Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks Cables Foreshadow Russian Instigation of Ukrainian Military Action
Now that Russia has sent troops to seize the Crimean Peninsula, international politics are tense and frantic. An anonymous reader notes an article from Joshua Keating at Slate, which points out that some of the diplomatic cables on WikiLeaks illustrate how this situation is not at all unexpected. Quoting a cable from October, 2009:
"... pro-Russian forces in Crimea, acting with funding and direction from Moscow, have systematically attempted to increase communal tensions in Crimea in the two years since the Orange Revolution. They have done so by cynically fanning ethnic Russian chauvinism towards Crimean Tatars and ethnic Ukrainians, through manipulation of issues like the status of the Russian language, NATO, and an alleged Tatar threat to 'Slavs,' in a deliberate effort to destabilize Crimea, weaken Ukraine, and prevent Ukraine's movement west into institutions like NATO and the EU."
The article points out another cable from a few days later, which was titled, "Ukraine-Russia: Is Military Conflict No Longer Unthinkable?"
and now let's talk about the leaked documents involving the "pro-western forces in the Ukraine""
Predicted the same thing in 2008.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Forging evidence of and publicly lie about mass-destruction weapons in order to make a case to invade a country...
Kremlin had no other choices left with Ukraine. There can be only two reasons for not letting Ukraine into NATO: foreign military bases inside the country and insufficently demarkated (or conflicting) borders. So Putin made it both.
At least according to the Obama administration.
If the US could invade Iraq without UN support and under the pretense of the moral high ground as defined by the US, then so can Russia invade Crimea. If the Kosovo can leave Serbia and become it's own country under the support of the US even though it is historically Serbian but by population Albanian so can Crimea which has a Russian majority. The US has made their bed and now it is sleeping in it. Precedence is a bitch, the US set the precedent and now they are winging about what is happening in Crimea !! Russia supplies 60% of Europe's energy and it will increase to 80% ... the US has nothing to stand on. If they apply sanctions, the Russians will increase the price of gas and oil and have Europe pay for them just for giggles.
I can understand it from the standpoint of the absolute love affair certain factions here have with Assange, but what his the nerd spin on this story (and fuck off with the "stuff that matters" as being a blanket excuse to justify anything put up here)? Yeah, I know, it is simply because it has a Assange tie-in (yes, around here Wikileaks == Assange).
I don't care who is right or wrong in the Ukraine, I don't care who is more manipulative: EU, USA or Russia. I don't care who has stolen more: Yanukovych or Tymoshenko. I pity those who died in this conflict, but I don't even care who has started the bloodshed.
There is one thing that I care about though. On one side of this conflict are Nazis. The "Right Wing", one of the main pushing forces in this uprising, are Nazis. They use Nazi symbols and slogans, they praise WWII Nazi collaborators as their heroes, their leader Yarosh (now the Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine) said that Russian people will never give up their ethnics and culture and therefore have to be eliminated.
So, if the Nazis are on one side, I'm on the other. No corruption can justify aligning with Nazis. I don't give a fuck how decent the majority of the protester might be. They. Fought. Side-by-side. With. Nazis.
Why shouldn't Ukraine just give up Crimea for the sake of national unity? Ukraine as a whole seems to be flying from one crisis to another, and it is seems to be torn between the pro-Russia and pro-West factions. Maybe Ukraine should just focus building its future as a Western country, and give up those territories where the population wants to live under Russian rule. Maybe later those areas can then join Ukraine if they so wish, like happened with the unification of West and East Germany.
Isn't this what the U.S. did in Grenada?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
Thatcher sent a message to Reagan: This action will be seen as intervention by a Western country in the internal affairs of a small independent nation, however unattractive its regime. I ask you to consider this in the context of our wider East/West relations and of the fact that we will be having in the next few days to present to our Parliament and people the siting of Cruise missiles in this country. I must ask you to think most carefully about these points. I cannot conceal that I am deeply disturbed by your latest communication. You asked for my advice. I have set it out and hope that even at this late stage you will take it into account before events are irrevocable. (The full text remains classified.)
"If the US could invade Iraq without UN support and under the pretense of the moral high ground as defined by the US, then so can Russia invade Crimea."
are you trying to be funny or are you a paid russian propagandist? the UN hasn't "supported" any kind of military action save for relatively small police actions since the korean war and that was mostly because the soviet union at the time was boycotting the UN. as it were, the only reason that there would be no UN resolution here is because of russia's veto.
let's look at your words: the US invaded "under the pretense of the moral high ground." they were not irredentist land grabbers. after their 'mission' was done, they left. the russians here are simply imperialists.
"kosovo": serbia had achieved "world pariah" status after its recent aggressive wars, additionally, the "independence" movement of kosovo was a drawn out process involving internal discussion and grassroots movements, not tanks of a foreign power rolling in.
politics.. hoammm http://gitarpoker.com/
Russia gave the Crimia to Ukraine as a bribe to get them to join the Soviet Union. Of course they now want to take it back.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
From Wikipedia: "When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the newly independent Ukraine had on its territory what was the third largest strategic nuclear weapons arsenal in the world."
and
"In a joint statement on December 4, 2009 the presidents of the United States and Russia, Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, confirmed the assurances of security to Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus given on the heels of these countries' consent in 1994 to give up their nuclear weapons."
a rocket powered shark with laser beams for him to ride around the black sea on...?
... who killed more then 1.5 million people.
The US has invaded sovereign states before in order to protect its interests many times. Ukraine is at least as important to Russia as Cuba and Grenada are (were?) to the United States. "At least as" because Grenada didn't have a large expatriate US population nor did it have US commercial interests.
Exactly!
US is Apocalypse rider ... Is it better in Iraq? Libya? Syria? Egypt?
Soulskill, get to sleep. We're tired of your crap posts all day.
"ASD Vershbow reaffirmed the Administration's message of support for Ukraine, underscored Ukraine's importance as a strategic partner, and commended the defense relationship, highlighting Ukraine's contributions to NATO and coalition operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo. ASD Vershbow stressed the need for Ukraine to stay on track with defense reform efforts"
The reality is, and that goes for the other former Soviet republics, that NATO (USA) is not going to go to war to defend the Ukraine. Your prime function is as a forward missile platform used to threaten the Russian Federation. In the event that either the US or Russia launch an attack on each others territory, you'll give the Americans prior warning. As such you'll have to be taken out first by the Russian military.
Why couldn't Ukraine become a model of a bi-ethnic state? Russians and Ukrainians are so similar. They have almost the same food, religion is majority Orthodox in both cases, language is similar, both proud of vodka, etc. Why do the West Ukrainian nationalists need to stomp all over the right of the Russians, when in power, and why do Russian-speaking Ukrainian politicians always fall under the influence of Russia trying to partition the country? There has always been "us vs them" attitude in Ukrainian politics, always divided along ethnic lines. However, both sides do not realize that there is one great thing that sets Ukraine apart from Russia, and this is why its worth saving: Democracy. Don't laugh, human rights and the "democratic process" in Ukraine may seem primitive at times, but at least they're trying. They had four different presidents representing different factions in the last 15 years and that's something remarkable considering Putin's one-party state right next to them in Russia.
Politics are singular.
The world might appear to be in the early stages of destroying itself (almost exactly 100 years after the war to end all wars started) but that's no excuse for sloppy grammar.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Because Putin is a neo-Soviet gangster, perhaps? And he's pissed off because the Ukrainian people have tossed out their dictator-in-waiting after the latter's sudden volte-face revealed him to be Putin's creature, maybe?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Even better, take Paul the Octopus (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... ), who correctly predicted the outcome of several soccer matches and was offered a job by a UK bookmaker for his performance.
I fear it makes as much sense to credit Paul for deep psychic insights into soccer as Mrs. Palin for an astute grasp of international politics. Perhaps I'd rather take my chances on Paul.
Crimea's only freshwater source is the Dnieper River in Ukraine via the North Crimea Canal. The peninsula is not connected to mainland Russia in any way, only to Ukraine via the Isthmus of Perekop, a 5 to 7 km wide strip of land. Without the canal, there is no water on the peninsula if you discount bottled Evian. Desalination is too costly and only possible in coastal cities. Therefore, in order to secure water supply to the newly re-grabbed piece of land, Russia needs to secure the canal and the Kakhovka Reservoir in mainland Ukraine, which means occupying, well, more land.
How many parties, other than Svoboda who now control the Interior Ministry under the interim regime in Kiev, call themselves National Socialists and have explicit nazi policies?
Svoboda, a significant part of the interim regime in Kiev, are committed to arming Ukraine with nuclear weapons.
...But...
Regarding the nuclear weapons situation.
According to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
Peak stockpile 1,080 warheads (1992)
Current stockpile 0 total
Maximum missile range NA
So.. no current stockpile. Sounds good to me.
But also according to Wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Notice third column
"Satellite Orion", "Midrange Orion", "Super Orion"
Ship diameter, 17–20 m, 40 m, 400 m
Ship mass, 300 t, 1000–2000 t, 8,000,000 t
Number of bombs, 540, 1080, 1080
Individual bomb mass, 0.22 t, 0.37–0.75 t, 3000 t
This can't help one speculate, even with all this Megatons to Megawatts program going on.
What happened to those 1080 Ukraniean warheads?
Uhm?
Above numbers are based on available technology and materials from 1958
Both factors have improved somewhat since.
Of cause, as usual all the people that would be capable of pulling of such an accomplishment are either retired or dead.
Including one that have actually piled up enough money to actually do it, with some help of cheap Ukranian Megatons, making SpaceX, Virgin Galactic and Armadillo Aroespace look like wooses. http://9to5mac.com/2011/08/16/...
Did he actually do it?
Russians are the majority on the Crimea. Therefore this island belongs to Russia. And so do all the Ukrainian regions which have a majority of Russian inhabitants.
Split Ukraine up and be done with it. Or risk a new Nuclear Standoff plus a more or less little conventional war.
Folks, don't fall for CIA information operations. They have clearly started the fire in Ukraine and now they blame it on the Russians. These are professional liars; see Iraq war III. And their support of Saddam Hussein in Iraq war I. And their toppling of Mossadeq.
Vladimir Putin has been trained as a KGB officer to serve the Russian people. He does that in an exemplar fashion, at least compared to the thug and alcoholic Jelzin, who sold out his country to Jewish-Anglosaxon interests, while his compatriots suffered from hunger.
That pisses off the Jews who run the west. And abuse it to the limits.
Long live Vladimir, a true patriot and hero to his people !
Me ? I am a German who is fucked over by his own elite, who care about everything except the interest of the average German man and his family. Vladimir Putin demonstrates that patriotism has not been completely killed off.
Long live Free Russia ! Keep your nuclear swords nicely maintianed and sharp !
..the Russians have much bigger firepower, so that would be easily decided.
I think people are focusing too much on Ukraine and not enough on Russia. Just look at what Russia has done. It trumped the West including the US on Syria, it has positioned itself better with finances through its oil sales and it now looks to be expanding its World military foot print.
Now, look at the US, its become a laughing stock as a World leader, it has a Secretary of State who now think climate change is our worst threat and
we are shrinking our military in order to pay for social programs that American's don't want. I would venture to guess Ronald Regan is rolling over in his grave
on how Obama and company has totally reversed course. The Ukraine has always been Russia's and frankly a lot of Ukrainian people want it that way.
I am less concerned about what happens in the Ukraine and more about what happens after.
...very much like the Imperial Dreamers who frequent Brussels and Berlin.
They crave for POWER, POWER and more POWER. Listen to Angela Merkel, she constantly complains about the "insignificance" of 80 million Germans as compared to 8000 million people on this globe.
Like Hitler, Merkel wants an Imperium and Power. The German people are just a tool towards their insane greatness. Hitler happily recruited Tatar muslims and Bosniaks and lots of other people in his insane war of Greatness.
Likewise, Merkel shits on the interests of Germans and happily imports millions of cheap workers into Germany while our middle class disintegrates like it apparently does in the US.
Switzerland and Russia; these are run by patriotic people, while the EU is just the less violent form of Hitler-Napoloenseque POWER DREAM. Angela Merkel is a traitor to the German people, so simple.
Dipl.-Ing.(BA) Frank Gerlach
Gäufelden
Germany
Anyone who has paid even slight attention would have predicted this.
The Crimea is the home of the Russian Black Sea fleet, Putin is not going to walk away from that (in fact they have a lease, although it has a somewhat dubious approval).
Putin would like to keep all of Ukraine in his orbit, but I think even he has doubts about his ability to seize Ukraine with force. The West will whine about the Crimea but has no leverage and will just hope they can bluff enough to maintain the rest of the existing Ukrainian borders without having Moscow annex the eastern part, too.
The whole east/west struggle is something of a pyrrhic victory for no matter who "wins" -- Ukraine's economy is a trainwreck, and the "winner" will have to spend big bucks to keep it propped up, which nobody wants to do.
Most western government thoughts were actually "oh, how do we spin it to continue business as usual with Russia".
Tagliavini commission was created, and as it included 2 German "experts" who had upfront declared Russia had right to invade, so it was clear what kind of task was assigned to them, (thank you Ms Merkel)
Commission has come to surprising conclusions, that Georgian government did not have right to defend it's own people on its own territory (which was bombed by heavy artillery on daily bases), yet Russia had right to defend it's "peacekeepers", (even though there is no evidence that any attack on Russian "peacekeepers" whatsoever has been carried out by Georgians), but just overreacted a bit. (on top of it 2 Georgian peacekeepers were killed on 6th of Aug 2008, somehow neither that did justify actions of the Georgian government (it was actually a mixed Russia-Georgian peacekeeping operation))
Now, Russia is AGAIN getting premium treatment, for just being aggressive. You can clearly see that in most messages (and even journalist comments) in the West.
Oh, there are interests, you know. Old USSR junk that is even remotely usable only vs former USSR republics absolutely has to be stationed in the Ukraine. Oh and there are Russians on the peninsula. And oh, there are interests of Putin there. Oh dare not make him angry, or it is all your fault.
I recall a guy called Chamberlain had similar, as well as extremely successful, approach to aggressors about 70 years ago.
Just look at how many million Germans they killed during the ethnic cleansing after 1945. There is lots of justice out there.
Please improve your lying skills, BASTARDS.
It was your puppet Shakasvili who started the Georgia war. He got incensed by Amercian Rah Rah.
Russia was quite disciplined in responding. They could have bombed the shit out of Georgia and then hang your bastard, just as you did with your own Iraqi bastard.
Given the recent history of Ukraine and also of Russia, this is not unexpected.
And if you've been paying attention *at all*, it's entirely expected.
Although it will piss many people off to hear it put so bluntly, you could say that most of the region is very similar, including Poland, the Czech Repulic, and many more countries that seem to descend from the same stock (even in their own legends). It's no longer an artificial line, however. Over time there are subtly distinct lines that separate the two nations, even if they're VERY similar. Asking them to just make up for centuries of really bad blood just because they're similar is asking a great deal more than you might realize. At this point it's like saying "why can't the USA and Canada just join up? They're virtually the same".
Putin is a wonderful scarecrow to be used in american politics. The media wielding him only has to say 'boo!' and the entire political elite jumps. It's pathetic. How about instead of "Putin! KGB!" meme we start saying "Obama! NSA! CIA! DHS! DEA! Lybia! Syria!"?
Right now, he'd be doing his "man on the street" interviews, asking Americans if they know where the Crimea River is.
Have gnu, will travel.
It's pretty obvious that Plan A (draw in Yanukovych) has backfired and we've now gone to Plan B (foment unrest as an excuse to intervene).
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
It is a must-read, IMO. Some very insightful points from the old congressman.
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/ar...
...in his place instead of mindlessly accepting his submissions now? Did fjord go on vacation or something?
What's going on in Ukraine isn't a revolution, it's a fascist coup overthrowing the democratically elected government because they couldn't stand losing the last election. Same as what the right wing of Venezuela is trying to do right now.
Specifically, neo-nazi fascists hating both ethnic Russians and....Jews. Maybe cold fjord's got a splitting migraine with the cognitive dissonance: he's a proud Brownshirt himself, but on the other he's also a Zionist troll, so he can't decide what to do.
The guy start by critizing moral relativism and you jump into it in your answer. It's like you're trying to look like an idiot.
Funny how the world's bully can go into Iraq for the oil (or to write our president's name in the history books), killing an insane number of innocent people but gets its hackles up when Russia takes military action over something that affects more that just Russia's corporate interests. The US would invade.. er I mean "send military aid" if either Canada or Mexico had the Ukraine's current problems.
How long have we been evil?
At least with the proxy wars of Vietnam and Korea, we were just doing it to show America's poor that communism couldn't work or win, so our rich would be safe for our poor.
While I do not mean this as flame bait for "Merikuns" I don't see how they will be able to perceive this post any other way. AC posting to the rescue!
Why couldn't Ukraine become a model of a bi-ethnic state? Russians and Ukrainians are so similar.
There's your answer right there.
It's a bit like the uncanny valley. People who are very different from you are interesting and exotic; you know it takes some effort to understand them. People who are just a little bit different from you are too incorrigibly stubborn to bring themselves up to snuff and think and act the right way.
That's why civil wars are so bitter and inhumane. In some ways it's harder to see humanity in someone who is culturally similar but irreconcilably different than in someone who is alien. Rudyard Kipling could wax lyrical about the noble savages in "Gunga Din" and "Fuzzy-Wuzzy", but he never once penned a poem in praise of the Liberal Party.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
This isn't a revolution. It's a fascist coup from a minority that couldn't handle losing the last election, so they overthrew the democratically-elected government instead.
Moscow once was called Soviet Union. In that time, they had a big army and abused their authority on all the countries surrounding them. Now their economic model has changed, but that's just the tip of the dog's tail. Their abusive methods continue. During that time, Russians would be made 'in charge' of the other countries, and Russians would go on 'Road Trips' for a new, good paying job in another country. There are 'ethnic speaking' Russians in a lot of these countries now. And so (lets call them Soviet Russia), has decided that all these 'Ethnic Speaking Russians' need protection from mother country. And so Belarus loses 20% of is land mass 'for the protection of the Russian Speakers', and it looks like Ukraine will lose about 1/3 of its land mass 'for the protection of the Russian Speakers', and this is in a country that only has 140 million people stretched across 9 time zones. They don't need a great economic model. They just take what they want. Americans made the mistake of linking their economic model with their actions. They are not coupled. Soviet Russia is back, it leader is Putin. Now you know.
Yep,
And Germans made up 90% in Sudeten in 1938 - so it was legitimate for Hitler to invade Czechoslovakia...
FWIW, Svoboda doesn't call itself national socialist, either. Some of their rank and file can be NS, as evidenced by discussions on their forum, but it's not the official platform.
"Why couldn't Ukraine become a model of a bi-ethnic state? Russians and Ukrainians are so similar. "
Ask the Serbs and Croats. Heck, ask the Irish and the Northern Irish.
As somebody who gets his "news" from Saturday Night Live (a comedy show) and who apparently cannot tell the difference between Formar Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (who never said that) and comic Tina Fey (who did) you clearly have nothing intelligent to say about the nation, foreign policy, or politics. Go back to your smoke-filled bus, spicoli, and leave the intelligent conversation the the smart people, like Palin.
Palin explained why her prediction would come true.
So, Paul the Octopus (or Puxatwney Phil, or any other random selector mechanism) fails in reality to fit your irrational bias. It's like so much of the anti-Palin mud... irrational when examined; Very much like all the hollering by the left when the woman scribbled a few words on her hand with a pen as reminders of topics she wanted to hit before tshe proceeded to speak sans teleprompter sor something like an hour (whereas the very same people laughing at the "stupid hick" worship at the feet of Obama who needs telepromters pre-loaded whith EVERY WORD of his speeches EVEN WHEN SPEAKING TO SCHOOL KIDS)
The thing most Palin-haters never want to admit is that she's every bit as smart as most people in politics ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE (for good, or ill) and the REAL reason they detest her is her political positions on a few moral hot-button issues. NOBODY who supports former Speaker of the House "crazy-eyes" Nancy Pelosi (the most-vacuous human being of either gender on planet earth) could POSSIBLY ridicule Palin who is at least 10 times smarter than Pelosi. Palin NEVER told people they had to pass a bill before reading it in order to find out what was in it.
First, it is 1954, not 1964. http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1954crimea&Year=1954
Second over there (as in many other countries) Ethnicity identification is not the same as Citizenship.
So if you go and ask 60% of the 2.3 million people in Crimea : 'are you Russian', they will say 'yes' -- because they think of Ethnicity.
If you change your question and ask: 'Are you a Russian citizen', on the ones that are on military basis or on travel there -- will say 'yes'.
So basically have Russian Ukrainians (eg. Mexican Americans), you have Tatar Ukrainians and you have Ukrainian Ukrainians (so stay symmetric in naming). You also have Armenian Ukrainians, Belorussian Ukrainians and so on.
Having a ethnicity indicating roots from another country is not a Geo-political justification for annexing territories. Unless you are being prosecuted based on your ethnicity.
In every conflict or even in general, in a non-uniform society -- there will be groups with horrible connotation.
Stewardship of the country, the international community and the enemy of Ukraine, all take that into account.
Each side propaganda machine and internal structures decide take or not take advantage of that natural multiplicity of political opinion.
This article states that Ukraine-Russia agreement for black see military basis is to expire 2017, and many have been thinking that this expiration can fall onto a 'pro-Russian' Ukrainian government or 'pro-EU' Ukrainian government.
With one giving favorable outcomes to Russian desire to keep those basis, and the other negative expected outcomes.
So in my view, there is a clear motive for Russia to wrestle out from Ukraine, the Crimea and potentially Eastern 1/3d of the country.
There are likely other solutions on the table, but given that EU and US have a weak anti-aggression position, it may be just as good time as any for Russia.
US has a week position, because we accumulated a significant debt of mistrust with Iraq (not Afghanistan) and Serbia.
Additionally a general sentiment of US anti-world-police movement (largely a motto of US Libertarian party, shared by a number of Republicans and Democrats) , and the current representation in WH -- removes a significant amount of negotiating and 'power projection' capital in the world stage.
Do you guys on the left have ANY intelligent and original comments? Or are you just limited to the irrational mud-slinging and personal spit-ball attacks we've become so accustomed to? Somebody mentions Palin or Santorum, or Cruz or anybody else you guys don't like and the response is like something from "Beavis and Butthead" instead of any cogent thoughts. Mentioning Palin has become my easy way to "out" fools in any gathering... you just say her name and the mindless idiots out themselves by commenting on how stupid she is and parroting the comment that she "could see Russia from her house" (something she never said, but that every moron on Earth BELIEVES she said).
The simple fact is that Palin DID predict this in 2008, as even CNN now admits. She was ridiculed by you lefties for her ignorance at the time, but now you claim it is so obvious an octopus could predict it ... so apparently all you lefties are dumber than BOTH Palin AND a stupid octopus BY YOUR OWN STANDARDS. It's also true, that in the 2012 cycle, Romney predicted that Russia was likely to become a major foreign policy problem for the U.S. and, again, all you lefties attacked HIM as an idiot who was "stuck in the 80's".
Interestingly, neither Obama nor the Clintons anticipated this. Clinton, in the nineties, signed a treaty with the Ukraine in which he promised the US (and some of our allies) would protect them if they gave up their nuclear weapons; had HE and Hillary been smart enough to anticipate this thing you lefties now all think was so obvious he would not have signed that treaty. The Ukranians handed over their nukes and now that they need the promised protection, fellow Democrat Obama is golfing, or at a film festival, or doing some other non-serious thing (fiddling perhaps?). Stuff like this matters more than some seem to think. For example: The next time you hear that Israel is being intransigent in not accepting a deal to surrender more (actual, physical) land in exchange for (intangible, transitory) peace accompanied by a guarantee that the US and European allies will protect it in its smaller boundaries - think of this incident (it's the concrete proof that such a deal cannot be trusted). The Israelis already point to the fact that they pulled-out of the Gaza and did not get peace... and the US State Department has tried to push them further by offering a treaty to protect them. I'm not arguing the right/wrong of ANY "side" if the Arab/Israeli matter, just pointing out that failure to keep one's word in such matters is problematic and affects many other things.
"Funny how the world's bully...
um, IF we are the "world's bully" then why do the American people always insist on getting out? Why do we not KEEP the lands we capture in war?
"... can go into Iraq for the oil..."
except that IF the US went there for oil, WHY DID WE NOT TAKE THE OIL?!?!?!?" - sheesh! some people are gullble AND stupid!
Sorry, but most of the truly "innocent people" (as opposed to paramilitaries hiding in civilian clothes) who died were killed by other Muslims of opposing religious factions (NOT the US) and any claim that THAT violence was caused by Bush is RACIST (a claim that "brown people" cannot be trusted with freedom and can only live in peace under the boot of a dictator like Saddam)
The US tends to "get its hackles up" when one independant nation attacks another independent nation (like When Saddam rolled into Kuwait, or Imperial Japan rolled into China, or NAZI Germany rolled into Poland, or China rolled into Korea, etc) This is one of the basic principles lefties around the world PRETEND to like and upon which both the "League of Nations" and the "United Nations" were based.
"The US would invade.. er I mean "send military aid" if either Canada or Mexico had the Ukraine's current problems."
Depends. Mexico IS and always has been such a mess and its crime and violence and refugees are always flooding over the border into the US but we have not invaded. Canada simply is in no geopolitical position to have this sort of thing happen; if they ever split along, say, French/English language lines (probably the biggest fault line they have) there would be no US intervention... so, NO, your desperate excuse for ex-KGB jackal Putin's rather transparent actions to try to re-build the "evil empire" is neither honest nor rational
"At least with the proxy wars of Vietnam and Korea, we were just doing it to show America's poor that communism couldn't work or win, so our rich would be safe for our poor."
Seriously, dude, what drug ARE you ON? The Korean war was a UN war, and while it failed to stop the communist take-over of North Korea (and look ho much the northerners have suffered under that communism) it succeeded BRILLIANTLY in giving the people of the southern half of the country freedom and a thriving economy. I seriously doubt you can find ANY sane South Korean who would prefer to live under any of the Kim-family of homicidal maniac dictators. As to Vietnam, JFK thought he was fighting a similar fight (nobly protecting free people from being overrun by commie tyrants) when he put troops in there. When Democrat President Johnson lied us into fully joining that war, who's to say? It's clear however that while SOME Amercians wanted out (because they liked the Communists), and others wanted to stay and fight (because they disliked the Communists) NOBODY in the US wanted to stay because we were imperialists who wanted to own the place, and NOBODY was using that was to show the poor in the US that Communism could not work... we also did not wage the war to show that gravity works, or to show any other self-evident thing. Communism cannot possibly work in the real world, and there's simply no need to have free people do anything to demonstrate that.
"While I do not mean this as flame bait for "Merikuns" I don't see how they will be able to perceive this post any other way. AC posting to the rescue!"
Don't worry... it's not flamebait... it's a billboard displaying your low IQ, poory history education, poor grasp of international events, etc. The old line that it's better to keep your mouth shut and let others assume you are dumb than to say something and prove it applies.
Tom Clancy's most recent and last book (Command Authority) also predicted this. Just as one of his previous books anticipated terrorists using airplanes to attack America. (Clancy had them running it into Congress, not the WTC, but close enough).
Don't forget, Sarah Palin predicted it back in 2008.
Russia probably bought a lot of gold, and put-options, before scaring the world. Monday most stock prices went down, and Tuesday they all came back up.
Barometer: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=GLD&t=5d
Are you high or something? "World's leading democracy"?