Posted on 04/16/2014 6:21:13 AM PDT by TangledUpInBlue
From Russian President Vladimir Putin’s perspective, the plan to annex parts of Ukraine probably goes something like this: take Crimea; ignite Russian nationalism in parts of the country where ties to Moscow run deep; then incite anti-Ukrainian protests in these places and use the protests as an excuse to send Russian troops into eastern Ukraine and annex it -- just as he did in Crimea.
“It is classic Russian foreign policy to try to destabilize a country before it completely takes it over,” said Edward Goldberg, a professor at Baruch College and the New York University Center for Global Affairs. “Russia has always considered Ukraine as a nation culturally and historically connected to it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
The Ukrainians didn't start anything with Russia. Putin has no business being in Ukraine...and you should "umm" do something about your stutter.
Umm...usually if you have to resort to personal attacks it's a sign you losing the argument.
“Exactly right. The Black Sea situation has developed into a massive disinformation campaign reminiscent of the Cold War. Only this time, it is the West on the offensive”
Absolute BS.
The Russians counterattacked only after the Georgia military launched a sneak attack into South Ossetia, which was de facto independent, and killed scores of civilians and the Russian peacekeepers that were stationed there. After three days of decimating the Georgia forces the Russians withdrew.
“Russians counterattacked only after the Georgia military launched a sneak attack into South Ossetia, which was de facto independent, and killed scores of civilians and the Russian peacekeepers that were stationed there.”
Accept Russian propaganda if you wish.
hmm Wehermacht counteracked only after Czech and Polish military launched sneak attacks into Sudetenland and German speaking areas of Poland.
Same old line from despots and same ole useful idiots sucking it up.
True. So many players involved.
I think a message to Russia should they have any inclination to invade Ukraine should be, ‘You broke it. You bought it.’
this all started over a financial mess in Ukraine. Seems folks rioted at the thought of decreased government benefits and other such losses. Now what?
Some times it means one is losing the argument while other times it means one is tired of taking the time responding intelligently to stupidity.
On the plus side, the Soros drones on this forum are outing themselves trying to minimize his role.
**************
Their perfect congruity with and enthusiasm for Obama/EU/Soros policy is entertaining. “Obamacons”.
Russia has had the naval base in Crimea since 1783.
I would not want America to give up a naval base that we had been operating since 1783.
The rest is just taunting, taunting, fear, uncertainty, doubt - the Russians are coming, the Russians are coming !
All to get American conservative rank-and-file to get behind finishing up the assimilation of Ukraine into the European Union.
Along with the rest of Eastern Europe, one at a time.
The EU is not even a country.
It’s a collection of globalist minions reporting to the financial elites of the world.
All the elites talk about is “can this country make their upcoming bond interest payments”.
Just listen to Bloomberg tv, that’s most of what they talk about, the current financial situation of globalism.
To the globalists, it’s all one grand old soirée for them, and a life of taxes and debt under an authoritarian government for the sheeple.
After three days of decimating the Georgia forces the Russians withdrew.
***********
It seems to have been quiet since. Like Libya after Reagan bombed it.
You asked when the last time Russia invaded a country. It was several years ago. In Georgia.
And, while I appreciate the simplified Wikipedia version, why did the U.S. condemn Russia's invasion? Why did Russia not withdraw, to this day, from 20% of the Georgian territory it invaded?
Perhaps the ex-KGB, communist dictator Putin is not the champion of freedom & religion some on this board make him out to be.
Really? Putin has been playing defense since the the February coup overthrew the elected Ukrainian government that had been friendly toward Moscow. Make no mistake about it, that coup was fomented and aided by the United States and our NATO allies with the intent of installing a West-friendly government in Kiev that would join NATO. Putin could not allow that to happen, as Russia's strategic naval and air bases in the Crimean peninsula are vital to its southern defense via the Black Sea -- and that's why Moscow immediately occupied Crimea to prevent its bases from falling into NATO's hands.
NATO tried a similar land grab six years ago in Georgia, and Russia thwarted us by invading Georgia and ensuring a friendlier government in Tbilisi. What many in the West fail to accept is that control of the Black Sea is vital to Russia's strategic defense -- which means Russia must and will do whatever it takes to retain its control. This is not unlike our own longstanding Monroe Doctrine, which declares that any colonization or interference in our hemisphere by a European power is viewed as aggression against the United States. NATO's expansion to Russia's borders is similar to one of our distant enemies signing treaties and basing its forces in Mexico, Quebec and British Columbia.
A little background into NATO's treachery... At the time of Germany's reunification in the early 1990s, NATO promised Russia that it would not expand eastward if Moscow withdrew its troops from former Soviet bloc countries. Then, in two batches in 1998 and 2004, NATO admitted 12 new Central and Eastern European members - right up to the borders of Russia itself. The Atlantic alliance that was founded to defend against Soviet invasion had morphed into an offensive alliance hell-bent on encircling and dominating Russia itself. Moscow pushed back when NATO began courting Black Sea nations, beginning with its Georgian invasion in 2008. NATO's hand was caught in the cookie jar in Tbilisi, just as it is now exposed in Kiev.
Frankly, I don't give a damn. I have nothing against any party in this fight, as it is none of my business. Likewise it is no business of the United States; contrary to all the War Party rhetoric, our security is not threatened one iota by the events along the Black Sea. Unless we choose to stick our nose where it doesn't belong, and we get bitten.
“Make no mistake about it, that coup was fomented and aided by the United States and our NATO allies with the intent of installing a West-friendly government in Kiev that would join NATO.”
That is a complete fabrication that the AlexJones nuts of the world are selling.
Ukraine has every right to decide its own fate in regard to Russia and the EU. Russia has NO right to interfere in a sovereign country’s affairs.
“NATO’s expansion to Russia’s borders is similar to one of our distant enemies signing treaties and basing its forces in Mexico, Quebec and British Columbia.”
Russian propaganda line. Each nation has a right to align with whoever they want. Russia’s disagreement does not give it a right to annex land in other countries.
“He had access and was content, until the EUrocrats foolishly moved to remove it.”
Russia’s access to their Naval base was NEVER changed or hindered, in the least.
” Putin may be a thug, but he didn’t start this mess.”
Yes, he did. He had no grievances accept for the old nazi line of protection Russian speaking people in another country.
“On the plus side, the Soros drones on this forum are outing themselves trying to minimize his role. “
And the Jack Boot Lickers of a despot wannabe Hitler are proving themselves to be not conservative in the least.
However, most people - especially younger people - preferred to speak to her in English. Rather than help her with her Hungarian, they wanted to practice their English.
I would suppose the situation would be different in rural areas, but I do see a trend here.
The link you provided says exactly the opposite.
“It also noted that Georgian attack on 7 August was a response, albeit not proportionate, to ongoing South Ossetian attacks.”
That’s what I’m thinking... since when does polling and inter-generational attitudes count for anything once the tanks start rolling???
Really? Perhaps you've never been inside a high-level military operations center since 1990. I have. Since the Soviet collapse, alphabet bureaucrats and NGO representatives almost outnumber military personnel in every operation and exercise. Since the Soviet collapse, nation building has become NATO's new offensive weapon in our bid to encircle Russia. Having outlived its original purpose of defending Western Europe against Soviet invasion, NATO has morphed into a tool of Western economic dominance of Eurasia. The pattern of its expansion illustrates this very clearly.
Russian propaganda line. Each nation has a right to align with whoever they want. Russia's disagreement does not give it a right to annex land in other countries.
The same could be said of the United States with regard to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. Border disputes involving major powers are rarely about rights, but about which party has the power (inherent or allied) to enforce one side's right or the other side's opposing will. In our own hemisphere, we have imposed our will upon our neighbors because we determined that our own security trumped their rights. Indeed, since the Monroe Doctrine was declared in 1823, we have denied the right of other Western Hemisphere nations to ally with outside powers. The Black Sea disputes are border disputes for Russia, and Moscow is not going to accept NATO's dominance of its southern border and its close seaborne approaches. Not without a fight.
“Since the Soviet collapse, alphabet bureaucrats and NGO representatives almost outnumber military personnel in every operation and exercise.”
Hyperbole that lacks perspective.
“Since the Soviet collapse, nation building has become NATO’s new offensive weapon in our bid to encircle Russia.”
Merely your opinion. Incorrect, opinion.
“Having outlived its original purpose of defending Western Europe against Soviet invasion, NATO has morphed into a tool of Western economic dominance of Eurasia. The pattern of its expansion illustrates this very clearly.”
Let me fix this for you. Having succeeded as the bulwark against big Statist Soviet aggression and prevented Europe from being invaded, NATO remains the wall against Soviet/Russian/Communism/Nationalism and its dangerous natural instinct to dominate its weaker neighbors.
“The Black Sea disputes are border disputes for Russia, and Moscow is not going to accept NATO’s dominance of its southern border and its close seaborne approaches. Not without a fight.”
LOL, Russian conscripts and war-fighting ability is a command and logistical nightmare for Russia, not NATO. Frankly, NATO without the US would make quick work of Russian forces.
The only reason that Russia is attacking Ukraine is it knows there is no alliance to automatically bring NATO in. Putin depends on the useful idiots of appeasement to dominate weak nations.
We will not deploy to Ukraine and we should not. Russia is paying its own price in loss of credibility, even as a multi-polar power. The West can exact a heavy toll on Russia in the terms of both future economic damage and strategic alliances, if it so wishes.
However, your Alex Jones conspiracy nonsense falls flat. What is going on not broad conspiracy but the same power politics and realpolitik that has dominated international relations for some time. Only the relationships have been tilted away from superpower balance of power to multipolar/superpower balance of power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.