General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTime for Realism and Common Sense on Ukraine
The Obama administration has responded to the crisis by flexing its own rhetorical muscles. When Russian President Vladimir Putin ignored Obamas warning that there will be costs if Russia sent troops into Crimea, Secretary of State John Kerry denounced the brazen act of aggression, vowing that Russia is going to lose, the Russian people are going to lose and suggesting asset freezes isolation with respect to trade and investment, while promising economic assistance of the major sort for whatever government emerges in Kiev.
... skip ...
Frustrated cold warriors filling armchairs in Washingtons outdated strategic think tanks will continue to howl at the moon, but US policy should be run by the sober. The president should work with the EU and Russia to preserve Ukraines territorial unity, support free elections and allow Ukraine to be part of both the EU and the Russian customs union, while pledging that NATO will not extend itself into Ukraine. It is time to reduce tensions, not draw red lines, flex rhetorical muscles and fan the flames of folly.
Editoral @ TheNation
I do agree that it is time for more sober approach to this issue rather than the hyper-ventilating that has been going on in the recent past.
malaise
(269,074 posts)Rec
MattSh
(3,714 posts)Right at the top, it states:
The international community should be pushing for compromise to prevent this fragile and bitterly divided country from breaking apart.
If a country is that fragile and bitterly divided, wouldn't it be better to help it break apart peacefully?
reformist2
(9,841 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Russia is far less concerned about its next-door neighbors economic relations with the EU...than the further extension of NATO to its borders....This isnt an irrational fear. Despite promises by George H.W. Bush not to extend the Wests Cold War military alliance after Germany was united, eight former Warsaw Pact nations and three former Soviet republics have been incorporated into NATO, with the United States and NATO even setting up a military outpost in Georgia. And the EU association agreement...in fact had military clauses that called for integrating Ukraine into the EU military structure, including cooperation on civilian and military crisis management operations and relevant exercises concerning them. No one should be surprised that Putin reacted negatively to such a prospect. Its difficult to imagine any American administration accepting a decision by Mexico to join a military alliance with Russia.
I seem to remember as a child practicing hiding under our desks during something called the Cuban missile crisis.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)its neighbors, belonging to NATO has proven to be a wise move for those that adopted in. Better to be allied with the US and EU than to be occupied by Russia.
Those states are free to pursue their own relations, Moscow's approval is not required.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Russia won't allow a situation where their interests (e.g. empire) is usurped by a hostile force. And having a NATO presence just dozens of miles away from Moscow is probably considered unacceptable under any conditions.
Also, 'freedom' becomes an extremely subjective (actually meaningless) term when the printer of the world's reserve currency starts throwing money around in foreign countries to "bolster democracy". What a sick joke.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)has already shown signs of driving Ukraine and most of the former Warsaw pact nations right into NATO's arms.
NATO was certainly anti-Soviet, but it is a stretch to say it >was< anti-Russian. In the future, it may definitely become anti-Russian.
And the Russians will only have Putin and his government to blame.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Its pretty clear the anti-Soviet posture has carried over to Russia. As for people reacting to aggressive postures, perhaps these Slavic NATO converts imagine themselves exempt from any of the power relations that spell terror and death to people in the middle east. Actually, I would be surprised if those people didn't consider themselves to be "too white" for such treatment at the hands of the US.
IIRC, Russia recently extended a proposal to NATO essentially asking to *join* the organization. NATO flatly refused without so much as a counter-proposal or even a suggestion.
I find that quite interesting. I guess even masters of the universe need their demons.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)by what Russia has done.
cprise
(8,445 posts)And yes, its embarrassing when an empire is trying to control its "back yard".
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Russian nationalists joined Serbia in the wars in the 1990s. Russia and Serbia were allied in WWI. Some Serbians have joined the Russian cause in Crimea.
Serbia has been one of Russia's most reliable allies in the world recently and historically, but the Serbian government has been silent on what Russia has done in Crimea.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)like Estonia who do not want Russia's boots to be on their throats once again.
Russia may not like the fact that they're now incapable of invading the Baltics and Poland, but screw them.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Personally, I think Poles could be very disappointed if their status as NATO hot spot fades.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)disappointment would be too profound.
Baltics don't need the money, just the knowledge that Russia has no choice but to leave them alone.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Ask Greece.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Turns out running up huge piled of debt without taxing the rich wasn't a great policy. Who knew?
cprise
(8,445 posts)In Greece's case, the tax problem put them on the forefront of a predatory lending and investment culture emanating out of Wall St. and London. Greece's government was misled about the safety of investing in megatons of ballooning debt.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)and covert aggression towards our neighbors to our south.
I don't approve of any of the aggression. Theirs or ours.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)T. J. Kong
(46 posts)Not a shot fired... phew (and i hope they keep it that way)
Could you imagine if one of our ignorant, blood-thirsty neo-cons were in-charge, over there, during this crisis?
Yikes, I get chills just thinking about it.
I guess my main criticism would be that their head of state was too quite in the immediate aftermath of the violent coup d'état in Kiev, especially as some were trying to spin it as a Democratic coup, so as to prevent that narrow narrative from becoming the dominate one, which is allowing this situation to unnecessarily continue to worsen vs constructive criticism and talks being engaged in by all sides.
However, I could be totally wrong on that criticism, since our M$M is notorious in misrepresenting the other side of the story
I think the grown-ups on our side need to step up, and work with Russia and the Ukraine to help resolve this serious constitutional crisis over there before the right-wing wackos get their way, and war actually does 'break-out'.
Sending positive energy to all diplomats involved in resolving this situation, and wish them all success for a peaceful conclusion to their very important work.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)enough in Ukraine.
Kthxbai
T. J. Kong
(46 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)T. J. Kong
(46 posts)plus a bunch more, which doesn't equate with your characterization of my post.
I apologize for not being more clear, but my main points were simply...
Pros:
1. No shots fired (by Russia)
2. Democratic process chosen in Crimea
Con:
1. Not enough timely communication in the immediate aftermath of the coup (by Russia)
Hope:
1. Influential parties to this crisis engage in constructive dialog to find a solution to settle the crisis peacefully, rather than unnecessary, and hostile tit-for-tat attacks, with a juvenile with-us, or again-us mentality.
This is a serious situation, with important, and powerful countries, not prostrate, and weak, like those we are currently still struggling with. So, it would be much wiser to take a different approach to ensure we DE-escalate, and NOT escalate.
I hope that is more clear.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)to their behavior being that Russia wasn't sufficiently pro Yanukovych.
And now you hope he gets rewarded with no negative consequences for his illegal actions.
Heard this all from the rt.com crowd
T. J. Kong
(46 posts)I am a proud U.S. Citizen, and a U.S. Vet, and I think your partisanship is obviously clouding your judgment, at the very least, since you have just 'met' me, and instead of talking, your are in automatic attack/accuse mode.
So, I will say good bye, until you genuinely wish to respectfully discuss.
cprise
(8,445 posts)...with posts so quick and frequent as to appear employed for that purpose.
We get the message that you consider us unpatriotic. The repetitive empty denunciations are rather pathetic, however.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,322 posts)To stop OSCE observers: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26499328
To take over a Ukrainian base: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crisis-shots-fired-as-russian-troops-take-over-ukrainian-naval-base-in-crimea-9182216.html
To stop unarmed Ukrainian soldiers marching to their own base: http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/mar/04/warning-shots-fired-ukrainian-troops-crimea-video
The 'democratic process' involved shutting down all the Ukrainian language, and independent, TV stations in Crimea before the referendum, and replacing them with programming from Russia. Thus rendering the referendum undemocratic.
cprise
(8,445 posts)(or any military personnel) do NOT count vis-a-vis 'intimidation'. Its really odd to present that 'point' when riot police were attacked with firebombs (considered an act of terrorism within the US) and heavy bricks and eventually gunfire starting around Dec. 2nd.
For that matter, I would like to see what the OSCE people were doing when the warning shots were fired. Were they waltzing across the border without proper procedures? Or were they acting appropriately? I think the description is vague possibly because the details would de-sensationalize their claim.
Nothing you listed even remotely approaches what the US aggression in the Middle East, or Latin America and the Caribbean.
OTOH, the Ukrainian insurgents have been killing people for weeks, and that fact was surely not lost on parliament when they suddenly turned 100% against Yanukovych while said insurgents were taking over government buildings and calling for the president to be killed.
Your ideal non-aggressive environment for voting was spoiled long before Russian troops made a ruckus.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,322 posts)The OSCE observers were trying to move from one part of Ukraine, where they had the permission of the Ukrainian government to be, to another part, for which they also had permission from the Ukrainian government. Russian troops prevented them, firing shots. And of course firing shots at the Ukrainian military is 'intimidation'. It's absurd to suggest otherwise. It's arguably an act of war, since they did it well inside Ukraine.
cprise
(8,445 posts)I'm not given to accounts of 'absurdity' that lack a sense of legitimacy.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)As if Putin doesn't know damn well that we don't have a leg to stand on. He's going to protect his interests - just like the U.S. does.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"As if Putin doesn't know damn well that we don't have a leg to stand on. He's going to protect his interests - just like the U.S. does."
...that Putin is in "clear violation of international law" and Obama was right to condemn his actions.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Oh, and how many people were killed when the Russian armed forces went into Crimea? That is, compared to how many people have been killed while the U.S. ignores sovereign borders with its drone program?
The U.S. does what it pleases because it's the biggest, baddest military power in the world. When the U.S. starts pointing out the mote in Russia's eye, it manages nicely to ignore the beam in its own.
As I said, Russia is rationally protecting its own interests - just like we do.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Oh, and how many people were killed when the Russian armed forces went into Crimea? That is, compared to how many people have been killed while the U.S. ignores sovereign borders with its drone program? "
...that doesn't change the fact that Putin's actions were a "clear violation of international law."
Also, the point that the "world will grimace at the irony" isn't relevant to the fact of the illegality. In fact, the UN voted to condemn Russia, and even China left Russia out in the cold.
delrem
(9,688 posts)"So, in a nutshell: hypocrites don't give a flying fuck about the blatancy of their hypocrisy."
..."in a nutshell," that's true. People are focusing on the hypocrisy of the U.S., when it's also hypocritical to condemn the Iraq invasion, and then try to use other events to justify Putin's illegal invasion.
It's far worse to be hypocritical in support of an illegal invasion than it is to be hypocritical in calling it out and pushing for diplomacy.
Why would anyone want to be on the side of justifying an illegal invasion?
delrem
(9,688 posts)That outcome didn't require 100,000+ deaths; 1,000,000 refugees; the total destruction of physical and political infrastructure in what has to be called the razing of a country. An outcome, y'know, a state of affairs where terms like "illegal invasion" make sense. That outcome didn't require weapons using depleted uranium, or massive use of exploding phosphorous.
It didn't require using hellfire missiles double-tapped from predator drones.
So in that light, ProSense, let's talk about hypocrisy.
A hypocrite might not, for example, distinguish statements emanating from Pres. Obama and SoS Kerry, from some shill's projections about what fictional posters might say on DU. A hypocrite like that might even claim that Russia is conducting an illegal invasion - and that it didn't just lay the ground for a democratic referendum. Well.... such folk can be exasperating, that's for certain.
"I do believe that today's referendum was hugely, 80+%, in favour of a certain outcome."
...if you support an illegal action controlled by Russia. If Putin wanted this to be on the up and up, he wouldn't have forced a vote at gunpoint via an illegal referendum, and then shut out election observers.
Also, Obama didn't invade Iraq.
"A hypocrite might not, for example, distinguish statements emanating from Pres. Obama and SoS Kerry, from some shill's projections about what fictional posters might say on DU. A hypocrite like that might even claim that Russia is conducting an illegal invasion - and that it didn't just lay the ground for a democratic referendum. Well.... such folk can be exasperating, that's for certain."
I take it you don't believe that Putin's invasion is illegal? Isn't it hypocritical to think Bush's invasion was illegal, but not Putin's?
Do you think the OP piece, which states that Putin's actions were illegal is a "shill's projections"?
delrem
(9,688 posts)You only accept elections that'll give you what *you* want. Cool.
And Obama didn't invade Iraq! So the fact that the USA invaded Iraq is irrelevant!
That's fucking grotesque.
You only accept elections that'll give you what *you* want. Cool.
And Obama didn't invade Iraq! So the fact that the USA invaded Iraq is irrelevant!
That's fucking grotesque.
...what's "fucking grotesque" is the inability to see that invading a country and forcing an illegal vote at gunpoint, blocking election observers is not a sign that Putin is interested in democracy.
As for the invasion of Iraq, you keep brining it up as if to say that because Bush invaded Iraq, Putin is justified in invading Ukraine. Is that your point?
delrem
(9,688 posts)It isn't about Obama and Putin.
It is more about the USA and Russia, but that can hardly be all. There are always the Ukrainians to consider...
Yes, John Kerry most certainly put The Hypocrisy Card on the table front and center, as spokesperson for the USA: "You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretexts."
So John Kerry said in one of the world's all time quotes from "statesmen".
ProSense explains that Obama wasn't president then.
Back when the bad things happened the R's were in office. The R's being terrible. So terrible that because there's been a change of administration, nothing from the earlier admin needs be to accounted for or even admitted to. Not just that, but the topics must become taboo.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)cprise
(8,445 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)A taboo replete with guilt, with raw emotion if the taboo is broken.
Perhaps it's just my nature not to want to assign action to mysterious diseases of the psych, "schizophrenia" or whatever, as if people fully adult weren't product of their own choices.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Ask Hillary.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Why would I care about Hillary's opinion?
LOL!
cprise
(8,445 posts)...or illegal.
The US apparently "midwifed" (i.e. assisted) the coup. I don't think Nuland and Pyat were asking for Biden's approval of their chosen replacement in order to deliver cookies to him. Merely deciding to back a replacement while Yanukovych was still in office was a breech of Ukraine's sovereignty.
US media didn't so much as use the word "rioters" to describe the "protesters" even after they had been launching fire bombs at the police and burning their surroundings for weeks.
Later, some of them started shooting police and co-rioter alike and while they stormed government buildings demanding the president's execution, we are supposed to believe parliament's vote to depose Yanukovych was not the result of threat or intimidation.
Cha
(297,347 posts)Their own little pity party for Putin Bad President Obama for condemning Putin's Action's for Breaking International Law. Good Putin for Breaking INterntional Law. He's just protecting his own interests.. Leave Putin Alone
Putin really does need to feature some of these posters on RT.. they'd be great.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)That's how geopolitics operate - those who have power protect their own interests. We do it, Great Britain does it, France does it, Germany does it, China does it. Granted, the West, in general, avoids taking action without at least a fig leaf of "legitmacy" - at least for overt actions (covert actions, such as fomenting coups are a different matter) - but it really is how the world works from the standpoint of exercising power.
So, when I say that Putin is protecting his own interests, it has nothing to do with approving of or liking Putin or his actions, it's merely pointing out his motivations - which ought to be obvious to anyone.
Why you feel the need to distort a simple statement of fact into something else entirely is really rather sad - not to mention, insulting.
On edit: I'd appreciate that in the future, if you have objections to something I've posted, that you take it up with me directly, rather than discussing me in third person. That's just rude.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)That's from the OP editorial. Putin's illegal invasion was not necessary to "protecting his own interests."
That's simply repeting Putin's justification for illegally invading the Ukraine.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Russia needs the Black Sea access that Crimea provides. It does not want this access threatened by the spread of NATO into Ukraine. Therefore, the calculation was made that getting full control of Crimea by military incursion and the quick "referendum" was the surest way to guarantee that Crimea's Black Sea port remained under its control. Disapproval from the rest of the international community be damned.
World powers will always find excuses for their actions, why should Russia be any different? No one with any intelligence believes the "protecting Russian citizens" excuse, least of all other world powers. They are fully aware of what Putin's game is in Crimea, and they understand his reasons quite well, since they would do the same if their own access to a vital trade route were threatened.
Putin acted with dispatch and created the "facts on the ground" that he needed. No amount of scolding is going to change that.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)So you support Putin's illegal invasion because Russia should be able to do whatever it damn well pleases?
Seems like you're throwing your support behind this practice from here on out.
The world isn't buying it. First the UN vote, and likely more to come...
Japan does not recognize Crimea vote: government spokesman
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024676007
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Then I said that all world powers find excuses for what they do - you know, the "fig leaf" that world powers come up with when they want to fuck with some other country. Like WMD in Iraq, for example.
Did I say anywhere that I support ANY of this? When I say that I recognize that this is how the world works, I am not in any way endorsing it, I am merely stating my observations.
What the hell is wrong with dispassionate observation? Am I suspect because I haven't participated in your idea of a proper two-minutes hate? Okay, here ya go: Bad Putin! Bad, bad Putin! Happy now?
Tell you what, I pretty much hate everything about how the world works. The big world powers and their weapons deals and their Big Oil and their corporate overlords have fucked it up big time for pretty much every common citizen on the planet. We are the captive audience while the Big Guns do their thing, and it's all about who controls wealth and resources.
WE ARE ALL BEING FUCKED. Ukraine and Crimea are just the latest on the list. Putin grabbed Crimea because he needed that Black Sea port access, period.
Granted, he's a bit of a throwback to the 19th century glory days of warring over control of the Suez Canal, or the Panama Canal, or shipping lanes in the Pacific - but still, it's nothing that hasn't been done before. If it shocks the sensibilities of polite company, it's only because the Western powers have found subtler and more insidious ways of jockeying for position when it comes to exploitation of resources and controlling the flow of wealth.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)After spending all that time pushing his propaganda, you're saying you only were presenting his POV. Seriously?
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I'm beginning to suspect that you have absolutely no grasp of geopolitics, whatsoever. Your worldview apparently consists solely of white hats and black hats.
Well, fine. Put me in your "black hat" column, then. I see there's no hope of attempting to conduct a rational conversation with you.
tsuki
(11,994 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)If that's not the point of harping on that, what's the point?
I mean, whenever anyone states that the invasion is illegal, why is "pointing out that Black Sea access is important to Russia" constantly offered up with no condemnation of Putin actions?
Look at your comments in this thread. They're all about what's "important" to Russia.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Meanwhile, as people hyperventilate over Russia's actions, a lot of really nasty sh*t goes down elsewhere.
Part of the reason this coup happened when it did was because the perpetrators (that includes the US "midwives" were counting on the Russian government presenting its nicest image during the Olympics.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Cha
(297,347 posts)Last edited Mon Mar 17, 2014, 12:12 AM - Edit history (1)
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)You cannot tell me that you honestly believe that countries don't protect their own interests. The only thing exceptional about Russia's actions in this case is that it's so blatant and upfront.
As I've been pointing out repeatedly, Russia needs the Black Sea access that comes with Crimea. The fact that Putin went so far as to bring in military force is evidence of how important it is to Russia. It's not about finding it "touching", it's merely recognizing the reality of the situation.
Why is pointing this out worthy of derision?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Cha
(297,347 posts)former9thward
(32,029 posts)Was it a one way conversation? Or are we only allowed to hear what 'our' side says?
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Putin saw the number on his caller ID and didn't pick up.
T. J. Kong
(46 posts)in that it kinda muddies the argument that this kind of referendum is 'illegal'.
When some ask why, it seems that the answer is 'because we say so', which isn't very convincing.
And then there is the other, potentially bigger elephant in the room... the automatic and rapid recognition of the violent coup as being valid, by some, yet the will of the people of Crimea, expressed in a formal, democratic, and non-violent process, is somehow, 'invalid'... again when some ask why, the answer appears to be because 'we say so'.
Again, not a very compelling narrative.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)firing weapons to keep international observers out and shutting down all opposition. Blockading harbors, holding hostage opposing troops?
malaise
(269,074 posts)so I really don't get the noise. Cameron might recall Thatcher in Los Malvinas - I remember a famous line defending the war because the English folks down there wanted to remain English.
It's the breathtaking hypocrisy that pisses me off - as if we're all stupid and don't understand reality.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Yes, they think we are stupid.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)makes that analogy break down. Argentinian presidents only bring that old non-issue up when they want to stoke Argentine nationalism to distract from internal political problems.
former9thward
(32,029 posts)It is not the position of Argentina or the Argentinian people. Of course they don't count.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Falklands have NEVER been part of Argentina.
That is not opinion, that is an undisputed fact.
And no, the position of the Argentinian people doesn't mean shit since the people of the Falklands want to remain British.
As a factual and legal matter, there is no controversy, just whining from Buenos Aires.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)with Russia taking it back, right?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)If the people of Crimea want to be part of Russia, then there should be a demilitarized political process by which their will is expressed.
former9thward
(32,029 posts)And that is telling in itself. The majority of South America supported Argentina. At the UN Security Council Panama voted no and China, Soviet Union, Poland and Spain abstained. The majority of the Non-Aligned Movement supported Argentina (120 countries but they are not part of the "rest of the planet').
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)dictators in Argentina 30 years ago.
Awesome argument, dude.
former9thward
(32,029 posts)Awesome, dude.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)centrist and yes nationalist groups.
Of course, worst case scenario for Ukraine is that it becomes a rightwing thug state like the champion of some at DU, Russia.
cprise
(8,445 posts)...of anyone involved in the Kent State massacre.
The CIA now operates with impunity here at home, and the drug war has put our prison population within a hairs breadth of what the Soviet Union had under Stalin.
The difference here is that the Pentagon claims military dominion over the *entire* globe excluding Russia and China. What they've written about South America alone is really quite...bracing. Yet, I'm supposed to be quaking in my boots over Russian devils (and especially Putin) like they were out to get me personally.
The bottom line in these discussions is that many of us on DU don't buy into the attitudes of American Exceptionalism, or jingoism, or a corporate aristocracy that runs the government for its own purposes. We try to read current events from the perspective of a Howard Zinn or a Noam Chomsky. So when you describe DUers who are sceptical of the infotainment story-telling like that, consider that your rhetoric might line up with those people in DU's past who accused us of loving Saddam Hussein.
Thuggery takes linguistic forms, too.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)But, that doesn't mean we can't disapprove of what he does.
You obviously disagree.
Of course, I don't watch or read rt.com, so of course we are going to disagree.
P.S. Please pass your evidence that the CIA is launching covert ops inside the US to Bernie Sanders. This would be a major story. Assuming you're not just bloviating with the idea that making a claim is the same as proving it.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Not to mention priming us for a war footing.
FYI, the CIA has put US Senate under surveillance, and the White House doesn't want to deal with it. Maybe its one of those things you missed while whinging on endlessly about people who don't buy into what US infotainment are selling-- they are almost always lying about international affairs.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Correct in only the most technical way. While what the CIA did should get its head fired, it is not the same as bugging Senate offices.
And those who defend rt.com have zero standing to mock other people.
cprise
(8,445 posts)You differentiate between searching the Senate's working notes, internal messages and search terms... and bugging phones used for Senate business? I call that getting creative with the facts.
There is no difference in magnitude from a privacy and confidentiality standpoint; You're trying to make excuses for the CIA.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)the U.S. violates territorial borders all the time with Pakistan and the drones.
Cha
(297,347 posts)Or are you just going to hold a little pity party for Putin?
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Thanks for posting it.
babylonsister
(171,075 posts)it's nail-biting time. What next? Diplomacy needs to work.
"It is time to reduce tensions, not draw red lines, flex rhetorical muscles and fan the flames of folly."
ProSense
(116,464 posts)The Obama administration has responded to the crisis by flexing its own rhetorical muscles. When Russian President Vladimir Putin ignored Obamas warning that there will be costs if Russia sent troops into Crimea, Secretary of State John Kerry denounced the brazen act of aggression, vowing that Russia is going to lose, the Russian people are going to lose and suggesting asset freezes isolation with respect to trade and investment, while promising economic assistance of the major sort for whatever government emerges in Kiev.
European governments were far more measured, with many condemning Russias Crimean invasion but most of them clearly reluctant to impose economic sanctions. Their economic ties to Russia are much closer than Americas, of course, but they also understand that diplomacy will be more effective. Among the cooler heads at home was Jack Matlock, ambassador to the Soviet Union under Ronald Reagan, who described the administrations warnings to Putin as ill-advised and argued that whatever slim hope that Moscow might avoid overt military intervention in Ukraine disappeared when Obama in effect threw down a gauntlet and challenged him. This was not just a mistake of political judgmentit was a failure to understand human psychologyunless, of course, he actually wanted a Russian intervention, which is hard for me to believe.
I'll give that a pass since it was written 10 days before the UN vote, in which even China left Russia out in the cold. The EU will propose stronger sanctions in the aftermath of the vote.
This and the claim about Obama's rhetoric read like the editors are implying a threat of force, which is not the reality. Russia did not have to choose this course. The offer has been a diplomatic solution and still is (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024664709)
Yes, yes and yes, but the claim about Kerry denouncing the invasion after the first three points is almost cartoonish.
Fact, the Russian invasion and Crimea referendum are illegal.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Which I guess means that democracy and self determination is illegal.
That explains why we support the overthrow of democratically elected governments in Latin America.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)No more so than in the Southern US, Scotland, Chechnya, and Venice.
Odd mix, but in the first there was no mechanism for secession. In Scotland and Venice there are, and Venice starts its vote today or later this week. Free and fair elections, after a season of campaigning, according to rules and in which the voter lists are properly drawn up and nobody's under undue pressure. Scotland may have its election in a year or so.
Chechnya was as much an autonomous republic as Crimea was. Yet we see the reactions and attitudes. The West has been consistent: free and fair elections in a way that maintains territorial integrity as far as outside actors are concerned. Russia, though, sees it differently: You want to leave Russia, it's over your dead bodies.
You want to join Russia, they'll set it up so that there's an election that's "free and fair" in that it achieves the desired result--with pro-Russian militias at the polling stations, pro-opposition people beaten in the streets in the week before, the government only allowing agitation for one side, voting lists that are drawn up and not open for inspection, truncated campaigning with only one side presented, and that the same view of the government and the occupying troops and the self-appointed armed militias.
It's the "free and fair" that's important for self-determination and democracy. In Crimea, certain groups felt sufficiently intimidated that they refused to turn out. Moreover, since everything was good to go for Russian unification the day after the elections--converting to rubles, media transmissions, replacement of staff, new laws aligning Crimean and Russian legislation, etc., etc., it seems rather pointless to say that there was anything like a real referendum at all. If it had failed, the banking and communication systems would have been a mess. And all the perks promised if they acceded to Russia--free trips to St. Petersburg for medical care, increased money for the local budget, increased pensions, massive investment in public infrastructure, etc., etc.--would have been lost. (Yes, counteroffers were made by Kiev. No, they weren't reported in Crimea because in the interests of self-determination and democracy unapproved sources were cut off, whether media or Internet.)
zeemike
(18,998 posts)How did you come by all of that?
It seems we have instant experts in world affairs here.
cprise
(8,445 posts)..were coursing through government buildings calling for his execution. What is a Yanukovych supporter supposed to do when faced with a murderous mob?
"Free and Fair" cuts both ways, and there's nothing free or fair about the conditions under which that vote occurred.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Which is why he stole the election that made him president in the first place.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)I keep forgetting that we live in a time when the evil ones are totally evil and the good ones are totally good.
The Bush policy of with us or against has now been installed on the left and the right.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)in a confrontation with the US seem to live by that principle.
Not too long ago we had people insisting that the Syrian government didn't use poison gas against his own people, that Obama was lying, and of course they quoted rt.com as if it was credible.
Same people appear in the Ukrainian debate, always criticizing President Obama and never offering even the meekest criticism of Russia's conduct. Though some at least act a little embarrassed when citing rt.com
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Not for what right wing radicals do in the Ukraine.
But it seems to me that you want to frame everything as a criticism of Obama...as if we are to take as truth everything the white house or state department says as the truth as some kind of loyalty pledge to the president.
And frankly I find that disturbing that progressives would do such a thing...that does not look good for the Democratic party to become just like the GOP cult in that blind loyality to the leader.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)with a foreign country.
To the point they became propagandists on behalf of Bashar Al Assad.
At some point, it becomes clear that they either have great love for the old soviet bloc, or are engaging in "the enemy of my enemy is today my friend."
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Disputes with foreign contries...and every year it is a new one.
There is something pathologically wrong when a nation has a new conflict every few months or so...and when it's people are calling for more of it...and trying to heard the rest of us by saying you are either with us or you hate America...shades of GWB and his pappy GHWB.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)And, people who reflexively side with whatever nation is against their country are the ones engaged in with us or against us.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Russia, the Ukraine? The Crimea?...are they threatening to invade us, take away our land or our property?....no they just are not doing what we tell them to do, that makes them against us and it makes us hate America if we don't buy that phony bullshit.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Under your calculus, Ronald Reagan was right to oppose the boycott of South Africa. None of our business . . .
zeemike
(18,998 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)I reject your "say nothing or bomb" framework
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And I am not saying say nothing I am saying not to be binary in our actions of saying something about one side and nothing to the other...that too is binary thinking.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)I oppose election rigging, imperialist aggression, and human rights violations no matter who does it. I criticized Bush for it, I criticize Obama for it, I criticize when Israel does it, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, the UK, the fascists in Ukraine, and Putin.
All I see around here nowadays are a bunch of "anti-imperialists" finding excuse after excuse for Putin's blatant aggression and utilizing all manner of tu quoque fallacy (including, I shit you not, Andrew fucking Jackson) to deflect criticism from Putin and somehow make Crimea all the West's fault.
Just have some fucking intellectual honesty and be anti-imperialist and pro-democracy consistently! Russia blatantly violates international law and human rights, and so does damn near every other country!
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Of take the log out of your eye before trying to remove the splinter in someone else's eye.
When we stop doing those things then we will have the moral authority to tell Putin to stop...otherwise we look to the world to be, and are, hypocrites.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Georgia and Ukraine are the current guy.
Stolen election in the US was the last guy. Stolen election in Russia is the current guy. Anti-LGBT in the US was the last guy. Anti-LGBT in Russia is the current guy.
So what fucking log are we talking about? You know, I'm not going to make apologies for the US's crimes, but I'm sure as fuck not going to go back to Vietnam or Andrew fucking Jackson to start excusing Russia's behavior.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)So that we don't see what we have done in the past that we have never resolved or admitted to.
That is the log...you never remove it until you can admit you have it in there.
And it is in there...we are still in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history, and we are still torturing people at GItmo after 13 years...and then you tell us we have the moral right to call out Russia?
Now you give me a break.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Look, I want to see the war criminals and torturers brought to justice too, but to say we've got absolutely no responsibility to call out Russia is just fucking stupid.
Fuck, during apartheid, you would have just kept screaming "Jim Crow! Jim Crow! Jesse Helms is still a Senator, you can't call out South Africa!"
Cut the crap. Putin is an imperialist homophobic warmonger. Obama is not. I've got plenty of problems with him, but calling out Russia over their escalation of tensions in Ukraine and doing so diplomatically is the right thing to do.
Pure isolationist bullshit.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)It is between Putin and the people who did a coup on the elected government of the Ukraine.
And you insist on calling out Putin but not the ones who did the coup against a democratic government and seized power with the help of that fascist element.
And ignore the fact the first thing that coup produced is a law making the Russian language illegal.
Funny how they are never called out for escalation of the tensions.
And no I will not cut the crap...I will not be herded like a sheep by emotional labels into the with us or against us pen...sorry can't go there with you.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Oh, you mean that bill. The one that removed Russian as an official language (which is not the same thing as making it illegal by a long shot) and was subsequently vetoed. Not that I ever supported that bill or thought it was a good idea at all.
And for what it's worth, I've never supported the new Ukranian government, and have in fact suggested international investigations into the Neo-Nazi elements WRT their rhetoric. But Svoboda hasn't invaded a neighboring country. Russia had several diplomatic and economic options available before a preemptive invasion, but the imperial bastard in the Kremlin who demanded diplomacy in Syria chose military action instead.
Cha
(297,347 posts)Travel Guide To Moscow
"First of all, Russia has become very corrupt throughout the last few years. Vladimir Putin has now been in office for twelve years and over those twelve years he has eliminated most elections, monopolized major media, and destroyed the democratic political system. Everyday people are brutally arrested for starting and participating in anti-Putin protests, while some are even detained simply for being nearby. Clearly, Putins actions are those of a dictator, and he plans to stay in power as long as possible."
http://sites.psu.edu/egorivanov/2014/01/31/travel-guide-to-moscow/
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The profs are on strike there right now.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)and what everyone that doesn't know or understand those things should be hearing and reading.
I think that NATO pledge carries the most weight.
T. J. Kong
(46 posts)http://crooksandliars.com/2014/03/karl-rove-claims-george-bush-sent-strong
These neo-cons are seriously deranged... do they still not know how the www works, yet?
The www has excellent looooong term memory, unlike our dysfunctional M$M.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 16, 2014, 10:48 PM - Edit history (1)
That was broadcast on Russian state tv news today (Sunday)
http://www.politisite.com/2014/03/16/russia-state-tv-putin-could-reduce-usa-to-radioactive-ash/
-----------------------------------------
But by all means, concentrate on criticizing the response to the unprovoked war of aggression and not the unprovoked war itself.
Cha
(297,347 posts)go so far to whine about President Obama and SOS John Kerry while Pumping up poor misunderstood Putin is foolish.
Meanwhile..
Travel Guide To Moscow
"First of all, Russia has become very corrupt throughout the last few years. Vladimir Putin has now been in office for twelve years and over those twelve years he has eliminated most elections, monopolized major media, and destroyed the democratic political system. Everyday people are brutally arrested for starting and participating in anti-Putin protests, while some are even detained simply for being nearby. Clearly, Putins actions are those of a dictator, and he plans to stay in power as long as possible."
http://sites.psu.edu/egorivanov/2014/01/31/travel-guide-to-moscow/
Common Sense from Ukraine?.. Okay..
The Fight for Democracy in Ukraine: A Conversation with Center UAs Svitlana Zalischuk
BY Micah L. Sifry
In the third and last part of our conversation, I asked Zalischuk about the referendum about to take place in Russian-occupied Crimea and the massive Russian troop presence across the border from eastern Ukraine. Russian invaded Ukraine, she said, mincing no words about Vladimir Putins actions in the wake of Yanukovychs departure from office. The referendum itself doesnt mean anything, she added, noting that the choice was between yes and yes, and didnt give people a choice of maintaining the status quo. You cant conduct a democratic referendum when a whole country is invaded and controlled by the troops of a foreign country.
This is not a conflict between Ukraine and Russia, she said, its a conflict between the civilized world and totalitarianism, one that undermines the whole architecture of the European and world community. I asked her about the idea that the democracy movement in Ukraine was mostly strongest in the western part of the country and not so much from the eastern half, where Yanukovych got the majority of votes. She said the picture was more complicated, because Yanukovych himself had campaigned in favor of stronger ties with Europe when he was running for president.
http://techpresident.com/news/wegov/24827/fight-democracy-ukraine-conversation-center-uas-svitlana-zalischuk
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)..who seem bound and determined to criticize Obama for refusing to engage in pointless saber-rattling.
So while I know there are a handful of people on the D.U. like that, I don't think that's an opinion held by many outside of the extreme negative patriot left.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)response to the invasion.
Cha
(297,347 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)If you don't like what the editorial said, take it up with The Nation instead of giving the OP shit for posting it.
As for the Russia media personality banging his shoe on the table, so what? It's just some blowhard - probably very much like some of our own homegrown blowhards like Glenn Beck - running off at the mouth. Hardly a matter of serious concern.
2banon
(7,321 posts)Cha
(297,347 posts)So, he's not just some idiot.. he's Putin's idiot.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/russia-could-still-turn-the-u-s-into-radioactive-dust-news-anchor-in-moscow-reminds-viewers/?_php=true&_type=blogs&emc=edit_tnt_20140316&nlid=1811197&tntemail0=y&_r=0
2banon
(7,321 posts)I noticed it was broadcast on tv news. ridiculous to give it a moments notice.
On your other point, it's only a geopolitical dispute between the east and the west. so far.
Moscow hasn't invaded us yet and I really don't think they're interested...
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)on my incoherent loon list.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)appointed to head an official Russian state news agency.
"Mr. Kiselyov was the man recently chosen by President Vladimir V. Putin to lead an official news agency charged with explaining Kremlin policy to the world, a media organization to be called Rossiya Sevodnya, or Russia Today."
So, he's not just some idiot.. he's Putin's idiot.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/russia-could-still-turn-the-u-s-into-radioactive-dust-news-anchor-in-moscow-reminds-viewers/?_php=true&_type=blogs&emc=edit_tnt_20140316&nlid=1811197&tntemail0=y&_r=0
-------------------------------------------
2banon
(7,321 posts)If you step out of the ring long enough to hear the chest thumping the Neo Cons are doing are doing here, rhetorical responses in the same vein is predictable, but meaningless other than to appease their own audience. Same here. Neo cons are insisting that we get NATO forces in Ukraine post haste and militarily respond to Moscow. Both sides are engaging in saber rattling.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Cha
(297,347 posts)The Fight for Democracy in Ukraine: A Conversation with Center UAs Svitlana Zalischuk
BY Micah L. Sifry
In the third and last part of our conversation, I asked Zalischuk about the referendum about to take place in Russian-occupied Crimea and the massive Russian troop presence across the border from eastern Ukraine. Russian invaded Ukraine, she said, mincing no words about Vladimir Putins actions in the wake of Yanukovychs departure from office. The referendum itself doesnt mean anything, she added, noting that the choice was between yes and yes, and didnt give people a choice of maintaining the status quo. You cant conduct a democratic referendum when a whole country is invaded and controlled by the troops of a foreign country.
This is not a conflict between Ukraine and Russia, she said, its a conflict between the civilized world and totalitarianism, one that undermines the whole architecture of the European and world community. I asked her about the idea that the democracy movement in Ukraine was mostly strongest in the western part of the country and not so much from the eastern half, where Yanukovych got the majority of votes. She said the picture was more complicated, because Yanukovych himself had campaigned in favor of stronger ties with Europe when he was running for president.
http://techpresident.com/news/wegov/24827/fight-democracy-ukraine-conversation-center-uas-svitlana-zalischuk
cprise
(8,445 posts)mike_c
(36,281 posts)An excellent editorial.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024673202
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Charles Krauthammer is always wrong.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)K&R