MD
qualiaphile
True, but had it not been for the USA you would have been part of either the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany depending on the time period.
This isn't about morality, it's about power.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
War in the Ukraine?
- Thread starter MD
- Start date
True, but had it not been for the USA you would have been part of either the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany depending on the time period.
This isn't about morality, it's about power.
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
I agree.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I hate to say this but there's very little that we can realistically do that would reverse what's happened, especially if the Europeans are not willing to stick their neck out. Since they get about 1/3 of their natural gas and some of their oil from Russia, don't expect them to go much beyond just complaining. And to the Russians we come off as hypocrites since we were so willing to invade Iraq, which never attacked us.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
You don't have to look far to find ways to accuse the US of hypocrisy. After all, we did invade Iraq on extremely flimsy grounds, and Iraq isn't even on our border. It is not unprecedented for a major power to ignore its treaty obligations when it feels that its national security is jeopardized in some way. Nevertheless, that should not be used as an excuse to just let Putin destabilize the peace and bully his neighbors. A stable Europe is in everyone's interest.
In any case, it looks like Putin has achieved his goal of convincing the rest of the world that he is prepared to invade (indeed, has invaded) Ukraine. He now begins to show signs of wanting to negotiate a peace agreement. He probably feels that his hand won't get any stronger. He can still invade Ukraine if his demands aren't met, but I doubt that he can get away without paying an economic price for his reckless behavior. Now, every single country on his borders with a substantial population of Russians is going to start worrying about the threat he poses to them. Belarus, one of Russia's staunchest allies and a brazen dictatorship, has already recognized the new government in Ukraine. Recent polls suggest that Russians aren't enthusiastic about the prospect of an invasion. And his image, so carefully pumped up during the Sochi Olympics, is now that of an international bully.
MD
qualiaphile
Putin has made the West look weak. Europe is actually very weak, but what Putin has done with Georgia, Syria and now Ukraine is damage the image of American power. If Russia pulls through this economically, it wins hands down. Remember most of the world's population is outside the west. What this also shows is that NATO isn't as strong as we thought, attacking only the fragile dictators of far off lands and not facing real enemies at its border. I think the credibility of NATO has gone down considerably. Yes there is the threat of nuclear annihilation, etc, but it still makes NATO look weak.
I think it will be interesting to see how China handles the senkyaku and spratleys in the upcoming months and years. Russia seized land from a country that is in Europe, without a shot being fired, without any military posturing from the EU. If the West just stands by as Russian troops invade Ukraine, China will feel a lot bolder in getting what they want from Japan and the Philippines. If they start land grabbing and the US just sits back and watches it happen then it can spiral into other countries starting their own little land grab wars. The Koreas, Iran-Iraq, Vietnam-China, India Pakistan, etc.
If more countries start land grabbing and Obama just sits back and watches shouting empty warnings, democrats will lose 2016. A republican hawk will win, which could be worse. America still has the most powerful military in the world.
Last edited:
esmith
Veteran Member
Russia's economy needs the petrodollars. How would the following scenario play out?
The US builds the Keystone pipeline, opens up more areas for oil and gas exploration, offers the EU prices that undercut Russia. This is a long term process but it could put Russia in check. The only problem with this is that doing so could cripple the Russian economy, inflation would run rampant, the ordinary Russian civilian would be hurt. Look at history and how economics played out in the rise of fascism in pre-WWII Germany and eventually led to WWII.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
First of all the Keystone Pipeline would take almost two years to build, which hardly solves the problem. Secondly, it is natural gas, not oil, that's the main problem. Thirdly, as you say above, Russia's response could even become worse than what already has happened.
Whatever is decided, and I do think something must be done, both the Europeans and us should be on the same page, but I don't see the Europeans much going beyond complaining. I listened to the former U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine last night, and he says there's not a whole lot we can do without the Europeans being aboard.
Right now we need to see what Putin will do next, particularly in terms of the rest of the Ukraine. If they take over a larger section, all bets above are off the table, and I think you may well see the Europeans coming on much stronger and backing it up with some real sanctions.
BTW, isn't it just pathetic that so many of the Republicans are trying to make political hay out of this at a time when we're involved in a crisis. To me, such debate belongs in Congress in regards to which actions should or should not be taken instead of using this for their 2014 campaign.
sandandfoam
Veteran Member
Who are 'the Europeans?'
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
Congress has made the US look weak and damaged its credibility, not Putin. Most countries understand what is going on here. Putin is dealing with a devastating blow to his policy of keeping Ukraine within his sphere of influence, so he is making a naked power grab that is damaging his reputation. By behaving responsibly, the US and Europe don't look weak. They look sane. And, while the reality is that Putin controls a big chunk of Europe's energy supply, he needs the cash to prop up a fairly weak economy at home. This move to take over Ukraine is not as popular among Russians as it first seemed. It is very unpopular with his neighbors, including his staunchest ally, Belarus.
China is much less likely to behave this way. They are doing fine without invading any countries, and they seem much more mindful of trade relations than Putin does at the moment. North Korea is a problem, but China is actually becoming a bit more helpful in that department lately. Putin is behaving badly because his strategy for a Eurasian Union has just collapsed. In fact, the other countries that would have joined in it are now having serious second thoughts, so Ukraine may turn out to be very counterproductive for him.
And that powerful military is worth nothing in this crisis. There is no military option open to us. If Putin had invaded a NATO country (e.g. one of the Baltic states), then we'd all be in deep trouble, and he knows it. Part of what he is trying to do here is keep Ukraine out of NATO and the EU and away from an alliance with the West.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I was generally referring to those in central and western Europe that depend on Russian natural gas and oil, most of which are in either the EU, NATO, or both.
MD
qualiaphile
Well written as always Copernicus and I agree with you on several points. But I still have to disagree with you about China. China has the second highest military budget in the world and each year it rises higher. There was recently an article on China's budget increasing almost 10% in 1 year. China has prepared its navy and armed forces for a war with Japan. It's economy will soon be larger than America's and it's military budget is said to rival the United states in 20 years. It wants to rival the United States and eventually defeat it and become the superpower of the 21st century.
I think this has shown the world that the West is not as strong as it was in the last century. Europe has technologically powerful armed forces, but also has an aging population, failing economy and no will to fight. America has a powerful military, but no political motive to use it. This is why I think the US should have atleast flexed some of its muscle, to show Russia and China that you cannot mess with the interests of the West. I see more powerful nations conducting incursions and land grabs, as the western world's economy is overshadowed by Asia's the threats of sanctions will diminish.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
We'll just have to disagree about China. The world has changed a great deal since the fall of the Communist Party in Europe and its "taming" in Asia. China's economy depends on Japan and the US. A war would be devastating for it. They have a very deadly problem with pollution and a lot of unrest over the inability of the government to deal with it. When I was there, most of the Chinese that I talked to were very patriotic and proud of their growing strength, but they had a low opinion of the government's honesty and ability to deal effectively with China's problems. The last thing the government wants there is destabilization of its local environment and its economy by acting like Putin is now. Indeed, some commentators think that Putin wasn't really prepared for such a strong reaction from the West and that he is now pulling back from his aggressive posture. It is far from clear that an invasion of eastern Ukraine will meet with cooperation from local Russian-speaking Ukrainians.
MD
qualiaphile
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
Despite the title that the editor attached to that report, if you read the article, you discover that China has not actually backed Russia on Ukraine. Rather, it has come out with ambiguous statements on the subject. Russia is claiming that China backs it, but that would make China one of the few nations in the world to do so. What it really looks like is a case where the Chinese leadership doesn't know what stand it wants to take. Traditionally, it sides with Russia against US interests. In this case, however, it does not want to see the strains that this dispute is putting on international markets. The truth is that the Chinese government couldn't care less about the fate of the Ukrainians, but it doesn't want to come out on the losing side of this growing dispute.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I admit that I'm not well informed on the topic, but if it is the will of the people of that region to split from Ukraine and join Russia, I don't see why not.
MD
qualiaphile
LOL! It's much more complex than that
Maybe you should get back to bashing cultures in the other threads, it seems you're much better at that.
Last edited:
MD
qualiaphile
I think the article is showing that China might be a passive ally of Russia in this situation, but an ally nonetheless and supportive of it for the simple reason that it provides a united front against the West. It doesn't want to actively support Russia with big words because that might be bad for business, but judging by all it's military posturing in the Pacific with Japan and the Philippines China is getting bolder. Had this happened a decade from now, China's support would have been much stronger and much more vocal.
India will also probably softly support Russia.
Last edited:
