COUP IN KYIV?

@Walter Hinteler,

0 Replies

@revelette2,

I agree with Condi's assessment. I agree with Bush's sanctions. I disagree with Obama lifting Bush's sanctions. I disagree with Bush's ridiculous statement about seeing in to Putin's soul.

In answer to your other questions, I suggest that you begin by reading the article. If you do, the answers should be clear to you.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

Where most of us are concerned about European security and Russian expansionism, others are far more concerned about partisan politics, and making this all Obama's fault.

If you want to blame something, blame the disastrous military adventure in Iraq. Putting to one side the fact that it was based on a false premise (WMDs,) it was executed with such breathtaking incompetence that it's no wonder Putin feels he has nothing to worry about. It also means that America can no longer take Britain's military support for granted as the vote in the Commons on Syria demonstrated. And the West has little stomach for more military engagements.

All of that is down to Bush.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I know the Great Bush/Iraq Debacle is fun to throw up to almost anything, but it is not as closely related as Putin rolling into Georgia and the US applying sanctions - Obama lifting the sanctions - and Putin rolling into Crimea.

Maybe, if Obama replaces Bush's sanctions, which he is now having to do - Putin will back off. Don't avert your eyes from facts just because they don't appease your political opinion.

2 Replies

@Lash,

I read the article, twice. I searched wherein she explained which sanctions were lifted, I couldn't find it. I did find where she described the Obama's administration reset of the missile defense shield. She merely said the isolation waned in regards to the sanctions. Perhaps the world including the US lost intense interest in Russia after Putin stepped down in 2008. Might have been a mistake, but he didn't get back in until 2012.

We tend to think what we do sets the rest of the world. According to Gates, Putin has been wanting to set up a Russian guard so to speak and saw the Ukraine unrest as an opportunity.

Quote:

GATES: Well, Chris, I think it's part of a long-term strategy on Putin's part to recreate a Russian sphere of influence and a Russian bloc where Russia has economic, political and security relationships with these countries that make them all lean toward or do the bidding of Moscow. And we saw it first in Georgia in 2008. We've seen it in him breaking off the E.U. discussions with Armenia. We've seen him do the same thing in Belarus, so, you know, he'll -- he may retreat tactically from time to time, but this is part of a longer term effort to -- to stop the expansion of NATO, but more importantly, bring the states of the former Soviet Union back under the influence of Moscow, and frankly I don't think that he will stop in Ukraine until there is a government in Ukraine, in Kiev that is essentially pro-Russians.

source

0 Replies

@Lash,

You're the one bringing partisan politics into the whole thing, and averting your eyes from the long term consequences of the debacle in Iraq.

When Bush applied sanctions did Putin move out of Nagorno-Karabakh? Are you honestly saying that Putin would never have occupied Crimea if those sanctions had still been in place? He would have had even less to lose. It's a ridiculous notion, and is symptomatic of someone grasping at straws to make a cheap political point.

0 Replies

Looking around online for more than half an hour, i don't find any evidence that Bush ever imposed any sanctions on Russia, which would mean that there was nothing for Obama to lift. Perhaps Lash could enlighten us about those sanctions, with a link to a reliable source.

0 Replies

@Lash,

And you're the one who's been advocating complete appeasement of Russia even though you bridle at that definition.

2 Replies

Here's an interesting article from the Daily Kos about Bush's reaction to the debacle in Georgia versus Obama's reaction to the debacle in the Ukraine. One interesting passage lists everything that Bush didn't do in response to the situation in Georgia.

Quote:

After all, President Bush didn't roll back the Russian occupation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia after Vladimir Putin's battering of Georgia in August 2008. Bush didn't lead an alliance of the willing to isolate Russia, undermine its economy, mine the Black Sea, provide defense guarantees and rush American military supplies to Tblisi. Instead, Dubya simply denounced Moscow's reaction using much the same language President Obama is deploying now.

Got that report on the alleged Bush sanctions yet, Lash?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I wonder what the 20 odd thousand Russian troops are doing when they are not seen on camera standing around due to the production crew having gone back to their posh hotel for dinner or when we miss the news due to some important mission or other.

I'm just hoping it doesn't get out of hand. But if there were no MAD I wouldn't be all that hopeful.

MAD really does save lives. They are all itching to send men to the front. I think they might well dream about it.

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

I wonder what the 20 odd thousand Russian troops are doing when they are not seen on camera standing around due to the production crew having gone back to their posh hotel for dinner or when we miss the news due to some important mission or other.

I'm just hoping it doesn't get out of hand. But if there were no MAD I wouldn't be all that hopeful.

MAD really does save lives.
They are all itching to send men to the front.
I think they might well dream about it.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving ?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

I advocate the US not spending money or lives.

This is the "reset" action Obama took that erased Bush's attempt to keep Putin in line.

Excerpt -

Many Poles and Czechs supported entry into the Western alliance eagerly, indeed passionately, as the guarantee that they would never again lose their independence to Germans, Russians, or anyone else. Because they cherish their American security ties as the key to their countries' future safety and freedom, the leaders of Poland and the Czech Republic aimed to strengthen those ties through their missile-defense agreements with the United States.
Obama, however, apparently decided that those agreements were less important than the goodwill he might buy with Russia by cancelling them. Maintaining solidarity with allies that look to America as the leader of the free world has never been an Obama administration priority.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/16/how_the_russian_reset_explains_obama_s_foreign_policy

Obama undid the provisions created by the Bush administration to respond to Putin's aggression.

4 Replies

@Setanta,

I was wondering as well since Lash posted that here and on Facebook ...

I couldn't remember any sanctions, so I'd looked it up a couple of days ago.
Fortunately, I re-found the link where the New York Times reported that the White House decided that the "Russian incursion" into its neighbor's sovereign terrorist will not take "direct punitive action against Russia for its conflict":
U.S. rules out unilateral steps against Russia

Quote:

By Thom Shanker and Steven Lee Myers
Published: Tuesday, September 9, 2008
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration, after considerable internal debate, has decided not to take direct punitive action against Russia for its conflict with Georgia, concluding that it has little leverage if it acts unilaterally and that it would be better off pressing for a chorus of international criticism to be led by Europe.

In recent interviews, senior administration officials said the White House had concluded that American punishments like economic sanctions or blocking Russia from world trade groups would only backfire, deepening Russia's intransigence and allowing the Kremlin to narrow the regional and global implications of its invasion of Georgia to an old-fashioned Washington-Moscow dispute.

Even as they vowed to work with allies, administration officials conceded that they wished the European Union had been willing to take firmer action than issuing tepid statements criticizing Russia's conduct. But the officials said the benefits of remaining part of a united front made it prudent for the United States to accept the softer approach advocated by Italy and Germany, among other allies. ... ... ...

In an interview, Defense Secretary Robert Gates described the administration as having come to a unified position that calls for "a long-term strategic approach — not one where we react tactically in a way that has negative strategic consequences." ... ... ...

As part of the new strategy, President George W. Bush notified Congress on Monday that, "in view of recent actions" by Russia, he was withdrawing from consideration an agreement for civilian nuclear cooperation that he and Vladimir Putin, then Russia's president and now the prime minister, negotiated in April after years of effort. While the step was the most meaningful show of displeasure the United States has made over Russia's military action in Georgia, it also reflected a more cautious response. ... ... ...

While the United States has been cautious in moving to punish Russia, it has thrown significant support behind Georgia, including a $1 billion economic assistance package that Bush proposed last week. The aid, officials said, was to shore up Georgia's economy and to help the political standing of President Mikheil Saakashvili, the republic's battered leader. ... ... ...

"Russia has been condemned by the European Union, by the Group of 7 foreign ministers and individually by many other countries," said a senior State Department official, who, like some others interviewed for this article, was given anonymity to discuss internal administration thinking.

"This is very strong stuff, and they do feel that," the official added. "And even if they didn't feel that, they might feel the billions of dollars of capital that has fled. The Russians are on a course of self-isolation. Nothing we do in a deliberate, punitive way would be as effective in isolating Russia as what they have done themselves." ... ... ...

The United States has left much of the direct diplomacy to Europe, including the administration's endorsement of a leading role by Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president and current president of the European Union, who visited Moscow on Monday to urge Russia to abide by the terms of a cease-fire he brokered last month. ... ... ...

0 Replies

I guess MADD will be satisfied
if the guys r busy fighting Russians,
being thereby disabled from driving. Yes ?

0 Replies

@Lash,

So you advocate the US not spending money, but criticise Obama for not spending money on various missile systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it.

Btw, I wouldn't pay much attention to any article that uses emotive phrases like, "cherish their American security ties as the key to their countries' future safety and freedom." If its argument had any merit it wouldn't need such cheap rhetoric.

0 Replies

@Lash,

This decision was cheered by most governments in western Europe who believed the scheme was an unnecessary provocation to the Russians. (Nato secretary general Rasmussen said, Obama's decision was "a positive step".)

Lash wrote:

Obama undid the provisions created by the Bush administration to respond to Putin's aggression.

I'd thought it was a program against Iran's "existing" missiles?

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

And from what I remember, it was all about Iran, not Russia.

1 Reply

@Lash,

The missile defense shield was not conceived to keep Russian in line, but rather to deflect any missiles Iran would send should they get the capabilities. The Obama administration scrapped it once it was revealed that they wouldn't need such a long range shield for any missiles that Iran would send and put another plan in its place set to operational in 2018, around the same time as the original.

I don't see the connection in that issue and Russia sending troops into Ukraine unless you really stretch it.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Don't you think we have enough on our plates without bringing Iran into it?

Kiev has a population of nearly 3 million. How many were at the demonstrations?

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Don't you think we have enough on our plates without bringing Iran into it?

Iran is part of this, the more we lash out at Putin the less likely it is that he will keep is word to not sell military gear to Iran. Obama and West NEED to be careful, a coalition of Iran, Russia and China would be a bitch to deal with if they decided to take on the West. Even worse would be if the muslims of the Mid East joined. The theory is that China is too dependent on Western markets and holds too much Western debt to rise up against us, but I have never been a believer in that. They are rapidly taking over Africa and with those raw materials plus Russian and Mid East energy they can demand and get what ever they want.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know