Well anyone with a brain knew the West would not go to War over the Ukraine.


Goober
+1
#1
Well anyone with a brain knew the West would not go to War over the Ukraine.

Further incursions into Ukraine will result in Troops being moved to and closer to the front line countries. Again the trip wire of the Cold War begins again.

Blaming Obama- well BS to that- The US and the EU were not going to War

Did the EU screw the pooch on the Ukraine- Yes- Should have been quick off the mark to bring Ukraine into the EU. They spent well over 320 B Euro on Greece. A basket case

Ukraine would have cost much less.

Impacts on Russia – well they will play out over the long term
Sanctions on their economy will take a toll. As the EU lessens their dependence on Russian Oil. & Gas that impact will only increase. Russia will lose a critical market

The Missile shield will go ahead.

The former Republics all took note when and why Russia invaded the Crimea.
They all have substantial numbers of ethnic Russian in their respective countries.

Gas Attack?
Worries over the fate of those natural gas supplies are certainly understandable. Russia has shown in the past twenty years how eager it is to use energy exports as a weapon, cutting off gas supplies at one time or another more than 40 times. Russian neighbors such as Belarus, Lithuania, Moldova, and Azerbaijan have all faced threats of Russian energy cutoffs as they flirted with pro-European policies in the past few years. Lithuania's prime minister accused Russia of waging "economic war" last September after Moscow threatened gas supplies and interfered with cross-border trade, apparently to punish the Baltic country for seeking closer ties with other EU countries.

Still, Russia would almost certainly lose more in an energy war with Europe than it would gain. Fundamentally, energy trade between Russia and Europe is a two-way street. As much as European policymakers fret about dependence on Russian gas, Gazprom frets about dependence on the European market, which accounts for fully three-quarters of its export sales. More broadly, Moscow relies on oil and gas exports for one half of its federal budget. That makes a prolonged shut off of gas exports to Ukraine and the rest of Europe a dangerous proposition for Russian

The U.S. energy boom, which turned the United States from prospective natural gas importer to hopeful natural gas exporter, has also freed up LNG volumes that have landed in Western Europe. Some lawmakers in the United States want to go even further and are pressing for the Obama administration to use the country's natural gas bounty to bolster allies overseas.

Germany is the key to any sanctions -
U.S. Increasingly Isolated On Russia Sanctions

Henry Kissinger: To settle the Ukraine crisis, start at the end - The Washington Post

1. Ukraine should have the right to choose freely its economic and political associations, including with Europe.
2. Ukraine should not join NATO, a position I took seven years ago, when it last came up.
3. Ukraine should be free to create any government compatible with the expressed will of its people. Wise Ukrainian leaders would then opt for a policy of reconciliation between the various parts of their country. Internationally, they should pursue a posture comparable to that of Finland. That nation leaves no doubt about its fierce independence and cooperates with the West in most fields but carefully avoids institutional hostility toward Russia.
4. It is incompatible with the rules of the existing world order for Russia to annex Crimea. But it should be possible to put Crimea’s relationship to Ukraine on a less fraught basis. To that end, Russia would recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea. Ukraine should reinforce Crimea’s autonomy in elections held in the presence of international observers. The process would include removing any ambiguities about the status of the Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol.
These are principles, not prescriptions. People familiar with the region will know that not all of them will be palatable to all parties. The test is not absolute satisfaction but balanced dissatisfaction. If some solution based on these or comparable elements is not achieved, the drift toward confrontation will accelerate. The time for that will come soon enough.

Vladimir Putin ‘Likes to Lie,’ Says Mikheil Saakashvili - TIME

Now the game starts to expand back to Cold War standards.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/wo...tml?ref=europe
Despite public assurances by Western officials, concern is growing that the escalating animosity between the United States and Russia over the Ukraine crisis could have a corrosive effect on the nuclear talks with Iran.
Even before the Obama administration expanded the scope of sanctions on Thursday over Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, the Russians had sent signals that their retaliatory tools might include an altered position regarding the Iran talks, in which Russia and the United States are colleagues in the six-nation group negotiating with the Iranians.

U.S. warns Russia against threatening Ukraine navy - World - CBC News

America Can’t Fix Europe’s Russian Energy Problem - TIME

e reasons why:
LNG is, and remains, a very localized market. The first LNG export port to clear the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) hurdle is Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass port, on the Sabine Pass River on the border between Texas and Louisiana. But it won’t come online until late 2015 at the very earliest—possibly even 2016. The next three ports on the wait list haven’t even been green lighted.
The U.S. isn’t producing a lot of shale oil and gas yet, anyway. While the U.S. energy department is predicting that shale oil production will climb to about 10 million barrels per day by 2017, right now, it’s about 3 million bpd. Given that America itself consumes over 90 million bpd of fossil fuel, it’s not as if we are about to become a major energy exporter, even as our own production rises.
We need cheap energy at home if we are going to fuel the manufacturing renaissance. We’ve heard a lot about the growth of manufacturing in America over the last few years. But a big part of that story is easier access to cheap shale oil and gas here at home. American business wants to build pipelines to take Western shale oil and gas to Rust Belt factories to improve competitiveness. If we start to see much of it going to Europe, we may have a political and/or trade fight on our hands.
The bottom line: American can’t save Europe when it comes to energy. The Continent needs to wean itself off Russian gas, no question.

Obama's Not Carter -- He's Eisenhower
n Nov. 4, 1956, Soviet tanks rolled into Budapest after Hungarian authorities announced that they would withdraw from the Warsaw Pact. A last, desperate teletype message from Hungarian insurgents read, "They just brought us a rumor that the American troops will be here within one or two hours.… We are well and fighting." Troops were not on the way. U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower, who had vowed to roll back Soviet control of Eastern Europe, did nothing, and the Hungarian uprising was crushed. Leaders of both U.S. parties accused Eisenhower of kowtowing to the Soviets. Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic candidate for president, alleged that the incumbent had "brought the coalition of the free nations to a point where even its survival has been threatened."
Russia has invaded a border nation once again, and once again the American president stands accused of vacillation. Barack Obama is not the former supreme commander of Allied forces, so the darts fired his way penetrate much deeper than they did into Eisenhower, who coasted to re-election. Obama's cautious response to Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of the Ukrainian region of Crimea has confirmed his growing reputation as a weak-willed figure whose faltering leadership has sent a message of impunity to the world's bullies. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham recently tweeted that Obama's failure to attack the Libyans who killed U.S. diplomat Chris Stevens in 2012 invited "this type of aggression." Graham has a partisan ax to grind, but much of the commentariat has followed suit. My colleague David Rothkopf, straining for terms of abuse sufficient to the moment, has written that comparing Obama to Jimmy Carter, the gold standard for presidential weakness, may be "unfair to Carter."
There is an implicit analogy here to the world of human relations. Since the only language a bully understands is intimidation, he can be deterred only if he knows in advance that he'll pay an intolerable price for his behavior: beat up my little brother and you'll answer to me. In the realm of foreign relations, this logic dictates Donald Rumsfeld's famous truism, "Weakness is provocative." Rumsfeld believed that the U.S. invasion of Iraq would serve as a demonstration project for bullies all over the Middle East, who would now think twice before testing American resolve. That experience taught many people, though not the former defense secretary, that bellicosity can be even more provocative than weakness.

The impulse to chestiness is hard to resist, whether in life or in foreign affairs. There is something glamorous and enviable about the freedom of action a bully enjoys. He swaggers, while lesser souls cower. We yearn to emulate that freedom without indulging in that cruelty -- thus our Walter Mitty fantasies. Bullying behavior seems even more intolerable when, like the United States, you're the most powerful kid on the playground. We thrill at the big brother who balls up his fist in the name of justice. Ronald Reagan got vastly more credit with the American people for crying, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall!" than his successor George H.W. Bush did for helping Mikhail Gorbachev end the Soviet empire peacefully. But the world owes Bush a much greater debt of gratitude.
Eisenhower understood that bullies often cannot be deterred without threatening a response that would be catastrophic for one and all. This is especially the case when the aggressor cares much more about the victim than we do. Nikita Khrushchev could not afford to lose Hungary, just as Putin believes that he cannot afford to lose Crimea to a Western-oriented Ukrainian government. That's no secret. Crimea was historically Russian, serves as the home to Russia's Black Sea Fleet, and satisfies Moscow's age-old drive for warm-water ports. A thug like Putin responds to a threat of this magnitude the only way he knows how -- with brute force. The idea that a more resolute American president would have made Putin stay his hand seems fanciful, on the order of "Who lost China?" or all the other places weak-willed American leaders are said to have lost to the communists. Today's version is "Who lost Benghazi?" -- or Syria.
Eisenhower felt confident that, in the end, the Soviets would not dance on the grave of the West, but that it would turn out the other way around. I suspect that Obama thinks about Putin in much the same way. Those who sneer at Obama now laud Putin as a strategic mastermind, playing Risk, as FP contributing editor Will Inboden puts it, while Obama plays Candy Land. Yet Putin has turned Russia into Saudi Arabia with nukes, a petrostate incapable of exporting anything that doesn't come out of the ground. He's playing with a switchblade while the rest of the world learns how to operate a laser.
As a foreign-policy president, Obama deserves to be compared to Eisenhower at least as much as he does to Carter. Like Obama, Eisenhower inherited a vast military budget that he viewed as an unsustainable burden on the national economy. He tried, not always successfully, to do more, or as much, with less. (In Maximalist, Stephen Sestanovich describes both as "retrenchment" presidents.) Obama's great goal in foreign policy is to wind down inherited conflicts -- including the war on terror, as I wrote last week -- in order to give his activist domestic agenda a fighting chance.
The besetting flaw of Obama's foreign policy is not that it's irresolute but rather that it has become so single-mindedly, unimaginatively subtractive. Obama entered office with great hopes of reorganizing the world order around global issues like nuclear nonproliferation and climate change. But he learned over time that he could not wish away the intractable conflicts he had inherited and that the American people had little appetite for his transformative vision, and so his enthusiasm sagged and his horizons contracted. He chose instead to make sure that America wasn't singed by the world's conflagrations -- above all in Syria, where he seems quite content to make empathic gestures in the face of the worst atrocities in a generation.
That's bad enough, of course. The distance between the hopes Obama once raised and the comfort zone he has chosen to occupy is far greater than was the gap between Eisenhower's rhetorical anti-communism and his pragmatic accommodations. Brian Katulis of the Center for American Progress, which functions as the White House's think tank, recently commented that Obama has stopped telling Americans why the world matters. He may have concluded that he can't win the argument.

My point, then, is not that Obama's detractors don't realize what a fine job he's doing, but that his failures are not failures of nerve. Had he followed a more confrontational policy toward Russia from the outset, as conservative critics wish he had, he might not have gained the cooperation he got on arms control, Afghanistan, and Iran -- and he would have played into Putin's fantasy of a battle of equals between the two countries, which in turn would have helped him gin up even more vociferous Russian nationalism in the face of unacceptable threats like the incorporation of Ukraine into Europe. I dearly wish that Obama had agreed two years ago to train, fund, and equip the Syrian rebels, and I believe his failure to intervene there will be a lasting stain on his presidency. But I wish he had done so to rescue the Syrian people from a monster, not to create a demonstration project for Putin.
Obama will now do what he can to isolate Russia through some combination of sanctions and the cancellation of events like the G-8 meeting scheduled for Sochi in June. None of that will have much of an effect so long as Putin's cult of personality continues to transfix ordinary Russian citizens; isolation will probably only strengthen his standing. A new era of East-West confrontation may loom, though if so it would be a much more lopsided one in which Russia has neither allies nor a legitimating ideology. Even more than the last time around, therefore, the West can afford to be steady and patient, secure in the knowledge that the future lies with the liberal democracies.

Putin Brings Real-World Experience to the Graduate School Seminar Crowd
Perhaps the EU should get less blame for this state of affairs than the United States does because Europe has had to rely on the U.S. to do the leading and the heaviest lifting for a long time now. When the United States doesn't, Europe tends to bow to pressures with France's incursion into Mali being a notable and laudable example.

Ukraine's Implications for Asia

Russia is a declining power with horrific social indicators kept afloat by oil and gas revenue. Its "allies" -- Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Armenia -- do not form the coalition of the future. China has much more going for it. But the hype around its rise has inflated Beijing's sense of itself, while diminishing Western and Japanese confidence. Yet the big democracies have far more internal political resilience than China's regime, whose greatest fear is of its own people.

Third, globalization creates acute economic vulnerabilities for authoritarian states. The Russian central bank itself has suggested that two-thirds of the $56 billion net capital outflow from Russia in 2012 may have derived from illegal activities.

Seventh, there is no substitute for American leadership -- in its absence, competitors will move to fill the vacuum.

Why punishment toward Russia’s ‘Putin Doctrine’ has only just begun | Financial Post

But elsewhere the punishment toward Russia is only beginning. There is a Putin Doctrine that Russia has a right to invade any sovereign nation that threatens its Russian minority’s interests. This upset Europe and Washington and sent chills down the spines of former Soviet republics and satellites because most have large Russian minorities.
Putin’s pronouncements will sabotage his ambitions in the long run. Countries deliberating whether to join NATO or the missile shield will no longer hesitate to join. Others on the fence about getting into the EU will veer to the west.
Putin’s so-called allies are upset, including China, Kazakhstan and Byelorus, Russian oligarchs and even the Russian public.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/wo...html?ref=world

Harper targets Russian banks in new sanctions over Crimean crisis - The Globe and Mail

U.S. sanctions on Russia begin to bite - Mar. 21, 2014
Moscow's MICEX index fell more than 2% -- taking its losses for the year to 14%. The ruble was steady, after dipping early in the day, but has still lost about 10% since the start of the year.
The U.S. added more senior Russian officials and a bank to its list of targets Thursday, including Yuri Kovalchuk, described by U.S. officials as President Vladimir Putin's personal financier.
And President Obama warned Moscow the U.S. would target key sectors of the economy if Russia escalates the crisis in Ukraine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/us...r-ukraine.html
Mr. Obama also opened the door to more sweeping measures against core parts of the Russian economy, including the oil and natural gas industries, which account for much of Russia’s exports. He said the actions could disrupt the global economy, but might be necessary because of what he described as menacing movements by the Russian military near eastern and southern Ukraine.
 
MHz
#2
Russia doesn't have any ambitions to take over any more of the Ukraine. When the current Government starts killing Russians they would still be better off to just get them to Russian soil and then take the Govt to the ICC for war crimes. Be odd if the old Crimean military was the ones to go in and defend the Russian speaking people. What would the Govt do then, kill the (former) Ukrainians? Not good PR no how you spin it.
 
WLDB
#3
Why blame the US, EU or anyone else outside of Russia? Blame Putin. It was his decision. He doesnt give a damn about what anyone else thinks. He'd go in either way. Short of an open war with the west I doubt anything would have stopped him or made him change his mind.
 
Goober
+1
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Russia doesn't have any ambitions to take over any more of the Ukraine. When the current Government starts killing Russians they would still be better off to just get them to Russian soil and then take the Govt to the ICC for war crimes. Be odd if the old Crimean military was the ones to go in and defend the Russian speaking people. What would the Govt do then, kill the (former) Ukrainians? Not good PR no how you spin it.

A new cold war has begun. people in the West that thought Russia would incorporate western values, free elections, human rights, oh yeah the big one, not having private property expropriated with gangster tactics are running and hiding.
Putin also mention protecting Russians in other countries. All the stans sat up and took notice. Why, they have substantial populations of ethnic Russians.

Russia when the EU has other sources for oil/ng will deteriorate. Their economy is based upon oil/ng.

Costs of borrowing went up- gonna go up again. Investors will not invest. Money is always nervous.

We know how the last cold war turned out. Putin is headed down the same road to ruining the economy.

Long game - 3 - 5 years- Russia loses big time.
 
MHz
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDBView Post

Why blame the US, EU or anyone else outside of Russia? Blame Putin. It was his decision. He doesnt give a damn about what anyone else thinks. He'd go in either way. Short of an open war with the west I doubt anything would have stopped him or made him change his mind.

You would make a good fiction writer. Russia was asked to come into Crimea, begged would be a better term. The West won't do squat and the world knows it. If there is a rash of referendums watch how many start ditching the USD knowing that nothing will happen to them. Iran/India is an example that has already happened, no press because nothing can be done to change it back.
 
WLDB
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

You would make a good fiction writer. Russia was asked to come into Crimea, begged would be a better term.

By some, sure. By all? Far from it. They dont seem too happy.
 
Goober
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

You would make a good fiction writer. Russia was asked to come into Crimea, begged would be a better term. The West won't do squat and the world knows it. If there is a rash of referendums watch how many start ditching the USD knowing that nothing will happen to them. Iran/India is an example that has already happened, no press because nothing can be done to change it back.

Russia had no legal reason to invade Crimea.
 
Durry
#8
Putin is taking those parts/parts of countries that want to be part of Russia.
Crimea is one of those parts. The people of Crimea want to join Russia and now I see the Ukrainian soldiers in Crimea are now joining the Russian military, so it's pretty easy for Putin to be a winner in this take over. I mean who are you going to rescue if they don't want to be rescued?

The eastern part of Ukraine also wants to join Russia.
So who is the west to go tell Putin to leave it as it is?
Somehow I don't think Putin is interested in doing things the western way, he just sees what he wants and knows what he can get, and then just goes and does it.
 
MHz
#9
Well good thing they didn't invade then. Anybody ever find out who those masked gunmen were? Even Russian Special Forces seemed to want to stay clear of them, as did the Ukrainian military. What did they have, one person at each gate to the bases and even Kiev couldn't come up with an order for the loyalist troops. The people of Crimea seem to have solved the 'problem' all by themselves.
Russia didn't 'officially' go in until after the vote and the request to be annexed. The US recognized Israel less than 20 minutes after they called themselves a free state. Surely you don't hold 2 different standards for the same sort of event.

Quote: Originally Posted by DurryView Post

.... knows what he can get, and then just goes and does it.

A lot of people admire that over the endless sanctions and months of bombs falling just to soften up an already defeated people that is the standard NATO operation..
 
Goober
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Well good thing they didn't invade then. Anybody ever find out who those masked gunmen were? Even Russian Special Forces seemed to want to stay clear of them, as did the Ukrainian military. What did they have, one person at each gate to the bases and even Kiev couldn't come up with an order for the loyalist troops. The people of Crimea seem to have solved the 'problem' all by themselves.
Russia didn't 'officially' go in until after the vote and the request to be annexed. The US recognized Israel less than 20 minutes after they called themselves a free state. Surely you don't hold 2 different standards for the same sort of event.


A lot of people admire that over the endless sanctions and months of bombs falling just to soften up an already defeated people that is the standard NATO operation..

He did invade.
But that is not the subject of the OP.
The OP is based upon what is to come.
Perhaps sticking to the OP would help.
Attack the OP I presented.
 
lone wolf
+2
#11
Naw.... The thread's being hijacked. You'll find debris in the ocean
 
Durry
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Well good thing they didn't invade then. Anybody ever find out who those masked gunmen were? Even Russian Special Forces seemed to want to stay clear of them, as did the Ukrainian military. What did they have, one person at each gate to the bases and even Kiev couldn't come up with an order for the loyalist troops. The people of Crimea seem to have solved the 'problem' all by themselves.
Russia didn't 'officially' go in until after the vote and the request to be annexed. The US recognized Israel less than 20 minutes after they called themselves a free state. Surely you don't hold 2 different standards for the same sort of event.


A lot of people admire that over the endless sanctions and months of bombs falling just to soften up an already defeated people that is the standard NATO operation..

You must be getting your news feed from the government controlled Russian media.
Is it still cold in Russia?
 
MHz
#13
Don't know, the weather channel doesn't know they exist. The Western media posted that they were invited in and 97% of the voters voted to join with Russia and 16,000/18,000 Ukranian service men defected from the Ukraine Armed forces to become Russian armed forces. How anybody can honestly call that an invasion is just not part of reality. It just shows bitterness when they know there isn't anything that can be done about it. That could be the domino at the start of a very long line, know what I mean.

That and this place has headlines that you never see in the West or if you do it is 3 days later. Russia as been to about 12 of these meetings, why would anybody think they would care about being 'expelled for bad behavior'? (irony not to be missed either)
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/1...sify-sanctions

They have a different club.
The Global Economic Chessboard and the Role of the BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa | Global Research
 
taxslave
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

You would make a good fiction writer. Russia was asked to come into Crimea, begged would be a better term. The West won't do squat and the world knows it. If there is a rash of referendums watch how many start ditching the USD knowing that nothing will happen to them. Iran/India is an example that has already happened, no press because nothing can be done to change it back.

The only people that begged your hero to invade Ukraine were russian citizens planted there by russia. The real citizens want to remain as Ukraine.

It is a sad fact that anyone not prepared to fight for their rights and freedom will soon loose both. The only question now is what other territory will will Putin take because of the unwillingness of socialist Europe to stand up for themselves.
 
MHz
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

The only people that begged your hero to invade Ukraine were russian citizens planted there by russia. The real citizens want to remain as Ukraine.

It is a sad fact that anyone not prepared to fight for their rights and freedom will soon loose both. The only question now is what other territory will will Putin take because of the unwillingness of socialist Europe to stand up for themselves.

So the 58% that were Russian speaking were plants and the other 40% that also voted to join Russia were not Ukrainian speaking people? What ever you are smoking or drinking I want no part of it.

I'm going to have to ask you for a link on this one.
 
Durry
+1
#16
Well I think if a country wants to connect with another country there are international processes in place to accommodate that, but the way Putin did it was a 19th century style of take over. This is the 21st century where law and order rules in a global economy. Putin just showed his ignorance and lack of respect for the globe to have a civilized organized society.,

Errrr are you from Serbian background by any chance?? (If you don't mind me asking).
 
damngrumpy
#17
The Ukraine is a divided country the eastern part wants to be part of Russia and the
western portion wants affiliation with the EU. Crimea is a naval port for the Russian
military. It also has resources.
The problem is the President was elected from the eastern half the country that is in
fact emotionally tied to Russia. It was called an election. The people who lost then
attempted to upstage the government that was legally elected.
The problem is division can often descend into civil war and that would not be a good
thing either.
You are right though the west was not prepared to go to war for the Ukraine. That
country has enormous debt and it would be a drain on the EU for a decade or more.
Southern and Eastern Europe have unequal currencies for one thing and they cannot
compete with the main powerhouse nations in the north.
 
Trex
+1
#18
The Ukraine was the third most powerful nuclear nation in the world upon the dissolution of the USSR.
Hundreds of nuclear warheads, delivery systems and access to the USSR's stockpiles of nerve agents and biological warfare agents( primarily mutated and weaponized smallpox).
They decided to renounce and give it all up.
For the good of the planet.
On one condition.
The world would agree to sustain and accept their nations borders.
The Americans signed on, the Euro's signed on, the Russians signed and finally the last two important players signed on: France and China.
And the Russians just wiped their a$$ with that deal and invaded.
And the world stood by and watched.
What do you suppose that tells Iran, Syria, North Korea, Pakistan and a recently very expansionist China?
On another note:
On the growing international crisis that is revolving around the invasion and illegal annexation of parts of the Ukraine Stephen Harper stands tall.
No other world leaders have called for as tough a set of sanctions against Russia as Harper has.
No other Western leader rushed to both Poland and the Ukraine for consultations as rapidly as Harper.
Both the G8 (7 now) and the EU have called for briefings by Harper on the situation.
Barak “line in the sand” Obama has stated that both the USA and Canada will integrate joint and equal sanctions together. One suspects that Barak will allow Harper to continue doing the heavy lifting internationally and attempt to take full credit at a later date.
 
Spade
+2
#19
Like Quebec, like Scotland, the eastern parts of the Ukraine have the right of self determination. If that means reintegration with Russia so be it.
 
MHz
#20
Better than self destruction at the hands of NATO/IMF. The Prairies dried up and blew into the Atlantic, the next place (Hello) will leave trees in windrows. The West seems to have made a deal with the USSR and the Bankers to install the core of an electricity grid for about $50M earlier and then to get the toasters and such the price was taken as raw products with grain being high on the list. Stalin in his buffalo coat may have read some American history in how to 'integrate a large population' whose language was not understandable, at all.
That makes the death even more gruesome until you add in the plight of some family in LA getting out into the country side. (btw, when on a twinned hwy and the other side is empty and the 'away' lanes are plugged drive over there and gun the engine before others do the same.

Then came the part about famine and to my way of thinking they knew a little more than I found to be comfortable with. When people die in masses from starvation they get hungry and angry and for some reason the anger leaves before the body dies but the will to fight for your life is gone. It just seems a bit eerie that somebody had sat back and documented that at some point and it is not applied to one time, it would apply to anybody who goes through the death by starvation process. In my case I have a chance, I can escape into the deep forest on a 24V mobility scooter. My eyes and ears better make up for my 10kph to a bears 50kph. That is a safe place for me because that is home plate. Everybody has a home plate that is different. Superstore bulk isles are just too wide for low gear and too narrow for any of the higher ones. The wagon doesn't help either I suppose, ...... or the large dog. Since I can't run away she can be the distraction I need to slow him down and 'escape' on the scooter. There is something wrong with both of those pictures, one I can control, any repeats of the other I can't.

Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Like Quebec, like Scotland, the eastern parts of the Ukraine have the right of self determination. If that means reintegration with Russia so be it.

Perhaps we should all become snitches at the ICC or guests that pay a subscription per whatever and all the trials are as covered as any NHL thing in the winter in Canada. The network I check in with to hear about the STL (or whatever it is cause they have one meeting and I forget what part of the alphabet channel they belong to. In the bit the did have there was a 3-d model and they could video track the 'cargo van' from miles away. They didn't have that at the first trial that I am aware of so this is like a not very important thing to do without doing it for every single vehicle on the road. That was 2005, .... do the math. I don't think they can store that much data when other places would be recorded and stored first, I could be wrong but that would make James Bond a real person if that was (really, really) true.
 
tay
#21
Am I right in my conclusion.


The people of Crimea voted to leave the Ukraine and join Russia.


Putin through a military presence has made that happen.


I don't see the problem.........






The head of the referendum committee in Ukraine's Crimea region says more than 95 per cent of voters have approved splitting off and joining Russia.




Crimea applies to be part of Russian Federation after vote to leave Ukraine | World news | theguardian.com












 
mentalfloss
#22
There's the breaking of international law argument and the claim from the west that this was an illegitimate referendum because everyone had a gun barrel pressed against their backsides.
 
darkbeaver
#23
The books are ugly, there were only two fixes, divine intervention or war. International law is a paper based expedient easily circumvented by tanks.

International law, international banking and the international community are identical.

Anyone with a brain knows the wars already started on 9/11.

To quote the Italian philosopher Diego Fusaro: “With the collapse of the bipolar structure of the universe, it has started a new phase of conflicts, all different, and at the same time all inside the new Fourth World War. This one is a geopolitical and cultural war declared by the Universal Monarchy to the rest of the world. A war against all the peoples and nations that are not ready to submit themselves to its power, i.e. to its politics of world’s dominion through the commodity-form.”
 
Tecumsehsbones
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

The books are ugly, there were only two fixes, divine intervention or war. International law is a paper based expedient easily circumvented by tanks.

International law, international banking and the international community are identical.

Anyone with a brain knows the wars already started on 9/11.

To quote the Italian philosopher Diego Fusaro: “With the collapse of the bipolar structure of the universe, it has started a new phase of conflicts, all different, and at the same time all inside the new Fourth World War. This one is a geopolitical and cultural war declared by the Universal Monarchy to the rest of the world. A war against all the peoples and nations that are not ready to submit themselves to its power, i.e. to its politics of world’s dominion through the commodity-form.”

I really shouldn't, but I can't help myself.

OK, moonbat, who's the Universal Monarch?
 
darkbeaver
#25
The war is against the multipolar world

Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

I really shouldn't, but I can't help myself.

OK, moonbat, who's the Universal Monarch?

Money, silly thing
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

The war is against the multipolar world



Money, silly thing

OK, so you and the guy you're quoting don't understand the word "monarchy."

That's what I was looking for, thanks.

And it's "silly filly." It's a pony thing.
 
petros
#27
Holy f-ck! Are there ever some extremely stupid people on these boards.
 
Durry
#28
Haven't seen anything intellect coming from you so you must be part of the problem..eh!!

**intelligent**
 
petros
+2
#29
How did you know I was talking about you Droopy? You have some sort of experience in being called stupid?
 
Trex
#30
So internationally thug life rules?
The stronger can pray on the weak at will?
No sane person should advocate territorial expansionism at gunpoint.

I ask again, does anybody actually believe that the nouveau-Soviets would have invaded the Ukraine at gunpoint if the Ukraine still possessed large numbers of
Nuclear warheads?
And what does that tell the non-nuclear nations of the world?

The EU is coming across as a bunch of navel gazing weaklings.
And Barak Obama is looking more and more like Chamberlain for our time.
However it is nice to see Canada punching well above its weight class on this issue.

On another note, Thomas Mulcair leader of the NDP stood up and strongly supported Stephen Harper and the Conservative party on this issue.
In fact he urged stronger actions from Canada..
Liberals Irwin Cotler and Chrystia Freeland told Canadian media that their Russian travel bans as a result of Harpers sanctions; “a badge of honor”.
No word from Justin as of yet.
 

Similar Threads

3
Ukraine
by china | May 27th, 2013
74
28
The Right Brain vs Left Brain 'test'
by Locutus | Oct 14th, 2007
no new posts