I think he should have reminded the world that Russia signed a treaty in support of non-interference by anyone in Ukraine. And that the United States, Great Britain and many in the rest of the world are disappointed to see this so-obvious violation of that treaty by one of the very countries who signed it. He could have said that the United States and other signers will be weighing their options and hope to keep in constant and close contact with Russia as this moves forward toward the goal of understanding why they have chosen to take military action and what ramifications that action will have in the rest of the world.
Have you been asleep for the past few years?!?
do we know where the russian troops are heading? the border of crimea and ukraine? their millitary bases? do we know what purpose the troops are there for.
you think we should have destabilized iran? Even though the entire Middle east is already destabilized because of Iraq an syria, you want to add more chaos to the region.
...making more of an effort to destabilize Iran and bring about regime change in Iran
You didn't sign an agreement requiring intervention. You signed an agreement that makes it impossible for future non-proliferation treaties to be taken seriously if no action is taken.
I think its depends on how you read the treaty and it is worth pointing out that diplomats are still reading over the treaty as we speak so nothing certain. It's this paticular wording that worries me.
"The three powers committed to “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”.
Clearly Russia have broken this agreement and now the question is how will the West react? If we fail to act on this then what does this mean for all our other treaties worldwide and our overall global position?
I see the paradigm and my view is that the USA is the aggresser in this matter. Nuland admitted that the USA has spent $5 billion in the Ukraine. Now you know we did not buy Ukrainian bonds. We did not send GMO corn, peas, beans, tomatos, or staples of some nature to feed the PEOPLE. We formed NGOs and staff that could organize and bring together large population groups for protests. Apparently, $5 billion worth and that will buy a lot of protestors, methinks. Meanwhile, Russia became the largest trading partner of Ukraine and still is. Many Ukrainians speak Russian, especially in the South and East. The protestors, perhaps $5 billion worth come from Western Ukraine and don't speak Russian. Wowser, could that be a magnification of the root problem. I'm pretty sure Russia is also signatory to this treaty everyone is referring to and being the closest neighbor is in the most favorable position to react in the most beneficial manner for Ukrainians overall. After all, it is Russia that had bailed out Ukraine. It is Russia that sells gas to Ukraine well below World Market Value, but perhaps not after this contractual quarter. It is Russia that is Ukraines largest trading partner. Give the Western Ukraind to the IMF, part and parcel, and the IMF will strip the assetts for the Corporate NWO and initiate an austerity program and there will be 50% unemployment rate. There will be missile bases in the Ukraine , allegedely to defend the EU from missile attacks from Iran. Actually, they will have Russian targets. Gee, could that be why Putin reacts strongly, decisevly and forcefully to prevent Ukrainian manipulation by Western Corporate interests?
Welcome to the world without American leadership, folks.
I agree with you that Russia has violated the agreement. Had Ukraine moved against Russia's naval base, that would have been a different matter. The problem is that the agreement was silent as to what would happen if its terms were violated.
In terms of what can be done, there are no practical military solutions. Non-military measures can and most definitely should be reviewed for possible implementation. Future agreements need to avoid circumventing the tricky issue of enforcement mechanisms. Usually, language about security guarantees or other terms that fall short of actual credible enforcement machinery are utilized to assure an agreement is reached.
I see the paradigm and my view is that the USA is the aggresser in this matter.
I, for one, am shock that Dave found a way to make the US the bad guy. Unexpected!
You're tuned to the "Mighty Wurlitzer" and I don't think they have informed you what to think yet. You know. Talking points. Everybody on the same page, written by????? Hang in there, Bubba, they'll let you know what to think pretty soon. Have a glass of milk and two cookies. Nothing to see here. Move on.
Putin has received permission from the Russian Parliament to mobilize the country's military in the Ukraine. Parliament has also requested that the Russian Ambassador be recalled from the United States in light of President Obama's remarks yesterday.
I guess we showed him. The President's timing on this one was all wrong.
Putin gets permission to use military in Ukraine; parliament wants to pull ambassador in DC | Fox News
Why are we getting involved in this?
Because you signed one of those pesky treaties.
Will Putin go into the rest of the Ukraine, besides their Crimean base ?
More than just this treaty with the US and UK, Ukraine has an agreement with NATO as well. Given that they had started the MAP (membership application process), all Ukraine has to do is make a request to NATO for assistance, even though they are not an actual member of NATO.
In 2002 NATO and Ukraine signed and adopted the Ukraine Action Plan. Russia's reaction to this was violent. In 2010, when the recently deposed pro-Russian President of Ukraine was elected, he and the Ukrainian parliament stopped the NATO MAP, but did not withdraw completely, so technically, the MAP is still in place.
Add to this; that Georgia is also involved in a NATO MAP, that the Russians invaded Georgia in 2008 and GW Bush had to send the 6th Fleet to the Black Sea to impose a no-fly zone over Georgia, what Georgia may do regarding requests for protection from potential spill over in this event may lead to NATO forces entering the Black Sea... and, dozens of other players such as Moldova and Romania which also have treaties with the US and UK... And lastly... Turkey which is just across the Black Sea from all this tension, is and has been for decades, a NATO member country.
What worries me are as follows: the White House just made the announcement to reduce our military force to pre-WWII numbers; the White House put a "line" to not be crossed in Syria and did nothing when the line was crossed; the White House has allowed Russia to take over and lead Iranian nuclear negotiation; the White House bowed to Russia in relation to force in Libya and and other Middle East conflicts; the White House has bowed to Russia and removed our missile defense systems from former Soviet block regions; Vladimir Putin has stated numerous times that he wants to reform the Soviet Union and is doing everything he can do to consolidate his power and gain territorial dominance, and; now the White House is attempting to draw another line in regard to Russia which Putin is obviously laughing at in the face of the world.
In essence, I don't feel comfortable at all that the White House has the talent, knowledge, vision or most importantly the respect of other global leaders to control this situation before it grows and gets completely out of control.
This rings close to what those that study history will remember occurred in the Sudetenland and even Austria in the 1930's.
History repeating itself.
Do you think Putin would bluff Obama after Rice , Kerry and Obama and Powers blow Hot Air?
Calling the situation in Ukraine "as dangerous as it is destabilizing," U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power said, "It is time for the Russian military intervention in Ukraine to end." She warned that "Russia's provocative actions could easily push the situation beyond the breaking point." She asked that Russia directly engage the Ukraine government and called for international monitors to be sent to Ukraine to observe the situation.
"Russia and the West find themselves on the brink of a confrontation far worse than in 2008 over Georgia," Dmitri Trenin, the director of Carnegie Moscow Center, said in a commentary posted on its website. In Georgia, Russian troops quickly routed the Georgian military after they tried to regain control over the separatist province of South Ossetia that has close ties with Moscow.....snip~
Hey there MMC, someone mentioned that Putin is withdrawing his ambassadors over comments Obama made?? Do you know what those comments were?
Heya Monte. :2wave: I figured they were the ones from Post 114 unless someone can find something else......Sounds like Obama tried to put some bass in his voice. Then got called on it. So Obama came back with the only thing he could. Willing to send in monitors.
Which Putin knows that's a UN call. So he pulled his Ambassador after they allowed that open Security Council Session. IMO!
Both Powers and Rice have been played and made to look like fools. So the Russians aren't sweting them. Same deal with Kerry as Lavrov has him cowled.
Your saying Russia pulled their ambassador to the US?
Will Putin go into the rest of the Ukraine, besides their Crimean base ?
Oh man. This is a very hot situation with only one right answer and about a hundred wrong ones. I am sure the White House is a very tense place right now.
I think he should have reminded the world that Russia signed a treaty in support of non-interference by anyone in Ukraine. And that the United States, Great Britain and many in the rest of the world are disappointed to see this so-obvious violation of that treaty by one of the very countries who signed it. He could have said that the United States and other signers will be weighing their options and hope to keep in constant and close contact with Russia as this moves forward toward the goal of understanding why they have chosen to take military action and what ramifications that action will have in the rest of the world.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?