Congratulations people of Crimea

[Pope Joan]

A new charge of light brigade will be on tanks, supported by helicopter gunships. Good stuff!

Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Drove the six hundred.
"Engage the guns, Brigade!
"First team from above" he said:
Into the valley of Death
Flew another hundred.

[BigBallinStalin]

I estimate the risk of nuclear war with Russia to be extremely improbable.

The two closest times were the Cuban Missile Crisis (with our bone-headed Chiefs wanting to bomb Cuba to start a nuclear war) and Reagan's nuclear armament program.

You ignored his question.

Probably inadvertently, but nonetheless...

Now in that instance I can see why we'd have been a little spooked, having Russian nukes ready to fire just off our shore is bad news.

But do you remember what it was that had the Russians so spooked that they felt they had the need to risk full scale nuclear war with the US?

I hate people talking past each other, so I'll answer.

The US had just reached an agreement with Turkey to place nuclear missiles there. The Russians were scared shitless. They knew that putting missiles in Cuba was going to be trouble, but they felt they had no choice. It was the only counter to the prospect of American missiles in Turkey. Turkey was just too close to home, with missile flight times under 10 minutes to major Russian cities, and what's worse, it has a lot of really brutal mountain terrain where the missiles could be hidden in such a way as to make them almost invisible to satellites and spy planes.

When the Russians agreed to pull their missiles out of Cuba, the Americans agreed to cancel the agreement with Turkey. That is one of the little details American propaganda rarely mentions about the causes and/or effects of the Cuban missile crisis.

Well, right, the Juniper missiles in Turkey led to the unintended consequence of the CCCP investing nukes in Cuba. The USG used the 'redaction' of Juniper missiles in Turkey as a bargaining chip to encourage the CCCP to remove nukes from Cuba. All I'm saying is that the US was close to starting a nuclear war--not because of having nukes in Turkey, but because of the mindset of the JCS (Joint Chiefs of Staff). They wanted to carpet bomb Cuba, and they knew that Russia would retaliate in Germany, and ultimately a nuclear war would ensue.

The problem was the thinking of US foreign policymakers during that crisis. Patches thinks a nuclear war (or a direct war with Russia) could happen if the US got Ukraine into NATO--in modern times. I disagree because (1) the USFP-makers seem to have learned from their mistakes, and (2) given the cost of nuclear war, Russia wouldn't do anything directly with Ukraine to retaliate.

(Of course, who knows how much Russia and the USG have invested in this political upheaval of Ukraine, but from the standpoint of Realism, the USFP-maker should continue getting Ukraine into NATO--a prerequisite/complement being Ukraine's getting into the EU. It seems that patches disagrees, which is the source of our contention).

[BigBallinStalin]

I estimate the risk of nuclear war with Russia to be extremely improbable.

The two closest times were the Cuban Missile Crisis (with our bone-headed Chiefs wanting to bomb Cuba to start a nuclear war) and Reagan's nuclear armament program.

You ignored his question.

Probably inadvertently, but nonetheless...

Now in that instance I can see why we'd have been a little spooked, having Russian nukes ready to fire just off our shore is bad news.

But do you remember what it was that had the Russians so spooked that they felt they had the need to risk full scale nuclear war with the US?

I hate people talking past each other, so I'll answer.

The US had just reached an agreement with Turkey to place nuclear missiles there. The Russians were scared shitless. They knew that putting missiles in Cuba was going to be trouble, but they felt they had no choice. It was the only counter to the prospect of American missiles in Turkey. Turkey was just too close to home, with missile flight times under 10 minutes to major Russian cities, and what's worse, it has a lot of really brutal mountain terrain where the missiles could be hidden in such a way as to make them almost invisible to satellites and spy planes.

When the Russians agreed to pull their missiles out of Cuba, the Americans agreed to cancel the agreement with Turkey. That is one of the little details American propaganda rarely mentions about the causes and/or effects of the Cuban missile crisis.

Good man, Dukasaur. This is correct.

Russia takes this shit serious, just like we do.

I estimate the risk of nuclear war with Russia to be extremely improbable.

Sure, as do I. But that doesn't mean that we should go out there poking the snake's tail either. Pulling nations that border Russia into Nato is the equivalent of poking a snake's tail. It's just not a good idea unless you have some awful compelling reason to be poking a snake's tail.
A compelling reason which you have not provided at all, BBS.

Are you really this interventionalist or are you just playing Devil's advocate?

If so, I had always thought you to be a bit more Libertarian than that. I'll have to remember this for now on.

First, I try to be a scientist. I want to understand what the USG most likely will do. Given their various frameworks (realism being one of them), I try to make predictions based on that, and see if the payoffs are worth the costs (and risks). This is why I think the USG will continue with pushing Ukraine toward the EU and NATO.

[notyou2]

in fact Nato which is a supposed defensive alliance was used to launch a war of aggression against Iraq, if we remember to back then.

If the Iraq war was a Nato lead war, then why didn't all the member states of Nato participate?

It was not a Nato lead war.

[patches70]

First, I try to be a scientist. I want to understand what the USG most likely will do. Given their various frameworks (realism being one of them), I try to make predictions based on that, and see if the payoffs are worth the costs (and risks). This is why I think the USG will continue with pushing Ukraine toward the EU and NATO.

The USG can't act alone, though. There are other members of Nato who have a say. It was Germany and France who squashed Ukraine's entry into Nato, they rightfully believe that it would only antagonize Russia. Something they don't want to do for obvious and not so obvious reasons.

Use your realism to understand why Germany and France are dead set against allowing the Ukraine (or Georgia) into Nato. After all, Germany and France are rational actors, are they not?
So why don't they want Ukraine and Georgia in Nato?

As to the EU, Brussels needs more countries to loot to keep the economic union going. (Before you blat blat blat about that, i'm just joking with that, mostly). The EU is an economic union, not a military alliance. More entwined economic relationships tend to decrease chances of war in general. Sadly, Ukraine doesn't meet the standards the EU requires for membership.

The EU gave the Ukraine a roadmap of sorts to meeting those standards, which the previous administration rejected in favor of a Russian deal, which sparked off what followed. It's a mighty fine coincidence don't ya think?
What's really funny about that whole thing, the EU sets tough standards in their original deal, forcing the Ukraine to jump through a lot of hoops with no actual guarantee that she would be let into the Union after it was done. Russia simply offers money and cheap energy with no real conditions except pay the money back over time.
The EU was going to loan Ukraine money as well, but only a pittance compared to the Russian loans.

Now that the new government has taken over the EU offers loans more than twice what Russia had offered, and the Ukraine is now in dire need of the money. Exactly where the EU gets the money proposed to be loaned, well, that's another story all together.

The point is, why is it that a sham deal was offered when it was a supposed pro Russian government and now it's a real deal (that could have been offered right from the get go) on the table now that there is a pro western government in power? And still no actual guarantees of EU membership.

Oh there are games afoot here in the Ukraine, all being played by rational actors with agendas. That certainly seems true enough, but it's the people of Ukraine caught in the middle and the country is heading towards a split and civil war over this game. And all under the cover of "Democracy!" It ain't about democracy to these players, except for the useful idiots running around in the streets.
Unless we accept the new normal that coups are apparently now a democratic process. As stated by our wonderful US Sec of State.

[DoomYoshi]

Sadly, Ukraine doesn't meet the standards the EU requires for membership.

According to recently resigned Prime Minister Azarov:

Ukraine needs to legalize same-sex “marriages” and adopt legislation on equal rights of sexual minorities

It must be really hard to get into the EU if those are the conditions.

[patches70]

in fact Nato which is a supposed defensive alliance was used to launch a war of aggression against Iraq, if we remember to back then.

If the Iraq war was a Nato lead war, then why didn't all the member states of Nato participate?

It was not a Nato lead war.

Nato originally was a military defense alliance, and that's it. Since the fall of the Wall Nato has now moved into the realm of enforcing UN resolutions, something they had not done before. And these resolutions are not defensive in nature, but punitive actions using Nato as the club.
The whole purpose of Nato has been corrupted from it's original intent. At the time of it's forming Nato certainly had an important role, it stopped the Soviets cold in their push across Europe, and that's a good thing.
Nato being used to enforce UN resolutions, a different animal all together.
What it serves to do is get the US entangled into conflicts she has no business being involved in at all. Since the US is the only Nato member that can actually project force of any note, it's the US that ends up having to do the heavy lifting on the whims of whatever the Tranzies want done.

No, I'm not a fan of the Tranzies. That's why I feel that Nato has reached the end of it's honorable life and now has morphed into something that is going to lead down dark paths if we aren't careful.

Besides, Nato is a crutch to the Europeans. They become dependents and the US becomes enablers. It's not a healthy relationship.

Nato has enforced UN resolutions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Bosnia, Kosovo (and others) and is the primary navy for non member states. Well beyond Nato's original scope and mission.

It's like having a new toy, and it's your favorite toy for a while. But as time marches on that toy gets old and there are better things around but you are too nostalgic to finally throw away the toy or give it up. So you think up new games to play with your old toy. One day, you'll go to walk down the stairs and trip over that toy and break your neck as you roll down the stairs.

Nato gives the US a say in how and what other member nations do. So I suppose there is that. From BBS realism POV I can see the appeal. But it's not healthy and ultimately it's dangerous as it creates ever more entangling and complex paths which can draw the US into a war in which she has no business nor ability to win. That is not the path I wish to see my nation go down.

Some disagree, so be it. Time will tell in the end as it always does. I just think there are better ways and Nato has outlived it's purpose. That's all I'm saying, really.

[patches70]

Sadly, Ukraine doesn't meet the standards the EU requires for membership.

According to recently resigned Prime Minister Azarov:

Ukraine needs to legalize same-sex “marriages” and adopt legislation on equal rights of sexual minorities

It must be really hard to get into the EU if those are the conditions.

So you're saying that's all the Ukraine has to do to get membership into the EU?
Seriously?

Hahahahaha!

Keep pushing whatever pet issue you want, Yoshi, but there is a thing called "reality". You do know that there are some EU member states that don't actually allow same sex marriage, right?
And they are still in the EU, so what are you saying, Yoshi?
Or are you just being silly?

The conditions to entering the EU are mainly economic, thus emphasis on "Economic Union".

Hell, the EU would allow a dictatorship if she just had the right balance sheet. As it stands now the EU is an economic dictatorship, something the Greeks learned the hard way as she has been systematically plundered by Brussels and living under technocrat rule for years now.

But virtually the entire world lives under economic dictators of one kind or another, for the most part but that's a completely different subject.

Thanks for your input!

[saxitoxin]

By accident or artifice it's increasingly appearing Russia may have totally outmaneuvered the United States.

Two months ago Russia was looking at economic integration with rich eastern Ukraine and her ugly step-sister poor western Ukraine.

Today it's looking at economic integration with rich Ukraine only, while saddling the EU with the albatros of a newly landlocked poor Ukraine.

The U.S.' European client states will spin this as a major win because of freedom, even as their bank accounts are being drained trying to support Europe's newest third-world hell hole. In Britain, the UKIP will use the specter of new EU equity transfers to the rump Ukrainian state to help win over more voters, further endangering one of America's beachheads in the EU Commission; this situation will repeat elsewhere. This may be the biggest blunder for the U.S. in 30 years.

[patches70]

By accident or artifice it's increasingly appearing Russia may have totally outmaneuvered the United States.

Two months ago Russia was looking at economic integration with rich eastern Ukraine and her ugly step-sister poor western Ukraine.

Today it's looking at economic integration with rich Ukraine only, while saddling the EU with the albatros of a newly landlocked poor Ukraine.

The U.S.' European client states will spin this as a major win because of freedom, even as their bank accounts are being drained trying to support Europe's newest third-world hell hole. In Britain, the UKIP will use the specter of new EU equity transfers to the rump Ukrainian state to help win over more voters, further endangering one of America's beachheads in the EU Commission; this situation will repeat elsewhere. This may be the biggest blunder for the U.S. in 30 years.

Now that's a wonderful analysis. True, the wealth in the Ukraine is concentrated in the Eastern regions while the Western regions (with the exception of Kiev itself) are in relation to the East, poor.

And therein lies the compromise that allows both sides keep face. Except Russia gets the better end of the deal while the US and EU have to deceive and spin false narratives to pretty up her face.

And yet another reason why the US should just stay out of all this stuff. To illustrate what Saxi is talking about-

[DoomYoshi]

Sadly, Ukraine doesn't meet the standards the EU requires for membership.

According to recently resigned Prime Minister Azarov:

Ukraine needs to legalize same-sex “marriages” and adopt legislation on equal rights of sexual minorities

It must be really hard to get into the EU if those are the conditions.

So you're saying that's all the Ukraine has to do to get membership into the EU?

Its not what I'm saying, it's what Azarov said when asked about why he didn't sign the association agreement.

[patches70]

Sadly, Ukraine doesn't meet the standards the EU requires for membership.

According to recently resigned Prime Minister Azarov:

Ukraine needs to legalize same-sex “marriages” and adopt legislation on equal rights of sexual minorities

It must be really hard to get into the EU if those are the conditions.

So you're saying that's all the Ukraine has to do to get membership into the EU?

Its not what I'm saying, it's what Azarov said when asked about why he didn't sign the association agreement.

Ahhh, ok, I see now. Thanks! I think he probably left out a few details, the rest of the conditions, but ok.

[Ray Rider]

As it stands now the EU is an economic dictatorship, something the Greeks learned the hard way as she has been systematically plundered by Brussels and living under technocrat rule for years now.

Word.

But virtually the entire world lives under economic dictators of one kind or another, for the most part but that's a completely different subject.

At least we in most Western nations have a greater degree of democratic representation at the highest levels of government compared to the EU. MEPs Daniel Hannan and Nigel Farage have been preaching about this for years.

By accident or artifice it's increasingly appearing Russia may have totally outmaneuvered the United States.

Two months ago Russia was looking at economic integration with rich eastern Ukraine and her ugly step-sister poor western Ukraine.

Today it's looking at economic integration with rich Ukraine only, while saddling the EU with the albatros of a newly landlocked poor Ukraine.

The U.S.' European client states will spin this as a major win because of freedom, even as their bank accounts are being drained trying to support Europe's newest third-world hell hole. In Britain, the UKIP will use the specter of new EU equity transfers to the rump Ukrainian state to help win over more voters, further endangering one of America's beachheads in the EU Commission; this situation will repeat elsewhere. This may be the biggest blunder for the U.S. in 30 years.

I agree with everything you say except the part about it being a US blunder. Obviously this isn't a positive development as it relates to the West/US, but what could/should they have done differently? I wouldn't support military intervention and would be critical of large financial aid as well, considering the current situation in the US & EU.

[saxitoxin]

As it stands now the EU is an economic dictatorship, something the Greeks learned the hard way as she has been systematically plundered by Brussels and living under technocrat rule for years now.

Word.

But virtually the entire world lives under economic dictators of one kind or another, for the most part but that's a completely different subject.

At least we in most Western nations have a greater degree of democratic representation at the highest levels of government compared to the EU. MEPs Daniel Hannan and Nigel Farage have been preaching about this for years.

By accident or artifice it's increasingly appearing Russia may have totally outmaneuvered the United States.

Two months ago Russia was looking at economic integration with rich eastern Ukraine and her ugly step-sister poor western Ukraine.

Today it's looking at economic integration with rich Ukraine only, while saddling the EU with the albatros of a newly landlocked poor Ukraine.

The U.S.' European client states will spin this as a major win because of freedom, even as their bank accounts are being drained trying to support Europe's newest third-world hell hole. In Britain, the UKIP will use the specter of new EU equity transfers to the rump Ukrainian state to help win over more voters, further endangering one of America's beachheads in the EU Commission; this situation will repeat elsewhere. This may be the biggest blunder for the U.S. in 30 years.

I agree with everything you say except the part about it being a US blunder. Obviously this isn't a positive development as it relates to the West/US, but what could/should they have done differently? I wouldn't support military intervention and would be critical of large financial aid as well, considering the current situation in the US & EU.

Probably nothing. This was a brilliant strategic play by Russia. The U.S. was simply outclassed at every level. All alternative actions the U.S. could take would still result in a likely Russian win, the only difference being the degree of victory. It appears Russia's best friends through this whole thing were the useful idiots in the anti-Russian opposition. Had it not been for them, Yanucovich wouldn't have been toppled and the stage wouldn't be set to amputate the bad Ukraine and dump it in the EU's lap while Russia takes good Ukraine to the bank.

The funniest part is how U.S. media is still running this story as "Ukraine slipping away from Russia" and "Russia making a last ditch attempt to keep Ukraine." If they watch the NBC Nightly News in the Kremlin, they must be dying of laughter. After you extract the wealth and population of eastern Ukraine, what's left for the EU is a country twice the size of the Netherlands but with the per capita GDP of Nicaragua.

[BigBallinStalin]

Wait, what? How is Russia 'carving up' Ukraine?

[saxitoxin]

Wait, what? How is Russia 'carving up' Ukraine?

Well U.S. media keep saying "unknown gunmen" have seized all the airports in Crimea, which makes it sound like a bunch of guys in blue jeans and bandannas ... but that's not what the photos show and to the best of my limited knowledge there aren't many countries that use Flora 3 camo -



Meanwhile, in the Duma today ...

The first document changes the federal constitutional law on admission of a new member to the Russian Federation. Its current version stipulates that a foreign state or its part may be joined to the Russian Federation only in case there is an international agreement between Russia and the state.

A Just Russia's amendments allow joining a part of a foreign state to Russia without such an agreement, but if residents of the territory vote for it at a referendum or its legitimate power structure applies to Russia.

http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/721413?utm_medium=rss20

[Phatscotty]

Who said this?

"If Obama is elected, Russia will move into Ukraine"

[patches70]

Yeah BBS, the Russian speaking sections of Ukraine are working to break away on their own, away from the western half of the nation. That's why I said this game being played by the US, EU and Russia is resulting in the splitting of the Ukraine and possible civil war.

The nation is split. The new government that took over by force in Kiev wants everyone to think that it's all Ukrainians that were part of the effort, but it's not that easy. The Russian speaking Ukrainians identify with Russia obviously and don't want what the new government is selling.

And the gunmen that took the parliament building in Crimea, they aren't just normal street thugs like the ones in Kiev. That's why the police in Crimea didn't lift a finger to stop them or eject them, the coppers were outgunned, outclassed and afraid to freaking die in a failed attempt at doing what Kiev wants.

Russia just recently acknowledged that indeed they are moving troops in Crimea and other parts of the Ukraine. Not twenty minutes ago Obama just had a press conference and said there would be "consequences" for Russia. He didn't say what those consequences would be, but in all probability Russia will ignore Obama. After all, what's Obama gonna do? Sic Nato on Russia? Hahah!

Now I don't have any idea of how much Russian (or US or EU for that matter) counter ops are going on in Ukraine, but those gunmen are well funded, well armed and have enough support to make the police shit themselves and stay the hell away from the whole mess. I don't know how much is "Russia carving up the Ukraine" as opposed to how much the Ukrainians themselves are so divided that they are willing and seem about to carve themselves up. But divided severely the Ukraine is.

And here we fools all thought it was all about some noble attempt to achieve democracy. Quaint thought, really. Maybe it is democracy, some Ukrainians want to be part of the west, the other Ukrainians want to be part of Russia and are self determining their own ways.
If we are really all about democracy then why not sit back and let the referendums be and let the chips fall where the people want them?
Of course, the new gov. in Kiev doesn't like that idea, do they?

[notyou2]

Who said this?

"If Obama is elected, Russia will move into Ukraine"

Probably someone that edited their post.

[saxitoxin]

After all, what's Obama gonna do? Sic Nato on Russia? Hahah!

Yep. Just like Hungary 1956 or Prague 1968. NATO =



And are Britain and France still sharing an aircraft carrier? I wonder who has it this month.

[patches70]

At least we in most Western nations have a greater degree of democratic representation at the highest levels of government compared to the EU. MEPs Daniel Hannan and Nigel Farage have been preaching about this for years.

You may be right about that Ray, at least that's how the conventional thinking goes. In the EU they are certainly slaves to the technocrats in Brussels, worse off than, say, we in the US.

However, I'd ask you a question, though I don't know if you are a US citizen or not nor how much you know about the US monetary system but the question is-

In what election do the people help determine or decide The Fed policy?



Answer that question and then you may see closer to what I am referring to, in that we are all living under the thumb of small groups of individuals who make the most important decisions about the value of the currency we use. And these people are almost in every case, unelected, unaccountable and unreachable by regular old citizens though all the decisions of these tiny groups of people affect every single person in said system.

But, that's another topic for another thread I'd think.
I hope things are going well for you Ray.
Peace.

[patches70]

And are Britain and France still sharing an aircraft carrier? I wonder who has it this month.

Neither, it's in drydock getting the barnacles scrubbed off. Besides, they don't have any planes to launch from the carrier anyway......

[patches70]

And in very recent events (in the last hour) units of the Russian 76th Chernihov division have landed in Crimea. The Ukraine acting president is claiming that 2,000 Russian troops have just invaded the Ukraine.

The 76th is a famous division. If we recall it was elements of the 76th that went into Georgia and kicked the shit out of the Georgians. This is a full time, professional division, not a bunch of conscripts.

Yes indeed, it's getting interesting in the Ukraine.

So, who thinks it's worth getting into a shooting war with Russia over the Ukraine? Show of hands, please.

[patches70]

It has been said- "Elections have consequences".

Apparently coups have consequences as well. Who'd a thunk it?

[saxitoxin]

And in very recent events (in the last hour) units of the Russian 76th Chernihov division have landed in Crimea. The Ukraine acting president is claiming that 2,000 Russian troops have just invaded the Ukraine.

The 76th is a famous division. If we recall it was elements of the 76th that went into Georgia and kicked the shit out of the Georgians. This is a full time, professional division, not a bunch of conscripts.

Oh Christ, I bet Reuters is already getting their boilerplate atrocity stories ready.

[INSERT VICTIM COUNTRY] is reeling from a [INSERT BELLIGERENT COUNTRY] invasion that White House officials claimed have left more than [CHOOSE ONE: 10,000 / 100,000 / one million] civilians dead and thousands more [CHOOSE ONE: HOMELESS / HUNGRY / HOMOSEXUAL]. A State Department source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said U.S. satellite photos showed scenes of devastation as [INSERT BELLIGERENT COUNTRY]'s troops [INSERT ONE: RAPED / RAMPAGED / REGURGITATED] their way across [INSERT VICTIM COUNTRY].

"The U.S. deplores this unprovoked and illegal action and is consulting with our partners in [INSERT ONE: NATO / THE OAS / MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL] on the most appropriate way to respond," said Secretary of State [INSERT INCUMBENT].