It doesn't matter if this part of Ukraine is more Russian etc. It's the principle of the matter we just can't have Russia annexing countries based on the presumption they are wanted there. What's stopping them taking Kazakhstan next or any other of the former Soviet satellite states and before we know it we are peering from behind another iron curtain.
Part of Ukraine wants to be with Russia.
Slippery slope arguments rarely work.
Why is that? If we learned anything from the 20th century its that you have to hold an aggressive line against tyrants otherwise they will keep pushing you.
Because we don't want major regional powers invading their neighbors at will, especially when we promised those neighbors protection in return for disarmament.
Well then whose to say the tyrants aren't the EU in this case?
Not unless the EU who make up 26 members of Nato are sending tanks, men and planes into Kiev to protect their interests.
Well then whose to say the tyrants aren't the EU in this case?
Well then whose to say the tyrants aren't the EU in this case?
Not unless the EU who make up 26 members of Nato are sending tanks, men and planes into Kiev to protect their interests.
Because America says they aren't. And America is always right about everything, even if there's no evidence. Like when Saddam had WMDs, they may not have existed but he still had them.
You're just a Communist. And you hate America. And you're fat. And (insert other childish insult here).
or just not tyrants...:roll:
Well then whose to say the tyrants aren't the EU in this case?
Russia didn't wanted US to invade/attack Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan as well. But it did happen.
Kerry's rush to punish Russia and Nato's decision to respond to Kiev's call by holding a meeting of member states' ambassadors in Brussels today were mistakes. Ukraine is not part of the alliance, so none of the obligations of common defence come into play. Nato should refrain from interfering in Ukraine by word or deed. The fact that it insists on getting engaged reveals the elephant in the room: underlying the crisis in Crimea and Russia's fierce resistance to potential changes is Nato's undisguised ambition to continue two decades of expansion into what used to be called "post-Soviet space", led by Bill Clinton and taken up by successive administrations in Washington. At the back of Pentagon minds, no doubt, is the dream that a US navy will one day replace the Russian Black Sea fleet in the Crimean ports of Sevastopol and Balaclava.
Not unless the EU who make up 26 members of Nato are sending tanks, men and planes into Kiev to protect their interests.
Not unless the EU who make up 26 members of Nato are sending tanks, men and planes into Kiev to protect their interests.
Anyone who understands that advocating closer ties to a country diplomatically isn't anything close to tyranny.
Military invasions though? I think those count.
What exactly is your point here? Russia was certainly in no position to do anything about those invasions. Are you saying that we hurt Russia's feelings so they have a right to hurt ours too, that we should just accept? An odd way of looking at geopolitics, that.
Anyone who understands that advocating closer ties to a country diplomatically isn't anything close to tyranny.
Military invasions though? I think those count.
What exactly is your point here? Russia was certainly in no position to do anything about those invasions. Are you saying that we hurt Russia's feelings so they have a right to hurt ours too, that we should just accept? An odd way of looking at geopolitics, that.
Which they won't. Although, there once was hope for such a mighty unity representing the best in mankind, it is now less than a paper tiger, whose members love playing soldier, but can not perform. Even if they could muster a defense and show up in Ukraine, which again, they won't, I do not think they are prepared for a return to the horrible land war conditions as existed on the Eastern Front during WW2. The Russians are, as Germans still remember.
So America was being tyrannical to England during WWII?
The point is the that we're being flaming hypocrites.
or democratic, law abiding, NATO members?
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?