This is all a ritual dance by the big powers. The only ones that will suffer are the ukrainian people.
Russia invades Ukraine
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
I believe that nothing other than noise and that for not all that long will be all that happens if this is as far as matters go. Russia has a pretty solid moral argument at this point.Question: Would the reunification of Crimea with Mother Russia be as natural and normal as the reunification of East and West Germany?
Crimea isn't Ukrainian. It also is of vital interest to Russia that that particular region remains stable. Not every Ukrainian is interested in biting the hand that feeds them.I believe that nothing other than noise and that for not all that long will be all that happens if this is as far as matters go. Russia has a pretty solid moral argument at this point.
You think they would've learned from Afghanistan.I don't think Ukraine is currently capable of any war except guerrilla-style war which would make it less attractive for the conquerors...
I wouldn't say 'useless'. Still deadly, especially if Russia doesn't have ABMs. However, I can imagine an ageing fleet like the SS-18s. They might go way off target if not adequately maintained and tested.It wasn't entirely altruistic on Ukraine's part many of the the nuclear weapons and aircraft they had were more or less useless to them
130 largely obsolete SS-18 liquid fueled ICBMs
46 solid fueled mobile SS-24 ICBMs
25 Tu-95MS "Bear" propeller driven bombers
19 Tu-160 "Blackjack" ("White Swan") intercontinental supersonic strategic bombers
1,080 long-range cruise missiles
several hundred tactical nuclear weapons
Of these which would really be of any use in deterring Russia other than perhaps the tactical nuclear weapons? Now if we were talking of perhaps 50 solid fuel sophisticated medium range ballistic missiles along the lines of the "Pershing II" then we might really be asking was this wise on the part of Ukraine. But then everything including Russian actions over the past twenty years would likely have been radically different than they have been.
Needless to say the warheads on the SS-18's were just as old as the missiles they were on. I'm sure we don't need to beat the dead horse as to the improvement of warheads over the decades.I wouldn't say 'useless'. Still deadly, especially if Russia doesn't have ABMs. However, I can imagine an ageing fleet like the SS-18s. They might go way off target if not adequately maintained and tested.
Further, alternative history is always that alternative - everything would be different, Russia would not have acted as it has over the past twenty-years if the situation was different.
Why can't the west wake-up and do there home-work instead of posturing?The title is somewhat misleading. Under the treaty with Ukraine signed in 2010, the Russians are allowed to station 25,000 troops in the Crimea, 400 warship, and 25 airplanes. So they are not invading, they are already there.
There isn't much doubt that Russia has taken control of Crimea. However, is a Russian takeover of Crimea something which seriously impacts the national security of the U.S.A., Canada, or the U.K., I think not.The title is somewhat misleading. Under the treaty with Ukraine signed in 2010, the Russians are allowed to station 25,000 troops in the Crimea, 400 warship, and 25 airplanes. So they are not invading, they are already there.
But, isn't Ukraine losing Crimea analogous to Canada losing Quebec? (How would you feel if France took Quebec away from Canada?) Won't the Ukrainians be pissed off?There isn't much doubt that Russia has taken control of Crimea. However, is a Russian takeover of Crimea something which seriously impacts the national security of the U.S.A., Canada, or the U.K., I think not.
Yes, this seems to be more to the point. Are we in a day and age where countries can still just "take" (or whatever fancier word suits you) a piece of another country through force?But, isn't Ukraine losing Crimea analogous to Canada losing Quebec? (How would you feel if France took Quebec away from Canada?) Won't the Ukrainians be pissed off?
KK
Economic factors aside, more like Newfoundland and Labrador. Before 1954 it had never been considered Ukrainian, and the people are overwhelmingly ethnically and linguistically RussianBut, isn't Ukraine losing Crimea analogous to Canada losing Quebec? (How would you feel if France took Quebec away from Canada?) Won't the Ukrainians be pissed off?
We will see what happens in the days, weeks and months ahead. My Ukrainian friend keeps telling me that Nazi Germany's fatal mistake in WW II was pissing off the Ukes. Let's see if this is Putin's fatal mistake.Yes, this seems to be more to the point. Are we in a day and age where countries can still just "take" (or whatever fancier word suits you) a piece of another country through force?
I would agree with your friends as I believe would most who have read about/studied the Eastern Front of World War II.We will see what happens in the days, weeks and months ahead. My Ukrainian friend keeps telling me that Nazi Germany's fatal mistake in WW II was pissing off the Ukes. Let's see if this is Putin's fatal mistake.
However, in the ethnically Russian and Rusophone parts of Eastern Ukraine the Russians are viewed as liberators every bit as much as the German Army was in the Summer of 1941. Persumbably the Russians will avoid making the same mistakes - at least they don't have SS Einsatzgruppen operating in their wake.
But it does significantly impact Russia's postion in the region, the Russian base in Sevastopol can be argued as vital to the strategic defense of russia. Statements the US makes about military action she engages in around the world. Apart from that one could argue that the Crimeans would rather be Russian than Ukrainian if it came to a vote.There isn't much doubt that Russia has taken control of Crimea. However, is a Russian takeover of Crimea something which seriously impacts the national security of the U.S.A., Canada, or the U.K., I think not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_collaborationism_with_the_Axis_powersI would agree with your friends as I believe would most who have read about/studied the Eastern Front of World War II.
"However, the absence of Ukrainian autonomy under the Nazis, mistreatment by the occupiers, and the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians as slave laborers, soon led to a rapid change in the attitude among the collaborators. By the time the Red Army returned to Ukraine, a significant number of the population welcomed the soldiers as liberators.[SUP][1][/SUP] At the same time, more than 4.5 million Ukrainians had joined the Red Army to fight Germany and more than 250,000 served as Soviet partisan paramilitary units.[SUP][2]"[/SUP]
OTTAWA (AP) Canada says it is pulling its ambassador from Moscow over the crisis in Ukraine.
A statement issued by Prime Minister Stephen Harper after an emergency Cabinet meeting says Canada also is pulling out of the Group of Eight process being chaired by Russia for an international economic summit in June.
Harper strongly condemns Russia's military intervention in Ukraine and urges President Vladimir Putin to withdraw his troops.
A statement issued by Prime Minister Stephen Harper after an emergency Cabinet meeting says Canada also is pulling out of the Group of Eight process being chaired by Russia for an international economic summit in June.
Harper strongly condemns Russia's military intervention in Ukraine and urges President Vladimir Putin to withdraw his troops.
OTTAWA (AP) Canada says it is pulling its ambassador from Moscow over the crisis in Ukraine.
A statement issued by Prime Minister Stephen Harper after an emergency Cabinet meeting says Canada also is pulling out of the Group of Eight process being chaired by Russia for an international economic summit in June.
Harper strongly condemns Russia's military intervention in Ukraine and urges President Vladimir Putin to withdraw his troops.
My guess is that it will take a lot more than some empty threats from Harper baby to get Russia to give up the Crimea. A barrage of hydogen bombs might or might not do it,
If it came to that, we can all kiss our asses goodbye.My guess is that it will take a lot more than some empty threats from Harper baby to get Russia to give up the Crimea. A barrage of hydogen bombs might or might not do it,
Anyway, why not put the future of Crimea in the hands of it's residents by having a referendum?...... Oh Wait! We can't do that because they would vote to split anyway. So much for democracy.
My take on this is that, this is the result of Ukraine's political system breaking down. The Opposition lost control to the protesters after they signed the EU sponsored agreement with Yanukovych. The latter gave practically everything away, only to have the radicals at the barricades declaring that they didn't recognize the agreement and they were giving Yanukovych until 10 AM to clear off, or else they were going to storm the parliament. The deal was now dead and Yanukovych cleared off along with the cops. I found it interesting that the newly appointed ministers had to have mob approval in the square.
Now they are trying to get legitimacy in order to get the IMF to loan them some money. It's going to mean austerity like no-one has seen before, far greater than Greece. Any significant EU money for Ukraine will result in anger in the troubled EU economies for seeing money going to a country outside the EU, instead of giving them a break with their own austerity programmes. Ukranians are still under the delusion that EU membership is going to bring them manna from heaven, including smart phones.
If only Yanukovych could have been allowed to continue his term until it ran out in Feb 2015, and then have him defeated a the polls and replaced. But I guess, he could have been reelected again by his Russian speaking constituency, and that wouldn't have pleased the US. Stupid US meddling and subverting will have resulted in the partitioning of Ukraine and brought us towards an armed confrontation with Russia.
