Could we have done anything about Russia/Crimea? Should we have?

[Murloc]

What if Russia decides to annex one of the NATO country?

come on, the annexion of someone who doesn't want to be annexed would cause instant reaction.
Most people are acting in mala fide when it comes to crimea imho. Nobody thinks the majority of crimeans will suffer from this, there is no human rights issue. Just international power struggles.

 

[master_shake_]

no oil in crimea, why would the us care about crimea

 

[JEDIYoda]

no oil in crimea, why would the us care about crimea

there is no truth to that statement other than to increase your post count!!

 

[AViking]

there is no truth to that statement other than to increase your post count!!

How do you figure?

The US does follow a pretty open policy of only intervening when national security or our national interests are affected.

Case in point: Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia, Nigeria, Guatemala...

 

[Blackjack200]

The whole situation seems like a (mostly) bloodless civil war following a change in leadership. The folks who wanted to be Russian (Crimea) got to be Russian. The folks who didn't want to be Russian got to not be Russian.

Have there been any reports that a majority of Crimea DIDN'T want to be part of Russia? If so, I could see a case for us stepping in. If not, who are we to interject?

It was bloodless because The Ukrain had no ability to stand up to the Russian forces. Any resistence would have simply been a massocre. And yes, I've heard lots of speculation that a majority of Crimeans did not want to be annexed. But that is irrelavent anyway. Crimea is not a soverign state, and an unsanctioned referendum held at the point of a gun is a preposterous justification for a land grab.

These days, Russia has annexed Crimea under the pretext that the local Russian population was under threat and has massed 40 thousand troops on the Ukrainian border. It's a done deal.

The US could destroy the Russian military in a matter of days.

Could've just turned off the Nordstream pipelines
Stopped all Russian visitors from entering Europe
Put all deals with Russia on ice

We've had a warm winter. Europes LNG reserves are loaded. You don't need military action to harm Russia, they're heavily dependent on their trade with Europe. Shut them out of the market and stop all Russians from visiting Europe (would probably sow a lot of discontent in Russia's upper middle class). Europe could take the hit a losing out of Russian gas and oil, especially if the Germans pulled head from ass and got their nuclear power plants back and running. Right now, Germany is holding back any real sanctions by being ridiculously dependent on Russia for their energy.

This is the real reason our hands are tied. Europe's dependence on Russian energy (gas), and I don't think it's just Germany. This is a wakeup call that there needs to be some kind of contingency plan for energy, You cannot let a cockroach like Putin have a gun to the head of Europe.

 

[JEDIYoda]

How do you figure?

The US does follow a pretty open policy of only intervening when national security or our national interests are affected.

Case in point: Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia, Nigeria, Guatemala...

I am sorry to disappoint you but you have drank the koolaid!! Keep on drinking.
But to make a baseless claim that we did not put troops on the group or commit our military to defend Crimea because Crimea had no oil or usable resource that we could exploit is just crazy!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

The US could destroy the Russian military in a matter of days.

so you say......these 2 words are the equalizer...nuclear weapons.....

 

[Blackjack200]

so you say......these 2 words are the equalizer...nuclear weapons.....

Putin would not be able to justify the use (or even threat) of nuclear weapons if the US military simply pushed Russia back out of Crimea. The reason we're on the sidelines is energy, not nukes.

 

[smackababy]

Putin would not be able to justify the use (or even threat) of nuclear weapons if the US military simply pushed Russia back out of Crimea. The reason we're on the sidelines is energy, not nukes.

And a nuclear strike against the US just doesn't work. No country has nukes close enough that our detection systems won't stop them before they get to us. However, quite a few European and Asian countries have US bases pretty close to them. They could take out one of our bases and still be within striking distance of another. In order to do any real damage, they'd have to actually hit the US, which is pretty impossible.

As for the OP, could we have done anything? Of course, we could have. We could have had boots on the ground in less than 12 hours. Should we have? Definitely not.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Putin would not be able to justify the use (or even threat) of nuclear weapons if the US military simply pushed Russia back out of Crimea. The reason we're on the sidelines is energy, not nukes.

actually YOU misinterpreted what I was saying -- the statement was made - The US could destroy the Russian military in a matter of days. -- my response was NO they could not destroy the Russian military in a matter of days!! -- why? Because as a last resort they can and would use Nuclear weapons -- regardless of the justification!!


Whether you agree or not -- I am right!!No justifications needs to be made for their use based on your statement!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

And a nuclear strike against the US just doesn't work. No country has nukes close enough that our detection systems won't stop them before they get to us. However, quite a few European and Asian countries have US bases pretty close to them. They could take out one of our bases and still be within striking distance of another. In order to do any real damage, they'd have to actually hit the US, which is pretty impossible.

Now you seems to like playing the roulette wheel......who says the Russians have no nuclear submarines out there that have nukes that could strike our mainland?? They do....in fact there have been reports in the past of the Russian submarines in the Atlantic......
You say it is impossible for a Russian nuke to hit the United States?? that is not true at all...

 

[Blackjack200]

actually YOU misinterpreted what I was saying -- the statement was made - The US could destroy the Russian military in a matter of days. -- my response was NO they could not destroy the Russian military in a matter of days!! -- why? Because as a last resort they can and would use Nuclear weapons -- regardless of the justification!!


Whether you agree or not -- I am right!!No justifications needs to be made for their use based on your statement!!

Okay, the US could destroy whatever Russian forces currently occupy or move to occupy Crimea in a matter days. Is that better?

(Also, nuclear weapons would not save the Russian military from destruction in an all out war, so my statement was still accurate, if you want to nit pick.)

 

[Blackjack200]

Now you seems to like playing the roulette wheel......who says the Russians have no nuclear submarines out there that have nukes that could strike our mainland?? They do....in fact there have been reports in the past of the Russian submarines in the Atlantic......
You say it is impossible for a Russian nuke to hit the United States?? that is not true at all...

Yeah, the Russians have ballistic missile submarines ("nuclear sub" just means that the sub is powered by a nuclear reactor rather than diesel engines) that are followed around by American SSNs that would send them to the bottom of the ocean if they ever tried to surface and launch.

 

[sm625]

hahahahahaaa rofl@9/11 nutcase........lololollll

Yeah its real funny. Too bad laughter and name calling arent valid debate tools. What they are is debate concessions. Unlike you, I actually have an interest in knowing what really goes on in the world, instead of being spoonfed the daily propaganda pulp and loving every gulp. The fact of the matter is that the US state dept has given more money to ukrainian terrorists than what was required to fully fund 9/11, at least the official version of 9/11 anyway. I hope you can still laugh when they nuke your city and blame that on the next bin Samwahnmuslin and get you to send your kids to breathe DU dust in Turkmenistan or wherever the next chessboard tile will be.

 

[norseamd]

come on, the annexion of someone who doesn't want to be annexed would cause instant reaction.
Most people are acting in mala fide when it comes to crimea imho. Nobody thinks the majority of crimeans will suffer from this, there is no human rights issue. Just international power struggles.

and crimean tatars?

 

[smackababy]

Now you seems to like playing the roulette wheel......who says the Russians have no nuclear submarines out there that have nukes that could strike our mainland?? They do....in fact there have been reports in the past of the Russian submarines in the Atlantic......
You say it is impossible for a Russian nuke to hit the United States?? that is not true at all...

I don't think you understand what a nuclear submarine is, and in the event they have a submarine capable of launching an ICBM from the mid Atlantic (because, they wouldn't be getting any closer, as the US ain't having that), that still gives us a lot of time to detect and act against said strike. Plus, we have quite a few bases ready to scramble the jets and take out retaliate before the missile even hits us.

Again, it is impossible for a European country to hit the US with a nuclear missile. Even in the event they have a launch facility in South America somewhere we don't know about, it would be quite unlikely it would make it to our borders.

 

[silicon]

no oil in crimea, why would the us care about crimea

it may not be as simplistic as what you are stating....global give and take between the powers has been a game long played. The cold war was essentially of move and counter move and the US and the West has won that one..at least for now. Crimea is just a small piece in the global chess game and what come next..well who knows?

 

[JEDIYoda]

I don't think you understand what a nuclear submarine is, and in the event they have a submarine capable of launching an ICBM from the mid Atlantic (because, they wouldn't be getting any closer, as the US ain't having that), that still gives us a lot of time to detect and act against said strike. Plus, we have quite a few bases ready to scramble the jets and take out retaliate before the missile even hits us.

Again, it is impossible for a European country to hit the US with a nuclear missile. Even in the event they have a launch facility in South America somewhere we don't know about, it would be quite unlikely it would make it to our borders.

Actually you are totally wrong....several times in the past the Russians have managed to get submarines into our waters.....the last recorded time was many years ago and it was I believe 5 non nuclear powered submarines and we lost one of the five.......
I disagree totally with your opinion that the soviets could not nuke one of our cities...

 

[JEDIYoda]

`

Yeah its real funny. Too bad laughter and name calling arent valid debate tools. What they are is debate concessions. Unlike you, I actually have an interest in knowing what really goes on in the world, instead of being spoonfed the daily propaganda pulp and loving every gulp. The fact of the matter is that the US state dept has given more money to ukrainian terrorists than what was required to fully fund 9/11, at least the official version of 9/11 anyway. I hope you can still laugh when they nuke your city and blame that on the next bin Samwahnmuslin and get you to send your kids to breathe DU dust in Turkmenistan or wherever the next chessboard tile will be.

The fact of the matter is I make it my business to know what is going on in that part of the world. I have made my living and still do on occasion traveling for various interested parties and reporting back on what I see and hear.....I don`t speak and understand and read 6 languages fluently for no reason........what I am spoon fed I am spoon fed by what I know and the people I know. The US News agencies are a laugh...to even come close to what is really happening in the world you need to go to other news agencies and still take what they say with a grain of salt!! the fact of the matter your not a very intelligent person if you believe in the conspiracy theories centering around 9/11......the world mocks and laughs at you!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

I don't think you understand what a nuclear submarine is, and in the event they have a submarine capable of launching an ICBM from the mid Atlantic (because, they wouldn't be getting any closer, as the US ain't having that), that still gives us a lot of time to detect and act against said strike. Plus, we have quite a few bases ready to scramble the jets and take out retaliate before the missile even hits us.

Again, it is impossible for a European country to hit the US with a nuclear missile. Even in the event they have a launch facility in South America somewhere we don't know about, it would be quite unlikely it would make it to our borders.

nonsense......in fact ignorant nonsense....the soviets have had the capability for a very long time to launch a nuclear strike via submarine for quite a few years......in fact they have the capability to launch a nuclear weapon from the Baltic sea...

The bottom line is somebody told you that we were invicible and that the soviets could not do certain things that I am sure would surprise you if you only knew!!

Link me to a credible source that disputes that....

 

[JEDIYoda]

Okay, the US could destroy whatever Russian forces currently occupy or move to occupy Crimea in a matter days. Is that better?

(Also, nuclear weapons would not save the Russian military from destruction in an all out war, so my statement was still accurate, if you want to nit pick.)

Let us nit pick...when faced with destruction you don`t throw down your weapons and surrender...you use what you have -- Nuclear weapons.....that` s the facts and you can bet before going down for the count the soviets would let fly everything they had........doh....

 

[AViking]

The world better learn to deal with these kinds of stale mates and political maneuvering where "nobody is really threatened" because we are already seeing the plays being made for the arctic. Russia already planted their flag which caused a ruckus but if the northern seas over the pole melt in the next couple decades we're going to have a serious push by Russia over it's dominance.

Russia clearly knows how how important certain territories are for both political power and natural resources.

 

[AViking]

I am sorry to disappoint you but you have drank the koolaid!! Keep on drinking.
But to make a baseless claim that we did not put troops on the group or commit our military to defend Crimea because Crimea had no oil or usable resource that we could exploit is just crazy!!

No it's not. I just gave you examples. You can't just brush them aside.

I'm all for it. At least partially. It makes sense for the US to spend treasure and blood on things that benefit it. Our blunders in Iraq and Afghanistan are testament to this. We have wasted trillions of dollars there and that's stupid. On the flip side of that though if we want to have some kind of moral authority we need to actually invest something into stopping giant humanitarian crisis' like genocides.

 

[sm625]

`
the fact of the matter your not a very intelligent person if you believe in the conspiracy theories centering around 9/11......the world mocks and laughs at you!!

I would put my knowledge and intelligence up against yours any day of the week. Even after 13 years you still believe that 9/11 conspiracy = no planes = Bush did it = god knows what else has been put out there. That proves that you are incapable of independent thought or rational analysis. 9/11 was a conspiracy by definition, and the official conspiracy theory that was put out by the propaganda ministry was a lie. And you swallow it, and beg for more. The fact that you are so easy to fool, and so arrogant as to think otherwise, is why they keep getting away with grossly illegal false flag operations around the world.

 

[AViking]

I would put my knowledge and intelligence up against yours any day of the week. Even after 13 years you still believe that 9/11 conspiracy = no planes = Bush did it = god knows what else has been put out there. That proves that you are incapable of independent thought or rational analysis. 9/11 was a conspiracy by definition, and the official conspiracy theory that was put out by the propaganda ministry was a lie. And you swallow it, and beg for more. The fact that you are so easy to fool, and so arrogant as to think otherwise, is why they keep getting away with grossly illegal false flag operations around the world.

Do you have a shred of evidence to support a Sept 11, 2001 conspiracy theory?