I posted this on another thread; fits here too:
I’m less concerned about the recent hostilities in the Ukraine than by the Haley statement that sanctions would remain in place as long as Russia remained in Crimea. Russia will never leave Crimea, originally part of Mother Russia, up until Kruschev, who was half Ukrainian, gave it away to Ukraine in the 60’s. It was always part of Russia before that.
Plus, the U.S. was intimately involved in the coup against the Russian oriented leader of the Ukraine, that lead to the hostilities in Ukraine in the first place. What right did the Obama Admin have to stir up trouble in a country that borders Russia? The Ukraine is not in our backyard, it is in Russia’s backyard, and they were upset with reason.
Crimea is Russia’s warm water port where they keep many of their ships. After the coup, they took over Crimea to protect their ports from the western leaning newly installed Ukrainian gov’t via a western instigated coup. I might add that the Ukraine is a thugocracy with Nazi-like propensities. We should never have been mucking around in Russia’s traditional backyard; the West opened up a Pandora’s box.
As a resident of lovely South Carolina, I’m more than willing to see Haley spout the neocon line to the UN, ineffectively and in futility, than to continue to be Governor of our state. Power-wise, it’s a massive step down for someone who really needed to step down.
Using your logic the UK should be able to lob artillery into the Irish Republic. Do you always support tyrants and empires?