Posted on 03/04/2014 12:14:33 AM PST by Jim Robinson
(Reuters) - With Russia's incursion into Ukraine reviving Cold War-style tensions, President Barack Obama is at risk of suffering a blow to his credibility at a time when he can least afford it: as he tries to convince voters to stick with his fellow Democrats in congressional elections that will help shape his legacy.
For five years, Obama has practiced a cautious approach to foreign policy crises, prizing sober diplomacy and the search for consensus over brinkmanship, in prolonged conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But the deliberative style that Obama's team sees as a statesmanlike attitude in tune with Americans' war-weariness, was described as dithering in the crisis over Syria, where the United States long discussed military action without committing.
Facing his toughest test yet in Ukraine, Obama is once again finding himself portrayed as a weak leader, outmaneuvered by a wily, opportunistic Russian President Vladimir Putin intent on reviving the United States' nemesis.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall the US and Europe agenda has been annexing all East Europe thru NATO .....and nobody complained.
So Putin protects his assets, ports, oil pipelines and waterways from Nato taking over Ukraine, and this at his border, and the World condemns his defense and calls it an “invasion”.
Putin is a thug still...but it’s quite amazing how the powers that be re-name every crisis to accomodate their agenda’s.
Ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall the US and Europe agenda has been annexing all East Europe thru NATO .....and nobody complained.
So Putin protects his assets, ports, oil pipelines and waterways from Nato taking over Ukraine, and this at his border, and the World condemns his defense and calls it an “invasion”.
Putin is a thug still...but it’s quite amazing how the powers that be re-name every crisis to accomodate their agenda’s.
They are all independent countries that have chosen to align themselves with NATO. They could align themselves with Russia if they so chose. But why would they do so, given that Russia was responsible for imposing totalitarian communist dictatorships on them for over 4 decades, complete with mass killings of "class enemies"?
Another bit I find especially amusing is the story about how Russia contributed enormously to Nazi Germany's defeat. It's literally true, but only after Russia contributed enormously to Nazi Germany's victories in the West by signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and serving as Germany's quartermaster for its blitzkrieg on the Western front. In effect, Russia helped put out a fire it helped set, but only after it had burned down much of the neighborhood and killed many of its neighbors (in the form of battle and concentration camp deaths in territories that would not have been conquered had Russia not given the Germans a free hand).. Ultimately, today's Russia is what Germany would have been like without a de-Nazification campaign. Russians think they saved the world, when they poured gasoline on it and struck a match. After WWII, they continued with a wicked campaign of spreading Godless totalitarianism with guns and Stalin-worshipers while urging the mass murder of class enemies. While I understand the tribal reflexes of ethnic Russians and pro-Russian Slavs, non-Russian Russophiles are overlooking a lot of things.
It’s good to know the history....But however Ukrainians and Russians in Ukraine want to remember it.... you will still have a divided Ukraine.
What’s the EU going to give Ukraine?.....who buy the way can’t stand on it’s own two feet regardless who is their leadership....they have enormous debt and on the edge of bankrutcy yet again....
If Ukraine thinks ultimately joining with NAto and then under the EU it pays to remember the nations such as Greece, Spain, Italy and others....what have they done for them and where are tthey today.
Russia today is not the Soviet Russia it was.....sure it’s got a ways to go but they are way far better off now then in the 90’s.....further Crimea and the Western half of Ukraine is highly Russian populated....they will continue to resist going with Nato.....
This isn’t about Nazi’s ....that’s history and well to know but it does not play out in the equations Russia and Ukraine are in now. This is not a continuation of the Cold WAr either, though many are trying to state so. It’s about trade...it’s about ports and access to resources and distribution of...it’s about leadership which will be co-operative with the Global Agenda On the World Stage.
- is that a basketball in Obama’s Mom-Jeans or is he trying to impress Putin?
I heard Russia has a new tourism slogan. “COME VISIT RUSSIA OR WE WILL VISIT YOU”
Here’s a video of this incident:
Raw:Ukraine Russian Troops Fire Warning Shots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzsZ_aDSGBY
That’s exactly it....quite something with the sound...and so interesting as it was happening.
Again, the other half of the base had ‘surrendered’...this Ukranian Commander wasn’t about to do that... (remember the Navy Captain who defected to Russia is no considered a traitor and up on charges because he ‘defected’ to Russia).
This Ukraine Commanders idea was a ‘Joint’ purposal for ‘both’ the Ukraine and Russian soldiers ‘together’ would secure the base and carry out the duties and responssibilites there. So that message had to be determined by other commanders, as well as who would determine how it would be done.....if accepted. Thus the standoff continued.
Then later the Admiral would arrive and discuss things further.... but it was never actually agreed on and I have yet to know if there was indeed an agreement after the Admiral arrived....
When all is said and done though..Crimea will be Putins.
“Obama has squat influence there....”
Just as George Bush had zero influence when Putin rolled into Georgia and the US could do nothing when the Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia in the 1960’s.
The European situation today is the product of US foreign policy in the post war era. Instead of retreating back to the homeland after WWII, as the US did after WW1, American politicians chose to place the burden of defending Europe from the Soviet Union on the backs of the US taxpayer and put American soldiers in position to bleed if the Soviet tanks ever came across the border. Germany, the UK, France and other European countries were free to rebuild their economies, and establish huge social programs for their populations, thanks to the US taxpayer bearing the cost of their defense for 50 years. Europe became rich and complacent. By the 1960’s the US could no longer afford to bear the cost of its imperial military, as well as support increased domestic spending, so it began to borrow heavily to fund its global military footprint.
What do we have to show for our efforts? The Soviet Union is resurgent and China is emerging as a rival power. Our economy is a mess and the accumulated debt load cannot be paid off. Essentially the company is bankrupt and waiting for the day the currency loses reserve status and the spending binge will have to end. Europe will continue to avoid spending on defense and will accommodate Russia in order to keep the natural gas pipelines open.
Our founding fathers warned us against involvement in foreign affairs and the perils of maintaining a large standing army. We ignored that advice, beginning in the 20th Century so our politicians could play on the global stage. We are now reaping the consequences.
Large military forces do not always equate to 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.