Wrong address, the trash is here:
Posted on 08/20/2014 12:28:48 PM PDT by DTA
Non violent activity is now the cause of a military invasion.
Why the West is the great Satan. Same song, different verse.
Sadly, some folks don’t realize they’re humming the old U.S.S.R. tune.
The Russians appear to suck that stuff right up.
This one is a subtle announcement of backtracking policy already being set up in motion.
The fact is - Neocon idiots hurt the interests of many in high places with their idiotic move in Ukraine.
Finnish prez announced couple of days ago that there are no grounds for NATO to intervene in Ukraine civil war, EU announced they have no military capacity to intervene either.
With sanctions hurting EU and Russia equally, many sober heads started thinking about General Winter.
Kiev goons are on their own.
Well, seeing that Foreign Affairs is published by the CFR . . . .
But the Czechs, Poles, Bulgarians, etc. felt otherwise, considering collective defense from the iron hand that had held their throat for 50 years, to be more important than appeasement.
This article is a bunch of BS. I heard the same BS about the USSR, e.g., "They are only reacting to encirclement by the West." Yet, when the wall came down and we had that small window of openness, we discovered that the Warsaw Pact had exactly zero defensive war plans.
I bet not 3 people honestly read that whole load of crap.
I did, but I was checking for Ron Paul over my shoulder the whole time.
The author is way behind the journalistic curve on this.
In fact, EVRYTHING BAD that happens in the ENTIRE WORLD is the West’s fault.
We know this because the Liberal media tell us so.
This is a common Russian propaganda lie, since they always like to blame their victims for their actions. They said the same thing during their invasion of Georgia. Note the exact same pattern, except, the big difference is the Ukrainians are putting up a better fight than the Georgians did:
"NATO would have expanded by now to admit ex-Soviet republics if Russia had not invaded Georgia in 2008 to defend a rebel region, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Monday."
http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/11/21/idINIndia-60645720111121
Russia builds or tries to build rebel movements in any country with a sufficient population of Russians, most of whom were forcefully colonized during the Soviet years after the native population was cleansed.
A history lesson on "Post"-Soviet aggression even without NATO membership:
"First, a little history is in order. Russia's hostile actions towards neighbors hardly ended with the collapse of Soviet communism. Russia's hostile actions towards neighbors hardly ended with the collapse of Soviet communism. On the contrary, Moscow continued to bully its former republics and satellites throughout the early and mid 1990s, even before the first round of NATO enlargement (to the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in 1999). In 1992 and 1993 -- after Russia formally recognized the independence of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania -- Moscow cut off energy supplies to these small, reborn democracies in an attempt to pressure them into keeping Russian military forces and intelligence officers on their sovereign territory. From 1997 to 2000, according to former U.S. Ambassador to Lithuania Keith C. Smith, Russia halted oil shipments to the country no less than nine times after it refused to sell refineries to a Russian state company. To this day, the Russian Foreign Ministry maintains that the Baltic republics -- which Russia militarily conquered, occupied, and subjugated for nearly five decades -- "voluntarily joined the Soviet Union in 1940." The Balts didn't become part of NATO until 2004. Given this history, is it any wonder why these countries -- or any other country victimized by Soviet-imposed tyranny -- would want to join the alliance? Is it NATO's fault for saying OK?"
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/04/08/nato_expansion_didnt_set_off_the_ukrainian_crisis
Though, this guy might have too bright of a view of NATO. From what I understand, while countries have joined NATO, NATO's military capability itself has not properly expanded. Not all of our allies are meeting their obligations.
At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004
This is another common myth, that what is going on in Ukraine is part of a EU-conspiracy to expand itself.
The deal itself isn't really to join the EU, but is the same type of agreement Israel and Turkey have signed with the EU. It was Yanukovych, actually, who built the foundations for this agreement, largely seen as an economic issue in Ukraine, not ideological (people from the left and right support it). By having this agreement, Ukrainians believe it will help their economy, and help deal with corruption, due to the obligations Ukraine would have once they have signed on to it. Yanukovych campaigned on it and pushed it until after the election when he decided to do the exact opposite thing; however, it still wasn't rejection of the EU agreement that he campaigned on that ignited the Maidan. What did so was Yanukovych's assaulting of the small number of protesters that had gathered. It was the visuals of young and old protesters being brutalized that caused Ukrainians to rise up, and the more people who were beaten or kidnapped by the regime, the more people rose.
For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw.
This is quite a mockery, because it makes the crimes of the regime that led to the protests to be a nullity. It also imagines these people conducting a military coup and replacing the government, when this did not happen at all. After the Russian-trained members of the SBU conducted the shootings, this was the real last straw of the Ukrainian parliament. Yanukovych's own party turned on him. Members of his party who had held posts were resigning. Yanukovych declared that he would soon resign, but then fled the country to a foreign enemy, thus abandoning his office. This is like Obama fleeing to Russia, rather than, say, to California, where he might be safer. The Ukrainian Rada voted for his removal after he had already removed himself and then immediately set a date for new elections. This is not a "coup" by any definition of the word.
He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base
It already holds a Russian naval base, which he used to take over the peninsula. The "Referendum" in Crimea was accomplished by Russian special forces marching into the Crimean Rada, where they appointed a new Prime Minister who was a known member of the Russian-Mafia (the Russian mob, however, is an FSB organization), who then proceeded to "democratically" announce a Soviet-style referendum.
Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault - The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin
I am not sure what this person means by "liberal" delusions. Actually, these are anti-NATO arguments pushed by Communists, and only lately by Liberaltarians like Ron Paul, who are traitors anyway.
The whole thesis of this article is flawed too. It is basically saying that Russia is a justified wife beater, and that we should have expected as much since the woman has a big mouth, and we were trying to get her some help.
Ahh a leftist Joooo hater will set us straight about Russia invasion of Ukraine.....barf!
As the Cold War came to a close, Soviet leaders preferred that U.S. forces remain in Europe and NATO stay intact, an arrangement they thought would keep a reunified Germany pacified.LIGAS
Sure, until they figure out what kind of trash they are supporting.
"A rhetorical offensive against Russia might have been a cathartic process for Australia. It has also played well domestically. But diplomatically it has been self-defeating.
It encouraged the belief in Kiev that Putin was temporarily constrained, frozen like a deer in the headlights of international opinion. Seizing the opportunity, Ukrainian forces mounted a military offensive in the vicinity of the crash-site at precisely the moment when Australia needed at least a couple of weeks’ quiet to fulfil its consular objectives on the ground.
This was not part of the plan. Abbott and Bishop had been leading an international chorus against Moscow, only to discover that the result of their efforts was to be undermined by the supposedly sympathetic government in Kiev. The investigation and full repatriation of victims was thwarted, probably irrevocably, while the looming threat of Russian military intervention suggests that Kiev was itself emboldened in ways that portend the widening of a conflict it cannot win.
Crisis management 101 teaches us that the only way to encourage a country like Russia back from the brink is to provide it with the opportunity to save face, to avoid the humiliation of being seen to succumb to international pressure. Australia, by dialling up the rhetoric, has played an active role in making that impossible.Management 101 teaches us that a bad actor is a bad actor, and needs to be fired not coddled.
Neocon promise was all fluff, a scam that fell through.
I guess that anyone dealing with American elites have Leo Strauss books on the shelf. Neocons are invisible like a cockroaches on a white carpet.
The neocons are not running this show, the Ukrainian people are . . . and the Russians/libs/commies are somewhat moody that they’re winning (for now).
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.