Jews ordered to register in east Ukraine??

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:16:32 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

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

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.

Well, you can disagree all you want, but China is going to have to do a lot more to protect their resources, all through the east.  So where does that leave them? 

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:22:32 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

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

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?

I'm saying that if we "aren't offering" Ukraine up, why did we even make the Geneva accord? Why don't we just say, have fun Ukraine, Moldova, and all the rest of you that Putin has his eye on.. We can't be involved, but involved. So either the international community made a deal to try and stop the violence or we didn't which one?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:21:55 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

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

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. 

you are correct that i don't believe China will be drawn into this.  but i don't recall ever calling this "regional".

So i'll ask you, if we aren't stuck, then what's next?

having Putin commit to treaties with teeth, and holding to them.  so far, we have none of that.

the UN is totally hamstrung so long as Russia is a member, and i don't think that there is any way of stopping that.  so, i suppose this would have to fall to NATO for enforcement.  i have not really thought much about it, but i think that i will have to do so in the coming weeks and month.  i don't expect this to end well.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:26:48 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:22:32 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

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

I'm saying that if we "aren't offering" Ukraine up, why did we even make the Geneva accord?

answer: we didn't make it.  it was four nations, i believe.  but the answer is: to give it teeth, presumably.  i have not read the accord, so i can't speak for it- but it was Ukraine's doing, not ours. 

Why don't we just say, have fun Ukraine, Moldova, and all the rest of you that Putin has his eye on.. We can't be involved, but not involved. So either the international community made a deal to try and stop the violence or we didn't which one?

we could absolutely do that, imo.  that is a viable option.  i don't think it is a WISE one.  but it sure as heckfire beats intervening militarily and declaring martial law in Ukraine.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:27:24 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:21:55 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

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. 

you are correct that i don't believe China will be drawn into this.  but i don't recall ever calling this "regional".

Right sorry, this about Ukraine, or you were asking about West Asia, then you were saying.... You have been trying to disect it into a regional situation this whole discussion

So i'll ask you, if we aren't stuck, then what's next?

having Putin commit to treaties with teeth, and holding to them.  so far, we have none of that.

the UN is totally hamstrung so long as Russia is a member, and i don't think that there is any way of stopping that.  so, i suppose this would have to fall to NATO for enforcement.  i have not really thought much about it, but i think that i will have to do so in the coming weeks and month.  i don't expect this to end well.

Exactly, the international community is boxed in. I have put lots of thought into this whole situation and have many threads that outline it. We have talked about it on MT for years, so again you are free to believe what you want.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:32:34 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:27:24 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

having Putin commit to treaties with teeth, and holding to them.  so far, we have none of that.

the UN is totally hamstrung so long as Russia is a member, and i don't think that there is any way of stopping that.  so, i suppose this would have to fall to NATO for enforcement.  i have not really thought much about it, but i think that i will have to do so in the coming weeks and month.  i don't expect this to end well.

Exactly, the international community is boxed in. I have put lots of thought into this whole situation and have many threads that outline it. We have talked about it on MT for years, so again you are free to believe what you want.

if that is what you meant by "boxed in", then i concede that.  i thought you meant that we, as individual nations, were boxed in.  i disagree with that.  we can do whatever we please.  we generally do.  we take illegal actions when it suits our interests, and we abide by international law when it suits us.  remind you of anyone?

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:31:43 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:26:48 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I'm saying that if we "aren't offering" Ukraine up, why did we even make the Geneva accord?

answer: we didn't make it.  it was four nations, i believe.  but the answer is: to give it teeth, presumably.  i have not read the accord, so i can't speak for it- but it was Ukraine's doing, not ours. 

Exactly, just like the Munich agreement was an international agreement for a region.

Why don't we just say, have fun Ukraine, Moldova, and all the rest of you that Putin has his eye on.. We can't be involved, but not involved. So either the international community made a deal to try and stop the violence or we didn't which one?

we could absolutely do that, imo.  that is a viable option.  i don't think it is a WISE one.  but it sure as heckfire beats intervening militarily and declaring martial law in Ukraine.

So that wouldn't be giving Putin exactly what he wanted? Then what?

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 11:34:26 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:32:34 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Exactly, the international community is boxed in. I have put lots of thought into this whole situation and have many threads that outline it. We have talked about it on MT for years, so again you are free to believe what you want.

if that is what you meant by "boxed in", then i concede that.  i thought you meant that we, as individual nations, were boxed in.  i disagree with that.  we can do whatever we please.  we generally do.  we take illegal actions when it suits our interests, and we abide by international law when it suits us.  remind you of anyone?

That's what I have been saying the whole time, we are between a rock and a hard place in Europe, and there is nothing the international community can do. Once this all breaks out, you better believe there will be lots we will do. Namely, helping China fight a war on two, if not three fronts. 

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:36:38 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:31:43 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

we could absolutely do that, imo.  that is a viable option.  i don't think it is a WISE one.  but it sure as heckfire beats intervening militarily and declaring martial law in Ukraine.

So that wouldn't be giving Putin exactly what he wanted? Then what?

no, because we are in no position to offer something that is not ours to give.  again, you seem to think we are in a position to offer up Ukraine to Russia to appease them.  i got that, now.  i understand that is what you think.  but i disagree.  we don't control Ukraine.  and until we do, we are not in a position to offer Russia anything.

i will agree that our threats are hollow, lifeless shells of threats, Aham.  we should not be making them, imo.

we have nothing to offer Russia, here.  we DO have something to offer Ukraine: our protection.  but we would have to be willing to back that up, and that means doing something like we did in Iraq: something that is beyond the scope of the UN.  and we could absolutely do that.  but we risk a lot in that gambit.  is it riskier than letting Russia piss in their own soup?  i honestly don't know.  but, as i say, i will be thinking about it over the coming weeks and months.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 11:39:46 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Apr 22, 2014 11:34:26 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

if that is what you meant by "boxed in", then i concede that.  i thought you meant that we, as individual nations, were boxed in.  i disagree with that.  we can do whatever we please.  we generally do.  we take illegal actions when it suits our interests, and we abide by international law when it suits us.  remind you of anyone?

That's what I have been saying the whole time, we are between a rock and a hard place in Europe, and there is nothing the international community can do. Once this all breaks out, you better believe there will be lots we will do. Namely, helping China fight a war on two, if not three fronts. 

yeah, i heard you.  but i still don't think we are trapped.  the trap is an illusion.  we are basically half the world's military right now.  that means we can do whatever we damned well want to do.  the ONLY conclusion to reach is that we don't want to do anything- because wanting to do something in the US is basically the same thing as doing it.

i can see how you might think that Europe is trapped.  and that is, essentially, what the president of Estonia is saying.  but Europe being stuck has never stopped us before, and it isn't stopping us now.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 12:13:06 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Furthermore, I will venture to say that Putin did not want any of this.  He would not have spent billions of dollars to put on the spectacle that was Sochi, to be followed by the abortive G"used to be 8" Summit thereafter if his goal was isolation from Western economic interests.  This all came at a most inconvenient time for him, as it destroyed the Russian economic initiatives in the west.  However the Russians view these areas as crucial to their national interest, and would in no way let them go.  No. way.

Please understand that I am not saying this to sympathize with the brute.  It is important to try to know how your adversaries think, however.  Putin saw the Russian national security interest here as being more vital than what he is sacrificing to maintain it.  As long as he had a friendly vassal running Ukraine, all was good.  Without that, Russia felt they needed to assert control there.

Picture the Parti Quebequois finally achieving independence from Canada, and voting to join Russia (implausible as the latter is)  We would not put up with that for one minute, and neither would Ottowa, btw.  Ixnay on the ushray.

that is a pretty lucid perspective, imo.  the Black Sea is strategically huge for Russia.  having to travel through little tiny FRIENDLY channels is unnerving enough.  having to travel through little tiny UNFRIENDLY channels is....well, let's say it would not be something any nation with any power whatsoever would tolerate.

if this view is correct, the battle will end here. 

[djAdvocate]

Apr 22, 2014 13:21:23 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

The importance of a warm water port to Moscow cannot be overstated.  No third rate group of wheat farming Kulaks is going to stand in their way on that one.  

i just had to give you a shout out for this one.  this is spot on, and funny. 

i am betting that this is about 80% of what Putin's swagger is about.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 12:37:22 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 22, 2014 12:13:06 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Furthermore, I will venture to say that Putin did not want any of this.  He would not have spent billions of dollars to put on the spectacle that was Sochi, to be followed by the abortive G"used to be 8" Summit thereafter if his goal was isolation from Western economic interests.  This all came at a most inconvenient time for him, as it destroyed the Russian economic initiatives in the west.  However the Russians view these areas as crucial to their national interest, and would in no way let them go.  No. way.

Please understand that I am not saying this to sympathize with the brute.  It is important to try to know how your adversaries think, however.  Putin saw the Russian national security interest here as being more vital than what he is sacrificing to maintain it.  As long as he had a friendly vassal running Ukraine, all was good.  Without that, Russia felt they needed to assert control there.

Picture the Parti Quebequois finally achieving independence from Canada, and voting to join Russia (implausible as the latter is)  We would not put up with that for one minute, and neither would Ottowa, btw.  Ixnay on the ushray.

that is a pretty lucid perspective, imo.  the Black Sea is strategically huge for Russia.  having to travel through little tiny FRIENDLY channels is unnerving enough.  having to travel through little tiny UNFRIENDLY channels is....well, let's say it would not be something any nation with any power whatsoever would tolerate.

if this view is correct, the battle will end here. 

I guess we will see. Especially if the attacks come from within, he sure seems to have learned his "lesson" from the last time...

2008 Georgia–Russia crisis

Vladimir Putin: The rebuilding of ‘Soviet’ Russia

The world was stunned when Russia invaded Crimea, but should it have been? Author and journalist Oliver Bullough says President Vladimir Putin never kept secret his intention to restore Russian power - what's less clear, he says, is how long the country's rise can continue.

Extracts from Putin speech, August 1999

We need to put an end to revolutions. These are staged so that nobody can be rich. But at the moment the country needs reforms so that nobody can be poor. Although this task, unfortunately, is becoming harder by the day. There is no such thing as a thriving state with an impoverished population.

A most important instrument and a most important priority for the government is a secure food supply. We will provide serious assistance to the agrarian sector and in the final analysis to millions of peasants who have just one concern - to feed the country with quality Russian produce.

Russia's territorial integrity is not subject to negotiation. Or, especially, to horse trading or blackmail. We will take tough action against anyone who infringes upon our territorial integrity, using all the legal means available to us.

Russia has been a great power for centuries, and remains so. It has always had and still has legitimate zones of interest abroad in both the former Soviet lands and elsewhere. We should not drop our guard in this respect, neither should we allow our opinion to be ignored.

Since then, he has seized every opportunity history has offered him, from the attacks of 11 September 2001 to the Ukrainian Revolution of 2013, in his bid to secure his aims. He has been tactically astute and ruthlessly opportunistic. At home and abroad, he wants Russia to regain the prestige it held when he was growing up.....

........At home, he crushed the most powerful of the oligarchs, first those who controlled media assets, thus taming the lively television scene, and then in 2003 police arrested Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the richest man in the country. His oil company was dismembered and bought by a state oil company. He was jailed in a process so egregiously predetermined that Amnesty International declared him to be a prisoner of conscience.

Russia’s friends in black Why Europe’s populists and radicals admire Vladimir Putin

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Dem, what I think Putin(the little fish) has done has effectively destabilized the entire Eastern continent and the global economy. I think that because him and his buddies think they are "winning" in the Mid East, he feels more empowerd than ever before. I think that if we truly understood Putin's actions, we wouldn't be reading stories like this.

It might be easy to say now that we get it, but I think the prez of Estonia's "I told ya so" moment is telling about how much we underestimated Putin's resolve.(In fact I don't see one thread on here, aside from mine, about the situation growing out of control inside of Russia since 2012. And I see zero talk about rising nationalism in Europe anywhere but MT/IP)

In other words, I think Putin's actions(spreading himself thin) will go down in the history books as the pretext to the worst global conflict we have ever seen, and I know for a fact that NATO doesn't hold a chance in hell of containing this. There is a massive reason China has stated they are going to fight terrorism, and it's directly linked to how Europe is now scared sh**less of Jihadists returning from Syria. All you have to do is search; "China middle east", and there is a list of current articles that outline where we are headed.

In any event, in the next 7-10 years this whole "situation" will have come to a head and we will get to see how it all plays out...

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Apr 22, 2014 19:04:21 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

 have ever seen, and I know for a fact that NATO doesn't hold a chance in hell of containing this. There is a massive reason China has stated they are going to fight terrorism, and it's directly linked to how Europe is now scared sh**less of Jihadists returning from Syria. All you have to do is search; "China middle east", and there is a list of current articles that outline where we are headed.

Apr 22, 2014 17:20:00 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Well I would disagree, at least given what has occurred so far, and I have explained why above.  I also don't think the Russians have spread thin- I think they are consolidating.  I also think that NATO will damn sure contain this if Russia shows any intent to attack any NATO members.  So I guess you and I disagree about completely these things.  I do agree that Europeans are by and large quite concerned about importing jihadists from Syria and beyond, and also that this ties in with the increase in nationalist tendencies in some of the populations. 
In any event, in the next 7-10 years this whole "situation" will have come to a head and we will get to see how it all plays out...

Indeed we shall ahamburger, and hopefully I am right and you are wrong. 

Dem, I hope I'm wrong about my new analysis of this situation as well. In fact, before Crimea, our thoughts on the situation were spot on. I though it could be contained as well. Since we both agree on the jihad/rising nationalism part, really we aren't far off now either.

Where we diverge is that I don't see Russia attacking anyone, they are working from within, and have been since at least 2011. This will leave NATO essentially helpless. Unless of course we want to go the Martial Law route, which NATO can't afford.. Europe's Far Right Is Embracing Putin.

Also, it's a calculated risk Putin is taking. I agree, he sees this as long term consolidation, I'm sure. However, he can't afford any of this. His military spending is up almost 100% since 2010, which was alarming his finance ministers already, and now there is this...

-Russia stares at recession as Ukraine crisis scars economy
-Ukraine crisis: Russia plans Crimea casino boom
-Russia to pour funds into Crimea, prime minister says

Don't forget, the EU hasn't truly gotten over their banking crisis, and lots of these little countries could cause major pain on that angle as well...

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Deminmaine, interesting thoughts!(we= international community just didn't want to keep typing it out every time)

First, I realized something while I was working today. I wouldn't be surprised, at all, if there is evidence that surfaces proving that Russia was supporting the right wing party in the Ukraine that he felt threatened by. It fits right in with how he is supporting the right wing all through Europe. I don't think Putin really cares about Russia's financial position right now. In fact, terrible economic conditions in Russia would lead to unrest and a reason to clamp down harder on his own people. It would also give him more soldiers as the army would be hiring.

I would say he's supporting the right wing in Europe for two reasons. 1) in NATO member states he's looking for a repeat of the Ukraine. 2) Throughout the rest of Europe, he's looking for support against fighting him. The more support he has in Europe, the easier time he has creating breakaway states in the former Soviet countries he's after.

With the martial Law point, I am talking about if pro Russian demonstrations break out in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. NATO would have to, with the govs of these countries, essentially declare a military protected state to control the situation.

As far as China getting involved over Ukraine directly, no, they won't. That's not what I'm saying though. What I'm saying, is what China has already openly stated. It's also the biggest point you didn't touch on. China is ramping up to fight the Jihad. This is why what Putin is doing is so dangerous. By destabilize Europe he is opening it up, as well as central/west Asia, to the Jihadists.

The Jihad is proof as to why I think that if this "situation" gets out of hand, NATO is helpless. Look at how well NATO did against the Jihad in the Middle East. Al-quada controls large swaths of Iraq now, and they are pulling a repeat in Syria. There are millions of refugees in Lebanon and Jordan, just like there was in Syria during the Iraq war. I would say the Jihad is essentially letting Assad take territories, at which point these refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan will start erupting.(This is already happening on a small scale). Once the fighters are drawn out of Syria, the Jihad will strike there once again, just like Iraq.

This is why Putin and his buddies thinking they are winning in the Mid East is so dangerous. Putin is spreading himself thin on this assumption. If the Jihad hits central Asia and parts of Europe, Russia is done. At this point there will need to be an army of 300 million to stop the Jihad. The one and only place on Earth where a force this size can come from is the far east. Once China is in this battle, they will find themselves in battles with all of SE Asia. Since China would be essentially fighting for/with us against the Jihad, the we would tell our Allies to back off China and when they didn't, we would start lending China support.

Again, I also hope you're right and we can contain this situation where it is.

One more thing. Not sure if you read this article, it's chalked full of great historical facts. The first being that we have already broken a treaty with Ukraine(which I was unaware of). The second is that this is the first time since WW2 that one country has annexed another country in Europe...

Crazy times my friend. Stay , we will make it through either way!

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

There were some really good facts in the article, I tend to ignore the opinions. The other big one in there is how NATO and the US are cutting way back on military spending.

I highly doubt we here in North America would be going back into the Mid East to take on a larger battle, especially if we are occupied in Europe. (The token troops you are talking about).

The far right in the Ukraine has moved its headquarters to the east and has openly stated they are going to attack pro Russian "rebels". Aka, give Putin a reason to protect "his" people. There were also some reports of Russian planes flying toward Denmark. They stayed in international air space, but Putin is really starting to flex those muscles he loves to show off.

I think the severity of the Jihad in Europe is way worse than some want to believe...

www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/04/europe-jihadist-isis-syria-qaeda-terror-france-germany.html

www.pri.org/stories/2014-04-24/scandinavians-first-time-are-joining-jihad

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10582945/Al-Qaeda-training-British-and-European-jihadists-in-Syria-to-set-up-terror-cells-at-home.html

www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-conflict-u-k-police-urge-muslim-women-to-stop-would-be-extremists-1.2620636

mobile.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/world/europe/britain-syria-war.html?_r=0&referrer=

mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA3L1PH20140422?irpc=932

I think Obama's trip is political theater. The real story is how China and the US have been working on a military strategy since at least 2011. This is why, IMO, China keeps upping their military spending even though they economy is essentially turning into a black hole.. The army will be hiring.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 25, 2014 0:13:29 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

There were some really good facts in the article, I tend to ignore the opinions. The other big one in there is how NATO and the US are cutting way back on military spending..

i would love that, if it were true.  unfortunately....

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Shouldn't have said way back, sorry... This is what I was talking about...

U.S. Army Plans To Remove About 2,000 Officers Due To Budget Cuts
China spends for 17 new warships as U.S. cuts back military

NATO's Military Decline

At 1.9%, France last year fell short of the 2% that is supposed to be the technical requirement for membership. Mr. Rasmussen's Denmark spent 1.4% of its GDP on defense, Angela Merkel's Germany 1.3%, Italy 1.2%, and Spain 0.9%. This is what a country spends if it thinks its main security threat is Belgium.

And the trend is down, as a majority of NATO members reduced defense spending in 2013. Among the more drastic defense cutters last year were Canada (7.6%), Slovenia (8.7%), Italy (10.3%), Hungary (11.9%) and Spain (11.9%).

The U.S. reduced its overall spending by an estimated 2%. That might not sound like much, but American spending comprised 72% of all NATO defense expenditures in 2013. Under President Obama's latest budget proposal, U.S. defense spending will fall from 4.6% of GDP in 2011 to 3.5% in fiscal 2015 and 2.9% by 2017......

Bottom line, with China spending more, we don't have to. Why should we? When it comes down to it, stability in the East is a bigger problem for China than it is for North America anyway.