So what are your thoughts on everything going on right now? Do you think Obama is teasing a vicious dog that is about to break free of it chain and open a can of whoopbutt, or do you think everyone will end up shaking hand, becoming friends again without anything more then just some loud barking.
Also if Putin does break free of his chains, do you see the USSR being rebuilt, or even worse a boots on the ground, full scale WW3?
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
-Albert Einstein
Putin just showed the world a textbook example of how to conquer a country without firing a shot. With extra points for punking out NATO and the Obama Administration.
Between Putin's antics and the US's misadventures in the Middle East, it sets the precedent for the 21st century that the old "might makes right" saying is still true. Sadly...
All the president is doing is mild toothless sanctions, by all rights we should have went to war to protect our treaty obligations with the Ukraine and the UK. I am very glad the president didn't but Obama isn't poking Putin at all, more like bending over backwards to prevent war, not starting one. Putin called our bluff, it is as simple as that.
Also, if it were a totally conventional war, there is absolutely no war Russia could win against NATO. I mean, it isn't even in the realm of possibility. NATO could field 10 times as many troops and has better technology. Mr. Putin would be a fool to try and go to war, so he has to be confident that the NATO member countries are unwilling to get involved in a war. The threat really is, nuclear, because I don't see a strong man leader like Putin willing to lose if it did come to that.
The moral of the story is telling countries like Iran, don't give up your nuclear weapons. The Ukraine made an agreement with the United States, the UK to protect it's territory in exchange for giving it's nuclear weapons back to Russia, and we let them down. We are no longer the world's policeman and I am fine with that, but I don't think most people are really appreciating the consequences of this.
You have to admit one thing, the Cold War was really good for the economy! ;) The Bear was not dead, just in hibernation a while.
There is absolutely no appetite for a war in Europe (unless it's picking on small African countries). Besides it's civilians and politicians being completely unprepared for this "sudden" rise of a "scary bear", NATO is a shell of what it was in the early nineties. Most of its conventional forces have been demobilized and all of it has been focused on low-intensity conflict while doing rotations thru Afghanistan. A fight with Russia would be a rude awakening to NATO I think.
Putin has masterfully parsed the diplomatic and legal gray area between Ukraine and Crimea, and the Russian military executed their very subtle campaign beautifully. It really was a Clausewitzian masterpiece given the small scale of it.
Quote from: Hikari on March 19, 2014, 01:45:12 PM
All the president is doing is mild toothless sanctions, by all rights we should have went to war to protect our treaty obligations with the Ukraine and the UK.
Also, if it were a totally conventional war, there is absolutely no war Russia could win against NATO.
Even though I have no family members in the military at this time, I think that it is time for the U.S. to quit acting like the policemen of the world. I am sick of hearing about the men and women of our country coming home in body bags just because a bunch of losers in D.C. want to flex their metaphorical muscles.
Enough is enough.
As far as any "coalition" is concerned, it always ends being US that foots most of the bill and has the highest count of military casualties.
Not to mention that this could
possibly trigger World War 3 or bring back the policy of Mutual Assured Destruction.
Screw that.
Even though I was just a grade school student at the end of the Cold War, our current and future generations do not need to go through all of the "duck and cover" stuff all over again. Not to mention the fact that if one side decided to launch nukes, the other would retaliate in a second and then what? Millions of deaths? Millions more suffering and dying from radiation sickness?
And for what? Just because we (yet again) stuck our damn nose in where it didn't belong?
No thanks.
Kind of does show what happens when Von Clausewitz and Sun Tzu go out drinking together, huh? ;D
It's a bit funny really, the people in Crimera want to be part of Russia, they identify as Russian, but we say they can't be. Whose side are we on?
Quote from: Cindy on March 19, 2014, 05:46:38 PM
It's a bit funny really, the people in Crimera want to be part of Russia, they identify as Russian, but we say they can't be. Whose side are we on?
I am not so convinced, especially since Russia invaded
before their so called referendum. Just like, I have a very tough time seeing other elections held at the barrel of a gun to be accurate (i.e. Afganistan, Iraq,etc).
Historically, Crimea was part of Russia, Khrushchev handed it over in 54.. It has a majority Russian population..
Quote from: JamesG on March 19, 2014, 11:51:05 AM
Putin just showed the world a textbook example of how to conquer a country without firing a shot. With extra points for punking out NATO and the Obama Administration.
Between Putin's antics and the US's misadventures in the Middle East, it sets the precedent for the 21st century that the old "might makes right" saying is still true. Sadly...
My amen to that post!
Quote from: JamesG on March 19, 2014, 02:57:06 PM
There is absolutely no appetite for a war in Europe (unless it's picking on small African countries). Besides it's civilians and politicians being completely unprepared for this "sudden" rise of a "scary bear", NATO is a shell of what it was in the early nineties. Most of its conventional forces have been demobilized and all of it has been focused on low-intensity conflict while doing rotations thru Afghanistan. A fight with Russia would be a rude awakening to NATO I think.
Putin has masterfully parsed the diplomatic and legal gray area between Ukraine and Crimea, and the Russian military executed their very subtle campaign beautifully. It really was a Clausewitzian masterpiece given the small scale of it.
Once again, yup!
Quote from: Cindy on March 19, 2014, 05:46:38 PM
It's a bit funny really, the people in Crimera want to be part of Russia, they identify as Russian, but we say they can't be. Whose side are we on?
Not all of them are Russians. And it was still done with most of the dirty tricks from the book.
Quote from: kelly_aus on March 19, 2014, 06:32:42 PM
Historically, Crimea was part of Russia, Khrushchev handed it over in 54.. It has a majority Russian population..
Crimea and Ukraine were both part of the Russian Empire (by conquest) before it became the Soviet Union. Its allocation to Ukraine was mostly an administrative, internal Soviet political move. Khrushchev probably couldn't conceive that the USSR would collapse and fall apart in only a few decades later.
Maybe sending troops wasn't the most diplomatic move, but I also think it would have been a disaster if NATO tried to send troops in responce. I'm not as convinced as most people that Russia's military is anything people want to start poking with cruise missiles, armed conflict with Russia is a very very bad idea. (at least in my opinion).
I would want to know more about how the people in Crimea feel, before doing anything rash.
The Crimera is an interesting situation. Russia needs the Crimera for a deep water access port for their naval unit. It was interesting to see the troops came in not after the new pro European government came in but when a bill was passed (shortly banning the minority languages). I can see Russia attempting to take some territory in Ukraine's west to form a land bridge but not much else. Parts of Europe and the Ukraine need Russia for its oil the pipeline going through Ukraine. Now while the ruble has gone down at the moment this is where Russia has some major power. Right now I believe we will have two dogs growing at each other (Russia USA). What will make it tense is if Russia ever change their stance on South Ossetia and Abkhazia from independent states to parts of Russia
Quote from: kelly_aus on March 19, 2014, 06:32:42 PM
Historically, Crimea was part of Russia, Khrushchev handed it over in 54.. It has a majority Russian population..
Much of Ukraine has been occupied or aligned with a number of different empires. Russia has historically brutalized the Ukrainian people.
Russia committed the Holodomor against the Ukraine, starving an estimated 10 million citizens to death during Russian occupation between 1932-33. Those that weren't starved to death were shot on site trying to get food. Twice Stalin decided to purge the Ukraine of their national identity by slaughtering another 500,000+ writers, artists, leaders and anyone else they could find that identified as Ukrainian. Ukraine was leveled during WWII when it was a battlefield between Russia and German forces, where another 1.5 million Ukrainians were killed. Further ethnic cleansing occurred until the time Stalin finally died.
The reason for the Russia population in Crimea is due to the forced deportation of the Crimean Taters by Russia in 1944. After killing off 100,000 Crimean's in the gulag, forced labor camps or simply starving them to death, Russia filled the void with their own citizens to repopulate the region. Yes, Khrushchev did release Crimea back to Ukraine in 54, maybe they felt guilty for all of the atrocities they committed. I guess Putin did not receive the memo.
http://freepublish.ru/obshhestvo/stenogramma/
english translation: http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=155481
QuoteInformation about the meeting of the leaders of the Maidan Oleg Tyagnibok (party "Freedom") and Dmitry Yarosh ("Right sector") became part of the public domain. It took place on February 25 in Kiev restaurant "Turgenef" on Large Zhytomyr. The abridged transcript of the conversation is published below:
D. Yarosh : Oleg, you already know that they'll ditch us soon. Well, maybe not me because Maidan is behind me, but you they'll ditch for sure.
O.Tyagnibok: That would be difficult since "Freedom" is now in the lead.
D.Yarosh : That's true only now. They'll not let "Freedom" to gain power. That yid with punched-out brains (presumably V.Klichko) and Yatsenyuk will both push you aside. They already started pushing Julia. Did you see what they showed on "1+1" (tv channel) about Zhenya (the daughter of Julia Timoshenko Eugenia)? How would you react if they did that about your Darinka (Tyagnibok's daughter)? It's total mudslinging. And it will get worse.
O.Tyagnibok : Are you sure about Zhenya?
D.Yarosh : Yes. It's Martynenko's job, and Yatsenyuk stands behind him.
O.Tyagnibok : A Julia Vladimirovna (Tymoshenko) know about this?
D.Yarosh : I think she knows.
O.Tyagnibok : What do you suggest?
D.Yarosh : It's very simple. Our goals are the same. We both stand for Ukraine without Yids and Katsaps (Russians derogatory). You'll help me, I'll help you. Turchinov, Yatsenyuk, the "boxer", and Julia too, they all think only about how to best grab as much money as possible. And Julia also wants to avenge her imprisonment to her "benefactors". They do us more harm than good.
O.Tyagnibok : So what do you expect from me?
D.Yarosh : Oleg, I need neither power nor money. If I wanted them, I would have already had both. I want Ukraine to be for Ukrainians. Right now I need to become the chief of the SBU. Yes and to clean up the communications of our "bespeki" (security forces) with Muscovites , and they know too much about us. If you help me, we can work together.
O.Tyagnibok : I've heard that your guys wanted to make you the head of SBU, but did not think it was true. Why do you need it? Go into politics. You have a lot of support.
D.Yarosh : Politics? Why? So I can wear a beautiful jacket? I already have the power. Gone are the times when we indulged slingshotting. Now I have so many weapons that it will be enough to break all kinds of "internal occupants". If my guys have the SBU, I will bring order to the "katsapschine" (East Ukraine derogatory) and in the Crimea. Katsaps will flee Sevastopol voluntarily. I'll cause the earth to burn under their feet. Matrosnyu will start to choke some of them, maybe blow up a couple of ships. They'll flee like rats and take their henchmen with them! I'll crush all this evil. Parallelly we could start stirring ->-bleeped-<- up in Voronezh, Belgorod and Kursk regions (Russian regions with Ukrainian population). Prepare battle groups of Tatars and direct them to the Caucasus to help the Emirate. Bellamy Muzychko will help with that. He has the experience, connections, the Chechens respect him. Point is - the more problems the Muscovites have at home, the less they will be a problem for us and the less they'll bother us. In the meantime we can gather strength to stand on our own feet.
O.Tyagnibok : You have plans like Napoleon.
D.Yarosh : No, like Bandera.
O.Tyagnibok : And what if the Katsap rise in Ukraine? In Donetsk, Kharkiv, Sevastopol there's lot of them. "Regions" and Commies are still showing some teeth.
D.Yarosh : They'll swallow it and wash it down with yushkа (Ukrainian soup). I think we can quietly remove the most violent of them. The rest will calm down.
O.Tyagnibok : That's risky. Кemember Gangadze?
D.Yarosh : Kuchma was simply betrayed. And by his own people. It doesn't happen with us. If we do something, we do it well. None had yet "surfaced".
O.Tyagnibok : And what will Europe say? They won't tolerate bloodshed for long.
D.Yarosh : Oleg, let's clarify where we stand. I am willing to endure this circus about Euro-integration as long as we're not seriously talking about joining the EU. I would rather embrace a Kuban Cossack than a Euro ->-bleeped-<-. Joining Europe is death for Ukraine. Death for the state and for Christianity. We want Ukraine for Ukrainians, ruled by Ukrainians and not serving the interests of others. Including America and the EU. And there's no other way.
O.Tyagnibok : Okay, with Muscovites and Europe it is clear enough, what about the Poles? They are seriously claiming Volyn now. On the maps they're already drawing Eastern Kresy (eastern borderlands). There are strong pro-Polish sentiments there. If we can't reach an agreement with the EU, they might release the Polish dogs on us. In January, the Polish Sejm accused "Freedom" of conducting an anti-Polish policy. They called me an anti-Semite and a Russophobe. There was so much howling!
D.Yarosh : You should be proud. No one called me that yet! OUN and UPA didn't kill enough AK (Armia Krajowa)? If they raise their little heads, we'll give them a second Katyn in no time. We won't give a meter of Ukrainian land to any Muscovite nor lyahs (Poles), even more so to the Jews! There's enough streetlamps for everyone. And to you, friend, I have the following proposition. I will not dismiss the Maidan until the presidential election. I'll establishes control over the work of the most important ministries and authorities in the regions. I'll provide support for our movement. Together with the political capabilities of your "Freedom", we will be powerful. Later, if the patsyuks (rats) start selling Ukraine again, we will again raise the Maidan and take power.
Analysis: Understanding the crisis in Ukraine: http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/analysis-understanding-the.html
Quote...
The Russian military and other local self-defense militias are at present the only check to curtail the authority of the far-right, pro-Western Kiev government over Ukraine's entire national territory. What appears superficially as the "peaceful" scenario—immediate Russian withdrawal, which is the main objective of Western governments—would at present embolden fascist forces and undoubtedly accelerate NATO militarism in the region.
Military escalation, on the other hand, would likely stimulate ultra-nationalist sentiments in both Ukraine and Russia, threatening national minorities, Jews, Tatars and others.
For progressive people and anti-imperialists, the current situation underlines the central importance of the leadership of mass movements. In our current era, with the weakness of the left, the far-right has reaped the fruits of populist uprisings. Revolutionary organizations—built on broad class solidarity not reactionary forms of nationalism— must be built.
We must emphasize that the Kiev government is not a "popular" government born of progressive protest, but a lash-up between pro-Western forces and fascists attempting to impose punishing economic policies on the Ukrainian people.
In the current era of imperialism, dominated by a small club of Western powers, they stage interventions and support regime change operations the moment a government asserts an independent orientation or a more compliant regime can be found. They care nothing about popular legitimacy or self-determination, using any opportunity to encircle and undermine those they do not physically crush.
It is folly for anti-imperialists to join in the chorus of condemnation against the Russian military so long as they are the only physical force obstructing the EU-NATO-fascist takeover of Ukraine. During this rapidly changing situation, as the U.S. capitalist media howls and misleads, we must remain vigilant and precise in our message. The poor and working people of the United States and of the world have no interest in another regime change operation or imperialist war. All anti-fascist activity in the Ukraine must be whole-heartedly supported.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who's who in Ukraine's new [semi-fascist] government: http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/whos.html
Quote...
Dmytro Yarosh, Right Sector neo-Nazi commander who said "our revival begins with our Maidan," is now second-in-command of the National Defense and Security Council (covering the military, police, courts and intelligence apparatus).
Andriy Parubiy, co-founder of the fascist Social National Party, which later changed its name to Svoboda. He is the new top commander of the National Defense and Security Council.
New Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk , a powerful right-wing banker, meets with neo-con John McCain. Pictured center is neo-Nazi Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok, now one of the most powerful figures in the country.
Ihor Tenyukh, member of neo-Nazi Svoboda party, now Minister of Defense.
Oleksandr Sych, member of neo-Nazi Svoboda, is one of three Vice Prime Ministers.
Oleg Makhnitsky, member of neo-Nazi Svoboda, now Prosecutor-General (Attorney General), and has immediately set out to indict the leaders of Crimea who do not want to live under the new order in Kiev.
The U.S. and European Union countries played a key role in the overthrow of the elected government in the Ukraine headed by Victor Yanukovych and the Party of Regions. Listening to the politicians in Washington or watching the corporate media, it would be easy to believe that the coup in the Ukraine has ushered in new era of democracy for the people of that country.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The new, self-appointed government in Kiev is a coalition between right-wing and outright fascist forces, and the line between the two is often difficult to discern. Moreover, it is the fascist forces, particularly the Svoboda party and the Right Sector, who are in the ascendancy, as evidenced by the fact that they have been given key government positions in charge of the military and other core elements of the state apparatus.
...
Support for the fascists is surging in the Ukraine. In 2006, Svoboda received .36 of 1 percent in the elections; in 2012 it became the fourth largest party in the Rada (parliament) with 10.45 percent of the vote and 37 seats out of 450. In a public opinion poll taken at the beginning of February, 54 percent said they would vote for Tyahnybok for president if he ran against Yanukovych. (The poll was held three weeks before the overthrow of Yanukovych.)...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How and why the U.S. government aided a coup led by neo-Nazis in Ukraine: http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/why-us-aided-ukraine-coup-russia.html
Quote...
Another case of imperialist-backed regime change – this time with neo-Nazis
The U.S. government has engineered, financed and fully supported a classic coup d'état that overthrew a corrupt but democratically elected government in Ukraine. Joining in the destabilization of the Ukrainian government were Germany, France, Britain and other NATO powers.
The U.S. State Department funds an international network of non-governmental organizations and media outlets that are used to create political opposition and conduct regime change against targeted countries from Venezuela to Bolivia to Syria to Ukraine and other countries. A principal vehicle for these U.S. operations is the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
A recent article by Robert Parry reports: "NED, a $100 million-a-year agency created by the Reagan administration in 1983 to promote political action and psychological warfare against targeted states, lists 65 projects that it supports financially inside Ukraine, including training activists, supporting 'journalists' and promoting business groups, effectively creating a full-service structure primed and ready to destabilize a government in the name of promoting 'democracy.'"
The new coup-led government was selected by a rump session of the parliament when many elected members could not show up to vote for fear of physical attack. It is filled with fascist and semi-fascist forces, as well as powerful billionaire oligarchs. The fascist forces promote hatred toward Russians, Jews, Poles and other minorities.
During the past year these forces have been vandalizing the anti-fascist monuments and memorials that honor the Ukrainian and other Soviet military veterans who gave their lives to defeat Nazism in World War II. The new coup government immediately initiated laws to ban the Communist Party of Ukraine as many of its offices were torched around the country. The new government also banned the use of Russian, Hungarian, Romanian, Greek, Tatar and others as officially recognized minority languages.
The Maidan movement took shape in the form of street protests in November 2013 demanding that the now toppled government of Yanukovych sign onto an agreement that would "integrate" Ukraine into the economic sphere of influence of Germany and the other E.U. countries.
...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EU and IMF spell disaster for Ukrainian working people: http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/eu-and-imf-spell-disaster-for.html
Quote...
On March 5 the European Union offered a $15 billion loan package to bailout the Ukraine. The conditions of this loan have not been made public.
Since the issue of whether Ukraine should join the EU and borrow money from the EU and International Monetary Fund or from Russia is central to the crisis in Ukraine, it's helpful to go back a few months and go over what happened at the beginning of the crisis.
On Nov. 21, the elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, decided not to sign an association agreement with the EU. The same day, Prime Minister Mykola Azarov rejected an IMF loan that was one of the conditions of association with the EU.
That night, a protest movement started that demanded integration with Europe. According to the New York Times, "On Friday evening (Nov. 22), about 1,000 people protested in the rain in Independence Square waving European Union flags and chanting, "Ukraine is Europe!"
Azarov rejected the onerous conditions of the IMF loan: "raise of gas and heating tariffs for the population by approximately 40%; commitment to freeze base salary, minimal salary, general nominal salary on the current level; significant shortening of expenses for budget purposes; reducing of subsidies in energy sector; gradual cessation of the Value Added Tax exemption for agriculture and other branches and other conditions."
The IMF loan was less than a $1 billion over seven years. Ukraine's debt is approximately $4 billion.
Ukrainians pay 20 percent of their gas bill, while the government pays the rest. The VAT tax exemption, which the IMF also wanted to undo, protects Ukrainian farms and businesses from powerful global competitors. The IMF canceled a prior loan to Ukraine because the Yanukovych government had raised the minimum wage.
In other words, for an insufficient loan the IMF was demanding conditions that would greatly harm workers and small farmers, while establishing the Ukraine as a virtual free trade zone that would inevitably lead to the selling off of industries and resources to the West. It is important to note that up until this point, Yanukovych and Azarov had been in favor of the Ukraine joining the EU.
...
The summary of my position on this subject is that it's a travesty - Russia and the US-lead NATO are both imperialist powers bent on subjugating the people of Ukraine.
While it leaves an awful taste in my mouth to align myself with Russia, I'm decidedly anti-NATO - both the US and Russia intend to exploit the people and resources of Ukraine, but Russia is going about it through neoliberal economic policy, while the US is supporting fascist movements in Ukraine. Fascism must be opposed at any cost. Furthermore, since I live in the US, it's most important for me to oppose imperialism here in my own country, since my activism is much more effective here than it would be in Russia.
I think you severely misunderstand the intentions of of both the Russian and Western governments. Last time I checked, NATO did not and had no intentions of sneaking troops in and carving off chunks of Ukraine or any other country. Actions speak volumes.
Quote from: JamesG on March 23, 2014, 10:20:28 PM
I think you severely misunderstand the intentions of of both the Russian and Western governments. Last time I checked, NATO did not and had no intentions of sneaking troops in and carving off chunks of Ukraine or any other country. Actions speak volumes.
The now G-7 and NATO have no intention other than use of threats and war-like rhetoric to address something that is outside of their control which is nothing more than a face saving effort. Putin knows this and will do what he has to do as the opportunity is ripe and no-one will risk global thermonuclear annihilation over this and Putin knows it.
Quote from: JamesG on March 23, 2014, 10:20:28 PM
I think you severely misunderstand the intentions of of both the Russian and Western governments. Last time I checked, NATO did not and had no intentions of sneaking troops in and carving off chunks of Ukraine or any other country. Actions speak volumes.
There is profit to be made from the exploitation of Ukrainian labor and resources. This is standard practice for the EU: coercing countries into joining and siphoning the wealth from the residents into the hands of the wealthy of countries with lots of influence in the EU (Germany, for example). This is the go-to strategy of global neoliberal politics - China, Russia, and the US do it too, not just the EU.
Quote from: Shantel on March 23, 2014, 10:37:32 PM
The now G-7 and NATO have no intention other than use of threats and war-like rhetoric to address something that is outside of their control which is nothing more than a face saving effort. Putin knows this and will do what he has to do as the opportunity is ripe and no-one will risk global thermonuclear annihilation over this and Putin knows it.
The possibility of nuclear war was never a factor in this conflict. Obama and Putin aren't suicidal fanatics bent on world destruction; neither is the US Congress or Federal Assembly of Russia filled with such people.
The danger is to the working people of Ukraine. The US is backing right-wing and fascist groups in Ukraine; Russia is militarily occupying the country. Both sides are intent on using Ukraine for the benefit of their respective business interests.
You're funny Vi, "Imperialists", "fascists"? Really? Are you having Cold War flashbacks, or are you just parroting Russian propaganda? The only people acting like fascists here are the Russians.
Nuclear weapons are the 800lb. gorilla in the room. it is what keeps everyone polite. On the surface anyway.
Quote from: kariann330 on March 19, 2014, 11:38:35 AM
Also if Putin does break free of his chains, do you see the USSR being rebuilt, or even worse a boots on the ground, full scale WW3?
Not a chance.
1. Nuclear Weaponry on both sides has been, and will continue to be, a great deterrent for both sides.
2. Even of both sides were to stay conventional and enter a war, Russia would be hard pressed to fight it. As of right now the US is the only country that operates super-carriers. And we just don't have one or two of these puppies, we have 12 or 13. WWII redefined both naval fighting and the overall definition of a global fighting force. Without carriers, you are flat-out unable to conduct a global war. You are simply out of the game. This also goes with space infrastructure, something like 80% of all satellites are owned and operated by the US Government and it's allies.
3. Russia would not reorganize it's entire government to go back to USSR-type politics just before a global war. Furthermore taking such actions would inevitably lead to several of Russia's satellite states to become separatist igniting a civil war.
4. Russia would be hard pressed to find committal allies. China wouldn't side because China has a lot to lose financially if it did. Furthermore any entering of a war by China will push Japan and South Korea into the war, and will put Taiwan even further out of reach. Sure Russia could probably get Iran, North Korea, and a few other states but lets compare those friends to the likes of UK, Canada, Japan, France, and Germany. Some of our allies operate their own--albeit smaller--carriers.
5. Finally Russia isn't financially in position to fight a war economically or politically. While it isn't wildly known, Russia's GDP per capita was higher in the Soviet Era.
-AM
Quote from: Androgynous_Machine on April 29, 2014, 01:23:34 PM
Not a chance.
1. Nuclear Weaponry on both sides has been, and will continue to be, a great deterrent for both sides.
But it does not prevent proxy wars (which is what the Ukrainian vs. "seperatists" fight is).
Quote
2. Even of both sides were to stay conventional and enter a war, Russia would be hard pressed to fight it. As of right now the US is the only country that operates super-carriers. And we just don't have one or two of these puppies, we have 12 or 13.
The US does not dare move CBGs in to the Black Sea where they would be sitting ducks for the Russian Navy. The USN would be to busy fighting for sea control (ie; keep its ships afloat) to be able to do much to influence events in Ukraine. That means they would be out in the Med. and Turkey allowing overflights is not a guarantee.
QuoteWWII redefined both naval fighting and the overall definition of a global fighting force. Without carriers, you are flat-out unable to conduct a global war.
The Russians aren't fighting a global war. They are fighting a regional conflict right on their border.
Quote
This also goes with space infrastructure, something like 80% of all satellites are owned and operated by the US Government and it's allies.
Which is extremely vulnerable. Seen "Gravity"?
Quote
4. Russia would be hard pressed to find committal allies. China wouldn't side because China has a lot to lose financially if it did. Furthermore any entering of a war by China will push Japan and South Korea into the war, and will put Taiwan even further out of reach. Sure Russia could probably get Iran, North Korea, and a few other states but lets compare those friends to the likes of UK, Canada, Japan, France, and Germany. Some of our allies operate their own--albeit smaller--carriers.
Unless the strategy is for everyone to go crazy together and overtax the US/NATO. The US could barely handle any one conflict, it would not be able to handle 3 or more. But that is "Bear and Dragon" silliness. This is a regional conflict, no one is going to start WWIII over Ukraine. The EU can't even summon the courage to cut off Russian oil. They sure as hell aren't going to send troops.
Quote
5. Finally Russia isn't financially in position to fight a war economically or politically. While it isn't wildly known, Russia's GDP per capita was higher in the Soviet Era.
Russia is a lot smaller than the USSR was. If Putin gets pushed hard enough, he may decide to push back. He could make a mess out of Western Europe without setting a single jackboot in Poland or Lithuania.
You are right James, Putin can push back hard and fast and without having to resort to placing any of his military in harms way. They control the oil.
Now Russia has stated they may not extend credit to the Ukraine where it comes to the purchasing of oil. What good is G7 US NATO sanctions when any and every loan given to the Ukraine goes to Russia to purchase the oil they need. Oh I hear people say they can buy oil from other countries Middle East, North Sea perhaps. Germany is one of the largest European importers of Russian oil it's not that easy. They have also started to sell more oil to China again who is going to pick up this slack, conventional warfare China would sit on the sidelines but if you looked at the Olympic coverage economically they are becoming close allies.
Speaking of economics Russia was heavily involved in helping to stabilize the Cyprus banking crisis, what may happen if they take their bat and ball and decide to go home.
Might makes right may of worked last century but in today's world money talks. Remember Crimea was not the first to want to come back to Russia, they just the first that actually did
Quibbles:
The Russians and Chinese really REALLY don't like or trust each other. It's a long way from the Russian oil/gas fields to Chinese coastal industrial cities and there is no infrastructure to get it there. It would take about as long to build that out as it would be for the US to build out oil and gas transhipment to Europe. Null set.
I think the Chinese would love to see Russia and NATO come to fisticuffs over Ukraine. Do the Chinese eat popcorn at the movies?
The Russians had/have an interest in in keeping Cyprus financially afloat, namely the billions or Rubles Putin's buddy oligarchs have stashed away there.
Crimea didn't want to come back to Russia, the old retirees didn't give a crap who was in charge in Kiev as long as their pensions kept rolling in and the cost of living was cheap. Russia didn't want Ukraine to get ideas about joining NATO/EU and taking their Black Sea port with them. All of this Russian nationalist crap is just window dressing Putin
's geopolitical moves.
Quote from: JamesG on April 29, 2014, 03:15:21 PM
But it does not prevent proxy wars (which is what the Ukrainian vs. "seperatists" fight is).
The US does not dare move CBGs in to the Black Sea where they would be sitting ducks for the Russian Navy. The USN would be to busy fighting for sea control (ie; keep its ships afloat) to be able to do much to influence events in Ukraine. That means they would be out in the Med. and Turkey allowing overflights is not a guarantee.
The Russians aren't fighting a global war. They are fighting a regional conflict right on their border.
Which is extremely vulnerable. Seen "Gravity"?
Unless the strategy is for everyone to go crazy together and overtax the US/NATO. The US could barely handle any one conflict, it would not be able to handle 3 or more. But that is "Bear and Dragon" silliness. This is a regional conflict, no one is going to start WWIII over Ukraine. The EU can't even summon the courage to cut off Russian oil. They sure as hell aren't going to send troops.
Russia is a lot smaller than the USSR was. If Putin gets pushed hard enough, he may decide to push back. He could make a mess out of Western Europe without setting a single jackboot in Poland or Lithuania.
My
ENTIRE post was in response to OP asking if this would escalate into a world war which
would most certainly be a global war. Which by the way, Russia is ill-prepared to wage for my aforementioned reasons.
QuoteWhich is extremely vulnerable. Seen "Gravity"?
Because Hollywood
always does a wonderful job of portraying things correctly right? Do you honestly believe all the eggheads (Physicists, Astro-Physicists, et. al.) in the variable alphabetical soups of agencies would place satellites in such a way where you could lose all of them so easily?
-AM
Quote from: Androgynous_Machine on April 29, 2014, 09:47:19 PM
Which by the way, Russia is ill-prepared to wage for my aforementioned reasons.
So are we. You might have noticed the US is beyond broke. We can't even afford to fight another small regional war with a third-rate country like Iraq, much less throw down with a major power like Russia. A global war would be a disaster for everyone, which is why it won't happen.
Quote
Do you honestly believe all the eggheads (Physicists, Astro-Physicists, et. al.) in the variable alphabetical soups of agencies would place satellites in such a way where you could lose all of them so easily?
Yes.
Look up Kessler Syndrome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome). Because of the way orbital dynamics work is a very real possibility.
The biggest problem is that Bully's like Putin will see our backing down as a weakness on our part and then will not hesitate to continue annexing states untill he has attained or exeeded his Aim of restoring the old USSR .Be afraid very very afraid because these type of people will only respect superior forces and People that are not afraid to use them .That lets out the US ,NATO ,UK .do I need to say more stop him now or he will be UNSTOPPABLE.We have seen the RUSSIAN MINDSET in action before and You can be certain that it HAS NOT CHANGED.
Quote from: JamesG on April 30, 2014, 06:23:39 AM
So are we.
Please. This recession "recovery" is slow but fine. The US entered a global war, started the largest military buildup in history, and effectively ground the most powerful navy in the world at the time (Imperial Japan) to dust all while under depression conditions, gutted manufacturing, ailed agriculture, and even higher debt:GDP than exists today.
The US has done far more in much worse conditions. Make no mistake, if a global world war needed to be fought, the US could afford it near indefinitely, that's the beauty in being the world trade currency.
-AM
Quote from: Androgynous_Machine on April 30, 2014, 12:41:58 PM
Please.
The US had a far greater industrial base then both compared to now and relative to the rest of the world. The US was not already TRILLIONS of dollars in debt, running BILLIONS of dollar yearly deficits. The recession is not "recovering" it has been papered over by billions of fiat dollars given to prop up corporate and financial institutions.
Quote
The US has done far more in much worse conditions. Make no mistake, if a global world war needed to be fought, the US could afford it near indefinitely, that's the beauty in being the world trade currency.
Which isn't going to last long, esp. if the US goes to war with the 2nd largest (soon 1st) economic power. The US is currently on a path that is fiscally unsustainable. And that is without any expensive high-intensity wars to pay for.
Quote from: JamesG on April 29, 2014, 06:28:28 PM
I think the Chinese would love to see Russia and NATO come to fisticuffs over Ukraine. Do the Chinese eat popcorn at the movies?
I know they eat fried scorpions & deep fried locusts as snacky finger food, I just don't know if they eat them at the cinema :laugh:
It seems to be not just America that has seemed toothless in recent months.
We had a big fuss in the UK a few months ago about Russia's anti LGBT stance, we threatened to pull out of the olympics & then did absolutely nothing but trot alont to the olympics like a bunch of spaniel puppies with our tails between our legs.
We then had a big fuss about Ukraine, we puffed out our chests, we blustered & went red in the face whilst making vauge non-commital threats & then we rolled over in submission & asked Putin to rub our bellies.
In completely unrelated news it would appear that we are approaching elections & i'm sure that after the public moaning for years about being sick of us being dragged into overseas conflicts then UK politicians wouldn't be afraid of losing votes by getting us into another unwanted conflict ::)
Sometimes a bully needs to be clipped round the ear before they get worse
It seems the general idea in this thread is that this issue is guided by more factors than brute military force, which I am glad to see. Maybe because of the internet, the public seems to have much more information about the intricate details of the situations than earlier generations would have on earlier issues.
My view on this is that a proxy war will/would be the height of military escalation here, largely due to current generation military tech. One embarrassment of the cold war era is the time Russia confused a US military drill for a nuclear attack. Current sensory equipment is immensely more sophisticated, especially the tracking of small things in orbit.
Much modern military tech focuses on shielding an area from attack. The advancements in offensive technology have created extremely powerful and stealthy weapons (like the modern submarines, hypersonic missiles, cybernetic attacks (Stuxnet), EMP weapons, telecommunications jamming). The bonds of the global economy also work to keep large scale wars in check, though this has more grey areas.
I see the public awareness of the issue as a large positive force here, as an ignorant public may not oppose its government going war. Again though, the grey areas. International conflicts are never as simple as an easy summary given in a news report. I am hopeful about it though, since so many minds are working on this. That said, the degrading relations between the Russian and American space agencies saddens me.
*My views on the issue are biased by my past military service, and limited by my focus on academics over the news*
I would to see Ukraine join NATO. Russia will back off, Putin is not stupid