I find this hart to believe, 100 thousand separatists,,,And Russia is not supplying, Troop and weapon....
2
I agree with rmp. Ukraine interests Russia as a buffer zone and the pandering of the Ukrainian government to foreign interests unsympathetic to those of Russia's, in addition to the discriminatory treatment of the Russian minority in the region are more than enough reasons to understand Putin's actions. I wish the members of NATO would stop looking at Russia through Cold War-tinted glasses, understand the country's desire to protect its turf and maintain its sphere of influence, and learn to work together to tackle a more ominous threat: that of ISIS. Personally, I am not voting for any candidate, Democrat or Republican, who heeds to myopic advise of myopic experts.
6
As stated in a separate article ... ' Speaking in Moscow, Konstantin Kosachev, the head of foreign affairs committee in the Russian parliament's upper house, warned Washington that supplies of lethal weapons to Ukraine would lead to "further escalation of the conflict," the Interfax news agency reported. '
Geez, this is like the politburo calling the kettle black.
Obviously someone needs to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Ukrainians, especially since we were there getting our many photo-ops as they strove for western democracy.
Historically, we have been there for far less friendly nations in their hours of need, so I don't understand the current dilemma in the White House. We made Ukraine a solemn promise long ago when we wanted them in the non-nuclear club, we fully encouraged them to follow the path to democracy and rise up against their rulers.
Now... all we do is say sanctions are biting Moscow and 'wonder' if we should 'consider' supplying the much needed arms to Ukraine to defend themselves from an obvious Russian developed onslaught.
Geez, this is like the politburo calling the kettle black.
Obviously someone needs to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Ukrainians, especially since we were there getting our many photo-ops as they strove for western democracy.
Historically, we have been there for far less friendly nations in their hours of need, so I don't understand the current dilemma in the White House. We made Ukraine a solemn promise long ago when we wanted them in the non-nuclear club, we fully encouraged them to follow the path to democracy and rise up against their rulers.
Now... all we do is say sanctions are biting Moscow and 'wonder' if we should 'consider' supplying the much needed arms to Ukraine to defend themselves from an obvious Russian developed onslaught.
3
Someone please explain to me how Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko - the leader of the bloody suppression of the rebels fighting for independence - ended up visiting our Congress rather then being detained for life in Hague?
Indiscriminate shelling of the East Ukrainian cities full of civilians by Ukrainian army and several anti-rebel paramilitary units has been widely documented by Amnesty International. How is Petro Poroshenko different from Assad?
I think I know how - he's "our dictator"!
As long as he's serving our goal of containing the resurgent Russia from raising its head in this world, Mr. Poroshenko doesn't need to worry about the International Criminal Court.
Indiscriminate shelling of the East Ukrainian cities full of civilians by Ukrainian army and several anti-rebel paramilitary units has been widely documented by Amnesty International. How is Petro Poroshenko different from Assad?
I think I know how - he's "our dictator"!
As long as he's serving our goal of containing the resurgent Russia from raising its head in this world, Mr. Poroshenko doesn't need to worry about the International Criminal Court.
9
If taken these steps will assure another Cold War and gazillions for the military contractors, ultimately leading to the nuclear annihilation of mankind. Please God save us from ourselves.
3
Everything will work out fine Neil, just as it has since dawn of time and the subsequent dawn of doom predictions.
3
The United States has refused to recognize Russia's traditional interests in Ukraine. Apparently there is the Monroe Doctrine to protect our interests in the Western Hampshire, but Russia gets the same old cold war policy of a "ring of steel". We have recruited Nato membership among the former Eastern Block, tried to surround Russia with missiles, and shamelessly interfered with Ukrainian domestic politics - all of them failures.
Now we are contemplating arming Ukraine. Even the Europeans refused to get involved in the Crimea grab. Naturally they don't want to wait for the other shoe to drop in Iraq and Afghanistan before engaging in other ventures in Syria and Ukraine.
The morons in the State Department and Pentagon can't think of anything better than the old Cold War playbook. Think morons is a harsh term? Just look where these "experts" have taken us over the past 15 years. One failure and one miscalculation after another. And please don't pass this off as George Bush, as Obama is now a war president also.
Now we are contemplating arming Ukraine. Even the Europeans refused to get involved in the Crimea grab. Naturally they don't want to wait for the other shoe to drop in Iraq and Afghanistan before engaging in other ventures in Syria and Ukraine.
The morons in the State Department and Pentagon can't think of anything better than the old Cold War playbook. Think morons is a harsh term? Just look where these "experts" have taken us over the past 15 years. One failure and one miscalculation after another. And please don't pass this off as George Bush, as Obama is now a war president also.
6
For hundreds of years, Russia's interest in Ukraine was to invade, to imprison, to dominate, to persecute, to deport, to kill. Your post do not provide any solution to the problem here, that is, what will stop Russian aggression in Ukraine.
5
Nobody was going to do any harm to Russia by signing some long-planned trade-political agreement between Ukraine and the EU in 2013. The same sort of agreement Turkey or Morocco have. Not a membership bid, not even bid to join NATO.
Just to recall: the former President of Ukraine was strong-armed by Putin to abandon the deal just before the final act. So much about interference in the domestic politics.
Russia was never surrounded by some "ring of steel". Military expenditures of all NATO members in Europe were in steady decline. The East-European countries decided themselves to join NATO. Almost all of them got a refusal first.
And while the decision to place the BM-Interceptors in Poland was not the wisest one, there were enough assurances and inspection opportunities given. Finally, by scrapping the deployment, USA has shown that they can be reasoned with. Not like Russia that respects only the blunt force.
Just to recall: the former President of Ukraine was strong-armed by Putin to abandon the deal just before the final act. So much about interference in the domestic politics.
Russia was never surrounded by some "ring of steel". Military expenditures of all NATO members in Europe were in steady decline. The East-European countries decided themselves to join NATO. Almost all of them got a refusal first.
And while the decision to place the BM-Interceptors in Poland was not the wisest one, there were enough assurances and inspection opportunities given. Finally, by scrapping the deployment, USA has shown that they can be reasoned with. Not like Russia that respects only the blunt force.
4
Trying to match Russa's arms to the separatists.....now that's a slippery slope if I've ever heard of one!
2
We armed the Afghan drug runners in the 1980s to great results... we just didn't have the foresight to stay attuned to what was happening after the Russian withdrawal. Just think of what could have been accomplished if we had spent the resources then what we had to commit a decade or so later.
To paraphrase your post, "now that's a [missed opportunity] if I've ever heard of one!"
To paraphrase your post, "now that's a [missed opportunity] if I've ever heard of one!"
When Western society is based on supporting tyrants it bites its own tail wanting to stay cosy in cashmere in a air-conditioned car speeding down highways of American dream. Except that we have forgotten something, we are all in this marriage together, and for a while now: buying oil from countries exercising oppression of human rights and violence against their own citizens... We keep indadvertedly supporting them. Ukraine was an independent country invited to join EU, it had a civil conflict and a disagreement it should have handled locally, just like Canada would if Quebec wanted to separate. Would France send troops to defend canadian citizens with French ancestry? Look at it this way, America, if you don't do what's right initially it will come back to haunt you in another way, while you try to uphold the vision of progress with glitter dust of Nike sneaks, Hollywood and latest Taylor Swift single. Enjoyed Russian oil? Yum. Now you have to send troops to Ukraine so the cancer doesn't spread to your own body. Or is it quite OK to have invasions casually happen - somewhere, over there, in 21st century, while we snack on popcorn? Right at the border with EU, no big deal.
4
Ukraine has enough troops, the article is about military aid to the country that first in the human history gave up nuclear weapons for the sake of peace only to be invaded by one of the guarantors in the deal.
4
Typical dilly dallying by our current administration, whose questionable competence was exposed by Obama's famous line in the sand failure in Syria. Yes we should arm the Ukraine in the defense of their country, and we should have done it when Russia grabbed the Crimea. Putin can't be trusted and Obama doesn't grasp the nature of foreign policy. He is too timid to even mention radical Islam, which has declared war on us and killed our citizens.
4
No, I think it's too early for Obama to take 'action', his style anyway. He'll wait until the Ukrainian people are bled dry, on their knees with the Russian backed criminals' bayonets to their throat. Then he'll ofter some band-aids. Just like he's doing in Iraq. Also, In Syria he waited until there were over100,000 dead before he drew a vanishing line in the sand - what line? Taking decisive and courageous action is only measured in terms of votes when it comes to this Administration.
2
US going deeper in another quagmire, this time in Ukraine in Eastern Europe on Russia's doorsteps. Currently supplying 'non-lethal' arms. getting ready to escalate it to more deadly versions. No mention of how a corrupt, declining, bankrupt country of Ukraine will pay for those arms to U.S. With our new deadlier werapons Ukrainian government will bomb and destroy perfectly livable buildings and other infrastructure in few more cities in the east Ukraine. The rebels will bomb and destroy similar structures in western Ukraine in retaliation expanding the war zone. Several hundred, perhaps thousands more Ukrainians will be killed. More of the country's infrastucture and buildings will be destroyed. Then US will provide billions$$$ in 'civilian aid' to rebuild the roads, bridges, homes, power plants, airports and other infrastructure.
Meanwhile, because of Republican Congress' opposition the US govt can not agree to spend any money to rebuild crumbling roads, bridges and other infrastructure in our own good ol' USA. We apparently have money to provide arms to Ukraine to wreak havoc and destruction. Then somehow (mostly and always) US and 'allies' will come up with billions more to rebuild what was destroyed with the arms we supplied. Ukraine is only one of the many places we spend hundreds of billions in arms to destroy (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya...soon Iran) and then spend more tens of billions our arms helped destroy. What a wonderful country - the USA?
Meanwhile, because of Republican Congress' opposition the US govt can not agree to spend any money to rebuild crumbling roads, bridges and other infrastructure in our own good ol' USA. We apparently have money to provide arms to Ukraine to wreak havoc and destruction. Then somehow (mostly and always) US and 'allies' will come up with billions more to rebuild what was destroyed with the arms we supplied. Ukraine is only one of the many places we spend hundreds of billions in arms to destroy (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya...soon Iran) and then spend more tens of billions our arms helped destroy. What a wonderful country - the USA?
6
You've watched the wrong channel: Russia invaded Ukraine, not the vice versa. Once you realize that, you understand that your comment is pointless.
3
Do we believe in democracy? In government by the consent of the governed?
The Russian majority in the Donetsk and Crimea area found themselves in Ukraine by an historical accident. They were born in the Soviet Union and always considered themselves Russian. Ukraine, to them, was just an administrative district of their country. They want no part of it now.
Why should we deny them the right to determine their own fate?
Kosovo, anyone?
Crimean, and Russian Ukrainians living on the Russian border do not want to be part of Ukraine with a violent-coup installed government larded with nationalists. What is so hard to understand?
It is American backing for the overthrow by force of a democratically elected President that started this mess in motion.
The river of anti Russian rhetoric has been ridiculous. You know when the information on a situation is utterly twisted; when John McCain and Lindsey Graham lead the charge.
The Russian majority in the Donetsk and Crimea area found themselves in Ukraine by an historical accident. They were born in the Soviet Union and always considered themselves Russian. Ukraine, to them, was just an administrative district of their country. They want no part of it now.
Why should we deny them the right to determine their own fate?
Kosovo, anyone?
Crimean, and Russian Ukrainians living on the Russian border do not want to be part of Ukraine with a violent-coup installed government larded with nationalists. What is so hard to understand?
It is American backing for the overthrow by force of a democratically elected President that started this mess in motion.
The river of anti Russian rhetoric has been ridiculous. You know when the information on a situation is utterly twisted; when John McCain and Lindsey Graham lead the charge.
9
And Los Angeles is a city of Mexicans who find themselves in an accident of history so when they break out and start bombing San Francisco, funded by the Mexican government, we should keep out mouths shut and just take it, right?
2
the anti-Kremlin rhetoric is well placed .. what do you say about the facts presented in "Putin's Plutocracy" by Karen Dewisha .. and in PBS Frontline's "Putin's Way" .. see on their website ..
3
I'm a Russian speaking Ukrainian and I have no desire for my country to be invaded by the Russia's thugs. Russia has brought nothing good to the world, only persecution, wars, dictatorships, Kremlin-incited ethnic conflicts, bloody propaganda, poverty, deportations, GULAG - the list goes on and on. Educated hard working Russia's youth flee to the West en masse since the fall of the USSR. My friends in FL lease properties to the Russian parents who get pregnant and fly to the U.S. so they children are born here. Go figure.
6
To those Russia and Putin apologists here, I want to mention one phrase of Sergei Brin, the co-founder of Google, in which he expressed his gratitude to his father: "Thank you for taking us all out of Russia." We Ukrainians agree with Mr. Brin wholeheartedly. We've been "out of Russia" for decades and have absolutely no desire for them to take us back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Brin#Early_life_and_education
6
I don't think American weapons can make any difference. It's a matter of morale not weapons. Ukrainian army doesn't want to fight (see twitter), while Novorossia "separatists" are eager to fight and ready to die because they are defending their land and families. Also, Ukrainian soldiers are poorly trained, they avoid direct contact, run away and surrender by hundreds. What they do instead – shell cities and civilian targets which makes Novorossia even madder. So, by providing lethal weapons to Ukrainian army Obama administration will not help Kiev win the war, but it will confirm the fact that it orchestrated the regime change via Coup D’état in Kiev in February 2014 and now is fueling this war by proxy with Russia. Of course we knew it all along, but “ordinary people” of America might start asking – Is the engendering conflicts and chaos around the globe in their interest?
11
When Russia pushed North Korea to attack the South, the U.S. provided military assistance to save the country. Today Russia attacked Ukraine, and both wars have striking similarities. Arm Ukraine, save Europe, and, ultimately, save the world from another genocidal dictatorship.
5
you are absolutely right ..
2
Those who "doesn't want to fight und away and surrender by hundreds" just repelled yet another terrorist's and their Russian puppet-masters attempt to take Debaltsevo.
So, the terrorists shell Mariupol and Debaltsevo (which they claim as "their" land) with countless MRLS valleys, kill "their" civilians and get even madder? Probably because after the downing of MH17 they've relaxed too much?
Proxy war with Russia? How so? According to all Russian officials Russia is not a part of the Ukrainian "internal conflict".
So, the terrorists shell Mariupol and Debaltsevo (which they claim as "their" land) with countless MRLS valleys, kill "their" civilians and get even madder? Probably because after the downing of MH17 they've relaxed too much?
Proxy war with Russia? How so? According to all Russian officials Russia is not a part of the Ukrainian "internal conflict".
5
The Minsk agreements are dead - so lets stop saying they are the basis for negotiations. The only reason Kiev wants them as it will give them a military victory without fighting. It gives the Rebels territory which can be shelled at will by Kiev and with no ability to develop a sustainable economy.
The Rebels have now seized more territory and they are right not to settle for the phony Minsk agreement. They are right to say that negotiations have to start over with a clean slate and with all options on the table and negotiated by both sides.
Read the Protocol and also read the comments on it. It is insightful if you want to really understand what is happening.
http://slavyangrad.org/2014/09/07/protocol-of-the-tripartite-contact-gro...
The Rebels have now seized more territory and they are right not to settle for the phony Minsk agreement. They are right to say that negotiations have to start over with a clean slate and with all options on the table and negotiated by both sides.
Read the Protocol and also read the comments on it. It is insightful if you want to really understand what is happening.
http://slavyangrad.org/2014/09/07/protocol-of-the-tripartite-contact-gro...
4
So you admit the fact that Russia blatantly violated the Minsk agreements and used the "ceasefire" to gain more territory occupying Ukraine's land? Why would then Russia honor the new "negotiations"? Putin simply cannot be trusted, and there seems to be no political solution to Russian aggression.
8
NO Kiev used the MInsk agreement to reinforce their troops and bring in more equipment, men and weapons. When that happened the rebels decided to take the airport( both sides claimed a right to it under Minsk) and end the shelling of Donetsk. They decided that after 3 months of violations by Kiev they would go on the offensive and declared Minsk dead. When they went to a new meeting a few days ago they wanted a full renegotiation of the agreement. This is NOT Putin, this is the Leaders of Donetsk and Lugansk. They are not mere puppets of Putin as you imply because you have not followed the conflict using information from both sides.
Minsk was all about helping Kiev and doing nothing for the rebels - and Kiev never fulfilled any part of the agreement. Kiev wants to blame Putin so they can suck the US into the negotiations.
Minsk was all about helping Kiev and doing nothing for the rebels - and Kiev never fulfilled any part of the agreement. Kiev wants to blame Putin so they can suck the US into the negotiations.
1
They are not rebels. Those thugs are terrorists backed by the regular units of the Russian army. The downing of MH17 and the recent shelling of Mariupol are strong evidences to that.
6
No weapons will help this demoralized Ukrainian army. According to the latest reports in European media (not available here, of course, as we have a "free" press - free to publish what White House tells you) - the latest Ukrainian government mobilization resulted in 80% of eligible to be drafted men fleeing the country!
How can the weapons help when there's nobody who's willing to press the trigger for the mother Ukraine?
And giving weapons to Ukraine will just play into Putin's hands of even more openly supporting the separatists (that by the way have no less cause with them than people of Kosovo or South Sudan.)
It's a loss-loss situation for NATO, US, and EU. Putin will win in the end - a year, or three from now there will be a pro-Russian government in Ukraine again.
Just look at the map and read the history book.
How can the weapons help when there's nobody who's willing to press the trigger for the mother Ukraine?
And giving weapons to Ukraine will just play into Putin's hands of even more openly supporting the separatists (that by the way have no less cause with them than people of Kosovo or South Sudan.)
It's a loss-loss situation for NATO, US, and EU. Putin will win in the end - a year, or three from now there will be a pro-Russian government in Ukraine again.
Just look at the map and read the history book.
4
Ukraine's been holding the Russia's prevailing horde for over a year, and yet Putin was able to occupy only a small spot on Ukraine's map. Given the military aid, Ukraine will be able to push the terrorists back across Russia's border and thus restore peace in Europe.
5
Unfortunately, the US currently has a POTUS without a spine, any shred of leadership ability or experience and he won't make any bold moves unless it involves more votes for Democrats - you'll have to wait until the extensive polling comes in and if supporting a pro-west ally, he's send some cookies.
2
New anti-tank weapons will definitively bolster Ukrainian defenses as well as morale of soldiers fighting the terrorists. Looking at the losses of the latter during their failed offensive in Debaltsevo, there are enough people willing to pull (not press) a trigger.
Unlike in Kosovo or South Sudan, where ethnic minorities were oppressed by the government, no such thing ever happened in Ukraine. The entire turmoil was started by the Russian saboteurs like Ghirkin.
Unlike in Kosovo or South Sudan, where ethnic minorities were oppressed by the government, no such thing ever happened in Ukraine. The entire turmoil was started by the Russian saboteurs like Ghirkin.
6
Will supplying arms to the Porosenko’s militia be a wise thing to do? Would the US tolerate Putin meddling in Cuba or the western hemisphere? The situation in Ukraine is two-fold: 1) Putin views Ukraine as an integral part of Russia and specifically sees Ukraine as Russian 2) To Ukraine this is one of many internal struggles to wrest its identity and independence from Russia, freeing itself from centuries of Russian subjugation. Providing arms to the rag tag Ukrainian Army might counter the advantage the eastern Ukrainian rebels have because of Russian assistance; but the US must be cognizant that it may precipitate an arms race between the US and Russia using the combatants as pawns in a proxy war between the US and Russia.
3
Fortunately, Cuba is off Russia's sphere of influence for good. Cubans want market economy and stringer ties with the West. Their young want freedoms, education, smartphones, and nice cars. Russia has none of those to offer.
4
How could the long-planned signing of some trade-political agreement between Ukraine and the EU in 2013 be considered "US meddling"? Just to recall: the former President of Ukraine was strong-armed by Putin to abandon the deal just before the final act. Ukrainians didn't like how brutally were the ensuing protests suppressed. More went to the streets. The former President fled. A new elections were called by the Parliament. Have you seen any US tanks and artillery columns entering Ukraine then?
5
Well I view Maine as a wholly owned subsidiary of South Carolina...does that make it so? Any validity warranted there? Putin is a megalomaniac, a criminal, a thug, a thief and a bully. I'm expected more from educated Americans.
3
Warmongers, please step down. When Putin sees that US and NATO are openly arming the Ukrainian government, he will get a "carte blanche" and a moral right to keep arming the separatists. Except this time he will not have to limit or hide whatever he is doing. How does this contribute to promoting negotiations towards the peaceful solution, please?
5
Looks like quoter the opposite, Putin has the "carte blanche" right now and he's sending troops and weapons to shell Ukraine's towns and villages indiscriminately. Russia once did the same to start the Korean War, and the the only feasible response to the aggressor was military aid to South Korea. Ukraine is no different.
4
How can you promote negotiations if the terrorists backed by the regular Russian army units with massive supplies of weapons and ammunition keep attacking and shelling Ukrainian cities?
It is not in the interest of Putin to openly march into Ukraine. Too expensive even for his imperial ambitions. It will also mean further isolation from the West. Those puppet terrorists are only there to submit Kyiv to negotiate on Putin's terms. Putin himself, his court and their children still want to be accepted in Berlin and Paris.
Think about "good and bad" cop strategy.
It is not in the interest of Putin to openly march into Ukraine. Too expensive even for his imperial ambitions. It will also mean further isolation from the West. Those puppet terrorists are only there to submit Kyiv to negotiate on Putin's terms. Putin himself, his court and their children still want to be accepted in Berlin and Paris.
Think about "good and bad" cop strategy.
3
Then UN needs to send peacekeepers. That would be SO logic. But UN doesn't arise this issue. The conflict goes further with no any political solution progress. With no support Ukraine just loses civilians captured at war zones.
1
It appears that enhancing the ability of opposing peoples' to kill each other is the default solution that Washington perpetually comse up with to resolve disputes. It's no wonder that we have decreasing confidence in government.
3
If my neighbor is getting robbed, I call police. Sanctions were the warning to Moscow, but they continued their bloody aggression in Ukraine. We can increase the sanctions and see more lives and territory taken by Kremlin warmongers, or we can arm Ukraine, our ally, to help protect its borders and sovereignty. It's no brainer.
4
There doesn't appear to be a diplomatic solution at this time. So perhaps we do need to send defensive weapons to the Ukraine. I would suggest anti-tank missiles, maybe some tanks and a 100 A-10 Warthogs. Since we are planning to phase out the A-10 in our arsenal why not give them to the Ukrainians. See what that does to the rebels (Russians) in those new Russian tanks.
5
Unless the West can send and Ukraine could start using new military equipment in less than a week it's too little too late.
But by all means, send them all the means necessary to fight off Putin's Russians.
Let's test this man's soul.......I think Putin's ego may not allow himself the chance to perhaps be historically branded as the man who may have started the next Great War (Hitler-like). Don't you think....?
Besides, what would that kind of brutal "war" response by Russia do to his country's World Cup standings?
But first the Western leaders must put aside their Fears and not cower at the thought of confronting Putin who has just as many of his owns fears! Then, there might still be a chance.
Putin tried initially to take over all of Ukraine's coastal oblasts as was evident by the provocateurs that suddenly sprung out of nowhere throughout such cities as Odessa, et al.
However there was less direct support by the populace and the military border transfers were not as easy as in the east. Therefore that plan was put on hold. But once the Donbas and land bridge to Crimea is secured that initial plan will then be re-addressed and implemented.
We can already see that Russian terrorist bombings will be prevalent so, it's a bit more than just a neutrality issue I think.
But by all means, send them all the means necessary to fight off Putin's Russians.
Let's test this man's soul.......I think Putin's ego may not allow himself the chance to perhaps be historically branded as the man who may have started the next Great War (Hitler-like). Don't you think....?
Besides, what would that kind of brutal "war" response by Russia do to his country's World Cup standings?
But first the Western leaders must put aside their Fears and not cower at the thought of confronting Putin who has just as many of his owns fears! Then, there might still be a chance.
Putin tried initially to take over all of Ukraine's coastal oblasts as was evident by the provocateurs that suddenly sprung out of nowhere throughout such cities as Odessa, et al.
However there was less direct support by the populace and the military border transfers were not as easy as in the east. Therefore that plan was put on hold. But once the Donbas and land bridge to Crimea is secured that initial plan will then be re-addressed and implemented.
We can already see that Russian terrorist bombings will be prevalent so, it's a bit more than just a neutrality issue I think.
2
Instead of talking about arming Ukraine, we should be talking about ending the arming of any group anywhere whatsoever. It is no coincidence that the regions of the US where there is the most concentrated arms manufacture - certain regions of California, the deep South, etc. - are the most hawkish. They live off the bloodshed industry. Just as we should have worldwide covenants to end global warming sources - our dependence, for instance, on oil and coal - we should also have covenants to close down the export of arms. The dependence of certain economies on arms sales is shocking. No arms to the Ukrainians, the Syrian rebels, the Pakistanis, the Afghans, the Saudis, the Israelis, the Nigerians, the Mexicans, the this and the that. Enough is enough
6
There were completely free presidential and legislative elections in Ukraine. It is better than in Russia where it seems likely that the last elections were flawed.
Putin had dared to do what even the dictator Stalin did not dare to do: annexing part of another country, without UN authorization. In this case, Putin annexed part of Ukraine. Stalin, instead, had insisted for Ukraine to have its own UN representation.
Putin had dared to do what even the dictator Stalin did not dare to do: annexing part of another country, without UN authorization. In this case, Putin annexed part of Ukraine. Stalin, instead, had insisted for Ukraine to have its own UN representation.
3
It is a bold and commendable step by US to supply arms to Ukraine. Despite economic turmoil, Russia is not deterred in its resolve to give up its territorial ambitions. Ukraine is no match to Russian Armed Forces. Ukraine's economy is still managed by Oligarchs. Ukraine's democracy is in still in infancy. If West (including US) is truly interested in deterring Russia, it must have a united front, not only in terms of ecumenic sanctions, but also in providing military help. This is going to be along drawn war that may drag on for decades. While supplying economic and military help to Ukraine, West should carefully monitor that help does not perpetuate and strengthen the Oligarch culture. While fighting this war, Ukraine must continue to demonstrate its resolve to build and strengthen is democratic institutions. A better outcome is likely if Ukraine and West forge tight bond with Russian opposition to work for the eventual fall of Mr Putin and his party. If memory of the fall of USSR serves well, Putin knows very well that a formidable enemy is within Russia. He also knows that Russians can ditch their leaders given the proper political climate that West may try to cultivate. On the other hand he may drive some solace knowing that US resolve to democracy and freedom weathered away in so many countries in recent history. Egypt is one of the better examples.
5
I keep seeing people asserting the deal with Ukraine to give up their arsenal of Nuclear Weapons was negotiated under Obama.
No, deal negotiated,signed and sealed under Bush41. USA, UK & Russia agreed to respect Ukraine borders.
Obama has been, in my opinion, limp-wristed about helping Ukraine with weaponry when Russia was clearly reneging on the agreement. Any country holding nuclear weapons (acknowledged or not) would be crazy to give them up based on guarantees unless military support is explicitly committed.
No, deal negotiated,signed and sealed under Bush41. USA, UK & Russia agreed to respect Ukraine borders.
Obama has been, in my opinion, limp-wristed about helping Ukraine with weaponry when Russia was clearly reneging on the agreement. Any country holding nuclear weapons (acknowledged or not) would be crazy to give them up based on guarantees unless military support is explicitly committed.
5
Maybe I should not be surprised by the NY commentators either supporting Putin or letting Putin a free hand. They have learned nothing from Chamberlain's ditherings/concessions to Hitler. Putin will not stop once he gets his version of the Danzig corridor to Crimea. The least we can do is to let the Ukrainians have the means to defend themselves but then self-defense goes against Progressives' principles when the victims are not of like mind.
4
Perhaps Ukrainian expats with military training need to take vacation to help Ukraine. Or maybe active military should take leave with their weapon systems to help out as Russia has been/is doing.
2
What is the U.S. going to do? Start WW III with Russia?
7
Why? Russian officials always repeat that it is the "internal conflict" and Russia is no part of it.
5
And about time too. It has been a huge mistake to wait this long just giving Putin freebies.
4
This report is the product of the same foreign policy "experts" and institutions that gave us the Iraq war and that favors arming the "moderate" Syrian opposition. In other words, institutionalized group think in which everyone has an interest in preserving the status quo of our national security system--their placers in this system literally depend on it. As others have pointed out, Ukraine is a vital interest to Russia but not to the U.S. It is foolish and reckless to think that increasing Russian casualties will bring Putin to the table. What Russia wants is keeping NATO out of Ukraine and some degree of autonomy for the Russian-speaking people of eastern Ukraine. The sensible policy would be to pursue a negotiation based on agreeing to these things. At the same time, we should make sure we are prepare to defend Poland and the Baltic states in accordance with our NATO commitments.
5
"This report is the product of the same foreign policy "experts" and institutions that gave us the Iraq war and that favors arming the "moderate" Syrian opposition."
And the whole annexation business and stealth dismemberment of a country was the product of the same KGB mentality - take a bow Mr. Putin - that made Eastern Europe a fiefdom of the former Soviet Union.
And the whole annexation business and stealth dismemberment of a country was the product of the same KGB mentality - take a bow Mr. Putin - that made Eastern Europe a fiefdom of the former Soviet Union.
4
If Ukraine is a vital interest to Russia, why the Russian started the war then? Without any attempts to negotiate?
Just to remind: the uprising in Kyiv has started due to Putin's strong-arming then-President Janukovich to reject a trade-political agreement with the EU. The same sort of agreement Turkey or Morocco have. Not a membership bid, not even bid to join NATO.
Russians aren't and never were the ethnic majority in Donbass. According to the last census, 52% were Ukrainians. Just another facts: everywhere in Ukraine Russians have the same rights as Ukrainians. Heck, even the current Foreign Minister was born and educated in Russia! In Crimea, where Russians constitute 70% of the population, they were given political autonomy according to the European standards 20 years ago. It did't stop Russian troops 1 year ago.
Therefore stating that the Russian aggression has any ethnic roots is wrong. Just to remind: Hitler has started the WWII under pretense of freeing ethnic Germans from oppression.
Just to remind: the uprising in Kyiv has started due to Putin's strong-arming then-President Janukovich to reject a trade-political agreement with the EU. The same sort of agreement Turkey or Morocco have. Not a membership bid, not even bid to join NATO.
Russians aren't and never were the ethnic majority in Donbass. According to the last census, 52% were Ukrainians. Just another facts: everywhere in Ukraine Russians have the same rights as Ukrainians. Heck, even the current Foreign Minister was born and educated in Russia! In Crimea, where Russians constitute 70% of the population, they were given political autonomy according to the European standards 20 years ago. It did't stop Russian troops 1 year ago.
Therefore stating that the Russian aggression has any ethnic roots is wrong. Just to remind: Hitler has started the WWII under pretense of freeing ethnic Germans from oppression.
5
If you believe what the ruling class said we don't have the money unless we increase the budget, so like normal Americans would do - forget about it.
Russian officials meticulously stress that Russia is not a part of the "internal" Ukrainian "conflict". Any weapon deal between two states, the USA and Ukraine, according to the international law, is absolutely legal. And should be not a concern to Russia.
3
Look at the demographic maps of the ethnicities of Ukraine. We cheered the separation of the Baltic countries from Russia because of their different heritage. We facilitated the breakup of Yugoslavia into several different countries do to ethnicity. Pakistan and Bangladesh were broken off of India because of religion. So why, when the ethnic Russians of Ukraine, who were separated from their mother country only 20 years ago and who were show the value of their vote in the uprising of last year , decide that they do not want that division is the U.S. now saying that they have to live with that decision. Give them the same rights the Yugolsavs had or it will end with the same civil war.
6
Under Bush41, We, UK & Russia agreed to respect Ukraine boundaries in exchange for Ukraine government handing over the large arsenal of nuclear weapons. We all signed the agreement.
So, I suspect Ukraine govt is wishing they still had those weapons.
So, I suspect Ukraine govt is wishing they still had those weapons.
5
Just a simple fact: Russians aren't and never were the ethnic majority in Donbass. According to the last census, 52% were Ukrainians. Just another facts: everywhere in Ukraine Russians have the same rights as Ukrainians. Heck, even the current Foreign Minister was born and educated in Russia! In Crimea, where Russians constitute 70% of the population, they were given political autonomy according to the European standards.
Therefore stating that the Russian aggression has any ethnic roots is wrong. Just to remind: Hitler has started the WWII under pretense of freeing ethnic Germans from oppression.
Therefore stating that the Russian aggression has any ethnic roots is wrong. Just to remind: Hitler has started the WWII under pretense of freeing ethnic Germans from oppression.
5
Russia is not motherland to Ukraine as Russians not mothernation to Ukrainians. In fact, sad to admit but those people seam hate each other as one always has intention to take over another.
Such a joke & travesty! President Obama was part of the team that convinced Ukraine to "disarm" back in the early 200's. All under the watchful eye of President Bush. And they all, including Ukraine fools, thought it was a good idea!
1
No No No - deal was cut in 1994 - Bush41 was POTUS then.
4
Later the U.S. cannot complain of some sort of anti-Americanism backed by the Russians as a response to this U.S. acting at the Russia's backyard. What would be the U.S. reactions if the Russians meddle in the U.S.'s backyard? I'd even understand the meaning of this U.S. acting whether the Russian military presence in Ukraine could mean some danger for the U.S. national security, but...is it the case?
4
@Little Panda
I doubt anybody is worried given that only Russia has violated the sovereignty of the independent nation of Ukraine and is the only nation that is destabilizing European security and territorial integrity.
Supplying arms to Ukraine is about providing Ukraine with the wherewithal to defend itself from Russian aggression who has already annexed a large swath of Ukrainian territory and is in an undeclared war against Ukraine.
If Putin is unfazed by the economic decline of Russia and Russian's from his Ukrainian ambitions, then Russia requires a different type of deterrence to raise the costs of territorial expansion. Supplying Ukraine with the defensive arms it needs to defend itself would raise the cost on Russia through increased "Cargo 200" shipments to a point where the Kremlin cannot continue to lie to Russians and the world that there are no Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine and it will cause Putin to have to explain to the Russian people why Russian soldiers are dying in Ukraine, which overall is a very unpopular move among Russians.
I doubt anybody is worried given that only Russia has violated the sovereignty of the independent nation of Ukraine and is the only nation that is destabilizing European security and territorial integrity.
Supplying arms to Ukraine is about providing Ukraine with the wherewithal to defend itself from Russian aggression who has already annexed a large swath of Ukrainian territory and is in an undeclared war against Ukraine.
If Putin is unfazed by the economic decline of Russia and Russian's from his Ukrainian ambitions, then Russia requires a different type of deterrence to raise the costs of territorial expansion. Supplying Ukraine with the defensive arms it needs to defend itself would raise the cost on Russia through increased "Cargo 200" shipments to a point where the Kremlin cannot continue to lie to Russians and the world that there are no Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine and it will cause Putin to have to explain to the Russian people why Russian soldiers are dying in Ukraine, which overall is a very unpopular move among Russians.
4
Cuban Missile Crisis ring any bells?
3
That already happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US didn't like Russia that close to the US at all. The US isn't the only Nation with National Interests.
1
By all means send them weapons but do remember that they can do the same to countries where you want to interfere. Yemen and Iran come to mind. Maybe North Korea too. Then don't go complaining about Russia not acting responsibly. The fact remains that Ukraine is on Russia's doorstep and thousands of miles away from the US. Stop interfering. The whole world is not your backyard or as you call it "Your national interests."
5
@Darius
Like Russia is already doing in Syria to prop up Assad and his family dictatorship?
Helping Ukraine is to help Europe and Ukraine achieve security from Russian aggression. Russia will do what it does...which includes supporting despots and dictators the US doesn't like whether the US helps Ukraine defend itself or not.
Like Russia is already doing in Syria to prop up Assad and his family dictatorship?
Helping Ukraine is to help Europe and Ukraine achieve security from Russian aggression. Russia will do what it does...which includes supporting despots and dictators the US doesn't like whether the US helps Ukraine defend itself or not.
2
Revisit the agreement that USA & Russia signed in 1994 to respect Ukraine's borders in exchange for Ukraine handing over their large cache of nuclear weapons. Consider whether any nuclear armed nation (admitted or not) would agree to give them up based on agreements involving us regarding border integrity.
3
And how many dictatorships is the US propping up? including despots. And have been doing for decades. Why did the US and EU meddle in Ukrainian affairs and overthrow a democratically elected president, just because he was pro Russia. That is what started the rot in the first place.
3
What is being advocated is to up the anti for Putin's messing around in Ukraine. The strategy is designed to make it difficult for Putin to explain how and why the Russian soldiers died in Ukraine.
You got that backwards. It's the US messing around in Ukraine!
4
Is the New York Times merely a megaphone for the U.S. Department of State, or is it actively trying to spur the Obama Administration to even bigger and more dangerous hypocrisy? The US spent upwards of $5 Billion to engineer a coup d'etat in Ukraine, for the express purpose of provoking a confrontation with Russia. For the Anglo-American establishment to now pose as the injured party is just laughable -- except that we don't need to go a whole lot further down this path before we see nuclear weapons come into play, as Mr. Gorbachev is warning.
6
@Marisol Nostromo
The US spent money not to "engineer a coup" but, as it did in all former Soviet states including Russia, to help former Soviet dominated states make the transition to democracy and an open economy. $5 billion in aid since the collapse of the Soviet Union is not a lot.
No American is taking a position as a victim or "injured party."
The US, as well as the nations of the EU and other democracies of the world, want to help and give support to Ukraine in reforming their broken Russian-styled post-Soviet kleptocracy and help Ukraine defend themselves from Russian aggression.
As long as Russia is in Ukraine, sanctions will stay and grow with Russian involvement and other forms of support, such as providing Ukraine with military aid to defend themselves. Europe and the rest of the world is not and will not overlook Russia's annexation and aggression toward a sovereign European state.
The US spent money not to "engineer a coup" but, as it did in all former Soviet states including Russia, to help former Soviet dominated states make the transition to democracy and an open economy. $5 billion in aid since the collapse of the Soviet Union is not a lot.
No American is taking a position as a victim or "injured party."
The US, as well as the nations of the EU and other democracies of the world, want to help and give support to Ukraine in reforming their broken Russian-styled post-Soviet kleptocracy and help Ukraine defend themselves from Russian aggression.
As long as Russia is in Ukraine, sanctions will stay and grow with Russian involvement and other forms of support, such as providing Ukraine with military aid to defend themselves. Europe and the rest of the world is not and will not overlook Russia's annexation and aggression toward a sovereign European state.
3
Oh yes. And Carl Gershman the NED president called Ukraine 'the grand prize' just for fun.
What you don't understand is that the Ukrainian army had complete advantage in armor, aviation, artillery and manpower in spring/summer. And what they have done with it ?
Half was burned and the other half was captured by rebels.
What you don't understand is that the Ukrainian army had complete advantage in armor, aviation, artillery and manpower in spring/summer. And what they have done with it ?
Half was burned and the other half was captured by rebels.
Great, and what happens when Russia starts to suport all those who do not like the US?
How about the Iran-backed houthy militia in Yemen, which is only a few hundred kilometers away from the Saudi oil fields? What if they were to get some precision missiles with which to hit those fields and equipment to support a Shiite uprising in Saudi Arabia? It would be enough to potentially trigger a global economic depression.
The US is playing a very dangerous game here.
I can think of plenty other situations that could really hurt US interests.
How about the Iran-backed houthy militia in Yemen, which is only a few hundred kilometers away from the Saudi oil fields? What if they were to get some precision missiles with which to hit those fields and equipment to support a Shiite uprising in Saudi Arabia? It would be enough to potentially trigger a global economic depression.
The US is playing a very dangerous game here.
I can think of plenty other situations that could really hurt US interests.
10
What happens? Nothing. Russians aren't into the active stand with the West now. They lack resources as well as political will for that. Putin just want to be recognized as the "big boy". Larger than Kim Jong-il.
1
Interfering in other nations' civil wars is rarely a good idea. See Syria.
What the US should be doing is repairing its crumbling infrastructure--bridges, tunnels, railway tracks, roads, water systems, electrical grids, seaports and airports--not engaging in more military adventures.
The Separatists have their reasons, rooted in their history (Gen. Vlasov's Ukrainian army of 100,000 sided with the NAZIs) of which we Americans are largely ignorant or choose to ignore.
What the US should be doing is repairing its crumbling infrastructure--bridges, tunnels, railway tracks, roads, water systems, electrical grids, seaports and airports--not engaging in more military adventures.
The Separatists have their reasons, rooted in their history (Gen. Vlasov's Ukrainian army of 100,000 sided with the NAZIs) of which we Americans are largely ignorant or choose to ignore.
12
tell that to Russia- they have no qualms about interfering
2
General Vlasov was from Russia (Nizhniy Novgorod) although his army was filled by different soldiers from various national mosltly Eastern European backgrounds.
I want to make sure that everyone understands that this is NOT only Russia against Ukraine war, this is Russia's war on the entire civilization and established post World War II order has changed since the annexation of Crimea and now inevitably parts of Eastern Europe under threat. The Baltic States, Poland and Romania are next. Many Ukrainian soldiers already got killed and at the very least US could help the Ukrainian army with weapons for the CHANCE to stop Putin before it goes any further. The appeasement never works, like any bully Putin will respect force and force only. Under Russian occupation of Eastern Ukraine, Kremlin thugs killed thousands including RUSSIANS, just for disagreeing with occupation inside of Donetsk and the documented EVIDENCE of mass graves will be provided in courts at the Nuremberg style trial after the war ends. Putin's advisors already calling on genocide of Ukrainian people since free and prosperous Ukraine is the threat to Putin's dictatorship in Russia. When Putin and his former KGB thugs simply grabbed power in Russia by staging a coup in 1999 and promising Yeltsin to spare his life in exchange, Putin stayed in power for 15 years, staging terrorist acts inside Russia by FSB and now wars to keep him in power until the end of his life. Unfortunately Russian people are clueless since the media in Russia controlled by the Putin's government. Obama needs to act fast on this Russian aggression before things get completely out of control!
6
Reminds me of 1962 when the Russians "armed" Cuba with missiles. What was our reaction? We DO NOT belong in the Ukraine's fight. This is an economic war between the EU and Russia. We should stay out.
9
1994 agreement with Ukraine, USA, Russis to respect Ukraine border integrity in exchange for Ukraine handing over large cache of nuclear weapons ring any bells?
3
US politicians McMain and Biden started making deals in Ukraine back in 2011. Biden for him and his son 'Hunter' with oil co.'s to do fracking. IMF to loan Ukraine money only if they agree to GMO crops since Ukraine is considered the breadbasket of EU. This is greed.
Why aren't Americans protesting US involvement responsible for this in the first place with the coup to oust their former president Over 5000 lives have been lost in the last year in Ukraine do to Ukrainian Army firing rockets into their homes. Russia has sent over a dozen humanitarian truckloads of food, water, generators, etc. of aide and with Ukraine's president resistance. More weapons, more deaths of people like you and I.
Why aren't Americans protesting US involvement responsible for this in the first place with the coup to oust their former president Over 5000 lives have been lost in the last year in Ukraine do to Ukrainian Army firing rockets into their homes. Russia has sent over a dozen humanitarian truckloads of food, water, generators, etc. of aide and with Ukraine's president resistance. More weapons, more deaths of people like you and I.
12
Does the administration have an endgame in mind? It has become clear that nothing will force Russia to relinquish its influence over eastern Ukraine. If the U.S. starts supplying lethal aid to Ukraine, then Russia will simply up the ante and step up its weapon deliveries to the separatists. The status quo on the battlefield will not change. What will change is the number of casualties and the amount of overall suffering caused by the conflict. Russia can match or negate any military assistance we can possibly provide to Ukraine. Furthermore, Russia has the advantage of being able to use its own troops, which eliminates the need for training and allows for much faster deployment of sophisticated weapons.
In fact, by arming Ukraine, we may be acting against Ukraine's best interests. So far, Russia has tried to maintain plausible deniability of its involvement in the conflict. But if the situation escalates far enough, Russia may be forced to drop all pretense and start providing direct military support to the separatists, including air and naval support. The U.S. would have no response to that, setting up the Ukraine government for a disastrous defeat.
The best course of action for everyone concerned is to encourage the Ukrainian government to start serious dialogue with the breakaway republics. It is obvious that Ukraine will never regain full control over Donetsk and Lugansk. The main priorities at the moment should be to establish a lasting truce and to end bloodshed.
In fact, by arming Ukraine, we may be acting against Ukraine's best interests. So far, Russia has tried to maintain plausible deniability of its involvement in the conflict. But if the situation escalates far enough, Russia may be forced to drop all pretense and start providing direct military support to the separatists, including air and naval support. The U.S. would have no response to that, setting up the Ukraine government for a disastrous defeat.
The best course of action for everyone concerned is to encourage the Ukrainian government to start serious dialogue with the breakaway republics. It is obvious that Ukraine will never regain full control over Donetsk and Lugansk. The main priorities at the moment should be to establish a lasting truce and to end bloodshed.
13
So called "breakaway republics" (but in fact - just a big bunch of Putin's terrorists) have no interest in political dialogue. There were enough chances for that:
1. The last presidential elections in May 2014 were fully sabotaged by those thugs.
2. Unilateral ceasefire proposed by then newly elect President Poroshenko was broken by terrorists.
3. The Parliamentary elections were sabotaged in the occupied parts of Donbass as well.
4. Minsk Agreements are sabotaged right now.
As you see, Kyiv is more than willing for political dialogue.
The main goal of Putin is not the military occupation of the mainland Ukraine. It's gonna be to expensive even for his imperial aspirations. He wants to control the Ukrainian politics by forcing official Kyiv to unconditionally accept any whims of those thugs. And pay all their bills too.
Therefore there is no risk of any further escalation if Ukrainians get American weapons. It will only persuade Putin to political dialogue.
1. The last presidential elections in May 2014 were fully sabotaged by those thugs.
2. Unilateral ceasefire proposed by then newly elect President Poroshenko was broken by terrorists.
3. The Parliamentary elections were sabotaged in the occupied parts of Donbass as well.
4. Minsk Agreements are sabotaged right now.
As you see, Kyiv is more than willing for political dialogue.
The main goal of Putin is not the military occupation of the mainland Ukraine. It's gonna be to expensive even for his imperial aspirations. He wants to control the Ukrainian politics by forcing official Kyiv to unconditionally accept any whims of those thugs. And pay all their bills too.
Therefore there is no risk of any further escalation if Ukrainians get American weapons. It will only persuade Putin to political dialogue.
2
Kiev junta is interested in dialogue about peace only when it's losing. After the coup they immediately sent armed nazi battalions to Donbass. Why they didn't start talking then ?
They agreed to talk only after their army was at the brink of a collapse in August. And all Ukrainian officials including the president were publicly saying that a truce is here only to reorganize and rearm the army.
LDNR officials were in Minsk two days ago and they were waiting for Poroshenko to officially proclaim Kuchma as a negotiator. He is not a Ukrainian official now.
And the other thing, Ukraine didn't pool back heavy artillery for months after the Minsk agreement. Why ?
They are shelling Donetsk for months without stopping. Thousands of civilians, women and children died from shells.
But that's a taboo for the 'free' Western media.
They agreed to talk only after their army was at the brink of a collapse in August. And all Ukrainian officials including the president were publicly saying that a truce is here only to reorganize and rearm the army.
LDNR officials were in Minsk two days ago and they were waiting for Poroshenko to officially proclaim Kuchma as a negotiator. He is not a Ukrainian official now.
And the other thing, Ukraine didn't pool back heavy artillery for months after the Minsk agreement. Why ?
They are shelling Donetsk for months without stopping. Thousands of civilians, women and children died from shells.
But that's a taboo for the 'free' Western media.
2
"They came three thousand miles, and died to keep the past upon the its throne; unheard upon the ocean tide, their English Mother made her moan." British Soldier's marker, North Bridge, 1775... Sound Familiar?
6
Now it's "Russia supported the rebels" .A week ago was "Russian troops in Ukraine" and the Ukrainian government admitted that it was a lie, that the Russian troops in Ukraine is not. Still America can not calm down . Following that come up?
11
Iran is praying that US does supply arms to Ukraine.
1
A country as well as a person is defined more by what they choose not to do than by what they choose to do.
There is also a very finite limit on the number of major things that can be done well at the same time.
Maybe, if we start sending weapons, Putin will go back home. Then maybe not. This could get very big and very dangerous. It may be worth the time, cost and risk, but before we start, we need to look carefully it may mean not doing. Or, at least, not doing well.
Our country has a long list of things that need to be done well; both here and abroad. Is this one of the projects that has to go to the top of the list. Once started, history shows changing our mind can be nearly impossible.
The President and the rest of us need to carefully use our emotional intelligence here.
There is also a very finite limit on the number of major things that can be done well at the same time.
Maybe, if we start sending weapons, Putin will go back home. Then maybe not. This could get very big and very dangerous. It may be worth the time, cost and risk, but before we start, we need to look carefully it may mean not doing. Or, at least, not doing well.
Our country has a long list of things that need to be done well; both here and abroad. Is this one of the projects that has to go to the top of the list. Once started, history shows changing our mind can be nearly impossible.
The President and the rest of us need to carefully use our emotional intelligence here.
6
When the Russians heard about the subject of this article (which presumably was some time before it was published in the NYT), the likely response would be to hurry up with their aggressive activity, before whatever hardware benefits arrive in the hands of the Ukes. So it should surprise no one as we see now a significant increase in activity by Russia in expanding its efforts to control larger regions of the Ukraine. Today's NYT editorial rather gently (and puzzlingly so) chides Russia to ease off the aggression but it may just be Russia's answer to what they knew was coming in the way of new equipment for the Ukes.
Europe has made itself weak and dependent on Russia. Russia and Russians are not concerned about immediate needs. Russians have a very filtered view of the world and events. Oil, Gas and military are the only things that give Russians self-esteem and NATO is the only remaining obstacle.
1
Critics say that if we supply Ukraine with the arms it needs to survive, Putin will just double down and we'll be back to where we started, or that we will somehow get into a war with Russia. These are valid concerns, but both are oversimplifications. There are limits to what Putin can and will do. Putin wants war no more than we do, because it would threaten his own destruction. Moreover, the Russian people will not be forever blind to the carnage that Putin's policies are wreaking on the Russian economy, and to the increasing isolation of Russia itself. There will come a time when Putin will have to make a rational calculation of his own interests, and stop blindly lashing out, as he has up until now. This will be a long-term struggle, but eventually, if Ukraine is given the ability to resist, Putin will fail. We must also remember that if we give up on Ukraine, that will not be the end of the story. Putin has already threatened most of the other countries on Russia's borders. If the West signals weakness, Putin will extend his aggression to them, and we will once again be faced with the same questions that we ignored when we failed to help Ukraine. The West is not being asked to fight, just to give Ukraine the tools to fight. Unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, the people of Ukraine actually want to be part of the West and are asking for our help. If we forsake them, we are giving up on everything we stand for,
4
Where oh where have I heard this domino analogy before?
You know of fantasy football? Let's play a new game, fantasy foreign policy. Maybe that's what the US has been doing all along.
You know of fantasy football? Let's play a new game, fantasy foreign policy. Maybe that's what the US has been doing all along.
10
No, the West (by which you mean the US) is not being asked to fight. Just send a few surplus rockets. Then maybe a couple of advisors to demonstrate how to fire the rockets. Then a few more advisors. Then a Seal Team and some Special Forces to train a few Ukrainian soldiers in specialized warfare. Then a battalion of marines to defend the advisors. Then the 101st Airborne to secure an important supply line. Then a carrier or two in the Black Sea to provide air support for the ground troops. Then another hundred thousand troops because the Russians are staging a massive buildup on the border. Then five hundred thousand troops because the elections are drawing closer, and no self-respecting politician wants to appear soft on national security.
No, the West is not being asked to fight, and while we are in the process of not fighting, the West certainly doesn't want to signal any weaknesses.
No, the West is not being asked to fight, and while we are in the process of not fighting, the West certainly doesn't want to signal any weaknesses.
2
If you want a modern day example of the stupidity of the west's brain power, then look no further than the recent suggestions of our western leaders.
I can't imagine a better way to start WW3 than believing that ones best option is to create more dead Russians so that Putin will somehow feel more embarrassed back home.
The weapons dealers will be laughing all the way to the bank as they stuff billions into their pockets.
What a stupid world we live in.
I can't imagine a better way to start WW3 than believing that ones best option is to create more dead Russians so that Putin will somehow feel more embarrassed back home.
The weapons dealers will be laughing all the way to the bank as they stuff billions into their pockets.
What a stupid world we live in.
19
Can we please stay out of this? Why do we need more wars? Our entanglement in the Midle East, yemen and Nigeria is not enough? And as bad and crazy as the Russians are they are far from brutal. Putin is not after genicode or beheading innocent ukrainian women and children. Nor is he seling them as slaves as Boko Harem or marhcing into Ukrainian schools and just shooting kids like the Talabian. All he wants is land and power. Is it just? No not at all. but w ejust can't be the world's policemen. We need to save our resources to those that are either a threat directly to us or those that are commiting large scale atrocities to innocent civillans.
10
While persuading Ukraine to hand over their nuclear to Russia in 1994, US Government has made some, although very vague, commitments to Ukrainian territorial integrity. If the USA walks away, it will deeply undermine a lot of its own nuclear nonproliferation efforts.
Not a week ago 30 Ukrainian civilians were murdered in the deliberate rocket bombardment of Maryupil' by terrorists. Ironically, terrorists consider that city as their own. So, they are firmly on their way to be the new "Greek-Orthodox" Taliban.
Not a week ago 30 Ukrainian civilians were murdered in the deliberate rocket bombardment of Maryupil' by terrorists. Ironically, terrorists consider that city as their own. So, they are firmly on their way to be the new "Greek-Orthodox" Taliban.
The U.S. should not and must not give arms to Ukraine or get involved militarily in any way. Such would lead to a confrontation with Russia, and that's not acceptable or survivable. Ukraine is not important to us, they brought this on themselves by driving out the leader without clearing it with Russia, and it would be preferable that the entire population of Ukraine be slain tomorrow, than for us and Russia to go to war. We all know what such a war would mean, for humanity and the world, and realistically there's no way the civil war will kill all Ukrainians.
The way to stop this conflict is by leaning on Russia economically until they're forced to negotiate peace. They can enforce peace in Ukraine with ease, all we have to do is make them want to, to ease up restrictions we place on their economy.
The way to stop this conflict is by leaning on Russia economically until they're forced to negotiate peace. They can enforce peace in Ukraine with ease, all we have to do is make them want to, to ease up restrictions we place on their economy.
10
ISIS, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, the taliban, the terrorist, the militant muslims, Sunni militants, Sadam Hussein, Osama Bin Ladin, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, Fidel Castro, and others.....are merely small time homicidal street thugs. These street thugs are small time potatoes who will make noise and name call. The big nuke boys to worry about are the U.S., Russia and China. On Oct. 16, 1964, China detonated its first atomic bomb. Hopefully everyone is also convinced that after the October 1962 missile crisis between U.S. Pres Kennedy and Premier Nikita Khrushchev of the Soviet Union over Cuba's small time street thug fidel castro, that the real power was not fidel, but rather the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Kennedy and Khrushchev came within a hair from pushing the button on a world nuclear war. North Vietnam was nothing without the military backing of Russia.
The real threat is a nuclear holocaust. The main players are the U.S., Russia, and China. Please don't believe the nonsensical Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968. If you do then you probably believe in the tooth fairy as well. As long as all countries of the world continue with their quest for power and control.....the threat of a nuclear holocaust is real...the only question is when.
In a war there has to be an undisputed winner and a loser....otherwise the war continues. Any time an outside arbitrator or mediator steps in and declares peace...it merely fuels the flames of war.
The real threat is a nuclear holocaust. The main players are the U.S., Russia, and China. Please don't believe the nonsensical Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968. If you do then you probably believe in the tooth fairy as well. As long as all countries of the world continue with their quest for power and control.....the threat of a nuclear holocaust is real...the only question is when.
In a war there has to be an undisputed winner and a loser....otherwise the war continues. Any time an outside arbitrator or mediator steps in and declares peace...it merely fuels the flames of war.
1
The US, China, and Russia should get together in a back room and as equal partners decide how to best stabilize a chaotic world. Each recognizing the others' strategic interest. These bit players will lose their ability to manipulate us and cause trouble. A relative peace will prevail.
1
I have been looking and watching this situation with Ukraine. All I can see is the one thing is going to happen Pres. Putin has already gone crazy and if the US goes to supplying arms this will end up being another Vietnam. President Putin has already tried flexing his muscles toward the United States by flying is bombers close to the United States namely Alaska and California. I hope our Congressman and the president of the United States has better sense to go into this with the Vietnam attitude and if you're going to start a war fighting like a war. Right now they are too many countries that won't part of the United States. We are being invaded from the South by either illegal Mexicans and everyone tries to stop this gets told they can't do that. What should happen is all the illegal Mexicans should be put in uniform and sent to Ukraine and to Iran and to see if they really want to fight our to be in this country. Being an old Vietnam vets is my thoughts.
3
The comments by other readers illustrate the complexity of foreign policy decisions and the long history of unintended consequences from American actions overseas, whether covert, diplomatic or military. Pulling the trigger, whether literally or figuratively, should be a last resort. We need to recognize our emotional outrage at Putin's covert war in Ukraine, but also step back and take an unemotional view of the potential consequences of our own actions in response to his.
13
"The comments by other readers illustrate the complexity of foreign policy ...."
Nice try. In fact, foreign policy couldn't be simpler. Or should be. Sometimes you're going to have to do things that are smart, but aren't right; and sometimes you're going to have to do things that are right, but aren't smart. But NEVER should you do things that are both stupid and wrong. And getting involved in this mess -- not to mention our Israel policy -- is both egregiously stupid and egregiously wrong.
Nice try. In fact, foreign policy couldn't be simpler. Or should be. Sometimes you're going to have to do things that are smart, but aren't right; and sometimes you're going to have to do things that are right, but aren't smart. But NEVER should you do things that are both stupid and wrong. And getting involved in this mess -- not to mention our Israel policy -- is both egregiously stupid and egregiously wrong.
4
As other commenters have note, Americans need to be aware of our government’s covert involvement in creating this “crisis.” Russia’s security hinges on keeping NATO and the West out of Ukraine. Our country came close to launching a nuclear war when the Soviet Union attempted to establish missiles in Cuba. The U.S. sponsored coup in the Ukraine is similar. Our current foreign policy is based on further tightening the NATO net around Russia, coupled with tying the Ukraine’s economic debt to the International Monetary fund so that western financiers may profit from the interest and control of the Ukraine. We need to back off from an ill-conceived takeover, not escalate.
5
"Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces."
This sounds like an idea conceived by people with virtually no understanding of the eastern Slavic regions and Russian culture and history in general.
If you want to draw out the violence in eastern Ukraine, then by all means pursue this strategy.
But I can tell you right now that partition of Ukraine into two states in inevitable. There will be an independent Ukraine in the west, and a semi-autonomous state called perhaps, eastern Ukraine in the east, populated largely by Russian-speaking people, just as it is now.
Furnishing weapons will just lead to more bloodshed and possibly to a showdown between Russia and Nato, which, for all practical purposes, means the US.
This sounds like an idea conceived by people with virtually no understanding of the eastern Slavic regions and Russian culture and history in general.
If you want to draw out the violence in eastern Ukraine, then by all means pursue this strategy.
But I can tell you right now that partition of Ukraine into two states in inevitable. There will be an independent Ukraine in the west, and a semi-autonomous state called perhaps, eastern Ukraine in the east, populated largely by Russian-speaking people, just as it is now.
Furnishing weapons will just lead to more bloodshed and possibly to a showdown between Russia and Nato, which, for all practical purposes, means the US.
25
To me it looks like partition of Russia is inevitable. They have greatly exceeded the limit of land grabs in the past 20 years.
2
I completely agree, there is no way ukraine will be whole again. The efforts should be consetrated on drawing borders and upholding them.
2
lasrarov, and how about we draw those borders just outside of Kremlin? I bet Russians will be grateful: no more wars, no more restrictions on food imports. Maybe Russia's hospitals will get running water and toilet paper at last.
Too few Americans are familiar with the word "disinformation."
Read these comments and observe the behavior of Putin it should be quite obvious this old Soviet technique is in use to spread false statements.
"Disinformation is intentionally false or inaccurate information that is spread deliberately. It is an act of deception and false statements to convince someone of untruth. Disinformation should not be confused with misinformation, information that is unintentionally false.
"Unlike traditional propaganda techniques designed to engage emotional support, disinformation is designed to manipulate the audience at the rational level by either discrediting conflicting information or supporting false conclusions." source: Wikipedia
Americans can see the same pattern in the US with a certain cable network that adopted the proven Soviet technique.
Read these comments and observe the behavior of Putin it should be quite obvious this old Soviet technique is in use to spread false statements.
"Disinformation is intentionally false or inaccurate information that is spread deliberately. It is an act of deception and false statements to convince someone of untruth. Disinformation should not be confused with misinformation, information that is unintentionally false.
"Unlike traditional propaganda techniques designed to engage emotional support, disinformation is designed to manipulate the audience at the rational level by either discrediting conflicting information or supporting false conclusions." source: Wikipedia
Americans can see the same pattern in the US with a certain cable network that adopted the proven Soviet technique.
3
What certain network? They're all using disinformation, omission and all tools they can to make Ukrainian "official" government look good while they kill there own people.
5
Would the Tonkin Gulf incident and Weapons of Mass Destruction be examples of disinformation?
5
This report forgets to mention the presence of a large number of 'advisors', CIA personnel and private security groups.
It's the same lies as told by the NYT regarding Syria where it always forgets to mention the large presence of these trainers and CIA weapons deliveries to all sorts of Salafist jihadists. In Syria it are Salafist head choppers, in Ukraine fascists groups like Pravy Sektor and the Azov Battalion.
Last week the US remembered Auschwitz. It was held on the same day they were supporting the remnants of those who stood guard there during WWII.
It's the same lies as told by the NYT regarding Syria where it always forgets to mention the large presence of these trainers and CIA weapons deliveries to all sorts of Salafist jihadists. In Syria it are Salafist head choppers, in Ukraine fascists groups like Pravy Sektor and the Azov Battalion.
Last week the US remembered Auschwitz. It was held on the same day they were supporting the remnants of those who stood guard there during WWII.
13
Those must be some brand new stealth-advisers, CIA, and "private security groups". Because nobody has managed to get any photo or video evidence of their presence. From the other side, captured Russian soldiers have been shown regularly on Ukrainian TV. Not to mention Russian tanks, artillery, MLRS, AA batteries.
And concerning the Pravy Sektor or Azov Regiment: according to the American political standards they will be recognized as some right-wing Republicans.
And concerning the Pravy Sektor or Azov Regiment: according to the American political standards they will be recognized as some right-wing Republicans.
It is not surprising that Putin is getting more aggressive in Eastern Ukraine after the Russian economy took hits after hits by sanctions and by falling oil prices. He needs such nationalistic news to distract Russians from their real problems.
3
US and EU should supply significant military aid to Ukraine immediately. Otherwise, Russia and Putin will continue to expand their aggression.
5
There's absolutely no sense of balance in this "report." Do the authors not believe there are dissenting opinions worth including in this article? There are numerous high-ranking contrary positions on this matter. Given the enormous gravity of this situation in terms of its war potential, articles of this sort are downright irresponsible of such a highly regarded news source. Providing advanced offensive weaponry to Ukraine can have extremely dangerous and widespread consequences. This appears to be an opinion piece of the Editorial Board disguised, thinly, as a news article.
9
The military wants to do something militarily stupid that will ensure more money flowing to the military. How remarkable! I don't think this is going to happen under Obama, whose "dithering" is actually a way of seeming to endorse stupid policy decisions - like sending weapons to the Ukraine - without doing them. There are many areas where Obama has been a bad president, or a mediocre one, but in avoiding stupid, neo-con adventures he's been good. The Ukraine is among those things that are none of the US's business.
4
Didn't Obama promise us all that he would "reset relations with Russia" when he was running for office? I guess he thought that all the problems were his own country's fault, and he just had to sit down and talk with Mr. Poo-Tin? D'oh!
We've got enough on our plate with Syria, Iraq and other Islamic trouble spots. We encouraged the Ukrainians to depose their president, and it's led to much trouble and no good. Sending in weapons will only inflame the problem. It would be like Russia arming Cuba. This is not our fight; we need to stay clear.
8
Obama should have helped them months ago with weapons .. and ditto for the Syrians fighting for democracy in Syria .. 1500 days ago ..
1
This Ukraine civil war is now becoming a proxy struggle between two superpowers. It is Vietnam all over again except neither side has yet dispatched their ground troops. Super powers play their games. They come and gone. The tragedy will be on the Ukrainians. Don't we ever learn that in the end, this whole episode is so wasteful and so stupid! The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind!
7
Before patriotic emotionalism clouds reason, understand perfectly clear. what this article calls "defensive weapons" have the dual use of also being "offensive weapons."
Slowly but surely, so that the Public does not realize too much all at once, the kings of this earth are leading the People to WORLD WAR!
Will it come before or after the Global economic collapse is the question?
The Global Financial Meltdown-Economic Pearl Harbour-Economic Tsunami of 2008 was the 1st sign of the Writing on the Wall. We just haven't paid close attention to the Signs of the Times. What is the best before date for the healing of the Nations? That depends on a Vigilant Citizenry moving forward from Today!
Slowly but surely, so that the Public does not realize too much all at once, the kings of this earth are leading the People to WORLD WAR!
Will it come before or after the Global economic collapse is the question?
The Global Financial Meltdown-Economic Pearl Harbour-Economic Tsunami of 2008 was the 1st sign of the Writing on the Wall. We just haven't paid close attention to the Signs of the Times. What is the best before date for the healing of the Nations? That depends on a Vigilant Citizenry moving forward from Today!
4
Why do our attempts at trying to help quell violence always rely primarily on supplying more weapons into a conflict that will only exacerbate the situation?
Oh that's right! Because it mirrors our own domestic policy on violence here at home: fight fire with fire . . . arm every man, woman, and child with their own gun as a way of keeping our homes safe from armed attack.
Oh that's right! Because it mirrors our own domestic policy on violence here at home: fight fire with fire . . . arm every man, woman, and child with their own gun as a way of keeping our homes safe from armed attack.
4
If the U.S. and other NATO countries supply Ukraine with weapons, we should prepare for NATO to be tested. We need to have a response to unconventional
war in the Baltics. Are the Baltic states ready? Is Nato ready?
war in the Baltics. Are the Baltic states ready? Is Nato ready?
3
During the last 6 years, with the exception of the bin Laden raid, Obama's foreign policy are a tale of cautions and conservatism. Don't expect him to deviate from that course. This leak is merely a warning to the Russians so they would not enjoy Ukraine too much.
1
If you think the US and its allies aren't already heavily involved with what is going on in Ukraine, you've got your head in the sand and spend way too much time buying all the propaganda the 24/7 entertainment news networks are shoving down your throat.
It was only September when we guaranteed over $1 BILLION of Ukraine's debt when their economy was struggling (nevermind that our own economy is sputtering at best) as well as an additional $291 million for a laundry list of things, most of which are undefined and unquantifiable -- perfect for a corrupt government like the US to funnel money toward politicians and causes that help the super-rich and those with (enough money to) influence. We The regular People and the citizens of Ukraine? Not so much......
This piece and the entire narrative of what's really going on over there is a crock. I don't pretend to know myself but it sure as heck isn't what is being reported by our sorry excuse for "news" in this country.
It was only September when we guaranteed over $1 BILLION of Ukraine's debt when their economy was struggling (nevermind that our own economy is sputtering at best) as well as an additional $291 million for a laundry list of things, most of which are undefined and unquantifiable -- perfect for a corrupt government like the US to funnel money toward politicians and causes that help the super-rich and those with (enough money to) influence. We The regular People and the citizens of Ukraine? Not so much......
This piece and the entire narrative of what's really going on over there is a crock. I don't pretend to know myself but it sure as heck isn't what is being reported by our sorry excuse for "news" in this country.
5
This administration has made an amateurish, incoherent mess of foreign affairs. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Iran, Ukraine, the hits just keep coming. I think he's going to fare quite poorly historically, even worse than the last progressive to badly muck it up, Jimmy Carter.
Where are the grown ups?
Where are the grown ups?
1
Don't forget, Ukraine holds one of the biggest liabilities on any balance sheet anywhere: the wreckage of the nuclear power plant at Chernobyl.
2
This sounds like Europe's problem, yet we hear nothing from them. We need to sit this one out and let them lead since it's on their doorstep. We need to continue rounding up democratic allies in Asia for a threat that is far more dangerous in the China Sea.
7
EU can't even deal with normal problems within their own countries, this kind of conflict is above them by miles. Just look at France for their ability to deal with real conflict.
1
Why did we then force Ukraine to give up nukes in 1994? Did not we guarantee to support Ukraine's sovereignty and borders integrity? Is there such a thing as international law?
1
Those, who keep saying that US has no business in Ukraine have to remember that US is the main guarantor of NATO allies' and Europe's security, which is now directly threatened by Russia. Not only Russia is waging war in Ukraine, which is bordering US' NATO allies, it's also sending its nuclear bombers to the shores of European countries, most recently UK and Ireland. If this is not a threat to US closest allies, than what is? Ukrainian interest is to defend itself, US interest is to defend its European allies, though Ukraine is not yet formally among them. Bu arming and supporting Ukraine, US is helping to stop the enemy of its allies, before it's too late and before they may be forced to fight a much harder war. This is an important strategic alliance and not, as some people seems to misunderstand it, meddling into Ukrainian affairs, or fighting for Ukraine. This is fight for Europe, no more, no less and it's in the core of global and US security.
2
For God's sake, stay out of Ukraine. With our Congress in the hands of Republicans, I cannot help but feel this idea has political undertones and little more.
If you are looking to spend even more money, try sending it to financially beleaguered Americans.
If you are looking to spend even more money, try sending it to financially beleaguered Americans.
21
It is time that NATO nations support our allies. We are supporting a war in Iraq for people who have never been allies before and leaving behind the Ukrainians who stood shoulder to shoulder with us in Afghanistan.
They need help! IF they dont get it we will see Russians expand into many more nations
They need help! IF they dont get it we will see Russians expand into many more nations
2
The pro and con votes here are quite balanced.
Normally, would consider that good - but here, I see it as a sign that a lot ofthe readers of NYT still have no idea a) what the whole thing is about, and b) believe it is Russia who is pushing West.
The opposite is true: US and NATO have been pushing East (against their assurances that they wouldn't) and now stand at the doorstep of Russia, much closer than missiles in Cuba ever were. Any serious and responsible leader would be worried about such openly aggressive steps.
Adding to that, US policy had been full of aggression: invasions, bombing, arming insurgents (terrorists) and initiating civil wars. I am sure that Mr. Putin does not look sympathetically at such chances.
There can be no doubt that Mr. Obama was fully informed about what was going on in Kiev - including the arms' cache with weapons, including hunting rifles (with visors) on the way from Lvov. Anyway, these rifles were, obviously used later in the massacre on the Maidan - for: the dead, protesters and policemen, were all killed by the same weapons - which were not police issue!
And CIA were reported PRESENT WITH MR. YATSENIUK'S FASCISTS. So, the question arises: Were they active in that massacre, or only onlookers? In any case, Mr. Obama must be fully informed about all that happened, because he was part of it. The question is then: Does he really want war?
Revolutions can happen out of the blue - though with some prediction. But this did not! What is the plan?
Normally, would consider that good - but here, I see it as a sign that a lot ofthe readers of NYT still have no idea a) what the whole thing is about, and b) believe it is Russia who is pushing West.
The opposite is true: US and NATO have been pushing East (against their assurances that they wouldn't) and now stand at the doorstep of Russia, much closer than missiles in Cuba ever were. Any serious and responsible leader would be worried about such openly aggressive steps.
Adding to that, US policy had been full of aggression: invasions, bombing, arming insurgents (terrorists) and initiating civil wars. I am sure that Mr. Putin does not look sympathetically at such chances.
There can be no doubt that Mr. Obama was fully informed about what was going on in Kiev - including the arms' cache with weapons, including hunting rifles (with visors) on the way from Lvov. Anyway, these rifles were, obviously used later in the massacre on the Maidan - for: the dead, protesters and policemen, were all killed by the same weapons - which were not police issue!
And CIA were reported PRESENT WITH MR. YATSENIUK'S FASCISTS. So, the question arises: Were they active in that massacre, or only onlookers? In any case, Mr. Obama must be fully informed about all that happened, because he was part of it. The question is then: Does he really want war?
Revolutions can happen out of the blue - though with some prediction. But this did not! What is the plan?
5
“One of the best ways to deter Russia from supporting the rebels in taking more territory and stepping up the conflict is to increase the cost that the Russians or their surrogates would incur,” Ms. Flournoy said in an interview.
In context it's clear that "to increase the cost" means to kill them. Killing Russians and eastern Ukrainians may or may not be an effective foreign policy but it certainly is an evil foreign policy. And this advocate of killing would be Sec. of Defense under Pres. Clinton II? Another reason not to vote for name recognition dynasties.
In context it's clear that "to increase the cost" means to kill them. Killing Russians and eastern Ukrainians may or may not be an effective foreign policy but it certainly is an evil foreign policy. And this advocate of killing would be Sec. of Defense under Pres. Clinton II? Another reason not to vote for name recognition dynasties.
5
To those Russia and Putin apologists here, I want to mention one phrase of Sergei Brin, the co-founder of Google, in which he expressed his gratitude to his father: "Thank you for taking us all out of Russia." We Ukrainians agree with Mr. Brin wholeheartedly. We've been "out of Russia" for decades and have absolutely no desire for them to take us back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Brin#Early_life_and_education
2
american polucy in Ukraina: We will figth the Russiana to the last Ukraian!!
10
Those who favor western military intervention might want to consider a few things. First, that is the former Soviet Union, so I wouldn't be quick to assume you would have unwavering local support when Uncle Augie may have been proudly decorated in the Soviet Army. Second, they are a modern military though failing in many respects. We've been effectively pinned down by far less. Third, they have effective weapons. They've been selling them all over the world for years. Fifth, they have outer space capability and command at present. Us, not so much. Sixth, it's pretty hard to supply an army that far away in that region. Ask the Soviets themselves. They had to do it for themselves in WWII. Seventh, what for? We gain nothing, again it's the former Soviet Union. Why fight what effectively is their war of secession. Eighth, it costs money. We don't have it to waste, and this really isn't the same thing as Hitler's expansionism. Ninth, those satellite countries have had years to arm themselves and form their own alliances and haven't. The Ukraine couldn't even muster the strength to scuttle a Soviet ship in their Crimean harbor. Tenth, this is isn't new. The question really is whether this is what number you put on problems in that region. Some of their previous expats started out wheat markets here. Eleventh, this could easily become a Russo-whoever war, or at least a third European war. Twelfth, things the list can grow, but the room here for it can't.
8
How did supplying Afghan rebels weapons against Russia work out? How did killing Gadhafi work out? How did arming the Iraq Army work out?
Terrible idea to arm or train countries that aren't at the least long term dependable core US allies.
Terrible idea to arm or train countries that aren't at the least long term dependable core US allies.
7
Right after we establish a national draft with no exceptions or exemptions we can discuss this proposed folly. A few children of the 1% and warmongers coming home in body bags, or missing a limb, will end this nonsense.
As if we don't have our own house to put in order.
As if we don't have our own house to put in order.
3
New secretary of the Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council is Andriy Parubiy -- co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU). Ukraine's new deputy secretary of national security is Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector group. The far right Svoboda party, whose leader has denounced the “criminal activities of Jews" and which was condemned by the European parliament for its “racist and antisemitic views”, has five ministerial posts in the new government, including deputy prime minister and prosecutor general. The leader of the even more extreme Right Sector is now Ukraine’s deputy national security chief.
Recent Ukrainian history - 22 January 2010, the previous President of Ukraine "Orange Revolutionary" Viktor Yushchenko awarded to Hitler-collaborator Stepan Bandera the title of Hero of Ukraine (posthumously). The award was condemned by European Parliament, Russian, Polish and Jewish organizations.
This is a quote from wikipedia of an order given by the organization that was led by Stepan Bandera. OUN-B ordered: "Moskali, Poles, Jews are hostile to us must be exterminated in this struggle, especially those who would resist our regime: deport them to their own lands, importantly: destroy their intelligentsia that may be in the positions of power ... Jews must be isolated, removed from governmental positions in order to prevent sabotage, those who are deemed necessary may only work with an overseer... Jewish assimilation is not possible."
Recent Ukrainian history - 22 January 2010, the previous President of Ukraine "Orange Revolutionary" Viktor Yushchenko awarded to Hitler-collaborator Stepan Bandera the title of Hero of Ukraine (posthumously). The award was condemned by European Parliament, Russian, Polish and Jewish organizations.
This is a quote from wikipedia of an order given by the organization that was led by Stepan Bandera. OUN-B ordered: "Moskali, Poles, Jews are hostile to us must be exterminated in this struggle, especially those who would resist our regime: deport them to their own lands, importantly: destroy their intelligentsia that may be in the positions of power ... Jews must be isolated, removed from governmental positions in order to prevent sabotage, those who are deemed necessary may only work with an overseer... Jewish assimilation is not possible."
4
What a great idea. Have the US provide more military support to Ukraine thereby increasing the purchases from the military industrial complex corporations who definitely love war, for very obvious reasons. In this was the Russian military industrial complex can to the same thereby improving their economy as well. The only losers would be those dumb Ukrainians who seem to fall prey to the sales made by the companies who rely to a significant degree on war. The best part is that both the USA and Russia cannot lose as the wars they support are not on their soils.
4
Why does this read as though it were a propaganda piece written for and by the Pentagon (with assist by the cabal of neocons in the State Department)?
10
I find it rather comical that even after it became common knowledge that the United States was supporting al-Qaeda in Syria--while calling them freedom fighters, protesters, rebels, etc--that some people are still unable to grasp that their government would support neo-nazis in Ukraine.
The uncomfortable truth is that a sizeable portion of Kiev's current government -- and the protesters who brought it to power -- are, indeed, far-right radicals. Ukraine is home to Svoboda, arguably Europe's most influential far-right movement today. Party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is on record complaining that his country is controlled by a "Muscovite-Jewish mafia". In Svoboda's eyes, gays are perverts and black people unfit to represent the nation at Eurovision, lest viewers come away thinking Ukraine is somewhere besides Uganda.
The far right Svoboda party, whose leader has denounced the “criminal activities of Jews" and which was condemned by the European parliament for its “racist and antisemitic views”, has five ministerial posts in the new government, including deputy prime minister and prosecutor general. The leader of the even more extreme Right Sector, at the heart of the street violence, is now Ukraine’s deputy national security chief.
And this is the government you and the President and John Kerry and Hilary Clinton are supporting and expect Russia to do nothing about it at its borders?
The uncomfortable truth is that a sizeable portion of Kiev's current government -- and the protesters who brought it to power -- are, indeed, far-right radicals. Ukraine is home to Svoboda, arguably Europe's most influential far-right movement today. Party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is on record complaining that his country is controlled by a "Muscovite-Jewish mafia". In Svoboda's eyes, gays are perverts and black people unfit to represent the nation at Eurovision, lest viewers come away thinking Ukraine is somewhere besides Uganda.
The far right Svoboda party, whose leader has denounced the “criminal activities of Jews" and which was condemned by the European parliament for its “racist and antisemitic views”, has five ministerial posts in the new government, including deputy prime minister and prosecutor general. The leader of the even more extreme Right Sector, at the heart of the street violence, is now Ukraine’s deputy national security chief.
And this is the government you and the President and John Kerry and Hilary Clinton are supporting and expect Russia to do nothing about it at its borders?
11
Yes, Putin wants the play the Game, creating a land-bridge to Crimea - and all that will lead to... Yet, it could be simply a coordinated, minor distraction. We need to also monitor closely the war-time footing China's new president is assembling, and perhaps coordinating with Russia; a means toward a new era. The transformation unfolding in recent years in Beijing is not the basis for "joining" a global economy that the Chinese President Xi Jinping is creating; he is counting on "leading", as in ruling in an age of unprecedented technology. Most people would agree that fighting corruption and privacy concerns in hard enough with capitalism in democratic societies - but progress in civil liberties is evident. Yet read Sun Tzu, listen to the chinese people themselves today, know China's history, and read the publications from China's military's college's with open eyes. Everything is changing very fast in China, and it's not hard to see where it leads.
The US seems to think it beat a country that essentially had drunk itself to death before Reagan was even elected.
2
The Ukrainians will not let another Soviet leader walk in and kill more Ukrainians. They remember what Stalin did in WW II. We should support the Ukrainians as much as possible, short of sending troops.
7
Ukrainians are doing good job at killing Ukrainians themself, they don't need another soviet leader.
6
So, just like in Syria and Iraq, materiel aid and airstrikes but no boots on the ground except American advisors to train vetted moderate freedom fighters? What could possibly go wrong?
There are lots of ways to get into wars. The best way to stay out of a war is to stay out.
And wasn't it Nazi Germany that invaded and devastated the Ukraine in WW2? Ukraine was already part of the Soviet Union in 1939.
There are lots of ways to get into wars. The best way to stay out of a war is to stay out.
And wasn't it Nazi Germany that invaded and devastated the Ukraine in WW2? Ukraine was already part of the Soviet Union in 1939.
2
Despite that Ukrainian Stepan Bandera continues have many loyal followers in Western Ukraine.
Unlike ISIS and terrorism, this is a static, traditional type of threat (proxy war between two countries). It is not a direct threat to the USA, but dithering too long will exacerbate the situation; appeasement does not work. A multi-nation international response is needed. The US can take the lead, but it needs to be a cooperation. If economic sanctions are not working well enough then military aid needs to be increased to match the needs of Ukraine. This should be looked at no differently than Russia's invasion of Georgia in 2008.
1
Good point T-Bone, and note that the Georgian conflict ended without much damage, without Russia taking over Georgia, and without lasting negative repercussions. Russia can work out what to do with Ukraine on their own, we have no need to get involved with this.
3
What many US Presidents avoided during the COLD WAR, Obama has opted to indirectly intervene by supplying weapons. The start of WW III. When will it turn nuclear is the next question? I suppose first the American soldiers have to march into Russia, drawing the world further into chaos, thank you Obama, this is your parting gift for the world.
8
Providing arms to Kiev could potentially be the worst thing to do at this point. This action could be all the Kremlin needs to justify a full-fledged invasion instead of a number of "polite people" on the ground in Donetsk.
If Vladimir Putin is as distrustful of the Western agenda as he appears to be, this action may be what instigates the first major European ground war this decade.
If Vladimir Putin is as distrustful of the Western agenda as he appears to be, this action may be what instigates the first major European ground war this decade.
3
Stay out of this one. I like living on this planet in one piece. There is no way we could win or lose and ever find an exit. Why do we get mixed up in every historical conflict in the world with no understanding or plan?
6
I dream that I open up the NYT to read that Washington is doing something constructive in the world.
Not bombing or invading a country, not subverting a government, no setting up embargoes, not destabilizing a region, not supporting Sunni Muslim terrorists. But instead, practicing diplomacy, brokering a peace, closing down a torture center, putting its money into education, biomedical science, infrastructure and jobs, etc.
And then I wake up!
Not bombing or invading a country, not subverting a government, no setting up embargoes, not destabilizing a region, not supporting Sunni Muslim terrorists. But instead, practicing diplomacy, brokering a peace, closing down a torture center, putting its money into education, biomedical science, infrastructure and jobs, etc.
And then I wake up!
10
So, the US helped the bloody coup in US and now thinks the conflict it created is not hot enough? Help Ukraine army kill more Ukrainians!
6
The Russians have the whip hand in this war. They don't have to invest a great deal of men and material just enough to keep the pot simmering thus keeping the Ukraine economy on its back. Any US arms shipped into Ukraine can be easily offset by Russia.
Kiev thinks the EU and especially Germany with its deep pockets should pump money into their coffers but both the EU and Germany while giving lip service to Kiev have no intention of serious investment in such a corrupt shattered country at war. They might as well burn the money in an incinerator or bail out Greece to more effect.
If Poroshenko is waiting for NATO and sanctions to ride to the rescue he may have a long wait. Moscow seems determined to make sure that Ukraine does not become a part of NATO and most if not all of NATO agrees with this. His best course is to meet with Merkel and Putin in a neutral location and hammer out an agreement.
The US should not be a part of these negotiations since this is primarily an eastern European matter and the Americans are incapable of being honest brokers over this issue because they have a different and more antagonistic agenda regarding Russia and will be happy to fight to the last Ukrainian.
Kiev thinks the EU and especially Germany with its deep pockets should pump money into their coffers but both the EU and Germany while giving lip service to Kiev have no intention of serious investment in such a corrupt shattered country at war. They might as well burn the money in an incinerator or bail out Greece to more effect.
If Poroshenko is waiting for NATO and sanctions to ride to the rescue he may have a long wait. Moscow seems determined to make sure that Ukraine does not become a part of NATO and most if not all of NATO agrees with this. His best course is to meet with Merkel and Putin in a neutral location and hammer out an agreement.
The US should not be a part of these negotiations since this is primarily an eastern European matter and the Americans are incapable of being honest brokers over this issue because they have a different and more antagonistic agenda regarding Russia and will be happy to fight to the last Ukrainian.
6
Give the weapons to the Ukrainians by giving them to the Poles who will
sell them on loan to the Ukrainians. If expertise in using weapons is
required, send in experts. The Poles fly F-16s. Use their expertise. The Russians used "volunteer" pilots
against us in Vietnam. We did not go to war over that. We should
supply volunteer pilots to bust up the tanks Russia is massing
on Ukrainian territory. If these simple steps are not taken, then Kiev
will fall. The brave defenders who held out in the Donyets airport for three
months had no food supplies and a lack of ammunition. If the Russians
are allowed to get away with this, then what is to stop them for moving'against NATO territory? Then, by treaty, we will be at war with Russia,
sell them on loan to the Ukrainians. If expertise in using weapons is
required, send in experts. The Poles fly F-16s. Use their expertise. The Russians used "volunteer" pilots
against us in Vietnam. We did not go to war over that. We should
supply volunteer pilots to bust up the tanks Russia is massing
on Ukrainian territory. If these simple steps are not taken, then Kiev
will fall. The brave defenders who held out in the Donyets airport for three
months had no food supplies and a lack of ammunition. If the Russians
are allowed to get away with this, then what is to stop them for moving'against NATO territory? Then, by treaty, we will be at war with Russia,
Sending in more weapons only produces more war. The US needs to look to its own growing incapacity to govern itself to understand the problems of Ukraine.
6
US and NY Times think Ukrainian Nazi government needs help for their struggling ethnic cleansing project. More US taxpayer funds urgently needed to keep the killing going.
10
Trying to get a grip here. Washington insists without proof {except hearsay from Kiev and NATO's constant cry of wolf} that Russia is supplying arms and constantly invading Ukraine. So now Washington is OPENLY considering to commit the very same crime they are accusing Russia of committing, by supplying arms and personnel to their chosen side? Is that it in a nutshell?
17
Well considering that NATO is giving Kiev tons of weapons what would be expected of the other side. Maybe people think bullets and weapons just appear by magic. The reality is that the average american does not care and is to dumb to pick out where this conflict is happening on a map.
1
There's plenty of proofs of Russia invading Ukraine's Crimea and Donbass. But some people only watching Kremlin news, God help them.
2
Oh yes, the Russian Invasion. Well the only invasion that has occurred in Ukraine is by a strike-force of taxpayer funded neo-cons from the State Department that have bought a coup d'état for the benefit of everything that this country pretends to oppose. Somehow, sometime, hopefully before these ideologues set our world on fire we can find reasonable, rational executives of policy to begin to extricate this nation from its destructive obsessions.
2
TICK. TICK. TICK. TICK
Sounds like a count down to war!
Remember WW1 and WW2. One stupid move after another that led to more than 70 million unnecessary deaths. With today's weapons we should easily get that up to more than a billion people killed. When will they ever learn?
TICK. TICK. TICK. TICK
Sounds like a count down to war!
Remember WW1 and WW2. One stupid move after another that led to more than 70 million unnecessary deaths. With today's weapons we should easily get that up to more than a billion people killed. When will they ever learn?
TICK. TICK. TICK. TICK
6
I think that economic sanctions are our primary leverage, and should be tightened even further against Russia. However, we must also provide Ukraine with direct military support. Yes, that will play into Putin's propaganda against the West, but Putin understands only direct force... economic sanctions will do nothing to threaten the billions he has absconded from the poverty reduced Russian people during his rein in the Kremlin. So the demise of his economy means little to him when his hold on power is firm. He leads with bravado, and appreciates only those who respond to him with direct force. Let his invading troops begin facing US technology on the battlefield, instead of the currently over-matched Ukrainian weaponry. Combined with sanctions that has the potential for changing Putin's tune.
1
Ukranians: Why shouldn't ethnic Russians in Ukraine control their own destiny? If you held a plebiscite in Eastern Ukraine, what would the results indicate? I think something that you do not like, but must accept. Your best option is to negotiate a border directly with Putin, and give the people of Russian descent control over their own destiny. And then join EU (those bureaucrats in Brussels would love to send German money to rehabilitate you).
Debaltseve is too small a nail for us to bother with, so is Eastern Ukraine, so is Ukraine for that matter. You had monarchs once, now you have robber barons. Take care of it yourself. The fact that two of your regimes have basically stolen everything you have - tells us you are not ready for anything worthy of a response from us. Please hear this clearly: there is no way that I want a single American life to be sacrificed to help you foster another kleptocratic regime. Not one. Period. We can see what is going on in Hungary. And because Russia is not Serbia, we will not wage an air campaign.
If I saw Kerry visiting Kiev while sitting in Russia, I would find it hard no to guffaw. There could not be a more powerful sign of our effete response. And rest assured that I will lobby my elected representatives hard to keep us out your messes. The sacrifice made by Americans in keeping sanity around the world is beyond the tipping point now; grow up and look after yourself.
Kalidan
Debaltseve is too small a nail for us to bother with, so is Eastern Ukraine, so is Ukraine for that matter. You had monarchs once, now you have robber barons. Take care of it yourself. The fact that two of your regimes have basically stolen everything you have - tells us you are not ready for anything worthy of a response from us. Please hear this clearly: there is no way that I want a single American life to be sacrificed to help you foster another kleptocratic regime. Not one. Period. We can see what is going on in Hungary. And because Russia is not Serbia, we will not wage an air campaign.
If I saw Kerry visiting Kiev while sitting in Russia, I would find it hard no to guffaw. There could not be a more powerful sign of our effete response. And rest assured that I will lobby my elected representatives hard to keep us out your messes. The sacrifice made by Americans in keeping sanity around the world is beyond the tipping point now; grow up and look after yourself.
Kalidan
2
"Lethal assistance" is related to war powers and the question of where the actual authority resides to decide on war or peace for the U.S. is far from settled: There exists a de jure restriction on the right of both Congress and the President to authorize an offensive war. That restriction is contained in the provision of the UN Charter that forbids offensive war and authorizes only a defensive war for all member nations and only for a limited time. After that prescribed time all UN members require approval of the UN Security Council to wage war.
Most importantly for the US, the UN Charter is an approved Treaty ratified by the Senate, and specifically empowered by the requisite votes in both houses of Congress. Therefore, according to the US Supremacy Clause, the UN Charter, as a lawfully approved and empowered Treaty is "the supreme Law of the Land" (Article VI, Par. 2).
Any time that five (5) US Supreme Court Justices are willing to uphold the war powers provisions of the UN Charter, the U.S. will be stopped -- legally -- from waging war outside the restrictions of the UN Charter without the approval of the UN Security Council.
Goldwater v. Carter would, of course, permit the president to abrogate the UN Treaty in its entirety without the consent of anyone -- including Congress. Would it not be wiser, however, to mitigate this little known restriction on US war making powers via a Constitutional Amendment before the Security Council gains final de facto authority?
Most importantly for the US, the UN Charter is an approved Treaty ratified by the Senate, and specifically empowered by the requisite votes in both houses of Congress. Therefore, according to the US Supremacy Clause, the UN Charter, as a lawfully approved and empowered Treaty is "the supreme Law of the Land" (Article VI, Par. 2).
Any time that five (5) US Supreme Court Justices are willing to uphold the war powers provisions of the UN Charter, the U.S. will be stopped -- legally -- from waging war outside the restrictions of the UN Charter without the approval of the UN Security Council.
Goldwater v. Carter would, of course, permit the president to abrogate the UN Treaty in its entirety without the consent of anyone -- including Congress. Would it not be wiser, however, to mitigate this little known restriction on US war making powers via a Constitutional Amendment before the Security Council gains final de facto authority?
1
This USA initiative is essential. Not only Ukraine, all of Europe is at stake. Russia claims this new step is "pouring gasoline on the fire", Zeit reports. Russia claims only Ukrainians fight there but lies and disinformation are official Russian policy advocated by Russia army chief Gerasimov's alarming speech in Nov. 2013. Russia smarts from the loss of the old USSR empire which includes the Baltics, Poland, Romania, the Check and Slovak Republics and Hungary. Now Ukraine! Russia wants back its old soviet glory, but behind that lies a centuries old anti-western sentiment. The broader environment is world instability which Russia also instrumentalises in its favor. So extreme vigilance and action are essential. The USA can no longer afford to wait and see. The dream for a prosperous, peaceful Europe is now fought over in Ukraine. Merkel will now visit Ottawa and Washington. Europe knows the danger and Europe with Germany at the helm will support the USA, never mind the Greeks, Hollande and other left- and right-leaning Europeans like the French National Front who oppose even a hint of anti-Russia action. They do not know what they do. Europe is in danger and it is appropriate to be "in Sorge", to be "concerned" as ex German chancellor Helmut Kohl said in his new book. Let's get real! The Baltics and Poland were correct with their alarmist position since the very outbreak of the Ukraine conflict and the Krimia annexation. It is high time we resist Russian aggression.
1
Ukraine, like much of Eastern Europe, has suffered more than its share of hardship from ancient through modern times. Its culture perhaps reflects the historical eastern European tug of war between asian and occidental influences, between republic and empire, or sovereignty and colonialism.
In interview after interview reported of its people in the media, it appears the citizenry is not so much obsessed with who is in power, but whether they can survive who is in power. Most of all, they want peace - regardless of who is delegating it.
To supply a questionably legitimate current Ukrainian government with the means to counter-escalate a conflict with neighboring Russia is, firstly, not in the best interests of peace-loving Ukrainian citizenry. Secondly, neither NATO nor the U.S. has any business meddling in affairs so close to the Russian heartland.
In 1962 we already went to the very edge of WWIII with our response to Russian meddling in Cuba, a country with which we share no borders. How can we expect the Russians, who have a common border with Ukraine, to react to our pseudo-altruistic meddling?
In interview after interview reported of its people in the media, it appears the citizenry is not so much obsessed with who is in power, but whether they can survive who is in power. Most of all, they want peace - regardless of who is delegating it.
To supply a questionably legitimate current Ukrainian government with the means to counter-escalate a conflict with neighboring Russia is, firstly, not in the best interests of peace-loving Ukrainian citizenry. Secondly, neither NATO nor the U.S. has any business meddling in affairs so close to the Russian heartland.
In 1962 we already went to the very edge of WWIII with our response to Russian meddling in Cuba, a country with which we share no borders. How can we expect the Russians, who have a common border with Ukraine, to react to our pseudo-altruistic meddling?
6
Even the playing field--- at least partially. Russia is actually providing troops; we can help the legitimate government by supplying tools.
This seems so silly. Why don't we just blow up some of the mysterious 'equipment' that has appeared in Eastern Ukraine, and then deny any knowledge or responsibility. It's not Russian equipment? No problem, those weren't US missiles. We admire patriotic Ukrainians fighting to defend the unity of their historic homeland.
This would be the perfect time for our Chinese friends to reclaim the formerly disputed lands on the Russia-China border. Surely the Kremlin would understand China's invading its neighbor to protect its sphere of influence?
Following our military catastrophes of the past fifteen years in which we have set the entire Middle East aflame without accomplishing anything beyond the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the displacement of millions and the destruction of the infrastructure of the entire area, it is beyond comprehension that a few blind people are calling for more of it in places where we have no hope at all of achieving anything. The hubris! The hubris of it all!
8
People like Michèle A. Flournoy have never seen what a war does and consequently such folks should never be in policy making positions where they do not have any operational experience esp in places where people get killed. I have had 20mm shells land in my front yard fired from an aircraft. My father was severely injured in war, injured by "friendly" fire. It is a very difficult and horrifying situation: 45 years later I shiver at the thought of what my life would have been if he had died because of those injuries.
The United States should really mind its own business and not create scenarios where Russia would really flex its muscle overtly. The question I ask: Is the United States going to fight a war with Russia? I can say with high degree of certainty that it will do no such thing and neither will any of its allies go on such adventures. My friends in the US tell me of the crumbling infrastructure, poor governmental services... ad infinitum: perhaps a bit more focus on internal issues is in order.
The United States should really mind its own business and not create scenarios where Russia would really flex its muscle overtly. The question I ask: Is the United States going to fight a war with Russia? I can say with high degree of certainty that it will do no such thing and neither will any of its allies go on such adventures. My friends in the US tell me of the crumbling infrastructure, poor governmental services... ad infinitum: perhaps a bit more focus on internal issues is in order.
6
The people who violently overthrew a legitimate and democratically elected government in Kiev lit a fire they now cannot extinguish.
Providing more weaponry could and likely would eventually result in a nuclear standoff.
More effort needs to be expended on finding common ground and less on the never ending political goading and misinformation that has now become a media art form.
Providing more weaponry could and likely would eventually result in a nuclear standoff.
More effort needs to be expended on finding common ground and less on the never ending political goading and misinformation that has now become a media art form.
5
There's really no stopping the megalomaniacs in Washington DC (Vietnam, Iran, Panama, Grenada, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc, etc.). So let's get on with WWIII and be done with it. Kind of like a global Super Bowl. except we'll all be "participating" and not just watching.
2
Considers? They're already there. And more on the way--and not just arms. Surely as fine an organization as the Times can provide higher level intelligence and reporting.
2
They are there unofficially, so it doesn't count where it applies to Nato. The Times can't openly state unverified statements about US and Nato unless the editor wants to see how being unemployed feels like.
3
According to this article a major Ukrainian General in Kiev has just come out with a statement declaring that no Russian troops have been involved helping the separatists in Eastern Ukraine:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40860.htm
Perhaps the most prudent steps would be to take a "fact-finding" mission into the area first, then develop an appropriate policy.
I saw a video recently of a lawmaker in Kiev inside their parliament trying to ascertain Victoria Nuland's actions PRIOR to the coup in Kiev where the entire time he was speaking he was being shouted down. This happened in December of 2013!!
The nuclear clock has recently been moved up to three minutes to midnight. The average people on Earth want truth, justice and peace...not a nuclear conflagration between the United States and Russia.
It is time for some truth not more murdering, destruction, lies and deceit.
All the people on this planet deserve better.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40860.htm
Perhaps the most prudent steps would be to take a "fact-finding" mission into the area first, then develop an appropriate policy.
I saw a video recently of a lawmaker in Kiev inside their parliament trying to ascertain Victoria Nuland's actions PRIOR to the coup in Kiev where the entire time he was speaking he was being shouted down. This happened in December of 2013!!
The nuclear clock has recently been moved up to three minutes to midnight. The average people on Earth want truth, justice and peace...not a nuclear conflagration between the United States and Russia.
It is time for some truth not more murdering, destruction, lies and deceit.
All the people on this planet deserve better.
7
O. K. If the US supplying weapons Ukraine what are the options for Russia. 1. Give American captured weapons. 2 Put the latest weapons, it is much more powerful than NATO. Weapons will be with the rebels after 2 hours, from the moment the team.
1
This is an amazingly detailed report of the fighting in Ukraine, but U.S. troops are not needed and would not be helpful as they would only muddy the water.
While NYT has provided a great deal of the history of the region I believe that the only relevant information deals with what is happening today, since the fighting began.
There is a sizable majority of Russians and Russian speaking people in Ukraine who desire independent rule or annexation
by Russia.
The Russians and the Ukrainians want the same things. Ukraine will allow the breakaway area to have self rule without secession from Ukraine and the Ukrainians say that an independent area is acceptable to them as long as it remains part of Ukraine. So what are they fighting about. This hostility could be resolved if both sides sit down to talk.
No outside interference will further the ultimate peace between these parties.
While NYT has provided a great deal of the history of the region I believe that the only relevant information deals with what is happening today, since the fighting began.
There is a sizable majority of Russians and Russian speaking people in Ukraine who desire independent rule or annexation
by Russia.
The Russians and the Ukrainians want the same things. Ukraine will allow the breakaway area to have self rule without secession from Ukraine and the Ukrainians say that an independent area is acceptable to them as long as it remains part of Ukraine. So what are they fighting about. This hostility could be resolved if both sides sit down to talk.
No outside interference will further the ultimate peace between these parties.
6
Providing lethal military aid to Ukraine would be a strategic mistake with grave consequences not only for the US and European continent but also for the entire world. It would be foolish because the US and EU are not willing to suffer the consequences of war and Americans and Europeans have no political will for it. It would be madness because Ukraine is not worth to plunge into an escalation of a local war with the Ukrainian having divided loyalty.
9
The happiest people in all this will be the military industrial complex. Who else is going to make big bucks out of peoples suffering? Voting for freedom is an illusion because the choice is not between good and bad but between bad and the fear that there is something possibly worse. Putin may be a psychopath but what the west is offering is narcissus. Keep wishing for Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy.
7
I don't think that it was a good decision to intrude into the war with Russia and Ukraine, at all. Russia is even using the tank they used in World War 2; they are SERIOUS about this war. It could've been much, much better to "watch them fight." Couldn't President Obama just think even once more before claiming to interupt? If North Korea is upset about this, then this war might turn into a huge "mess" again.
1
The State Department is in pretty sorry shape when it tolerates a bad actor like Victoria Nuland , who is a principal author of the chaos in the former Ukraine, and set this whole war train in motion. Apparently she's still around, floating foolish ideas like this. The feckless Obama puts up with it, as these neocons and neoliberals have some kind of hold on him. These people do not understand the Russian people or Putin, and they have no military sense whatsoever. They think financial warfare - sanctions - will bring the designated "enemy" to his knees and genuflecting before their superior wisdom. If that doesn't work, how about some really crippling sanctions, and, if Putin and the Russians don't respond, how about progressively arming our picked good guys including the neonazis in Ukraine? How about some American "advisors" and maybe a no-fly zone? They really totally misjudge the Bear. Risk nuclear war with the Russians over a civil war in Ukraine?
11
Remove Russia from Swift. Period. End of game financially. The Russian people can only stand a certain degree of pain. That move before weapons.
1
There is a difference between selling Ukraine weapons that will help resist a conventional Russian invasion (radars, anti-tank missiles, etc.) and weapons that could potentially be used against civilians (even inadvertently in its counter-insurgency.)
The US should provide Ukraine with the former, unless you are one of those Putin apologists who see Ukraine lying prostrate before Russia has the proper state of affairs. The US should not provide Ukraine with the latter, which would only give Putin ammunition in the arena of public opinion.
It's a compromise solution that will most likely leave no one happy, but it will help prevent Russia from leveraging the possibility of the conventional invasion for its advantage.
The US should provide Ukraine with the former, unless you are one of those Putin apologists who see Ukraine lying prostrate before Russia has the proper state of affairs. The US should not provide Ukraine with the latter, which would only give Putin ammunition in the arena of public opinion.
It's a compromise solution that will most likely leave no one happy, but it will help prevent Russia from leveraging the possibility of the conventional invasion for its advantage.
1
there is nothing you can use against a tank that won't kill people
We have no business to interfere in Ukraine. Let Europeans deal with it. It is apparent that Putin does not want another Nato alliance on his border. I sometimes have the feeling we want to start 3rd world war. Very very scary. Why do we have to get involve on a regular basis with overseas conflicts. We have already spend billions of dollars? That money we need in this country to create jobs and provide free education. Eastern Ukraine is Russian speaking volks and if they want to join Russia let them do so. I guess the whole issue is about the control of the natural gas rather than anything else.
9
The real aims of the contestants remain somewhat clouded BUT supplies of new lethal arms are certain to cause more suffering to millions of good and innocent people....
4
I'm not supporting a banker's coup in a foreign land. It's not happening!
4
First, arms. Then, perhaps, 'advisors'. Does anyone recall that progression the last time around, and just how much of a brilliant success it turned out to be? Jes' sayin', as we say down heah in the South.
6
The only thing we know for sure if we do this is that a lot of people are going to die. Let's not have another Taliban here if we can avoid it like that we bolstered in Afghanistan in the 80s against the Soviets.
2
The United States of America has no immediate national security issue in the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Our nation is located in the Western Hemisphere. European NATO, on the other hand, most likely does. The European Union and European NATO comprise basically the same political, economic and (potential) military footprint. 500 million people with a GDP that rivals our own. Any intervention should be lead from NATO countries in the European region. (Most specifically Germany. The largest economy.) Assuming a failure to act from that quarter, and a negative result for the Greater European area, the US should consider the mandatory one year notice (Article 13) of withdrawal from NATO.
4
Using Russian troops as "volunteers" on vacation is not original to Putin or the Soviet Union. The practice of sending troops disguised as workers of various descriptions into sovereign territories was used by Nicholas I, Alexander II, Alexander III, and Nicholas II. It worked in breaking Bulgaria, Romania, Moldova, etc. from the Ottoman Empire, and grabbing ALL the "Stans" from native rulers. Nicholas II was finally caught by the Japanese sending troops into Manchuria disguised as railroad construction workers. That led to the Russo-Japanese War and the rebellion against the Czarist regime in 1905. There are lessons here and you don't need a Harvard degree in Underwater Basketweaving to see them.
1
More weapons mean more war, more war and more civilian deaths. When will the U.S. learn to keep its nose out of other people's business??? For more than half a century the US has used the Russians/USSR as the bogey man for any number of ills around the world. Imagine, that instead of supplying weapons we were aggressively seeking to end this conflict by respectful dialogue with the Russians and the Ukrainian separatists. Imagine. What would the world be like if the US could shed itself of its need to always have the Russians as our enemies? How many world conflicts could be solved? And, tell me, exactly when, if ever, the Russians have attacked the US? And, we need to remember, please, that it was our proxy war with the Russians that got us into Afghanistan--we didn't want to let them win there, so we got involved to drive them out. Well, we all know how that is turning out--going on and on and on. I say, let the Russians have their wars if they want them. What we need to do is take the high road and try to end these conflicts by diplomacy, not more weaponry. But, we won't, most likely. WE love the WAR INDUSTRY too much. Sadly, we need our bogey man, and Russia it is.
7
Putin is a problem for the world, not just Ukraine. I doubt that the Russian people really support Putin's aggression. It is time for more direct support of Ukraine, including Crimea where it appears those once in favor of Russia's presence are now questioning Putin's actions in Crimea. At the very least there should be Peace Keeping Forces in Ukraine with the mission of sorting out fact and fiction. My opinion, if you believe that Putin is providing "little green men" and weapons to Separatists then provide military weapons to Ukraine and consider more.
Russia is reeling from the drop in oil prices.
Wouldn't it make more sense to hit them economically where thy already have an open bleeding wound?
Wouldn't it make more sense to hit them economically where thy already have an open bleeding wound?
A guns and butter,govt lover,like Obama is sure to be up to doing anything that expands the role of govt,domestic and foreign.With RINO Republicans big on defense,seems like we will end up involved in another war.
2
Giving Ukraine offensive weapons is a waste of time and resources that will not change the eventual outcome of the conflict- whatever that will be. If we want to stop Russian aggression in Ukraine, we will have to meet it with our own aggression.
My vote- lets sit this one out. Ukraine has never been a friend to the US.
My vote- lets sit this one out. Ukraine has never been a friend to the US.
5
A Democrat president putting American lives at risk with a ramp up to war with a nuclear armed Russia? Can't get much crazier than that.
11
What is the vital national security interest of the USA to involve itself further in a conflict in Ukraine? None that I know of which would justify raising the military tension level with Russia and inviting dangerous confrontation. The USA has not nearly exhausted the range of sanctions it could deploy to further pressure the Russians to desist. For example, Russia still has access to the SWIFT international payment network. Cutting that off could be a far more effective deterrent than fueling more warfare in Eastern Europe, especially as the Russian economy is already imploding due to the reduction of oil prices and existing sanctions. I applaud the President's caution and hope it continues while other potentially superior tactics are deployed to discourage Russia from continuing to support these separatist forces.
2
Banks not tanks. Continue to out-produce Russia and flood the market with cheap oil. Cripple Russia economically while arming and supporting our Ukrainian partners.
No weapons will help this demoralized Ukrainian army. According to the latest reports in European media (no available here, of course, as we have "free" press - free to publish what White House tells you) - the latest mobilization resulted in 80% of eligible to be drafted men to flee the country!
How can the weapons help when there's nobody who's willing to press the trigger for the mother Ukraine?
And giving weapons to Ukraine will just play into Putin's hands of even more openly supporting the separatists (that by the way have no less cause with them than people of Kosovo or South Sudan.)
It's a loss loss situation for NATO, US, and EU.
Putin will win in the end - a year, or three from now there will be a pro-Russian government in Ukraine again.
Just look at the map and read the history book.
How can the weapons help when there's nobody who's willing to press the trigger for the mother Ukraine?
And giving weapons to Ukraine will just play into Putin's hands of even more openly supporting the separatists (that by the way have no less cause with them than people of Kosovo or South Sudan.)
It's a loss loss situation for NATO, US, and EU.
Putin will win in the end - a year, or three from now there will be a pro-Russian government in Ukraine again.
Just look at the map and read the history book.
6
PUTIN is a DICTATOR and one simply does NOT allow dictators to get away with invading neighboring countries and occupying their territory. This is one of the lessons of WWII. The issue becomes WHO should stand up to him? Pity the "so-called" Europeans have the backbone of a jellyfish. If they won't take a firm stand one wonders why we should do so. OK: discuss amongst yourselves.
2
Can anyone really believe that expanding the proxy war between the U.S. and Russia will serve the cause of peace?
13
To the President: Are you out of your mind!
15
Lethal arms. Against whom will my (since I'm a citizen and a taxpayer) lethal arms be used? Eastern Ukrainian civilians.
I (and apparently most NYT readers) am dead set against this warmongering intervention by Wall Street, the Pentagon and the fool Obama.
I (and apparently most NYT readers) am dead set against this warmongering intervention by Wall Street, the Pentagon and the fool Obama.
13
No, no, no.
The Ukrainians have been shelling civilian sectors of Donetsk for months.
Keep out of this.
The Ukrainians have been shelling civilian sectors of Donetsk for months.
Keep out of this.
14
Not taking sides, just think both sides are dirty and the US and allies should not give their support to either one. It seems obvious that the rebels/Russians have been up to no good either shelling Mariupol, probably in eye-for-an-eye reprisal. Getting bogged down in this hampers our foreign policy and has no advantages for us.
2
Google Mariupol massacre that occurred last May. Local police tried to defend local citizens but new government appointed police objected.
1
That's what your Kremlin bosses told you to post here. We all know that actually Russia is supplying troops, mercenaries, and armaments to turn East Ukraine into rubbish and cripple Ukraine's economy. We also remember Russia's Buk missile that killed the passengers of MH17.
Since President Obama has decided to go to war with Russia now, renewing the Cold War, and encouraging a new Sino-Russian alliance for self defence, I guess he plans to surpass President Bush as the worst President ever.
9
I look forward to the U.S. getting involved in another overseas conflict it can't win. Perhaps, we can put ground troops in Ukraine after we exhaust the solutions involving advisers, Special Ops forces, and drones. Oh, wait. I am mixing up our Syria strategy with this conflict. At least, we can spend a few more billion dollars in military aid in the Ukraine so the Pentagon can keep getting its giant portion of our annual budget. Fortunately, our roads, bridges, social services and education funding are all in no need of budget cash.
10
This, sadly, seems to be the MO for this administration. Avoid any involvement or aid at the beginning until the situation reaches critical mass - and what could have been nipped in the bud or minimized, reaches epidemic proportions.
Syria, ISIS, Ukraine, Boko Haram...
This "sticking your head in the sand and hope it goes away" approach is making the world a much more unstable and dangerous place...
Syria, ISIS, Ukraine, Boko Haram...
This "sticking your head in the sand and hope it goes away" approach is making the world a much more unstable and dangerous place...
6
This administration CAUSED Ukraine crisis
3
DONT DO IT WW111
11
Why not, America? Arm the world!
“God created war so that Americans would learn geography.” ~ MARK TWAIN
“God created war so that Americans would learn geography.” ~ MARK TWAIN
12
Ukraine requires defensive weapons that are deterrents and that can stop tanks in their tracks. Negotiations are vital but defending Ukraine a border state to Russia is vital to western Europe. Watch out Europe Mr. Putin could come marching into Paris with his Generals one day!
To those Russia and Putin apologists here, I want to mention one phrase of Sergei Brin, the co-founder of Google, in which he expressed his gratitude to his father: "Thank you for taking us all out of Russia." We Ukrainians agree with Mr. Brin wholeheartedly. We've been "out of Russia" for decades and have absolutely no desire for them to take us back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Brin#Early_life_and_education
2
US has no business arming yet another nation! Ukraine is none of our business! Pot calling the kettle black. US invaded most of Central America at one time or another, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, and countless others.
We have bases in over 150 countries on the planet!
This Administration and 'so called' leaders should focus on OUR country and leave Russia and Putin alone! Our glass house is very big!
We have bases in over 150 countries on the planet!
This Administration and 'so called' leaders should focus on OUR country and leave Russia and Putin alone! Our glass house is very big!
11
What would Russia do if we were to annex Canada or Mexico and Central America? We have to stop sometime and mind our business here. The very best thing we can do is to halt the arms flow. Those who want to fight will always find a way but we and other civilized people don't have to load their guns.
War benefits no one.
Like everyone else, even the shortsighted manufacturers of death have kids who they don't want to mourn before their time. We all have to wake up and confront this failing madness and we'd better do it by November of 2016.
War benefits no one.
Like everyone else, even the shortsighted manufacturers of death have kids who they don't want to mourn before their time. We all have to wake up and confront this failing madness and we'd better do it by November of 2016.
Oh good, another war. Just what we need. Let me ask the obvious: the war is in central Europe. Are the Europeans going to fight it, or let us do it for them? Are we just War Daddy to them?
3
In my deep opinion and critical assessment, USG should still decide not to 'give' lethal munitions or weapon systems to Ukraine at this time. Perhaps if selling certain stores and equipment on fair market, it's different, but arguably not give. There's a difference. Where USG could arguably continue to assist current Ukrainian nation-state, is with more comprehensive field-hospital-type material aid - more than the previously donated first aid kits. That and perhaps micro, field-operated surveillance drones, radios and even artillery directional finding radars? But even more critical aid could be contemplated in form of strategic economic and industrial-supportive aid with far-greater benefit and impact to security of sovereign Ukraine. How about loan guarantees for certain energy-related infrastructure, including LNG and also alternative-energy production, e.g. small wind turbines? And how about something totally outside the box too? Contemplate something along the lines of construction of a natural-gas powered turbine manufacturing facility in Ukraine?!? Natural-gas powered electrical generation turbines could then be bought (on loan) to power Ukrainian demand and also be sold (exported) regionally and globally, with said Ukraine subsidiary being a new manufacturing supply hub?? Just my views. Respects to all and keep hope for a transition from brutal war/separatist solution, to a political solution to negotiated, co-existing new-Ukraine settlement..
Well, Nicaragua v. USA is the leading case as far as Russias involvement in the East of the Ukraine is concerned. Was this US aggression? No! Because the "little green men" could decide forthemselves what they wanted to do. It was THEIR civil war in Nicaragua. So please dont speak of Russian agression, think of the contras. And try to understand the history of the Ukraine.
3
This is Ukraine's hour of need. Russia is not only violating Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity but is threatening the security and stability of all of eastern Europe.
In 1994 the U.S. and Britain gave Ukraine security assurances when Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons.
Sanctions and international condemnation have not stopped Russian aggression against Ukraine. It is therefore quite proper and desirable for the U.S. to assist Ukraine with defensive weaponry. This would not mean that the U.S. is militarily engaged against Russia, but means that the newly democratic Ukraine has a better chance of defending its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In 1994 the U.S. and Britain gave Ukraine security assurances when Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons.
Sanctions and international condemnation have not stopped Russian aggression against Ukraine. It is therefore quite proper and desirable for the U.S. to assist Ukraine with defensive weaponry. This would not mean that the U.S. is militarily engaged against Russia, but means that the newly democratic Ukraine has a better chance of defending its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.
1
No aid. Period. Stay away. Keep giving Pakistan our bullets. Ahh... that feels better.
2
Bad decision. Shame on the US foreign policy. Shame on all you of us who support that. I was born and raised in Crimea and all people I know there were very happy to be part of Russia. I've been there twice since April of 2014. I know what East Ukraine feels. US supported overthrowing legal president Yankovich and puts Poroshenko instead of him. What did US officials do in Kiev during Maidan? We all have seen Nuland who was giving cookies to Ukrainians... US brought that misery into Ukraine. Ukraine is just a tool to bring Russia down. That will not happen... Putin shows too much patience with US officials, but there will be a point of no return soon... where nobody wins... and it is really coming...
8
Putin has told us that the breakup of the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact was the greatesst 20th Century geopoloitical tragedy. He has repeatedly acted to amelliorate its effects and to create a buffer as he is doing now.
As an old intelligence officer, Colonel Putin acts on a correlation of forces. If the price or risk gets too high, he will back down. Arming the Ukraine and the Baltic Republics while encouraging the Poles, and other recent NATO members to support Ukraine will change the correlation of forces and restrain Russian acts. Likewise bringing a brigade of the 3rd Armored Division back to Germany or Poland would signal our resolve. Alas, that is not in this Administration's DNA.
As an old intelligence officer, Colonel Putin acts on a correlation of forces. If the price or risk gets too high, he will back down. Arming the Ukraine and the Baltic Republics while encouraging the Poles, and other recent NATO members to support Ukraine will change the correlation of forces and restrain Russian acts. Likewise bringing a brigade of the 3rd Armored Division back to Germany or Poland would signal our resolve. Alas, that is not in this Administration's DNA.
Putin is fighting for his life, and this "war" serves 2 purposes for Putin:
1) Excuse for dropping standard of living - prior to Crimea the Russian economy was already faltering, probably negative growth even, and Putins ratings were around 25%. Now Putin has 80%+ ratings and an external excuse for the bad economy.
2) Scare people to prevent regime change - the Russian people will now associate "regime change" with civil war and social / economic disruption, and of course will not protest against the increasing authoritarianism, loss of freedom and economic decline of his failed policies.
So what can the Free World do? Make disruption in Ukraine as painful as possible for Putin. The most powerful force in Russia are Moms, and if they see that their sons are being sent to die in Ukraine, they fear nothing and will protest. The Ukrainian military has been gutted for the last 20 years, and does not have the weaponry to make a stand against an armored or trained enemy. So defensive weaponry is critical to stop Russian aggression in Ukraine.
Second, Ukraine has been robbed by its leaders for the last 20 years, and now is facing a larger, meaner and better trained enemy. The Free World needs to do all possible to support the fledgling efforts that are underway to reduce corruption and foster rule of law.
The Ukrainian people risked their lives to throw off one tyrant. Now they need a little help to stop another. The Free World should give them that help.
1) Excuse for dropping standard of living - prior to Crimea the Russian economy was already faltering, probably negative growth even, and Putins ratings were around 25%. Now Putin has 80%+ ratings and an external excuse for the bad economy.
2) Scare people to prevent regime change - the Russian people will now associate "regime change" with civil war and social / economic disruption, and of course will not protest against the increasing authoritarianism, loss of freedom and economic decline of his failed policies.
So what can the Free World do? Make disruption in Ukraine as painful as possible for Putin. The most powerful force in Russia are Moms, and if they see that their sons are being sent to die in Ukraine, they fear nothing and will protest. The Ukrainian military has been gutted for the last 20 years, and does not have the weaponry to make a stand against an armored or trained enemy. So defensive weaponry is critical to stop Russian aggression in Ukraine.
Second, Ukraine has been robbed by its leaders for the last 20 years, and now is facing a larger, meaner and better trained enemy. The Free World needs to do all possible to support the fledgling efforts that are underway to reduce corruption and foster rule of law.
The Ukrainian people risked their lives to throw off one tyrant. Now they need a little help to stop another. The Free World should give them that help.
3
Why can't the US just send over Victoria Nuland to hand out more cookies?
How do you provide "defensive weapons" to a military that has been attacking civilian areas, in a fashion that looks a bit like an effort at ethnic cleansing?
Does the US have defensive private mercenaries from Xe on the ground, in addition to military "advisors"?
Why is the United States free to help overthrow an elected government nowhere near its borders, free to help the new putsch regime attack its own citizens, and free to aggressively expand NATO?
Is the idea that it is not aggression, or terrorism, or war crime when the US Hegemon does it?
Isn't that propaganda?
And isn't most of the mainstream corporate media spin on this crisis?
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaga...
You bet it is - too often, newspapers are writing stories as if CIA advisers had right to final edit as well as initial consultation on 'narrative.'
How do you provide "defensive weapons" to a military that has been attacking civilian areas, in a fashion that looks a bit like an effort at ethnic cleansing?
Does the US have defensive private mercenaries from Xe on the ground, in addition to military "advisors"?
Why is the United States free to help overthrow an elected government nowhere near its borders, free to help the new putsch regime attack its own citizens, and free to aggressively expand NATO?
Is the idea that it is not aggression, or terrorism, or war crime when the US Hegemon does it?
Isn't that propaganda?
And isn't most of the mainstream corporate media spin on this crisis?
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaga...
You bet it is - too often, newspapers are writing stories as if CIA advisers had right to final edit as well as initial consultation on 'narrative.'
7
This is a Russian invasion, directly and by proxy, plain and simple. Ukrainians want to remain a single independent country. Pew Global Attitudes 2014 poll found that even in Eastern Ukraine only 18% favor allowing secession. Even among Russian speakers in the East the results were 57% in favor of remaining united and 27% in favor of secession. http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/08/despite-concerns-about-governance-uk...
The world should join with the US in giving Ukraine the means to defend itself while tightening sanctions on Putin's kleptocratic inner circle.
The world should join with the US in giving Ukraine the means to defend itself while tightening sanctions on Putin's kleptocratic inner circle.
This is about autonomy of those regions who were disenfranchised when the elected president was ousted. Donbas is primarily ethnic Russian and don't share the views of the current government. Many hundreds of thousands have fled into Russia to escape the violence. The attacks against them by the new government have only solidified their desire for self governance. Their culture and family is more important to them than Western money.
1
STAY OUT. Let them solve their own problems. And let us concentrate on our $17 trillion debt. Non-interventionist is the new US and jail to the warmongers. 2016 is coming. Are we ready?
3
Obama and Rice have been overly cautious here in light of months of unimpeachable evidence of direct and massive Russian intervention. Putin only understands force, and thinks (rightly so, to date) that this administration is weak and indecisive. "Time is of the essence." The way to deal with a bully is to punch him in the nose, and hard. What the devil is 'Washington' waiting for, now???
Difficult question. Our West favoring government in Kiev is getting smashed. The Russians just take what they want. But historically, Ukraine was the bread basket of Russia and an integral part of it. Putin probably wants to restore the empire, but we have baited the bear.
The illegal Kiev junta - brought to power by Washington neocons - army already killed 5000+ civilians in the Eat Ukraine. They have been using heavy artillery and aviation to destroy cities.
OSCE reported multiple times about their massive war crimes and attempted ethical cleansing in the East Ukraine.
The average Ukrainians are now far more scared of right wing fascists who took all the power than of the Russian.
There are many questions that Kiev junta fascists needs to answer...Starting with who killed all those people on Madan, what happened in Odessa, who shoot down MH17 etc...
And somebody wants to send them arms....!!!
If we have any honesty we should bomb them and send their leadership to Hague ASAP!
OSCE reported multiple times about their massive war crimes and attempted ethical cleansing in the East Ukraine.
The average Ukrainians are now far more scared of right wing fascists who took all the power than of the Russian.
There are many questions that Kiev junta fascists needs to answer...Starting with who killed all those people on Madan, what happened in Odessa, who shoot down MH17 etc...
And somebody wants to send them arms....!!!
If we have any honesty we should bomb them and send their leadership to Hague ASAP!
7
this is idiocy.
Russia can reply by giving arms that can reach Tel Aviv or Ridya to Hezbolla. Or arm a cartel run Mexico?
Or worse.
We have poked the bear, and were idiots to think that the bear would or could shrug it off.
Sorry if you are geographically challenged, but Ukraine is an immediate area of Russian national interest. The place is one big Russian war graves cemetery.
Russia can reply by giving arms that can reach Tel Aviv or Ridya to Hezbolla. Or arm a cartel run Mexico?
Or worse.
We have poked the bear, and were idiots to think that the bear would or could shrug it off.
Sorry if you are geographically challenged, but Ukraine is an immediate area of Russian national interest. The place is one big Russian war graves cemetery.
7
All peace-loving Americans who are interested in a cause of nuclear disarmament should be lobbying President Obama to help Ukraine defend itself. 20 years ago Ukraine voluntarily gave up its nuclear weapons (and many conventional weapons) in exchange for guarantees of sovereignty and territorial integrity from Russia, the US, the UK. These guarantees were broken by Russia--Russia annexed the Crimea, started the "separatist republics", is supplying them with financing, soldiers, and weapons. The other guarantors, the US and the UK, so far have done little to prevent the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine and the tremendous loss of life and suffering. No other country would ever consider giving up any of its weapons, especially nuclear weapons, given the current example of Ukraine. There are many Ukrainian, Russians, Jews, people of other ethnicities in Ukraine defenseless against the Russian tanks and GRAD missiles. Many of them died a week ago when civilian areas of Mariupol were fired upon from the Russian positions. President Obama should not let these people die because his predecessors helped destroy the weapons that could have saved their lives.
1
This discussion is only for your amusement. The U.S. and it's NATO lackeys are already sending lethal weapons to Kieve which has an illegitimate Nazi government. Why are we doing this? Just to spite Putin? Or to save Obama's face after a few years of truly bad foreign policy decisions by the anti-war candidate who does not want America to do "stupid stuff."? Well, this measures 10 on the stupidity Richter scale.
8
Such a move would ratchet up the cycle of violence. This needs to play out to a political settlement, or we are headed for world war.
27
couldn't agree with you more.
state of Multnomah
state of Multnomah
1
It is obvious that Putin's Russia won't accept political settlement, as their main goal is an ultimate land grab. Remember Ossetia, Chechnya, Transnistria, Crimea.
1
There is no simple answer to what the US ought to do. Many commenters here seem to believe that America can wash its hands of this crisis and not suffer any consequences, but this is wrong. Either NATO is a functional organization capable of resisting aggression from the East or that aggression will continue, sooner or later. On the other hand, it is true that providing a huge arsenal can only be a prelude to the introduction of both NATO and American troops, a situation both sides are keen to avoid. A compromise would have to obtain the support of Ukrainians. I'm not sure one is readily at hand, but if there is a part of the Ukraine in which a sizable majority actually wants to rejoin Russia, they should be allowed to separate peacefully, by referendum. The rest of the Ukraine could then join the EU and NATO. Both sides would have won something, and perhaps 80% of the Ukraine would be independent and free to develop its own culture and economy in a democratic context, in association with the West.
There's this thing called the United Nations. They used to have peacekeepers. Why aren't they heading there?
Because Russia will just veto it
JFK was ready to risk war with the Soviet Union when it installed rockets in Cuba. Ukraine borders Russia and at times was part of both Russia and of the Soviet Union. The current conflict involves areas of mainly Russian speaking people. What is the profit to the United States of poking the Russian bear on its current border?
9
This whole thing would never have started if only US government prevailed on their Ukrainian proteges to let President Yanukovich serve out the remaining year of his term. Later, the civil war could have been avoided if Donetsk and Lugansk regions were just granted the autonomy which they requested. Even now, negotiated autonomy and non-aligned status of Ukraine would immediately put a stop to these hostilities. Does US Government really think that unitarity of Ukraine is worth starting a hot war with Russia over? It just boggles my mind that instead of agreeing to reasonable demands of Donetsk separatists and Putin, Obama is determined to fight this out until the last Ukrainian. Does he really hate Putin so much that he cannot think straight?
8
Obama is risk adverse. He will provide an substantive weapons to Ukraine. They are on thief own.
"W is a trusted commenter San Francisco 3 hours ago
This is not a US problem. Let Europe deal with it if it wants to secure access to cheap Russian gas. At this rate, Obama's insertion of the US into multiple conflicts puts him on a par with Bush. Time to vote for someone who will get the US out of regional conflicts, and put our tax dollars to work on domestic issues." got 52 Recommends
I mean seriously? Are there Russian agents in the house?
This is not a US problem. Let Europe deal with it if it wants to secure access to cheap Russian gas. At this rate, Obama's insertion of the US into multiple conflicts puts him on a par with Bush. Time to vote for someone who will get the US out of regional conflicts, and put our tax dollars to work on domestic issues." got 52 Recommends
I mean seriously? Are there Russian agents in the house?
2
The rule-of-thumb: your beneficiary should know how to use the weapons you provide him. Otherwise you: a) in fact provide the weapons to your buddies` enemies; and b) give a massive anti-advertisement to your production (in Georgia, 2008, piles of American rifles were just smashed by bulldozer, for exemple).
Any way, it should be interesting to see how US weapons will perform in hands of unaccustomed Ukrainian conscripts. Especially under assumption that their counterparts will wield far more familiar arms. Probably that will cost Americans a share or two in international weapons market.
Any way, it should be interesting to see how US weapons will perform in hands of unaccustomed Ukrainian conscripts. Especially under assumption that their counterparts will wield far more familiar arms. Probably that will cost Americans a share or two in international weapons market.
3
Russia is in a full on war with the Ukraine. Next will be the Baltic and Balkan Countries that have significant Russian speaking populations.
Putin is rallying the Russian people on the war-cry that NATO is behind them. So, if we actually do supply the Ukraine with weapons, WW III will have begun, and the Russians have more nukes that we do and a crazy ambitious leader.
Putin is rallying the Russian people on the war-cry that NATO is behind them. So, if we actually do supply the Ukraine with weapons, WW III will have begun, and the Russians have more nukes that we do and a crazy ambitious leader.
The Baltics have upset themselves. They are neurotic. Thus they expect the US to spend billions to put troops in their country to give them a warm, fuzzy feeling. What nonsense. They need to calm down and start paying their bill to NATO by increasing their spending on defense and stop just hanging on to US taxpayer coattails.
1
Over 5,000 dead and the largest war in Europe in 20 years, with a nuclear power no less. As shocking as the attacks are in Paris and how sexy it seems to be these days to paint Muslims as savages (h/t to bigots like Bill Maher and Sam Harris), in any given year less than 2% of terrorist attacks in the west are by Islamists, and toddlers kill more people than terrorists. It is about time that this incredibly dangerous conflict in the Ukraine sit on the front pages, where it belongs.
1
I don't think it's a good idea, if this decision is made it's just going to escalate the conflict even more and at the end will harm Ukraine instead of helping it. Don't American government realize that people who sit in Kremlin and make all the key decisions have paranoid ideas about America wanting to destroy Russia using Ukraine? Supplying arms to Ukraine will be the first domino push that will trigger chain reaction which might lead to a big war between Russia and NATO. Isn't it obvious? You will just give Putin cart blanche to invade Ukraine openly and with much bigger forces than now, it will be perfect Casus Belli for him since 85% of Russians already think that war in Donbass is a result of American aggression against Russia.
This war must be stopped - the longer it continues the more devastating its effect on Ukraine and Ukrainian people will be. If you want to help Ukraine go with the peace talks, increase political and economical pressure on Russia, give financial aid to Ukraine but do not get military involved. Because if you do you will have to go all the way until you destroy Putin's regime, but I honestly don't even think it's possible, not to mention that the whole world might get destroyed in the process.
This war must be stopped - the longer it continues the more devastating its effect on Ukraine and Ukrainian people will be. If you want to help Ukraine go with the peace talks, increase political and economical pressure on Russia, give financial aid to Ukraine but do not get military involved. Because if you do you will have to go all the way until you destroy Putin's regime, but I honestly don't even think it's possible, not to mention that the whole world might get destroyed in the process.
3
Well, how far should Putin be aloud to go. His explanation for taking Crimea and his support for rebels in Eastern Ukraine is to protect Russian speakers. Well, there are Russian speakers all over Eastern Europe. What is next, Moldova? Then Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania? From what I have read recently Lithuania is not going peacefully. It is no secret Putin wants as big a buffer between the EU and Russian as he can afford politically and financially. The Ukrainian rebels will continue advancing west as long as they keep getting support from Russia and all of Ukraine will become a proxy war between Russia and the West.
When the Russian annexation of Ukraine started last year they tried to take Odessa and that didn't go well for the rebels. Russia was trying to secure the coast of Ukraine with the Black Sea, land lock the country and then force Moldova to its will.
I wonder how many of the residents of Crimea are still waiting on support from Putin. I suspect their standard of living has diminished dramatically as a few local, politically-connected oligarchs have grabbed as much wealth as possible.
Taking over counties uninvited is costly and complicated. Unfortunately, the US knows this all too well.
I think the US should continue with financial pressure, provide intelligence and some unmarked drones to Kiev. And if a drone should stray across the border to a supply depot in Russia, we don't know anything about it.
When the Russian annexation of Ukraine started last year they tried to take Odessa and that didn't go well for the rebels. Russia was trying to secure the coast of Ukraine with the Black Sea, land lock the country and then force Moldova to its will.
I wonder how many of the residents of Crimea are still waiting on support from Putin. I suspect their standard of living has diminished dramatically as a few local, politically-connected oligarchs have grabbed as much wealth as possible.
Taking over counties uninvited is costly and complicated. Unfortunately, the US knows this all too well.
I think the US should continue with financial pressure, provide intelligence and some unmarked drones to Kiev. And if a drone should stray across the border to a supply depot in Russia, we don't know anything about it.
2
Why do you think they took Crimea? If not for US-led coup in Kiev there would be no need for that....
4
On of the 1st acts of the new US installed Coup leaders in Kiev was to announce Russian would no longer be an Official Language in the Ukraine. Naturally, the sizable Russian speaking population in Ukraine would be disturbed, upset, and angry about such a move. Fortunately, saner heads got to the new appointed President and that legislation was VETOed, but the cat was already out of the bag and the Russian speaking minority rightly became suspect of the intentions of the New Coup Leaders?
4
“Boom, boom, boom” sings Katy Perry to millions of Americans watching the Super Bowl, comfortable in their living rooms. The boom, boom, boom heard by thousands of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the Donbass is of a wholly different nature as they remain huddled in basements to survive the assault from their government. Meanwhile, President “don’t do stupid things” Obama is on another channel preparing the American people for the fact that the boom these poor people (who just want to speak their native language and maintain their traditions) hear will be coming from American “defensive” weapons. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya…to quote a singer from another era, “How many deaths will I take till he knows, that too many people have died.” This talk of yet another military intervention is sheer madness and it is time for the American people to say “no” to the military war complex.
32
Singer was Joan Baez.
3
Putin could end this war in a heartbeat. He started it and he can end it. The Ukrainians in Sloviansk in the Donbass Region who were under the thumb of the so-called Russian separatists for a time were so happy to be liberated by the Ukrainian soldiers because the separatists ruled as if they were in the Middle Ages. The vast majority of Ukrainians want to be free from Russia's corrupt ethos and live better lives. So the focus of your post should be exclusively on Putin and his use of force to create this war. No one but Putin is to blame.
2
What about the Russian-sponsored "boom, boom, boom" for Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians? Or Chechens? Or Georgians? And let's not forget Moscow-fueled Korean War. It's also history.
1
Do we really know what is happening in the Ukraine? The New York Times published online Jan. 3, 2015 an editorial-type- article, in the face of "Russian propaganda," purporting to show that Yanukovych was abandoned by his supporters to the surprise of Western observers. The article was written by Andrew Higgins and Andrew Kramer, who reported from Kiev on the Yanukovych ouster in February 2014. On February 20, 2014, H and K reported from Kiev in their lead sentence that Yanukovych Government "Security forces fired on masses of antigovernment demonstrators in Kiev on Thursday in a drastic escalation of the three-month-old crisis that left dozens dead and Ukraine reeling from the most lethal day of violence since Soviet times." Only later in the article we learn that the violence was provoked by Government opponents who broke a truce and charged security forces, taking some of them prisoner. Go online and judge for yourself. This is a matter for the Times' Public Editor. Is General Breedlove his own President? We are making a big mistake in Ukraine. And we like it. (I need more than 1500 characters to do justice to this topic.)
8
Yanukovich was a mafiosi crook and becoming a dictator who jailed his opponents .. the Ukrainian people took their chance to be rid of him when they had the chance ..
You are right. The new guy Poroshenko is no match to Yanukovich - he does not jail, he killed over 5 thousand of his own people. What a change for the better!
1
Very interesting article. America supplying arms to Ukraine. However, there is no mention of broad range support and assistance of European NATO countries in this pursuit. This is unacceptable. Once again, the United States, a nation in the Western Hemisphere, is being drawn into a conflict which has no direct impact to our national security. (Undoubtedly it will be identified as an American lead coalition.) Greater Western Europe, specifically Germany, should be directing any military assistance operation. Their national security is threatened.
3
If the generals get there way .Maybe Russia will sink the dollar.
This would get the fed off the hook .They can blame Russia.
We should stop poking the bear as he might smack us on the head.
This would get the fed off the hook .They can blame Russia.
We should stop poking the bear as he might smack us on the head.
1
Rather then sending arms we should be sending envoys to help settle this idiotic and unnecessary conflict that can escalate to WWIII any given moment.
As far as it goes now...The Ukrainian army will soon will be jumping into the Dnieper river.
Majority of refugees ended up in Russia together with few hundred thousand of Ukrainian men of military age. Our DC neocons' proxies in Kiev will eventually end up hanging on threes once Ukrainians liberate themselves not from Russians but from the oppressive junta installed by Victoria Nuland.
As far as it goes now...The Ukrainian army will soon will be jumping into the Dnieper river.
Majority of refugees ended up in Russia together with few hundred thousand of Ukrainian men of military age. Our DC neocons' proxies in Kiev will eventually end up hanging on threes once Ukrainians liberate themselves not from Russians but from the oppressive junta installed by Victoria Nuland.
8
That is a job for NATO or the UN.
1
Arming Ukraine Forces....????!!!
Only if the pay cash in advance. Please forget my taxes.
Only if the pay cash in advance. Please forget my taxes.
2
I was astounded when I saw Putin declare that NATO has a "foreign legion" in Ukraine.
Mr Putin, surrounded by enthusiastically approving generals, declared that Ukraine "trying to contain Russia was against Ukraine national interest". Then he added:
"In effect, it is no longer an army but a foreign legion, in this case NATO's foreign legion, which does not of course pursue the aims of Ukraine's national interests".
The way it was said, in conjunction with Putin's admission that Russian "volunteers" were fighting in Ukraine, is basically a declaration of war.
Putin was very clear that he wanted to invade Eastern and Southern Ukraine.
If we let Putin invade half of Ukraine, as he wants to do right away, he would be propelled, by the logic of war, aggression and the concomitant collapsing economy, by the same exact forces which pushed Hitler to want always more, always faster.
So the exact same program would be reproduced: after Munich, in 1938, Hitler was given the part of Czechoslovakia with Germans. In short order, he occupied the country, enslaved its weapon industry.
Putin admitted that the real problem was that “I can be in Kiev in two weeks”.
Arming Ukraine enough to enable it to resist now will break Putin’s plan, and not let him turn into the irresistible victor he would otherwise pass for.
If we lose Ukraine, we will lose peace. A new world war will start. This time, with nukes.
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/survival-trumps-tolerance/
Mr Putin, surrounded by enthusiastically approving generals, declared that Ukraine "trying to contain Russia was against Ukraine national interest". Then he added:
"In effect, it is no longer an army but a foreign legion, in this case NATO's foreign legion, which does not of course pursue the aims of Ukraine's national interests".
The way it was said, in conjunction with Putin's admission that Russian "volunteers" were fighting in Ukraine, is basically a declaration of war.
Putin was very clear that he wanted to invade Eastern and Southern Ukraine.
If we let Putin invade half of Ukraine, as he wants to do right away, he would be propelled, by the logic of war, aggression and the concomitant collapsing economy, by the same exact forces which pushed Hitler to want always more, always faster.
So the exact same program would be reproduced: after Munich, in 1938, Hitler was given the part of Czechoslovakia with Germans. In short order, he occupied the country, enslaved its weapon industry.
Putin admitted that the real problem was that “I can be in Kiev in two weeks”.
Arming Ukraine enough to enable it to resist now will break Putin’s plan, and not let him turn into the irresistible victor he would otherwise pass for.
If we lose Ukraine, we will lose peace. A new world war will start. This time, with nukes.
https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/survival-trumps-tolerance/
1
Then he added:
"In effect, it is no longer an army but a foreign legion, in this case NATO's foreign legion, which does not of course pursue the aims of Ukraine's national interests".
What he said was: "Who is fighting there ? Partly, there are official units but in significant part there are nationalist volunteer battalions."
So, you and probably other 'free' Western media just cut out one sentence out of context.
Russia isn't interested in dividing or occupying Ukraine. Do you think they're stupid ? Ukraine needs 50 bln$ just to stay afloat.
Only red line there is Ukraine joining NATO. Russia won't allow that to happen. No one was stopping Ukraine to go toward the EU but negotiations were needed because Ukraine has tight economic ties to Russia. Yanukovich almost signed an agreement with EU but they promised nothing to him and on the other side Russia gave 15 bln$ without any restrictions. for the example, last year Ukraine got 9 bln$ from different sources but payed 14 bln$ back and all that with strong austerity measures over already impoverished population.
"In effect, it is no longer an army but a foreign legion, in this case NATO's foreign legion, which does not of course pursue the aims of Ukraine's national interests".
What he said was: "Who is fighting there ? Partly, there are official units but in significant part there are nationalist volunteer battalions."
So, you and probably other 'free' Western media just cut out one sentence out of context.
Russia isn't interested in dividing or occupying Ukraine. Do you think they're stupid ? Ukraine needs 50 bln$ just to stay afloat.
Only red line there is Ukraine joining NATO. Russia won't allow that to happen. No one was stopping Ukraine to go toward the EU but negotiations were needed because Ukraine has tight economic ties to Russia. Yanukovich almost signed an agreement with EU but they promised nothing to him and on the other side Russia gave 15 bln$ without any restrictions. for the example, last year Ukraine got 9 bln$ from different sources but payed 14 bln$ back and all that with strong austerity measures over already impoverished population.
1
you are of course absolutely right ..
1
It is the US, not the Russians, who have 700 Military bases all over the world. Now the US is getting some push back.
3
All this talk from the pro-Putin, land theft defenders about how Russia can do what it wants in its own backyard because that's the prerogative of a "great power". Funny that, as if these same posters would have nary a word of criticism if Obama suddenly announced plans to annex northern Mexico or parts of Canada for the US.
3
yes . you are right .. it is people who are either passivist or anti American ..
The United States should mind their own business.
10
@Joseph F Foster
Similar things were said in the United Stares in the 1930's when Europe was falling into World War II when Germany threatened European security and territorial integrity. That delay and thinking allowed Germany to basically take over Europe before the U.S. could not ignore it and resulted in American blood soaking European soil.
Ignoring a threat like Russia to European security is asking for trouble as seen by history already.
Helping Ukraine defend themselves is the right thing to do for the US, EU and any nation part of the democracies of the world.
Similar things were said in the United Stares in the 1930's when Europe was falling into World War II when Germany threatened European security and territorial integrity. That delay and thinking allowed Germany to basically take over Europe before the U.S. could not ignore it and resulted in American blood soaking European soil.
Ignoring a threat like Russia to European security is asking for trouble as seen by history already.
Helping Ukraine defend themselves is the right thing to do for the US, EU and any nation part of the democracies of the world.
it is America's business to get rid of murderous Kings and Dictators .. always was and always will be America's business ..
Perhaps I am naive, but I thought all of this is about Putin wanting a secure land-bridge to Sevastopol. Funding the Separatists is cheaper than building a bridge and a pipeline across the Kerch Strait. The guy is a lunatic and we can punish the Russians with sanctions, but if you want to control an area, you need tanks and Putin has plenty of them. No doubt he is counting on the West forgetting after this is all over (and he controls the land).
1
The best way to help Ukraine is for the USA and the EU to give them a lot of money instead of arms.
We don't have any cash to give away...
But we do have some old army surpluses...which are also environmentally unacceptable...so why not get a rid of those toxic piles for the fun of Ukrainian nationalists / fascists...
They may even find some money to pay for it.
But we do have some old army surpluses...which are also environmentally unacceptable...so why not get a rid of those toxic piles for the fun of Ukrainian nationalists / fascists...
They may even find some money to pay for it.
As is usual with this President's foreign policy, he is a day late and a dollar short.
3
From a practical stand point, even with U.S. weapons, the Ukraine military is no match with Russia’s, and will certainly lose any such conflict. Introducing ‘defensive’ weapons will result in more casualties, both civilian and military.
So who gains by sending weapons? Military contractors! As we reduce our military presence in the Middle East, we need continue to stoke the war machine. I’ve been waiting to see where we’d attack next. Becoming engaged in a war with Russia is just good business.
So who gains by sending weapons? Military contractors! As we reduce our military presence in the Middle East, we need continue to stoke the war machine. I’ve been waiting to see where we’d attack next. Becoming engaged in a war with Russia is just good business.
9
Bad idea. The solution to putting out a fire never involves more gasoline and matches. Russia is economically isolated and facing economic devastation from the collapse of oil prices. On the other hand: If there's one thing Russians know how to do, it's suffer in the name of military actions. The last thing the West needs to do is push them into another conflict they would regard as existential--which they surely would if Western arms were being poured into an area so close to their borders.
Economic pressure, in our increasingly-interrelated world, is effective; military action isn't. I hope the US will, for once, take the option that doesn't involve feeding the military-industrial complex regardless of the costs for everyone else.
Economic pressure, in our increasingly-interrelated world, is effective; military action isn't. I hope the US will, for once, take the option that doesn't involve feeding the military-industrial complex regardless of the costs for everyone else.
25
@Alamac
Unfortunately it seems Putin is not concerned with the economic wellbeing of Russia or Russian's as one can see by the collapsing Russian economy, Russian ruble and financial system while Putin continues to deepen Russia's involvement in Ukraine.
If Putin is not effected by Russia's economic decline, then it is time to increase other costs on Russia. Providing Ukraine with modern weapons and defenses will cause Russian casuality numbers to rise which Russia has been making great efforts to conceal from Russian's. If Ukraine can make Russia's costs go up to a point the Kremlin can no longer hide the "Cargo 200" shipments coming home from Ukraine, Putin must face a populace that does not favor going to war in Ukraine.
Unfortunately it seems Putin is not concerned with the economic wellbeing of Russia or Russian's as one can see by the collapsing Russian economy, Russian ruble and financial system while Putin continues to deepen Russia's involvement in Ukraine.
If Putin is not effected by Russia's economic decline, then it is time to increase other costs on Russia. Providing Ukraine with modern weapons and defenses will cause Russian casuality numbers to rise which Russia has been making great efforts to conceal from Russian's. If Ukraine can make Russia's costs go up to a point the Kremlin can no longer hide the "Cargo 200" shipments coming home from Ukraine, Putin must face a populace that does not favor going to war in Ukraine.
2
Did "economic pressure" help the passengers of MH17 be spared from Russia's "Buk" missile? Or did it help avoid Russia's recent shelling of Mariupol? Did it stop the advancement of the Moscow-backed and equipped terrorists from gaining more ground in the East Ukraine since August 2014?
2
We should definitely send arms to Ukraine. And other prosthetics as well.
Extra arms might help our hapless decision-makers resolve this and other present and future crises. Maybe fourarmed (sic) will make them better forewarned.
What happened/is happening in Ukraine, Russia relations, megalomaniac behavior, geopolitical gamesmanship and zero-sum versus win-win dynamics are all expect-the-expected not expect-the-unexpected calculations.
Extra arms might help our hapless decision-makers resolve this and other present and future crises. Maybe fourarmed (sic) will make them better forewarned.
What happened/is happening in Ukraine, Russia relations, megalomaniac behavior, geopolitical gamesmanship and zero-sum versus win-win dynamics are all expect-the-expected not expect-the-unexpected calculations.
Please! Stop talking about it! DO IT!!!
Russia has stronger economy and strong army. We won't stop fighting for our motherland. But without assistance from outside gradually we will lose our territory. Time to talk has passed. I think it's time to act!
Russia has stronger economy and strong army. We won't stop fighting for our motherland. But without assistance from outside gradually we will lose our territory. Time to talk has passed. I think it's time to act!
4
No it is not time to support DC neocons' proxies in the Ukrainian.
3
Last year, Pope Francis warned from the Vatican about WWIII. At that time, Cardinal Bergoglio warning did sound as an exaggeration. Of course, the pope and his diplomacy had a correct reading of world affairs.
In the Middle East, Japan is now engulfed in the American made war on terror against Islamic militant groups. If PM Shinzo Abe imposes his will over Japanese public opinion, ultra nationalism and militarism will be brought back to Japan. China will react accordingly.
Diplomacy is over and a full blown war is taking shape in central europe with US/EU facing down Russia over Ukraine. It remains to be seen whether Germany will abandon diplomacy and go along with America's military response. Chancellor Merkel -- facing a challenge on the Greek debt and its impact on the eurozone -- must now deal with the consequences of another military conflict in central europe.
The current world geopolitical scenario is bad news for emerging and developing countries alike. They've already been impacted by forthcoming changes in US monetary policy, China's economic deceleration and commodity prices in free fall. As the song goes: War. What is good for?
In the Middle East, Japan is now engulfed in the American made war on terror against Islamic militant groups. If PM Shinzo Abe imposes his will over Japanese public opinion, ultra nationalism and militarism will be brought back to Japan. China will react accordingly.
Diplomacy is over and a full blown war is taking shape in central europe with US/EU facing down Russia over Ukraine. It remains to be seen whether Germany will abandon diplomacy and go along with America's military response. Chancellor Merkel -- facing a challenge on the Greek debt and its impact on the eurozone -- must now deal with the consequences of another military conflict in central europe.
The current world geopolitical scenario is bad news for emerging and developing countries alike. They've already been impacted by forthcoming changes in US monetary policy, China's economic deceleration and commodity prices in free fall. As the song goes: War. What is good for?
5
Giving weapons to the Ukraine is absolute lunacy. It will only escalate the fighting and cause more killing. Then if the Ukrainians start gaining ground because of NATO advice and equipment, the Russians will do the same. This is absolute madness. I could end with potentially millions of Russian and European troops killed. German young people will never go and fight in a mad war like this, neither will British young men. A big percentage of US veterans are psychologically damaged from Iraq and Afghanistan. The US will never be able to muster enough conscripts to fight a war in Russia. Then there is the cost of all the cruise missiles. The US people will never accept a war with Russia. The only way is for the US to use nukes. That will be the end of all we know. Absolute madness. As Kissinger says, he cannot understand why the US is so obsessed with Putin. He feels the US should be working with Putin. But then, this is an obsession.
8
After 12 years of failed and expensive foreign wars and a financial and economic crash that is lingering, it is natural that popular pressure is mounting to punch the bad guys out. (The success of the movie, American Sniper, attests to that.) But it would be folly to provoke further wars in eastern Europe as well as the middle east.
The United States today is a tired behemoth, relying on a mercenary army and a huge military budget. Worse, its constitutional system is broken, because its leaders no longer adhere to the rules of the game.
We need to fix ourselves instead of trying to be "the indispensable nation."
The United States today is a tired behemoth, relying on a mercenary army and a huge military budget. Worse, its constitutional system is broken, because its leaders no longer adhere to the rules of the game.
We need to fix ourselves instead of trying to be "the indispensable nation."
6
Unfortunately, it is now time to act. With his latest offensive Putin has made very clear his objectives, which are to create a land bridge to Crimea and to carve out a larger enclave for the separatists. This is not in the interest of Ukraine, the future of Europe, or the world.
Underneath all the geo-political issues there lies the realities of morality and ideologies. Do you want a reactionary regime like Russia to have more influence or power in the world? That is what the real issue is all about; world stability versus more of Russia's self-serving manipulative power in the world that feeds off arms sales and alliances with other pirate states. In spite of the Israeli issue and what happened in Iraq, you simply can't put America in the same category as the Russians.
Is America capable of the challenge?
Underneath all the geo-political issues there lies the realities of morality and ideologies. Do you want a reactionary regime like Russia to have more influence or power in the world? That is what the real issue is all about; world stability versus more of Russia's self-serving manipulative power in the world that feeds off arms sales and alliances with other pirate states. In spite of the Israeli issue and what happened in Iraq, you simply can't put America in the same category as the Russians.
Is America capable of the challenge?
15
Barry, land bridge is being build from Russian city of Kerch. Educate yourself. http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/crimea-to-be-linked-to-russia-wi...
1
So, someone in the US thinks that it is a fine strategic move to force Putin to lose face by enabling the Ukraine to kill more clandestine Russian soldiers.
Could your article please expand on the questions what happens after Putin loses face? If you force Putin to admit it, he will point to the US military aid as justification of his decision. His popularity in Russia will possibly drop from 75% to 72% or even rise.
Then what? You will have supplied military aid to a corrupt bankrupt country without any discussion what the next step is after Russia also supports the Eastern Ukraine openly. You discuss fomenting an open war in Europe without any discussion why your strategic concerns give you the right to do so or why the US has "strategic concerns" everywhere in the world whereas Russia should be happy about neighbouring countries becoming NATO members.
You do not discuss at all the question of what the Eastern Ukrainian and the Crimean population wants or in what way the US has encouraged Kiev to engage the secessionists with the military from the start. In Europe, most people think that there is a right to secede from a country, especially if the central government does not fulfill minimum standards with regards to the treatment of ethnic minorities.
Most importantly, you do not say what final goal you are envisioning. Do you really think that the Eastern Ukrainian people will ever be a happy part of the Ukraine again?
Could your article please expand on the questions what happens after Putin loses face? If you force Putin to admit it, he will point to the US military aid as justification of his decision. His popularity in Russia will possibly drop from 75% to 72% or even rise.
Then what? You will have supplied military aid to a corrupt bankrupt country without any discussion what the next step is after Russia also supports the Eastern Ukraine openly. You discuss fomenting an open war in Europe without any discussion why your strategic concerns give you the right to do so or why the US has "strategic concerns" everywhere in the world whereas Russia should be happy about neighbouring countries becoming NATO members.
You do not discuss at all the question of what the Eastern Ukrainian and the Crimean population wants or in what way the US has encouraged Kiev to engage the secessionists with the military from the start. In Europe, most people think that there is a right to secede from a country, especially if the central government does not fulfill minimum standards with regards to the treatment of ethnic minorities.
Most importantly, you do not say what final goal you are envisioning. Do you really think that the Eastern Ukrainian people will ever be a happy part of the Ukraine again?
8
The Russians have the whip hand in this war. They don't have to invest a great deal of men and material just enough to keep the pot simmering thus keeping the Ukraine economy on its back.
Kiev thinks the EU and especially Germany with its deep pockets should pump money into their coffers but both the EU and Germany while giving lip service to Kiev have no intention of serious investment in such a corrupt shattered country at war. They might as well burn the money in an incinerator or bail out Greece to more effect.
If Poroshenko is waiting for NATO and sanctions to ride to the rescue he may have a long wait. Moscow seems determined to make sure that Ukraine does not become a part of NATO and most if not all of NATO agrees with this. His best course is to meet with Merkel and Putin in a neutral location and hammer out an agreement.
The US should not be a part of these negotiations since this is primarily an eastern European matter and the Americans are incapable of being honest brokers over this issue because they have a different and more antagonistic agenda regarding Russia and will be happy to fight to the last Ukrainian.
Kiev thinks the EU and especially Germany with its deep pockets should pump money into their coffers but both the EU and Germany while giving lip service to Kiev have no intention of serious investment in such a corrupt shattered country at war. They might as well burn the money in an incinerator or bail out Greece to more effect.
If Poroshenko is waiting for NATO and sanctions to ride to the rescue he may have a long wait. Moscow seems determined to make sure that Ukraine does not become a part of NATO and most if not all of NATO agrees with this. His best course is to meet with Merkel and Putin in a neutral location and hammer out an agreement.
The US should not be a part of these negotiations since this is primarily an eastern European matter and the Americans are incapable of being honest brokers over this issue because they have a different and more antagonistic agenda regarding Russia and will be happy to fight to the last Ukrainian.
6
Apparently President Carter who many believe was weak drew a line in the sant for the Russians and said military force would be used to protect Europe. our passivity here encourages Putin. I get why Ukraine needs to be a bit more restrained about their relationship,to NATO but this is aggression on Putins part. We should provide aggressive weapons. Is Putin ever worried about how the U.S. will react. And once again Susan Rice is on the wrong side of a major issue. Just because she blusters a lot and is ambitious doesn't mean that she has a grasp of strategy. I wish she were a good strategist but she just isn't. if she were not Obamas friend she would be long gone.
2
It might be wise for an international collaborative effort similar to the one organised to strike against ISIL to conduct air strikes against the Russian backed separatists. A few days of air strikes could end or severely cripple any actions in progress. Enough of this dance. Ukraine has the right to end this hostile occupation by any means necessary. Ideally with international support Ukraine can be provided with jet fighters and the resources needed to equip ground forces to mop up what would be left after arial bombings.
Unbelievable! This person thinks that Russia is Iraq or Pakistan? Unbelievable! This is what brain washing means when people start to underestimated mate their powerful enemies based in the results of the wars with VERY weak opponents.
Russia has the best planes in the world (SU 35 is better than F22, T50 is better than F35), their tanks (T90 and the latest Armata better than all world's best tanks), their S400 and S500 anti-missile systems are leaps and bounds above the Patriot missile)
The list goes on.
Wake up, people.
Russia has the best planes in the world (SU 35 is better than F22, T50 is better than F35), their tanks (T90 and the latest Armata better than all world's best tanks), their S400 and S500 anti-missile systems are leaps and bounds above the Patriot missile)
The list goes on.
Wake up, people.
2
We are edging toward treating Ukraine as a member of NATO, which it isn't. Are we ready to go to war with Russia over Ukraine's border? Surely President Obama doesn't want to, but he is also afraid of appearing weak, and possessing an arrogance born of insecurity, he is surrounded by an inferior staff. A dangerous combination.
8
Please don't do this. It would be A Very Bad Thing.
A Very Bad Thing.
Just don't.
Please.
A Very Bad Thing.
Just don't.
Please.
8
Immediate gut reaction to the news we may become involved in yet another war: Just a very bad idea.
Considered and thoughtful response to the news we may become involved in yet another war: Just a very bad idea.
Slippery slope fraught with unknown dangers. And shocked, shocked to learn the military supports military action. US arms manufacturers: Hey, it's a job creator.
Considered and thoughtful response to the news we may become involved in yet another war: Just a very bad idea.
Slippery slope fraught with unknown dangers. And shocked, shocked to learn the military supports military action. US arms manufacturers: Hey, it's a job creator.
7
Even the mighty US must realise that power projection,has its limitation."Ejecting" Putin might be more difficult than estimated..None of the recent "regime change" initiatives can be considered successful except in creating misery to millions of innocent people...
4
The report to be issued today has a roster of Cold Warriors and corresponding recommendations worthy of the 1950s. The US unmistakably seeks confrontation with Russia (and beyond, China) to maintain what in fact it has already lost in, now, a multipolar world structure: unilateral global hegemony.
Use of the term "defensive" is laughably hypocritical. Why not be frank: arm the Kiev government to the teeth, place large NATO forces on the Russian border, tighten still further the sanctions regime on Russia--all of which is occurring or soon will.
Disregard the neo-Nazi leadership base of Ukraine. Disregard prior US intervention in facilitating the coup. Disregard the West's (led by the US) attempt to isolate, contain, and ultimately dismember Russia. For what? Market fundamentalism, IMF-World Bank austerity measures? Militarization of world capitalism (again, US-led) is moving on the slippery slope of nuclear war as if Thanatos were in the saddle.
Use of the term "defensive" is laughably hypocritical. Why not be frank: arm the Kiev government to the teeth, place large NATO forces on the Russian border, tighten still further the sanctions regime on Russia--all of which is occurring or soon will.
Disregard the neo-Nazi leadership base of Ukraine. Disregard prior US intervention in facilitating the coup. Disregard the West's (led by the US) attempt to isolate, contain, and ultimately dismember Russia. For what? Market fundamentalism, IMF-World Bank austerity measures? Militarization of world capitalism (again, US-led) is moving on the slippery slope of nuclear war as if Thanatos were in the saddle.
28
Nothing hypocritical about the use of "defensive" since Ukraine is fending off a Russian-backed aggression.
Considering that there are no Svoboda members in the cabinet and a whopping total of seven Right Sector/Svoboda members in the Rada, your characaterization of Ukraine's leadership as "neo-Nazi" is groundless and overwrought. Your characterization of the overthrow of Yanukovich as a "coup" is very incorrect. It is thus easy to disregard both of those things since they aren't true while the invocation of nuclear war is pure hysterics.
Considering that there are no Svoboda members in the cabinet and a whopping total of seven Right Sector/Svoboda members in the Rada, your characaterization of Ukraine's leadership as "neo-Nazi" is groundless and overwrought. Your characterization of the overthrow of Yanukovich as a "coup" is very incorrect. It is thus easy to disregard both of those things since they aren't true while the invocation of nuclear war is pure hysterics.
3
Is it a good idea for the US to arm the Ukrainian army? Would it "tempt Putin to raise the stakes"? Nobody can tell what the outcome of such a scenario will be. A military involvement may not be an option for Putin. He is more inclined to create a frozen conflict in Donbas, where he could prod and stir when it suited him, to keep Kiev from moving closer to Brussels.
It's time for both parties to look for a political solution to the conflict. No doubt Kiev is trying to defend its territorial integrity and sovereignty, after having lost Crimea. But the Kremlin has also a hard time to abandon the separatists to their fate, saying Kiev conducts a punitive operation against Russian speakers.
It's time for both parties to look for a political solution to the conflict. No doubt Kiev is trying to defend its territorial integrity and sovereignty, after having lost Crimea. But the Kremlin has also a hard time to abandon the separatists to their fate, saying Kiev conducts a punitive operation against Russian speakers.
4
Obama is not his own man. His handlers will tell him what to do.
I don't think any President can control foreign policy, unless he agrees with the bellicose few.
I don't think any President can control foreign policy, unless he agrees with the bellicose few.
4
The Washington secret empire knows perfectly well that the US presidency is the only office above it.
Despite what many wants to believe... Russia is not what it used to be any more and waging war in it's backyard may be one of the stupidest ideas Washington ever had.
14
Please no - let's not step into another quagmire. Being a proxy battlefield with us feeding weapons in one end and the Russians feeding weapons in at the other will be nothing but a disaster for Ukraine - much worse than what they are suffering now.
10
Ukraine sabotaged the peace talks by refusing to enter direct negotiations with the separatists. The US should refuse all aide to Ukraine until and unless they are willing to talk directly with the separatists. Further, all aide to Ukraine should be predicated on their making good faith efforts to reach a political solution (e.g. federation).
Do not forget that the vote to remove Yanukovych failed to reach the required 3/4 threshold. Yanukovych was removed from office in violation of the Ukrainian Constitution and in defiance of the Supreme Court of Ukraine. When Yanukovych refused to abdicate (e.g. his Kharkiv speech) his political opponents forced him to flee Kiev and appointed an 'interim President'.
Imagine the American corollary, if Republicans voted to impeach Obama, failed to get the votes but removed him from office anyway, and then appointed Mitt Romney as 'interim President'... could you imagine the results? I imagine that the result of such an action would be to undermine democracy and instigate a civil war... exactly as it was in Ukraine.
Do not forget that the vote to remove Yanukovych failed to reach the required 3/4 threshold. Yanukovych was removed from office in violation of the Ukrainian Constitution and in defiance of the Supreme Court of Ukraine. When Yanukovych refused to abdicate (e.g. his Kharkiv speech) his political opponents forced him to flee Kiev and appointed an 'interim President'.
Imagine the American corollary, if Republicans voted to impeach Obama, failed to get the votes but removed him from office anyway, and then appointed Mitt Romney as 'interim President'... could you imagine the results? I imagine that the result of such an action would be to undermine democracy and instigate a civil war... exactly as it was in Ukraine.
7
Yanokovich fled to his Russian masters after his allies had had enough of his use of deadly force in an unsuccessful effort to crush the Maidan--he didn't have to be impeached, he quit. The comparison to your Obama hypothetical fails since you didn't take into account that Yanukovich started the violence.
3
Ukraine has been many things during the last thousand years, including an independent nation for the last 24 years. If Putin wants to reclaim the Soviet empire as a greater Russia, he should not be given a free hand. Better to show him boundaries now rather than later. Like a two-year-old, he doesn't know when to stop unless he's shown.
3
Please enlist and bring your adult children with you.
1
If we supply weapons to the Ukraine forces, U.S. "advisors" will follow and we will be digging our war hole deeper until the darkness at the end if the tunnel is endless. Obomba's lust for bombs and warfare must be lawfully stopped by Congress before it leads to WWIII.
8
Michelle Flournoy nails it: Russia's Achilles heel is battlefield losses. If another 2 to 5 thousand civilians are going to be killed, we should not be afraid to empower Ukraine’s military to inflict losses on Russian military. Otherwise Putin will keep driving by the off ramps.
1
It is long past time for western democratic powers to provide Ukraine the financial and military support it needs to defend itself against repeat invasions conducted by the current Russian regime.
1
I trust you are willing to pay a Ukraine war tax add on and to sacrifice your life, or the lives of your children?
1
We are encircling China with military ties with Asia Pacific countries. Obama's recent visit to India was part of it. We have encircled Russia by having many surrounding countries join NATO. Many of these countries are corrupt, financially bankrupt, and will depend on help from West, especially USA. We are also involved in conflicts in Middle East. These conflicts can bankrupt us unless we clearly define our national interests and do not jump into conflicts on outcry of neoconservatives who took us to Iraq war.
9
Cities such Mariumpol were multicultural and multinational cities - reading their history one learns that the Roman Catholic cathedral was destroyed after WWII. For Russia to state that these were ethnically solely Russian populated is an outright lie.
2
Noooooo! This is exactly what Putin has been waiting for. Up to now, Russia's support for the rebels has been covert if but thinly veiled. As soon as we step in and start supplying arms, etc. to Ukraine, Russia will consider this a green light to overtly step into the conflict in force. Only problem is that our supply lines will be thousands of miles long and Russia's only tens of miles. This will be no contest and will backfire spectacularly. Unless we're willing to put thousands of boots on the ground, which we're not, it would be best to stay out of there. Bad decision!
6
The military geniuses who led the American invasion of Afghanistan don't feel they need internal lines of supply.
The NY Times: "Russia has repeatedly violated an agreement..."
... In fact, the newspaper prepares the public opinion to sending of sophisticated weapons, to escalation of the conflict, and to continuation of the fratricidal war in Ukraine. Complacency, with which President Obama said yesterday on CNN about the success of the US policy, that has helped to fuel the conflict in Ukraine, shows a complete indifference of Americans to the fact that thousands of people were killed there and millions have to seek a refuge. Despite the statement of Chief of the General Staff of the Ukrainian Army: "I should also say that currently the Ukrainian army is not fighting with regular units of the Russian army", - Americans are thinking that the war in the East of Ukraine is waging by the Russian troops and the USA are ready to "negotiate" until the last Ukrainian.
... In fact, the newspaper prepares the public opinion to sending of sophisticated weapons, to escalation of the conflict, and to continuation of the fratricidal war in Ukraine. Complacency, with which President Obama said yesterday on CNN about the success of the US policy, that has helped to fuel the conflict in Ukraine, shows a complete indifference of Americans to the fact that thousands of people were killed there and millions have to seek a refuge. Despite the statement of Chief of the General Staff of the Ukrainian Army: "I should also say that currently the Ukrainian army is not fighting with regular units of the Russian army", - Americans are thinking that the war in the East of Ukraine is waging by the Russian troops and the USA are ready to "negotiate" until the last Ukrainian.
4
Personally I would much rather throw the economic book at Putin because the US could inflict really serious harm on Russia purely by the use of soft power. The US could ban any US banks or banks doing business in the US which effectively means all the major banks in Europe and Asia from having any contacts with Russian banks or commercial enterprises. It would probably provoke retaliation in the form of the seizure of US assets in Russia but then this would enable the US, UK and anyone else who wanted to participate to seize Russian assets held overseas including those of the Kleptocratic oligarchic elite.
4
Being in Moscow I want to share my view on this! I may be biased by Russian propaganda but I honestly try to see all sides and their interests in the conflict. To me though US seems overly zealous in fighting for Ukraine. I mean, right on the US border, in Mexico, over 100 000 people died in last years due to drug war and corrupted government. Yet no indignation or media focus there. I understand that US is heavily working with former USSR countries to bring democracy, but topping governments and arming sides and escalating conflict does not seem like a right tool for this... And look at anti-Putin hysteria: just a few years ago he was a cool guy and a leader and bang - overnight he became a nazi and imperialist, does this not look suspicious? Please look at this wiki article and think twice how people see the US when they approach with their ideas to one's borders... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_authoritarian_regimes_supported_by_...
17
Russia is committing armed aggression against the Ukraine for no other reason than that they wish to move into the Western orbit. Putin is a thug running a phony democracy in Russia. The only escalation that has taken place so far has been by Russia.
7
Why would Russia want to move into western orbit? To me it looks more like the US wants to move right to Russian border orbit, all facts indicate that. Do you see Russia topping legal government next to US border, investing billions to change a legal regime, encouraging armed fights and calling US an aggressor for trying to react to it? I want you to explain your assertions please. To me facts are pointing to the contrary. Why would Russia after all those peaceful years and close ties with Ukraine out of the blue decided to start a civil war? Now look at all of the US interest - Joe Biden's son is already taking a high position in energy company in Ukraine, US is talking about selling gas to Europe as Russian export via Ukraine seems disrupted, US military is excited as they want to supply new modern arms to Ukraine, great new market, NATO gets more moneys as they claim they are needed again And what are Russian benefits? Destroyed trade and family ties torn? Please substantiate when you claim something, otherwise those are just empty words, I think it is a fair request.
3
Please listen to Mikhail Gorbachev, Spiegel Interview: 'I Am Truly and Deeply Concerned'
"In November 1990, at the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Paris, the talk was of a new peaceful world order. George Bush, Sr. and I were especially active in promoting this. But nothing came of it -- a demilitarization of politics didn't happen. Instead, a dangerous winner's mentality became widespread in America...I remind people of how John F. Kennedy took a stand against the demonization of people in the Soviet Union and said that a true peace could not be a Pax americana, that peace could not be dictated by America. There is either peace for all or there is no peace...Unfortunately, America then started building a global empire, a mega empire...
"The Americans began by surrounding Russia with so-called rings of defense -- NATO's eastward expansion. NATO intervened militarily in the Yugoslavian civil war without the consent of the United Nations. That was a precedent-setting case. All that triggered a backlash in Russia. No Kremlin leader can ignore something like that.
"Please recall President Putin's speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2007. Putin clearly stated at the time where Russia's red lines are and that Russia does not agree to NATO's advance on its borders. For us Russians, by the way, Putin wasn't saying anything new."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/gorbachev-warns-of-decline-in-...
"In November 1990, at the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Paris, the talk was of a new peaceful world order. George Bush, Sr. and I were especially active in promoting this. But nothing came of it -- a demilitarization of politics didn't happen. Instead, a dangerous winner's mentality became widespread in America...I remind people of how John F. Kennedy took a stand against the demonization of people in the Soviet Union and said that a true peace could not be a Pax americana, that peace could not be dictated by America. There is either peace for all or there is no peace...Unfortunately, America then started building a global empire, a mega empire...
"The Americans began by surrounding Russia with so-called rings of defense -- NATO's eastward expansion. NATO intervened militarily in the Yugoslavian civil war without the consent of the United Nations. That was a precedent-setting case. All that triggered a backlash in Russia. No Kremlin leader can ignore something like that.
"Please recall President Putin's speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2007. Putin clearly stated at the time where Russia's red lines are and that Russia does not agree to NATO's advance on its borders. For us Russians, by the way, Putin wasn't saying anything new."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/gorbachev-warns-of-decline-in-...
16
There seems to be a general inability to look to this from the Russian point of view. Not good...
2
USA is the only side in this conflict interested in prolonging the war and inflicting more casualties.
Do not make mistake thinking that this conflict is between RUS and UKR only. There are many players and stakeholders in this conflict. You want to know who is the winner in this war going to be?
USA , that is who. No matter how this war ends the USA wins economically. UKR remains failed, vassal state. RUS economy is in shambles. EU economy is so depressed they will be eager to bend over and sign TTIP agreement on US terms.
Do not make mistake thinking that this conflict is between RUS and UKR only. There are many players and stakeholders in this conflict. You want to know who is the winner in this war going to be?
USA , that is who. No matter how this war ends the USA wins economically. UKR remains failed, vassal state. RUS economy is in shambles. EU economy is so depressed they will be eager to bend over and sign TTIP agreement on US terms.
9
Providing weapons to Ukraine would be another stupid idea of this administration. We got to be realistic and stop dreaming, we are not and we cannot engage in a direct military conflict with Russia. It would put not only us but the whole world in risk of a major military confrontation of unprecedented consequences. All this would do is just to put Ukraine to more suffering and the loss of lives. I can guarantee anyone 1000% that at the end of this conflict Russia's still going to get what they want. It's not that I'm a psychic and I can see the future, it is just being realistic whether we like it or not, it is what it is, but it is up to us to have the willingness to accept reality.
9
"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks here because of a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing"
Neville Chamberlain, House of Common, Czech crisis 1938
Neville Chamberlain, House of Common, Czech crisis 1938
5
This is not your grandfather's world. Now there are ICBMs tipped with thermonuclear warheads to play with.
It was obvious a long time ago the USA should be providing weapons to Ukraine, but our president is still thinking about it. Putin probably is laughing at Obama right now.
3
Russians know how well supplying weapons to the Taliban to fight The USSR worked out for the US.
No, the President is wise to deliberate about this especially after the failed war-making policies of his predecessor - something from which we're still suffering.
The US (but more so NATO) needs to support the legitimate government in Kiev against foreign aggression.
The US (but more so NATO) needs to support the legitimate government in Kiev against foreign aggression.
Yes, just dare to do it. I swear Russia will remember it and will supply letal weapon to California, Texas, Alabama and others when proud people of these states declare independence from brutal US regime. Just for the sake of brother killing brother, as US taught us.
5
Putin is operating with a mid - century mindset. It is frightening and apalling that he wants to build a new Russian empire the old fashioned way: military takeover. Modern empires built on economic might are less distructive and more prosperous for everyone. We have to stand up to these primative actions if we are to maintain a better world order. History shows that leaders like Putin must be checked early or the consequences will only get worse over time.
1
Please don't arm anybody.
The previous experieces were all negative.
USA can interviene diplomatically or with santions.
The previous experieces were all negative.
USA can interviene diplomatically or with santions.
6
Bullies only change when someone confronts them. They don't recognize talking, they recognize power. Russians like American are sensitive to wars and their boys coming home in body bags. They remember Afganastan just as we remember Vietnam. This past summer there was some press about Soilders funerals and upset families in Russia because they new their sons died in Ukriaine. The only internal pressure for Putin will be public opinion and the only way this will happen is through body bags. Supply the Ukrianians. Find away to get arms to help Ukriaine. If we get caught just say it must be Ukriaine nationals coming back from all over the world to fight for their country. Just like the Russians are saying the russian soilders fighting in Ukraine are volunteers. AND most importantly look at History. When you show no resolve then it will happen again. Power only recognizes power.
2
Stay out of Russia and the east, it's not our fight. Russia is going to roll soon and flatten whatever is in it's way.
6
No No No.
Don't get involved with providing lethal assistance.
But if I know Mr. Barack Obama, he will end up doing some kind of "middle of the road" deal.
Mr. Obama—keep your focus here at home.
Don't get involved with providing lethal assistance.
But if I know Mr. Barack Obama, he will end up doing some kind of "middle of the road" deal.
Mr. Obama—keep your focus here at home.
10
Because America earns in the war , it is one of the main sources of income! Obama has invested in Ukraine $ 5 billion , and you can believe me , he has long been returned the money ! He does not care about human life and destiny !
6
If there is one overarching lesson in the blood-soaked history of the 20th Century, it is that wars never stop war. Even when the weapons come from someone with a Nobel Peace Prize.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
8
Let Ukraine pay the price of being a corrupt state full of quasi-fascist nationalists. They lose their Russian speaking minority in Crimea and East Ukraine, because those people know better than to stay with Kiev. Be happy the Russians as being so reserved.
American Neocons think these conflicts are a joke or a game, I suggest they send their kids over there and see what separatists do
to Western jokers who meddle in freedom fights.
American Neocons think these conflicts are a joke or a game, I suggest they send their kids over there and see what separatists do
to Western jokers who meddle in freedom fights.
10
Sadly Ukraine is paying the price for having a corrupt and proto fascist imperial and aggressive state next door to it. Russia is a state without moral reservations to launch unprovoked aggression, murder and destruction on any of its neighbours that it perceives to be defying its imperial fiat.
The only thing that protects the Baltic states and other former Eastern European Russian dominions from similar fates is their membership in NATO.
It is for that reason that Russia has such hysterics about NATO. NATO poses no threat to Russia. But it does bar Russia from further bullying its other neighbours and this it cannot stand.
I suggest you live for 1 day under the benign rule of the DPR and the LPR and see how much freedom is accorded to you...
The only thing that protects the Baltic states and other former Eastern European Russian dominions from similar fates is their membership in NATO.
It is for that reason that Russia has such hysterics about NATO. NATO poses no threat to Russia. But it does bar Russia from further bullying its other neighbours and this it cannot stand.
I suggest you live for 1 day under the benign rule of the DPR and the LPR and see how much freedom is accorded to you...
1
This is so predictable: US cannot pass up opportunity to arm one side against the other. The problem in Ukraine is that that most Ukrainians do not want this war and do not want to fight, as evidenced by difficulty in raising troops to do the dirty work. Lobbing shells on defenseless areas is cowardly and criminal and Ukrainians know it. Only those in the extreme western part wish to impose themselves on the eastern part. The people in the east know what they are fighting for and, apparently, those in the west do too; but those in the center do not. From the beginning (meaning since Maidan) we have been backing the wrong side. It is time to get out and let the Ukrainians govern themselves . The last thing they need is to destroy each other in a meaningless civil war.
9
Another important issue is the comparison to Serbia and the secession of the Kosovo, a region who has always been part of Serbia and only in the last 150 years has become increasingly ethnic Albanian.
Here, the inhabitants of the Kosovo fought for their secession and the US not only aided them, but bombed Belgrade. Now, compare this to the Ukraine and imagine Putin openly bombing Kiev.
At that time, Moscow was a traditional ally of Serbia and powerless to stop that and said that the West has opened a Pandora box with the principle that any ethnic region can secede with outside military aid.
So, in many ways, you should regard the Ukrainian conflict as logical consequence for disregarding Russia in the Serbian war.
Here, the inhabitants of the Kosovo fought for their secession and the US not only aided them, but bombed Belgrade. Now, compare this to the Ukraine and imagine Putin openly bombing Kiev.
At that time, Moscow was a traditional ally of Serbia and powerless to stop that and said that the West has opened a Pandora box with the principle that any ethnic region can secede with outside military aid.
So, in many ways, you should regard the Ukrainian conflict as logical consequence for disregarding Russia in the Serbian war.
10
The comparison to Kosovo doesn't work. The secession of Kosovo was prompted by a Serbian campaign of ethnic cleansing that came at the tail end of a series of such Serbian persecutions. The post-Yanukovich government in Ukraine did nothing like that.
1
Sending arms to the Ukrainian government would indeed "tempt President Putin to raise the stakes." And then what ......?
It would be wiser to work with the European Union and Russia to arrange for a federated union in Ukraine--or a partition of the country into two smaller countries, each representing distinct linguistic and ethnic minorities.
It would be wiser to work with the European Union and Russia to arrange for a federated union in Ukraine--or a partition of the country into two smaller countries, each representing distinct linguistic and ethnic minorities.
7
Everywhere where USA tries to interfere it becomes a huge mess.
US supported the coup in Kiev last year, thinking that they will finally be able to close Russian naval base in Crimea and open their own there.
And after Crimea chose to become a part of Russia USA went nuts.
The eastern regions are only needed because there are huge reserves of Shale gas in which Joe Biden's son has a stake in. And since the east of Ukraine gave the west the finger immediately USA wants to start supplying arm. Washington is full of a bunch of warmongers.
US supported the coup in Kiev last year, thinking that they will finally be able to close Russian naval base in Crimea and open their own there.
And after Crimea chose to become a part of Russia USA went nuts.
The eastern regions are only needed because there are huge reserves of Shale gas in which Joe Biden's son has a stake in. And since the east of Ukraine gave the west the finger immediately USA wants to start supplying arm. Washington is full of a bunch of warmongers.
11
The last thing we should consider is turning our former cold war nemesis, namely Russia into a boiling hot potato. We're sounding more and more like the war-mongers the world thinks we already have become.
11
I imagine the warhawks in the Pentagon are licking their chops over this possibility. The US will get to go war against Russia, although indirectly, as it did in Korea and Vietnam. I am surprised Obama would even consider such folly. The US could not beat the Talban, which I consider a notch about F-Troop, and know it wants to take on a real army? Go figure. I say let the Russian sympathizers in the Ukraine join Russia. Its not our fight. Stay out.
9
It's about time! We need to move quickly before another civilian plane is shot down by Russians with American, Dutch, Malaysian, and Australian passengers on board and before more Ukrainians are killed for a basic right to freedom from dark Soviet past!
1
I must have missed official report on who shot the plane. I am glad you did not. Could you please provide the link of it?
1
As Russia annexes eastern Ukraine, will the US still be considering supplying arms to Ukraine Forces?
2
Instead of more war and bloodshed let the eastern areas depart from Ukraine but give the resulting Ukraine immediate NATO and EU membership. Borders change all the time. Large parts of Germany are now part of other countries. Alsace and Lorraine were German. Western Poland is former Prussia. Kalliningrad, Russia was Koenigsberg, the former Prussian capital. Even Lviv was once part of Poland. Just look around Europe and current borders are not what they were for most of history.
So why force a group of people to remain in Ukraine? They are ungrateful. Let them cast their lot with Russia and let the rest of Ukraine move forward with the West. Why waste lives and billions of euros on what will become a stalemated fight?
So why force a group of people to remain in Ukraine? They are ungrateful. Let them cast their lot with Russia and let the rest of Ukraine move forward with the West. Why waste lives and billions of euros on what will become a stalemated fight?
6
The short answer to Candide's question is that Ukrainians want to remain a single independent country. Pew Global Attitudes 2014 poll found that even in Western Ukraine only 18% favor allowing secession. Even among Russian speakers in the East the results were 57% in favor of remaining united and 27% in favor of secession. This is a Russian invasion directly and by proxy, plain and simple.
1
Do you mean "...even in Eastern Ukraine?..." It would be no surprise in Western Ukraine.
A CNN interview now shows the President saying that he overthrew the previous government. I believe that there is a law against sending weapons to governments created by a coup. What is it that we don't get, that Russia is uncomfortable about having an armed NATO on it border? We should have Obama and Putin meeting in Yalta, just as we did after WW ll. That is what any Peace Prize recipient would do to avoid a nuclear catastrophe.
7
I support the president to make the right call on this. All signs point to Russia upping the anti and it is reasonable to counter that move. For Americans to protest at this point is very premature; wrong president folks.
Americans are often guilty of applying lessons from the last war to the current threat. This is an entirely new situation which is very fluid and needs careful deliberate consideration.
That's what we elected him to do and in my book Obama has been up to the task: not perfect but after six years he is very seasoned now. Let's stand behind our leader.
Americans are often guilty of applying lessons from the last war to the current threat. This is an entirely new situation which is very fluid and needs careful deliberate consideration.
That's what we elected him to do and in my book Obama has been up to the task: not perfect but after six years he is very seasoned now. Let's stand behind our leader.
3
Providing, United States weapons to the Ukraine, will only and seriously increase the heath, and the number of casualties in the Ukraine, and instead of deescalation, will only contribute to more tension, and aggravate the conflict.
There is not question whatsoever, that there is a huge dissatisfaction, disapproval, and discontent, within the population of Eastern Ukraine (which are overwhelmingly of Russian descent), with the central government in the capital Kiev, and which was not the case at all, with the democratically elected government before, and which Victoria Nuland, from the State Department said, was overthrown with United States financial help, in the amount of 5 Billion $, to install a pro E.U. government.
Putin, will never give up help, to these Ukrainian-Russians, (and his remaining in power depends on it) and this may lead, to a partition of the country or t), a take over of the whole Ukraine by Russia, or in an extreme case, a direct military confrontation with the United States, and Putin is
already, ready for it.!!
There is not question whatsoever, that there is a huge dissatisfaction, disapproval, and discontent, within the population of Eastern Ukraine (which are overwhelmingly of Russian descent), with the central government in the capital Kiev, and which was not the case at all, with the democratically elected government before, and which Victoria Nuland, from the State Department said, was overthrown with United States financial help, in the amount of 5 Billion $, to install a pro E.U. government.
Putin, will never give up help, to these Ukrainian-Russians, (and his remaining in power depends on it) and this may lead, to a partition of the country or t), a take over of the whole Ukraine by Russia, or in an extreme case, a direct military confrontation with the United States, and Putin is
already, ready for it.!!
5
It is not true that the tragedy of Ukraine started with the return of Crimea to the Russian territory (Crimea had been severed from Russian Soviet Republic and given to Ukrainian Soviet Republic in 1954 by Nikita Khrushchev). The tragedy of Ukraine started in November 2013 - February 2014, when the Western powers openly supported a violent overthrow of the bad, but legitimately elected Ukrainian president. (This overthrow lasted 5 months and was named Maidan) The US and the EU did not care about Ukraine's sovereignty then. They only started caring about it when the insurgency started - prompted by the Maidan-made destruction of the political balance between East and West that had existed in Ukraine between 1991 and 2014.
7
The violence was started by the Ukrainian president, Yanukovich, and his overthrow was a product of the persistence of the Maidan and his own allies eventually deciding not to back his play, blaming the West for this is incorrect. The tragedy started when Russia, having lost its client, decided to engage in a land grab.
1
Ukrainian Crimea was never Russian, and here's a concise historical analysis why http://youtu.be/R5aDgRb2jzQ
I always respect people's opinions, including delusions, but accusing Russia of land grabs in the period after 1991 is preposterous. Look at the political map: where was NATO in 1991 and where it is now; look at the map of Western-led interventions in Yugoslavia, not to mention Middle East. In Crimea we are protecting not the land, but the people. Read NYT and other publications before 2013: they all report that Crimea and Donetsk are populated by Russia's sympathizers. Can you imagine that these people were not happy with the Maidan regime, which did not include a single person from Crimea and Donetsk into the new government? If you can't, it makes no sense to argue.
2
Why must we ALWAYS be looking for a war someplace on which to spend middle class taxes and increase the profits of the military industrial oligarchy??
Keep this up Washington and we'll find ourselves 'reenacting' our own most famous war.
Keep this up Washington and we'll find ourselves 'reenacting' our own most famous war.
8
It's hard to believe that we are not doing that already, so why make a public show of it? Wouldn't it be best to pump up the sanctions a couple of notches, since this is what will bring Putin to a new conclusion? He is stepping up the war, though, in the hopes that he can bring it to an end, and in the process, maintain most of the gains, if not all, that he has already made. Whereas, by stepping up our economic sanctions and making it clear that even Crimea must be returned to its former status before the sanctions will be lifted, will heighten the concerns of Putin's supporters/beneficiaries to the point that they will want out or him out.
Another proxy war in the making - still US vs. USSR as the leader of Russia never left the USSR behind. So, we do battle destroying someone else's land, homes, crops, and lives. Of course, if we stay 'out' Putin will roll over more and more of Ukraine as he looks to rebuild his empire.
Please, not another war! Please stop supplying money and arms to any country or group from Morocco to Pakistan, including Ukraine and Israel.
7
This is just another example of deliberate delusion in international politics: pretending that Russian troops are not fighting in Ukraine, Israel does not have nuclear weapons and there is such a thing a English cuisine.
3
The issue is less Ukraine but rather containing a Putin Russia that enjoys widespread popular support from using its military to acquire territory or simply to intimidate former Soviet Republics.
Oil prices have tied his hands, but his weakened response is effective against a weak opponent. Oil will likely recover sometime over the next few years. We successfully conducted proxy wars for a generation against the Russians. It is a very unfortunate situation but the US should seriously consider arming the Ukrainians to prevent a return of the old Russia
Oil prices have tied his hands, but his weakened response is effective against a weak opponent. Oil will likely recover sometime over the next few years. We successfully conducted proxy wars for a generation against the Russians. It is a very unfortunate situation but the US should seriously consider arming the Ukrainians to prevent a return of the old Russia
1
Why is this taking so long? Are we waiting for Kiev to fall before we act on it?
1
It is heartening to hear a shift in policy is in the air, but time is important and Ukraine is under an overwhelming assault with Russian soldiers and equipment out-matching the Ukrainian Army fighting with out dated Soviet weaponry.
Ukraine deserves American and global support in defending themselves from Russia and doing nothing will only embolden Russia to further territorial expansions. I hope the Obama Administration gives approval for the military to supply Ukraine with the proper weapons to defend themselves against Russia.
Ukraine deserves American and global support in defending themselves from Russia and doing nothing will only embolden Russia to further territorial expansions. I hope the Obama Administration gives approval for the military to supply Ukraine with the proper weapons to defend themselves against Russia.
2
Everywhere where USA tries to interfere it becomes a huge mess.
US supported the coup in Kiev last year, thinking that they will finally be able to close Russian naval base in Crimea and open their own there.
And after Crimea chose to become a part of Russia USA went nuts.
The eastern regions are only needed because there are huge reserves of Shale gas in which Joe Biden's son has a stake in. And since the east of Ukraine gave the west the finger immediately USA wants to start supplying arm. Washington is full of a bunch of warmongers.
US supported the coup in Kiev last year, thinking that they will finally be able to close Russian naval base in Crimea and open their own there.
And after Crimea chose to become a part of Russia USA went nuts.
The eastern regions are only needed because there are huge reserves of Shale gas in which Joe Biden's son has a stake in. And since the east of Ukraine gave the west the finger immediately USA wants to start supplying arm. Washington is full of a bunch of warmongers.
10
Seems to me the warmongers are the people in the Kremlin who decided to start a war and sow destruction by pouring weapons, mercenaries, troops and fighters into Eastern Ukraine when the vast majority of people in the east wanted no such "brotherly aid". Outrageous to blame the victims for the acts of the Kremlin's imperial aggressions.
3
So how exactly is having a referendum for independence a warmonger act. Luhansk and Donbass just followed the good example of Crimea.
1
Too little, too late, as usual O is always playing defense. Putin is always playing offense, and is totally convinced that O is a total coward. Hey, you don't succeed in the KBG unless you are ready to kill your opponent. O, is just trying to hold on for two years, Putin is in this for the long run, say taking over all of Ukraine. JV? Not even close. O is the organizer of the water boys. Sad.
1
Is this what Mr. Vladimir Putin meant when he talked about " defending ethnic Russians " living in Ukraine? This is more than defending Russian speaking ethnic citizens. This is aggression. He is taking over by force Ukraine piece by piece at the cost of civilian lives. He is saying one thing and doing another. He sent his " little green men " to Crimea saying at first that Russia was not sending soldiers there, then later he commented that he had Russian troops in Crimea. In eastern Ukraine he sent his special units to create chaos and take over government buildings with the pretext that it was the people rising against Kiev. No one confronted him when he took over Crimea from Russia. He is continuing his aggression and smiling. The man is sick because it will bring a disaster onto him and his people. This has to stop. The shelling of buses carrying scared women, young men, and children in Ukraine has to stop. The average Ukranian is living a life of hell not knowing where to hide from the threat of being blown up by shells indiscriminately fired by Putin's terrorist rebels and supporters in eastern Ukraine. The world has had enough. We must arm the Ukranian army to their teeth so they can repel and push away these foreign invaders from eastern Ukraine. The world has seen enough. We must help the Ukranian army to defend itself before it is squashed by these foreign terrorists and the Russian army. These terrorists like ISIS have no respect for civilian lives and humanity.
7
Barack Obama think why do you need this? This is not your war. You Americans do not understand what is happening there. Absolutely do not understand. You see the information from the TV and the only thing you want to show. Russia does not interfere in the affairs of the United States between Mexico. So why is the US climb in this war? Why Sanzio not introduced against the United States when the killing of civilians in Iraq?
After all, there himichesskoe weapon was never found More! Who can answer these questions?
After all, there himichesskoe weapon was never found More! Who can answer these questions?
11
Well I see no harm in giving Ukraine weapons to defend its cities.
Plus there is no way those weapons could harm Russian soldiers. After all like Putin said there are no Russian troops in Ukraine..... RIGHT ?
Plus there is no way those weapons could harm Russian soldiers. After all like Putin said there are no Russian troops in Ukraine..... RIGHT ?
7
Well Kiev junta forces already murdered 5000+ civilians....
Are you in a right mind?
Are you in a right mind?
2
Ike warned us of the military-industrial complex over six decades ago and his own GOP who profess to revere him, as they also revere Lincoln for having freed the slaves, still won't heed his warning. Down this road is Armageddon, as one listens to Putin in the Russian news media thumping his chest and planning to play with his weapons of mass destruction.
1
Ukraine is made up of ethnic Russian, mostly in the east, and with ethnic Ukrainians, mostly in the west.
After "freedom" slowly slipped into the country, encouraged by International Jewish groups and American interference, since the 1990's that I'm aware of, a democratically elected President was chased out of office. This is freedom and democracy?
Russia is merely protecting the ethnic Russians and trying to keep the U.S. and Europe from putting missiles on Russia's door step.
Why is America creating so much conflict around the world? It gives the gang of Rothchilds, Rockefeller, JP Morgan... more control of America. Scare the heck out of the American people so they will blindly pay tax for their security!
America and Europe should engage Russia, open visas for Russians should have been the rule. Instead Europe and America choose to work with the Russian oligarchs, to steal Russian resources and then pretend that the Russian government is not a good partner.
We, the people, need to wake up and take back our country!
After "freedom" slowly slipped into the country, encouraged by International Jewish groups and American interference, since the 1990's that I'm aware of, a democratically elected President was chased out of office. This is freedom and democracy?
Russia is merely protecting the ethnic Russians and trying to keep the U.S. and Europe from putting missiles on Russia's door step.
Why is America creating so much conflict around the world? It gives the gang of Rothchilds, Rockefeller, JP Morgan... more control of America. Scare the heck out of the American people so they will blindly pay tax for their security!
America and Europe should engage Russia, open visas for Russians should have been the rule. Instead Europe and America choose to work with the Russian oligarchs, to steal Russian resources and then pretend that the Russian government is not a good partner.
We, the people, need to wake up and take back our country!
4
"After "freedom" slowly slipped into the country, encouraged by International Jewish groups"
This is naked anti-Semitism, and from a person I am willing to bet plays the "Kiev as neo-Nazi" card to the hilt. How's that for irony?
This is naked anti-Semitism, and from a person I am willing to bet plays the "Kiev as neo-Nazi" card to the hilt. How's that for irony?
6
What country would that be John? The Netherlands, the US or the United States of Paranoia and conspiracy theories... Your knowledge of Ukraine is pathetically absurd and ridiculous. The majority of Eastern Ukrainians may speak Russian, but they are ethnically Ukrainian. And seeing what their compatriots in Donetsk and Luhansk are doing to those regions and the people living there, the people who have so far been spared Russian mercenary and Chechen "liberation" have no wish to have their regions and cities, such as Kharkiv and Dnepropetrovsk similarly "liberated".
2
I hope the Free West is prepared for a return to the darkest days of the cold war , or worse . Russia is a local power and has no right to spheres of influence in former USSR satellites . No corridor from Russia to Crimea should be permitted . Arms will have to be provided to the legitimate Kiev government sooner or later but these could move from the US to a commercial third party who could SELL them to Kiev , the debt being written off by the Western governments .
Since the ostensible fall of the USSR , the anticipated "Peace Dividend" has been carefully hoarded by Russia but spent by the West . The balance is being restored at the moment by the erosion of Russia's economic infrastructure but it may be too late . The CIA , MI5 and MI6 are needed now more than ever . No nation or individual ever had cause to fear any of these bodies unless they were enemies of Freedom and Democracy . All US and UK cutbacks on defence programmes should be reversed .
Since the ostensible fall of the USSR , the anticipated "Peace Dividend" has been carefully hoarded by Russia but spent by the West . The balance is being restored at the moment by the erosion of Russia's economic infrastructure but it may be too late . The CIA , MI5 and MI6 are needed now more than ever . No nation or individual ever had cause to fear any of these bodies unless they were enemies of Freedom and Democracy . All US and UK cutbacks on defence programmes should be reversed .
3
So you are supporting the genocide that Kiev tried to commit.
Disgusting.
And Russia is a global power which has all the right to protect ethnic Russians.
Do you remember what USA did in Grenada when US citizens were attacked there ?
Disgusting.
And Russia is a global power which has all the right to protect ethnic Russians.
Do you remember what USA did in Grenada when US citizens were attacked there ?
3
As in Syria, isn't it a little late for this talk? The Ukrainians should have been provided with anti-armor weapons early on, but it is probably too late. Putin will keep expanding his conquests until it is clear the West will go to war with him.
How much do we snub a Russia with 5,000
nuclear weapons?
nuclear weapons?
4
Amazing how short the public memory is. In 2002, I looked with amazement as the public was manipulated into Iraq war while leaving the true source of Islamic terrorists untouched. The result is obvious in today's Middle East. Now a more dangerous version of the game is afoot. A legitimate government was overthrown in Ukraine with US help, remember Victoria Nuland anyone? Wife of the famed neocon Robert Kagan. A neonazi regime is being propped up in Ukraine while suppressing the self determination rights of Russian speaking Ukrainians. Putin is not a saint, but not a fool either to allow the repeat of early days of WW2.
13
It is more than foolish to support the Ukrainian government in a civil war against its own people in the seceding Eastern part, but that does not make it a "neonazi regime", either.
Thank's for the perspective of the Olgintsy. You know who you are but for those who are unfamiliar see: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/russia-is-not-charlie/5143...
Your talking points are tired. There was no coup, the US did not overthrow the Ukrainian government (Ukrainians fed up with Yanukovych's corruption did that); and only Russia is behaving in an imperialistic manner in bullying a country which has the temerity to seek its own sovereign path without the Kremlin's consent. As for Russian speaking Ukrainians being threatened by the current democratic government, this ongoing accusation is so lacking in substance, and is frankly repulsive when the consequences of Russia's very real war against Ukraine for Ukrainian civilians in real deaths, displacement and destruction are ongoing.
Your talking points are tired. There was no coup, the US did not overthrow the Ukrainian government (Ukrainians fed up with Yanukovych's corruption did that); and only Russia is behaving in an imperialistic manner in bullying a country which has the temerity to seek its own sovereign path without the Kremlin's consent. As for Russian speaking Ukrainians being threatened by the current democratic government, this ongoing accusation is so lacking in substance, and is frankly repulsive when the consequences of Russia's very real war against Ukraine for Ukrainian civilians in real deaths, displacement and destruction are ongoing.
2
This is more of a European problem, let them take the lead on this. We should stay out of it.
6
Its about time the United' States started helping the Ukrainian nation. We knee from the start we would have to or Russia/Putin well be back on the front door step of NATO. Its seems that most people knew this except certain people in the Obama administration who kept there head in the sand..What a shame this has been on America letting Russia slaughter thousands of people while we TALK.
6
Weapons should had been given to Ukraine months ago and the fact that it is only now that they are debating these facts makes them irresponsible.
The only way Russia will stop attacking its neighbor is if its neighbor have enough weapon to send enough russian troops back home in body bags.
Russia only left Afghanistan because the Afghans resisted them and killed off an unbearable numbers of Russians...Something similar needs to happen for Russia to leave Ukraine.
More sanction needs to also be applied to make this a huge economic cost for Putin and his gangster in the Kremlin.
The only way Russia will stop attacking its neighbor is if its neighbor have enough weapon to send enough russian troops back home in body bags.
Russia only left Afghanistan because the Afghans resisted them and killed off an unbearable numbers of Russians...Something similar needs to happen for Russia to leave Ukraine.
More sanction needs to also be applied to make this a huge economic cost for Putin and his gangster in the Kremlin.
5
You say "The only way Russia will stop attacking its neighbor is if its neighbor is if its neighbors have enough weapon (sic) to send enough Russian troops home in body bags."
Do you, or anyone else out there, really think that Russia will do nothing if advance weaponry is provided to the Ukraine? Perish such thoughts, please! it shouldn't take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out that Russia will simply arm the Separatists with equally, if not more, advanced weapons. The the Ukrainians would fill far more body bags with its own than it will fill with Russians to send back to Russia.
As a side point, I wonder if you would espouse this same principle for the Israel versus Palestinians situation?????
Do you, or anyone else out there, really think that Russia will do nothing if advance weaponry is provided to the Ukraine? Perish such thoughts, please! it shouldn't take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out that Russia will simply arm the Separatists with equally, if not more, advanced weapons. The the Ukrainians would fill far more body bags with its own than it will fill with Russians to send back to Russia.
As a side point, I wonder if you would espouse this same principle for the Israel versus Palestinians situation?????
4
The Russians have been remarkably reserved. The US will find this out should they make the mistake of dumping arms into the region. You have go be completely ignorant of East European history over the last 200 years to threaten Russia like this proposal does.
Ask yourselves, why is Ukraine causing this bloodshed, why is the West looking to escalate? Ukraine stops it's attacks, the conflict will end.
Ask yourselves, why is Ukraine causing this bloodshed, why is the West looking to escalate? Ukraine stops it's attacks, the conflict will end.
11
Same goes for your Pro Russians: Stop your attacks and the conflict ends....after all your side is the one attacking towns now.
Ask yourselves: why are you causing this bloodshed and why are Pro Russians looking to escalate as they bombard more towns?
Ask yourselves: why are you causing this bloodshed and why are Pro Russians looking to escalate as they bombard more towns?
4
Pro Russians are defending themselves. They did not start this war. War was started by Kiev's illegal interim president back in april.
5
CK: somewhat ironic that you invoke the history of Eastern Europe for the past 200 years to substantiate an argument in defence of Kremlin imperialism. There are plenty of Eastern Europeans, Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians, the Baltic States, who are very aware of their history and Russia's role in it as long time oppressors and periodic invaders. The only difference between the security those states now enjoy from Russian aggression and Ukraine lacks, is NATO membership.
1
Russia is proud to have Crimea "without" a single bullet shot and the West is trying to get the rest of the Ukraine without a single bullet given.
The press is to failed to have done due diligence in the lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, and this article suggests they are not much more critical today. It freely quotes and uses the term "defensive arms". What is a defensive arm? Any military tool used for "defense" enables "offense". How is an anti-tank missile "defense"? If the Ukrainians destroy separatist tanks, or otherwise deny an area to them, the Ukrainian military is in a better position to attack. Even bullet-proof vests, called "non-lethal", give soldiers more ability to attack. They will suffer less casualties, and be able to maintain more offensive momentum than without the vests. Counter-battery radar? It's the first step to counter-battery fire, which again can enable offensive attacks. A good defense on one part of the battlefront frees up more assets for an offensive on another part. And yes, even blankets can help an attacking force. The Germans were sorely missing them in winter 1941 and their attack ground down to a halt for lack of winter supplies (including winter clothes and bedding).
And what next? What happens when American weapons kill Russian soldiers? What will Russia do? Will they give weapons to American adversaries?
I am a former Pentagon strategist, and it is astounding that on the one hand someone, both in the media and the government, is throwing the concept of "defensive arms" around; and that there is a complete lack of strategy and planning.
And what next? What happens when American weapons kill Russian soldiers? What will Russia do? Will they give weapons to American adversaries?
I am a former Pentagon strategist, and it is astounding that on the one hand someone, both in the media and the government, is throwing the concept of "defensive arms" around; and that there is a complete lack of strategy and planning.
6
So are you saying that there ARE Russian soldiers in Ukraine that might be killed by western supplied weapons?
What are they doing in Ukraine?
What are they doing in Ukraine?
4
Exactly the point- weapons are never defensive. It does not matter if Russian troops are in Ukraine or not. It is a backwater country and a European problem. The US should not get involved in any way especially if Europe does not .
2
For Obama and Bush to be so gung ho to engage in armed conflict thousands of miles away on the doorstep of Russia after their misjudgments in going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan and Yemen (and making a mess of all three ventures) is hard to understand. Why we are so anxious to attack Putin and Russia on their border where we have no legitimate reason to be trying to damage Russia and should be seeking Russia's cooperation in dealing with world problems. After our disasters in the three wars we have plunged into how is it we have resources to waste on trying to make trouble for Russia when our only interest In doing so seems to come from our sidekick Israel who resents Russia opposing Israeli killing and theft of land in Palestine.
8
Well Bill: because it is not about the US attacking Russia and Russian troops. It is about providing Ukrainians with the means to defend themselves from Russian aggression and troops that began and refuse to stop this conflict. And seriously, Israel as an instigator of this conflict? The paranoia that is often seen in the comments section of RT is now seeping into the comments section here.
This is about Ukraine having a sovereign right to defend itself. It has nothing to do with the middle east conflict.
This is about Ukraine having a sovereign right to defend itself. It has nothing to do with the middle east conflict.
2
Let's provide tanks, heavy weapon artillery, helicopters and jets to the Ukranians. I'll bet the Russians won't even realize it, since we don't realize they're sending weapons into East Ukraine
3
It's about time we support with more than words.
3
How much should we raise your taxes to pay for this?? $3billion divided by the 100 million Americans that actually pay taxes makes your share $30. Now that is just for starters expect to pay many more as it escalates.
1
I'm glad you sre not in command wth such short commend. The consequenses will be huge and start a 3rd Wirld War. The IS will become stronger as of lack if control and the US will get involved in a war far far from a winning position. There are no winners here and the world will be a dissaster the next 10 years. Who can predict it this time.
No one can, so stay out.
No one can, so stay out.
1
I'm not an interventionist, but I think the Ukrainians have fought bravely and deserve any support we can realistically give them.
5
Putting aside, for a moment, what's going on in Ukraine. Is selling arms to Ukraine is legal? Yes. It's not under UN embargo. If no laws are going to be broken, by supplying arms to Ukraine, what's the problem, exactly? Mr. Putin might not like it? What else can't we sale to Ukraine (or any other country, for that matter), because it might upset Mr. Putin? If Mexico decides to get closer with Russia, even purchase weapons from Russia, the US won't be happy about it. Guaranteed. Will it invade it?
Russia is in open aggression against Ukraine. It's supplying advanced heavy weapons. Russian army has been fighting alongside with rebels against Ukr army. Some time in June, the State Department was "seriously concerned" by the reports that 3 tanks crossed border from Russia to Ukraine. There're hundreds of peaces of heavy weapons crossing the boarder now. Time and again it was said that US is not going to supply lethal weapons to Ukr. That there's no other way, but negotiations and peaceful resolution. Each turn Mr. Putin doubled down.
Ukraine is defending itself against that aggression. It had no army 9 months ago. Ukr soldiers are fighting to the death. There're stories on Facebook by Ukr. battalion commanders (looks legit), how they're shooting from small arms at advancing tanks' triplexes to "blind" the crew and throwing hand grenades. That's like going against grizzly bear with a Swiss army knife. Perhaps it's time we help them to defend themselves
Russia is in open aggression against Ukraine. It's supplying advanced heavy weapons. Russian army has been fighting alongside with rebels against Ukr army. Some time in June, the State Department was "seriously concerned" by the reports that 3 tanks crossed border from Russia to Ukraine. There're hundreds of peaces of heavy weapons crossing the boarder now. Time and again it was said that US is not going to supply lethal weapons to Ukr. That there's no other way, but negotiations and peaceful resolution. Each turn Mr. Putin doubled down.
Ukraine is defending itself against that aggression. It had no army 9 months ago. Ukr soldiers are fighting to the death. There're stories on Facebook by Ukr. battalion commanders (looks legit), how they're shooting from small arms at advancing tanks' triplexes to "blind" the crew and throwing hand grenades. That's like going against grizzly bear with a Swiss army knife. Perhaps it's time we help them to defend themselves
5
Who is the aggressor here? The right wing nationalists who perpetrated the coup against the elected president of Ukraine are attacking the people of eastern Ukraine.
The government in Kiev can't negotiate a cease fire because they have absolutely no control over the volunteer battalions fighting in the east.
We are supporting extremists in Kiev just like we supported the jihadist mujahedeen in Afghanistan in the 1980's.
The government in Kiev can't negotiate a cease fire because they have absolutely no control over the volunteer battalions fighting in the east.
We are supporting extremists in Kiev just like we supported the jihadist mujahedeen in Afghanistan in the 1980's.
58
Get your facts straight - there was no coup in Ukraine. There were popular demonstrations which led to brutal suppression by the former corrupt administration of Yanukovych which resulted in him fleeing the country to Russia, and subsequent free and fair elections for a reform-minded democratic government now led by President Poreshenko.
Russia early on took advantage of this turmoil by staging a dubious succession and illegal annexation of Crimea, and then tried to repeat the process in the Donbass, Ukraine's industrial heartland.
THERE WOULD BE NO WAR in Ukraine if Russia would stop attacking Ukraine! The so called pro-Russian separatists would have collaped in September if Putin hadn't stepped in to pump them with arms and troops.
And now these separatists have gone on a massive offensive. Should Ukraine, a sovereign nation, not be allowed to defend itself with aid from its allies in the name of 'peace?'
That's preposterous - the Russians launch military operations while claiming Ukraine is the aggressor in a sleazy disinformation campaign designed to confuse and dilute any criticism of a war that on Russia benefits from.
No one wants war, but it's happening in front of our eyes and no peace talks are going to succeed without force to back them up.
A democratic republic in Europe is being savagely attacked by Russia. If you don't care, that's your prerogative, but stop spreading Putin's lies and propaganda so that others may judge for themselves based on facts.
Russia early on took advantage of this turmoil by staging a dubious succession and illegal annexation of Crimea, and then tried to repeat the process in the Donbass, Ukraine's industrial heartland.
THERE WOULD BE NO WAR in Ukraine if Russia would stop attacking Ukraine! The so called pro-Russian separatists would have collaped in September if Putin hadn't stepped in to pump them with arms and troops.
And now these separatists have gone on a massive offensive. Should Ukraine, a sovereign nation, not be allowed to defend itself with aid from its allies in the name of 'peace?'
That's preposterous - the Russians launch military operations while claiming Ukraine is the aggressor in a sleazy disinformation campaign designed to confuse and dilute any criticism of a war that on Russia benefits from.
No one wants war, but it's happening in front of our eyes and no peace talks are going to succeed without force to back them up.
A democratic republic in Europe is being savagely attacked by Russia. If you don't care, that's your prerogative, but stop spreading Putin's lies and propaganda so that others may judge for themselves based on facts.
2
Do you get your info from Russia Today broadcasts?
2
The democratically elected government in Ukraine cannot negotiate a cease fire because Putin and his separatists puppets, bolstered by Russian troops and equipment, seek to wreak more death and destruction on more areas of Eastern Ukraine. At to the absurd extremists nationalists arguments, you should take a closer look at the conduct of the Russian government to find truer representations of fascism today. Or even some recent European parliamentary elections. Far right candidates and parties polled minuscule percentages in Ukraine's most recent elections.
1
After supporting the armed coup against the legitimate president of Ukraine, the United States continues to insist on supporting, if not fomenting, the Ukrainian hawks. Thus far, the proxy war initiated by it, has gone as well as Iraq and Afghanistan. With additional brilliant moves, an all-out war between the US and Russia might become the real legacy of the Obama administration. The one cheering thought in all this, is that Mr. Obama is currently as popular in Ukraine as he is in Russia.
7
One major problem with your thesis Nikolai. The proxy war was not started by the US or even the current democratically elected Ukrainian government.
The war was started, fueled, instigated and fanned by ongoing Russian aggression and imperialism against Ukraine. Ukraine has a right to defend itself, no one else will.
The war was started, fueled, instigated and fanned by ongoing Russian aggression and imperialism against Ukraine. Ukraine has a right to defend itself, no one else will.
3
Your statement is belied by the fats. The crisis was started by the five billion dollar investment in subverting the Ukrainian government (according to Nuland). This claim by Nuland, was recently substantiated by president Obama who has very clearly said on CNN that the US was involved in the armed coup in Ukraine. No one hides the fact that the US wants Ukraine to join NATO and that is something Russia cannot allow out of defense considerations. Everything else flows out of this dynamic. The current US path most likely will lead to a war with Russia, and no one will win that. Ukraine, for all practical purposes is no longer a sovereign country, but America's satrap.
1
@nokolai burlakoff
You've distored the facts. The $5 billion was spent over 23 years and supported a variety of NGOs. Claiming that it was to subvert a specific government is simply incorrect. Obama also said nothing about the events in Ukraine being an armed coup.
You've distored the facts. The $5 billion was spent over 23 years and supported a variety of NGOs. Claiming that it was to subvert a specific government is simply incorrect. Obama also said nothing about the events in Ukraine being an armed coup.
2
If the President wanted and N.A.T.O. wanted to help Ukraine they could have did that long ago. But I think N.A.T.O. has had a wait and see stance. Hoping that President Putin start a negotiated settlement. But if he thinks just because nothing was done in crimea, that would be bad mistake. Are we ready for cold war II ?? Why will Russia not just let other countries live in pice ?? They sure pose NO threat to Russia. The only one that I can think would the one on there border CHINA.
The crisis in the Ukraine is no longer a subject of debate or negotiation. What we are seeing unfolding is an issue of global concern. We are witnessing the same with the ISIS movement dragging countries into their terrorist agendas - countries such as Japan that have up until now remained neutral. Much like the terrorists bearing weapons on behalf of ISIS, Mr. Putin is taunting other countries to become involved in the Ukraine situation. Forbes Magazine last year name Mr. Putin the most powerful person in the world today. Today we are witnessing a global crisis engineered by terrorists, and power mongers such as Mr. Putin. The United States does not stand alone today in what we are confronting. This is a global dilemma that demands all civilized countries on this planet to take a united stand to confront the enemies now thriving in epic proportions. This is no longer the U.S. against the bad guys. For the sake of peace, what is confronting us today cries out for a unified, global effort.
2
Sorry. The UN does not agree with you and it is their call to make.
1
We need to provide "volunteer" units of tank buster aircraft together with air defense suppression units. Special forces on the ground to direct air support for the Ukraine as well.
I'm over this Putin dictator. Let's put him out of business.
Plus get tougher on sanctions. Bear in mind that Putin is as rapacious as Hitler ever was, so he'll keep coming, until you stop him.
I'm over this Putin dictator. Let's put him out of business.
Plus get tougher on sanctions. Bear in mind that Putin is as rapacious as Hitler ever was, so he'll keep coming, until you stop him.
3
Is it really an independent panel?As you say regarding ,former senior American officials, who urge the United States to send $3 billion in defensive arms.
Has anyone looked in to this panel and there connections to the military industrial complex?
I would not be at all surprised if the whole independent panel is connected one way or another to TMIC .
It's just another way of multinationals getting there bloody hands on are hard earned dollars.
Not surprisingly Hillary has got her nose in the trough as well.
Gentleman STOP THE MADNESS!
Has anyone looked in to this panel and there connections to the military industrial complex?
I would not be at all surprised if the whole independent panel is connected one way or another to TMIC .
It's just another way of multinationals getting there bloody hands on are hard earned dollars.
Not surprisingly Hillary has got her nose in the trough as well.
Gentleman STOP THE MADNESS!
3
how about food and cloths? I'm hungry and been wearing same shoes for 3 years. thanks.
2
Yes they only want to send bombs and ammunition,sorry but the generals are not in the shoe or clothing industry.
I notice the article on the Debaltsevo salient mentions Semenchenko. What it does not tell you is what happened to Semenchenko.
"http://dnrespublika.info/kombat-avantyurist-semenchenko-posle-kontuzii-u..."
"31.01 battalion commander Semenchenko participated in the operation to release battalion "Svityaz". During the operation, he was wounded. This morning when he was in a road accident. His condition has deteriorated. He was given medical assistance," the statement said."
Further reading says that he has a punctured lung, fractures, and a concussion.
"http://dnrespublika.info/kombat-avantyurist-semenchenko-posle-kontuzii-u..."
"31.01 battalion commander Semenchenko participated in the operation to release battalion "Svityaz". During the operation, he was wounded. This morning when he was in a road accident. His condition has deteriorated. He was given medical assistance," the statement said."
Further reading says that he has a punctured lung, fractures, and a concussion.
1
Thanks Judy for providing readers with the website news services of the DPR. Curiously, the DPR representative does not mention the number of civilians they are killing with their ongoing bombardment of the "Debaltseve salient" (as if this were the battle of the Bulge and you were commenting on the History Channel), nor any of the the other towns and cities they have shelled and civilians they have killed in other parts of Eastern Ukraine. God save the poor souls in Kharkiv and Dnepropetrovsk from any further "liberation" from their brotherly chechen and Russian neighbours.
1
To joftoronto: 100% sure it is DPR bombardments? NYTimes told you that? There are plenty of info all over internet, including videos with inhabitants of Donetsk, Mariupol, Gorlovka, etc. Let those people tell you, not NY times.
So all of our Generals are excited about getting into another war. And why not? That's how they advance up the ladder, get their pay raised and open the post-military doors to fortunes. They certainly run no personal risk. Since their losses on Afghanistan & Iraq what better than the Ukraine that the CIA so politely opened for them.
Perhaps we should send them and Susan Rice to the front.
Perhaps we should send them and Susan Rice to the front.
5
Sanctions are being laughed off by Putin behind closed doors and are basically ineffective, allowing him to forge ahead with his land grab plan. It's the right thing to do to have a coalition of allies supply arms to Ukraine as quickly as possible to stem the tide of fully armed Russian backed rebels, if only to create a stalemate situation, temporarily at least .
2
Putins Iraq.
6
Are we inching towards a war with th Russia? I do not think we should - Putin has no sense of humor.
What can the US gain from such a war? Poland and the Baltic State something, perhaps. Ukraine is NOT a member of NATO and should never become one.
Current and previous Czech presidents are not that critical of Putin as some politicians here.
What can the US gain from such a war? Poland and the Baltic State something, perhaps. Ukraine is NOT a member of NATO and should never become one.
Current and previous Czech presidents are not that critical of Putin as some politicians here.
20
The Czech president did indeed come out with uncritical comments about Putin last November. The resulting demonstrations by large crowds however made it clear the Czech population do not agree with him.
And certainly the president of the other half of the old Czechoslovakia does not share Zeman's views and is a vocal critic of Putin.
And certainly the president of the other half of the old Czechoslovakia does not share Zeman's views and is a vocal critic of Putin.
3
Please state a legitimate reason why Poland could join NATO and Ukraine can't? That's right, there's none.
1
U.S. Considers Supplying Arms to Ukraine Forces...?!
DC neocons started this carnage. They hang out at Majdan whole time until legitimate government and president were overthrown in one of the most brutal coups.
DC neocons started this carnage. They hang out at Majdan whole time until legitimate government and president were overthrown in one of the most brutal coups.
21
And where's the so called "legitimate govt and president"? Did not they flee to mother Russia? Aren't they on the Interpol Wanted List? http://www.interpol.int/notice/search/wanted/2014-13031
2
Time to stop poking our head in the sand. We should have been arming the Ukrainians from the day that Russia blatantly invaded the country. 500 antitank Javelin systems would be a good start. We have thousands of Gavins sitting around in warehouses in Germany. I'm sure the Ukrainians would welcome a couple hundred of those too. All of those are defensive, of course? I'm sure they would also greatly appreciate good satellite and all the ELINT we can provide them.
12
Once again Obama is a day late and a dollar short. He either has to decide it's not important and stay out of it or go for it. Opponents like Putin use aggression to have their way. Either one stands up to him or don't bother. Roosevelt had it right: "Speak softly but carry a big stick." We have spoken loudly and carried no stick. I don't mean shoot first like Baby Bush but back up what we say. Putin knew he had little to fear from us. We were very lucky the price of oil dropped.
7
President Obama seems to want to make bad decisions. We are on the edge of going back into the Middle East. Now we want to jump into middle of the Ukraine Russian war. Both are a witch's brew and we will be entangled in both for many years. Apparently, 15 years of fighting in a hopeless wars has not been enough for the US.
The president, according to news reports, also believes that measles vaccines for children should be the parents call. This is a trifecta of bad decisions.
The president, according to news reports, also believes that measles vaccines for children should be the parents call. This is a trifecta of bad decisions.
12
If we do not help our allies hold their ground in Ukraine or Georgia, next thing we will find ourselves is standing ground against Russian aggression in the Baltic states and Alaska.
1
Dear NYT and the readers, why not consider what the "end plan" is? Or whether our administration in Washington has a long-term plan at all for relations with Ukraine and Russia? Okay, let's officially arm Ukraine with all their war party desires, and then what? Russia will step up and do the same for the East. This area is vital for their national security, and Putin will never allow a hostile nation with NATO bases on the border with Russia. Is the desired end game a big showdown, the Armageddon, the nuclear cloud? Because this is where it may end up. People who have lived through the previous cold war acknowledge that the current situation is far worse and more dangerous, because there is no public debate, anywhere, no different points of view on the situation, no discussion. As people, we are being dragged into a proxy war that no one wants.
32
I am glad that reasonable people disagree with you. Your reasoning would of given all of Europe to Russia
4
Why "the East", currently occupied by Russia and it's mercenaries, is "vital for their national security"? Where do you draw your information from? Why the North is not vital, or South, or West? Are you willing to give Alaska back to Russia because "it is vital for their national security"?
1
To Tom: not at all. Putin so far has been mostly reacting to the situation. Making such dramatic statements as "Putin wants to take over Europe" is ignorant and irresponsible, to say the least. Sure, USA can give arms to Ukraine, but who is going to fight? Poroshenko is scrambling to enlist men in the West, who are fleeing the country in every direction, including seeking refuge in Russia.
1
"Some of the weapons are too sophisticated to be used by hastily trained separatists, a Western official said. NATO officials estimate that about 1,000 Russian military and intelligence personnel are supporting the separatist offensive"
The same would be true if we sent radars to locate enemy artillery fire. I suspect it already is true of the radars we sent to locate mortar fire, and our communications gear with its code and jamming features.
This is how we got into Vietnam, with "advisers" and then a need to protect our advisers. We had similar numbers doing the same sort of specialist help in Afghanistan.
We are edging into this in ways no more truthful than Tonkin Gulf or WMD.
The same would be true if we sent radars to locate enemy artillery fire. I suspect it already is true of the radars we sent to locate mortar fire, and our communications gear with its code and jamming features.
This is how we got into Vietnam, with "advisers" and then a need to protect our advisers. We had similar numbers doing the same sort of specialist help in Afghanistan.
We are edging into this in ways no more truthful than Tonkin Gulf or WMD.
44
This is NOT Vietnam. This is the first full scale war in Europe in 60 years. This war is run by a megalomaniac that believes he can win a Nuclear war with the US. This man Putin must be stopped.
3
And how do you feel about how Russia has been "edging into this"? Your argument is that the US should never support an ally no matter what. It's a one size fits all argument that automatically negates and projection of American power. Just as bad as the "war is the first option" hawks.
2
Ironic comments Mark. I'd say the party who has been fueling and participating in this war while attempting to deny their participation is not the US government.
Notice the faulty logic at play here:
Russia has every right to defend its "interests" by sending troops, and heavy armor into Ukraine, a sovereign nation.
Yet, Ukraine, a sovereign nation, should not receive military aid from its allies to defend its territorial integrity from foreign forces on its territory because it might "escalate" the situation.
Absurd.
Russia has every right to defend its "interests" by sending troops, and heavy armor into Ukraine, a sovereign nation.
Yet, Ukraine, a sovereign nation, should not receive military aid from its allies to defend its territorial integrity from foreign forces on its territory because it might "escalate" the situation.
Absurd.
21
People fighting in the East are Ukranians who don't recognize the current government that came to power by military coup. Based on what you said, Ukraine is defending its "territorial integrity" from its own citizens. Absurd.
4
Agreed. I think not sending weapons is more about Obama's cowardice than good foreign policy.
2
Its allies? How come that US did not consider Ukraine an ally until the Government became clearly anti-Russian? Coincidence?
Provide defensive and OFFENSIVE weapons to Ukraine. Surely even someone like Obama does not want to be another Neville Chamberlain. Chase the beast Putin back to his lair and destroy him.
6
What could possibly go wrong?
16
best comment!
I do not understand. We have methodically started a new Cold War with Russia, trying to circle Russia with military bases and missiles and vilifying Russia for any resistance. Georgia launched an attack against Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers in Ossetia, on the Russian border, and we immediately began to vilify Russia for responding, even though the response was necessary to protect Ossetians and Russian peacekeepers and the response was measured. Now, we have encouraged a coup in Ukraine, a coup that is wildly anti-Russian, and we are further vilifying Russia for being concerned with Russian heritage people along the Russian border.
New York Times columnists write of President Putin in the most inflaming terms. I do not understand. We went to war needlessly in 2003 and have been at war ever since. Why are we bent on making harming Russia which should be our ally? Why do we vilify Russia and especially President Putin who reflects Russian needs and responsibilities?
New York Times columnists write of President Putin in the most inflaming terms. I do not understand. We went to war needlessly in 2003 and have been at war ever since. Why are we bent on making harming Russia which should be our ally? Why do we vilify Russia and especially President Putin who reflects Russian needs and responsibilities?
45
Why does Russia always try to present itself as the victim? Why does it blame for the US for everything that goes wrong in Russia? (including low oil prices which are subject to the economic laws of supply and demand) The US did not encourage a coup in Ukraine. How can a coup in Ukraine be anti-Russian? Was Putin President of Ukraine at the time? Actions speak louder than words--when Russian GRAD missiles are killing civilians in a Ukrainian city (civilians of all ethnicities, including ethnic Russians)--what is there to say? Russia is not the victim here but the aggressor and the longer Putin pretends there are no Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine (do you believe that lie, too?) the more credibility he is losing with the world leaders. Stealing the Super bowl ring did not help.
3
the amount of Russian apologists in this section are mind boggling. Generals, like all officials have press offices for a reason. The fact that this information is being leaked by unnamed sources indicate that the United States is warning Russia to back off with the possibility of increasing lethal aid to Ukraine. If anyone has any proof of NATO weapons already being supplied to the Ukrainians, I'd like to see it. Right now I see ex Soviet equipment with a mixture of more modern US type protective gear. The insurgents on the other hand, have lots of specialized heavy equipment that isn't in the Ukrainian arsenal. Are people really defending aggression by Russia against Ukraine simply because people decided to depose a corrupt president? What ever happened to the guarantee of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all, especially under the rule of law?
15
I don't get the complete inability of empathy with how other people would react to your actions. Would the US back off because Russia supplies more weapons to Eastern Ukraine?
So why do you expect Russia to be "warned off" by the threat to do likewise?
These posts reveals a deep conviction that US citizens are somehow different and superior to everyone else and that while you would bravely stand up to threats everyone else will cowardly bend before yours.
No matter what your take on the conflict is or your goals are, if you do not regard Russian as coequal humans your analysis will be seriously flawed.
So why do you expect Russia to be "warned off" by the threat to do likewise?
These posts reveals a deep conviction that US citizens are somehow different and superior to everyone else and that while you would bravely stand up to threats everyone else will cowardly bend before yours.
No matter what your take on the conflict is or your goals are, if you do not regard Russian as coequal humans your analysis will be seriously flawed.
3
You speak as if you know for a fact what kind of weapons the rebels have. There is propaganda on both sides. Notice how the shelling or mariupol by rebels got reported by our media, but the shelling of donetsk all last year by ukraine's military was not really mentioned often. Its funny that you quote "the guarantee of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all"......most of the rebels are eastern ukrainian's. You have to understand the history of these two countries, they are very connected and Russian culture spread out into the satellite countries, hence the reason most of these people speak Russian rather than Ukrainian, or both. I mean lets use logic here, remember when western media reported that the Crimean election was forced? So why have we not heard of any dissent or rebellion coming from that area? I also don't know why we do not see more evidence of "9000 Russian troops entering ukraine" in the latest offensive.....this is all absurd and its all leading to war, I have seen it from the start by just looking at headlines throughout the year.
1
it's not about who's side your on .Its not the super Bowl .Russia v America.
It's about the Generals and there friends making money from the sale of weapons .Do you think they really genuinely care about the people in Kiev?
The top brass and ex top brass are lining there own pockets .And of course they want the war to escalate right up until both countries have there finger on the nuclear triggers.
It's about the Generals and there friends making money from the sale of weapons .Do you think they really genuinely care about the people in Kiev?
The top brass and ex top brass are lining there own pockets .And of course they want the war to escalate right up until both countries have there finger on the nuclear triggers.
Most people are under the mistaken impression that the Budapest Memorandum obligates the signatories to go to war in defense of Ukraine's territorial integrity. That is a untrue. The Memorandum has no such clause.
The Memorandum shows that the signatories pledged to "respect" Ukraine's territorial integrity, but nothing more. The term "respect" is used vaguely. Beyond that, the treaty obligates the US to take action in the UN if Ukraine suffers nuclear attack by another power. But, Ukraine has not suffered a nuclear attack.
More than anything else, the Memorandum was just a gesture of good will between the signatories. It holds symbolic value, showing that the signatories appreciate that Ukraine had the pragmatism to relinquish nukes which it did not have the operational command and control abilities to use in the first place. That's all.
See this very sober, insightful article by Doug Bandow to understand what the Memorandum really meant for the US and other signatories:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2015/01/28/ukraines-conflict-with...
The Memorandum shows that the signatories pledged to "respect" Ukraine's territorial integrity, but nothing more. The term "respect" is used vaguely. Beyond that, the treaty obligates the US to take action in the UN if Ukraine suffers nuclear attack by another power. But, Ukraine has not suffered a nuclear attack.
More than anything else, the Memorandum was just a gesture of good will between the signatories. It holds symbolic value, showing that the signatories appreciate that Ukraine had the pragmatism to relinquish nukes which it did not have the operational command and control abilities to use in the first place. That's all.
See this very sober, insightful article by Doug Bandow to understand what the Memorandum really meant for the US and other signatories:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2015/01/28/ukraines-conflict-with...
10
It was also understood that NATO would not expand to Eastern Europe.
I have the utmost sympathy why the Baltic countries and Poland wanted the protection of NATO because of their history, but NATO has failed to couple this expansion with minimal respect towards Russian interests, for example the insistence on the respect of the rights of the huge Russian minorities in the Baltic countries (which is very variable from country to country).
Even if you think that Putin is just an evil imperialist who wants to conquer the world you should at least have the common sense not to give him the means to justify it towards his own people.
I have the utmost sympathy why the Baltic countries and Poland wanted the protection of NATO because of their history, but NATO has failed to couple this expansion with minimal respect towards Russian interests, for example the insistence on the respect of the rights of the huge Russian minorities in the Baltic countries (which is very variable from country to country).
Even if you think that Putin is just an evil imperialist who wants to conquer the world you should at least have the common sense not to give him the means to justify it towards his own people.
3
Give Ukraine some nuclear weapons back.
So, should we wait till Russia attacks Ukraine with nukes? Of should we provide Ukraine defensive weapons to make sure any further attack will be too costly for Russia's lend grab syndrome?
Unbelievable! So the US would make a major move in seeing Ukrainians even more pitted against each other?
10
Russia and Ukraine are like North and South Korea. We could not allow the North to invade the South back then, and we should not allow for that to happen now. It's that simple, we are allies with Ukraine which gave up their nukes for the sake of peace at the request of the U.S.
For a war that we have little interest in, a decision based on the assumption that Putin will back down after a rise in casualties, given Russia's heightened state of patriotism seems far fetched. This indirect approach may have the untoward result of escalating the conflict to a place we may not want to be, especially without our allies on board. Sure Russia is in the wrong, but is the corrupt and dysfunctional Ukraine worth it? Would it be wiser to take stock and shore up our defensive capability within NATO that could deliver a decisive blow should Mr. Putin go further? This strikes me as a more serious approach.
7
It is obvious to any curious observer that Russia has sponsored pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine. It is also clear that Russia was keen on maintaining plausible deniability by avoiding supply of any of the weapons that Ukrainian army itself doesn't have. It keeps story that all rebel equipment was captured from government forces alive. Rebels were supplied with outdated Soviet era weapons( other then a few anti-aircraft weapons that grounded Ukrainian air-force ). With direct US military support to Ukrainian government the charade will end. Eastern Ukraine will be flooded by latest tanks, precision weapons, and most of all overwhelming air superiority. None of the Russian air force participated in battle so far. Largely demoralized Ukrainian conscripts won't stand a chance
12
Why would Russia's air force move into Ukraine? Wouldn't it be considered and open invasion and war? Putin says he wants peace and his troops in Ukraine are just volunteers? Will they sent "volunteers" with jets and bombers? How will they explain that in media like Russia Today or Life News? What story will they bring to the UN?
1
This is another Obama decision-a-rama. He did it in Syria, studying the situation until it was too late to do anything. The commenters below, whether paid by Russia or not, needn't worry. Obama will come to a conclusion as soon as it's clear that whatever he decides makes no difference.
7
I agree, but I hope you are wrong.
Yes, he studied ISIS until it turned into 'ISIL'. The greatest presidential distraction in communication since Bill Clinton's legal exploration of "is".
To arm Ukraine would be incredibly foolish. Are they our allies in the region? Yes. Do they support us in terms of their NATO contributions? Sure. Are they a buffer between Russia and the rest of Eastern Europe? Definitely. All of that being said to arm Ukraine causes two major issues. Firstly, as we have seen in the past arms earmarked for one group often end up in the hands of the wrong group. Furthermore, the groups that we arm often turn out to be either unfriendly to our actual interests or inept at defending those interests. Secondly, and more importantly, arming Ukraine would put us into direct conflict with Russia, whose troops, despite Putin's assurances otherwise are most certainly in Ukraine. Keep in mind Russia is a nuclear armed power. Keep in mind as well that these sorts of moves and alliances are partially what led to World War II and certainly what led to WWI. To arm Ukraine, no matter how noble that might seem is to risk a larger war, and ultimately would hinder, rather than help our interests. Another foolish move (if carried out) by Obama.
17
So you suggest we should've stayed out of Europe's problem with Hitler. Then, most certainty, we'd now have to press "1" for German, and "2" for Spanish.
Do not forget that Hitler sought to undo the effects of the Versailles Treaty by annexing the Rhineland, Austria e. Both times, he instructed his commanders to back off in case of military resistance. Had the french opposed he Rhineland occupation, Hitler would have backed down. Sadly they war. WWII followed.
1
General Smedley Butler was right when he said, "War is a racket for the military industrial complex and corporations who stand to profit."
Enough! Our so-called "leaders" need to do more talking and negotiating to settle conflicts peacefully for all living things on this planet and stop killing people and causing needless death, destruction and heartache.
We must stop the militarization of conflicts if not for all of us living now, then for all the yet unborn future generations.
Enough! Our so-called "leaders" need to do more talking and negotiating to settle conflicts peacefully for all living things on this planet and stop killing people and causing needless death, destruction and heartache.
We must stop the militarization of conflicts if not for all of us living now, then for all the yet unborn future generations.
If Romney would have won the last election this would already have happened (and forced Putin to back down). But with Obama we have nothing but appeasement.
Why do liberals not understand?
Why do liberals not understand?
3
War is not the answer, but neither is backing down from the face of a bully. The whole western world sees what Putin is doing, he's throwing Russia's weight around wherever there are "Russians" at risk. This is very similar behavior to Hitlers reasons for cleaving off portions of countries with ethnic German populations right before he rampaged across Europe. To top it all off, the Russian people are being fed nonstop bull by the state controlled media. The story they're getting told is that ethnic Russians are being oppressed and slaughtered in Ukraine, as well as full on anti west propaganda.
The western world doesn't want a fight with Russia. The western world doesn't want to rape and pillage Russia. We want to open doors to economic development and prosperity in Russia. We want to welcome the Russian people to join us on the world stage. What we don't want is Putin taking us back to the days of the Cold War.
The western world doesn't want a fight with Russia. The western world doesn't want to rape and pillage Russia. We want to open doors to economic development and prosperity in Russia. We want to welcome the Russian people to join us on the world stage. What we don't want is Putin taking us back to the days of the Cold War.
10
Ukraine does not need defensive weapons. It needs laser guided bombs and drones for precision bombing. We should not waste our money but make good use of it.
4
Supplying arms to Ukraine is a very irresponsible idea, and it will only make the current situation worse for Ukraine. No war can be won with weapons alone. A soldier needs to know what he is fighting for, and what he may die for. Ukranian army is demoralized, men flee the country to avoid mobilization, because they don't want to fight their own in the east. Some small towns in the West have no men left. As they say "it is better to be prosecuted by 3, than to be carried by four." Many have relatives there. Those who enlist hope to make money from it, as Poroshenko devised a price list: money to pay per tank destroyed, per person killed etc. This approach hardly inspires patriotism.
10
Really, "Ukranian army is demoralized"? Then how they withstand Russia's aggression for the whole year with no military aid? We all know that Russia's military budget is a hundred-fold of that of Ukraine. Yet Russia could only make marginal on-gouund advances by blatantly violating so called ceasefires. You're just trying to spread some poorly cooked Kremlin propaganda.
1
hey, George Bush looked into Putin's eyes and saw a real man there. Maybe he may have more insights into this situation. Obama should seek council from Bush. What's wrong with this picture?
4
How, I wonder, might the US react if Russia sent aid to Mexico's drug cartels?
It is a poor analogy but demonstrates a simple point: proximity more than any other issues determines urgency. Putin and the Russian people will react with righteous indignation and genuine fear. They will become our enemies.
We don't need more of those.
It is a poor analogy but demonstrates a simple point: proximity more than any other issues determines urgency. Putin and the Russian people will react with righteous indignation and genuine fear. They will become our enemies.
We don't need more of those.
24
Noticed you didn't mention Ukraine's interests, nor even mention Ukraine. Typical of people dismissing Ukraine's interests as simply not relevant to the discussion. The Baltic states are next to Russia. The only thing stopping Russia doing the same thing as it is doing in Ukraine is their membership in NATO. Russia does not respect anything but force.
2
Putin has close ties with the Russian Mafia, so it is very possible that Russian made AK's are making their way to Drug cartels.
I never cease to be amazed by the ignorance of the Americans who haven't been further than their neighborhood, get scares news from the totally controlled media, have quite vague knowledge of world history but consider themselves experts in European foreign affairs and having a right to judge other "untermensh" nations.... You can't imagine how laughable your statements are! Will you tell me as well how Russian economy is all in shambles? Go ahead, I just came from spending 10 days there with my family that lives there.
The idea of getting involved in this problem conflicts with just about every tenets of the Powell Doctrine, and it is therefore doomed to failure.
12
Powell was a monstrous failure in the only policy-making job he ever held, and his doctrine, such as it was, lies in history's dustbin.
It worked just fine in Korean War. Push the Russian aggressor back and build strong borders. Solution well proved.
Ukraine should have played neutral zone to the west and Russia instead they decided to pick sides. Did anyone NOT see this coming?
I hope it was worth it for them because thats where all the bloodshed will happen. The rest of the world can pledge all the support they want but if you don't have boots on the ground you don't have skin in the game.
I hope it was worth it for them because thats where all the bloodshed will happen. The rest of the world can pledge all the support they want but if you don't have boots on the ground you don't have skin in the game.
6
Did you EVER hear of a US general who wasn't in favor of more armed forces committed elsewhere? Or an arms manufacturer who wasn't cheer-leading for new markets for yet more arms and munitions? Both would be a at an utter loss in the (utterly improbable) case that peace broke out!
And our proxy wars have worked so well before in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, etc, etc, etc...
And our proxy wars have worked so well before in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, etc, etc, etc...
22
You've conveniently forgotten about the Moscow-incited Korean war, aggression of the Russia-backed North against the South. This is exactly what's going on now, Russian-Ukrainian war, in which most Russians believe that they "fight America" in Ukraine by killing Ukraine's children.
Better late than never. This decision has been taking a lot longer than necessary, in part thanks to Russia's information warfare campaign -- effectively denying against all evidence that it is helping the rebels, while accusing Ukraine of being NATO's Trojan horse. It's time to call Putin's bluff and even up the odds for the Ukrainian military.
5
We are closer to a nuclear war than we have ever been (even in the Cuban Missie Crisis). Supplying these weapons to the Ukraine will bring us much closer. Sure the chances are small, but this move would make the danger within the grasp of human experience. It should shock anyone who is following this.
This is not a game played by some right week think tank. It is real.
What does it hurt the USA if some parts of Donetsk and Luhansk become semi independent. Not much. The separatists need to have a buffer zone so that the Ukrainian army cannot shell Donetsk at will and to have a corridor between the two cities. Once that happens the Russians can dictate to the separatists that they accept the boundaries. (Everyone seems to have forgotten that the Minsk agreements gave the airport to the separatists)
If the US plays hardball so will the Russians. They will have nothing to lose. They have a great army. Not as good as the USA, but the fight will be in their turf. Napoleon and Hitler both lost that fight even with superior armies.
This is not a game played by some right week think tank. It is real.
What does it hurt the USA if some parts of Donetsk and Luhansk become semi independent. Not much. The separatists need to have a buffer zone so that the Ukrainian army cannot shell Donetsk at will and to have a corridor between the two cities. Once that happens the Russians can dictate to the separatists that they accept the boundaries. (Everyone seems to have forgotten that the Minsk agreements gave the airport to the separatists)
If the US plays hardball so will the Russians. They will have nothing to lose. They have a great army. Not as good as the USA, but the fight will be in their turf. Napoleon and Hitler both lost that fight even with superior armies.
9
Thoughts of nuclear war are pure hysterics--the idea that we are closer than during the Cuban Missile Crisis is intensely paranoid.
2
How come Ukraine is "Russia's turf"? Is East Germany "Russia's turf" as well? What's wrong with people these days?
1
This is not our war, and Obama must resist the hawks who are just itching for another proxy fight with Russia. Don't poke the bear, Mr. President!
19
Yes, we should wait till Putin comes to take Alaska to save Russians there. Then it will be our war. We might even send some MRE to help our troops there before Russia shells them to the dust with rockets.
the US sends weapons to one party of a war, Russia sends weapons to the opposing party. When have I seen this before? If it happens, I suppose history repeats itself.
8
That happened in the Korean War. What happened to the Russia's side, North Korea, we all know. Not hard to imagine what would happen to the South if the humanity did not intervene.
When I was a child during World War ll my parents told me that Hitler wanted to "rule the world." They were wrong. It is the United States that wants to do that. We threaten Russia, China, Iran and Pakistan. Again and again we send our armies into the Middle East. Never mind the fact that we do not possess the wherewithal to do any of it. Perhaps one day the sane nations of the world will unite to put us out of our misery.
19
Please, god, no. Foreign aid weapons are immediately sold off to the highest bidder and used to indiscriminately shell civilian populations in the vague direction of enemy fire. As an American immigrant from Donetsk, my heart sinks and I'm shaken to my very core that my tax dollars will pay for the bombs falling on my family abroad.
27
Meanwhile, Russia's tax dollars are put to use in shelling Ukraine's Mariupol with dozens of civilians dead and over a hundred gravely wounded. And Crimea is still occupied by Russia.
1
I guess these old cluckers like McCain didn't get their lesson sending weapons to Irak and Syrian Rebels.
Those weapons will end up right in the hands of the East Ukrainians when the conscripts defect and turn themselves overs.
US foreign policy is a complete mess.
Those weapons will end up right in the hands of the East Ukrainians when the conscripts defect and turn themselves overs.
US foreign policy is a complete mess.
13
I call this "Doing nothing or black belt in sitting on hands" the Obama doctrine. It's corollary is to scream "We need to go to war, now!" which is the McCain doctrine.
Where there any defections you know about? Probably not, but there were unfortunate casualties and significant number of POW captured due to the lack of weapons and ammo on Ukraine's side and plentiful supply of those to the Russia-backed terrorists and regular troops.
1
We'll just take their colors, or reason away like Putin, (remember Crimea), our boy's will march in and nobody will know who they are. The U.S. of course will deny knowing anything of this new support.
You really want American guys to die there? For what? What America will gain from this? Nothing.
1
We should be trying to support a cease fire to stop the killing of civilians on both sides. Increasing a conflict that could ultimately bring Russian and American troops into direct conflict is crazy. The government in Kiev is beyond our control and far too willing to kill their own citizens to get their way.
It would be wise to consider how this mess got started in the first place and to remember that Russia is an ally in the fight against Muslim extremists. Russia isn't doing anything in Ukraine that we didn't do in Cuba when Castro overthrew the government except their objectives are more limited.
It would be wise to consider how this mess got started in the first place and to remember that Russia is an ally in the fight against Muslim extremists. Russia isn't doing anything in Ukraine that we didn't do in Cuba when Castro overthrew the government except their objectives are more limited.
21
I think we've spent enough on war for a while. Giving arms to countries that are in decline seldom works out as hoped. How about using the 3 billion to start re-building our infrastructure, which is way overdue. As a bonus, it would also provide good paying jobs and stimulate our economy. Europe can handle this situation, if they are that worried about it, instead of us subsidizing their foreign policy needs.
22
@Curtis Fitzgerald:
Europe, if anything, is more worried about this potentially nuclear threat the US has brought to their doorstep. Europe, collectively, is wishing the US would butt out.
Europe, if anything, is more worried about this potentially nuclear threat the US has brought to their doorstep. Europe, collectively, is wishing the US would butt out.
1
Well said. A fine idea. The USA would be wise to move in constructive positive directions rather than possibly inflaming an already dangerous situation by injecting more weapons into this conflict.
American imperial ambitions look to Ukraine as the means to dominate the Eurasian land mass and thus dominate the world. This is a dangerous dream and I wonder why we are taking on more than we can accomplish. With over a thousand foreign US military bases world wide, we lorde over the world like a mighty Rome. Rome overextended itself, it's oligarchy corrupt and fell. We'd be wise to look at that example and stop listening to our Army warriors who are itching for a fight.
30
The US and NATO providing weaponry to Ukraine is reckless and would move the world closer to nuclear holocaust than ever before. Russia cannot and will not allow the West to turn Ukraine into a military asset. That development represents a grave threat to Russia's security and international position, and would put NATO in position to, literally, to limit Russia's sovereignty. No Russian leader could allow this to happen without courting backlash from his own nation.
When Western arms arrive in Ukraine, Russia will be compelled to ramp up its own military involvement in the conflict. Most likely we'll an open Russian intervention using air power and massive tank divisions, a la WW2. Tens of thousands of troops on both sides will soon lose their lives. From there, matters may spin out of control between Moscow and NATO, leading ultimately to someone pressing the nuclear button.
Face it. We are threatening Russia and courting major war. I blame foreign policy hawks in the US for this entire mess, from the beginning to the end.
When Western arms arrive in Ukraine, Russia will be compelled to ramp up its own military involvement in the conflict. Most likely we'll an open Russian intervention using air power and massive tank divisions, a la WW2. Tens of thousands of troops on both sides will soon lose their lives. From there, matters may spin out of control between Moscow and NATO, leading ultimately to someone pressing the nuclear button.
Face it. We are threatening Russia and courting major war. I blame foreign policy hawks in the US for this entire mess, from the beginning to the end.
34
Your evocation of nuclear war and a WW2-level of Russian military intervention is pure hysterics.
9
This conflict is on Europe's doorstep, not ours. Why can't they step in for once. Our bellicosity is as unreasoning as Putin's empire fantasy. One has the feeling Obama is so overwhelmed by all these RTP folks, not to mention generals, shouting in his ear about how the US needs to participate in any conflict, anywhere, that he cannot form an independent judgment. So depressing, again.
9
Ukrainians should learn a lesson from Pakistan and Afghanistan. Never allow the US to get involved in your conflict, they will just pour more kerosene over fire and will leave you alone when you are in the deepest mess just like they left Pakistan and Afghanistan once the Soviets were destroyed.
My advice, work it out with your people, but never listen to the USA, they only have their own self interest and not yours, you will always have to live with Russia next door, the USA does not have to.
I make this sincere advise to you as my country has been destroyed because once we trusted the Americans when their man Brezinski came to help us, the CIA sent arms to us and Ronald Reagan called the Afghan mujahideen as the equal of US founding fathers.
Look what the US did to Libya and Iraq and Syria, you still have time....dont trust the CIA...
My advice, work it out with your people, but never listen to the USA, they only have their own self interest and not yours, you will always have to live with Russia next door, the USA does not have to.
I make this sincere advise to you as my country has been destroyed because once we trusted the Americans when their man Brezinski came to help us, the CIA sent arms to us and Ronald Reagan called the Afghan mujahideen as the equal of US founding fathers.
Look what the US did to Libya and Iraq and Syria, you still have time....dont trust the CIA...
22
So now the generals are pushing the United States toward a proxy war. Have they really thought about the end-game? American weaponry killing Russian soldiers? Putin is unlikely to back down and will definitely raise the stakes. What then? Heavier weaponry or direct NATO involvement? Putin will never let Poroshenko's army roll over the rebels. The route that the generals are proposing leads to a very dangerous place for both the United States and Russia. Though the president has been a disappointment in many respects, I really hope that he has at least gained enough wisdom to resist the machinations of the military-industrial complex.
26
It's really strange that the U.S. paints Russia as expansionist and aggressive while we have far more bases scattered all over the world and have been at war against countries thousands of miles away from us for more than 20 years either covertly or above ground.
22
Recall, first of all, that George Bush wanted to bring Ukraine into NATO. (eg. WAPO headline in 4/2/2008, "Bush Pressing NATO to Set Membership Path for Ukraine, Georgia" As a matter of Russian national security, did we really expect that Putin would allow a potential loss of access to the naval base at Sevastopol, Russias outlet to the Mediterranean; or have a large NATO member directly on its border? Would we permit a potentially hostile marxist regime to set up shop in Mexico? Let's get real. BTW, Crimea was part of Russia, under the USSR.
This in no way defends Putin's absolutist path in Russia, but it's simply a matter of realpolitik. Russia WILL have what it considers to be adequate buffer states. It may only be a "gas station" as Senator McCain has stated, but a large, well-armed former super-power gas station, acting in its perceived self-interest, on its own border. We would do well to be cautious.
This in no way defends Putin's absolutist path in Russia, but it's simply a matter of realpolitik. Russia WILL have what it considers to be adequate buffer states. It may only be a "gas station" as Senator McCain has stated, but a large, well-armed former super-power gas station, acting in its perceived self-interest, on its own border. We would do well to be cautious.
22
Why don't the Europeans take care of it? It is their neighborhood.
8
Sure, we should cut school lunches when millions of kids are starving in US, and throw another 3 Billion to Ukraine so that oligarchs can steal and run.
Yuri Borisov - stole millions of dollars of US aide to Ukraine and escaped with his family.
Former Ukrainian minister of energy and coal industry Eduard Stavitsky suspected of embezzlement and money laundering, also found refuge where criminal oligarchs gather.
Yuri Borisov - stole millions of dollars of US aide to Ukraine and escaped with his family.
Former Ukrainian minister of energy and coal industry Eduard Stavitsky suspected of embezzlement and money laundering, also found refuge where criminal oligarchs gather.
19
In 1994, Ukraine, Russia, the U.K. and the U.S.A. signed the Budapest Memorandum, through which Ukraine agreed to rid itself of nuclear weapons, while in exchange the other signatories agreed to respect the independence and sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine” and to “refrain from the threat or use of force” against that country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
Russia has broken its word.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
Russia has broken its word.
12
Those nukes were not Ukraine's to keep. The Budapest Memorandum was a purely symbolic agreement in nature. Everyone, including the Ukrainian government itself, understood that nation had neither the expertise or the funds to properly maintain and secure the world's third largest nuclear arsenal. In fact, it was the U.S. who was the major driver behind the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine. Furthermore, being a memorandum, it is neither binding or enforceable, meaning that any party has the right to withdraw from its terms at will.
8
@Free Radical
Russia had no more claim to the nuclear weapons then Ukraine did. The Budapest Memorandum represented a quid pro quo and thus was binding.
Russia had no more claim to the nuclear weapons then Ukraine did. The Budapest Memorandum represented a quid pro quo and thus was binding.
5
Well yes. When Russia agreed to the reunification of Germany (which needed the approval of the signatory powers of the WWII winners who separated Germany among them), it was promised that NATO would not expand to Eastern Europe in exchange for accepting the reunification and the souvereignty and new power of Eastern Europe. And historically speaking, Russia had excellent reasons to fear a strong Germany.
So NATO has broken its word, too. And the reasons were quite similar to Russia's reasons, the historically understandable security interests of the Baltic countries, geostrategical interests, a changed world.
Look at any map of Russia with all the NATO bases around it and imagine that these were Russian military bases around the US all over the Canadian and Mexican border and in the Caribbean. Try to empathise with non-US people as if they were fully human and not as if the whole world is the legitimate property of the US. Try to compare Eastern Ukraine to Kosovo and look at Russia's non-reaction to the bombing of its historic ally by NATO.
I support the sanctions in response to the invasion of the Crimea because it is simply bad to invade a country first and then organize the referendum, but I resent the double standard in US media and I also see no other possible outcome than autonomy and/or being part of Russia for the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine because the population their wants it and it is insane to support a government in waging civil war against its own population.
So NATO has broken its word, too. And the reasons were quite similar to Russia's reasons, the historically understandable security interests of the Baltic countries, geostrategical interests, a changed world.
Look at any map of Russia with all the NATO bases around it and imagine that these were Russian military bases around the US all over the Canadian and Mexican border and in the Caribbean. Try to empathise with non-US people as if they were fully human and not as if the whole world is the legitimate property of the US. Try to compare Eastern Ukraine to Kosovo and look at Russia's non-reaction to the bombing of its historic ally by NATO.
I support the sanctions in response to the invasion of the Crimea because it is simply bad to invade a country first and then organize the referendum, but I resent the double standard in US media and I also see no other possible outcome than autonomy and/or being part of Russia for the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine because the population their wants it and it is insane to support a government in waging civil war against its own population.
1
I don't buy for one minute that America is not already knee deep in the Ukraine, we just can't help ourselves, if there is a war we want in.
19
This would be a bad mistake. This is setting the stage for a major conflict with the 2 major nuclear powers. I you start to hear of us sending U.S. military advisors, we are going to hear duck and cover next.
12
With the Russian economy crashing it looks like a good time to squeeze Putin. In six-twelve months his public support will be plunging, his foreign reserves depleted, his currency devalued and Russian unrest rising, Putin will be facing potential implosion. If nothing else his appetite for future aggression will be deterred.
There is only one way to stop a bully.
There is only one way to stop a bully.
10
So long as Mr. Putin's imperial adventures seem to be cost-free, they will be supported by the Russian people as restoring Russia's "greatness." But Russians turned against the Kremlin's occupation of Afghanistan as the body bags multiplied. Putin knows this, and has tried to prevent the Russian media reporting Russian casualties in Ukraine. But if the Ukrainian armed forces are given the weapons they need to defend their land effectively, the prospect of substantial casualties--and protests at home-- may deter the Russian leader. Moreover, more accurate, radar-assisted Ukrainian artillery would cause fewer civilian casualties.
60
Russia has plenty of sophisticated weaponry as well and would no doubt step up the ante in response. Where will this proxy war stop? Furthermore, Russia has the major advantage of being able to semi-covertly use its own military personnel in the conflict, which avoids the need for the training of the foreign armed forces and allows for much faster deployment of advanced weapons systems.
4
Agree. And independent polling in Russia supports your argument. Polling from Levada center found that only 13% of the Russians were willing to have their children fight in Ukraine while 68% did not want their children to go fight in Ukraine. While Putin continues to lie that there are no Russian soldiers in Ukraine and the body count is low for the population of 140 million is spread out over 11 time zones, the war will continue. If the body count mounts and suddenly there are even more new graves, the Russians may start protesting.
1
The Ukrainians are to stupid to use it properly.
1
Supplying weapons to Ukraine will only exacerbate an already volatile situation. The situation on the ground will remain little changed, since Russia will have no choice but to step up its weapon deliveries to the separatists in response. What will change is the scale of destruction and civilian casualties. Besides, what can the U.S. offer to Ukraine that it does not already have? Modern communications equipment might help, but aside from electronic equipment, there is not much we can give them that will truly change the course of the conflict. When Ukraine was a member of USSR, it was literally stocked for WWIII and therefore already possesses more heavy weaponry than personnel to operate it. Conventional defensive weapons such as anti-tank missiles have not evolved much in the past 20 years, and Ukraine's Soviet stocks are still more than adequate.
67
23 year old weapons are no match for today s weapons. Anti-tank weapons have not evolved. LOL!!! Now we have active armor tanks which makes 23 year ant-tank weapons useless. The new anti-tank weapons can set off active armor then then penetrate or come in from a top down position. The US could of supplied precision munitions that would cut the civilian casualties by 75%. Maybe you are very old and don't keep up with things but buddy times have changed. Or, would you like Putin and his henchmen to keep killing the UAF? Remove Russia from Swift, send weapons and end this thing.
3
The scale of destruction changes with each ceasefire as Russia supplies more men and equipment.
Advantage Pro(fessional Russians!
Advantage Pro(fessional Russians!
"Brother, brother, brother, we don't need to escalate....."
Once again Mr. Obama agonizes over a decision that should have been made months ago. And once again, an ally is left wondering if American support and NATO truly have meaning. The new Soviet/Stalinist Russian regime is obviously prepared not only to supply arms and other support to Ukraine but the new Soviet/Stalinists have committed Russian forces to man and operate sophisticated offensive weaponry. Like Hitler and Stalin before him, Mr. Putin sees easy victims and Western power paralysis. When Mr. Putin begins to carve up Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Poland, perhaps then NATO and Mr. Obama will take notice. By then it will be too late. The Russian bear will only have whetted his appetite. Germany, Austria and Hungary will be easy pickings.
Mr. Chamberlain, I mean Mr. Obama, has created a power vacuum. Mr. Putin will fill it. Roosevelt and Churchill are spinning in their graves.
Mr. Chamberlain, I mean Mr. Obama, has created a power vacuum. Mr. Putin will fill it. Roosevelt and Churchill are spinning in their graves.
10
We are faced with Mr. Putin who believes that Ukraine is part of Russia (as it once was) and should never have been given separate status. Believing that, it is hardly likely that he will back down. The Russian people are historically willing to endure pain if they believe that the motherland is in danger from outsiders. Putin has convinced them that such a situation now exists. With that background, I am unconvinced that supplying defensive weapons to Ukraine will cause Putin to rethink both the military cost and economic pain to his people. President Obama needs to make his thinking clear and frankly address Americans on this matter.
76
Putin believes that Ukraine is part of Russia and Islamic State leaders believe that there should be an Islamic state in the Middle East and Al Qaeda believes that the US is an evil place. Putin may also believe that the Arctic and Antarctica are Russian territory and their resources belong to Russia. He may also believe that Alaska belong to Russia--we don't know the extent of his beliefs. However, we should not allow the US foreign policy depend on the beliefs and delusions of foreign leaders. I believe it's in the national interest of the US to supply Ukraine with defensive weapons since eastern borders of Ukraine are now the eastern borders of democratic Europe protecting the rest of Europe of Russian aggression.
2
It's actually the other way around: a part of Russia used to be a part of Ukraine first.
I wouldn't say that Putin 'believes Ukraine is part of Russia'. Rather, I'd say Putin will take whatever he can get away with taking. No end in sight.
2
We should stay out of this conflict. Ukraine should be a neutral buffer state, apart from the EU and NATO.
20
That's what the previously elected regime wanted: ties with both Russia and Europe. The US neo-con foreign policy cannot tolerate:
1. Nations which are not controlled by the IMF (Libya, Iraq, Syria, Iran, etc)...ie, nations with very little debt (LIbya had none at all). Russia has only 13% national debt...so that is a great crime.
2. Independence, or the choice of neutrality. During the run up to the wars in SE Asia, those leaders who advocated neutrality were seen as enemies.
JFK, seeing the folly of this policy, and against the wishes of the Pentagon (some of whom wanted to use nukes in "local conflicts") and many in his own staff, turned against this "neutrality is Communism" policy and issued a Presidential directive to withdraw all troops from Vietnam and tolerate nations which chose neutrality. He paid with his life, and within weeks of his murder, LBJ repealed his directive and ordered a buildup which led to 500,000 US troops and the slaughter of 3 million civilians, including nearly a million children.
1. Nations which are not controlled by the IMF (Libya, Iraq, Syria, Iran, etc)...ie, nations with very little debt (LIbya had none at all). Russia has only 13% national debt...so that is a great crime.
2. Independence, or the choice of neutrality. During the run up to the wars in SE Asia, those leaders who advocated neutrality were seen as enemies.
JFK, seeing the folly of this policy, and against the wishes of the Pentagon (some of whom wanted to use nukes in "local conflicts") and many in his own staff, turned against this "neutrality is Communism" policy and issued a Presidential directive to withdraw all troops from Vietnam and tolerate nations which chose neutrality. He paid with his life, and within weeks of his murder, LBJ repealed his directive and ordered a buildup which led to 500,000 US troops and the slaughter of 3 million civilians, including nearly a million children.
6
That should be the Ukrainians' choice to make. Recent history has already seen enough instances of world leaders carving up the countries of Central and Eastern Europe into zones of influence, deciding for them which block or zone they should be part of. If Ukrainians want to join the EU, they should have as much chance to join as any other European country. If Ukrainians want to join NATO, they have as much right to apply as any other European country. It should not be up to Putin to get the a veto right, and it should not be up to Americans, Germans or Brits to decide for the Ukrainians that they should be neutral or a "buffer state". How would you feel if world rulers consigned your country to be a "buffer state", regardless of whether you like it or not? As the Balts say: "Nothing About Us Without Us".
2
Or at least the eastern part (Crimea).
Perfect help to Putin - he was telling to Russian public that US and NATO are for surrounding and threatening Russia. This is as insane as it can go… especially after Obama cutting short his visit to India to embrace new King (read totalitarian dictator) of Saudi Arabia. Needless to say - the main and the most furious supporter of terrorism and wars.
12
Actions by the US have directly caused yet another country to crumble into anarchy, chaos, and civil war. Let's not make this any worse. If the well-being of the people of Ukraine were our highest concern, we would withdraw support for the new illegitimate government of Ukraine and suggest they cut the best deal they can with Russia. Instead, the US is taking over the resources of Ukarine. Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, along with a family friend of John Kerry, sit on the board of directors of a major Ukrainian NG company. Former US State Dept. employee Natalie Jaresko, has been appointed Finance Minister of Ukraine a couple days after receiving Ukraian citizenship. Monsanto, Cargill, and DuPont are taking control of the agricultural and shipping sectors of Ukraine. This was the plan all along: that the US extract the wealth and exploit the people of Ukraine and keep them in debt. By the time the people of Ukraine get a clue, they will not be able to reverse this.
22
Divide, conquer, and loot.
6
Last time I checked, it was the Ukrainian people who wanted closer ties with the EU and not with Russia. It was the Ukrainian people who ousted their corrupt leader. It's now the Ukrainian people who are dying in their efforts to push back Russian troops on Ukrainian soil. Who is exploiting who now?
8
If we provide Ukraine with weaponry their poorly trained and corrupt army will squander if not sell it to God knows who; plus Putin, who has been playing the Russian nationalist card will have a nice talking point, and one, for a change, which will be based on reality.
Finally, providing weaponry will just prompt the Kremlin to up the ante. What do we then, provide them even more sophisticated weapons? and on and on it goes.
Finally, providing weaponry will just prompt the Kremlin to up the ante. What do we then, provide them even more sophisticated weapons? and on and on it goes.
12
in reply to rjesp, BKB and others: The only general making a comment according to the article is General Breedlove and, as NATO military commander, he might legitimately be operating under different constraints than were he back as an American commander. The other military commanders' views are merely referenced by third parties. As to private comments, all Presidents would be derelict in their duties, if they did not seek the analysis and opinions of senior military officials.
in reply to AK and others: 1/ There is no parallel between Viet Nam and the Ukraine. Viet Nam was a national liberation struggle, where the Soviet Union backed (for their own motives) the Viwtnamese. Ukraine is partially a national liberation struggle in which Russia is opposing the Ukrainians. 2/ The Ukraine is in no sense an existential threat to Russia any more than Cuba has been an existential threat to the U.S. for the past half century.
in reply to JoeM: We did not put the Ukraine in NATO. In any case, it should be up to the Ukrainians as to whether they want to join NATO, and if that constitutes"spitting in Russia's eye", then that is their choice. They have a much, much greater stake in such choices than we do.
in reply to a number of Commenters: Our policy regarding Russian ations in the Ukraine are only partly about the Ukraine. At this point they are even more about the Baltic countries, Bulgaria, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, and others.
in reply to AK and others: 1/ There is no parallel between Viet Nam and the Ukraine. Viet Nam was a national liberation struggle, where the Soviet Union backed (for their own motives) the Viwtnamese. Ukraine is partially a national liberation struggle in which Russia is opposing the Ukrainians. 2/ The Ukraine is in no sense an existential threat to Russia any more than Cuba has been an existential threat to the U.S. for the past half century.
in reply to JoeM: We did not put the Ukraine in NATO. In any case, it should be up to the Ukrainians as to whether they want to join NATO, and if that constitutes"spitting in Russia's eye", then that is their choice. They have a much, much greater stake in such choices than we do.
in reply to a number of Commenters: Our policy regarding Russian ations in the Ukraine are only partly about the Ukraine. At this point they are even more about the Baltic countries, Bulgaria, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, and others.
10
"Ukraine is partially a national liberation struggle in which Russia is opposing the Ukrainians. 2/ The Ukraine is in no sense an existential threat to Russia any more than Cuba has been an existential threat to the U.S. for the past half century."
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Ukraine is an ethnic civil war between the the country's Ukrainian nationalist west and the historically Russian eastern region. Ukraine's geographical position makes it vital to Russian national security. The stakes for Russia in this conflict are far higher than for the West.
Ukraine, in its current borders, is not fully differentiated from Russia, and will not be during our lifetime. The West needs to find a solution to the crisis that respects this shared reality between Russia and Ukraine.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Ukraine is an ethnic civil war between the the country's Ukrainian nationalist west and the historically Russian eastern region. Ukraine's geographical position makes it vital to Russian national security. The stakes for Russia in this conflict are far higher than for the West.
Ukraine, in its current borders, is not fully differentiated from Russia, and will not be during our lifetime. The West needs to find a solution to the crisis that respects this shared reality between Russia and Ukraine.
6
You're assuming Russian intentions. I think the main concern is NATO's investment in surrounding them. Why not insist peace keepers and negotiators talk with all parties and hammer out an agreement. It worked in Kosovo.
President Obama has little capacity for fresh anything. That said, if he unleashes the military to an at large status over the remaining time he has in office, and is prepared to suffer the consequences without cutting them off at the knees or throwing them in front of the first bus load of liberal protesters then fine.
3
Obama doing polls to see if it will help his rep? Should have been done a year ago. This is one case where boots on the ground is not an option. Putin is not predictable and Ukraine should be able to handle if they have the hardware they have requested since the Russian invasion of Crimea. Besides have two narcissists facing each other? Not pretty.
1
I guess those white ukranians are more important than black nigerians.
3
There is nothing strategic about Nigeria or Africa
3
Then why is China investing 300 billion dollars in Africa, why is Africa China's largest trading partner. In 2012, China's trade with Africa reached $198.5 billion.
More than 80 percent of China's $93.2 billion in imports from Africa in 2011 were crude oil, raw materials and resources. In 2012, the China Development Bank agreed to provide $3 billion in loans to Ghana, which was almost 10 percent of Ghana's GDP.
While the U.S. is busy containing Russia, China is thinking long term in establishing ties to capitalize on Africa's rich natural oil and mineral supplies as well as growing economies in which to conduct trade. This seems much more productive than arming rebels in various strife riddled countries around the world.
More than 80 percent of China's $93.2 billion in imports from Africa in 2011 were crude oil, raw materials and resources. In 2012, the China Development Bank agreed to provide $3 billion in loans to Ghana, which was almost 10 percent of Ghana's GDP.
While the U.S. is busy containing Russia, China is thinking long term in establishing ties to capitalize on Africa's rich natural oil and mineral supplies as well as growing economies in which to conduct trade. This seems much more productive than arming rebels in various strife riddled countries around the world.
2
This one of those moments when very distinguished proponents lose sight of "what the other guy" will do in response. Arm the Ukrainians with offensive weapons and you can bet your bippy that the Russians will not only make life hell for us in Afghanistan (check Northern Distribution Route), come closer to Iran and supply them offensive weapons but also up the ante in Syria.
Ukraine is a civil war and every time we've chosen side (Vietnam, Syria, Lebanon) we've chosen the losing side.
Ukraine is a civil war and every time we've chosen side (Vietnam, Syria, Lebanon) we've chosen the losing side.
23
How about investing in rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure, restoring Democracy in our political process, strengthening innovation and investment in clean energy, building alliances with Central and South America through cultural exchanges, offering free ambassador semesters to any highly qualified Russian students that are interested in studying in the U.S. including expert computer software and internet engineers and offering peace initiatives to Azerbaijan and Armenia. The last thing that the U.S. needs is to intervene in another foreign country's internal affairs without cooperation from that country's neighbors (i.e. Russia.) I can only imagine how Americans would feel if Russia was interfering in internal political events in our neighbor's (Mexico, Canada, Cuba, etc.) countries. The Russians should allow the elderly, sick and poor in Donetsk and Luhansk who are trapped in their basements. Just because today is a testosterone charged football holiday for red blooded Americans doesn't mean that this announcement is extremely irresponsible and repulsive to anyone who cares about our troops.
21
Was there ever a war that US passed on? Haven't we roiled enough of the World?
40
Amused by the dire warnings issued to the West concerning intervention in Ukraine by supplying defensive weapons.
Where are the dire warnings to Russia for using regular Russian Federation troops and armaments to invade Ukraine?
Where are the dire warnings to Russia for using regular Russian Federation troops and armaments to invade Ukraine?
9
This is total nonsense and just pouring gasoline in the fire. It will lead to an endless war with many deaths, and the only winners will will be the arm industries. A separation of Ukraine is the only solution, as the Russians in the east will not want to live under Ukranian regime anymore: too much blood has been shed already! The conflict is certainly not in Europe's interest and i hope that the new Greek government can help to get a process started to end the conflict with the help of progressive forces in other mediterrenan countries.
34
Yes, but it will provide huge profits for the Military/Industrial establishment.
4
No more war.
Putin's Russia is not Nazi Germany. This is a regional political dispute of marginal significance to US interests. General Breedlove has no business telling us what to do. Where's Stanley Kubrick when we need him.
No more war.
Putin's Russia is not Nazi Germany. This is a regional political dispute of marginal significance to US interests. General Breedlove has no business telling us what to do. Where's Stanley Kubrick when we need him.
No more war.
46
That is exactly what Putin is, he has fabricated a reason to go to war in Ukraine, just as he has for every war he started since he become president.
8
Are you saying he overthrew the elected government in Ukraine and installed neo-Nazis in the coup regime?
Per capita income in bankrupt Ukraine is 3.6K a year ($300 a month) and wages, pensions, and social benefits are being cut to pay for the IMF loans. Russia's per capita has doubled since Putin won office and is now $14K.
Why would anyone want to take over this basket case? Why would any Ukrainians wish to be part of Russia?
Per capita income in bankrupt Ukraine is 3.6K a year ($300 a month) and wages, pensions, and social benefits are being cut to pay for the IMF loans. Russia's per capita has doubled since Putin won office and is now $14K.
Why would anyone want to take over this basket case? Why would any Ukrainians wish to be part of Russia?
5
Dale, don't worry, Russia's per capita GDP will be back where it belongs soon enough. The path has already started.
1
What value could the fleet of A-10 Warthog attack aircraft have in the defense of Ukraine territory ? They fly below the functional range of anti-aircraft guns and swoop in quickly to blast tanks.
2
Who would fly them? The US or should we wait and train the Ukrainians? You forget that advanced equipment requires training to use it. You just don't hand an advanced weapon to Ukraine and think that their soldiers can use it the next day.
4
Who is going to fly those planes? Do you have any idea how long flight training takes? Since Ukrainians are clearly incapable of operating those planes, are you willing to risk the lives of American pilots?
3
It is time for US/NATO to provide the Ukrainian forces with defensive weapons to enable their units to cope with Russian tanks, artillery and other Russian weapons. Does anyone doubt that the weaponry now in Eastern Ukraine is Russian? It is very important that Russia not be allowed to fragment Ukraine. This country has a right to exist without being bullied by Putin. The dynamic is to stop Putin now or risk the whole of the former USSR to Putin's techniques. Of course, he will behave as predicted when modern anti-tank weapons are introduced but it is necessary to force Putin to draw his personal line. Deepen the sanction measures and couple them with Putin's behavior so that Russians know the connection-aimed at Putin personally and not at the Russian people. It is important for Russians to see the connection to Putin for whatever misery ordinary persons in Russia feel. NATO and US must manage to mount an information campaign to Russian people showing that Putin is responsible for whatever discomfort, economical hardship and other loss of quality of life which obtains.
14
"It is important for Russians to see the connection to Putin for whatever misery ordinary persons in Russia feel."
Most Russians already feel uneasy about Western meddling in Ukraine, as they sense that something's happening that could translate into a strategic threat to their nation. So far, Russians don't feel sufficiently threatened, though, that they favor a full scale military intervention in Ukraine.
If the West sends military aid to Ukraine, inevitably Russia will have to launch a full fledged conventional war against Kiev's forces. Tens of thousands of Russians troops will die, much like in Russia's great wars of the past during tsarist and Soviet times. The Russians themselves will feel anguished and embittered over these losses, and they will feel deep rage toward the EU and the US. Essentially, Russian nationalism will be triggered, which will cause the confrontation to spiral to an even deeper and more dangerous level than.
The US is starting something that will could lead to the destruction of both countries at once.
Frankly, I don't think there's anything important enough about Ukraine to warrant such a devastating conflict between the great powers.
Most Russians already feel uneasy about Western meddling in Ukraine, as they sense that something's happening that could translate into a strategic threat to their nation. So far, Russians don't feel sufficiently threatened, though, that they favor a full scale military intervention in Ukraine.
If the West sends military aid to Ukraine, inevitably Russia will have to launch a full fledged conventional war against Kiev's forces. Tens of thousands of Russians troops will die, much like in Russia's great wars of the past during tsarist and Soviet times. The Russians themselves will feel anguished and embittered over these losses, and they will feel deep rage toward the EU and the US. Essentially, Russian nationalism will be triggered, which will cause the confrontation to spiral to an even deeper and more dangerous level than.
The US is starting something that will could lead to the destruction of both countries at once.
Frankly, I don't think there's anything important enough about Ukraine to warrant such a devastating conflict between the great powers.
5
Bad idea. We need to stay far far away from this conflict.
America is more than a bomb dropper and weapon supplier. Let Europe pick up the slack.
America is more than a bomb dropper and weapon supplier. Let Europe pick up the slack.
21
Europé can do this, but our politicians need a push in the right direction...
1
If we want the war to stay away from us, we need to honor the Budapest Memorandum guarantees and provide all the assistance to Ukraine, including defensive weapons and intelligence. Let Ukrainians fight and defend democracy, otherwise the largest country in Europe might be occupied by one of the most dangerous dictatorships, further endangering the world's peace. Ukraine never invaded any country and was willing to let go all the nukes for the sake of the world's peace. It is fair for Ukraine to be able to protect their children from Russian rocket shelling.
6
Well, with the neighborhood bully going after an injured little guy, you'd think someone would step up and get him to back off. The strength of the EU remains untested, so the leaders are choosing other options to get Russia to stop. I think Putin knows this and will keep up his tough guy act until someone makes it too painful for him to keep beating on Ukraine. Perhaps slipping Ukraine a pair of brass knuckles or even a prybar would help even the fight.
Can we please drop the pretense of this being a rebellion? This is 100% a Russian invasion using willing locals under the command of Russian soldiers. They are seeking a land route to the Crimea.
I think if we started addressing the issue correctly more and better solutions might present themselves and at least Putin wold no longer be able to pretend he is just defending "ethnic Russians". It might make him make a few mistakes since he seems to be rather bullet proof at the moment. He isn't hurting form the sanctions and the Russian people are used to deprivation and poor government and BTW are still proud to be Russian and will defend even bad governments if they feel attacked. You know Putin is going to make out this help is an attack if it happens.
Hey McCain how do you feel about your going to the Maiden and starting this war with your interference in foreign policy now?
I think if we started addressing the issue correctly more and better solutions might present themselves and at least Putin wold no longer be able to pretend he is just defending "ethnic Russians". It might make him make a few mistakes since he seems to be rather bullet proof at the moment. He isn't hurting form the sanctions and the Russian people are used to deprivation and poor government and BTW are still proud to be Russian and will defend even bad governments if they feel attacked. You know Putin is going to make out this help is an attack if it happens.
Hey McCain how do you feel about your going to the Maiden and starting this war with your interference in foreign policy now?
11
Arming Ukraine against Russia is a huge mistake. First off, no amount of arms will dissuade Russia from defending Russian speaking people in the region. All we will accomplish is throwing more billions to our weapons industry, and there will be more dead bodies in the region. After the Ukrainian aerial bombing of the civilian areas, there is no way in the world these people will go under Kiev ever again.
46
Most of the Jewish population in Ukraine is Russian speaking and they emphatically don't want Putin protecting them, especially given the poor level of protection and the high number of fascist groups in Russia itself. Last March, before Putin started the war in Ukraine, the Jewish leaders in Ukraine published an Open Letter of Ukrainian Jews to Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin. Google it and read it and see where the Jews and other ethnic minorities prefer to live--in a democracy with a strong civic society or in a dictatorship where one day they are protected and another day there are pogroms. But democracies need to be defended from dictatorships as Europeans found out in WWII--so Ukraine needs weapons to protect its citizens, including Russian speaking citizens. There are many Russian speakers in the US--should Russia now come to the US to "protect" them?
2
"...defending Russian speaking people in the region."
Defending from who? They back Kiev!
Defending from who? They back Kiev!
1
It's about time. The west has let Putin run ram-shod over the Ukrainians.
I wonder if they would be so hesitant if it were a neighbor of there's. Now if Obama would take some decisive action for a change ?
I wonder if they would be so hesitant if it were a neighbor of there's. Now if Obama would take some decisive action for a change ?
4
The West erroneously continues to view the conflict in Ukraine through a rational choice prism. It has long ceased to be a simple cost-benefit issue for Russia. For her, the conflict has long moved into the ideological-emotional "this is the REDDEST line we'll ever draw" realm. Under no circumstances, not even under the toughest sanctions we can levy on her, will Russia back down from making sure the Russians in eastern Ukraine have a secure homeland, whether within a decentralized Ukraine or as independent state. And the sooner the West gets it the more likely we are to spare our resources over here (in providing futile military aid) and civilian lives over there.
On the military aid, however one wraps it, mission creep is all that comes out of it. To say that a proxy war with Russia will make our campaign against ISIS a walk in the park is to say nothing of what's in store if we get ourselves into this war in any capacity.
On the military aid, however one wraps it, mission creep is all that comes out of it. To say that a proxy war with Russia will make our campaign against ISIS a walk in the park is to say nothing of what's in store if we get ourselves into this war in any capacity.
14
Why fighting against ISIS then? Let them have their own state too! ISIS want some land grabs, so does Russia.
Regardless of what Kerry and General StrangeBreedLove imagine, providing weapons to Kiev is obviously going to escalate the Russian response. What happens when the Russians decide to provide certain kinds of weapons to Iran, Syria, or even ISIS? It's only macho fools who underestimate what can happen from this kind of brinksmanship, hastily rushing in where wise men fear to tread.
The same fools who thought it was just fine to arm Afghan jihadists during the 1980s were the first to go running for their defense attorneys after 9-11 happened. Those who thought it was fine and dandy to be arming Saddam during the 1980s were nowhere to be found when Kuwait was invaded. It's a good thing that saner heads prevailed when Wesley Clarke wanted to start shooting over Pristina airport.
No good will come from expanding NATO upto Russia's borders. It's no wonder that the Kagans and Nulands keep trying, given the weird itch that some ethnic lobbies in the US have to re-fight their ancestral blood-feuds by going eyeball-to-eyeball with Moscow.
The same fools who thought it was just fine to arm Afghan jihadists during the 1980s were the first to go running for their defense attorneys after 9-11 happened. Those who thought it was fine and dandy to be arming Saddam during the 1980s were nowhere to be found when Kuwait was invaded. It's a good thing that saner heads prevailed when Wesley Clarke wanted to start shooting over Pristina airport.
No good will come from expanding NATO upto Russia's borders. It's no wonder that the Kagans and Nulands keep trying, given the weird itch that some ethnic lobbies in the US have to re-fight their ancestral blood-feuds by going eyeball-to-eyeball with Moscow.
26
Russia has already been providing weapons to Assad for a long time, as they provided weapons to Saddam and other dictators.
2
What will prevent Russia from openly sending weapons to separatists? Moreover, it will be the right thing to do since these American weapons will be used to kill civilians even more efficiently then Ukrainian army does it now with old mortars and artillery.
14
Russia is already openly sending weapons to the separatists. In fact, most of the separatists are Russian soldiers who are, according to Putin, "on vacation".
7
Neither Motorola or Givi, both commanders in the Donetsk army are Russian - both are natives of Ukraine. Most of the troops fighting are from Donetsk and like all wars there are volunteers from all over the world including France,
3
To v- You're too late, both Ukrainian and U.S officials admitted there are no Russian troops in Ukraine.
2
When was any decision made as to expansion of Western European influence into (the) Ukraine. It has been in Russia's sphere of influence, and, as far as I know, has traded with Europe but was neutral between serving Western Europe's purposes, giving Europe financial advantage, and serving Russia's interests of like kind. Now apparently NATO and other European nations decided to seize an opportunity to usurp what had been the commercial and economic value of Ukraine, from Russia to themselves ... and this without regard for the economic and other losses to be incurred to Russia.
Beyond that, Russia has had port facilities on the Black Sea and other direct interests in the Crimean peninsula and in the western parts of Ukraine. Plus, the people living there have had close ties with Russia culturally, politically, and economically.
he fact that many rebelled after Kiev fell to what amounted to attempt at installation of a new government that tries to serve Western Europe to Russia's disadvantage. It shows how a conflict was set up ... that serves only the cause of uncalled-for aggression against Russia by the West.
The West, and the U.S. somehow decided doing all this was right ... to be antagonizing not only many in the Ukraine, in the Crimea, but the people of Russia.
It would not be seen so if it were to go to the United Nations.
It's clearly interference that has so far amounted to willful aggression, no matter the claims about any economic benefits to Ukraine.
Beyond that, Russia has had port facilities on the Black Sea and other direct interests in the Crimean peninsula and in the western parts of Ukraine. Plus, the people living there have had close ties with Russia culturally, politically, and economically.
he fact that many rebelled after Kiev fell to what amounted to attempt at installation of a new government that tries to serve Western Europe to Russia's disadvantage. It shows how a conflict was set up ... that serves only the cause of uncalled-for aggression against Russia by the West.
The West, and the U.S. somehow decided doing all this was right ... to be antagonizing not only many in the Ukraine, in the Crimea, but the people of Russia.
It would not be seen so if it were to go to the United Nations.
It's clearly interference that has so far amounted to willful aggression, no matter the claims about any economic benefits to Ukraine.
10
Funny how you say NATO, the West, and US did all this. This was the Ukrainian people doing it. Not unlike our own decision to split with Britain with France's help.
7
Ukraine is not someone's sphere of influence. It is a sovereign independent country with some 40+ million hardworking educated people who's children's math and science scores are probably higher then those in the U.S.
3
For those of you who don't believe the US engineered the Ukrainian coup that overthrew the legally elected government of Yanukovich please read this article.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the...
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the...
32
And he was legally thrown out.
2
Your reliance on the Mearshimer article is sadly misplaced. There is nothing in it that shows that the US engineered the overthrow of Yanukovich and his characterization of it as a coup it totally unsubstantiated. Likewise, his reliance on the Nuland call is nothing but an old canard at this point and devoid of proof that it involved the US deciding anything. He does blame NATO and EU enlargement, wrongly, but that is totally different. He also mentions the $5 billion the US spent but acknowledges that this was money that had been spent since 1991--which is different from the conspiracy theory which holds that somehow this all went into the overthrow of Yanukovich.
13
So what? Do we need Another Russian puppet in Europé? No, we need to make Russia suffer until she get rid of that theif.
4
During a briefing with General Muzenko he announced that “To date, we have only the involvement of some members of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and Russian citizens that are part of illegal armed groups involved in the fighting.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/01/kiev-announces-russian-invasion-u...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/01/kiev-announces-russian-invasion-u...
5
THIS whole Campaign in Ukraine has been ill-thought and ill-planned.
With all my sympathies with the Ukrainian Nationalists for self-determination, it seems the folks in the South and East Ukraine do not share their aspirations.
Ukraine is in shambles and has been so since the collapse of the USSR, now it has been fatally wounded, is totally corrupt and is badly broke.
Even if the Rebels lay down their Arms now and join the North willingly, the country will be in Economic ruins for several generations to come.
AND I don't see the EU or the US willing to fork out a Trillion dollars to bring it into the Western fold.
Time has come to make a "face saving deal" with Russia, cut our losses and move on.
With all my sympathies with the Ukrainian Nationalists for self-determination, it seems the folks in the South and East Ukraine do not share their aspirations.
Ukraine is in shambles and has been so since the collapse of the USSR, now it has been fatally wounded, is totally corrupt and is badly broke.
Even if the Rebels lay down their Arms now and join the North willingly, the country will be in Economic ruins for several generations to come.
AND I don't see the EU or the US willing to fork out a Trillion dollars to bring it into the Western fold.
Time has come to make a "face saving deal" with Russia, cut our losses and move on.
38
Ukraine is a country or reach resources and very hardworking, talented, well educated people. If it wouldn't be for Russia's constant invasions for the past several hundred years, they'd be living on par with the Western Europe. Finally there's a chance to build strong borders with Russia and join the civilized humanity.
4
In truth, Ukraine was actually strengthened by Russian domination. Ukraine's major industries were all established by the tsars and Soviets, using mostly Russian capital and resources. During Soviet times, Moscow administrative decisions doubled Ukraine's territorial size too.
If any country is to blame for Ukraine's relative backwardness, it's Poland. Ukraine's leadership and intellectual capital -- it's aristocracy and educated classes -- became Polonized during the centuries of Polish rule. That left only the peasantry and Cossacks to represent Ukraine as a nation. Subsequently, Russia subsumed Ukraine as a result of many wars with Poland.
If any country is to blame for Ukraine's relative backwardness, it's Poland. Ukraine's leadership and intellectual capital -- it's aristocracy and educated classes -- became Polonized during the centuries of Polish rule. That left only the peasantry and Cossacks to represent Ukraine as a nation. Subsequently, Russia subsumed Ukraine as a result of many wars with Poland.
7
There have been many independent polls showing that the majority of the Southern and Eastern Ukraine does not want to separate from Ukraine. Why do you think there are Russian tanks now on the Ukrainian territory? Because the population itself does not want to become part of Russian voluntarily, so Putin is trying to make it part of Russia by force. And who is next? The Baltics? The Finns seem threatened, too. Ukraine needs defensive weapons to stop Russian aggression in its tracks and protect its civilian population.
2
The refrain of Russia vilification and hatred need to stop. We have started a new Cold War and are preparing a hot war. We must stop, there is no possible reason for us to encourage the Ukraine government to wage war. I am appalled.
101
We started the new cold war? I don't remember the US invading Ukraine and seizing Crimea.
11
Because, Nancy, Russia doesn't want anything but war. They will not stop until Kyiv has another dictatorship that steals billions from the third poorest country in Europe. The war won't stop until Ukraine's sovereignty is respected. Ukraine gets enough encouragement from its neighbor, Russia, that is invading it and supporting thugs. New Cold War? Apparently you did not read enough about the last Cold War. This isn't a Cold War. Vilification of Russia? Russia's intrusion into Ukraine and the frozen conflict it has created has vilified its image more than anything. It's doing the same thing it did in Georgia but on a bigger scale. Russia brought this "vilification" on itself.
7
Should Russia be encouraged to refrain from waging war too? I suspect that would not fit into your world view.
6
Here's the thing: when Ukraine became independent of the Soviet Union, the U.S. and U.K. guaranteed their sovereignty in exchange for them giving up their nuclear weapons. We may not remember that, but the Ukrainians certainly do. We owe them.
Alternatively, we could say "we're sorry" and give them their nukes back . . .
Alternatively, we could say "we're sorry" and give them their nukes back . . .
28
Penetrating writing by Gordon and Schmitt. Ms Flournoy, Ms Rice and Valerie Jarett are discovering, at this late date, what it means to lock horns with a foreign power.
Republicans might gloat at this statement, but it is the failure of your Bush and Cheney to achieve anything in Afghanistan and Iraq that fractures your Republican Party between isolationism and confrontation.
So here we are. The Russians support military activity in Ukraine and the US issues a report. It's like ACA, aka Obamacare. ACA needed to happen. Instead, they sat around a conference room table accomplishing nothing.
My father once said, sardonically, a U.S. president needs to convince the Russians that he (or, now, potentially, she) is crazy. You Russians cross the line and we'll launch.
Some Democrats think that Hillary Clinton is too atrong. Some Republicans want this country to become isolationist. In the last two years of the Obama administration, he has been projected into the role of defining American internationals policy for the 21st century. Bush and Cheney failed to do that.
Flournoy, Rice and Jarrett stand with all of this on their shoulders. Or they can pass it off to another administration, giving them a report. I say, lock horns with the Russians. Jack Kennedy did.
Republicans might gloat at this statement, but it is the failure of your Bush and Cheney to achieve anything in Afghanistan and Iraq that fractures your Republican Party between isolationism and confrontation.
So here we are. The Russians support military activity in Ukraine and the US issues a report. It's like ACA, aka Obamacare. ACA needed to happen. Instead, they sat around a conference room table accomplishing nothing.
My father once said, sardonically, a U.S. president needs to convince the Russians that he (or, now, potentially, she) is crazy. You Russians cross the line and we'll launch.
Some Democrats think that Hillary Clinton is too atrong. Some Republicans want this country to become isolationist. In the last two years of the Obama administration, he has been projected into the role of defining American internationals policy for the 21st century. Bush and Cheney failed to do that.
Flournoy, Rice and Jarrett stand with all of this on their shoulders. Or they can pass it off to another administration, giving them a report. I say, lock horns with the Russians. Jack Kennedy did.
6
In fact, Nixon had this theory that he should make the USSR think he was dangerously crazy. During the evening cruises on the Potomac River, Nixon would get drunk and start issuing orders to nuke Vietnam (I think the source is Kissinger). Everyone just ignored him..and in the morning, it was all forgotten.
JFK had the wisdom to defy the Pentagon and many on his own staff to refuse a nuclear confrontation with the USSR and worked out a deal involving removing missiles from Cuba and Turkey. He also had the wisdom to issue a Presidential directive to withdraw all troops from Vietnam, but that got him (along with other matters) got him murdered.
JFK had the wisdom to defy the Pentagon and many on his own staff to refuse a nuclear confrontation with the USSR and worked out a deal involving removing missiles from Cuba and Turkey. He also had the wisdom to issue a Presidential directive to withdraw all troops from Vietnam, but that got him (along with other matters) got him murdered.
4
You watched too many JFK movies. You are very wrong on your JFK history. JFK ordered the blockade of Cuba and the raising of our force levels. He was ready to invade Cuba. He worked on the side to get a peaceful solution but he knew you can only do that from a position of strength.
3
"My father once said, sardonically, a U.S. president needs to convince the Russians that he (or, now, potentially, she) is crazy. You Russians cross the line and we'll launch"
I can't speak for the Russians, but I--along with much of the world--am convinced. I'm convinced: that the neo-cons are crazy, that the people of the US are very easily manipulated, that the US is a very dangerous country that cannot be trusted or bargained with. There are no national security interests or humanitarian interests in Ukraine that are worth a militray involvement by the US.
I can't speak for the Russians, but I--along with much of the world--am convinced. I'm convinced: that the neo-cons are crazy, that the people of the US are very easily manipulated, that the US is a very dangerous country that cannot be trusted or bargained with. There are no national security interests or humanitarian interests in Ukraine that are worth a militray involvement by the US.
2
given the magnitude of the Russian aggression, I'm increasingly thinking providing weapons to Ukraine to defend their cities is the right way to go. It's certainly dangerous, but letting Putin destroy and conquer Ukraine without doing anything is even more dangerous.
31
Yes, becasue he won't stop there.
4
It is time for the United States to provide such weaponry and greater assistance to the legitimate, democratically elected government of Ukraine. Too often this POTUS has failed to adjust or revise an ineffective
strategy whether the opposition is Congressional Republicans or the defiant international law-breaking Russian President. Sanctions have been a great first step but as a result Putin has become more defiant, broken his word and agreement repeatedly, significantly increased support to these "alleged separatists" and used his actions to prevent the collapse of domestic political support as the Russian economy crumbles, he and his circle turn on and acquire assets even from supportive oligarchs, and he violently crushes all dissent. I believe it is abhorrent rather than commendable for the US to fear military conflict in the defense of liberty and freedom more than the Russians fear conflict in order to expand their suppression of freedom, liberty, and fair economic policies. To fear direct conflict and Russian war expansion is to concede defeat for human liberty from the start. The US and Europe are now faced with a quandary no one foresaw or thought possible since WW II - the attempted annexation or takeover of one independent nation by another through war. The United States and Europe should not fear him or the consequences of righteous action. Morality compels the US to arm and support the Ukrainians with all we have available.
strategy whether the opposition is Congressional Republicans or the defiant international law-breaking Russian President. Sanctions have been a great first step but as a result Putin has become more defiant, broken his word and agreement repeatedly, significantly increased support to these "alleged separatists" and used his actions to prevent the collapse of domestic political support as the Russian economy crumbles, he and his circle turn on and acquire assets even from supportive oligarchs, and he violently crushes all dissent. I believe it is abhorrent rather than commendable for the US to fear military conflict in the defense of liberty and freedom more than the Russians fear conflict in order to expand their suppression of freedom, liberty, and fair economic policies. To fear direct conflict and Russian war expansion is to concede defeat for human liberty from the start. The US and Europe are now faced with a quandary no one foresaw or thought possible since WW II - the attempted annexation or takeover of one independent nation by another through war. The United States and Europe should not fear him or the consequences of righteous action. Morality compels the US to arm and support the Ukrainians with all we have available.
10
Nationalism is a disease.
10
This anti-Russian rhetoric has got to stop. Russia might be a poor country, but it has nuclear weapons and a huge military. Putin has made it clear that the Ukraine is his red line. He will not let the U.S. and Europe put another NATO base at Russia's borders. Since no President will be able to convince the American people to get into nuclear war with Russia over the Ukraine, don't make the situation any worse by arming the Ukrainians. Find another way to feed the military industrial complex.
122
No President need ask the American people to go to nuclear war with Russia. All he has to do is push a button. (simplistic term for a procedure) You think there would be any time for that? Unless you take a stand Russia will do whatever they want. Doing nothing will only make the situation worse. Ever hear of a little thing called WWII and what led to it?
2
And what about the Ukrainians, who are not pans or soldiers of ours, but a people and a nation that merely wants to go about its democratic business without be great ended and killed?
Ukrainian billionaires have relocated to Vienna and can be seen in their Bentleys with Ukrainian license plates. They have not made sacrifices or given money to their own country. Let these men start the support of young untrained Ukrainian soldiers instead of pulling their own families out of Ukraine and settling them in Vienna. This is why we should stand back and wait for Ukrainians to take the lead. America is always wasting its citizens money without really understanding the situations it gets into.
6
No. No. and No.
1st because there is right on both sides here. they need to negotiate not fight
2nd because they will lose anyway. Russia is not ISIS.
3rd because all options have not been exhausted
1st because there is right on both sides here. they need to negotiate not fight
2nd because they will lose anyway. Russia is not ISIS.
3rd because all options have not been exhausted
5
1st... because we should negotiate with terrorists? That's how this started in the East.
2nd... they've been fighting Russians and the terrorists with Russian arms for a year. The 'cyborgs' of the Donetsk Airport held out for 11 months before losing the main terminal. They still have a part of that area.
3rd... There have been ceasefires that only Ukraine abided by. We've done sanctions. You're right, all options haven't been tried and this is one of them.
2nd... they've been fighting Russians and the terrorists with Russian arms for a year. The 'cyborgs' of the Donetsk Airport held out for 11 months before losing the main terminal. They still have a part of that area.
3rd... There have been ceasefires that only Ukraine abided by. We've done sanctions. You're right, all options haven't been tried and this is one of them.
3
How about the option of talks or allowing those in the south and eastern Ukraine a vote? Their elected president was forced out and replaced with one who didn't share their interests. They're asking for autonomy, why not negotiate instead of shelling more cities? It beats starting WW3.
1
wrong, wrong and wrong.
try to imagine , at least what position you would argue for if you had the slightest sympathy for Russian speakers, orthodox, who have voted for the admittedly corrupt Yanukovich
try to imagine how Ukraine could defeat Russia in a real war, even with American weapons; and wha tit would look like if the U.S. went further than just giving weapons
try to imaginethe circumstances under which violent opponents are nevertheless capable of making a compromise (Begin-Sadat; Rabin-Arafat; De Klerk- Mandela)
try to imagine , at least what position you would argue for if you had the slightest sympathy for Russian speakers, orthodox, who have voted for the admittedly corrupt Yanukovich
try to imagine how Ukraine could defeat Russia in a real war, even with American weapons; and wha tit would look like if the U.S. went further than just giving weapons
try to imaginethe circumstances under which violent opponents are nevertheless capable of making a compromise (Begin-Sadat; Rabin-Arafat; De Klerk- Mandela)
1
More severe sanctions. A military escalation will exacerbate the problem and only lead to more death and destruction. Russia will not allow the rebels to lose a fight. We need to make them feel some real economic pain.
1
The new Cold War! This will not end well.
6
The NYT article clearly distinguished between military officials and "American officials". General Breedlove was asked by media to confirm his opinion and he did not return the request. Therefore, it is not fair to dump on the military officials who provided advice within a chain of command for which American officials had released to the media. Like many other comments recently in this matter there appears to be a discrepancy with what was written and what is interpreted.
3
Is it the US that calls the shots here or the US and the EU/UK jointly. From this article it seems that Europe is waiting for the US to do the dirty work against Russia - very dangerous.
5
While I am quite sympathetic to the general concept of self-determination, conveyance of US weaponry to the Ukrainians is simultaneously a symbolic gesture; a futile one; and doing such will likely aggravate already fractious relations between the USA and Russia. In other words, it's a bad idea. If any regions' immediate self-interest lies in military support of Ukraine, it's the EU.
Since Americans apparently cannot resist the temptation to export arms into conflict zones and if our government is really looking to make a tangible difference in an area of unquestioned geo-strategic significance, arm the Kurds. They, at least, have made significant inroads against ISIS. As an added bonus, they have made genuine efforts to conform to conventional Western values, unlike the dubious commitments of the Iraqis and the self-styled "pro-Western" elements of the Free Syrian Army.
Since Americans apparently cannot resist the temptation to export arms into conflict zones and if our government is really looking to make a tangible difference in an area of unquestioned geo-strategic significance, arm the Kurds. They, at least, have made significant inroads against ISIS. As an added bonus, they have made genuine efforts to conform to conventional Western values, unlike the dubious commitments of the Iraqis and the self-styled "pro-Western" elements of the Free Syrian Army.
1
The more Ukraine is militarized, the more the hawks in the Russian government are empowered to demand a response by Russia. Arms races, according to a Harvard study of 2000 arms races throughout history, leads, in 98% of the cases, to war.
Russians do not want war; they want to make money. Ukraine, ruled by fascists, oligarchs, and Western banker stooges is desperate and bankrupt. It's per captia income is $3600 and falling, while Russia's is 14K. War is a common means to try to rescue a regime from total failure. Ukraine wants to drag the US and NATO into a war with Russia to prop itself up from inevitable collapse.
Bush used war (he told former Brazilian President Lula that the best way to stimulate the economy was war) to rally support (he had very little) and to justify massive government borrowing/spending. In the process, he more than doubled the debt in his 8 budgets and started two criminal wars based on lies, killing over 500,000 civilians. He had, Republicans like to brag, 52 straight weeks of economic growth based on this military stimulus....until it all collapsed in the worst recession in 80 years.
Russians do not want war; they want to make money. Ukraine, ruled by fascists, oligarchs, and Western banker stooges is desperate and bankrupt. It's per captia income is $3600 and falling, while Russia's is 14K. War is a common means to try to rescue a regime from total failure. Ukraine wants to drag the US and NATO into a war with Russia to prop itself up from inevitable collapse.
Bush used war (he told former Brazilian President Lula that the best way to stimulate the economy was war) to rally support (he had very little) and to justify massive government borrowing/spending. In the process, he more than doubled the debt in his 8 budgets and started two criminal wars based on lies, killing over 500,000 civilians. He had, Republicans like to brag, 52 straight weeks of economic growth based on this military stimulus....until it all collapsed in the worst recession in 80 years.
4
If we do supply arms to Ukraine. Whats the goal? Whats the exit strategy?
I hope it is not to use Ukraine's just to bruise the ribs of the Russian bear. We "USA and Russia" tend to leave country's decimated when the reasons for being their is war by proxy and the leadership vacuum tends to create highly trained local combatants that then become warlords that then meta-morph into terrorist upon abandonment. Then we will see additional Russian money pour into Cuba that will yank the beard of Uncle Sam.
Move counter move, move counter move think it thru clearly.
I hope it is not to use Ukraine's just to bruise the ribs of the Russian bear. We "USA and Russia" tend to leave country's decimated when the reasons for being their is war by proxy and the leadership vacuum tends to create highly trained local combatants that then become warlords that then meta-morph into terrorist upon abandonment. Then we will see additional Russian money pour into Cuba that will yank the beard of Uncle Sam.
Move counter move, move counter move think it thru clearly.
5
Oh, dear. Here we are again, us v. Russia! War has never solved anything for anyone other than to create more wars!
9
I love that statement ... becaue it is so *not* true. It stopped Hitler, it stopped Japan, it stopped the Soviet Union's advance. Being unwilling to fight often causes a bigger fight. We need to make it very expensive for Russia to play it's games while they whither from the low price of oil. Make it cost in money and soldiers and they will at least stop.
13
World War I was called the "war to end all wars" and that worked out, didn't it?
3
This would be the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and against the wrong enemy. Russia should be an important partner in combating ISIS, combating terrorism generally, and working to get a nuclear deal with Iran. And in the long run Russia is an important counterweigh to China. These are all possible advantages we would be throwing away if we side with Ukraine.
How is it possible that the vital interests of the American people are involved in who controls the northeastern shores of the Black Sea?
How is it possible that the vital interests of the American people are involved in who controls the northeastern shores of the Black Sea?
31
Send all the weapons we want, the Russians can match them & top them. That would be only one part of the equation. Part 2: put a battleship or two near the port of Odessa. We can get there (west of Crimea) without confrontation--not to Mariupol though. That's done. This is only way to stop the Russians from taking Odessa too. The Russian Navy may be better than Ukraine but they are no match for ours. If Russians take Odessa, Ukraine becomes landlocked & Russians take Moldova too.
5
"Russian Navy...no match for ours." So, you think the Russian strategy, if we aggress against against their Navy (for what reason?) would be to blink? I think not. For the Russians, it is essential to have a safe "wall" or buffer from NATO aggression. It is survival. If/when they give a reason for others to intervene - and it doesn't take much to entice the US into wars, does it? - they know and anticipate. (Great chess players for centuries.) We can let them calm down while both world opinion and their own population watches, or we can pour gasoline.
In the words not of me or some "pundit", but of the one man who succeeded in pointing Russia towards being a part of a civil global society, post USSR, here's the observation of "progressive" Russia, Gorbachov. Note this is from Russia's popular press, read by both Russians and "foreign", just like the Times(es). But IMHO, Gorbachov's opinion is widely shared. (Crimea is done, now stop punishing the innocent people in Russia AND Ukraine by fueling a war rather than peace.)
Like many in the US, Russia, and Ukraine, we see the horrors of thugs and mercenaries, flamed by the news media and governments. Yes, Russia also emphasizes fluff and spin and propaganda too, but friends/family are dying. Not from any lack of weapons or soldiers, either. From failure of dialogue, and provocation from every side, local and foreign. But it's Russia's doorstep, and our ramping up of Cold War II/WW3.
Gorbachov: http://sptimes.ru/story/41714
In the words not of me or some "pundit", but of the one man who succeeded in pointing Russia towards being a part of a civil global society, post USSR, here's the observation of "progressive" Russia, Gorbachov. Note this is from Russia's popular press, read by both Russians and "foreign", just like the Times(es). But IMHO, Gorbachov's opinion is widely shared. (Crimea is done, now stop punishing the innocent people in Russia AND Ukraine by fueling a war rather than peace.)
Like many in the US, Russia, and Ukraine, we see the horrors of thugs and mercenaries, flamed by the news media and governments. Yes, Russia also emphasizes fluff and spin and propaganda too, but friends/family are dying. Not from any lack of weapons or soldiers, either. From failure of dialogue, and provocation from every side, local and foreign. But it's Russia's doorstep, and our ramping up of Cold War II/WW3.
Gorbachov: http://sptimes.ru/story/41714
6
One might understand all of this agitation to war on the part of elements within the U.S. government if one understands that the news coming out of the Ukraine tonight is that of a Putsch against the current government and even the secession of the west of the Ukraine from Kiev. Were this to happen, then the state known as the Ukraine will cease to exist. Quite likely there will be spontaneous uprisings across the East, including the city of Odessa. Novorussia would become a de facto reality; however, the instability would not be in the interest of Russia, which again, would prefer a neutral, bloc-free Ukraine. The western rump of such a Ukraine would likely overtime become a member of the EU and perhaps even NATO, a scenario which is not in the best interest of Russia.
5
Do you mean the government who came to force as a result of revolution? Will be overtrown by people who do not support the government that prefers to trow bombs and artillery fire at them because they don't trust the new government? As a citizen of a state that wants to separate from rest of Canada, I really hope our president will not try these measures of gaining people's trust.
3
As for a forthcoming putsch against Poroshenko is this the article you are referring to"
http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/01/22/2653
"According to available information, the Ukraine is preparing another armed coup. Structures close to Alexander Turchinov and Yatsenyuk Arsenіy, with direct support from the US State Department organized the "People's veche", which will meet on the initiative of the Council of the Maidan. During the veche will be taken vote of censure to the president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko. In the guilt he would put the current economic situation, corruption, inability to resolve the political crisis, the loss of the Crimea. "
http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/01/22/2653
"According to available information, the Ukraine is preparing another armed coup. Structures close to Alexander Turchinov and Yatsenyuk Arsenіy, with direct support from the US State Department organized the "People's veche", which will meet on the initiative of the Council of the Maidan. During the veche will be taken vote of censure to the president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko. In the guilt he would put the current economic situation, corruption, inability to resolve the political crisis, the loss of the Crimea. "
4
This is not a US problem. Let Europe deal with it if it wants to secure access to cheap Russian gas. At this rate, Obama's insertion of the US into multiple conflicts puts him on a par with Bush. Time to vote for someone who will get the US out of regional conflicts, and put our tax dollars to work on domestic issues.
261
There are and never will be candidates brave enough to put a leash on the dogs of war.
1
I agree that it should be someone more peaceful than Obama. But most of the Republicans are not more peaceful and neither is Hillary. Maybe Rand Paul is our best bet.
4
Was WWII purely European problem, too? The world is even more interconnected now than it was in the 20th century and having a dictator redraw the maps of Europe through aggression and annexation has a very bad precedent. It's better for the US to be involved sooner rather than later, before millions have died.
2
Classic Obama dithering -- and a very clear example of how it costs lives and American prestige. As Ukraine's President Poroshenko said months ago when he addressed Congress: "Wars are not won with blankets." Russia has now demonstrated with the utmost clarity at least twice that any success on the ground Kiev attains (at the cost of many lives) will be countered and pushed back by fresh incursions of Russian armor. How in God's name are Kiev's brave soldiers to stop Russian armored assaults when, as this article states, their anti-armor missles "are out of commission." Here's a hint: They can't. See, e.g., what's happening now on the ground. The U.S. should have sent anti-tank, shoulder-fired Javelin missiles and up-to-date counter battery radar months and months ago. Let's just hope there is still a Ukrainian army left to arm by the time Professor Obama stops dithering.
78
Maybe you forget that the Russians have enough nuclear weapons to turn the United States and western Europe into toasted radioactive rubble. The magnitude of this threat is nearly beyond comprehension. But the author of this letter is agitating for us to engage in a war on Russia's doorstep. I suggest we stay out of this one.
17
No doubt that shock and awe should be applied again, right? I mean, it worked so well the last time, right? If we have to, we'll elect a Bush, right?
5
This is dangerous talk, as is any discussion about sending arms to Ukraine. The defensive arms discussed kill Russians and Ukrainians just as effectively as offensive weapons. Where are the Europeans? Not involved, not wishing for an Iraq or Syria in Central Europe.
Anyone who has lived in southern Russia or eastern Ukraine knows that this area is culturally part of Russia, as western Ukraine is much more integrated with Europe. The only viable solution now is a federated state – much like the United States or maybe Switzerland – with Kiev as the national capital and regional governments and legislatures.
But perhaps that doesn’t serve the interests of leading American political families whose family members or foundations are closely tied to Ukrainian business interests. How moral is a US policy based on those considerations? We would all be served in the long run for those family interests to be dedicated to a realistic solution that results in a peaceful, or at least non military, solution.
Anyone who has lived in southern Russia or eastern Ukraine knows that this area is culturally part of Russia, as western Ukraine is much more integrated with Europe. The only viable solution now is a federated state – much like the United States or maybe Switzerland – with Kiev as the national capital and regional governments and legislatures.
But perhaps that doesn’t serve the interests of leading American political families whose family members or foundations are closely tied to Ukrainian business interests. How moral is a US policy based on those considerations? We would all be served in the long run for those family interests to be dedicated to a realistic solution that results in a peaceful, or at least non military, solution.
3
When Russia moves on to inevitably "defend the Russian speaking people" of Latvia and the other Baltic states, it will become quite obvious why all these ex-Soviet states were so eager to join the collective defense agreement called NATO. Will the naysayers still doubt the intentions of Russia and the necessity of NATO?
17
Oh, please!
There is no evidence whatsoever that Russia has any such intensions. Russia VOLUNTARILY left those countries at the end of the Cold War. The US never leaves anywhere. They have to be chased out,.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Russia has any such intensions. Russia VOLUNTARILY left those countries at the end of the Cold War. The US never leaves anywhere. They have to be chased out,.
10
Russia never voluntarily left any of these countries. The Soviet Union (not Russia), which had been illegally occupying the Baltic countries since the end of WWII, left after it collapsed due to a desire of its people, including Russians, for their own democratic and independent countries. Since Putin came to power, Russia has increasingly tried to assert its influence over the former Soviet countries, such as in Estonia in 2007 and Georgia in 2008. Oh, and ask the Chechens whether Russia ever voluntarily left.
7
Who says Russia was illegally occupying the Baltics?
"Russia has increasingly tried to assert its influence over the former Soviet countries,"
All countries try to influence"Maybe Russia should try to assert its influence like the US did in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and the long list of Latin American countries which lived under fascist governments which the US used its "influence" to create. Start with Chile and go around the continent and talk to people about it. Then you will understand who the real villain is in the world.
"Russia has increasingly tried to assert its influence over the former Soviet countries,"
All countries try to influence"Maybe Russia should try to assert its influence like the US did in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and the long list of Latin American countries which lived under fascist governments which the US used its "influence" to create. Start with Chile and go around the continent and talk to people about it. Then you will understand who the real villain is in the world.
3
1. You can just see the Military Industrial Complex and its minions--Brookings Institution, the Atlantic Council et al--salivate at the prospect of another windfall--at the expense of the US taxpayer, of course. Why don't they start a collection and pay for it themselves?
84
Big mistake. No strategic interest. No be-headings. Mistake to mess with Russia while the Islamic State exists. The Russians are not going to sponsor a terrorist attack against US.
75
A stronger Russia will resist the Islamic state to its south. A weak Ukraine will not.
1
Russia is a natural ally in the "war" against Islamic aggression; they have been policing the unstable Caucasus for centuries. Russia is also a useful partner in resolving the Syrian mess.
An unstable Russia is not in the best interests of even our oligarchy much less the rest of the citizenry.
The only party which benefits are the arms merchants (and inept, shockingly meddlesome generals, looking for yet another war). The losers: the people of Ukraine. Russia does not deserve NATO on its front porch; and, Ukraine, another corrupt east European oligarchy/virtual criminal enterprise, is not worth a taxpayer dime or US life.
An unstable Russia is not in the best interests of even our oligarchy much less the rest of the citizenry.
The only party which benefits are the arms merchants (and inept, shockingly meddlesome generals, looking for yet another war). The losers: the people of Ukraine. Russia does not deserve NATO on its front porch; and, Ukraine, another corrupt east European oligarchy/virtual criminal enterprise, is not worth a taxpayer dime or US life.
7
The Russians sponsored a terrorist act in London (having two KGB agents carry a highly radioactive Polonium-210 on a civilian flight, then all over London, then into a London restaurant just to kill a Putin's foe). They can sponsor a terrorist act like that in the US. They did provide the terrorists antiaircraft weapons to shoot down MH17--there were no Americans on board, true, but lots of other countries' civilians died. The Boston marathon bomber had a Russian passport, he was a refugee from a Russian-Chechen war, a very brutal bloody war. Russia may seem as far away as Nazi Germany seemed in the 1930's but it's as dangerous and should be stopped before it tries to carve up more pieces of Europe.
Russia depends on the West's reluctance and timidity, allowing it to engage in aggressive bullying, to the point of invasions. The Russian economy is definitely on the ropes, but you have to remember that Putin is raising military expenditures, as his government faces crippling cutbacks, due to sanctions, the fall of oil prices and Western sanctions.
15
I think you will find that America had debt at over 17 trillion dollars whilst Russia has a surplus of over 5 billion. You suckers have allowed the multinationals that control your two main political parties and influence all of the policy making in their favour to suck you dry and you dont even have the brains to realise it.
The wars created by America to feed your paranoia allow them to take your freedom and money thats why over the past five years the wealth of the top 1% has increased by 50% and for the rest of the populations it has fallen
The wars created by America to feed your paranoia allow them to take your freedom and money thats why over the past five years the wealth of the top 1% has increased by 50% and for the rest of the populations it has fallen
11
I think you will find that Russia is in a sharp recession (greater than the one in 2008), the ruble is in free fall leading to an inflation threat and Russian banks are being crunched.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2015/01/09/the-russian-economy-col....
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2015/01/04/what-will-russias-re...
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2015/01/09/the-russian-economy-col....
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2015/01/04/what-will-russias-re...
3
Don't send weapons, but provide high quality intelligence and, above all, pile up sanctions on Russia until it feels the pain enough to oust Putin.
54
So economic pain will mean the Russian proles will kick out Putin? In the USA millions of our own proles are suffering and they would never "oust" their president. Get real!
4
Yes, it worked really well in Iraq, Cuba, and Iran. Let's do it again, but this time against a powerful nation which is richer, more democratic, and freer than ever in its history. Did I mention they have thousands of nukes and a public which, unlike the US, supports their leaders?
Putin came to power in 2000 and since then GDP has tripled and wages have doubled, with 13% national debt and a 500 billion surplus cushion to weather hard times imposed externally. He has over 80% support whereas the US Congress has over 80% disapproval!
Putin came to power in 2000 and since then GDP has tripled and wages have doubled, with 13% national debt and a 500 billion surplus cushion to weather hard times imposed externally. He has over 80% support whereas the US Congress has over 80% disapproval!
6
High quality intelligence is useful if one can do something with it. It's not enough to know that Russian tanks are coming and they'll be here in half an hour if you can't do anything about it (except dies until their tires). It's a different story if you have intelligence and anti-tank missiles to stop their advance. Ukraine is not asking for a Mistral (a highly sophisticated offensive attack ship the Russians have ordered from the French) but defensive weapons to protect themselves.
2
To be simple about it, but not simplistic, Putin is not a complicated character. He got to where he is by careful bullying and calling people's bluffs. He sees the West as decadent and weak and unwilling to hold firm to principles he believes we really don't hold very strongly. We are not talking about escalating a conflict, or putting US/Nato troops in harm's way but dealing with a bully. And please, Mr. Obama, no red liner written in pink, but rather, firm, direct behind the scenes diplomacy that calls his bluff. He will not directly back down but he will compromise down. Or, as he believes, we really are weak and he can get what he wants...because he wants it.
17
It's time--indeed, well beyond time, for the U.S. and the rest of the free world to stand up to the Russians by providing whatever material assistance the Ukrainians need to defend their country.
It's clear that Putin will do anything and everything to prevail, but so far the West has been unwilling substantial to do anything to assist the Ukrainians. Putin is willing to risk a major war, the West is unwilling to do anything exception sanctions.
The ball is very much in the court of the U.S. and the West as a whole. We may not want a war or anything close to it, but Putin has absolutely no qualms about pursuing this war.
Right now the West isn't appeasing, but it's also not taking any action which would assist the Ukrainians and, without our concerted assistance, this conflict with continue and continue and continue and the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian state will continue to loose.
It's clear that Putin will do anything and everything to prevail, but so far the West has been unwilling substantial to do anything to assist the Ukrainians. Putin is willing to risk a major war, the West is unwilling to do anything exception sanctions.
The ball is very much in the court of the U.S. and the West as a whole. We may not want a war or anything close to it, but Putin has absolutely no qualms about pursuing this war.
Right now the West isn't appeasing, but it's also not taking any action which would assist the Ukrainians and, without our concerted assistance, this conflict with continue and continue and continue and the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian state will continue to loose.
18
Are you willing to put your life on the line for this "New Cold War"?
4
It is the Ukraine government that is destroying its own country. Ukraine president Poroshenko is a criminal. This is what America was saying about him in 2006 Poroshenko is described as a "disgraced oligarch" by the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst. Later that year, a cable from Deputy Chief of the U.S. Mission in Kiev Sheila Gwaltney mentions that "Poroshenko was tainted by credible corruption allegations."
Washington post Gregory Kolyada, a fellow of the Strategic Culture Foundation think tank, notes, that "chocolate mogul" Petro Poroshenko "started his business by laundering the money of Soviet administrators… He had a head start thanks to the criminal connections of his father, [who was] sentenced for large-scale theft in 1986."
Washington post Gregory Kolyada, a fellow of the Strategic Culture Foundation think tank, notes, that "chocolate mogul" Petro Poroshenko "started his business by laundering the money of Soviet administrators… He had a head start thanks to the criminal connections of his father, [who was] sentenced for large-scale theft in 1986."
8
While the US and other western allies are unwilling to intervene directly (and, realistically, probably should not), it is inexcusable that we have declined to provide basic defensive weapons, e.g., anti-tank ordinance, and the like, to allow Ukraine to ward off the armored and heavy weapons being supplied by Russia to its proxies. Had such defensive weapons been supplied sooner, the escalating attacks from the Russian-backed forces may well have been discouraged at an earlier point. The West undertook a plausible but failed gamble that exceptional restraint would induce similar restraint by Russia. The escalation has occurred, and there is no reason to think it will be discouraged except by making Ukraine capable of defending itself. Flournoy is right: While there is risk either way, the greater risk at this point is that the Russian proxy forces will continue to escalate their attacks and territorial aggression until convinced that advances will be met with capable force that risk Russian casualties.
If there is a greater irony, here, it is that Russia ultimately is likely to end up with the one thing that Putin claimed was most unacceptable: A NATO-aligned military force on its border. Of course, if the borders of "New Russia" are expanded to include not only Crimea, but the northern shores of the Black Sea linking to Russia, plus most of Ukraine's eastern lands, perhaps that is acceptable as a "buffer" in Putin's mind.
If there is a greater irony, here, it is that Russia ultimately is likely to end up with the one thing that Putin claimed was most unacceptable: A NATO-aligned military force on its border. Of course, if the borders of "New Russia" are expanded to include not only Crimea, but the northern shores of the Black Sea linking to Russia, plus most of Ukraine's eastern lands, perhaps that is acceptable as a "buffer" in Putin's mind.
16
" A NATO-aligned military force on its border" will start new age of the Russia-USA counterposition, with cancellation of all joint programs of nuclear armaments reduction and the critical level of danger for the humankind.
4
Your tax dollars at work! Throwing $3 billion to arms manufacturers to get US involved in a civil war on the other side of the globe! Is this part of the Obama's plan to revive the American middle class in America that he so proudly proclaimed in his State of the Union?
84
There is no civil war in Ukraine. The "Novorossiya" project is more similar to the Islamic State (just a different religion serves as the unifying force--Orthodox vs. Muslim) than the US Civil war. Some of the fighters in Ukraine on the terrorist side are the Chechens--an ethnic group that has never had any ties to Ukraine but is led by Putin's strongmen Kadyrov. Imagine if Eastern Islanders were fighting on the Confederacy side--that's how the Chechens are viewed in Ukraine--they would have never been in Ukraine if it were a civil war situation.
1
War forever and ever Amen. Thank you Peace prize winner.
25
Do you prefer the Holocaust? The Jews were left defenseless and let die. Now Ukrainian civilians are left defenseless because "peaceful" Americans don't want Russian soldiers shooting at them to be inconvenienced by any resistance. Many of those civilians are ethnic Ukrainians, many are Russians, some are Jewish. Should they all be allowed to be used as target practice in the name of peace? That would be inhumane.
I thought I'd add my support for arming Ukraine before this is flooded by paid Russian trolls. Having studied in Russia, I am far from a Russophobe, but it only takes a quick trip around the Russian media to know where this war has been going for months and who is at fault. I was blessed with coming of age in the Gorbachev era, and I never thought I'd see such a vile propaganda machine on European soil in my lifetime. The Radio Moscow of old looks like a bastion of unbiased truthfulness compared to the delights of Channel One.
50
I've noticed many comment contributions coming from Kiev as well. They've been hammering away for arms and more of our billions. Where's it all going?
3
Note the timing of all the pro-Russian comments. It's late at night here and Americans have been watching the Superbowl rather than posting comments to this board -- but it's Monday morning in Moscow, and the Putin trolls (pretending to be Americans) are out in full force, upvoting one another. The arguments are standard RT talking points: Ukraine will just be another Vietnam for the U.S., Russia wants a neutral Ukraine, Russia would have conquered it already if it wanted to, the West wants to plunder Ukraine, don't "provoke" Russia because Putin is dangerous, U.S. generals shouldn't be "making policy." I'm waiting for them to use the word "illegitimate" and "fascist" to describe the Kiev government, and to describe Obama as a "neocon." Nothing wrong with the NYT letting the Russians post all they want, but there's likewise nothing wrong with people like me who watch it happen over and over again flagging it as propaganda.
"President Obama has made no decisions..." So, what else is new?
3
Unlike George Bush, "The Decider." He decided very quickly to invade Iraq. Wasn't that a wonderful example of decision-making. Actually, when it comes to war and peace, a responsible President takes his time, so we don't get involved in 10-year wars that result in the deaths of thousands of Americans and trillion-dollar debts.
5
We would be making a very significant mistake if we become involved in this regional war.
116
US and EU started the war,man.
20
It depends on the depth of the involvement. Like most others, I am adamantly opposed to direct involvement by our military. Other forms of support may be more acceptable.
It's too late for that - the US started the war by supporting the illegal coup against an elected government in Kiev.
4
I hope any weapons sent to Ukraine don't end up in the hands of Russia like so many of the weapons we gave to the Iraqis ended up in the hands of ISIS.
9
When is enough ever enough?
14
Helping Ukraine against the Russians will be picking a fight we can never win. I spent the first 2/3 of my life waiting for the Russians to extinguish all life on planet Earth and I do not wish to return to those dark times ever again.
The time to help Ukraine was before Russian troops and tanks crossed the border into Crimea and Putin was still denying involvement. The opportunity was missed, the window has closed, move along and don't start WW3.
The time to help Ukraine was before Russian troops and tanks crossed the border into Crimea and Putin was still denying involvement. The opportunity was missed, the window has closed, move along and don't start WW3.
17
Russia had a land border with Crimea?
2
Not land, Sevastopol is the home of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy and the staging point for 16,000 Russian Marines who are operating as "Peace Keepers" that are essentially backing separatist rebels against the democratically elected government of Ukraine.
The West has a few options here:
A) Support the Ukrainians with the weapons and economic resources needed to deter Russian aggression.
B) Wait for Ukraine to fall and have to confront Putin ourselves sometime in the not too distant future.
C) There are no further options...
A) Support the Ukrainians with the weapons and economic resources needed to deter Russian aggression.
B) Wait for Ukraine to fall and have to confront Putin ourselves sometime in the not too distant future.
C) There are no further options...
21
Why not a solution as in Kosovo? There are those who saw their elected president ousted and feel discarded by the new government. Some Ukrainians prefer being under EU, others strongly oppose it. Just it really justify a possible world war?
8
No, there is one more option - to stop warm up the war and let the puppet Ukrainian government to negotiate with the rebels.
And stop the practice of "coloured revolutions" which are in fact hidden occupations.
And stop the practice of "coloured revolutions" which are in fact hidden occupations.
13
Just wondering, it's because unlike in Kosovo, Ukraine has been invaded by a foreign country that has already stolen territory and is now trying to steal more under the guise of a civil war. It would be as if in Kosovo Albania invaded Serbia, stole Kosovo, and then decided to steal a few other key Serbian cities for good measure.
5
“Raising the risks and costs to Russia” by shipping weapons to Ukraine will work just as well as supplying weapons to the South Vietnamese Army worked 50 years ago. When your adversary views the fight as an existential struggle (and Putin increasingly does), any escalation will simply be met by the adversary raising the stakes further. When that adversary has a few thousand nuclear warheads, as Russia does, and the fight is not existential for you, pretty soon you hit a point where the risks of further escalation become unbearable. Down that road lies defeat. The alternative is to recognize that what happens in Ukraine is much more important for Russia than it is for the US and to seek a negotiated settlement that accommodates some of Russia’s interests. Demanding capitulation and throwing more fuel into the fire of war is not going to work.
414
A negotiated settlement called "Minsk" has been rejected by Russia since September and has instead been used to take advantage of Ukraine's attempts to abide by its terms.Diplomacy is used as a weapon of war by Russia. They only understand force.
10
Minsk was a bad deal for the DPR and LPR. It left Kiev able to shell its cities which was unacceptable. Minsk was an ultimatum not a negotiation. Real negotiations with everything on the table needs to take place between the DPR and LPR and someone from Kiev with FULL plenipotentiary powers which Kuchma did not have.
4
The war in Ukraine is not "existential" for Russia, though Putin's future might rest on it.
Russia can only take so much pain before Putin is overthrown. His billionaire chums are already hurting from the loss of so much wealth. The Russian media can only spout Kremlin propaganda for so long - if body bags start returning home to Russia people will come to see Putin as little more than a rehash of the old Soviet despots.
Letting Russia get away with such blatant mischief will only embolden Putin in the future.
Russia can only take so much pain before Putin is overthrown. His billionaire chums are already hurting from the loss of so much wealth. The Russian media can only spout Kremlin propaganda for so long - if body bags start returning home to Russia people will come to see Putin as little more than a rehash of the old Soviet despots.
Letting Russia get away with such blatant mischief will only embolden Putin in the future.
13
Yet another example that the American military is the de facto ruler of our nation. All Presidents exhibit allegiance to every whim of the military for fear of appearing weak. Additionally, the Presidents are kept in somewhat of a cacoon with constant military speech.
Presidents and Congresspeople are mere puppets that serve the military.
How often is the military denied what they want logistically or politically?
Presidents and Congresspeople are mere puppets that serve the military.
How often is the military denied what they want logistically or politically?
13
Anyone who wishes to read something other than Michael Gordon and the New York Times's intensely biased reporting on the Ukraine crisis would do well to read Patrick Smith's series of articles in Salon.com, particularly here:
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/30/our_dangerous_new_mccarthyism_russia_noa...
and here:
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/21/distortions_lies_and_omissions_the_new_y...
It may surprise you to learn that there is a vast disconnect between the conclusions reached by Mr. Gordon and his unnamed, unaccountable government officials and Mr. Smith's much better-researched, better-sourced information.
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/30/our_dangerous_new_mccarthyism_russia_noa...
and here:
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/21/distortions_lies_and_omissions_the_new_y...
It may surprise you to learn that there is a vast disconnect between the conclusions reached by Mr. Gordon and his unnamed, unaccountable government officials and Mr. Smith's much better-researched, better-sourced information.
36
There is nothing particularly good about Mr. Smith's work. He repeats the Kremlin line that the overthrow of Yanukovich was a result of armed "putcschists" (and the loaded word itself is a giveaway) while conveniently overlooking that the armed aspect of this was started when Yanukovich initiated the use of deadly force. He again trots out the old canard about the Nuland-Pyatt call actually meaning anything other than two diplomats assessing the leaders of the opposition--and no solid proof has been presented that it was anything but that. Yanukovich's allies deserted him because they realized that his raising the stakes by turning this into an armed conflict didn't work. Likewise, the term "neo-fascist" belongs in quotes despite Smith's criticism given that even the initial government had limited Svoboda presence and the current one has none.
12
The Salon articles quoted are tripe. This is not about McCarthyism or another red scare. Kiev is not a neo-Nazi state, that's pure Russian propaganda. Indeed, Putin's proclamations about doing whatever is necessary to protect Russian speaking people sounds eerily reminescent of someone else.
13
I simply do not understand the anti-Russia sentiments of sections of the US leadership. This is a regional conflict and Russia has a legitimate interest in keeping NATO off its frontier (It is inexplicable why NATO even exists as its mission was complete with the collapse of the USSR).
There are zero US interests at stake, other than arms merchants and perhaps an opportunity for inept US military leadership for advancement (General Breedlove, a general in a democratic army should be immediately recalled and retired for making what are policy comments on this issue). Further, any money or goods sent to Ukraine will be stolen by its oligarchs.
There are zero US interests at stake, other than arms merchants and perhaps an opportunity for inept US military leadership for advancement (General Breedlove, a general in a democratic army should be immediately recalled and retired for making what are policy comments on this issue). Further, any money or goods sent to Ukraine will be stolen by its oligarchs.
8
Anyone who agrees with the support with weapons of the Ukrainian Army should realize that the Ukrainian Army will use it for killing their own citizens, instead of the full-scale political dialogue with rebels. Anyone who support this will be guilty in numerous casualities among civillian population in Donetsk, Gorlivka etc. Ukraine doesn't need weapons, Ukraine needs de-escalation and negotiations which are still ignored by the main figures in the Ukrainian power.
30
No, they'll use it for shelling Russian clients who have turned Donbass, including Donetsk and Luhanks, into a war zone.
10
But they aren't rebels, they are Russian soldiers.
I'm sure if Ukraine had the capacity to truly hit behind the lines and hit the Russian forces that are holding up the secondary fronts, things would be very different.
I'm sure if Ukraine had the capacity to truly hit behind the lines and hit the Russian forces that are holding up the secondary fronts, things would be very different.
5
Participation of Russian soldiers in this war is very-very overestimated.
1
America has every right to be concerned about the growing Russian support to the separatist. But that does not mean that the U.S. can arm Ukrainian forces to take on the separatists. America cannot afford another proxy war. The only way to contain Russia is through isolation in every field.
Already, Russia is reeling under severe financial crisis. Its economy is in shambles. There is a growing restlessness among Russians. If further sanctions are imposed, with passage of time, Russia is sure to feel pressure from its own people and stay away from Ukraine.
Let not another Afghanistan be created in Ukraine.
Already, Russia is reeling under severe financial crisis. Its economy is in shambles. There is a growing restlessness among Russians. If further sanctions are imposed, with passage of time, Russia is sure to feel pressure from its own people and stay away from Ukraine.
Let not another Afghanistan be created in Ukraine.
21
Very bad idea. This is not fighting Syria or Iraq. Escalating this conflict by sending weapons will leave more civilians dead and would only be used to justify Russia's actions. Russia would likely be forced to up the ante. The US has no real place in this fight and it is wasting its time and money as usual. It has learned nothing from its previous battles.
148
Bingo!
History repeats because people repeat their knowledge of history.
Reminds me of Dr. Strangelove..........now it's Breedlove.
Reminds me of Dr. Strangelove..........now it's Breedlove.
13
Last quarter, Russia posted a budget surplus. It how has posted surpluses for 14 straight years and has a cushion of 500 billion, national debt of 13%, and 5.1% unemployment, with 600 billion in new trade deals with BRICS nations.
While the sanctions are causing a slowdown in economic growth the economy is hardly in shambles. By contrast, the US has had huge deficits for 14 straight years, a 100% debt ratio, and is being hurt badly by the Saudi price war, which is drying up investment in oil shale and causing loss of jobs.
As for providing weapons to Ukraine, I think putting more weapons in the hands of neo-Nazis, oligarchs, and Western bankster stooges, is a recipe for disaster.
"Defensive weapons" (such as anti-ballistic weapons systems---since the rebels have no air force, what kind of defensive weapons are meant?) tend to increase insecurity through the "security dilemma."
"The security dilemma, also referred to as the spiral model, is a term used in international relations and refers to a situation in which actions by a state intended to heighten its security, such as increasing its military strength or making alliances, can lead other states to respond with similar measures, producing increased tensions that create conflict,"
Defensive weapons are part of a dynamic of increasing weapons which, according to a Harvard study of 2000 arms races throughout history, lead in 98% of the cases to war.
\
While the sanctions are causing a slowdown in economic growth the economy is hardly in shambles. By contrast, the US has had huge deficits for 14 straight years, a 100% debt ratio, and is being hurt badly by the Saudi price war, which is drying up investment in oil shale and causing loss of jobs.
As for providing weapons to Ukraine, I think putting more weapons in the hands of neo-Nazis, oligarchs, and Western bankster stooges, is a recipe for disaster.
"Defensive weapons" (such as anti-ballistic weapons systems---since the rebels have no air force, what kind of defensive weapons are meant?) tend to increase insecurity through the "security dilemma."
"The security dilemma, also referred to as the spiral model, is a term used in international relations and refers to a situation in which actions by a state intended to heighten its security, such as increasing its military strength or making alliances, can lead other states to respond with similar measures, producing increased tensions that create conflict,"
Defensive weapons are part of a dynamic of increasing weapons which, according to a Harvard study of 2000 arms races throughout history, lead in 98% of the cases to war.
\
11
With Russia controlling so much oil and going off the dollar you can understand the urgency for the West to bring them down before a new Global Currency takes hold. Sadam, Gadaffi, and others had those ambitioins. Where are they now? BRICS is doing something about them. and Russia is an impediment to our "National Interests" by being one of the first to do so and trade oil in Rubles.
4
@dale ruff
Russia has slid into recession and the ruble is in free fall, forcing the Russian central bank to hike interest rates up to try to protect it.
Why would you be concerned about the Ukraine having anti-air weapons--are you admitting that the Russian air force is operating over Ukrainian territory? Incidentally, there already is a war--one started by Russian clients.
Russia has slid into recession and the ruble is in free fall, forcing the Russian central bank to hike interest rates up to try to protect it.
Why would you be concerned about the Ukraine having anti-air weapons--are you admitting that the Russian air force is operating over Ukrainian territory? Incidentally, there already is a war--one started by Russian clients.
2
This war was instigated with 5 Billion dollars to pro-democracy movements from Merkel and crew to incite the overthrow of a corrupt Ukraine government. It was facilitated by the CIA and has had McCain photographed with Nazi Party subversives. It is a threat to Soviet interests as everything NATO has done in that area since the end of the Cold War has been. Know and understand your enemy and the reasons why they react before you blame them.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The United States and its allies - NATO and the EU are already and have been providing lethal aid to the unconstitutional government in Kiev, a government which we helped to put in power in a coup. There are NATO weapons, NATO ammunition and other NATO combat equipment on the ground and being used against the people of the East of the Ukraine. The Director of the CIA has personally been to Kiev on more than one occasion. High ranking military advisers have been in Kiev and have visited the Ukrainian forces, even giving medals to the wounded. It seems that the good folk do not realize that a gun-to-gun encounter with Russia could result in a nuclear war. Nothing is worth a nuclear war, nothing, particularly not the egos of warmongers.
The United States and its allies - NATO and the EU are already and have been providing lethal aid to the unconstitutional government in Kiev, a government which we helped to put in power in a coup. There are NATO weapons, NATO ammunition and other NATO combat equipment on the ground and being used against the people of the East of the Ukraine. The Director of the CIA has personally been to Kiev on more than one occasion. High ranking military advisers have been in Kiev and have visited the Ukrainian forces, even giving medals to the wounded. It seems that the good folk do not realize that a gun-to-gun encounter with Russia could result in a nuclear war. Nothing is worth a nuclear war, nothing, particularly not the egos of warmongers.
135
And the real people behind this uncalled for rebellion in Eastern Ukraine are the Russians who don't want freedom in their puppet states because they can't exploit a free country
8
There was no coup.
The interim government in Kiev after Yanukovych fled the country and abdicated his presidency followed the constitution in setting up an interim government and then holding presidential elections exactly 90 days, the shortest timeframe allowed by the constitution, from the ouster of Yanukovych.
And why shouldn't the US be sending high level advisers to Kiev to counter the actual Russian soldiers on the ground? It's really the least the US could do.
The interim government in Kiev after Yanukovych fled the country and abdicated his presidency followed the constitution in setting up an interim government and then holding presidential elections exactly 90 days, the shortest timeframe allowed by the constitution, from the ouster of Yanukovych.
And why shouldn't the US be sending high level advisers to Kiev to counter the actual Russian soldiers on the ground? It's really the least the US could do.
7
Lest anyone be influenced by the pro-Russian apologists here seeking to cast doubt on the presence of the regular Russian troops and armor in Ukraine, there is indisputable photographic and video evidence of this reality. Part of the propaganda campaign of Russia is to employ seemingly "Western" voices in the mass media pushing the Kremlin line as a weapon of war.
18
And this is why the renamed Blackwater is aiding and training Ukraine? And WHO is footing the bill?
6
Unsubstantiated allegations are one of the primary tools in Russia's propaganda campaign. Thanks for reminding me.
9
You got it, for that's what is going down.
2
Why do we think our intervention in the Ukrainian civil war will be of benefit to the US? Here are two excellent articles which oppose US involvement in the Ukrainian civil war.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2015/01/22/u-s-should-stay-out-of...
http://us-russia.org/2902-in-ukraine-us-interests-are-incompatible-with-...
These are excellent opinion pieces and the one by the Stratfor editor George Friedman is really excellent and should be required reading by those in Congress and the Pentagon who are beating the drums for the US involvement in another war.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2015/01/22/u-s-should-stay-out-of...
http://us-russia.org/2902-in-ukraine-us-interests-are-incompatible-with-...
These are excellent opinion pieces and the one by the Stratfor editor George Friedman is really excellent and should be required reading by those in Congress and the Pentagon who are beating the drums for the US involvement in another war.
7
Did you actually read George Friedman's piece? It does not support your contentions at all. It merely analyzes the current situation but does not draw the conclusions you seem to claim it does.
10
I'm sure that if I looked, I could find dozens of opinion pieces on why the US should be supporting the legal and legitimate government in Kiev against the Russian invasion.
One can find anything to bolster one's view if one looks for it.
One can find anything to bolster one's view if one looks for it.
4
Our involvement in Ukraine will NOT bring peace. Only compromise will bring peace. A Kiev military victory will not bring peace either.
So much blood has been spilled on bother sides, that unity in Ukraine is impossible other than by imposition of brutal, authoritarian regime of the people of the Donbas. Is that really what America stands for?
At this point Kiev should seriously consider relinquishing the Donbas and let them have their independence. It will be hard pill for Kiev to swallow but a brutal occupation and suppression of the Donbas will not bring anything but more misery for the whole country. From what I have read Poroshenko is willing to compromise and make concessions to get peace. It is unfortunate that the war part of Yatsenyuk and Avakov will not let him make any compromise to get peace. Opinions have become too hardened on both sides.
So much blood has been spilled on bother sides, that unity in Ukraine is impossible other than by imposition of brutal, authoritarian regime of the people of the Donbas. Is that really what America stands for?
At this point Kiev should seriously consider relinquishing the Donbas and let them have their independence. It will be hard pill for Kiev to swallow but a brutal occupation and suppression of the Donbas will not bring anything but more misery for the whole country. From what I have read Poroshenko is willing to compromise and make concessions to get peace. It is unfortunate that the war part of Yatsenyuk and Avakov will not let him make any compromise to get peace. Opinions have become too hardened on both sides.
47
And Russia's involvement in Ukraine will bring peace?
All it's brought so far is misery and death.
You have been beating this drum of splitting Ukraine since Day One of the protests against Yanukovych. But, during the entirety of Ukraine's independence from the Soviet Union, this was never an issue inside Ukraine. It only became fodder for the pro-Russian revanchists after Russia invaded and annexed Crimea.
Had Russia not sent Russian nationals back in March and April to create these fake separatist regions in the first place, there would be no war in eastern Ukraine today.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the very clear facts that this is an entirely Russian lead operation shows that you do not want any peace at all in Ukraine.
All it's brought so far is misery and death.
You have been beating this drum of splitting Ukraine since Day One of the protests against Yanukovych. But, during the entirety of Ukraine's independence from the Soviet Union, this was never an issue inside Ukraine. It only became fodder for the pro-Russian revanchists after Russia invaded and annexed Crimea.
Had Russia not sent Russian nationals back in March and April to create these fake separatist regions in the first place, there would be no war in eastern Ukraine today.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the very clear facts that this is an entirely Russian lead operation shows that you do not want any peace at all in Ukraine.
6
Roger:
I don't think you would hold those same views if you were aware of the history of Russia, Ukraine, and how the two nations came to overlap in east Ukraine over a period of centuries. The background facts are complex.
I don't think you would hold those same views if you were aware of the history of Russia, Ukraine, and how the two nations came to overlap in east Ukraine over a period of centuries. The background facts are complex.
1
That was exactly the reasoning behind carding up Poland and letting Hitler occupy Western Poland and Soviet Russia occupying Eastern Poland--all in the name of peace. It's hard to know what the residents of the occupied territories actually want since their occupiers are not letting them speak their minds. Maybe the solution is to get ALL the weapons, including all Russian tanks and all Russian soldiers out of Ukraine and then asked the civilian population what they want. The current situation is awful and even more so for the residents of the areas being attacked by the Russian tanks--often they are not even given time to flee and the Ukrainian soldiers trying to protect them don't have anti-tank missiles to stop the tanks from advancing. The US needs to give Ukraine weapons to protect its civilians otherwise it's tacitly supporting the slaughter of the innocents.
3
No, no, no! We can't save the entire world. We'd like to, but not at the expense of our young men and women! They deserve the lives they were born to, and this country is immersing itself in wars all over the map! It's unfair to our own citizens. I sympathize with all the countries who are in civil wars. And countries who try to get out from under the thumb of aggressors. But we have a lot to do for ourselves, as well. And we do have an obligation to our own citizens. When there's the slightest risk of danger to the U.S., such as ISIS, we must try to stop it. But, to get into other conflicts is wrong.
61
Americans save the world - Really?????
The entire middle east is on fire thanks to American regime changes - Lybia, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Ukraine. wow - good job America
5000 dead in Ukraine, how many more in Iraq, Afghanistan - 10 of thousands. That's really something to be proud of.
The entire middle east is on fire thanks to American regime changes - Lybia, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Ukraine. wow - good job America
5000 dead in Ukraine, how many more in Iraq, Afghanistan - 10 of thousands. That's really something to be proud of.
2
Ukraine is asking for defensive weapons, not US soldiers. There is no civil war in Ukraine, there is an ISIS-like terrorist organizations backed by Russia that is trying to build a perfect "Orthodox" world, some of those Orthodox Russian nationalists want that world to be from Lisbon (Portugal) to the Far East. This redrawing the borders of Europe concerns the US as much as it does Europe.
2
We thought Ukraine's nukes were a "risk of danger to the US," so we made a deal with Ukraine: If they unilaterally disarm the "strategic" arsenal, we would guarantee their territorial sovereignty and protect their borders.
If we now, having got what we wanted, welch on the deal, how do you think that example will impact our ability to address threats like ISIS. Wouldn't it make it somewhat harder to resolve such dangers if no one thinks they can trust our commitments?
If we now, having got what we wanted, welch on the deal, how do you think that example will impact our ability to address threats like ISIS. Wouldn't it make it somewhat harder to resolve such dangers if no one thinks they can trust our commitments?
1
When we led the way on serious sanctions it took weeks for the EU 27 to convince their ... whatever ... to follow the United States.
"Poland, the Baltic States, Canada and Britain, the report says, might also provide defensive weapons if the United States takes the lead."
And might not.
And I guess we are about to hear that if we had sent $5 billion in arms two years ago this would never have happened. Well.. that would have been another $5 billion on the deficit and maybe half might have been "lost" but ... then maybe it should have been $10 billion and 20,000 more troops in Poland.
And why was "WarGames" considered fiction?
"Poland, the Baltic States, Canada and Britain, the report says, might also provide defensive weapons if the United States takes the lead."
And might not.
And I guess we are about to hear that if we had sent $5 billion in arms two years ago this would never have happened. Well.. that would have been another $5 billion on the deficit and maybe half might have been "lost" but ... then maybe it should have been $10 billion and 20,000 more troops in Poland.
And why was "WarGames" considered fiction?
3
I've been opposed to military aid but I too am coming around.
The odd thing is that we've gotten so used to trying to respect Russia's point of view that even we think of it as controversial to send such aid to the legitimate government of a friendly nation.
If Russia really hasn't invaded Ukraine, then it should not be controversial even to send troops to assist Kiev regain control of a portion of its own territory.
The odd thing is that we've gotten so used to trying to respect Russia's point of view that even we think of it as controversial to send such aid to the legitimate government of a friendly nation.
If Russia really hasn't invaded Ukraine, then it should not be controversial even to send troops to assist Kiev regain control of a portion of its own territory.
16
A little context about where the fighting is and what the rebels' objectives are would help; there's enough confusion in the Western media about who is doing what--not all of it accidental.
The rebels are trying to straighten the line of demarcation in the western side of the area they hold, in order to stop six months of indiscriminate shelling and rocketing of cities and towns in the rebellious region by Kiev forces.
Debaltseve is in the centre of a "tongue" or "pocket" of Kiev-held territory that sticks into rebel territory and allows the shelling. There is no assault on Mariupol or any attempt by the rebels to take more territory in other regions.
The U.S. government knows this, and must calculate whether involving itself in what is essentially a limited civil war in Ukraine is worth escalating military tension between the U.S. and Russia. I'm guessing that once the Kiev forces' artillery is pushed out of range of rebel civilian centres, the real negotiating will begin.
The rebels are trying to straighten the line of demarcation in the western side of the area they hold, in order to stop six months of indiscriminate shelling and rocketing of cities and towns in the rebellious region by Kiev forces.
Debaltseve is in the centre of a "tongue" or "pocket" of Kiev-held territory that sticks into rebel territory and allows the shelling. There is no assault on Mariupol or any attempt by the rebels to take more territory in other regions.
The U.S. government knows this, and must calculate whether involving itself in what is essentially a limited civil war in Ukraine is worth escalating military tension between the U.S. and Russia. I'm guessing that once the Kiev forces' artillery is pushed out of range of rebel civilian centres, the real negotiating will begin.
9
The rebels are trying to further the ambitions of their Russian patrons by keeping Ukraine in a state of ferment with an unjustified armed rebellion started under Russian auspices. Mariupol is being shelled; sounds like an assault and an attempt to slice off a little more territory that reaches towards Crimea.
8
"There is no assault on Mariupol or any attempt by the rebels to take more territory in other regions"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBC - 24 January 2015 Last updated at 17:40 ET
Rockets kill 30 in Mariupol as rebels launch offensive
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30967949
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BBC - 24 January 2015 Last updated at 17:40 ET
Rockets kill 30 in Mariupol as rebels launch offensive
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30967949
4
I have read that the shelling was caused by bad coordinates - that the real target was a Kiev outpost sitting outside Mariupol That was the intended target not the city.
The prime Minister of Donetsk made it perfectly clear if Poroshenko wants a cease fire then come to the Donetsk airport for tea and negotiate it or Ukraines unconditional surrender.
3
I get more and more anxious because we are getting embroiled in more and more situations totally out of our sphere. I know there is a moral imperative. But how many fires can we douse ? New fires start raging before we can extinguish the earlier one. Why is Europe not getting involved? It is right in their backyard and very soon will be around their house. Europe, time to tie your own shoelaces. You have enough modern artillery,trained armies and wealth. Sounds selfish but we also have to take care and spend our own money on ourselves. For every new endeavor of our armed forces ,the American Citizen keeps getting pushed further and further back. We really do have some grave problems at home which gets short shrift because there are no funds. Only the military spending seems to have no limits. There are moral imperatives that our citizens are entitled to like jobs,a living wage,infrastructure fixing, health care, social security, improvement of our schools and..do I need to go on?
26
Europe, time to tie your own shoelaces. You have enough modern artillery,trained armies and wealth.
While the US was defending Europe it's citizens were enjoying healthcare, sick time, vacation pay, and other benefits. What's to become of them if they are made to shoulder more economic responsibility for their own protection? Ha! What indeed!
While the US was defending Europe it's citizens were enjoying healthcare, sick time, vacation pay, and other benefits. What's to become of them if they are made to shoulder more economic responsibility for their own protection? Ha! What indeed!
3
Obama won't fight ISIS(which he and Hillary created by releasing Abu Bakr and supporting Syrian Rebels) but will fight Russia?
Seriously?
Seriously?
16
Nope, nope and nope. Putin's popularity is at an all time high in Russia, because he has painted this as a western conspiracy against mother Russia. The Russian economy is crumbling, the further we stay away from this conflict the better. It is a tragedy, but adding western forces to re-take 193 square miles of territory will only aggravate the situation. Putin will sink with his corrupt government, when the economic noose tightens. Inserting ourselves into another countries affairs militarily only make us the bully. Money yes, bullets no. Let Putin hang himself with his own corrupt government and failed economic policy. There are no Olympic diversions looming and there are enough economic stakeholders in the current Russia, that politics will play a vital row.
14
Putin will sink with his corrupt government
Just as Fidel did... in the give or take time of over fifty years?
Just as Fidel did... in the give or take time of over fifty years?
6
Who will pay the 3 billion dollars needed for this assistance? Will it be Ukraine? Will it be the EU, the ones who did so much to create this mess? Will it be the Germans? The Greeks? Strapped US taxpayers do not need this burden. Just exactly where the final borders of the old Tsarist empire are drawn is not a vital national security issue for the United States. The sooner Ukraine settles upon borders that more accurately reflect the cultural, linguistic, and religious realities on the ground the sooner the Kiev government can go about the business of attempting to build a successful state. A successful Ukraine is in the best interests of the West. A wounded Ukraine full of bitter ethnic resentment serves Russia's interests.
37
A successful Ukraine is in the best interests of the West.
And the reasons why the Russians won't interpret this as a "Domino Theory" are?
And the reasons why the Russians won't interpret this as a "Domino Theory" are?
4
Point well taken. But if the West and Ukraine continue to insist upon holding onto the Donbass despite the wishes of the population there is very little chance that the world will see a successful Ukraine -- at least for another century.
There's a serious risk that if the U.S. and the West proceeds with a plan to arm the Ukrainian military, Russia may announce that action will allow and cause Ukraine to take aggressive military action against the rebels and the civilians in rebel territory and thus in response Russia will officially provide arms to the rebels to defend themselves from U.S. arms being provided to the Ukrainian military.
At that point the Russian arms may include items such as missiles capable of hitting Kiev and further areas of Ukraine with the net result being a much increased war that Ukraine can't win.
At that point the Russian arms may include items such as missiles capable of hitting Kiev and further areas of Ukraine with the net result being a much increased war that Ukraine can't win.
25
Whatever Putin wishes to achieve will be well established while Washington is still trying to make a decision.
6
Truth is Washington DOES things BEFORE it tells us what it will do. Who do you think is paying the CIA and Blackwater? Again!
6
It's now pretty clear that Putin has no intention of stopping the war in Ukraine until he controls the entire country. Obama can either listen to Susan Rice and Joe Biden, or he can give the Ukrainian Army the weapons it needs to defend itself. I voted for Obama twice, but I have to say that I think it was perhaps a mistake. Caution is one thing, but the continual waffling and dithering are maddening. We either give the Ukrainians what they need now, or we watch the "separatists" march into Kiev later this year. Your choice, Mr. President.
14
Are you kidding? Go to war with Russia....yet again? Hasn't our dismal failure in Afghanistan been enough?
24
Ukrainian Army doesn't "defend itself", they fight against their own citizens and shell their own cities. Use different sources of information.
10
If Putin had wanted to control the entire Ukraine, he would have conquered it when the Crimea seceded from the Ukraine. On the contrary, Putin wants the Ukraine to remain a neutral, bloc-free country. He does not want the country because it has been since its inception in 1991, a fiscal and economic nightmare. The West wants the Ukraine for two reasons: to plunder its wealth and to serve as a gateway to plunder Russia.
215
Do we really want a proxy war with Russia? And why does Gen Dempsey think he should be making foreign policy?
210
While we've not had proxy wars against Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union, we have had several proxy wars against the Soviet Union. Afghanistan and Angola spring immediately to mind.
I think the real question is:
Does Russia want a proxy war with the US?
Considering how Afghanistan turned out for the Soviets, I would think not.
I think the real question is:
Does Russia want a proxy war with the US?
Considering how Afghanistan turned out for the Soviets, I would think not.
5
General Dempsey should be fired ASAP.
3
In a democracy, even generals are allowed to express their opinions, especially since they may have very valuable opinions to share
This war has evolved from Russia instigating and supporting a rebellion in Donbas to a full Russian invasion of Ukraine by 1000's of regular Russian forces with support of Russian tanks, artillery, grads, anti-aircraft missiles and munitions and intelligence apparatus.
Therefore the response of the world community should change accordingly. This is a full invasion of Ukraine with the ragtag rebel forces used simply as cover for the overt aggression.
The fact that Putin and Lavrov and the Kremlin are clever and habitual liars should only have an effect on the most naive and credulous.
This is now nothing short of naked aggression and it deserves an appropriate condemnation and response by the EU and the US.
Russia uses diplomacy as a weapon of war and propaganda and that is all that will result from dealing with Russia on that level.
Therefore the response of the world community should change accordingly. This is a full invasion of Ukraine with the ragtag rebel forces used simply as cover for the overt aggression.
The fact that Putin and Lavrov and the Kremlin are clever and habitual liars should only have an effect on the most naive and credulous.
This is now nothing short of naked aggression and it deserves an appropriate condemnation and response by the EU and the US.
Russia uses diplomacy as a weapon of war and propaganda and that is all that will result from dealing with Russia on that level.
17
Thanks, Liberty Lover, for your superb post.
1
The desire for Russian confrontation is more dangerous today then the Bay of Pigs incident. There is no stopping the onward globalization of the American-NATO Empire. The poor WILL BE pawns once again as Free Enterprise and the World Banking System seek to rape the resources of yet another deluded cultural scociety in the pretense of promises of profits and freedoms that can only be amassed by the affluent few as they are in our own once great society. God bless and protect the innocents so easily led astray.
77
No, no, no, no, NO!!
158
Again, this is some General popping off. Generals do not make policy in a democracy; he should be removed from command immediately. In any event, US generalship since WW2, with the exception of Ridgeway in Korea, has been uniformly awful.
1
What would you say if your city was shelled by Russian rockets and there was no US military to protect you? or the defense forces only had rifles against tanks and GRAD rockets? or it was one of your relatives whose flight was shot down by an antiaircraft missile? Ukrainian civilians are now sitting ducks, unprotected and defenseless against Russia's lethal weapons. The US, as the country that helped disarm Ukraine and destroy its weapons, and as one of the guarantors of its territorial integrity, should help rearm it. Google Mariupol and look at the events there in the past 10 days.
2
"NATO’s military commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces"
An unelected military official wants to send weapons to one side of a civil war in a country which isn't even part of the supposedly defensive alliance that is NATO... More incomprehensible wish of counter-productive and dangerous meddling from NATO and US officials, some certainly wish to reignite the cold war to stay relevant...
An unelected military official wants to send weapons to one side of a civil war in a country which isn't even part of the supposedly defensive alliance that is NATO... More incomprehensible wish of counter-productive and dangerous meddling from NATO and US officials, some certainly wish to reignite the cold war to stay relevant...
179
It's not a civil war, it's a military invasion of an autocratic, aggressive Russia into Ukraine - a country that genuinely attempts, from the grassroots up, to reform itself into a normal, Western-style democracy. It does its own fighting and dying, but it does need military support from the West. If Ukraine falls, there will be others.
20
President Obama needs to start facing reality. His response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the threat of the Islamic State in the Middle East illustrate that whatever foreign policy he has been engaging in is not working.
It's true that sanctions are killing the Russian economy. The problem is that Putin doesn't care about that, he's put Russian national integrity on the line. The only way to stop a bully from taking a swing on you at the sandbox is to slug him back and make his nose bleed.
We should have acted during the Crimean invasion. Likewise, we can't seriously pose a major threat to ISIS with a simple air campaign. Yes it's helping, as the lifting of the Siege of Kobani shows. But the way you win this kind of anti-insurgency campaign is with boots on the ground working with Syrian rebels, the Iranians (as unpalatable as that sounds) and the Iraqi Army (including the Kurdish and Shiite militias).
This is not being a warmonger. Taking decisive leadership in these tricky conflicts is called being presidential, being a real leader with a spine. Obama must act decisively.
It's true that sanctions are killing the Russian economy. The problem is that Putin doesn't care about that, he's put Russian national integrity on the line. The only way to stop a bully from taking a swing on you at the sandbox is to slug him back and make his nose bleed.
We should have acted during the Crimean invasion. Likewise, we can't seriously pose a major threat to ISIS with a simple air campaign. Yes it's helping, as the lifting of the Siege of Kobani shows. But the way you win this kind of anti-insurgency campaign is with boots on the ground working with Syrian rebels, the Iranians (as unpalatable as that sounds) and the Iraqi Army (including the Kurdish and Shiite militias).
This is not being a warmonger. Taking decisive leadership in these tricky conflicts is called being presidential, being a real leader with a spine. Obama must act decisively.
10
So far, Putin has been able to wage hus subversive (to his people) by totally controlling the Russian media and convincing them that it's the West and Kyiv tgat are the aggressors and baby eaters...
It's time to wage an information and cyber war on Putin to covince the a russuan people that Putin is the one that is orchestrating this fiasco. What do you think if his own people turn against him?
It's time to wage an information and cyber war on Putin to covince the a russuan people that Putin is the one that is orchestrating this fiasco. What do you think if his own people turn against him?
8
As Americans, we don't want to see anymore loss of territory in Ukraine to Russian-sponsored aggression. It seems Russia wants more of a buffer zone for itself against the west, plus it wants to extract the resources within that expanded buffer zone for itself. Unlikely that Mr. Putin will live to see another Soviet Union. The record, however, includes the fact that his takeover of Crimea met no Western sponsored military fight. The ongoing continued aggression, also Russian- backed -- demonstrates that, as Americans, we do not have the resolve to intervene militarily, either directly or indirectly, because we fear Russia on that land. However, we have shown resolve coming at it from a different angle, which is economic sanctions that can be still tightened and refined.
66
Putin's primary motivation is a land route to Crimea for strategic reasons and not it's resources.
5
Charles:
You misunderstand the nature of this conflict. Ukraine has no resources that Russia wants. Rather, Russia's stake in the conflict is two fold. First is that Russia's security hinges on keeping NATO and the West out of Ukraine. Second is that much of east Ukraine is historically Russian, and inhabited by a large Russian population that feels threatened by Ukraine's lurch toward right wing ethnic nationalism. On both scores, Putin has no option except to act assertively to protect Russia's interests.
Many Westerners fail to understand what really motivates Russia to act as it does in this crisis. That lack of Western awareness is dangerous, and plays into the hands of leaders with hawkish foreign policy objectives.
You misunderstand the nature of this conflict. Ukraine has no resources that Russia wants. Rather, Russia's stake in the conflict is two fold. First is that Russia's security hinges on keeping NATO and the West out of Ukraine. Second is that much of east Ukraine is historically Russian, and inhabited by a large Russian population that feels threatened by Ukraine's lurch toward right wing ethnic nationalism. On both scores, Putin has no option except to act assertively to protect Russia's interests.
Many Westerners fail to understand what really motivates Russia to act as it does in this crisis. That lack of Western awareness is dangerous, and plays into the hands of leaders with hawkish foreign policy objectives.
173
By the same rationalization Russia could invade all eastern European nations. Not a very compelling argument for aggression against other sovereign nations.
3
Being the world's superpower, and the leader of the free world has lots of privileges, but also entails obligations such as providing diplomatic, economic, military support to those fighting for their liberty and freedom, and even fighting for those principles when necessary.
6
So you advocate the required new taxes to pay for it?
5
If necessary. We can afford it with record corporate profits and tremendous income growth by the 10%.
2
Ever heard of the expression "there are no free lunches" The problem isn't our tax burden, but tax allocation. No one likes paying taxes, but I dislike the idea of living in a world in which we are not a superpower even more
Think long an hard about that. It might look like a brave move, but if it escalates are we prepared to go toe to toe with Russia on their doorstep? I hope not.
106
We are over prepared. Russia wouldn't stand a chance.
3
Obama has consistently chosen to do as little as possible in the world, except the bare minimum necessary to save face. If you happen to be a non-priority population- Syrian, Iraqi, Ukrainian, Egyptian, Yemeni, etc- do not expect help from the USA, no matter what kind of popular support, democratic aspirations, or Western values you have lived and died for.
Not much is going to change in the next two years; and the next President is going to inherit wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Yemen and Nigeria- and possibly Pakistan as well.
So when we vote in 2016, do you think the USA voters will choose Hillary Clinton as the strong global Defense candidate, or a Republican male? One thin is sure, Obama isn't doing Hilary any favors on the issues he is leaving for her to run on.
Not much is going to change in the next two years; and the next President is going to inherit wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Yemen and Nigeria- and possibly Pakistan as well.
So when we vote in 2016, do you think the USA voters will choose Hillary Clinton as the strong global Defense candidate, or a Republican male? One thin is sure, Obama isn't doing Hilary any favors on the issues he is leaving for her to run on.
5
Yes, we need to fight, alas.
5
Why are generals making comments on any matters of government policy? This has become a disturbing trend. This general's job is to do what he is ordered to do not make public comments on policy.
248
Why are Generals making comments? Because our President utterly refuses to see the obvious and to respond accordingly. The world is a far more dangerous place because of Obama
7
Vaguely reminiscent of the U.S. backed Egyptian military dictatorship and ousting of the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood in 2014.
4
They didn't elect Obama, but they are still sworn to defend America from enemies foreign an domestic. I believe they are being rather nice to him considering how miselected he was.
This should have been done as soon as the Russians went on the offensive. The most critical need right now is for Western powers to aid Ukraine militarily: with equipment, strategic planning, and intelligence.
Along with every person of conscience in the world, I have watched the renewed build-up of Russian military forces and equipment in Eastern Ukraine, along with the rising death toll, with profound dread. The US Congress recently passed the Ukraine Defense Act--to aid the Ukrainian army against unceasing Russian military aggression.
This week Putin spun yet another lie (does he even believe his own propaganda?), when he claimed that there is no Ukrainian army. Of course, this fits his twisted fantasy that there is no such nation as Ukraine either. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg dismissed as "nonsense" Putin's allegations "that a NATO legion was fighting alongside Ukraine government troops in the east of the country."
Ukraine must be given more military aid NOW.
Along with every person of conscience in the world, I have watched the renewed build-up of Russian military forces and equipment in Eastern Ukraine, along with the rising death toll, with profound dread. The US Congress recently passed the Ukraine Defense Act--to aid the Ukrainian army against unceasing Russian military aggression.
This week Putin spun yet another lie (does he even believe his own propaganda?), when he claimed that there is no Ukrainian army. Of course, this fits his twisted fantasy that there is no such nation as Ukraine either. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg dismissed as "nonsense" Putin's allegations "that a NATO legion was fighting alongside Ukraine government troops in the east of the country."
Ukraine must be given more military aid NOW.
55
All of which begs the question of why are we yet again becoming involved in a conflict halfway around the world ? Oh wait - oil. Its always about Oil. People never matter to us. Not even our own.
31
Giving Ukrainian soldiers the means to kill Russian soldiers is tantamount to us pulling the trigger. This mess could have been avoided is we had not tried to "run the table" after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Adding the Ukraine to NATO was spitting in the Russian's eye, and would have added zero to our security. . but then again it would have provided a fresh weapons market for our military contractors, An attack on the Ukraine is NOT an attack on the US, unless you see it as an attack on our potential weapons market.
113
And if that is not enough what next? An opon confrontation with Russia and WW3? The United States got the Ukraine into this mess with the stupid coup. Now they are reaping the extra baggage that comes along with it.
20
We already know that Vladimir Putin isn't deterred by much, and that includes an economy in shambles. So, if we really want them to maintain their independence, we can give the Ukranians what they really need, *so long* as we are prepared to go the rest of the way.
Are we?
Are we?
31
"The rest of the way"
What does this mean exactly? What if providing weapons is the rest? Why prematurely sign on for ww3?
What does this mean exactly? What if providing weapons is the rest? Why prematurely sign on for ww3?
3
That was my point...
4
U.S. to go to war with Russia? That isn't going to happen. Nor should it unless you want to risk Armageddon.
4
Those who think it a true rebellion are easily fooled.
NATO was constructed as a method for Erope to DEFEND itself from Soviet Union attack.
The attack by Russia on a country not in NATO but to the immediate west is a threat to Europe and NATO should treat it as such.
If we are believet the trope that Russia has a right to provide equipment and troops to support this bogus rebellion then NATO has the right to counter it at the very least with defensive equipment to the attacked sovereign nation of Ukraine.
To do nothing and to hand vistory to Putin's stooges will encourage only more agression as we should have learned when Hitler was not challenged when he began to invade his neighbors under the pretext of aiding persecuted German speakers there.