Ukraine in turmoil

[Todd]

If you can't understand how comparing the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, in order to "free" the "Russians of Ukraine", and the absence of reaction from European leaders, can be compared to the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938 by Germany, in order to "free" the "Germans of Sudetenland", and the absence of reaction from European leaders back then, I can't really do anything for you.

It is good to see that you read articles here or there, though evidently only articles with one basic outlook, and that you can repeat superficial similarities, but you offer no proper historical context, no comparative strategic analyses, or anything else.  And you rely on a variant of the tired Nazi analogy, though you are evidently convinced that by attempting to shift the focus to Chamberlain vs Merkel you are not doing so - but the pictures you posted tell another story altogether.

[Cosi bel do]

It is good to see that you read articles here or there, though evidently only articles with one basic outlook, and that you can repeat superficial similarities, but you offer no proper historical context, no comparative strategic analyses, or anything else.  And you rely on a variant of the tired Nazi analogy, though you are evidently convinced that by attempting to shift the focus to Chamberlain vs Merkel you are not doing so - but the pictures you posted tell another story altogether.

I appreciate all the contempt I can receive from a self-proclaimed Yankee Republican

[Ken B]

I appreciate all the contempt I can receive from a self-proclaimed Yankee Republican

Whoa Nelly! Although Canadian I suspect I am much more a Republican (a South Park Republican) than Todd, and I agree with you.

Your post was a sardonic comment on the fecklessness of the modern western leaders. Ironic that Todd should object to anything sardonic, but there it is.

I don't know what the best policy is. The worst is announcing we will stand with Ukraine and then not doing so, in the hope of peace. I think that is Your (Cosi) worry and that worry the reason for Your sardonic comments. Well justified I think.

[mc ukrneal]

It is good to see that you read articles here or there, though evidently only articles with one basic outlook, and that you can repeat superficial similarities, but you offer no proper historical context, no comparative strategic analyses, or anything else.  And you rely on a variant of the tired Nazi analogy, though you are evidently convinced that by attempting to shift the focus to Chamberlain vs Merkel you are not doing so - but the pictures you posted tell another story altogether.

I don't really understand what you want. He gave you the bare outline. To be honest, I would have listed a bunch of events that would have drawn some similarities, but I can see you have poo-poo'd that as insufficient. For example, one can draw parallels with the invasion and subsequent annexation of Crimea followed by the invasion of Ukraine, the crack down on opposition and laws on various groups (gays for example) and the full frontal PR war being waged by Russia today. Just how much further does one have to go until you will be satisfied (not that I intend to necessarily do try to do so)?

[Ken B]

Ah!  Godwin's Law!

Ah! Nonsense upon stilts!

Godwin's Law is about comparing your opponent to Hitler. Cosi is comparing elected leaders to deluded fools. 

[Todd]

Your post was a sardonic comment on the fecklessness of the modern western leaders.

I suppose it's seeing the lazy and inaccurate comparison to Nazis, supposedly not in this case though (though with a Hitler pic and mention of Munich), that's irksome.  A sardonic comment deploying propaganda should be replied to.  There was only one Hitler, and he's dead.

He gave you the bare outline.

Yes, he parroted the line about saving Russian populations.  I suspect I know at least some of the events and actions you would have listed, as you have commented on Russia before. 

In any event, implicit in any comparison to Nazis, direct or indirect, is the fear-mongering "what next"?  Russia will not be satisfied with either annexing Ukraine (which seems unlikely) or maintaining a good old fashioned sphere of influence (which is much more likely), and therefore something must be done.  For the Ukrainian people.  For Democracy.  You know, stuff like that.  But what I see is aggressive expansion by the US and EU right up to Russia's border, and with it, had it succeeded, control of one of the most strategically important regions for Russia.  I'm not at all surprised by Putin's reaction.  Russia has legitimate security concerns.  I see Russian actions as mostly defensive, and Ukraine is far more important to Russia than it is to the EU or US.  Putin is a detestable autocrat, but that doesn't mean the strategic importance of Ukraine to Russia isn't real.

[Todd]

Ah! Nonsense upon stilts!

Godwin's Law is about comparing your opponent to Hitler. Cosi is comparing elected leaders to deluded fools.

And the deluded fools were dealing with Nazis.  Claims that dredging up Chamberlain and appeasement are somehow separate from this are, as I stated before, incredible.

Incidentally, Godwin himself stated that his "law" merely relies on a gratuitous references to Nazis, not directly comparing someone to Hitler.  Plopping in an ancient newspaper with a picture of, yes, Hitler, sure seems gratuitous to me.  Maybe not to you.

[mc ukrneal]

I suppose it's seeing the lazy and inaccurate comparison to Nazis, supposedly not in this case though (though with a Hitler pic and mention of Munich), that's irksome.  A sardonic comment deploying propaganda should be replied to.  There was only one Hitler, and he's dead.




Yes, he parroted the line about saving Russian populations.  I suspect I know at least some of the events and actions you would have listed, as you have commented on Russia before. 

In any event, implicit in any comparison to Nazis, direct or indirect, is the fear-mongering "what next"?  Russia will not be satisfied with either annexing Ukraine (which seems unlikely) or maintaining a good old fashioned sphere of influence (which is much more likely), and therefore something must be done.  For the Ukrainian people.  For Democracy.  You know, stuff like that.  But what I see is aggressive expansion by the US and EU right up to Russia's border, and with it, had it succeeded, control of one of the most strategically important regions for Russia.  I'm not at all surprised by Putin's reaction.  Russia has legitimate security concerns.  I see Russian actions as mostly defensive, and Ukraine is far more important to Russia than it is to the EU or US.  Putin is a detestable autocrat, but that doesn't mean the strategic importance of Ukraine to Russia isn't real.

Invading a country is defensive? Even when they signed a treaty agreeing to respect the territorial intergrity of said country? That makes little sense. The irony is that the Ukrainian people were always very pro-Russia for the most part. At least half of the country are now lost in this respect. 

[Ken B]

I suppose it's seeing the lazy and inaccurate comparison to Nazis, supposedly not in this case though (though with a Hitler pic and mention of Munich), that's irksome.  A sardonic comment deploying propaganda should be replied to.  There was only one Hitler, and he's dead.




Yes, he parroted the line about saving Russian populations.  I suspect I know at least some of the events and actions you would have listed, as you have commented on Russia before. 

In any event, implicit in any comparison to Nazis, direct or indirect, is the fear-mongering "what next"?  Russia will not be satisfied with either annexing Ukraine (which seems unlikely) or maintaining a good old fashioned sphere of influence (which is much more likely), and therefore something must be done.  For the Ukrainian people.  For Democracy.  You know, stuff like that.  But what I see is aggressive expansion by the US and EU right up to Russia's border, and with it, had it succeeded, control of one of the most strategically important regions for Russia.  I'm not at all surprised by Putin's reaction.  Russia has legitimate security concerns.  I see Russian actions as mostly defensive, and Ukraine is far more important to Russia than it is to the EU or US.  Putin is a detestable autocrat, but that doesn't mean the strategic importance of Ukraine to Russia isn't real.

Actually, yes. Stuff like that. Russia has intelligible security concerns.  Not a legitimate warrant for invading a country, stifling its democracy, or rounding up its citizens.  Even assuming you are right about Putin's motives.

But if Russia has security conerns, don't Poland or Finland, or Latvia, or Germany? Or Ukraine? Is it really that clear these are best met by aquiescing to anything Putin does in Ukraine?

There were two photos posted by Cosi. Both had banners about Peace. Both had pictures -- of Neville Chamberlain. I suggest you are missing the lede.

[Ken B]

Invading a country is defensive? Even when they signed a treaty agreeing to respect the territorial intergrity of said country? That makes little sense. The irony is that the Ukrainian people were always very pro-Russia for the most part. At least half of the country are now lost in this respect.

Reminds me of the time we defended your White House. Well, it wasn't white then. 

[Todd]

Invading a country is defensive?

That is the logic behind preemptive war. 

But let's stick with Russia and Ukraine: With respect to slowing, or halting, additional expansion of the EU, yes.  Ukraine is a proxy battlefield.  It has the misfortune of being one of the latest playthings of great powers. 

But if Russia has security conerns, don't Poland or Finland, or Latvia, or Germany? Or Ukraine? Is it really that clear these are best met by aquiescing to anything Putin does in Ukraine?

Of course all countries have security concerns.  Your last question would only have meaning if anyone suggested that anyone acquiesce to anything Putin does.  I'm not sure who has suggested that here.  Please, point out where someone did.

What serious and credible offers have been made with respect to guaranteeing Russian security in the event it decided to withdraw from Ukraine completely?  Is there a serious offer to allow it permanent use of the Crimea, say on a long-term lease basis?  What types of mechanisms are included in whatever proposed treaties may be on offer in the event that Ukraine or Russia violates terms of the agreement?  It is essentially impossible to see how any Russian leader would let Ukraine fall completely out of its sphere of influence.  Letting the country get carved up, sure, that can make sense, but having a potentially hostile power right up again Russia, and one that would allow a massive front to open, while being stripped of a warm water port, would be strategically disastrous for Russia.  Now, of course, this relies on less positive views of the EU and specific European powers, and the US, than many here apparently hold. 

Russia is still a great power, and it acts like one.  You know, just like the US.  I'm reminded of a quote attributed to Stanley Kubrick, where he stated that great powers act like gangsters and small powers act like prostitutes.

There were two photos posted by Cosi. Both had banners about Peace. Both had pictures -- of Neville Chamberlain. I suggest you are missing the lede.

The photos have value only because of the subject matter - appeasement of Nazis.  'Tis gratuitous.

[Florestan]

what I see is aggressive expansion by the US and EU right up to Russia's border

Aggressive expansion by the EU? I must have missed the news about EU troops being deployed in, and taking control of, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - these being the only recently admitted EU countries bordering Russia.

You want relevant comparisons? Here is one for you. When Germany invaded Belgium in 1914, thus violating the 1839 Treaty of London, the German Chancellor von Bethmann-Hollweg dismissed it a "scrap of paper". Well, take a look at another scrap of paper:

Budapest, 5 December 1994

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,

Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State,

Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,

Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.

Confirm the following:


    The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

    The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

    The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.

    The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

    The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm, in the case of the Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.

    The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.

This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature.

Signed in four copies having equal validity in the English, Russian and Ukrainian languages.

Now, that any treaty or memorandum bearing Russia´s signature (be it Imperial Russia, USSR or the Russian Federation) is not worth for them more than the paper it is written on, I as a Romanian know only too well. I am only sorry to notice that the diplomatic honor, or the honor period, of the US and UK is just the same: a mere scrap of paper...

[Florestan]

I'm reminded of a quote attributed to Stanley Kubrick, where he stated that great powers act like gangsters and small powers act like prostitutes.

Maybe, but there is a huge moral difference between the prostitutes who are left with no other option for surviving, and the gangsters who took away from them all other options.

[jochanaan]

Well, the events as they happened tend to show that no form of appeasement would have stopped the National Socialist Party's continued violent aggression.  Recent events suggest that maybe Putin and his supporters may be no more prone to "listen to reason."

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I am only sorry to notice that the diplomatic honor, or the honor period, of the US and UK is just the same: a mere scrap of paper...

You only just now realized this? Members of a lot of Indian tribes would laugh at such naivete. Treaties only matter if you have the force and will to back them up.

[Ken B]

Harper meets Putin. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-15/harper-uses-handshake-to-tell-putin-he-must-get-out-of-ukraine-.html

[LapsangS]

I believe that USSR should be returned

[Florestan]

I believe that USSR should be returned

And I suppose you are only too willing to join it as the Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic... 

[North Star]

I believe that USSR should be returned

To the fiery chasm from whence it came, you mean? 

[Ken B]

I'm not sure if this belongs here or European Politics. But since we are talking about Russian invasions Putin's totally justified, purely defensive reaction to the shocking aggression of the Finns, Poles, and Belgians, I chose here.
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2014/11/17/putin-targets-the-scandinavians/