Posted on 02/03/2015 6:15:19 AM PST by Kaslin
Among Cold War presidents, from Truman to Bush I, there was an unwritten rule: Do not challenge Moscow in its Central and Eastern Europe sphere of influence.
In crises over Berlin in 1948 and 1961, the Hungarian Revolution in 1956 and the Warsaw Pact invasion of Prague in 1968, U.S. forces in Europe stayed in their barracks.
We saw the Elbe as Moscow's red line, and they saw it as ours.
While Reagan sent weapons to anti-Communist rebels in Angola, Nicaragua and Afghanistan, to the heroic Poles of Gdansk he sent only mimeograph machines.
That Cold War caution and prudence may be at an end.
For President Obama is being goaded by Congress and the liberal interventionists in his party to send lethal weaponry to Kiev in its civil war with pro-Russian rebels in Donetsk and Luhansk.
That war has already cost 5,000 lives -- soldiers, rebels, civilians. September's cease-fire in Minsk has broken down. The rebels have lately seized 200 added square miles, and directed artillery fire at Mariupol, a Black Sea port between Donetsk and Luhansk and Crimea.
Late last year, Congress sent Obama a bill authorizing lethal aid to Kiev. He signed it. Now the New York Times reports that NATO Commander Gen. Philip Breedlove favors military aid to Ukraine, as does Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. John Kerry and Gen. Martin Dempsey of the joint chiefs are said to be open to the idea.
A panel of eight former national security officials, chaired by Michele Flournoy, a potential Defense Secretary in a Hillary Clinton administration, has called for the U.S. to provide $3 billion in military aid to Ukraine, including anti-tank missiles, reconnaissance drones, Humvees, and radar to locate the sources of artillery and missile fire.
Such an arms package would guarantee an escalation of the war, put the United States squarely in the middle, and force Vladimir Putin's hand.
Thus far, despite evidence of Russian advisers in Ukraine and claims of Russian tank presence, Putin denies that he has intervened. But if U.S. cargo planes start arriving in Kiev with Javelin anti-tank missiles, Putin would face several choices.
He could back down, abandon the rebels, and be seen as a bully who, despite his bluster, does not stand up for Russians everywhere.
More in character, he could take U.S. intervention as a challenge and send in armor and artillery to enable the rebels to consolidate their gains, then warn Kiev that, rather than see the rebels routed, Moscow will intervene militarily.
Or Putin could order in the Russian army before U.S. weapons arrive, capture Mariupol, establish a land bridge to Crimea, and then tell Kiev he is ready to negotiate.
What would we do then? Send U.S. advisers to fight alongside the Ukrainians, as the war escalates and the casualties mount? Send U.S. warships into the Black Sea?
Have we thought this through, as we did not think through what would happen if we brought down Saddam, Gadhafi and Mubarak?
America has never had a vital interest in Crimea or the Donbass worth risking a military clash with Russia. And we do not have the military ability to intervene and drive out the Russian army, unless we are prepared for a larger war and the potential devastation of the Ukraine.
What would Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon or Reagan think of an American president willing to risk military conflict with a nuclear-armed Russia over two provinces in southeastern Ukraine that Moscow had ruled from the time of Catherine the Great?
What is happening in Ukraine is a tragedy and a disaster. And we are in part responsible, having egged on the Maidan coup that overthrew the elected pro-Russian government.
But a greater disaster looms if we get ourselves embroiled in Ukraine's civil war. We would face, first, the near certainty of defeat for our allies, if not ourselves. Second, we would push Moscow further outside Europe and the West, leaving her with no alternative but to deepen ties to a rising China.
Given the economic crisis in Russia and the basket case Ukraine is already, how do we think a larger and wider war would leave both nations?
Alarmists say we cannot let Putin's annexation of Crimea stand. We cannot let Luhansk and Donetsk become a pro-Russian enclave in Ukraine, like Abkhazia, South Ossetia or the Transdniester republic.
But no one ever thought these enclaves that emerged from the ethnic decomposition of the Soviet Union were worth a conflict with Russia. When did Luhansk and Donetsk become so?
Rather than becoming a co-belligerent in this civil war that is not our war, why not have the United States assume the role of the honest broker who brings it to an end. Isn't that how real peace prizes are won?
lol...
I’m “anti-American” because I note the truth??
You are really whacked out, dude. Do you work of OFA, too?
Please link to me EVER defending “Russia’s right to own and enslave nations”
It is EXACTLY that type of hysterical strawman rhetoric that has caused people, not just here, but around the world, to no longer believe anything that Kiev says.
Russia has invaded NATO?
WHICH Nato border??
Does CNN know about it, yet?
Why aren’t the nukes flying?
Your hysterical crap has gotten really funny!!
But it’s not just here. I see this exact same meme being pimped in many places on the internet.
You keep calling Ukraine a country on Russia’s border, well it is a country on our NATO borders, and Russia is invading it.
If you are with us, you sure hide it well, as you seem to be arguing for Russia, and spouting what serves Russia.
bovine excrement...
I’ve been following this since it began.
YOU HOWEVER, are propagandizing and trolling.
Do you deny that Obama and Psaki have now admitted they “arranged” the coup in Ukraine?
While you are at it, define “US”...
Is “US” the Obamunists and OFA?
You seem to represent Putin’s interests very well, too bad you aren’t on our side.
Again, define “our” side...
You certainly don’t mean America’s.
Shouldn’t you be in your next “techclass”, anyway?
Of course I mean America’s side, since that is all that I have ever argued while you keep looking out for Putin’s side and against America/NATO.
That is what we are arguing about. I want Putin stopped, you don’t.
What is a “techclass”
But things have changed since then. Russians lost the cold war. They fall off the 1st league and now sits in the 2nd row, together with Brazil etc.
Central and Eastern Europe WAS Russia's sphere of influence just like much of Asia WAS Japan's sphere of influence. It simply isn't anymore. It's not a matter of personal opinion, It's a matter of cold facts. 3 decades ago half of Europe was under Kremlin's direct control. Now leaders of these countries can laugh in the face of Kremlin's guy and Kremlin can do nothing except releasing strongly worded statements.
Are you saying what Obama wants is “America’s side”?
Really??
On FR, no less??
In this case, I don’t believe Obama has “America’s best interests” in mind regarding Ukraine.
Even Wolf Blitzer has been forced to admit it is a wizzing contest between Obama and Putin.
Why are you supporting OBAMA???
“This is not your grandfather’s Red army.”
Of course not. His grandfather’s Red army was at least 20 times more powerful.
America and the West, and NATO, and Russia and Putin, all predate Obama, and ALL will be here in in 24 months when he leaves office.
As you keep supporting Russia invading Ukraine, you make it clear that you are not one of us, but one of Putin’s people.
There is nothing good that can come from allowing Russia to conquer European nations, or any nation anywhere. You guys had your way for generations, especially with what you enslaved during and after WWII, but Reagan brought you down, and we don’t want you to restart now that Reagan is gone.
Oh man. If you think that Putin is capable of nuking a US city for sending some Javelins to a sovereign country that doesn't even have arms export embargo imposed and buy military equipment from other countries as we speak then you must be thinking he is some kind of Hitler 2.0.
He isn't Hitler 2.0 or even any KGB “strongman”, he is just some botox clown that used to push the paper around in the KGB some decades ago.
Yeah, Russia is a former shell of itself. On a conventional basis, I think even the U.S. Army of the Vietnam era, circa 1968-1970, could take Russia of 2014, even with the equipment we had in 1968-1970. Still the crumpler is that thy have nukes and can still tear us up pretty bad. Even so, the invasion of another sovereign nation is not to be taken lightly, we can’t go to war over it ourselves, but I think there are ways we can express our outrage and perhaps help out the Ukraine with materials. If I could magically wave my hand, I’d give the Ukraine 5000 M-60 tanks and 500 F-15’s. I think the mistake they made was to give up their nukes, at one time, the Ukraine was like the 3rd or 4th largest nuclear power in the world.
“our way”? I’m in Indiana, dude.
Chill with your trolling.
“I think the mistake they made was to give up their nukes, at one time, the Ukraine was like the 3rd or 4th largest nuclear power in the world.”
After the fall of the Soviet Union, a broke and already corrupt Ukraine became the world’s largest-ever arms bazaar. They were selling everything that wasn’t nailed down, and some things that were, to anybody with cash.
We moved to secure the nukes, in the fear that they would end up in muzzie hands, and spent BILLIONS for them, that disappeared into Ukraine’s cesspool of corruption.
It isn’t trolling on my part tcrlaf, and it doesn’t matter where you are posting your anti-American/West, pro-Putin arguments from.
wetpheonix was one of your best partners, and he claimed to be in Putin’s old KGB unit, the FSB, and posting from Russia.
There have always been Americans that supported Russia over the US and NATO, during the Reagan years they were truly hysterical.
“Why are you supporting OBAMA???”
Yawn. Cheap trick.
Even the Army of the Vietnam war? I think it would vastly outclass the Russian Army.
As far as nukes, we all have nukes, and Russia didn’t want to use them to save their empire, they won’t be committing suicide by going out in a nuclear war now.
There is nothing that Russia or anyone in the world is doing, that would make want Russia to annihilate itself in nuclear war.
There is no nuclear standoff going on.
By the way, you never told me, what is a “techclass”?
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.