russian foreign policy and the GOP's political strategy, essentially both are based around the concept of nullification - the long slow backwards retreat. Neither can change direction, or offer something new, both are tied to their past to a point where it's crippling their ability to survive. The world has changed and they haven't changed with it - both are likely cold war and cultural dinosaurs.

And we all know what happened to the dinosaurs.
 
2014-03-19 11:32:36 AM

thesubliminalman: You are incorrect, their stock market has lost BILLIONS, which his government has had to pump into his failing economy, and the sanctions haven't even hit yet.

Hey this reminds me of someplace, hmmmm.


I'm sure you aren't talking about the US economy, which is stronger than it has been since the Clinton years, and has record stock market pushes monthly.  Surely you must be thinking of somewhere else.
 
2014-03-19 11:33:17 AM

Hector Remarkable: Putin's playing Rock, Scissors, Paper; we're playing Tiddly-WInks.
No, Putin's playing Bocci Ball, We're playing Scrabble.
Wait, no, PUTIN's playing Parcheesi , we're playing with our genitals.


THIS IS AMERICA SON! THE ONLY THING WE PLAY WITH IS OUR GUNS!
 
2014-03-19 11:33:52 AM

Vitamin Pb: Rwa2play: netcentric: Rwa2play: netcentric: A former Marine's Marine Core blog....

Nothing better than the Core's view of Foreign Policy.

So it's "a former Marine's blog" when it doesn't suit your worldview?


A meme isn't as funny if I have to highlight it or point it out to you.

I can see that; I can also see that meme should've been retired years ago.

It's the Marine Corpse. Get it right.


Yes well the only good marine is a corpse of a marnie.
 
2014-03-19 11:34:00 AM

Laobaojun: Hypothetically, we park a carrier strike group in the Black Sea (despite the practical issues there) and the Russian Federation forces return to the numbers under the treaty or even a complete withdrawal. The ethnic Russians in Crimea go full court on the oppression allegations against the Ukrainians, and in a few years we look like asshats for supporting thugs. Again.
Putin still ends up with a measure of success. But since he is not leaving, NATO is still dithering, and the UN hasn't really given a rat's rear end, this is all trivia next to the simple truth that Putin out thought us, and the US is the victim of its own failure to think past the next election or next Fox news cast.


Uh, isn't Turkey (a NATO ally) already in the Black Sea? (Granted, it's not a carrier group, but Turkey plus the rest of NATO in Europe can easily draw Russia to a stalemate - at worst - for the week or less it'd take for a US response team to get there.)

IF the ethnic Russians in Crimea press the oppression allegations (which is a pretty big 'if'), it changes very little. IF (an even bigger one this time) those allegations turn out to be true - if the Ukranian government was oppressing ethnic Russians - then the US has already lost by setting up an "us vs Putin" conflict 2 weeks ago. (I'd also argue that Putin repeatedly stomped on his own dick if that was the case. Unilaterally invading a country, even for the "right reasons", without consulting anyone else, shows more brazen disregard for "international law" than Bush did with the Iraq Adventures.)

The initial actor in a conflict always has a strategic advantage - by definition, Putin is playing offense while Ukraine, the US, Poland, etc are playing defense. As soon as the military ducks are in their rows, Putin either turns tail to staunch his own economic bleeding, or NATO does it for him.

Or it goes nuclear. Which could also be fun.

// I live in DC - I'll be a whiff of hydrogen and ozone before my optic nerve can send the picture of the flash to my brain
 
2014-03-19 11:34:46 AM

ikanreed: FLMountainMan: Be honest, how much Fox News have you watched since the Crimean invasion? And why?

No one watches Fox News unless they wish to become dumber.


You would think.  My exposure is incidental - it seems to be playing in every single small business I ever go to.  But I'm amazed at how many liberals on Fark seem watch it religiously.
 
2014-03-19 11:35:14 AM

Gunny Highway: Just because

[i.kinja-img.com image 636x948]


I don't know what that is, but it's awesome.
 
2014-03-19 11:35:27 AM
www.tzona.org
Chessmate, Libbos
 
2014-03-19 11:36:24 AM

Peter von Nostrand: cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: Bush was not a big government pussy, Obama is.

This is what the GOP actually believes! The guy that turned a surplus into a deficit, started two wars that took 12 years to resolve, created the Patriot act and NSA spying programs IS NOT a big government "pussy"?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!

He also created the largest bureaucracy in history. Then again you aren't responding to someone who is in touch with reality


Fair point.
 
2014-03-19 11:36:28 AM

Laobaojun: Tactical success =/= strategic success.

Hypothetically, we park a carrier strike group in the Black Sea (despite the practical issues there) and the Russian Federation forces return to the numbers under the treaty or even a complete withdrawal. The ethnic Russians in Crimea go full court on the oppression allegations against the Ukrainians, and in a few years we look like asshats for supporting thugs. Again.
Putin still ends up with a measure of success. But since he is not leaving, NATO is still dithering, and the UN hasn't really given a rat's rear end, this is all trivia next to the simple truth that Putin out thought us, and the US is the victim of its own failure to think past the next election or next Fox news cast.


How did Russia out-think you?

It seems to me that Russia used to have all the influence it wanted over the Ukraine, including full use of the port at Sevastopol.  Now it needs to use military force just to maintain that, and is taking an economical and political beating for it.  What advantage has Russia gained out of all this?
 
2014-03-19 11:36:29 AM

Dr Dreidel: LordJiro: Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.

Slaves2Darkness: Yes. The whole reason he invaded Crimea is that Russia can't have NATO so dam close. Essentially the same reason that the US has punished Cuba for 60 years is the reason that Russia is invading Crimea. Secondly Russia's economy is taking a beating. If the US turns up the economic pressure on Russia all it will take is time before Putin folds or is replaced.

Isn't the monkeywrench in all that the fact that Putin/Russia basically control the European continent's natural gas supply?

So we can sanction Russia, and risk them either jacking up the price on or simply stopping the NG supply altogether. It's my understanding (admittedly thin) that it'd take the US several weeks to a month at least to make up that lost supply.


The problem Russia has with stopping the NG supply is once you do it there is no going back. Your European customers have to find some other source of heating fuel and while it may cost more they will never trust Russia to supply them again. Stopping the NG also will increase the economic loss as people who are not receiving product don't tend to pay for said product.
 
2014-03-19 11:37:00 AM
King me!
 
2014-03-19 11:37:00 AM

FLMountainMan: ikanreed: FLMountainMan: Be honest, how much Fox News have you watched since the Crimean invasion? And why?

No one watches Fox News unless they wish to become dumber.

You would think.  My exposure is incidental - it seems to be playing in every single small business I ever go to.  But I'm amazed at how many liberals on Fark seem watch it religiously.


How many? I think most of us liberals just watch Jon Stewart make fun of it.
 
2014-03-19 11:37:18 AM

theorellior: It really amuses me no end that the hyper-patriot numbnuts who cheered everything Bush did now clutch their pearls and run down a sitting president when America! is in danger. I thought we were supposed to rally 'round the flag when evildoers were at our doorstep?

Have a bowl of dicks on the house, you deserve it.


The politics of war in the US are tricky. You've got Republicans who beat their chests and demand ACTION! all the time but in practice only support wars started by other Republicans and you've got Democrats who beat the bongos of peacenickery but in practice can be reliably counted on to get behind any war anyone would care to start.

Us hippies just have to hope for cripplingly large Republican minorities I guess.
 
2014-03-19 11:37:44 AM

way south: LordJiro: way south: [dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 768x543]

"Putin's desperate, losing move will ultimately be overcome by the tides of history."

Translation: We're losing now, but someday it will look like we won.
History tends to not work that way.

/I want to see Putin go down in flames and I have no objection to Obama being the man who does it.
/But until we get a few W's up on the board I'm not convinced Obama can do it.

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.

He hasn't made a serious mistake yet, tho.
The sanctions are a joke and there is no threat of war. So Putin can stay in place and starve out the Ukrainians until his authority is accepted as fact.

Maybe someday Russia falls again. But if it outlasts both Obama and Putins presidencies, history won't record it as being the fault of either man.


The mere possibility of sanctions have forced Russian businesses to withdraw their money from foreign banks and markets.  This pretty much ensures that the Russian economy is going to shrink and contract, no matter what else happens after this point.

In short, the fear of sanctions accomplished what the sanctions were intended to do and we haven't even laid any down yet.

You seem to believe that sanctions will be a 'joke', but the Russian oligarchs are taking those sanctions seriously enough to basically take a lot of their money and burn it in a barrel out behind their house rather than risk having their assets in foreign markets once seizures and sanctions are put in place.

So, they're taking sanctions pretty seriously.  Plus, you're a faceless poster on the internet.  I guess the whole 'joke' thing is ironic in hindsight, hm?
 
2014-03-19 11:37:45 AM

Livinglush: Laobaojun: Livinglush: Rapmaster2000: Once Putin takes over all of Europe

You obviously have no understanding of the history of the USSR and Russia for the last 25 years.

You need to go back a lot more than 25 years to really get this one.  If you don't appreciate the goals of Пётр Алексеевич, you don't understand what Putin is after.

Peter would be a refreshing change from Putin.


Read what Russians say about Putin, and look at Putin objectively, not with the standard American "that gotdamned Russki bastich" mindset.  He sees himself as the steward of a Russian renaissance,  like Peter the Great.  Deal with the guy like he's Ivan the Terrible, and he's played you hard.
 
2014-03-19 11:38:02 AM

Livinglush: I'm sure you aren't talking about the US economy, which is stronger than it has been since the Clinton years, and has record stock market pushes monthly.  Surely you must be thinking of somewhere else.


Yes, surging stock markets, huge bonuses for Wall Street, and high unemployment, record numbers on Food Stamps, and ever-increasing income inequality, especially in blue states.

Seriously, the Obama Administration has been an oligarch's wet dream.  But I know it's all the fault of those damned House Rethuglikkkans and the Koch Bros.!
 
2014-03-19 11:38:14 AM

SpaceButler: Laobaojun: Tactical success =/= strategic success.

Hypothetically, we park a carrier strike group in the Black Sea (despite the practical issues there) and the Russian Federation forces return to the numbers under the treaty or even a complete withdrawal. The ethnic Russians in Crimea go full court on the oppression allegations against the Ukrainians, and in a few years we look like asshats for supporting thugs. Again.
Putin still ends up with a measure of success. But since he is not leaving, NATO is still dithering, and the UN hasn't really given a rat's rear end, this is all trivia next to the simple truth that Putin out thought us, and the US is the victim of its own failure to think past the next election or next Fox news cast.

How did Russia out-think you?

It seems to me that Russia used to have all the influence it wanted over the Ukraine, including full use of the port at Sevastopol.  Now it needs to use military force just to maintain that, and is taking an economical and political beating for it.  What advantage has Russia gained out of all this?


Putin gets to yell harsh things at the West while taking his shirt off. That's all right-wingers care about.
 
2014-03-19 11:38:40 AM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


I'm still trying to figure out where the Fark Liberals* came up with 'Republicans are fans of Putin'.

*Fark Liberals and real Liberals are not the same creatures.
 
2014-03-19 11:38:59 AM
Rwa2play:  Also:  Wouldn't be surprised if Obama is coordinating with the EU on a plan to make up for a potential loss of NG from Russia.

The fracking industry has already begun a campaign that NG-from-fracking is now necessary in order to help Europe free itself from its dependency on Russian fuel.  It's only in the fine print that they admit it will take several years-- best case scenario-- to drill enough and set up enough infrastructure to begin meeting the demand.  By which time, of course, the press will be running "whatever happened to Crimea" stories and Russian expansionism will-- one way or the other-- be over.

Long-term environmental consequences like triggering earthquakes and poisoning freshwater be damned, there's an immediate and uncertain need we have to be prepared to meet five years from now!
 
2014-03-19 11:40:17 AM

SpaceButler: Laobaojun: Tactical success =/= strategic success.

Hypothetically, we park a carrier strike group in the Black Sea (despite the practical issues there) and the Russian Federation forces return to the numbers under the treaty or even a complete withdrawal. The ethnic Russians in Crimea go full court on the oppression allegations against the Ukrainians, and in a few years we look like asshats for supporting thugs. Again.
Putin still ends up with a measure of success. But since he is not leaving, NATO is still dithering, and the UN hasn't really given a rat's rear end, this is all trivia next to the simple truth that Putin out thought us, and the US is the victim of its own failure to think past the next election or next Fox news cast.

How did Russia out-think you?

It seems to me that Russia used to have all the influence it wanted over the Ukraine, including full use of the port at Sevastopol.  Now it needs to use military force just to maintain that, and is taking an economical and political beating for it.  What advantage has Russia gained out of all this?


More importantly other than preventing atrocities to the people of Crimea what the fark does the US care who rules in that 2nd world shiat hole? Seriously people why the hell is the whole world supposed to be policed by the US. As long as Russia does not attempt to cross into Poland, who is part of NATO and our ally where Ukraine is not, what the fark do we care?

Oh wait I know why we care, because Republitards never pass up an opportunity to go to war and masturbate with the blood of dead children.
 
2014-03-19 11:40:46 AM

Slaves2Darkness: Dr Dreidel: LordJiro: Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.

Slaves2Darkness: Yes. The whole reason he invaded Crimea is that Russia can't have NATO so dam close. Essentially the same reason that the US has punished Cuba for 60 years is the reason that Russia is invading Crimea. Secondly Russia's economy is taking a beating. If the US turns up the economic pressure on Russia all it will take is time before Putin folds or is replaced.

Isn't the monkeywrench in all that the fact that Putin/Russia basically control the European continent's natural gas supply?

So we can sanction Russia, and risk them either jacking up the price on or simply stopping the NG supply altogether. It's my understanding (admittedly thin) that it'd take the US several weeks to a month at least to make up that lost supply.

The problem Russia has with stopping the NG supply is once you do it there is no going back. Your European customers have to find some other source of heating fuel and while it may cost more they will never trust Russia to supply them again. Stopping the NG also will increase the economic loss as people who are not receiving product don't tend to pay for said product.


Norway's already said that they can and will be able to cover short-term oil needs.  Germany, likewise, has made talk about kicking their nuclear reactors back online as needed.

Between the two, especially since winter is just about over, if Russia cuts off the fuel, Europe will be okay and Russia will have cut off their largest supply of foreign currency.  Their economy would melt down.
 
2014-03-19 11:41:31 AM

FLMountainMan: Livinglush: I'm sure you aren't talking about the US economy, which is stronger than it has been since the Clinton years, and has record stock market pushes monthly.  Surely you must be thinking of somewhere else.

Yes, surging stock markets, huge bonuses for Wall Street, and high unemployment, record numbers on Food Stamps, and ever-increasing income inequality, especially in blue states.

Seriously, the Obama Administration has been an oligarch's wet dream.  But I know it's all the fault of those damned House Rethuglikkkans and the Koch Bros.!


I didn't say it was better for average Americans, but the economy is doing great for businesses, and for the wealthy, and for the Koch Bros.
 
2014-03-19 11:41:51 AM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

I'm still trying to figure out where the Fark Liberals* came up with 'Republicans are fans of Putin'.

*Fark Liberals and real Liberals are not the same creatures.


It started with Giuliani saying he was a great leader and Palin saying he was a bad-ass bare-chested bear rassler. The praise sounds like something fans would say.
 
2014-03-19 11:42:13 AM

naptapper: Losing? Really?


Because reasons.

/and because David Brooks, and "tides of history" and other cliches
//cold war is over, send in the next war
 
2014-03-19 11:43:04 AM
Russia is a kleptocracy with a capitalist economy. Hit the money men where it hurts with sanctions and they'll remove Putin and go back to playing nice because to them being billionaires is way more important that their puppet having a place to play with his boats.

Start yanking the money and Putin will retire due to health reasons.
 
2014-03-19 11:43:50 AM

Infernalist: plcow: LordJiro: brandent: JK47: LordJiro:

Russia's economy cannot handle serious sanctions from the EU/US, let alone a world war. Why should Obama do anything while Putin throws money down a hole just to wave his dick around? Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.


Yeah, comprehensive trade sanctions against Russia would flatten their economy.  Natural Gas exports alone comprise nearly half of the Russian GDP.

Yes yes. By all means Europe should threaten to stop buying gas. I wonder why Europe hasn't already fixed this obvious oversight. They should get right on it. I mean really. You would think they would have already done such a simple thing.

Yes. Russia is the only exporter of oil/gas on the planet.

As far as Europe is concerned, it's them and Norway.  They don't have the import facilities to accept gas from anywhere else.

Oil can sort of be found elsewhere.  It's not actually fungible like everyone thinks it is.  And Russia is a MAJOR exporter of oil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports) good luck absorbing that supply shortage with prices alone.  They will go through the roof.

Refusing to purchase Russia's Oil & Gas would be so devastating as to not even really consider it an option.  Energy is their Queen.  Not Crimea like the article would like people to believe.  They have most of Europe, and especially Ukraine by the nut sack.  Ukraine has almost no production of their own and for the last couple of years keeps boycotting anyone who tries to drill on their bland wasteland.

Ukraine doesn't 'need' oil production.  They're one of the top producers and suppliers of agricultural goods in the world.  Just behind Canada and the US.

And Russia is still a net importer of food stuffs.  And no, Russia does not have Europe by the short and curlies.  The winter is ending and they're already arranged for alternate fuel supplies by way of Norway's oil and Germany's nuclear reactors.

Meanwhile, in America, we're franti ...


1) How are they going to farm with fuel for their equipment? How are they going to heat their houses?
2) Norway's oil is already in the equation, are you thinking they can magically create more out of their ass?
3) It take YEARS to build/convert over an export facility.  We are moving as fast as we can, but the economics are shaky, regulatory issues abound, and what we have moving forward right now is a drop in the bucket in terms of international trade.
4) A natural gas pipeline across the pacific?  lol.  we can't even get Keystone built.  That would take 10+ years.  What I am talking about is what is going to happen this summer and next winter.
 
2014-03-19 11:44:27 AM

Ghastly: Russia is a kleptocracy with a capitalist economy. Hit the money men where it hurts with sanctions and they'll remove Putin and go back to playing nice because to them being billionaires is way more important that their puppet having a place to play with his boats.

Start yanking the money and Putin will retire due to health reasons.


It's a game to see who runs out of money first.  The West or Russia's oligarchs.
 
2014-03-19 11:44:47 AM

Slaves2Darkness: The problem Russia has with stopping the NG supply is once you do it there is no going back. Your European customers have to find some other source of heating fuel and while it may cost more they will never trust Russia to supply them again. Stopping the NG also will increase the economic loss as people who are not receiving product don't tend to pay for said product.


Makes sense in theory, but that still doesn't account for:
-what Europe does in the interim. They can't make up the Russian supply quickly or easily, and it's still winter for a month (or more. Shiat's weird this year). I've heard that the US/Canadian supply is strong, but the infrastructure to get it across the Atlantic Ocean is not, and that's not the kind of thing you can spin up in a day. It's not a military prison on a tropical island.
-you underestimate the business of geopolitics. If Europe cuts off the Russian NG supply, they'll be back on it within a decade after the current conflict ends (assuming a new one doesn't come up in the interim). Russia might/probably wouldn't get back to being the top supplier to Europe, but they'd still get that cheddar.
-Russia might be willing to forego short-term profits in favor of long-term Crimea-holding.
 
2014-03-19 11:45:40 AM
We embargo Russia. In combo with China, this helps them move over to a new non-U.S. dollar exchange. Europe receives the expected oil embargo, escalating already inflationary economics there. Several third world nations that still receives Russian funding get even closer to total collapse and revolutionary activity. The possibilities for interesting times this decade seems to be pretty open, but my actual expectations will be that little calamity will ensue. With little probability of war and the exceptions that are being thrown around for the embargo, Russia won't have a serious enough reason to change anything.
 
2014-03-19 11:46:27 AM

Ghastly: Russia is a kleptocracy with a capitalist economy. Hit the money men where it hurts with sanctions and they'll remove Putin and go back to playing nice because to them being billionaires is way more important that their puppet having a place to play with his boats.

Start yanking the money and Putin will retire due to health reasons.


This.  All you need to know about Vladimir Putin is that he's a lifelong government bureaucrat with a net worth of $70 billion.
 
2014-03-19 11:46:49 AM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

I'm still trying to figure out where the Fark Liberals* came up with 'Republicans are fans of Putin'.

*Fark Liberals and real Liberals are not the same creatures.


Yeah, no republican every had a bromance for Pooty-poot.
 
2014-03-19 11:46:56 AM
Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.
 
2014-03-19 11:48:51 AM

Mentat: TedDalton: If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea? Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons? Having nuclear weapons matter. That is the realpolitik lesson in all this. Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.

Do you guys really believe that the situation would be better if a small, corrupt nation who just overthrew their President and was on the verge of a civil war had access to 20 year old nukes?


Of course not.  I prefer weapons of mass destruction never existed.  But realistically, some countries will deduce that Ukraine has lost territory to Russia because they gave up their nukes back in 1994.  Further, why give up nukes if no one will defend you from those who do?

Bottom line, the West has been isolating Russia one by one, slowly but surely since 1992, with the expansion of NATO and the EU, this Crimea mess is a small bite back by Russia but in the long run, doesn't matter.  The focus should be on how to bring Russia into the fold of a true G8 country (rule of law for property rights, freedom of press, limited corruption, etc.) without pushing so hard that Russia feels trapped and does something truly desperate.
 
2014-03-19 11:49:12 AM

pkellmey: We embargo Russia. In combo with China, this helps them move over to a new non-U.S. dollar exchange. Europe receives the expected oil embargo, escalating already inflationary economics there. Several third world nations that still receives Russian funding get even closer to total collapse and revolutionary activity. The possibilities for interesting times this decade seems to be pretty open, but my actual expectations will be that little calamity will ensue. With little probability of war and the exceptions that are being thrown around for the embargo, Russia won't have a serious enough reason to change anything.


Awesome fantasy, bro.
 
2014-03-19 11:50:48 AM
Why Russia will lose:

1. This pushes all the old Russian ex-client states into the western sphere of influence. He just alienated tons of countries that were on neutral ground.

2. This pushed almost all of Ukraine into Europe's hands.  Russia got Crimea, an area that was mostly Russian anyway.

3. Foreign investment, something Russia really needs will dry up. Why they hell would you put your money into a crazy mans state.

4. Europe will now at least try to get away from Russian energy. Something Putin is holding over them.

5. Most likely get them kicked out of the G-8. That is a big thing. Everyone's economy is interlinked unlike the cold war.

6. You will most likely have a low grade insurgence in Crimea. As the U.S knows this is expensive and difficult to deal with.

7. Negated all the good will they just got from their billion dollar Olympics.

8. The eye of sauron (China) will now look to the west. We can finally get the ring into Beijing.

9. Maybe the EU will have to actually get together and solve their own problems without the U.S.

Bad for us.........

1. We didn't go all warmonger on their ass. So certain four year old jingoistic politicians will have a talking point for the next couple of years.

2. Old politicians will be screaming cold war into the microphone for the next five years. Because they honestly deep down miss it.

3. The west lost Crimea which was really under Russian control anyway.

4. This will effect Syria and Iran negotiations in a bad way.
 
2014-03-19 11:52:25 AM

FLMountainMan: FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.

He'd ask why there were so many strawmen in front of him.


He'd say "zzzzzzzzzzz..."
 
2014-03-19 11:52:43 AM
I think I light be reading different news than some of you guys. It looks to me that Putin's winning here. And looking at how the people living in Crimea (read: Russians) are reacting, I'm pretty sure Putin's going to keep on winning.

I can't help but wonder if we're trying to put a western spin on this. I mean, the people there sound like they don't want to be part of Ukraine.
 
2014-03-19 11:53:52 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Putin gets to yell harsh things at the West while taking his shirt off.


Is that all this is about?  It's 2014, we have web sites for that.  Maybe he'll leave Ukraine alone if we give him a webcam and agree to watch all his YouTube videos.
 
2014-03-19 11:54:34 AM

busy chillin': [www.tzona.org image 600x405]
Chessmate, Libbos


img.fark.net

If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.
 
2014-03-19 11:55:25 AM

FLMountainMan: Livinglush: I'm sure you aren't talking about the US economy, which is stronger than it has been since the Clinton years, and has record stock market pushes monthly.  Surely you must be thinking of somewhere else.

Yes, surging stock markets, huge bonuses for Wall Street, and high unemployment, record numbers on Food Stamps, and ever-increasing income inequality, especially in blue states.

Seriously, the Obama Administration has been an oligarch's wet dream.  But I know it's all the fault of those damned House Rethuglikkkans and the Koch Bros.!


It's been Republicans that have fought, tooth-and-nail, against anything that would speed up the recovery for the lower classes or shrink unemployment, such as minimum wage increases which would do both. It was the GOP that watered down the stimulus, which economists said should have been significantly bigger. It was Republicans and Republican-lite Blue Dogs who turned the ACA from a fiscally responsible public option into an insurance company handout. And it was Republican policy that skullfarked the economy in the first place.

Anyone who tells you Republicans are fiscally responsible are liars.
 
2014-03-19 11:56:04 AM

FlashHarry: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

i wonder what reagan would say if you told him that republicans were praising a russian dictator while attacking our president at the same time.


I am pretty sure the gipper would have a heart attack to see a black man in the white house who was not serving drinks.
 
2014-03-19 11:57:59 AM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


ts3.mm.bing.net
Including this guy who almost became President.
 
2014-03-19 11:58:30 AM

BalugaJoe: [i1.ytimg.com image 480x360]


i get my kicks above the waistline, sunshine.
 
2014-03-19 11:58:45 AM

durbnpoisn: The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian. So does Russia.


No.  The vote was not legitimate.  The question on the ballot was basically "Do you want to join Russia, or declare independence?" with no option for remaining part of the Ukraine.

This lead to widespread boycotting of the vote.  It should also be noted that the vote was conducted with Russian soldier marching through the streets, and under the supervision of pro-Russian election observers.

To top it all off, the result was about 97% in favor of joining Russia.  In a region that is about 12% Tartar, an ethnic group that has a long history of oppression at the hands of Russia, and today tend to be extremely anti-Russian.

So, in summation, the vote was a total sham, just meant to provide a visible pretext for a land grab.
 
2014-03-19 12:00:40 PM

stuffy: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

[ts3.mm.bing.net image 198x180]
Including this guy who almost became President.


"almost"
"47%"
"Corporations are people"
"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. "

etc.
 
2014-03-19 12:00:49 PM

udhq: In a region that is about 12% Tartar, an ethnic group that has a long history of oppression at the hands of Russia, and today tend to be extremely anti-Russian.

So, in summation, the vote was a total sham, just meant to provide a visible pretext for a land grab.


something was definitely fishy.
 
2014-03-19 12:01:20 PM

Cerebral Ballsy: It looks to me that Putin's winning here.


Losing most of Ukraine is a win?
 
2014-03-19 12:01:44 PM

durbnpoisn: Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.

you may want to look up a map of Ukraine.

 
2014-03-19 12:01:51 PM
Laobaojun: "Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place."

Yeah, no.  Firstly, the Ukraine wasn't part of the EU/NATO before this started.  Russia was their close ally. Being invaded by your supposed ally isn't a black mark against a third party.  It's a giant warning sign to anyone else who might be torn between the two suitors, that they need to factor in what an alliance with Russia is likely to *mean*.

Further, Putin's move pushed western Ukraine into the arms of the EU/NATO so strongly that they can't be *allowed* to fail.
And as Western money continues to pour into the Ukraine to prop it up, it's going to be West Germany/East Germany redux.
Which is only going to further-weaken Russia's pitch to any other countries.

And Putin knows this. But he didn't have a choice.

Putin grabbed Crimea because he *had to*.  If it was a move of strength Russia wouldn't have sent troops without markings, nor spent weeks denying it.
Putin did *that*, because he was still hoping the 'revolution' would fail, Yanukovich could be reinstalled and could use the unrest as an excuse to side more-strongly with Russia.

It was only when it became obvious the 'revolution' was not going to fail, that Putin admitted the Russian presence and dropped the charade that Yanukovich was legitimate. 
None of that is consistent with a Russian move of strength.
 
2014-03-19 12:02:04 PM

cameroncrazy1984: pkellmey: We embargo Russia. In combo with China, this helps them move over to a new non-U.S. dollar exchange. Europe receives the expected oil embargo, escalating already inflationary economics there. Several third world nations that still receives Russian funding get even closer to total collapse and revolutionary activity. The possibilities for interesting times this decade seems to be pretty open, but my actual expectations will be that little calamity will ensue. With little probability of war and the exceptions that are being thrown around for the embargo, Russia won't have a serious enough reason to change anything.

Awesome fantasy, bro.


It's not that far from reality.  Russia, who made good early strides during the 90's towards becoming westernized, is currently pushing itself backwards.  They're attempting to use old ways in the modern world.  But since opening up their economy, they're slowly realizing "oh shiat, we actually have to play ball from time to time, or our economy dries up, and we collapse again."

If they continue on their current course, their only real method to continue will be to economically tie themselves to China, and become isolationist with regards to the west.  It's a really, really poor course, and will only result in their continued zombie economy and a slowly eroding set of border states, but it's an option.
 
2014-03-19 12:02:18 PM

bigsteve3OOO: So I see things this way:
The world has 2 options
1  Let putin have whatever portion of Ukraine he wants
2  Do not let him have it

Putin has 2 options:
1  Give it back
2  keep it

If both pick #2 we are going to shoot it out.

I will be investing in defense stocks.  Anyone know the ticker symbol for Halliburton?


Owned by Kellogg, Brown, and Root; Halliburton is under the auspices of the KBR ticker symbol, traded on the New York Stock Exchange.

It has mostly fallen over the last 2 months, though not precipitously.
 
2014-03-19 12:02:33 PM
I don't particularly want Russia to take over Crimea. If the Crimeans want to be Russian, then I guess that's fine. Whatever.

But either way, it's not worth a single American life to me. Period.
 
2014-03-19 12:02:59 PM

busy chillin': udhq: In a region that is about 12% Tartar, an ethnic group that has a long history of oppression at the hands of Russia, and today tend to be extremely anti-Russian.

So, in summation, the vote was a total sham, just meant to provide a visible pretext for a land grab.

something was definitely fishy.


What's your beef? I'd steak my life on the fact that this was from a raw news feed.
 
2014-03-19 12:03:34 PM
Amish Tech Support:
7. Negated all the good will they just got from their 50 billion dollar Olympics.
 
2014-03-19 12:04:22 PM

durbnpoisn: Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.


I believe you want to understand what's going on better; here might be a place to start:

When the USSR collapsed the Russians literally lost control of their nuclear arsenal. Parts of it were in other, now independent, countries. Ukraine was one of them. Russia agreed to respect Ukraine territorial independence, in return for Ukraine giving up it's nuclear arsenal. Russia has now unilaterally violated that agreement.
Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances
The part of all of this that will cost Russia the most is violating this agreement and what that means in terms of trust and trade. For instance: Russia spent years gaining entry to the G-8 trade group. Now it's the G-7 again. It will take more years (after Putin is gone) to regain that membership.
 
2014-03-19 12:05:09 PM

ringersol: Laobaojun: "Even if we "win", the US and NATO looks ineffective and like a poor choice as an ally because Ukraine was "invaded" in the first place."

Yeah, no.  Firstly, the Ukraine wasn't part of the EU/NATO before this started.  Russia was their close ally. Being invaded by your supposed ally isn't a black mark against a third party.  It's a giant warning sign to anyone else who might be torn between the two suitors, that they need to factor in what an alliance with Russia is likely to *mean*.

Further, Putin's move pushed western Ukraine into the arms of the EU/NATO so strongly that they can't be *allowed* to fail.
And as Western money continues to pour into the Ukraine to prop it up, it's going to be West Germany/East Germany redux.
Which is only going to further-weaken Russia's pitch to any other countries.

And Putin knows this. But he didn't have a choice.

Putin grabbed Crimea because he *had to*.  If it was a move of strength Russia wouldn't have sent troops without markings, nor spent weeks denying it.
Putin did *that*, because he was still hoping the 'revolution' would fail, Yanukovich could be reinstalled and could use the unrest as an excuse to side more-strongly with Russia.

It was only when it became obvious the 'revolution' was not going to fail, that Putin admitted the Russian presence and dropped the charade that Yanukovich was legitimate. 
None of that is consistent with a Russian move of strength.


Basically if you're winning the game, you wouldn't need to keep throwing Hail Marys.

/Maries?
 
2014-03-19 12:08:02 PM

durbnpoisn: Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.


By my understanding:
Crimea was formally made part of Ukraine during the Soviet era, but it was kept by Ukraine when the USSR fell, though Russia retained its Black Sea fleet and that fleet's deepwater port at Sevastopol.  Ever since that deal was worked out, I'm not aware of any serious debate about the fact that Crimea was Ukrainian territory.
The western world is upset about Russia annexing Crimea mainly because of how it's happened.  It wasn't initiated by the people of Crimea; it was initiated by Russia using insignia-free military troops and crony politicians, in response to the people of the Ukraine in general making it clear through mass protests that they wanted to join the EU and not be a de facto Russian vassal.  If this had all started with a domestic referendum in Crimea, I doubt the west would be doing much more than shrugging, or maybe grumbling a little.
 
2014-03-19 12:09:33 PM

Cerebral Ballsy: I can't help but wonder if we're trying to put a western spin on this. I mean, the people there sound like they don't want to be part of Ukraine.


That's because the people who want to stay with Ukraine are already moving away or get beaten up by thugs until they stop complaining.
 
2014-03-19 12:10:54 PM

Dr Dreidel: Slaves2Darkness: The problem Russia has with stopping the NG supply is once you do it there is no going back. Your European customers have to find some other source of heating fuel and while it may cost more they will never trust Russia to supply them again. Stopping the NG also will increase the economic loss as people who are not receiving product don't tend to pay for said product.

Makes sense in theory, but that still doesn't account for:
-what Europe does in the interim. They can't make up the Russian supply quickly or easily, and it's still winter for a month (or more. Shiat's weird this year). I've heard that the US/Canadian supply is strong, but the infrastructure to get it across the Atlantic Ocean is not, and that's not the kind of thing you can spin up in a day. It's not a military prison on a tropical island.
-you underestimate the business of geopolitics. If Europe cuts off the Russian NG supply, they'll be back on it within a decade after the current conflict ends (assuming a new one doesn't come up in the interim). Russia might/probably wouldn't get back to being the top supplier to Europe, but they'd still get that cheddar.
-Russia might be willing to forego short-term profits in favor of long-term Crimea-holding.


Yeah nothing says Russia has to cut off all NG exports. If they cut it any appreciably amount and start raising the price, that's going to wreak enough havoc as is. They can charge more for oil too, though OPEC can head that off to a certain extent. I'm not entirely certain they would though.
 
2014-03-19 12:10:58 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll

I'm still trying to figure out where the Fark Liberals* came up with 'Republicans are fans of Putin'.


Then pay attention. There's a series of links up thread of conservative commentators praising Putin.
 
2014-03-19 12:12:39 PM

tinyarena: When the USSR collapsed the Russians literally lost control of their nuclear arsenal.


Literally!
 
2014-03-19 12:12:55 PM

kbronsito: durbnpoisn: Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.

you may want to look up a map of Ukraine.


Yes, look at the map.  They not only lost the entire Crimean coastline, but the Sea of Azov is effectively closed to them now.  For all intents and purposes, Ukraine just lost 75% of its Black Sea coastline and most of its major ports.
 
2014-03-19 12:13:24 PM
The joke to me is the persistent myth that any individual (such as a president) or even nation (such as the US) can police the entire world effectively, on the off chance a miscalculation is NOT made. This simplistic thinking will eventually be proven ludicrous to anyone who cares to study it.

Just like the economy (regional, global) - things just happen, and no one party can do much about it.  Proof? This recession began in 2008 and the BEST efforts of dozens of nations has not made a dent. It will just run its course.

In the not too distant future... when another dozen countries become nuclear, it will become obvious how little control certain interests actually have over the behavior of other countries, or other interested parties.

Worse, the US, whose economy lurches from doom to doom, will have to contend with a rotting nuclear quagmire (as will Russia), and will find itself petering out while China and India step forward, due to simple inevitability of countries with a behemothic middle class are wont to do.

Most of us will live to see this.
 
2014-03-19 12:13:43 PM
If that's true, Putin needs to let Kasparov know all is forgiven and to pretty please come back, because Putin sucks at chess.

Hell, in Putin's shoes Kasparov would have resigned (in every sense of the word) a long time ago, just out of good manners. You know the worst possible way to insult a chess player? Dragging out a game you know you're bound to lose hoping he'll do something really idiotic.

If he won't stoop to calling Kasparov, he might try Gorbachev. He had reasons for writing off the Warsaw Pact in the first place. Oh, and Afghanistan. Most Russians never forgave Gorbachev for selling the family farm, but after enough bad harvests there sometimes isn't a choice.
 
2014-03-19 12:16:53 PM
QUESTION:

1. Brazil's economy is bigger than Russia's. And China isn't in the G8 either. Why not give Russia's spot to either of those guys?

2. Russia has a World Cup coming up. I'm sure the U.S, UK, or Spain/Portugal would be happy to host it instead. (If the Russian team boycott's... who the fark cares. They can't even qualify unless they host anyways. One more spot for a team someone may actually want to watch).
 
2014-03-19 12:17:13 PM
What interests me most about this conflict is how it plays out on some websites. For example, The Telegraph site is never a place to go for sensible, reasoned arguments but oh boy has it gone full tilt crazy over the Ukraine. There is a marked increase in pro-Russian shills and marked increase in anti-EU loons and somehow they have formed a loose alliance of EU hate. Never mind that it's Russia which has annexed a region, no it's the pro-facist EU's fault. It's futile to even offer a reasonable point of view because it will be shouted down but this stupidity.
 
2014-03-19 12:23:52 PM
plcow: 1) How are they going to farm with fuel for their equipment? How are they going to heat their houses?
2) Norway's oil is already in the equation, are you thinking they can magically create more out of their ass?
3) It take YEARS to build/convert over an export facility. We are moving as fast as we can, but the economics are shaky, regulatory issues abound, and what we have moving forward right now is a drop in the bucket in terms of international trade.
4) A natural gas pipeline across the pacific? lol. we can't even get Keystone built. That would take 10+ years. What I am talking about is what is going to happen this summer and next winter.


1) there is spare capacity in nearly all oil producing countries especially OPEC ones they rarley produce more than 70% of there capacity to keep the prices high.
2) Norway oil and gas is way below max capacity it's about 50% of what it peak capability is.
3) yep but most facilities are well below maximum also the supply is often unrefined .
4) it's a lot less political sensitive to go across the ocean than it is land especially considering the circumstances. Also it's been done successfully and quickly before http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pluto
 
2014-03-19 12:24:01 PM

Mentat: TedDalton: If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea? Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons? Having nuclear weapons matter. That is the realpolitik lesson in all this. Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.

Do you guys really believe that the situation would be better if a small, corrupt nation who just overthrew their President and was on the verge of a civil war had access to 20 year old nukes?


It would be better for Ukraine.
 
2014-03-19 12:25:34 PM

TwistedFark: And we all know what happened to the dinosaurs.


Yep.  They got left off the Ark.  I can't wait to see those CGI dinosaurs in the new Noah movie.  I bet Jesus rides an Allosaurus.
 
2014-03-19 12:27:09 PM

naptapper: Losing? Really?


failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.

FTA   "Surely, the Obama administration is adrift in a sea tossed by crises. But the smugness of the "we told you so" crowd is equally uninformed. The Cold-War-is-back narrative is so politically tinged that it is hard to take much of it at face value. The general thrust of the argument is that certain administrations were soft  or too careless in expanding NATO (). This combination of expansion and insufficient spine in the face of aggression, emboldened the Russian bear that has come screaming back to terrorize all of Europe once again. In the of the Right Honorable Lindsey Graham, "It started with Benghazi. When you kill Americans and nobody pays a price, you invite this kind of aggression. #Ukraine.""

So here we have a false assumption set up through a straw man (the we told you so crowd).  Yes there are some people pointing out that Obama has hardly stood firm on his red lines.  Of course Lindsay (ambiguously gay) Graham shilling for the intelligence community and general chicken hawks makes it appear this way.  The author however ignores the fact that no one is really going around and explaining the nature of all of this.  By the way I think Victoria (fark the EU) Nuland was involved the policy involving the toppling of Syria (Benghazi blowback), Attempted Syrian destabilization and now the Ukraine.

But LETS IGNORE THAT.  Nevermind handing out cookies to protesters agents provocateur alongside John McCain who also met with opposition members and helped plan who the USA would find acceptable to lead the Ukraine...as opposed to who was elected to lead them.  Yes leave all of that out.  Leave out the false flag sniping of protesters and police and all of the damage and mayhem.  All the while we chide Russia to 'be nice' and tell the Ukrainians to not hurt the violent protesters or else.  So for a couple months we were delivering involuntary anal sex to the Ukraine and now we have a mess to clean up in what is left and we are out the oil and gas rights in Crimea/Black Sea area.  Which by the way was the entire reason for all of these antics.

Also please forget about the people who died and or are dying/will die as a result of this particular brand of greed.  Russia isn't innocent they want the gas and oil as much or more than we do and are willing to act decisively to get it and invoke cultural ties as a reason.  Which is far more valid than anything we have yet to come up with.

This isn't about the cold war.  That's a red herring and the author should know that.  This is about resources and wealth. Oh and about debt.
 
2014-03-19 12:28:13 PM

Yamaneko2: Mentat: TedDalton: If Ukraine still had nukes, would they still have Crimea? Would we let Russia take Crimea if they didn't have nuclear weapons? Having nuclear weapons matter. That is the realpolitik lesson in all this. Would be nuclear states like Iran and Best Korea are taking note I'm sure.

Do you guys really believe that the situation would be better if a small, corrupt nation who just overthrew their President and was on the verge of a civil war had access to 20 year old nukes?

It would be better for Ukraine.


How?

Ukraine:  We have dozens of obsolete nuclear weapons that we may or may not be able to use against you, assuming of course that they haven't all been sold on the black market!
Russia:  We have thousands of functional nukes and we only need to aim a few your way,

Getting rid of Ukraine's nukes was they right thing to do for everyone.
 
2014-03-19 12:29:23 PM

TDBoedy: naptapper: Losing? Really?

failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.

FTA   "Surely, the Obama administration is adrift in a sea tossed by crises. But the smugness of the "we told you so" crowd is equally uninformed. The Cold-War-is-back narrative is so politically tinged that it is hard to take much of it at face value. The general thrust of the argument is that certain administrations were soft  or too careless in expanding NATO (). This combination of expansion and insufficient spine in the face of aggression, emboldened the Russian bear that has come screaming back to terrorize all of Europe once again. In the of the Right Honorable Lindsey Graham, "It started with Benghazi. When you kill Americans and nobody pays a price, you invite this kind of aggression. #Ukraine.""

So here we have a false assumption set up through a straw man (the we told you so crowd).  Yes there are some people pointing out that Obama has hardly stood firm on his red lines.  Of course Lindsay (ambiguously gay) Graham shilling for the intelligence community and general chicken hawks makes it appear this way.  The author however ignores the fact that no one is really going around and explaining the nature of all of this.  By the way I think Victoria (fark the EU) Nuland was involved the policy involving the toppling of Syria (Benghazi blowback), Attempted Syrian destabilization and now the Ukraine.

But LETS IGNORE THAT.  Nevermind handing out cookies to protesters agents provocateur alongside John McCain who also met with opposition members and helped plan who the USA would find acceptable to lead the Ukraine...as opposed to who was elected to lead them.  Yes leave all of that out.  Leave out the false flag sniping of protesters and police and all of the damage and mayhem.  All the while we chide Russia to 'be nice' and te ...


Don't forget chemtrails.
 
2014-03-19 12:30:03 PM
It will take several years to get LNG from the US to Europe.  It will increase domestic costs substantially.  If we cut Russia's volume to Europe in half, they just increase the other halfs price and reroute the lost half to China.  Is it wise to trash the Russian economy and probably push the world economy back into a deep recession over all this?  I know, domino theory, but I think Russia has sent out the message they want, and as long as Nato and the EU quit trying to annex former republics, Putin may be kept busy with his own economy.  Ukraine has had a surge of money poured into it and may be better off economically and be rid of a pretty nationalistic part of their country.  They should just ask for a high and just compensation for their loss, treat eastern Ukraine with justice and respect, and just move on or they may end up with a much worse situation.
 
2014-03-19 12:30:26 PM

Mentat: kbronsito: durbnpoisn: Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.

you may want to look up a map of Ukraine.

Yes, look at the map.  They not only lost the entire Crimean coastline, but the Sea of Azov is effectively closed to them now.  For all intents and purposes, Ukraine just lost 75% of its Black Sea coastline and most of its major ports.


they can't have more than a dozen ships... half of which are probably not shipshape because the money to maintain them was stolen by the government and the spare parts were sold in the black market. I think Odessa's port can house that navy (and I'm using the word "navy" very generously here). The loss of strategic naval ports is only critical importance to countries with actual navies. No country likes losing territory. But naval issues are not Ukraine's biggest problem here.
 
2014-03-19 12:30:32 PM

SpaceButler: durbnpoisn: Okay, so I did some reading just to be clear on this.  This is what I see...

Crimea is in dispute because the Ukraine says it's theirs, and so does Russia.
The people in Crimea, and their gov't say they want to be Russian.  So does Russia.

The only people that seem upset about this are the Ukranians, who will lose the territory, and the entire western world, for no real good reason that I can understand.

I can, at least, see why Ukraine is upset about losing Crimea.  Where would they put their navy if they lost all that coastline?
But that's about the only thing that seems to make any sense.

By my understanding:
Crimea was formally made part of Ukraine during the Soviet era, but it was kept by Ukraine when the USSR fell, though Russia retained its Black Sea fleet and that fleet's deepwater port at Sevastopol.  Ever since that deal was worked out, I'm not aware of any serious debate about the fact that Crimea was Ukrainian territory.
The western world is upset about Russia annexing Crimea mainly because of how it's happened.  It wasn't initiated by the people of Crimea; it was initiated by Russia using insignia-free military troops and crony politicians, in response to the people of the Ukraine in general making it clear through mass protests that they wanted to join the EU and not be a de facto Russian vassal.  If this had all started with a domestic referendum in Crimea, I doubt the west would be doing much more than shrugging, or maybe grumbling a little.


We'd all be doing jack shiat about it. god only knows what Putin was thinking?
and righting histories wrongs, this was a wrong Russia actually inflicted on itself and his bare chest wresting dead tigers mentality has probably made way worse.
All I can think is he's played his 'I'm gonna make Russia great' again card way too early. i.e this is how he's gonna make Russia great again.
we've been warned.
 
2014-03-19 12:36:00 PM

kbronsito: QUESTION:

1. Brazil's economy is bigger than Russia's. And China isn't in the G8 either. Why not give Russia's spot to either of those guys?

2. Russia has a World Cup coming up. I'm sure the U.S, UK, or Spain/Portugal would be happy to host it instead. (If the Russian team boycott's... who the fark cares. They can't even qualify unless they host anyways. One more spot for a team someone may actually want to watch).


^^^^ this I like. Putin is about leveraging his image, so this is a viable thing to do. I agree with the concept that basically we have no dog in this fight (militarily) but there are tons of diplomatic and economic things we can do that will embarrass Vlad. In the meantime we can rollback on Start II and build some really cool antimissile systems in Europe. Now that's a good use of a trillion dollars...
 
2014-03-19 12:37:36 PM
I hate chess. Can we play checkers instead?
 
2014-03-19 12:38:42 PM

Mentat: TDBoedy: naptapper: Losing? Really?

failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.


'you're forgetting chemtrails'


Yeah...look buddy.  I don't know who you shill for or why or even if you do.  But regardless of that I pointed out facts of what is going on.  And your attack has no factual refutation only an immature ad hominem attack which is about as convincing as telling me I'm a poopy head.
 
2014-03-19 12:38:59 PM

Infernalist: Ghastly: Russia is a kleptocracy with a capitalist economy. Hit the money men where it hurts with sanctions and they'll remove Putin and go back to playing nice because to them being billionaires is way more important that their puppet having a place to play with his boats.

Start yanking the money and Putin will retire due to health reasons.

It's a game to see who runs out of money first.  The West or Russia's oligarchs.


So we are back to the cold war.
 
2014-03-19 12:40:10 PM

TDBoedy: The author however ignores the fact that no one is really going around and explaining the nature of all of this.


So he shouldn't KISS and instead bore us to death?
 
2014-03-19 12:42:23 PM

TDBoedy: Mentat: TDBoedy: naptapper: Losing? Really?

failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.

'you're forgetting chemtrails'


Yeah...look buddy.  I don't know who you shill for or why or even if you do.  But regardless of that I pointed out facts of what is going on.  And your attack has no factual refutation only an immature ad hominem attack which is about as convincing as telling me I'm a poopy head.


Are you trying to go for Pocket Ninja's gimmick here or just trolling in general?
 
2014-03-19 12:44:07 PM

Captain Steroid: I hate chess. Can we play checkers instead?


Reminds me of the saying, "Never play leapfrog with a unicorn."
 
2014-03-19 12:45:10 PM

Nancy Grace's Billowing Face Vents: Just like the economy (regional, global) - things just happen, and no one party can do much about it. Proof? This recession began in 2008 and the BEST efforts of dozens of nations has not made a dent. It will just run its course.


That's hardly true.  Canada fared pretty well through the recession - better than any other G8 nation - because the Canadian government didn't de-regulate as much as the others, thereby preventing Canadian banks from over-leveraging themselves and engaging in many of the other risky activities that took down banks en masse in much of the rest of the West.  Germany has weathered much better than the rest of Europe, in part because of a much more progressive response to the crisis that included government programs to keep more workers employed by allowing their employers to reduce their hours but keep their pay the same using government subsidies to make up the shortfall.  Australia recovered faster than anyone else, thanks largely to a stimulus that actually worked.  Meanwhile, nations like Spain and the UK who responded with austerity measures have had a much more difficult time trying to recover, including major unemployment problems and even riots.  America's originally-Keynesian stimulus plan was watered down to include a bunch of tax cuts in an ill-fated attempt to gain some Republican support, and since then, America has had middling results in recovering from the financial crisis: better than some, worse than others.  I'm not a trained economist, so I could be wrong, but to me it seems like the financial crash and its aftermath actually have a number of clear lessons to teach about how the things governments do can encourage or discourage a crash like the one in 2008, and to aid or hinder recovery.
 
2014-03-19 12:51:15 PM

Gonz: I don't particularly want Russia to take over Crimea. If the Crimeans want to be Russian, then I guess that's fine. Whatever.

But either way, it's not worth a single American life to me. Period.


If Crimeans want to be Russian is not a clear thing. But yes. If they want to be they should be part if Russia... but not like this. Should be legitimate debate and discussion without armed Russian soldiers manning the booths.


Do Crimea want to be Russian. 58% ethnically Russian. 42% ethnic groups that hate Russia.

Of the 58% Russian, many in the younger generations tend to lean to want to stay Ukrainian; the older generatio almost entirely lean to Russian..

It really isn't clear which way the population really would lean. It would probably be a pretty close vote.

But I agree. In a clean, well organized referendum with international oversight for fairness; Crimea should be allows self determination.
 
2014-03-19 12:51:47 PM
Meanwhile, Obama counts to potato
 
2014-03-19 12:53:41 PM

Rwa2play: Ignored "Rwa2play". If you want to completely hide ignored user comments, change the "Show header of ignored comments" option in your user profile.


ad hominems get the ignore button
 
2014-03-19 12:54:22 PM

naptapper: Losing? Really?


That fantasy narrative goes right along with the other fantasy narrative that republicans live Putin. The latter is especially funny given damn near very one of the farkers spouting it in this thread were mumbling around Putin's penis a few weeks ago.
 
2014-03-19 12:56:17 PM

Captain Steroid: I hate chess.


obvious
www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-03-19 01:02:10 PM
It sounds like he's just saying "ignore what they've done in the past 10 years, because they're nothing compared to 30 years ago."  His analysis is incorrect, though.  After popular sentiment during Afghanistan and Iraq indicated that the West's push for influence has sputtered and died, Russia (and China) prepared to expand their sphere of influence.  Georgia in 2008 was Putin testing the waters, and the US failed that test (when Bush and Congress were just about as deadlocked as they are now). Having so many western countries dependent on Russian resources didn't help matters either. Emboldened by our reaction, China started in on the South China Sea.

The only reason the current Ukraine situation is bad for Putin is that due to a bunch of upstarts, he now has to take by force what would have been handed to him easily within 5 years.  The question now is what will our response be?  Sanctioning a couple handfuls of politicians is a joke.  What we're facing now is the same question faced during the world wars:  Are we going to isolate ourselves and let the world burn, or do we rightfully resume the mantle of "world's police" since doing without one has worked so poorly?
 
2014-03-19 01:06:07 PM

derpy: Anayalator: KAVORKA: How is he losing?

He's plaing Czechers

[cdn.pastemagazine.com image 521x294]


3.bp.blogspot.com

Guy in the cube next to me is looking at me like: What the hell is so funny??  Great work!!!
 
2014-03-19 01:15:57 PM

TDBoedy: Rwa2play: Ignored "Rwa2play". If you want to completely hide ignored user comments, change the "Show header of ignored comments" option in your user profile.

ad hominems get the ignore button


LET ME SHOW YOU ALL THAT I'M IGNORING THIS GUY~!

The last refuge of a douchebag.
 
2014-03-19 01:16:14 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Peter von Nostrand: cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: Bush was not a big government pussy, Obama is.

This is what the GOP actually believes! The guy that turned a surplus into a deficit, started two wars that took 12 years to resolve, created the Patriot act and NSA spying programs IS NOT a big government "pussy"?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!

He also created the largest bureaucracy in history. Then again you aren't responding to someone who is in touch with reality

Fair point.


Both of you are nuts, and you know it. Bush did not make the federal government be in complete charge of our lives, take away all our rights, and put everyone on welfare. Obama did.

Obama approval rating, how is that treating you, peons? Your boy will go down as the worst President in the history of the country.
 
2014-03-19 01:17:23 PM
The Cold War may be over, but Putin is reaching further back than that, trying to re-create the Soviet Union.  Damn, but this might be an issue worth going to war over...
 
2014-03-19 01:27:40 PM

flondrix: The Cold War may be over, but Putin is reaching further back than that, trying to re-create the Soviet Union.  Damn, but this might be an issue worth going to war over...



Perhaps, but only if he gets incredibly aggressive with no thought of the consequences.  This isn't like the Cold War, from an economic perspective.  They know they can't survive if they're choked off from the world economy.  Sanctions can actually cripple the country.  They don't have the resources and economic power to build a world power on their own.

So yes, they can cause enough trouble to warrant war in the short term.  But on any timescale of consequence, they're screwed if they do.
 
2014-03-19 01:29:06 PM

grumpyguru: It sounds like he's just saying "ignore what they've done in the past 10 years, because they're nothing compared to 30 years ago."  His analysis is incorrect, though.  After popular sentiment during Afghanistan and Iraq indicated that the West's push for influence has sputtered and died, Russia (and China) prepared to expand their sphere of influence.  Georgia in 2008 was Putin testing the waters, and the US failed that test (when Bush and Congress were just about as deadlocked as they are now). Having so many western countries dependent on Russian resources didn't help matters either. Emboldened by our reaction, China started in on the South China Sea.

The only reason the current Ukraine situation is bad for Putin is that due to a bunch of upstarts, he now has to take by force what would have been handed to him easily within 5 years.  The question now is what will our response be?  Sanctioning a couple handfuls of politicians is a joke.   What we're facing now is the same question faced during the world wars:  Are we going to isolate ourselves and let the world burn, or do we rightfully resume the mantle of "world's police" since doing without one has worked so poorly?


The deadlock over the South China Sea has been ongoing for decades.  It has nothing to do with recent events and entirely to do with everyone wanting a piece of the valuables under the sea.  Just because its gotten more attention recently doesn't mean the status-quo changed.

What Western push for influence are you referring to?  Iraq and Afghanistan were bloody invasions (and fairly stupid ones at that).  The EU hasn't really been pushing for more influence in Eastern Europe as they are all furiously bailing out their own boats to let new ones in their sailing club.

The situation is bad for Putin because hes trading short term gain(???) for long term loss.  I say short term gain with lots of questions because Crimea has a naval base that is under permanent lease, a majority Russian population with bought politicians giving him undue influence in the national politics of Ukraine, a net drag on the Ukrainian economy, and zero natural resources to speak of.  So he gets to hold the official deed.  Big deal.  Why would you want to?  It was a better deal to pay rent for a single base and have defacto political control over the entire peninsula without having to support it.

In return for that crappy deal every other ex-Soviet Republic is going to think twice about any Russian involvements and influences.  Because they JUST might be trading more than resources or money at some point.  They showed the world that being within the Russian sphere of influence means obey completely or ELSE.  Not a very attractive thing at the negotiating table.

These first sanctions weren't hard.  That's not the point.  Sanctions aren't an on off switch you just throw on and the financial markets are complex.  You start small while you give your own economies time to divest or divert their positions away from your next move.  Trade is a two-way street and you are trying to minimize how much blow back into your own economy you cause.

The second bolded statement vastly overstates the effects of all this.  With the Russian economy plugged into the rest of the world at a much greater extent than they used to it won't come to a military confrontation.
 
2014-03-19 01:33:29 PM

Thunderpipes: Both of you are nuts, and you know it. Bush did not make the federal government be in complete charge of our lives, take away all our rights, and put everyone on welfare. Obama did.

Obama approval rating, how is that treating you, peons? Your boy will go down as the worst President in the history of the country.



You should probably know that you're not as good an ambassador for conservatism as you seem to think you are.
 
2014-03-19 01:33:45 PM
Nancy Grace's Billowing Face Vents: "This recession began in 2008 and the BEST efforts of dozens of nations has not made a dent."

Have you considered that the best efforts of a dozen nations may not have been geared toward promoting general recovery? And that so long as the bleeding is staunched, and the problems of the struggling nations aren't spilling over any borders, the people at the wheel see no particular need to even *try* to promote recovery in those areas?

"while China and India step forward, due to simple inevitability of countries with a behemothic middle class are wont to do."

Have you considered that a large population may not lead inevitably to a large middle class?
If the west is any guide, one ought to wonder whether even *having* a large middle class is at all a natural or sustainable result of our flavor of market economy (to say nothing of China and India's even-less-redistributive flavor). There's a case to be made from the data that the US' large, strong middle class was more a temporary aberration caused by one-time events (war, postwar recovery, being initially advantaged at the onset of an opening of world trade, one-time demographic shifts such as women entering the workforce, etc) and since the erosion of organized labor has only been propped up from total collapse by a series of convenient bubbles.

If, in fact, middle classes are not inevitable, natural features, then developing economies have a much longer, slower grind ahead of them. And the turn toward inequality in the last couple decades is going to work strongly against any broad-based progress in that area.
 
2014-03-19 01:34:09 PM

TDBoedy: Mentat: TDBoedy: naptapper: Losing? Really?

failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.

'you're forgetting chemtrails'


Yeah...look buddy.  I don't know who you shill for or why or even if you do.  But regardless of that I pointed out facts of what is going on.  And your attack has no factual refutation only an immature ad hominem attack which is about as convincing as telling me I'm a poopy head.

You're

the one who said that the US staged a coup in Ukraine over the Black Sea oil rights and that somehow Russia is the victim in all this.
 
2014-03-19 01:42:45 PM

Thunderpipes: cameroncrazy1984: Peter von Nostrand: cameroncrazy1984: Thunderpipes: Bush was not a big government pussy, Obama is.

This is what the GOP actually believes! The guy that turned a surplus into a deficit, started two wars that took 12 years to resolve, created the Patriot act and NSA spying programs IS NOT a big government "pussy"?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!

He also created the largest bureaucracy in history. Then again you aren't responding to someone who is in touch with reality

Fair point.

Both of you are nuts, and you know it. Bush did not make the federal government be in complete charge of our lives, take away all our rights, and put everyone on welfare. Obama did.

Obama approval rating, how is that treating you, peons? Your boy will go down as the worst President in the history of the country.


Okay, there's no way you are a legit account. Now to figure out who's troll alt you are
 
2014-03-19 01:50:48 PM
I know little about the petro-politics of the region, but there's a pipeline from Azerbaijan over to the Mediterranean sea already. Iran also has access to the Caspian Sea, and loosening sanctions on Iran for playing nice might mean they get more oil to European markets. Russia's loss could be Iran's gain here.
 
2014-03-19 03:16:14 PM

Peter von Nostrand: He has legions of Republicans as fans, so he always has that going for him. Hell, I'm surprised he didn't win the last cpac straw poll


Too liberal.
 
2014-03-19 04:41:20 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-19 06:56:19 PM

TDBoedy: Mentat: TDBoedy: naptapper: Losing? Really?

failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.

'you're forgetting chemtrails'


Yeah...look buddy.  I don't know who you shill for or why or even if you do.  But regardless of that I pointed out facts of what is going on.  And your attack has no factual refutation only an immature ad hominem attack which is about as convincing as telling me I'm a poopy head.


If your post was an Arctic expedition and the North Pole was a fact, you would be stranded somewhere in Bermuda eating your sled dogs.
 
2014-03-19 10:58:01 PM

Felgraf: Yakk: Getting everything you want = a loss now?

He got a territory that is going to be a massive money sink, their stock prices have already taken a hit, and he's gonna push other nearby territories towards the EU that much faster.

He's also given the EU a huge imepetus to get off their ass and get their gas from somewhere else.


THIS. Also, prior to his puppet fleeing Kiev, Vlad the Paler had ALL of the Ukraine. Now he only has Crimea.

Plus that gas pipeline looks mighty rickety. If war breaks out in Eastern Ukraine I sure hope it doesn't get hit by stray ordnance.
 
2014-03-20 05:44:04 AM
Looking back they could have played it differently
Learned about the man before they fell
But it took time to understand the man
Now at least they know they know him well
 
2014-03-20 08:20:49 AM

NEDM: TDBoedy: Mentat: TDBoedy: naptapper: Losing? Really?

failing upwards...or something.  The article opinion piece was so disingenuous that I nearly blacked out trying to read it all.  I still ended up only skimming as my brain can only take so much BS at one time.

'you're forgetting chemtrails'


Yeah...look buddy.  I don't know who you shill for or why or even if you do.  But regardless of that I pointed out facts of what is going on.  And your attack has no factual refutation only an immature ad hominem attack which is about as convincing as telling me I'm a poopy head.

You're the one who said that the US staged a coup in Ukraine over the Black Sea oil rights and that somehow Russia is the victim in all this.


Lets see how misleading your statement is in construction:  First part is accurate...the US staged a coup.  The second part about Russia being a victim?  Yeah I never said that.  The Ukraine is a victim of the US/EU/NATO bloc and to a similar degree Russia.  I don't know how you guys interpret things so poorly.
 
Displayed 240 of 240 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report