Jews ordered to register in east Ukraine??

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

At this point all we can do is essentially declare martial law along Russia's entire Western border. Right from Estonia to Moldova. I'm guessing these countries wouldn't be very thrilled with this idea considering the rising nationalism in lots of these counties. Which means we would have to pump trillions into these floundering economies to make sure the natives didn't get restless, so to speak.

We would have to keep this up for at least 3 years because we would need to put the infrastructure in to ship gas from North America to really get these sanctions to bite.

Unfortunately, the EU is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy and the US is in no way able to fork out trillions to support a NATO operation and support all these floundering Eastern European countries. If we tried, the EU would be headed back into recession/depression which would cause more nationalism across all of Europe, and the US wouldn't have the capital for the infrastructure to ween the EU off Russian oil and gas.

This is why I'm saying this will be China's war. We here in NA will eventually get it and start putting the infrastructure in to ship NatGas, and as the situation gets more out of hand in the Eastern part of the world, China will have to step up because they have interests from there western border all the way to the UK.

Scary times a head, without a doubt. But North America has made it through two world conflicts already, and each time the world economy has grown bigger. As the old saying goes, third times a charm.

[billisonboard]

Apr 22, 2014 8:23:04 GMT -5 lazysundays said:

nypost.com/2014/04/18/fliers-ordering-jews-to-register-in-ukraine-a-hoax/

The Nazi-era-style leaflets — which instructed Jews to register as pro-Russia separatists and declare all property — were likely used as a tool get the international community involved in the battle between Russia and Ukraine, the rabbi told The Guardian.

As is, IM (not so)HO, all the talk of "appeasement".

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 8:19:27 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I just find it hard to believe that after centuries of peaceful coexistence and mutual respect for national boundaries that Europe is engaging in this type of behavior.  Hey,  maybe if we march off to fight in Europe, it would be a war to end all wars. 

Centuries of peaceful coexistence? A more untrue statement hasn't been made in this thread. How about decades, at best. 

[billisonboard]

Apr 22, 2014 8:41:57 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

At this point all we can do is essentially declare martial law along Russia's entire Western border. ...

"We", whoever the hell you are meaning by that term, can't "declare martial law" in other countries. We can invade, occupy, and rule other countries. "They" can declare martial law in their own countries or they can hand their firing pins over, their choice.

[billisonboard]

Apr 22, 2014 8:49:09 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 8:19:27 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I just find it hard to believe that after centuries of peaceful coexistence and mutual respect for national boundaries that Europe is engaging in this type of behavior.  Hey,  maybe if we march off to fight in Europe, it would be a war to end all wars. 

Centuries of peaceful coexistence? A more untrue statement hasn't been made in this thread. How about decades, at best. 

Got me on that one.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 8:51:18 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 22, 2014 8:41:57 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

At this point all we can do is essentially declare martial law along Russia's entire Western border. ...

"We", whoever the hell you are meaning by that term, can't "declare martial law" in other countries. We can invade, occupy, and rule other countries. "They" can declare martial law in their own countries or they can hand their firing pins over, their choice.

Bingo, bills! The international community is backed into a corner. There is essentially nothing the international community can do here, but sit back and watch China get involved. Once the dust settles we will have a true global economy.

[billisonboard]

Apr 22, 2014 9:12:30 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 8:51:18 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

"We", whoever the hell you are meaning by that term, can't "declare martial law" in other countries. We can invade, occupy, and rule other countries. "They" can declare martial law in their own countries or they can hand their firing pins over, their choice.

Bingo, bills! The international community is backed into a corner. There is essentially nothing the international community can do here, but sit back and watch China get involved. Once the dust settles we will have a true global economy.

We are not in any corner.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 2:57:39 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I think you have your facts backwords dj, we didn't demand a thing from Putin off the start. HE demanded that Crimea has a referendum. We made a bunch of empty threats because we didnt want to use force to stop him.
 Appeasement.

no.  that is NOT appeasement.  appeasement would be if he specifically asked us to do something "or else", and WE DID IT.  what you are describing is pretty much the opposite of appeasement.  it is not the Chamberlain gambut.  it is the gambut of All Hat No Cattle.  does it make us look bad?  i suppose.  but the kind of reckless swagger we exhibited in Iraq (and that Russia is exhibiting now) makes one look far WORSE, imo.

After HE invaded the rest of Eastern Ukraine, we made a Geneva accord to hault the violence because we didn't want to use military force to stop him. Appeasement. He wants his cash for oil and gas the EU has now balked at this, which goes right back to the threats we made off the start being even more hollow, and since we don't want to use force.. Appeasement.

again, i totally disagree that making threats and NOT following them up is appeasement.  appeasement is giving Putin something he wants in exchange for SOMETHING WE WANT.  none of that happened.

I think this idea that diplomacy has ever worked with our enemies is NUTS,

i think the idea that it has never worked is NUTS.  do you really need me to illustrate that?

there are basically no examples of long lasting diplomatic solutions.(you outlined a perfect example as to why it's nuts with you mid east example) In fact, the only long lasting diplomat act that I can think of off the top of my head, is the deal we worked out after the war of 1812.

the Baqt treaty lasted 641 years.  there were literally dozens of treaties after WW2 that are still in affect and quite effective.  SALT was quite effective in reducing arms in the USSR and the US.  we still have a long way to go for stuff like that, which is why your attitude (which, i have to say, is widely believed) terrifies me.

The fact you think Germany wasn't holding a gun at the international community in the 1930's tells me something.

red herring.  i never said that.  Germany absolutely threatened our allies.  that is why we got involved.  your claim is that they held a gun to our head.  it is nonsense.

Also, re read the article about Estonia's prez, it wasn't until after they annexed Crimea that ppl started to listen. Since you still seem to think there is a diplomatic way out of this, I would say you are in the camp of people still in denial.

perhaps.  or perhaps i am one of those people that won't send my friends and family to their death for anything other than our own critical national interests.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Well demigobles(as you called yourself) during WW2 there were fronts in Europe, the Mid East, and Asia. There is lots of evidence of Chinese massive military build up, haven't you noticed how much their military spending has increased? I guess we will see how it plays out. But China has specifically said they are going to stop terrorism from spreading in Central Asia, which means they are concerned with more than just the south China sea. Oh and Russia and China already fought a war, so there is also history on that front as well.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 8:19:27 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I just find it hard to believe that after centuries of peaceful coexistence and mutual respect for national boundaries that Europe is engaging in this type of behavior.  Hey,  maybe if we march off to fight in Europe, it would be a war to end all wars. 

see, now, THAT would be not learning from history, imo.

we have been through two world wars.  each was more disastrous than the previous.  is there anyone here that thinks that inviting a third one is even remotely a good idea?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 8:41:57 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

At this point all we can do is essentially declare martial law along Russia's entire Western border.

huh?  another police action?  with RUSSIA?  you have GOT to be kidding.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 9:12:30 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 8:51:18 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

"We", whoever the hell you are meaning by that term, can't "declare martial law" in other countries. We can invade, occupy, and rule other countries. "They" can declare martial law in their own countries or they can hand their firing pins over, their choice.

Bingo, bills! The international community is backed into a corner. There is essentially nothing the international community can do here, but sit back and watch China get involved. Once the dust settles we will have a true global economy.

huh?  China?  why on earth would China get involved in a regional conflict in WEST Asia?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 9:19:41 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 22, 2014 9:12:30 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Bingo, bills! The international community is backed into a corner. There is essentially nothing the international community can do here, but sit back and watch China get involved. Once the dust settles we will have a true global economy.

We are not in any corner.

truly.  we can do nothing.  we can work through the UN.  we can bomb Russia into the dark ages (and hope they don't do the same).  we can support Russia in their takeover of Ukraine. 

Ukraine is in a box.  no doubt.  but nobody else is.

[billisonboard]

Apr 22, 2014 10:42:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 8:19:27 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I just find it hard to believe that after centuries of peaceful coexistence and mutual respect for national boundaries that Europe is engaging in this type of behavior.  Hey,  maybe if we march off to fight in Europe, it would be a war to end all wars. 

see, now, THAT would be not learning from history, imo.

we have been through two world wars.  each was more disastrous than the previous.  is there anyone here that thinks that inviting a third one is even remotely a good idea?

We have been through one war that was close to including the whole world. The other that we call a world war was just one in the long string of European turf wars, like this one.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 10:40:43 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Well demigobles(as you called yourself) during WW2 there were fronts in Europe, the Mid East, and Asia. There is lots of evidence of Chinese massive military build up, haven't you noticed how much their military spending has increased? I guess we will see how it plays out. But China has specifically said they are going to stop terrorism from spreading in Central Asia, which means they are concerned with more than just the south China sea. Oh and Russia and China already fought a war, so there is also history on that front as well.

sure.  but why would China fight Russia for UKRAINE? 

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 10:50:24 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 22, 2014 10:42:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

see, now, THAT would be not learning from history, imo.

we have been through two world wars.  each was more disastrous than the previous.  is there anyone here that thinks that inviting a third one is even remotely a good idea?

We have been through one war that was close to including the whole world. The other that we call a world war was just one in the long string of European turf wars, like this one.

yeah, i'll grant you that.  i was mostly referring to scope and casualties.  the most devastating war in US history is STILL our own Civil War.  not many other countries can claim that (it was NOT one of the Great Wars).

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 10:39:46 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 2:57:39 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I think you have your facts backwords dj, we didn't demand a thing from Putin off the start. HE demanded that Crimea has a referendum. We made a bunch of empty threats because we didnt want to use force to stop him.
 Appeasement.

no.  that is NOT appeasement.  appeasement would be if he specifically asked us to do something "or else", and WE DID IT.  what you are describing is pretty much the opposite of appeasement.  it is not the Chamberlain gambut.  it is the gambut of All Hat No Cattle.  does it make us look bad?  i suppose.  but the kind of reckless swagger we exhibited in Iraq (and that Russia is exhibiting now) makes one look far WORSE, imo.

That is exactly what happened. He said let me have Crimea, or else I will invade all of Ukraine, spin it how you want, that is how it went down.

After HE invaded the rest of Eastern Ukraine, we made a Geneva accord to hault the violence because we didn't want to use military force to stop him. Appeasement. He wants his cash for oil and gas the EU has now balked at this, which goes right back to the threats we made off the start being even more hollow, and since we don't want to use force.. Appeasement.

again, i totally disagree that making threats and NOT following them up is appeasement.  appeasement is giving Putin something he wants in exchange for SOMETHING WE WANT.  none of that happened.

WE want to end it diplomatically, we made an accord, HE wants Eastern Ukraine jthe accord failed.

I think this idea that diplomacy has ever worked with our enemies is NUTS,

i think the idea that it has never worked is NUTS.  do you really need me to illustrate that?

there are basically no examples of long lasting diplomatic solutions.(you outlined a perfect example as to why it's nuts with you mid east example) In fact, the only long lasting diplomat act that I can think of off the top of my head, is the deal we worked out after the war of 1812.

the Baqt treaty lasted 641 years.  there were literally dozens of treaties after WW2 that are still in affect and quite effective.  SALT was quite effective in reducing arms in the USSR and the US.  we still have a long way to go for stuff like that, which is why your attitude (which, i have to say, is widely believed) terrifies me.

You obviously have no idea where I'm coming from. I thought for the longest time this could all be solved peacefully, Putin proved me wrong. Good point on the Baqt treaty from 641 ad though.

The fact you think Germany wasn't holding a gun at the international community in the 1930's tells me something.

red herring.  i never said that.  Germany absolutely held a head to our allies.  that is why we got involved.  your claim is that they held a gun to our head.  it is nonsense.

Right the 3rd Riech was a peaceful moment off the start...

Also, re read the article about Estonia's prez, it wasn't until after they annexed Crimea that ppl started to listen. Since you still seem to think there is a diplomatic way out of this, I would say you are in the camp of people still in denial.

perhaps.  or perhaps i am one of those people that won't send my friends and family to their death for anything other than our own critical national interests.

You keep believing what you want. This has turned into a pointless debate on if we are still appeasing Putin or not. In the grand scheme of things he will be a footnote, as I have stated time and again. I will listen to the prez of Estonia who was right the whole time, you keep believing whatever it is you believe.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 10:43:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 8:41:57 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

At this point all we can do is essentially declare martial law along Russia's entire Western border.

huh?  another police action?  with RUSSIA?  you have GOT to be kidding.

You didnt even read the post or the comments between bills and myself after. This is putting words in my mouth. 

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 10:46:18 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 9:12:30 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Bingo, bills! The international community is backed into a corner. There is essentially nothing the international community can do here, but sit back and watch China get involved. Once the dust settles we will have a true global economy.

huh?  China?  why on earth would China get involved in a regional conflict in WEST Asia?

Yes it all just regional, the mid east, central Asia, spreading into Europe... All just regional, keep telling yourself that...

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 10:54:49 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 10:39:46 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

perhaps.  or perhaps i am one of those people that won't send my friends and family to their death for anything other than our own critical national interests.

You keep believing what you want. This has turned into a pointless debate on if we are still appeasing Putin or not.

it is not pointless at all.  appeasement ENABLES Russia in a way that other tactics don't.  it also implies something about Obama that i think is not true.  and finally, IF enough people believe it, it makes AGGRESSION on our part far more likely.  i think it is a VERY VERY big deal- not pointless @ all.

In the grand scheme of things he will be a footnote, as I have stated time and again. I will listen to the prez of Estonia who was right the whole time, you keep believing whatever it is you believe.

i have no argument with the president of Estonia.  i agree completely that Russia plans to annex half of Ukraine.  i agree that Ukraine is in a box.  i agree that Putin is doing it to restore some grand purpose (expansionistic) to Russia- a country that is basically a shell of it's former, pre collapse self.  and i think it is mostly for show.  i could explain that last comment in detail if you are interested- but you have already stated that you are not interested, so i won't bother.

your position implies that we should do something.  you have stated what you think we should do (take over Ukraine and declare martial law).  i find that idea more terrifying by far than Putin.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 10:50:56 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 10:40:43 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Well demigobles(as you called yourself) during WW2 there were fronts in Europe, the Mid East, and Asia. There is lots of evidence of Chinese massive military build up, haven't you noticed how much their military spending has increased? I guess we will see how it plays out. But China has specifically said they are going to stop terrorism from spreading in Central Asia, which means they are concerned with more than just the south China sea. Oh and Russia and China already fought a war, so there is also history on that front as well.

sure.  but why would China fight Russia for UKRAINE? 

Yes it's all regional, none of this is connected. Keep telling yourself that.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:00:33 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 10:46:18 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

huh?  China?  why on earth would China get involved in a regional conflict in WEST Asia?

Yes it all just regional, the mid east, central Asia, spreading into Europe... All just regional, keep telling yourself that...

i am a close observer of China.  when has China intervened militarily anywhere other than SE Asia?

don't ask again "what are they building defenses for"?  just answer the question.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:00:58 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 10:54:49 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

You keep believing what you want. This has turned into a pointless debate on if we are still appeasing Putin or not.

it is not pointless at all.  appeasement ENABLES Russia in a way that other tactics don't.  it also implies something about Obama that i think is not true.  and finally, IF enough people believe it, it makes AGGRESSION on our part far more likely.  i think it is a VERY VERY big deal- not pointless @ all.

Wow, you are literally proving my points. Our inaction has given Putin the resolve to push further. I'm sorry you can't see that.

In the grand scheme of things he will be a footnote, as I have stated time and again. I will listen to the prez of Estonia who was right the whole time, you keep believing whatever it is you believe.

i have no argument with the president of Estonia.  i agree completely that Russia plans to annex half of Ukraine.  i agree that Ukraine is in a box.  i agree that Putin is doing it to restore some grand purpose (expansionistic) to Russia- a country that is basically a shell of it's former, pre collapse self.  and i think it is mostly for show.  i could explain that last comment in detail if you are interested- but you have already stated that you are not interested, so i won't bother.

your position implies that we should do something.  you have stated what you think we should do (take over Ukraine and declare martial law).  i find that idea more terrifying by far than Putin.

My position is that we should have done more to help the Ukraine to stop it at Crimea. What I was outlining to demigobles is that we are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. If you would take the time you would have seen it was outlining that it's impossible to do anything really now but watch because we CAN'T just impose martial law...

[djAdvocate]

no. that is NOT appeasement. appeasement would be if he specifically asked us to do something "or else", and WE DID IT. what you are describing is pretty much the opposite of appeasement. it is not the Chamberlain gambut. it is the gambut of All Hat No Cattle. does it make us look bad? i suppose. but the kind of reckless swagger we exhibited in Iraq (and that Russia is exhibiting now) makes one look far WORSE, imo.

That is exactly what happened. He said let me have Crimea, or else I will invade all of Ukraine, spin it how you want, that is how it went down.


actually, no.  that is not how it went down.  he claimed that they were not even his troops.  he claimed that it was a democratic movement.  he asked that Ukraine hold a referrendum on Crimea.  none of us believed it.  but he absolutely did NOT say "give me Crimea, and i will leave Ukraine alone", and even  if he DID, we were not in a position to offer it to him- UKRAINE WAS.  so, if any appeasing is going on, it is THEIRS, not ours.

that is because THEY are in a box.  but again, we are NOT.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:02:21 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:00:33 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Yes it all just regional, the mid east, central Asia, spreading into Europe... All just regional, keep telling yourself that...

i am a close observer of China.  when has China intervened militarily anywhere other than SE Asia?

don't ask again "what are they building defenses for"?  just answer the question.

Tibet, there current foray into central Asia, there current and past battles on the India border, and the war they fought with Russia.. There is PLA in Africa protecting their interests there, and they now control a sea port in Pakistan.  It's coming... I wish it wasn't, but, we have made our bed, so to speak.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:07:31 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:00:58 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i have no argument with the president of Estonia.  i agree completely that Russia plans to annex half of Ukraine.  i agree that Ukraine is in a box.  i agree that Putin is doing it to restore some grand purpose (expansionistic) to Russia- a country that is basically a shell of it's former, pre collapse self.  and i think it is mostly for show.  i could explain that last comment in detail if you are interested- but you have already stated that you are not interested, so i won't bother.

your position implies that we should do something.  you have stated what you think we should do (take over Ukraine and declare martial law).  i find that idea more terrifying by far than Putin.

My position is that we should have done more to help the Ukraine to stop it at Crimea. What I was outlining to demigobles is that we are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. If you would take the time you would have seen it was outlining that it's impossible to do anything really now but watch because we CAN'T just impose martial law...

you are right about this being pointless.  i disagree that we should have intervened in Crimea.  i disagree that we are in a box now.

i understand your frustration, but the fact is that there is very little that the international community can do about countries acquiring neighboring states.  when China took over Tibet did we like that?  no.  what did we do about it?  nothing, really.  if we took over part of Canada, there is very little that anyone could do about it.  so, the real question becomes: what next?

that is probably what we should be discussing.  Ukraine is pretty much gone at this point.  what next?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:12:18 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:02:21 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am a close observer of China.  when has China intervened militarily anywhere other than SE Asia?

don't ask again "what are they building defenses for"?  just answer the question.

Tibet, there current foray into central Asia, there current and past battles on the India border, and the war they fought with Russia.. There is PLA in Africa protecting their interests there, and they now control a sea port in Pakistan.  It's coming... I wish it wasn't, but, we have made our bed, so to speak.

Tibet is a neighboring state, and i already addressed that issue.  you have an interesting world view about China.  i disagree with it, but i don't think it is irrational.  i think that what China is doing is protecting resources, just like we do.  it is the privilege of global powers.  i don't think that is what Russia is doing, at all.  but maybe someone can explain why i am wrong.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:08:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

no. that is NOT appeasement. appeasement would be if he specifically asked us to do something "or else", and WE DID IT. what you are describing is pretty much the opposite of appeasement. it is not the Chamberlain gambut. it is the gambut of All Hat No Cattle. does it make us look bad? i suppose. but the kind of reckless swagger we exhibited in Iraq (and that Russia is exhibiting now) makes one look far WORSE, imo.

That is exactly what happened. He said let me have Crimea, or else I will invade all of Ukraine, spin it how you want, that is how it went down.


actually, no.  that is not how it went down.  he claimed that they were not even his troops.  he claimed that it was a democratic movement.  he asked that Ukraine hold a referrendum on Crimea.  none of us believed it.  but he absolutely did NOT say "give me Crimea, and i will leave Ukraine alone", and even  if he DID, we were not in a position to offer it to him- UKRAINE WAS.  so, if any appeasing is going on, it is THEIRS, not ours.

that is because THEY are in a box.  but again, we are NOT.

Ah there you go, Ukraine appeased Putin on Crimea, the we tried to stop the violence from spreading in eastern Ukraine with the Geneva accord.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:13:12 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:07:31 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

My position is that we should have done more to help the Ukraine to stop it at Crimea. What I was outlining to demigobles is that we are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. If you would take the time you would have seen it was outlining that it's impossible to do anything really now but watch because we CAN'T just impose martial law...

you are right about this being pointless.  i disagree that we should have intervened in Crimea.  i disagree that we are in a box now.

i understand your frustration, but the fact is that there is very little that the international community can do about countries acquiring neighboring states.  when China took over Tibet did we like that?  no.  what did we do about it?  nothing, really.  if we took over part of Canada, there is very little that anyone could do about it.  so, the real question becomes: what next?

that is probably what we should be discussing.  Ukraine is pretty much gone at this point.  what next?

I have already outlined it in great detail what I think is next. You refuse to accept that China will be drawn into a global conflict because apparently this is all just regional.  So i'll ask you, if we aren't stuck, then what's next?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:18:28 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:08:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

no. that is NOT appeasement. appeasement would be if he specifically asked us to do something "or else", and WE DID IT. what you are describing is pretty much the opposite of appeasement. it is not the Chamberlain gambut. it is the gambut of All Hat No Cattle. does it make us look bad? i suppose. but the kind of reckless swagger we exhibited in Iraq (and that Russia is exhibiting now) makes one look far WORSE, imo.

That is exactly what happened. He said let me have Crimea, or else I will invade all of Ukraine, spin it how you want, that is how it went down.


actually, no.  that is not how it went down.  he claimed that they were not even his troops.  he claimed that it was a democratic movement.  he asked that Ukraine hold a referrendum on Crimea.  none of us believed it.  but he absolutely did NOT say "give me Crimea, and i will leave Ukraine alone", and even  if he DID, we were not in a position to offer it to him- UKRAINE WAS.  so, if any appeasing is going on, it is THEIRS, not ours.

that is because THEY are in a box.  but again, we are NOT.

Ah there you go, Ukraine appeased Putin on Crimea, the we tried to stop the violence from spreading in eastern Ukraine with the Geneva accord.

you seem to be saying that we are in a position to OFFER Ukraine to Russia.  is that what you are saying?