The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Russia should pay a price economically for this, as we don't want more powerful countries swallowing up the territory of weaker nations just because they have some citizens there. Crimea is a somewhat unique situation as it was Russian before given away by the leader of a defunct empire 50 years ago. Beyond putting the squeeze on Putin and his buddies however, there's little more the US should be doing. I would boot them out of the G-8 however and he can kiss off hosting any more splashy international events ever again to boost the image of his kleptocracy.

He's already got the 2018 World Cup in his back pocket.

Certainly there's an argument for a majority of people in an area having a say in what country they want to be a part of. But the way this was gone about was wrong in so many ways that it's hard to have a lot of sympathy for the slight ethnic Russian majority doing what they're doing. And then of course you have all sorts of legal messes with Ukranian assets in Crimea, the fact that Crimea gets most of their electricity and water from Ukraine, etc.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Regardless of the presence of the Russian military or whether you believe the first digit of the vote tally, it seems pretty clear to me that joining Russia is the will of the majority of people in Crimea....

By that logic, then, Lincoln was wrong to stop the Confederacy from seceding in 1861, no??

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

By that logic, then, Lincoln was wrong to stop the Confederacy from seceding in 1861, no??

Yes, I think he was. There were a great many more options available than the route chosen by Lincoln, but that would go down a path that's highly off topic.

[5mn_Major]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

By that logic, then, Lincoln was wrong to stop the Confederacy from seceding in 1861, no??

...or allowing Miami joining Cuba, if it decided to do so.

[Rover]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I still say Reagan would have sent Rambo, Aaaanold, and Chuck Norris over there to mop the Crimea with Russia's troops. Its a sign of weakness that Obama won't send fictional characters and aging action movie stars from 30 years ago to do what needs to be done.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

By that logic, then, Lincoln was wrong to stop the Confederacy from seceding in 1861, no??

Yes. He was. For that and a myriad of other reasons including how awful it is to have the South weighing us down with political BS all the time.

[LynahFan]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

By that logic, then, Lincoln was wrong to stop the Confederacy from seceding in 1861, no??

How does that follow? I'm not speculating on what the *Ukraine* should or shouldn't (try to) do about it. It's a little different when a piece of your own country tries to break away than someone else's does, yes?

[Rover]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Interestingly enough, Lincoln's reasoning for preserving the union were simple enough, but not brought up yet out here. He felt that if you allowed the country to split over one issue, those pieces would keep dividing up until there were a dozen bickering countries sharing the territory that used to make up the united states, and that would be the death of democratic govt.

The stakes aren't quite as high in Ukraine, and besides, Lincoln didn't ask any other country to bear the brunt of the fighting. His military did that themselves (and suffered horrific losses in the process. More American soldiers died in the Civil War, counting both sides, than WWI and WWII combined).

So as many of us have been saying, its up to these countries (Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine) to solve their own fvcking problems, much like we've been doing here in the USA for the last 200+ years.

[joecct]

Interestingly enough, Lincoln's reasoning for preserving the union were simple enough, but not brought up yet out here. He felt that if you allowed the country to split over one issue, those pieces would keep dividing up until there were a dozen bickering countries sharing the territory that used to make up the united states, and that would be the death of democratic govt.

The stakes aren't quite as high in Ukraine, and besides, Lincoln didn't ask any other country to bear the brunt of the fighting. His military did that themselves (and suffered horrific losses in the process. More American soldiers died in the Civil War, counting both sides, than WWI and WWII combined).

So as many of us have been saying, its up to these countries (Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine) to solve their own fvcking problems, much like we've been doing here in the USA for the last 200+ years.

Hear! Hear!

[Rover]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Hear! Hear!

What are you, some kind of freakin libral?

[joecct]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Interesting take on Russia - the more things change, the more things stay the same?

http://www.aawsat.net/2014/03/article55329733

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Interestingly enough, Lincoln's reasoning for preserving the union were simple enough, but not brought up yet out here. He felt that if you allowed the country to split over one issue, those pieces would keep dividing up until there were a dozen bickering countries sharing the territory that used to make up the united states, and that would be the death of democratic govt.

The stakes aren't quite as high in Ukraine, and besides, Lincoln didn't ask any other country to bear the brunt of the fighting. His military did that themselves (and suffered horrific losses in the process. More American soldiers died in the Civil War, counting both sides, than WWI and WWII combined).

So as many of us have been saying, its up to these countries (Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine) to solve their own fvcking problems, much like we've been doing here in the USA for the last 200+ years.

Wait a minute. You're the donkey who's always criticizing my examples of ******* misdemeanors as being "too far in the past to be relevant." Yet now you offer up the response to a 19th century domestic political matter (with no troops massed on our borders) as being on point for how we should proceed in Europe today. That's presumably the same "thought" process by which you declared certain responses to Russia suggested by me as "stupid" but remained mute when HIM did more or less what I suggested. Just out of curiosity, do you actually ever read the shiza you post? Or are you just some sort of ******* mynah bird, pecking away randomly at a key board? All reflex and no brains.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Hear! Hear!

Naturally, the more confused he is, the more you agree.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I still say Reagan would have sent Rambo, Aaaanold, and Chuck Norris over there to mop the Crimea with Russia's troops. Its a sign of weakness that Obama won't send fictional characters and aging action movie stars from 30 years ago to do what needs to be done.

We could always send a delegation of *******s headed by Barbra Streisand (and other members of F.A.G.) to bore them to death.

[Priceless]

Wait a minute. You're the donkey who's always criticizing my examples of ******* misdemeanors as being "too far in the past to be relevant." Yet now you offer up the response to a 19th century domestic political matter (with no troops massed on our borders) as being on point for how we should proceed in Europe today. That's presumably the same "thought" process by which you declared certain responses to Russia suggested by me as "stupid" but remained mute when HIM did more or less what I suggested. Just out of curiosity, do you actually ever read the shiza you post? Or are you just some sort of ******* mynah bird, pecking away randomly at a key board? All reflex and no brains.

He was responding to a question raised by Fishy. You should criticize him.