Splitting the space could be the solution.
This dumb conflict led by Russia could possibly have that same type of affect that led to WWI except this time the human animal definitely has the technologies to totally destroy the world. Maybe this would be better for the total destruction of the human animal could give all of those supposed gods out there a chance to fix their mistakes and this time create an animal with a much larger and increased real knowledge base which could eliminate the needs to wipe out any human animal desires to control everyone else.
1
Israel has been pushing our patience for years.
4
The Leader of the Free World's clarion call to action after the assault on Ukraine vessels by Russia?
“We do not like what’s happening either way.”
Donald Trump
5
In this geostrategic game, no one is playing three dimensional chess. Putin is playing checkers and Trump is playing tiddlywinks. Checkers requires a simple tactical strategy. In Putin's case, it is to advance Russia's territorial control whenever the West relaxes its vigilance, with the ultimate aim of controlling the entire board -- or Soviet space -- once again. In Trump's case, there is no strategy, just an uninformed reaction to whatever stimuli present themselves. Trump works on instinct. His primary drive is not to upset anyone who finances him. That means that as long as he is President, Putin and MbS can feel perfectly safe to do what they want, unless Congress finally decides to spoil the party.
7
"The dispute over the waterway is fundamentally unresolvable..."
You forgot the word "peacefully" somewhere in there. This remains a rather frighteningly tense situation.
2
"Russia-Ukraine Fight Over Narrow Sea Passage Risks Wider War"
Really? ))) Washington has long been trying, with the help of its tame Kiev junta, to provoke Russia into a military invasion, but so far it has never succeeded, and it will not be possible in the future. It is better for the American authorities to deal with their crisis on the southern borders and not to go to another continent.
7
“We do not like what’s happening either way.”
Sure, sure, good people on both sides...
2
@oogada
For sure! And only in the center of the cobweb, on the banks of the Potomac, sits the evil, poisonous and dangerous man-eating spider ))
1
The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
As a result, between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Before that, Ukraine had the world's third largest nuclear weapons stockpile,[2][3] of which Ukraine had physical if not operational control.[4][5]
4
@dzuri
Ignorant! Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine NEVER possessed nuclear weapons, this is a fairy tale. The USSR possessed nuclear weapons and it was rightfully transferred to Russia, as the successor of the union.
4
@Purity of Budapest memorandum is a lie? Ahahaha
1
I have a question about this ludicrous 30-day PARTIAL martial law that was announced in Ukraine. Apparently, it only affects 10 provinces, not the whole country. So, if I stand on the county line, separating an affected province from another and I make a step eastward, I lose my civil rights, but if I step westward, I keep them?
Is this a joke?
3
@waldo Unfortunately, this is a crazy and illogical reality, in which unlucky Ukrainians have been living for the fifth year. After the armed coup, they lost almost everything that was left to them from the Soviet Union and was created since 1991. Neo-Nazi gangs are rampant in the country, people have no money for housing and food, and they survive only at the expense of migrant workers who work abroad.
6
I love President Trump, “Not good. We’re not happy about it at all,” he said. “We do not like what’s happening either way.” This is similar to what he said about Khashoggi murder.
Also, US has been "openly" using military all across the globe, i.e. US is running a racket everywhere: if you want to go your way you are going to get our military to rain down bombs on you. So, what if now Russia wants to do a bit of their own muscle flexing. Why not? If US navy can fire some Tomahawk missiles into Baghdad killing civilians (I will never forget the "MURDER" by a US Tomahawk of the concierge girl at Rasheed Hotel, then Russian navy can easily fire off some projectiles into Ukranian ships! I say why not.
USA is not the only one who can run a racket everywhere, others with strong weaponry have the same will. If the USA wants to be the only one, they let's see you sink some Russian ships... would love to see how that plays out!
2
Ukraine certainly has some reason to complain about access to the Azov Sea through the Kerch Strait. Ships often get delayed through Russian bureaucratic harassment.
However, the present crisis is clearly a Western provocation. The first act happened on 19 november when EU ministers discussed the Kerch Strait. Also the Ukrainian behavior - sending ships of war and not going away when asked by the Russian marine - was clearly meant to create a crisis.
The article is wrong that assertion of its claims on Crimea is Russia's main reason for building the bridge. Ukrainian harassment was such that a bridge was the only way to keep the area viable.
11
It is winter and a Europe that depends on Russian gas to keep its people warm, gives Putin optimal conditions to create trouble with minimal blowback from Europe. He will push to the limit until Spring lessens Europe’s dependence on his gas supplies.
6
@Geral Ross
And Ukraine depends strongly on Russian gas, too... It looks to be an interesting winter. I hope a diplomatic solution can be reached, and soon. This has the potential to get even uglier and more dangerous quickly.
2
It took several Grafs in this to get to the heart of the story- that Ukraine attempted to provoke Russia with a military incursion under a legalistic claim that Crimea is still theirs. It isn't in fact, and never will be again because the people there don't want to be under a NATO puppet regime (and, of course, the crown jewels of important military bases Moscow built there in the 20th century
which also leads to pointing out that the Russian special forces sent to "occupy" Crimea were actually ground security troops meant to prevent any attack on the 25-30 thousand Russian military personnel who already "occupied" the place. The importance of the outpost, in that short range nuke missile can dominate both the Dardenelles and mouth of Danube, is too obvious...).
The piece in no Graf explains why the Chocolate Czar is about to get a pink slip. That would be the Great Recession that has a stranglehold on the Ukraine economy after the glorious firebomber revolution. Not that Poro's class, the Oligarchy, has not made out like banditos libres taking Western "aid money" to go play in the West's financial casinos ...
7
Crimea's population would be without vital supplies and mobility without the bridge. The Azov sea, however, has to be open to Ukrainian shipping because the industrial port of Mariupol is there. Something has to be done to lower the tension and develop a better arrangement for access for Ukraine. Mediation should be tried by EU for example.
Unfortunately, Poroshenko is interested in using this so called war situation to improve his dismal standing in the polls and maybe manage by hook or crook to get re-elected. His approval rating before this crisis was 8%
7
>>> "The Azov sea, however, has to be open to Ukrainian shipping because the industrial port of Mariupol is there."
Yes, and the Azov Sea *is* open to shipping. The Kerch Strait is not, however, open to deliberately provocative maneuvers by Ukrainian gunboats.
It would be nice if the EU could mediate but, like NATO and led by the US, the EU appears to be committed to anti-Russian posturing.
3
The White House awaits instructions from the Kremlin before making a statement.
Next up, the further rescue of Russian minorities and seizure of territory in Ukraine by independent Russian volunteers.
The members of Ukraine's parliament were taken away for their own safety by said volunteers.
'' I am making out the report now. We haven't quite decided yet whether they committed suicide or died trying to escape." Captain Renault Casablanca.
5
Putin, the bully, is seeking to take control of the Azov Sea. Outnumbered and outgunned on the water, there is very little Ukraine's threadbare navy can do to stop it.
Legally Ukraine's position was also weak. Under the terms of a 2003 agreement, the Azov Sea and its access through the Kerch Strait were supposed to be shared by Ukraine and Russia. But no dotted lines had been put on the chart to mark the claims. Instead, vessels of both sides had been given carte blanche to pretty much roam as they wished.
Since Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, the dynamic changed. The Kerch Strait was no longer flanked by Russia to the east, and Ukraine in the west. The strait is now militarised and fully under Moscow's control, since the opening of the Kerch bridge in May that links Russia to Crimea.
To punish Ukraine for being pro-West, cargo ships that wanted to reach its Azov ports now found themselves subject to more inspections and lengthy delays that sometimes stretched to a week. An extra day at sea cost a shipping company up to $15,000. Picking up steel or grain from Mariupol is now risky and expensive, leading to a decline of business there.
It's unlikely that the Azov Sea will be another venue of an armed conflict. But the intimidation in form of an economic blockade could cripple Ukraine's economy - part of Putin's strategy of a possible stealth invasion.
12
@J. von Hettlingen
"Since Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, the dynamic changed. "
Here is a question for you smartypants: why did the 'annexation' or whatever you want to call it even take place?
Ukraine administered the Crimea during Soviet times and even after independence, without any problems (Crimea always had a high degree of autonomy). It even made good money from leasing of the naval port to Russia.
Had the Western-financed and instigated coup not taken place in 2014 in Kiev, things would have remained the same.
You reap what you sow. And the poor Ukrainians are paying the high price.
7
@waldo A May 2013 Gallup poll showed that 52% of the people of Crimea preferred the status of an autonomous region of Ukraine, 22% desired to be a part of Russia. That month the parliament of Ukraine voted 318 out of 449 votes to approve the association agreement with the EU that had been negotiated under president Yanukovych who promised the people of Ukraine a road to Europe. In late 2013 as winter was approaching Putin chose to pressure Ukraine threatening a cut-off of gas, curtailment of ag imports from Ukraine and other measures. This convinced Yanukovych to abandon the agreement that he had negotiated with the EU and to choose Russia's Eurasian Union. He did not prepare the people for the sudden shift in policy and tens of thousands took to the streets in protest.
Insofar as such protests were a totally predictable consequence it appears that Russia may have intended to destabilize Ukraine to seize Crimea and other actions. It is known that Yanukovych was strongly opposed to the annexation of Crimea and his removal would have been favored by the Kremlin which was then free to seize Crimea with its massive forces in the territory and a decimated Ukrainian army weakened by two decades of corrupt management.
The only coup that took place in Ukraine in 2014 was in Crimea when Russian special forces surrounded the parliament and forced a vote on a referendum.
4
Well, actually Yanukovich refused to sign the treaty in November 2013, by simple reason, the EU offered much smaller loan than Russia, and demanded much bigger changes that Yanukovich thought were bad for Ukrainian economy. By December, it was clear that the US was bend to depose Yanukovich. The American officials including McCain encouraged the opposition to revolt. They even discussed the Ukrainian government that they installed after Yanukovich. After the riot forced Yanukovich to fleet, the reduced Parliament started to discuss the 'language law' that denied Russian language status of the state language. It was clearly an assault on the Russian-speaking Ukrainians, who just saw their lawfully elected leader to be deposed by the mob with support of the USA. No wonder they wanted out of Ukraine, that's why Crimeans supported the Russian Annexion of Crimea, that was annexed without a shot and with 1 casualty. on the other hand, the new Ukrainian government started the milatary assault on the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine that resulted in long-term conflict that left 10,000 dead
7
It's worth considering that Austria-Hungary only went to war with Serbia in 1914 because it was confident it had the backing of Germany (which it had). Kaiser Wilhelm II had entered into an ill-considered alliance with the crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire despite Bismarck having earlier warned against it (but the Kaiser sacked Bismarck).
If not for that alliance, Austria-Hungary may well have backed off, and if it did not, Russia would have prevailed in the subsequent war (example: Russia captured and held Przemysl in Austrian Poland and held it despite Austrian attempts to dislodge them).
Roll forward to today: if Vladimir Putin thinks he has Trump in his pocket, and/or Ukraine thinks it has the backing of NATO and thus the U.S., maybe both sides might be more tempted to be more adventurous than they might otherwise be.
Remember, it was Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia that sparked off WW 1.
8
@Bruce Stafford
Sorry, mate, your analogy sucks. First of all, the Austro-Hungarian monarchy wasn't an empire; second, the problem in 1914 wasn't Serbia, but Bosnia, a multi-ethnic, multi-religious enclave the Monarchy tried to pacify (capture). Furthermore, there was no 'Austrian Poland'. The Monarchy controlled Galicia, an area now part of Poland (within its post-WWII borders), Ukraine and Slovakia.
As for why the Kaiser supported Austria, the Germans wanted to expand their empire, capture new colonies in Africa and clip the wings of the declining British empire and needed a pretext. The Sarajevo incident and the predictable Serbian response after that offered the perfect opportunity to launch a wholesale war, with most of the Entente unprepared.
Just as when Hitler rolled over Europe in 1939-1940.
All this has absolutely nothing to do with the totally unnecessary skirmishes between Russia and Ukraine.
7
Donald "You had some very fine people on both sides" Trump will throw Ukraine under the bus. Trump loves him some Putin. Trump's inner "mind": 'A bit of invading other countries is OK if it's your pals doing it. We've done our share. We just don't do the annexing part because if it's not right on our border it's a pain to maintain. I mean look at Puerto Rico.'
MAGA! I wonder if supporters are starting to figure out it was a meaningless slogan coming from Trump used solely to get votes. Not to Improve our country but to funnel money and power the very very wealthy.
8
You say naval vessels to hide the fact that they were gunships.
This provocation was done by Poroschenko so that he would have a flimsy excuse to declare martial law. He is doing this to cancel the scheduled elections, which he would have lost.
14
Russia shot at Ukrainian vessels that have every right in international law to sail to the Azov sea. Russia did the provoking through its act of war.
9
@Big bird
No Birdie, no. The Azov sea is not 'international waters'. It is an internal waterway between Russia and Ukraine and all traffic through it is regulated by the 2003 agreement between the 2 countries. That agreement includes the requirement to register ('file a route plan') with the other prior to sending ships, so incidents, like this can be avoided. When one side decides to trample said agreement, the other is entitled to act, don't you think?
9
But it was not an international waters, it is internal sea that belongs in parts to Russia and to Ukraine. Ukrainians ships were in Russian waters.
6
In all probability it appears that finding a slippery political ground beneath his feet not congenial to win the forthcoming elections, the Ukrainian President Preto Poroshenko with tacit support from the West has found it opportune to provoke military conflict with Russia. The UN should play a fair and restraining role to end the conflict.
18
Putin, knows he has Trump in his back pocket. Trump will offer no more than a mild rebuke at best.
9
@damon walton, NATO has already announced that they will even provide military support against Russia.
So the US is already on a war footing.
Poroshenko is just like Trump, he does not understand the world but wants to rule it, no matter the cost to others.
And the West is falling for it.
9
What the author of this piece (and the related NYT editorial) do not mention is that this whole escalation in the Azov started with Ukraine's arrest of a Russian fishing boat on the grounds that it was registered in Crimea. They when held the crew for months before letting them return to Russia. They still hold the captain and the vessel. That's when Russia started inspecting the merchant ships bound for Ukrainian ports. Should Ukraine released the boat and the crew at that point it would have been the end of it. Instead Ukraine chose to create a new naval base in the Azov and started to move ships there from Odessa without informing Russia and getting passage clearance for the narrow and dangerous straight under the bridge. Russians were also concerned that Ukrainians could attack the bridge itself, as aggressive rhetoric in Ukrainian "patriotic" press and even from some politicians threatened just that. Saying that Russia started it or wanted it flies in the face of reality and implies that Putin has full control of Ukrainian navy. He does not, Poroshenko does, and he ordered it to enter Russian waters. Did he not anticipate what response it would elicit?
25
If you didn't believe in the idea of a well-organized, Kremlin-directed online army of commenters before reading this comment section, I'm sure you will now.
48
@P. Done I also believe in a well organized online army of commentators directed by the CIA and other anti-Russian forces. Both sides engage in this. You just have to use common sense in the end and ask who benefits the most from this tempest in a teapot? But I doubt that either side is out to subvert the NYT comments section.
6
@P. Done I live in WI, have no contacts in the Kremlin, and side with Russia on this one. You can have your own opinions but NOT your own facts. Paul Manafort was a valet/lobbyist for the Ukranians so there's that nod to the Ukranian taint and what's going on there generally.
4
Putin and his thugs have their assets/ill-gotten gains stashed in the US and Europe: freeze them, now.
If Trump the Tough Guy can order the use of lethal force against women and children at the border surely he can summon up the courage to freeze the assets of those bent on war-like actions in their zeal to destabilize and steal land from a sovereign nation. He ranted and raved enough about what he saw as Obama giving away Crimea to Putin.
10
Vlad can't make a new Soviet Union without Ukraine and Belarus.
10
@Walter
I don't understand why Russia's attempts to maintain economic and political ties (and yes the influence) with the neighboring countries are immediately labelled a "new Soviet Union". Russia has not been Soviet for the past 30 years. Also those historic ties pre-dated the Soviet Union by centuries.
The comparison is completely misplaced. It's like calling Merkel's dominance in EU a "new Nazi Germany" or US involvement in conflicts half way across the globe a "new Roman Empire"
15
The Ukrainian Pinochet (aka Poroshenko) emboldened by the US promises of "support" is trying to avoid loosing the upcoming election by provoking an open conflict with Russia and declaring Marital Law. It's quite simple really.
11
@X-Rusky
And Ukrainian lawmakers seem to be well aware of this possibility, which is why the declaration of martial law is time- and geography-limited.
The Azov Sea and Kerch Strait have been an issue since the collapse of the USSR. The dispute over the Azov Sea and Kerch Strait has been heating up since the Russians opened the bridge in the spring -- the bridge which the Ukrainians argue was illegally constructed, since they say Crimea was illegally annexed. There's a 1993 treaty recognizing both countries' ability to use the Azov Sea and Kerch Strait. This treaty was put in place when Ukraine controlled Crimea and the western side of the strait, and it benefited Russia then because the Ukrainians couldn't cut off Russia's access to Taganrog and Rostov on the Azov Sea. Having now annexed Crimea and controlling both sides of the strait, Russia seems to want to go back on that deal.
Let's not forget, too, that there's currently a big religious dispute going on -- the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople about a month ago granted a tomos (basically, a decree of self-governance) to the Ukrainian Orthodox church, making Ukrainian Orthodox no longer officially under the governance of the Moscow Patriarchate. Prior to that, there had been three Orthodox jurisdictions in Ukraine and only the Moscow-led one was officially recognized. This of course made the Moscow Patriarchate and many Russians furious and has only served to further ratchet up tensions between the countries.
2
Trump doesn't "like what's happening either way." Even-steven. When Trump sees it as even, then you know the bad guys are REALLY wrong and bad.
5
The most important paragraph in this article:
"There was, however, a widespread sense among opposition figures and analysts that Mr. Poroshenko aimed to put off the March election, noting that he had not called for martial law during previous points in the conflict when the fighting was far worse."
Understanding Poroshenko's motivation should be our chief concern. Martial law is serious; it's unacceptable. It's extreme. It doesn't make sense. He is not to be trusted. We have gotten into the habit of criticizing Russia, and certainly that government is not trustworthy, but that doesn't mean all others are trustworthy.
21
It was backed overwhelmingly by the parliament so it wasn't very controversial or nakedly self-serving. Russia is also keenly aware of how it will look and are using this premise as cover for this miltary escalation. At the end of the day, there is only the fact that Russia has directly attacked the Ukrainian military on flimsy grounds and that is what the world must respond to, everything else aside.
Wouldn't the Parliament benefit as well, if there is no elections? They would keep their seats, right? no wonder they voted for
1
"There was, however, a widespread sense among opposition figures and analysts that Mr. Poroshenko aimed to put off the March election, noting that he had not called for martial law during previous points in the conflict when the fighting was far worse"
While opposition's paranoia is quite understandable, our venerable "analysts" will be served well to remember that this is THE FIRST open confrontation between militaries of the two countries. Therefore, the implied precedent does not exist. As simple as that.
1
@Devil's advocate Gosh, it takes a fine blade to split the hairs thinly enough to determine that that last five years of conflict haven't been "open."
Wherever did you acquire such an advanced skill? Do tell!
8
It should be noted, Ukraine had 1200 nuke warheads well after the USSR dissolution.
Through a treaty bill Clinton signed,Ukraine would give up the weapons, the US and others were to guarantee and defend Ukraine if necessary... Obama and Merkel reacted with their renown thoughtfulness at Russia's Crimea incursion and did nothing.
don't complain too much of Trump in this matter.
10
@Lane I absolutely agree with you, nobody will harras Ukraine, if there are still some nuclear weapons left - like nobody is really harrasing NK - now is even Trump best friend of Kim. For this reason I doubt e.g. that NATO will help little nations like Baltic states or Easter Europe - nobody will risk greater war because of small country - and that was, how WW2 started. Nobody helped Czechoslovakia, when it was needed, and it was sold just for sake of short peace. P.S: Nobody mentioned, that Putin had greates support home during Crimea annexiation and at this time it was fading out, so he needed new impulse to kick popularity up at home.
1
@andy
Nyet. Putin is popular here, already.
2
@Lane -- "the US and others were to guarantee and defend Ukraine if necessary"
Not true. It did not say that. No "guarantee." No action beyond the Security Council was mentioned either.
They promised to respect it themselves. (Yes, including Russia) But they did not guarantee that others would do so, not even those who promised.
4
The main problem of both Russia and Ukraine is that they try to pursue success via making nationalism their main agenda. Nationalism is a dead end, European Union proved it by reaching it's greatest state since Roman Empire. You will achieve nothing by war and mutual hate.
United we stay. Divided we fall.
Peace from Russia.
2
Russia would like to fight Ukraine. Trump will not support use of U.S. forces to stop Russia and that means that nobody will offer to fight Russia if the crisis becomes a war. Russia can defeat Ukraine in a conventional war. Then Putin can force Ukraine into agreements to work with Russia and not with the West. It may not return to the Russian federation but it would become a satellite country of Russia.
6
@Casual Observer It would be great for people of Ukraine!
3
@maria respectfully, it will never be great for people of Ukraine as for any other independent country with distinct culture and language. Please educate yourself more about history of Ukraine and never say what would be great for people who have a long history of aspiration for independence and who fight for better life in unity each day.
7
And how better are the lives of ordinary people in the independent Ukraine? Ukraine used to be richest republic in the USSR, now it is rated below Venezuela, according human development index. Yeah, better life.
9
The objective facts of this incident are: 1) Two
armored Ukrainian military cutters and a tug, entered Russia's territorial waters on an unknown track near Crimea in the Black Sea. 2) They maintained radio silence, and refused to communicate with, or follow the orders, of the Russian Border Service. 3) Ukrainian vessels neared the Crimean Bridge, the channel under which the Russians closed. 4) After refusing the orders of Russian Border Security a number of times, and refusing to respond to inquiries, the Russians deliberately bumped one of the Ukrainian vessels to show that they meant business. 5) When that failed to elicit a response, the Russian used armed force to arrest all three vessels (in their territorial waters).
It is obvious from this report of events, which can be corroborated by open sources, that the incident was a deliberate provocation on the part of Kiev. I find it disturbing and sad that the Tines insists on slanting the story to a Russophobic end.
21
Russian waters? Ah, you mean the illegally annexed Crimea and the shared waters of the Sea of Azov. Russia is in the wrong in this, both in blocking off the waters into its illegally annexed territory and in attacking the Ukrainian flotilla, injuring Ukrainian sailors and capturing Ukrainian ships.
28
Finally someone who knows that crossing another nation's border on a military vessel while refusing to respond on the radio is NOT being attacked.
9
@nikolai burlakoff
The objective facts of this incident are: 1) Two
armored Ukrainian military cutters and a tug, entered Russia's territorial waters on an unknown track near Crimea in the Black Sea. 2) They maintained radio silence, and refused to communicate with, or follow the orders, of the Russian Border Service. 3) Ukrainian vessels neared the Crimean Bridge, the channel under which the Russians closed. 4) After refusing the orders of Russian Border Security a number of times, and refusing to respond to inquiries, the Russians deliberately bumped one of the Ukrainian vessels to show that they meant business. 5) When that failed to elicit a response, the Russian used armed force to arrest all three vessels (in their territorial waters)....
[ Precisely so, and Russia responded as necessary to protect against an attack. ]
10
“Not good. We’re not happy about it at all,” he said. “We do not like what’s happening either way.”
What a milquetoast
11
The Ukrainian nazi regime simply cannot co-exist with Russia peacefully. That is just against all their Russophobic nature. They will keep provoking and challenging the Russians until those will have enough and do a regime change in Ukraine. The sooner that happens the better it will be for everyone, most of all for the people of Ukraine who had about enough of that crazy junta. This festering boil in the heart of Europe cannot be left untreated for much longer, it must be lanced once and for all.
14
@David Absolutely agree. The only thing holding the bankrupt (both financially and politically) regime of Pinochet-Poroshenko is the lifeline from the US. If they manage to resuscitate it for another presidential term it will only postpone the suffering. But inevitably Ukraine is bound to change its course along the lines of Finland - play nice with Russia and EU and make tons of money as the go-between.
9
Poroshenko is a billionaire member of the old Ukrainian oligarchy, e.g. He's a crook. He has a "decades long track record of being neither pro-Russian, nor pro-Western, but pro his own money" ( FP - April, 2018, Lev Golinkin). He and his cronies are kleptocrats who have done nothing to stem the endemic corruption that is crippling Ukraine's economy, and threatens to spiral it into chaos. They can still be a ruling kleptocracy under Russian domination - and they know it.
Putin is making a calculated risk on this current move. He is counting on the West to talk big, rattle their sabers, but do nothing. I think he will win that bet. The West has a long history of not intervening when East European countries are threatened with domination by Russia - or for that matter, the Nazi's.
My guess is that most of Ukraine's intelligentsia and professionals will see the handwriting on the wall and leave NOW if they can ( if they have not already). Unfortunately the hope of many for an independent, democratic Ukraine is a lost cause - for now.
15
Trump’s babble about the Ukraine situation is his standard spew about all topics about which he has no clue.
Re GM closures he says he was “very tough” with the CEO.
Really? No REALLY?
Trump’s cowering to the Saudi ruling family and his insane lack of understanding re: tariffs, free trade, economics (both macro and micro)
are just the most recent examples of his unfitness to remain in the WH. Really!!
15
first, the US should say out of this Sea of Azov access dispute, it is far away and none of our business. Our intervention in helping overthrow the elected (but unpopular) pro-Russian government in Ukraine has backfired, resulting in Ukraine's loss of Crimea. Further intervention can only make everything worse.
I don't think we can tell who is responsible for the latest flare-up, or why Ukraine gunboats were there or why the Russians seized them, but rushing to blame Russia would seem to fly in the face of who benefits more from this event which is clearly Ukraine's government (and maybe U weapons makers)
17
All this knee-jerk Trump bashing! Look I hate and look down on him as much as anyone. But Haley's statement in the Security Council was unequivocally supportive of the Ukraine. This mindless Trump thumping is like the boy who cried "Wolf!" Save it for when it's needed and relevant.
20
@HKGuy Absolutely agree. When the Ukranian mess was started by Victoria Nuland, the Assistant Secretary of State under Hillary Clinton, Trump was still busy pitching the Apprentice on TV.
8
The POTUS was afraid of Montenegro - as a bunch of hot heads - who might drag us into a war.
It is Ukraine's corrupt politicians who will drag us there.
In Russia they say if Moscow is brain and St. Petersburg is the heart then Kiev is the mother of Russia - as in religion. Orthodox Russians dream of going to Kiev and visit the founding church.
So, this is a country that attempted to challenge it's historical ally, benefactor and even folks who look to Ukraine as mother of their religion.
This was all done in the name of wanting to be westernized.
I have been to Kieve, and even Chernobyl - these folks except for some historical errors and blunders - should be firmly friendly with Russia.
I fully take side of Russia in this so called conflict with Ukraine. This is as much a manufactured confrontation as the alleged Gulf of Tonkin.
Our incredible UN ambassador - should caution Ukraine - and let it know that America does not want dragged on this senseless war - if that is what Ukraine is hoping for.
One Montenegro is one too many - if POTUS is right.
16
Russia is a culture of liars. In general, people are not free to speak the truth. Add to that a government lead by lifelong, at heart, KGB agent Putin and you get bald-faced lies.
Question: Was Trump ever in the KGB?
11
@The Sanity Cruzer
Sweeping categorical statements are rarely wise or accurate
4
Russia has roughly the GDP of Italy. The only "firsts" it excels in is world's lowest birth rate and highest rate of alcoholism. I've been all over the world and have never seen people as unhappy as they were in Russia. The only way Putin can distract people from their constant misery is by adventures with other nations. He's pathetic.
33
I don't know. Russia is rated 49 by the index of human development, ahead of such countries as Bulgaria, Romania, Uruguay, and much higher than Ukraine that rated 88, lower than Venezuela. I guess the martial law it what Poroshenko has to offer to happy Ukrainians.
11
>>> "Russia has roughly the GDP of Italy. The only "firsts" it excels in is world's lowest birth rate and highest rate of alcoholism."
Well, no. Actually, Russia also has the world's largest number of nuclear warheads -- nearly 8,000 of them. Snarky, dismissive disrespect may not be the wisest possible posture for Americans to take.
Remember, we've effectively lost every war (and similar military adventure) we've cooked up since WWII, and we wouldn't have come close to winning that one if not for the Soviet Union, which did the bulk of the heavy lifting and suffered the overwhelming majority of the deaths, injuries and hardship.
Well, I guess you could call Grenada a victory. ;^)
15
@HKGuy You and I did not visit the same country.
7
Do you think Trump will order US ships to conduct freedom of navigation exercises through the Kerch Strait as he has continued to do in the South China Sea? I doubt it. He didn’t care that Putin seized Crimea, so why start caring now as they consolidate their unlawful actions in Eastern Ukraine by cutting of their access to the sea. Of course, this is a small potatoes maritime issue by comparison, plus he is more In Putin’s pocket. And there is the small matter of the blockading ship anchored across the strait. But this is lots harder than deploying the military to fight off unarmed Central American migrants at San Ysidro and Trump has demonstrated that he doesn’t actually do hard. He prefers to jerk our allies around and roll over for our foes.
12
@Mike Iker Why don't you read Haley's comments in the Security Council or watch them (available on YouTube)? They're completely critical of Russia's action. There's so much to criticize Trump for. I detest him. But this uncritical, auto-pilot Trump hatred is self-defeating to our side.
8
The Russians still want to dominate, just as they wanted to dominate in the period following World War Two. If someone doesn't stand up to them, they'll just get more aggressive.
I'm not well versed in international diplomacy, but surely the U.S. has folks who are. We have good people in the Defense Department and the State Department. Too bad we have such a clueless narcissist in the White House.
18
Doesn't America want to dominate the World? That is news to me, considering how upset Americans are about growing influence of China. Actually, the US demonizes Russia because Russia stands to the USA, trying to defend own interests. Russia is not worst the country in the World. The US invaded several countries creating multiples crisises in the World that dwarf the Ukrainian crisis. Saudi are much less Democratic than Russia and attacks their neighbors creating another humanitarian crisis, and yet, only Russia is singled out. Don't try to present that the US worry about anything else except it's own dominance.
16
@Boneisha There is really no evidence that Russia "wants do dominate" as you suggested. Russia's aspirations were more likely limited to playing a bigger economic and political role on its borders in Europe and Asia. Which was proportional with its economy bouncing back after the collapse of the Soviet Union. But for some reason this did not sit well with the US.
9
@yulia
Why this "not worst the country in the World" attempts to emulate the worst behavior in the world. Do you sincerely believe that repugnant actions can be legitimized by fingerpointing?
Russia maybe a primarily a Petro state and international arms corporation at heart, but the Russian people are a proud and welcoming people that can live on farless than their American counterparts. They see time in much longer increments than Americans. Russia has a shared culture and language. While Americans culture consists of Mac and cheese and black Friday as hallmarks for an empire. Less is basically more sometimes. Russia isn't going anywhere.
11
Yeah, but any American can grow potatoes. So there's that.
4
Russia produces more potatoes than the USA with half the population.....
5
Here we go again. WAG THE DOG! Russia stayed out of the midterms but now that they are over, Trump needs a war provocation to blunt the results of the Mueller probe. Putin is right on spot to provide the diversion. The timing is perfect.
7
@Sharon P Believe it or not, international incidents happen without Trump's supposed manipulation. Aside from the ridiculousness of this as a diversion from the Midterms (a little, isn't it?), this presupposes Trump has godlike powers to foster world events and control the entire news cycle. He doesn't.
10
Russia is just a larger Pakistan - a third rate country with nuclear weapons. Look at a map of Europe. Russia lost its satellites and its European SSRs. Now it causes trouble in a minuscule area of Georgia and the Ukraine. The USA should sell both every weapon they need. No better use of US arms then killing Russians.
4
@Eric Weisblatt:That's colorful what you say but it's lacking any objectivity. Remember US fears Russia and won't even confront their Jets from buzzing our Carriers. Btw how do you explain the Iraq war which not only killed 5,000 US troops but some +250,000 Iraqis when Iraq never lifted a finger against the US, actually Saddam earned bravos for fighting the Iranians by Reagan. Are you sure we the US of A isn't a 3rd rate rogue country run by imperialists?.
15
Europe must act decisively.
As JFK once said: “There are risks and costs to a program of action; but they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction. “
Trump will continue to do his Neville Chamberlain impression.
7
@Armand:What do you suggest? it was the US who directed and fully supported the illegal Ukrainian rebellion.
11
@Larry Even if that were true — it's not BTW — I'd applaud America for toppling one of the worst, most plutocratic dictators, a Russian puppet.
5
@HKGuy:
>>> "Even if that were true — it's not BTW . . ."
Oh, yes, it's true, and the evidence is both overwhelming and easily found.
>>> ". . . I'd applaud America for toppling one of the worst, most plutocratic dictators, a Russian puppet."
You don't have the slightest idea what your'e talking about. Viktor Yanukovych, whatever else may be said about him, was the lawfully-elected head of the recognized government of the Ukraine -- and he was "toppled," as you put it, in a violent coup, supported by the US and fronted by real-live, no-kidding, actual Nazis.
Don't be so eager to applaud and so proud that you're doing it.
13
I can hardly wait for the bloggers to blame the United States for the trouble between the Ukraine and Russia,
3
Gosh!
One can only faintly detect the sound of crickets from the Oval office!
3
When you send an invitation to someone, this is not an appeasement.
2
Forget about the meeting and I’ll Mars landing. The headline today should be - Fascism Touches Down In Ukraine.
5
@Tim Shaw:
Actually, fascism has been in Ukraine for a long time. Check it out:
US is arming Neo-Nazis in Ukraine:
https://therealnews.com/stories/max-blumenthal-us-is-arming-neo-nazis-in-ukraine
BBC -- Neo-Nazi Threat in New Ukraine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY
UK Channel 4 News:
Far-right extremists at core of "democracy protest"
https://www.channel4.com/news/kiev-svoboda-far-right-protests-right-sector-riot-police
And a whole lot more, from WWII to this very day.
11
@Tim Shaw
The fascist group in control of today's Ukraine is the direct descendant of the ones whose members collaborated with the Nazis and murdered hundreds of thousands of Jews at the Babi Yar ravine and other killing sites during WWII. This group, which is backed by the U.S., has displayed Nazi insignia on its helmets and uniforms, and former Senator John McCain posed proudly with them for photos. In WWII, the Soviets finally defeated them (and the Germans), and that appears to be the main reason for their current hatred of Russia.
9
and this is only made worse by the fact the US has a very weak and ill prepared President... Oh, and he's owned by the Kremlin...
23
Other media outlets report that Trump said “We don’t like what’s happening.” Of course this is just an attempt to sound tough without rattling Putin’s cage too much. This should be interesting. More than likely we will find out what we all know to be true: Trump won’t do anything at all to Russia.
27
Trump is walking the same path as Chamberlain- appeasement of America’s foes
It’s easy to attack ones allies but harder to take on a foe
Trump is a coward and is a danger to the world
21
Let's keep in mind the incident took place on the Black Sea, not the Azov sea, when the Ukrainian vessels were trying to leave the area.
4
@Mike H
"International incident in the Sea of Azov" sounds more exotic and remote than Black Sea. :)
2
Why haven't we heard from Trump? He seems unable to criticize Saudi Arabia and Putin. It will be interesting to see his tax returns and to see how much he received from Russia and Saudi Arabia. Or does he just expect to do business with them when he changes jobs. I wouldn't expect them to be grateful once Trump can't help them.
8
``...is reminiscent of the events of the 1930's``Appeasement is what comes to mind when seing the lukewarm response from leaders of the world to Russia's prior aggressive military behavior in East-Ukraine that lead to today's events. I mean, it's only 10 000 deaths after all, nothing that should raise too much concern I guess compared to Syria's hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of displaced. This is totally fake news says the coward. But nobody knows for sure, we'll see what happens. Remember that Churchil seemed to have been one of the few who recognized and denounced the Nazi regime when it was already occupying France. Kind of late, isn't it? We the people who can speak and have the power to denounce Russia's aggression against its neighbors must not remain silent.
19
Funny (but not really), our Commander-And-Chief seems more intent in using our multi- trillion dollar military on gassing the raggedy immigrant caravan in Tijuana, then to employ them to send a message to Putin that he can't simply continue to annex ,piecemeal, a NATO ally without serious consequences.
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania must right now be having serious second thoughts about what good joining NATO has done them (while at the same time Putin and his generals are celebrating yet another bloodless victory against the hapless West, by cracking open yet another magnum of champaign and opening another kilo of beluga caviar).
25
@Birddog It seems like you are pretty well informed, but I must point out that Ukraine is not a member of NATO. Completely agree with your general premise though.
3
@Frog Thank you for the correction!
So typical of neocon Haley and her British colleague to immediately blame Russia before any serious investigation, on the week of President Trump's meeting with Putin. She can't be retired fast enough.
13
Russia and Ukraine signed a treaty in 2003 regarding Ukraine access to the Kerch strait. Poroshenko disregarded that treaty and sent the Ukrainian navy into Russian waters without warning. Russia responded, and now Poroshenko is doing what he wanted to do all along - declaring martial law, probably because he figures he can't win elections in March otherwise. It's why he sent the Ukrainian navy to provoke Russia to begin with.
20
Ukraine followed longtime practice when sending those ships to Azov sea and had notified Russia before
8
Don't feed the Sergei-bots.
17
@James Connolly, Jr., thanks for an informative post questioning the dominant liberal/neoconservative consensus. I tried to find some back-up for Mike H's contention that Ukraine warned Russia, and followed longtime practice before sending it's Navy vessels thru the Kerch Strait. Nothing. And of course sycophants will question your citizenship in the face of your logical, reasoned outlook, like PeteH did.
3
Recalling the catastrophes of World War One and World War Two, the so-called mainly "white race" nations' leaders - both democratic and totalitarian - will apparently never learn, preferring the massive blood-letting of the millions of their "white-skinned" and also millions of "non-white skinned" citizens, over the use of basic, human, intelligence. Apparently, the Czars, the Kings and the Queens, the Presidents, the elected or appointed Prime Ministers, brainwashed by their self-seeking advisers, have lost their respects for the human lives of their "subjects", possibly because their millions of the murdered (thirty in WW1, sixty in WW2) will easily replace themselves. About fifty per cent of my generation (1922-1926) were wiped out by the sheer self-aggrandizing follies of our "leaders", both elected ones and dictators. Why don't - in that alphabetical order - do the "Chiefs" of Britain, France, Russia, Ukraine, and the United States get together in all-night sessions, determined that there will never again wage a war against each other, by proving, to start with, that a solution to the "Crimean-crisis" can be solved by each of them ceding just a bit of their super-ego sovereign powers. With my special appeal to the leaders of Russia and Poland, two nations whose populations, both Slavic and non-Slavic, have suffered enough to deserve a lasting peace (and equal respect).
Adalbert Lallier
10
Ukraine in the EU? That's tantamount to introducing a new
strain of the Aids virus into the EU. And Puitin is well aware of the consequences. Exactly why he didn't take the whole ignorant and
corrupt bunch in the first place.
F3
7
How about this? Free access through the Kerch Strait for Ukraine and recognition that Crimea is part of Russia for Putin? Otherwise agendas will get in the way of what should be common sense. Crimea was Russian anyway before Khrushchev gave it to Ukraine.
8
This may be the first of what may become a parade of aggressive moves by autocratic leaders who have been reassured by the pass that Mr. Trump handed to Saudi Arabia in the Khashoggi matter. Mr. Putin assumed that the craven administration of Mr. Trump would look the other way and it appears that he was correct.
27
After the end of the Second World War, general George S. Patton said "We've defeated the wrong enemy". First and foremost task should be to ascertain who our real enemies are!
3
@Raj Nair With all due respect to Gen. Patton, one of the great field commanders of the war, it was Russia, not we that did the vast majority of killing and dying in the defeat of Nazi Germany, while we supported with logistics and tended to business in the Pacific.
15
I think Patton may have repeated at this point something to the effect that, "No [one] ever won a war by dying for their country, but by making the other [one] die for theirs."
@jdd Interesting perspective. My departed father, who was wounded during the D-Day landing in Normandy, had a slightly different opinion regarding the contributions of our troops, many of whom he saw butchered by the Nazis during our "logistical support" operation in Europe while we "tended to business" in the Pacific.
2
Perhaps the U.S. should escalate tensions with Russia, even sending U.S troops to the Ukraine and risking war?
Democrats are so far in on the “evil Russia” theme, that they have no grounds to oppose a military conflict.
Liberal stalwarts Rob Reiner and Morgan Freeman say that we are “at war” with Russia. Perhaps they will get their wish this Christmas.
Let’s just hope that they are serving on the front lines along with Adam Schiff.
10
Well, let's forget US internal politics for a second. The fact is here -- Russia attacked several Ukrainian vessels, again creating a threat of war
5
@Mike
I would say "Let's forget Russian/Ukrainian internal politics for more than a second. Like maybe forever."
Yes, Russia once again did something provocative. And, yes, they may do much more - especially in Donetsk. So what?
Let's stay out of it. I have no interest in seeing my son shipping off to fight for two Russian-speaking Ukrainian provinces. I do have interest in liberals not trying to score domestic political points by further inflaming tensions with Russia.
4
And so begins WWIII with Trump on the enemy's side
4
Although there is a history between the Ukraine and Russia, Czar Putin cares for neither. There is no legitimate reason other than greed for the annexation of the Ukraine. Czar Putin wants it and will have it by force if necessary. The Pretend King Trump will give it to him as a "gift" for the holidays. History is the past, what is important is how the Ukrainian people feel. It is a country. Like all countries, it has borders. If Czar Putin crosses the border without any resistance from NATO or us, then he will continue to "annex" former Russian territory that he believes will benefit him monetarily. His beloved Russia was cut up and he wants it back. Like the bully in the playground, he would start a War for it. It is not about keeping out of foreign skirmishes, it is about drawing the line. This is why we should have voted for a President not a lackey who does the bidding of a wanna be Czar and a treasonous GOP party.
13
Ukraine would be much better off reuniting with Mother Russia. They were the same country only a few decades ago, and they share a common language, culture and history. Peaceful reunification should be the goal.
7
Actually, their languages are similar, but not the same. They were both part of the same empire for hundreds of years, but that's no reason to force them to unify. Similarly, Austria and Hungary are better off as separate counties.
28
Ukrainians have chosen their destiny, and it was to pursue a European path, and it's an important principle-- letting each country choose their own alliances. It's not up to us to tell them where they belong.
14
@Rolf Excuse me, Rolf, maybe you should come over here to Ukraine and talk to actual Ukrainians. They don't want to be a part of Russia. They do NOT think of themselves as Russians. They are proud Ukrainians. And they will fight to the death to remain proud Ukrainians. They have been treated with nothing but condescending disrespect by Russia. They are not going back. Nor should they.
4
While there are a lot of snarky comments, this conflict induces instability in all of Europe and increases the probability, however still small, of a major military conflict that draws in NATO. Martial Law or not, Ukraine is essentially defenseless against Russia and knows it. For all practical purposes, the Ukrainians have already given up on the separatist region and Crimea for the medium term. The hope of the people is to modernize their economy away from the oligarchic Russian system without triggering a Russian military response. There's a lot of corruption in Ukraine and a fraught path to reform, but if they are successful it will give Europe more of a stake in Ukraine that may help stabilize the region. Europe and U.S. may be forced to confront Russia with much stiffer sanctions on it's banking system, now, to avoid a military conflict, in future. The fear of imposing real sanctions appears to be that Russia will unleash major cyber warfare. Better to prepare ...
14
>>> "The hope of the people is to modernize their economy away from the oligarchic Russian system . . ."
Really? And replace it with their own, right-wing, kleptocratic oligarchs? Like Poroshenko and Company?
Well, then, they're off to an excellent start.
5
If the Ukrainian people wanted to be Russian they wouldn’t call themselves Ukrainian.
39
@Lewis Sternberg Really, I have friends in Quebec who call themselves Canadian.
2
Is this violation of Ukraine's sovereignty as serious as the uninvited presence U.S. troops and military aircraft on the sovereign territory of the nation of Syria? Is it as serious as the violation of the sovereignty the territory of Iraq by the Cheney Administration? Is it as serious as the violation of the sovereignty of the nation of Libya by the U.S. and Great Britain during the anti-Ghadaffi campaign?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
16
@William Verick Good questions.
2
@William Verick
**YES**
Don't let your preferenced bias tell you it isn't as serious. If you look into the history of these war torn nations you will find a pattern of repression, hate, and propaganda that has caused rifts and ruined integral cultures and killed families and ways of life, forcing people into regimes etc by way of a subtle genocide.
Do you remember the Holocaust in WWII (systematic genocide -not just of Semitic people at all, by the way).
Maybe you should do some in depth reading on the plight of Poland and it's neighbours in those times, and forward and back. It has been going for a grossly lengthy time.
1
@william. The answer is "much more serious, of course."
There appears to be an aggression problem with some countries. The nice way to put it is that colonization from Great Britain and America for centuries maybe did not produce any really good civilization ideas. Some good outcomes, but in general taking over a country is a bad thing, i.e. slavery-inexcusable.
The bad way to put it is aggression and complete takeover from (in our recent past) Russia and Germany. I mention Germany because in one century, has had tried twice to take over the world. This type of thing starts with the people living in such countries, then the general culture, and then the world view that these countries have. Get along or take over. This leads to fighting. It is ingrained, centuries old. Look at this picture of the Ukraine Parliament, a mess, but still trying to keep order.
1
Mr. Trump can just call his buddy Vlad and it will all be fixed.
Go ahead Mr. T...make the call!
Oh, my, is Trump's buddy up to mischief, again? Surprise, surprise.
5
The U.S. should stay out of this. It is between Russia and the Ukraine.
The territory of Ukraine was not a country but was part of Poland until 1772 when it was divided between Tsarist Russia and Hapsburg Austria.
As a result of the Russian Revolution and Russia leaving the WWI fight the west acknowledged it as a country.
There was a fight from 1917-1921 and Russia took back control in 1921 and remained part of what was then the Soviet Union.
Upon there breakup of the Soviet Union Ukraine declared independence again.
This fight over Ukraine goes back to the 1600's
As for the Crimea, this is, and has been Russias warm weather port. The Crimean War was fought there and it was part of Russia then.
Like the Viet Nam lesson, stay out of it.
The U.S. has to stop getting into these fights. The U.S. youth have to stop being cannon fodder in other peoples fights.
13
@annoyed
U.S. was a beacon of decency and honor for most part of the world and for me personally. No matter if U.S. dont want to be that beacon anymore, I glad that there was somebody to step up against injustice, not just for themselves. This example one day, I hope, will inspire anothers to step up and take a fight. Because that's right, and because moral is far more precious than money or self interests.
3
@annoyed I agree, no US soldiers should shed blood in Russia's expansive wars against former colonies", but as a great power, we should not shirk our responsibilitiy to completely sanction the present Russian leadership global impotence.
Unfortunately, Russia and Saudi Arabia has financially leveraged the present US leadership into fawning cowards. hopefully this will be remedied soon.
1
How well this decency worked in the ME? Thousands killed , millions of refugees, countries became failed states, but who cares of consequences? Decency is the name of the game, but how decent is the game with such devastation?
4
I stand with Ukraine, and I am pleased that this marshal law is temporary and limited in scope. One must not become the mirror image of Russia, despite the fact that there is a great need to halt further Russian escalations.
7
I'm sure the Russians are quaking in their boots as they contemplate the dire consequences that will arise from even more sanctimonious statements of displeasure voiced by Europe and the United States. Yep, I'm sure they're just quaking in their boots.
5
"Russia has said it was forced to open fire after the Ukrainian ships entered what the Kremlin called Russian territorial waters, and failed to heed warnings to stop."
Russian Su-30 warplane opened fire with two missiles when Ukrainian vessels were at international waters heading away from Kerch. Just a daily reminder that Russians can't be trusted.
53
@Serhii
Well, the Uki boats did not register their route in advance and refused to obey orders to stop. Any more problems you have, Serhii?
11
@waldo
According to Russia and why should they stop in shared waters, Russia is boss?
5
they lost the water together with Crimea. imagine Serbian troops would march in Kosovo. I am sure you would be the first one screaming 'aggression' despite the fact that Serbia doesn't recognize annexion of Kosovo. Why it should be different in case of Ukraine?
5
My understanding is our CIA put the present power structure in place in the Ukraine. The conflict is/was over Russian gas getting to Europe. Biden's son, I heard about a year or two ago, was on the board of a gas pipeline corporation, seeking to do business in the Ukraine. It seems we are witnessing not necessarily the power of the Russians pitted against the rest of the world, but oil and gas against us all, pitting one side against the other to their advantage. Meanwhile, these international corporations, which include all of them, including the Russian oil and gas corporation, do business with one another all around the world..China, India, the Arctic, Sudan..on and on. Wars make money on weapons, etc, and they burn oil and gas.
16
Your understanding is mistaken.
4
@Mondoman according to whom?
6
Oh, please. Only a blind bat would not see through this charade. The Ukis needed a low risk-high gain distraction from their internal problems and using the Azov sea was the perfect opportunity.
3 small ships of no strategic value provoked the Russians into (predictable) acting and now the eyes are rolling, the crocodile tears are flowing and martial law is eancted - albeit only in parts of the country and only for 30 days.
I can't be the only one who doesn't buy into the whole thing.
22
@waldo
Exactly, three small ships that could do nothing against the Russian navy so why fire on them? Especially as they were already withdrawing.
4
they worry about the bridge. Beside do you remember how much damage inflicted in the US 4 passenger planes?
1
This is what happens when a corrupt mad-man controls half the world's nuclear weapons.
6
Putin is gearing up to annex Ukraine. Nato;Do something now or it will happen.Trump will mumble empty words; do nothing. Ray Sipe
58
@Ray Sipe
NATO has no business in Ukraine. Mind you it didn't have any business in Yugoslavia either. The difference is that Russia today isn't Russia in the '90s and Putin is no Yeltsin.
And the Ukrainians should understand, that it will be their country that will be destroyed, not any NATO members.
8
@Waldo Isn't the point that Russia also has no business in Ukraine?
7
@Mondoman No it's not the point. Russia has plenty of business in Ukraine. NATO doesn't.
5
Putin is toast this time. Look for him to start a beef elsewhere that NATO cannot ignore. He should know better, what with the history of two-front wars and all that. It's not looking good for him. He's also, usually, one deceptive step ahead of everyone in the disinformation game, being ex-KGB. Winter is coming. This will give him an excuse to shut off the gas pipelines. Stay warm, Central Europeans!
2
The Ukrainian government, the puppet one we installed, heavily influenced by Nazis (not neo-Nazis), is not to readily be believed. How about an investigation by some nonpartisans given access to the satellites we have taking pictures of everything in that area? Even though there are some differences, it still could be just another Gulf of Tonkin or weapons of mass destruction fraud all over again. Isn't this the kind of false claims that have been used so many times to start profitable attention-diverting wars in the past?
If I were a Ukrainian government official who wanted more aid from the US, and did not care how my country got it, I too would arrange a provocation that the Russians cannot ignore, like sailing into their territorial waters. And what I would least welcome would be an honest investigation.
Enough of the propaganda. Investigate before making certain claims and taking ill-advised actions.
15
@Timshel
Unfortunately you do not have a good knowledge of the Ukrainian borders, it would be better if you had looked at the map before insinuating that they were within Russian waters.
The European Union is looking at integrating Ukraine into the EU and will most probably expedite the matter with this kind of provocation from the Russian Gov't.
If Russia would have wanted to keep Ukraine within it's influence it should have not conduct itself as Ukrainian being second class citizens !
10
@Timshel, I agree.
5
@Wentworth Roger:
Well, Roger, I have an excellent understanding of Russian borders and I can tell you that (a) Crimea has been Russian since 1783 and (b) the vast majority of Crimeans think of themselves as Russian and tried, repeatedly, to distance themselves from Kiev in the wake of the breakup of the Soviet Union.
Oh, yes, also (c) those Crimeans overwhelmingly supported, and still do support, annexation by Russian in the wake of the 2014 coup, led by honest-to-goodness Nazis and supported by the US and its allies.
13
This comes on the heels of the flaccid response Trump gave to the House of Saud for the torture and murder of Jamal Kashoggi. When our enemies think it is OK to act aggressively because Trump will forgive all for personnel financial reasons, America has lost (or sold) it's moral standing in the world. I go back to the line I posted on the day Trump was elected. When you reward bad behavior, worse behavior will follow.
63
This is what happens when Russia has a friend in the Whitehouse.
31
Don't discount the Russian version of this story. The west has a long history of poking the bear and the United States (and, by extension, the EU) has never been shy about manipulating other countries to serve its interests. As for violating sovereignty, well, the U.S. knows something about that, too.
10
Putin is seeking to rally the Russian public around the flag, and distract them from the fact that Russia's economy is suffering as plunging oil prices and sanctions take their toll.
This adventure is not wise. There is no way that it meets any sort of rational cost-benefit analysis.
Putin is getting reckless ; and for his recklessness, all of Russia will eventually pay a very dear price..
38
Putin is literally testing the waters. Expect an escalation in both the frequency and severity of these incidents in Ukraine and surrounding areas as Vlad tries to fulfill his life’s ambition of “getting the band back together” and reunite what he views as rightfully belonging to Russia.
82
The problem isn't Russia, its Putin and political extremism in general. Russians aren't all bad people, I've partied with some of them before. If anything its the U.S. allowing big countries to run ramshackle all over and its no surprise that after Russia OPENLY ATTACKED Ukraine, NATO and the West have done nothing more than verbally reprimand the Kremlin. No further actions will be taken. Russia could actively annex the entire countries of Ukraine and Belarus and NATO wouldn't do anything. Not unless its a NATO country, and even then...
4
@D.
Russians have endured centuries of disinformation and distortion and repression by their leaders and as a result have become accustomed to being misinformed and deceptive.
3
There are very fine people on both sides.
21
How long do you think we'll have to wait before trump declares unconditional support for Russia?
5
So far, the comments on this story demonstrate the deep ignorance of the vast majority of Americans of the facts and history surrounding the subject issues.
What we see here is little more than brain-dead and clueless Russophobia, driven by hatred of Trump and many years of demonizing Russia and its leaders by our government, with eager assistance from most of our mainstream media.
It's really embarrassing to watch our fellow Americans jumping at the chance to show how little they know and how easily they are propagandized.
8
@Douglas
So it's ok for one country to fire at another? To take land from another? To provide assistance to separatists?
5
Expect a strong statement from the White House as soon as Putin dictates it to the president.
22
This should be front page news. This is how wars are started. Everyone should come to the rescue of the Ukrainian people.
Putin doesnt follow any international laws.
15
How is it that the United Nations Secretary General for Political Affairs, Rosemary DiCarlo, is unable to confirm details of the incident in the Kerch Strait, but the New York Times has no problem doing so?
Somehow the media "know" things that people whose job it is to know such things don't know.
5
@GT
Read the fine print. "Unable to confirm" does not mean the same thing as "I don't know". The media does not have to wait for government hierarchy to formulate a politically competent response. Government may very well have even greater details than the NYT, but the NYT can go to print whenever they want with whatever info they have. Nothing nefarious about it.
Another reason why the media IS NOT the enemy of the people!
9
@Andrew
"I wish to underline that the United Nations currently cannot independently verify the circumstances surrounding the incident."
- Rosemary DiCarlo, UN Security Council, 26 Nov 2018
Any reading of the "fine print" you're doing, is entirely your own. I'm not asking the Times or any other publication to refrain from reporting on the topic. I'm asking them to refrain from making judgements as is done here with the sensationalistic headline about an "Attack by Russia." Nefarious or not, it's poor journalism.
6
This is what happens when the Russian government isn't held accountable by the United States.
Congress had better take the reins when it comes to this escalation of tension between Russia and Ukraine. We all know how the Puppet-in-Chief will respond.
92
@L from Moscow your comments looks strange, there is no way that Russia will be accountable to anyone be it Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Yes there are consequences and sanctions from the West, yes Crimea was untied with Russia breaking some of earlier Russia-Ukranian legal agreements. I am not Putin supporter and never voted for him, but I fill that there is no way the Crimea will left Russia until Crimean people want it, and I personally know that since 1992 when they voted first time to be with Russia (but it was not taken into account) they want to be with Russia. They speak Russian, they think Russian.
Also what Poroshenko does is "house of cards" style games in front of elections, trying to improve his rating, having one small conflict with Russia, risking lives of Ukrainian sailors. Check the newsfeed earlier this fall several Ukrainian navy vessels crossed Kerch strait w/o a problem, just because they have provided notice in advance of their passage. This time there were no notice as I understand. Is it responsible behavior by Poroshenko ? Poroshenko failed, liberal ideas at Ukraine failed, what they did - they show Russians that liberal system doesn't work in Ukraine and won't work in Russia now on, Ukraine power is built around external enemy Putin's Russia and nationalistic ideas, praising fascist heroes that participated in Holocaust - and it is a shame for all of us. If wish Ukrainian politicians were wise and showed the democratic way to Russians.
2
Vlad says it didn't happen. Fake news. He was very strong. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. We'll never know for sure. Just have to wait and see what happens.
178
@RNS, and didn’t many Trump devotees day they’d rather be ruled by Putin than by “Dems”?
6
"I'd rather be a Russian than a Democrat" is the common refrain among covfefeans, yes.
Who cares if the planet is baking, the seas are rising and dirtying, heroic journalists are getting literally butchered, Crimea and Taiwan are getting seized, and landlords and guns are even less well-regulated? We got dubious job numbers and oil barrels to sell!
Make putin Russia Great Again! MRGA!
10
Don’t forget the CIA, NSA, FBI, and British MI6 all say it happened and there’s a video of it happening... but Trump doesn’t need to hear any of that. He spoke with Vlad. We’ll never know!
5
Yet the problem persists, despite any warm words of international support. Russia is a huge, very militaristic country with nothing to lose, ruled by a political class who believes it has egg on its face after the collapse of the soviet regime. The problem is not going away any time soon.
42
This would not have happened if Hillary Clinton were president; they’d have risked war with the West. But the Russians know they can tromp all over Ukraine because Trump won’t do smack. Putin is even more emboldened after Trump’s disgraceful handling of Saudi Arabia. He can posture all he likes, but he’s a weak man who has weakened our nation in the eyes of the world.
156
@Portia. You mean Secretary Hillary " Reset"? Thank you for the laugh of the day!
11
Is that why Russia annexed part of the Ukraine during the last administration? Don’t be dense. This is the embedded motive of the large and powerful. Trump is no different than the past administration
6
@Mike
Yeah, I agree Mike. This is a big problem and its been so for a while. The current Russian administration wants something back they think they've lost, something they won't get without war. They won't be satisfied until they have all of Eastern Europe and the stans under their umbrella again. They're going to eat at this until something changes. If they succeed here its somewhere else next. It has nothing to do with our politics, aside from what petty manipulations they can toss at us to disrupt our functionality.
4
Another act of uncalled violence. When does the road of appeasement end?
26
Trump calls Putin...Putin denies it...Trump sees no reason not to believe him...
106
The short story is: Russia has become a "Rogue State".
34
Why is this not "front page" news? We're on the brink of WWIII.
57
@Brad The sky is always falling.
1
Exactly
@Brad ~
So far it seems more like Vietnam.
1
Nikki R. Haley, the ambassador from the United States, called the episode an “arrogant act” by Russia that the Trump administration and the international community would not accept....
[ Ukraine threatens the Kerch bridge repeatedly, Russia acts to protect the bridge against a Ukraine incursion and the problem is who is arrogant and what sort of war should the "international community" start because the wildly hawkish Nikki Haley wants a war with Russia? ]
4
Ukraine does not threaten that bridge.
They must sail underneath it in order to get where they're going. Russia knows this and defines it in a distorted way. Sailing underneath it does not constitute threatening it.
34
@Nancy
As far as I can tell, the Ukraine boats did not clear passage with and were not inspected by the Russians as required. The Russians cannot allow the Kerch bridge to be damaged and must be very cautious. Ukraine boat captains must know this and be cautious in turn.
8
@Nancy
The situation seems simple, there are groups in Ukraine that are a threat to the Kerch bridge and Russia must be sure no threat leads to action against the bridge. A diplomatic settlement should be sought, but Russia will protect the bridge.
6
Remember, there are good people on both sides of this....
72
Did Nikki Haley ck with Trump before making her statement? I'm sure Trump will support Putin's action just like he supports the Crown Prince in Saudi.
104
Yes, it all depends on where the $$ nets out regarding which side is supported -- more particularly where the pennies land for the Trump family than for our country. $$ always "trump" ethical choices, decency, and frankly long-term stability of global politics and social rights.
16