Russia Denounces Arrival Of U.S. Military Trainers In Ukraine

[Purveyor]

Source: LA TIMES

Russia's Foreign Ministry on Thursday called the arrival of U.S. military trainers in western Ukraine a “provocation” and warned Ukrainians that they should rethink the consequences of hosting Western forces.

“U.S.-Ukrainian military drills in the western Ukrainian Lviv region threaten Russia's security,” ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said in a statement carried by the official Tass news agency.

A top NATO commander lambasted Russia in turn in a fashion reminiscent of the Cold War, a reflection of the crisis that now afflicts East-West relations after two decades of hope for an end to the bipolar world.

At an event in Riga, the Latvian capital, NATO Deputy Secretary-General Alexander Vershbow called Russia “angry” and “revisionist,” accusing the Kremlin of trying to reduce Ukraine to a failed state and suppress dissent in Russia.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-ukraine-russia-us-trainers-20150305-story.html

[awoke_in_2003]

1. As we would denounce Russia...

if they sent military trainers to Mexico.

on edit: For the record, I think Putin is a thug in a cheap suit going on a land grab. However, there isn't much we can do about it without going toe to toe with them, and we tend to only pick on those who can't punch back hard.

[cstanleytech]

2. Or how we would denounce Russia for invading and annexing part of Ukraine

which they have done.

[awoke_in_2003]

3. I agree...

we can denounce, but that is about it.

[Xolodno]

25. But was it part of the Ukraine?

After the break up of the Soviet Union, the borders were drawn up mainly by how the republics were drawn up...which you could argue aren't really legal as much of the republics were redrawn to prevent succession....which obviously has caused problems today.

The borders of Ukraine prior to WW2 did not include Crimea either and "Krushev's gift" could really be seen as nothing more of transferring an area for administrative purposes that should have reverted back to Russia. But why stop there....

Technically this area belongs to the Tatars and you could make the argument that Crimea and some territory north belongs to them and should be allowed to resettle. There is precedent for this as in the case with Israel whom we support.

But this idea will never get traction, Europe does not want an Islamic nation in its continent and barely tolerates Turkey's holding of Istanbul/Constantinople.

Of course if we make these arguments, then we can argue Kalingrad should be returned to Germany or resurrected as Prussia.

That's the problem with this mess and others, we are assuming borders are settled around the whole globe, which clearly they are not. For example, Palestine/Israel, India/Pakistan, China/Tibet/Taiwan, Israel/Lebanon, Israel/Syria, USA/Native American Tribes, USA/Cuba, etc.

We can denounce...but that's it. Our own moral standing doesn't give us much say so other than areas we are willing to flex muscle and spill American blood.

I believe George Washington was half right, we shouldn't get involved in foreign affairs....unless there is a detrimental affect to the US....such as WW2. But then you could argue that if we had stayed out of WW1...WW2 may never have happened.

[cstanleytech]

38. Considering most of the world recognized the borders as drawn then the yes the Crimean Peninsula is

part of Ukraine.

[Xolodno]

44. So its world recognition that defines borders?

Then why aren't we doing more to get Israel to stop occupying Palestine?

Yugoslavia had recognized borders...then they changed.

The Soviet Union was considered one nation....then it became several.

Tibet has a government in exile....yet we still consider it part of China and still treat the government in exile as a government.

Taiwan is its own nation....but they don't have a seat at the UN.

Kurdistan deserves to be a nation, but aren't.

Syria had recognized borders....and the way things are going it may become at least two states.

See the problem with using "world recognized borders"? Its an easy way out to ignore a problem or a politicians quick way to dodge a murky subject.

Plus the world didn't have any say...they just accepted it. And given much of the world was ready to turn a blind eye to the annexation of Crimea...in time our globes will show it as being Russian territory (although I think it should be returned to the Tatars...but that's a snow ball chance in hell).

[cstanleytech]

46. Nice try but the problem is the Kharkiv Pact.

By making that pact Russia was acknowledging it was Ukrainian territory.

[Xolodno]

47. Wasn't a try...

I'm pointing out how, treaties, assurances, etc. at the end of the day only mean something by the parties able to enforce it.

Russia can publicly acknowledge, sign, etc. but should it change its position, they can withdraw. There is no way to enforce treaties unless there are guns and money behind it.

We told them we wouldn't advance NATO beyond Germany...how did that work out?

If the Tatars started a significant movement to return to their home territory and have their own nation and government, would you still say no because of some pact?

International Laws at the end of the day are often just "cover" to write in the history books.

[cstanleytech]

50. But see this isnt the "What if?"™ game though.

This is reality and in reality Russia invaded the Ukraine, simple as that.
I'm not advocating for a military response by the US or its allies because lets face it, Russia has nukes and the Ukraine is imo atleast just not worth that risk but that doesnt mean I am going buy into supporting completely frivolous claims that Russia might or did have a right to that region because thats frankly bullshit, pure and simple.

[Xolodno]

54. Well...if were going to talk reality...

Reality is that the territory doesn't belong to either Ukraine or Russia. I also believe the reality that Russia has enormous distrust of the west, and we have done absolutely nothing to massage those fears.

Russia see's Ukraine going west as staging area to conquer them. Paranoid? Sure...but who can blame them.

USA see's Ukraine going west as "advancement of democracy". Has the stench of Bull Shit? Sure...but who can blame that.

And rights to territory? That has always been bull shit, its always been about who has the guns and money.

You're probably going to disagree...but I do believe the USA help orchestrate the overthrow of Ukraine's legitimate President (albeit...still under a corrupt system). And no, not because of Nunlands cookies...that was the victory lap. I was convinced by the actions afterwards from this government....that is..."Giving Putin an off ramp"...FYI..Obama said that. And the sudden rise of "we should change the law about exporting natural gas...so we can supply Europe". To me, that was proof positive...now you can dismiss it...but I can't....I have a wife whose parents came from a country that, according to the US...went "democratic"...there choices of exile were the Soviet Union and USA...religious freedom won out.

[cstanleytech]

55. Actually I wont disagree but it does cross into the tin foil hat area atleast according to the

DU ToS.
Now, would it surprise me if the US did have something to do with it? Nope, not really.

Edit: I will point though there is another possibility and is that Russia could have just have easily been behind in order to justify their invasion, not likely though but just as possible as a US one but the mostly one is that the Ukrainian people just were fed up.

[Xolodno]

62. I'm inclined to believe...

..that a significant portion of the populace was disaffected. Ukraine was/is divided politically by more than two factions (something us here in the US fail to grasp), the part that was not pro Russia wasn't happy...and the part that was pro Russia wasn't happy. It's easy to manufacture dissent and take advantage of it in such a scenario...only thing is...the east didn't like the replacement....and another power took advantage. But that's my opinion.

[cstanleytech]

64. "(something us here in the US fail to grasp)" Oh I think alot of us grasp it, after all

we have had a certain nutjob party waging little more than a terroristic campaign within the US for years now, in fact they have waged it so well they even managed to take over the Senate and the House.

[Scootaloo]

63. Sort of, yes

When a state declares its independence, it declaims its borders to the world. in 1990, Ukraine declared its independence, and claimed the soviet-era borders of Ukraine. in 1991 with the formal dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, this territorial claim was formally recognized by Russia and Belarus, and followed rapidly by the rest of the world.

Legally, a recognized border between two nations cannot change without both nations agreeing to the change. A nation cannot just grab territory from another nation, nor can a nation cleave off a part of itself and shunt it to another.

Now, what can happen is that one portion of a state can become independedent, and then seek union with another state. This is what Novorussia and Crimea sought to do. However, as you might expect, there are more than a few hurdles in that regard.

First, a secessionist state is not actually a legally independent entity until its parent state signs a treaty that says it is. This treaty can come about through whatever means needed, but without that treaty, it's just a "rebellious province" or whatever. Novorussia has never gained such a treaty, and so its attempts to join with Russia (and Russia's apparent interest in annexing it) is not legal. Crimea is a little more murky, since it was considered an autonomous province, and may have actually had the right to secede from Ukraine based on a vote of Crimeans.

Second is the issue of occupation. A nation generally cannot declare sovereignty over territory it does not control, or while it is under the power of another state. Novorussia does not control all of the territory it claims, and it would be hard to make a case that Novorussia is actually under the control of a Novorussian government, rather than competing Ukranian and Russian forces. Crimea, too, was under Russian occupation (unacknowledged, but present) when it held its independence-and-annexation vote.

For your specific examples...

Then why aren't we doing more to get Israel to stop occupying Palestine?

Well, that's a big question. But... legally speaking? There is no treaty between Palestine and Israel. Had Palestine been an independent nation at the time of Israel's declaration of independence, it would be a simple issue - israel is a breakaway province and nothing more. However, Palestine lacked that sort of recognition, and being under extensive occupation even as Israel declared its independence, could not counter-declare. And then after the war Palestine fell under occupation by Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, which just stagnated the situation further.

Formally speaking, Israel's borders are those Israel declared in 1948, which mirror the bounds of hte 1947 partition plan - anything beyond those lines is not Israel, whoever they may belong to. However, palestine's leadership has repeatedly stated a willingness to cede territorial claims up to the green line drawn in 1949. So...

Yugoslavia had recognized borders...then they changed.

Actually if you look at the map, the borders with other nations never changed; Yugoslavia simply dissolved into numerous former Yugoslavian states.

The Soviet Union was considered one nation....then it became several.

Same as Yugoslavia, the borders the former USSR previously had have not changed - it has simply split off nations.

Tibet has a government in exile....yet we still consider it part of China and still treat the government in exile as a government.

Our treatment of Tibet's Government as a government is a relict conceit of hte cold war. Whether right or wrong, a formal treaty exists between the People's Republic of china and the Kingdom of Tibet, that cedes Tibet's territory and populace in total to the People's Republic of China. Tibet absolutely got screwed, but treaty law doesn't really care much about fairness.

Taiwan is its own nation....but they don't have a seat at the UN.

Becuase the People's Republic of China is the recognized legitimate government of Chinese territory, including the Island of Taiwan. This makes the Republic of China effectively another "breakaway province," even though, in a historical view, it's the rest of china that did the breaking-away. Much as with our support of Tibet, our soft handling of Taipei is a cold war relic.

interestingly, until rather recently the republic of china insisted that not only was it hte sole legitimate governmetn of all of china, but also of entire other nations and chunks of nations (Mongolia, for instance.)

Kurdistan deserves to be a nation, but aren't.

Who determines whether a nation "deserves" to be a nation or not?

Kurdistan has the hurdle of being within the borders of four other nations - Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. of these four, only Iraq has any sort of autonomy. An independent Kurdistan would require treaty agreements with four separate nations just to be able to have borders.

Syria had recognized borders....and the way things are going it may become at least two states.

As with Yugoslavia and Russia, this is a wholly internal matter.

[Demeter]

4. Risking nuclear war for the sake of Nazis--the new American Way

The Demonisation Of Russia Risks Paving The Way For War By Seumas Milne

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/04/demonisation-russia-risks-paving-way-for-war

... It’s all about Putin. The Russian president is an expansionist dictator who has launched a “shameless aggression”. He is the epitome of “political depravity”, “carving up” his neighbours as he crushes dissent at home, and routinely is compared to Hitler. Putin has now become a cartoon villain and Russia the target of almost uniformly belligerent propaganda across the western media. Anyone who questions the dominant narrative on Ukraine – from last year’s overthrow of the elected president and the role of Ukrainian far right to war crimes carried out by Kiev’s forces – is dismissed as a Kremlin dupe.

That has been ratcheted up still further with the murder of the opposition politician Boris Nemtsov. The Russian president has, of course, been blamed for the killing, though that makes little sense. Nemtsov was a marginal figure whose role in the “catastroika” of the 1990s scarcely endeared him to ordinary Russians. Responsibility for an outrage that exposed the lack of security in the heart of Moscow and was certain to damage the president hardly seems likely to lie with Putin or his supporters.

But it’s certainly grist to the mill of those pushing military confrontation with Russia. Hundreds of US troops are arriving in Ukraine this week to bolster the Kiev regime’s war with Russian-backed rebels in the east. Not to be outdone, Britain is sending 75 military advisers of its own. As 20th-century history shows, the dispatch of military advisers is often how disastrous escalations start. They are also a direct violation of last month’s Minsk agreement, negotiated with France and Germany, that has at least achieved a temporary ceasefire and some pull-back of heavy weapons. Article 10 requires the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Ukraine.

But Nato’s hawks have got the bit between their teeth. Thousands of Nato troops have been sent to the Baltic states – the Atlantic alliance’s new frontline – untroubled by their indulgence of neo-Nazi parades and denial of minority ethnic rights. A string of American political leaders and generals are calling for the US to arm Kiev, from the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Martin Dempsey, to the new defence secretary, Ashton Carter. For the western military complex, the Ukraine conflict has the added attraction of creating new reasons to increase arms spending, as the US army’s General Raymond Odierno made clear when he complained this week about British defence cuts in the face of the “Russian threat”.

EMPHASIS MINE

[Purveyor]

9. Thanks for posting this. It deserves a OP on its own so I took the liberties

to start one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016116189

Thanks again.

[Demeter]

10. Thank you!

Every time I post things, they get alerted, locked, trolled or otherwise suppressed. It is very tiresome, having my own entourage of un-supporters....the opposite of a fan club.

[snooper2]

34. You should probably think about what you just wrote..

LOL

[Demeter]

35. Think about it how?

That it sucks? That it is not the DU I joined over a decade ago? That the entire society is turning into this?

Really, don't you think I've noticed that?

[Xolodno]

48. I don't post much...

....but read a lot..and was a long time reader before I joined....and I disagree about the part about the "Nazis". Yes, a very small faction of the Ukrainian government is fascist. And it should be a cause of concern...they are Republicans on steroids. But many here completely dismiss it. But if an open neo nazi got elected to congress...this place would be on fire. It makes no sense...its ok in one case but not in the other.

But yeah....in the past it was about having constructive arguments....now...its a curse word, LOL and innuendo. Its starting to resemble Free Republic....and I'll get called a Putinista for saying this....

[HERVEPA]

53. Putinista backslapping. Such a lovely picture.

[Blue_Tires]

41. Milne's a full of shit propagandist

Tragic to see his "analysis" get such traction just because it confirms the fictitious beliefs of some posters...

[Igel]

5. Or perhaps Cuba.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/16/russia-reopening-spy-base-cuba-us-relations-sour

Of course, connections between Venezuela and Russia are sort of an open boast. Some of these predate the Ukrainian business. And the typical response from many on DU was the opposite. "After all the US did to these countries, who could blame them?"

Except that "all the US did" is typically viewed from a few decades' hindsight, unlike having Russian Grad batteries killing Ukrainians ... last week. Or it's an "embargo" that is only partly honored around the world, as opposed to gas embargoes and destruction of as much infrastructure as possible.

Damned hard these days to see the beam in your neighbor's eye because of the dust speck in our own.

[Demeter]

11. I'll bet you a nickel

Russia pays rent for the facility, unlike the US in Guantanamo...taken by force.

Yup--first line in your post:

Decision to reopen signals intelligence facility south of Havana follows Russia forgiving 90% of Cuba's unpaid Soviet-era debts

[Telcontar]

13. We pay rent on Gitmo

Cuba has only cashed a single check tho

[Demeter]

14. Meaning the US is squatting--against the landlord's will

that doesn't count, you know.

[Telcontar]

16. Umm no. Legally negotiated treaty

[Xolodno]

20. Heh..it may be legally negotiated....

...but negotiated under a corrupt government that was sent into exile.

The term "Legal" in the world stage really just means who has the guns to back up their negotiated stance. You could also make the case that since the US didn't officially recognize the Cuban government, we really couldn't deliver payment to them....and should have been sending checks to remnants of the Batista regime. Plus, its not like we ever pulled out of treaties...oh wait....

[Telcontar]

31. Youre right, ultimately the law is a codified form of do what I say or I will hurt you

[Xolodno]

45. True.

But its also useful for equal protection when applied altruistically.


Problem is...International Law, Norms, etc. is all bull shit. Treaties, assurances, statements, etc. are only worth on the parties able to enforce them.

We call ourselves the "world police" and were as corrupt as hell.

[MattSh]

26. Legally negotiated, under the threat of...

we'll come in and kick your ass if you don't accept.

Sort of like a legally negotiated Mafia treaty.

[cstanleytech]

39. Umm no, to qualify as squatting the landlord has to have "not" been

paid but Cuba has been paid it has chosen though not to cash the check and thats its choice.
Hopefully though that will change because of what Obama has done and I wouldnt even mind if Guantanamo was handed back to Cuba as it would probably make an excellent port for trade in the region especially once the upgrade is done to the Panama Canal.

[geek tragedy]

7. They have contacts with Cuba and Nicaragua nt

[newthinking]

8. This is a direct violation of the Minsk accords

Things have settled down. Why do this at this time?

[Adrahil]

15. I just looked over the accords....

It calls for the withdrawal of foreign armed formations, but no mention of advisers or trainers. Can you point out the section you think is being violated?

[newthinking]

18. That certainly was not the intention. So then *both* sides can have that kind of assistance?

Do you really think this aids the accords?

[Adrahil]

19. Well, the Russians would be entering sovereign territory..

... Without permission of the sovereign authority. Not the same.

[Demeter]

29. It's a civil war, and the eastern part of the nation has repudiated the west.

How in any sane way can that be considered "sovereign" territory?

It's like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...who gives a care?

[cstanleytech]

40. So, if Russia were to send weapons in secret say to oregon to help

the citizens there to fight for their freedom from the US it would only be a civil war and Russia would be innocent??

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

51. Obama has to deal with the thug Putin and the thugs GOP at home, no matter what he does

he will be criticized and if he isnt careful some GOP will commit treason again, like Boehner just did

The GOP is making the Presidents job impossible, on purpose.

[awoke_in_2003]

58. If Obama said he like puppies...

the republicans would find some way to make an issue of it.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

59. His wife recommended water as healthy and they went apeshit

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/are-conservatives-really-going-after-michelle-obama-for-promoting-water/

[awoke_in_2003]

60. I would call them asshats...

but they give the term asshat a bad name.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

61. Dingleberries shame on me, i love dingleberries

[uhnope]

6. To the rescue team: Godspeed. To Russia: STFU

[Tarheel_Dem]

22. Someone's trying to shut you down.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service



On Fri Mar 6, 2015, 12:33 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

To the rescue team: Godspeed. To Russia: STFU
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1030909

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Ok we get it, you hate Russia. But must you pollute every thread with a pissing match? People would like to have, you know, an intelligent conversation.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 6, 2015, 12:44 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry alerter but I will not let you silence unhope.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[uhnope]

23. Funny how that works, isn't it.

As you surely know, I can show posts by the Putin Explainers that link to the website of Hezbollah, that expressed unmitigated hatred for the USA, that link to white supremacists and rabid anti-Semites--and tons that just plain transmit talking points direct from a fascist Kremlin to DU. But they think I'm stopping their "intelligent conversation."

What's funny is that if they went away, I'd stop posting about Russia as much (especially if there's no open fighting in Ukraine) and post about voting rights, RW talk radio, police brutality, the need to keep the GOP out of the WH and other preoccupations. But the obvious presence of such rabidly anti-democratic forces on DU makes me step up to help counter them.

I'm sure they try to shut down the other fighters against Putin just as much.

Thanks.

P.S. It looks like Go West went east again http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016116207

[Tarheel_Dem]

27. Please don't ever be silent in the face of such blatant propagandizing. And good riddance to GW.

[Blue_Tires]

32. +1

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

52. I dont know who is trying to shut up who, but Putin is loved by GOP

Putin is a thug and a thief and a punk.

Putin and GOP working together are making Obama job impossible.

Obama is in need of our support, GOP cant do that.

Fuck GOP
Fuck Putin

[Xolodno]

28. Let me ask you a couple of direct questions.

1. Under the current situation, do you want open war with the USA and Russia?

2. If you prefer arming Ukraine and costs start getting high for Putin...who then just invades Ukraine openly. Do you want open war then?

To head your questions off at the pass.

No I don't like Putin.

No, I don't like what he is doing and the bloodshed occurring in Ukraine.

And yes, I believe Ukraine does have the right of self determination, problem is that its so corrupt I don't believe we or Russia should use it to its advantage.

Who should really own Crimea? The Tatars. But Islamophobia is too rampant for that to happen today.

[uhnope]

67. thank you for your polite inquiry

1. No
2. Probably not, but the premise is huge and there's no simple answer. I think EU countries would consider troops at that point.

I don't want war. I also don't want to repeat the mistakes of the past, when Czechoslovakia was abandoned to the Third Reich because all the rest of the world was afraid to get involved.

[davidpdx]

12. Cue the fake propaganda map with all the "NATO bases"

[uhnope]

24. DUzy!!! nt

[treestar]

17. Ukraine is a sovereign nation

Now you have Russia telling Ukraine about "consequences?" Where do they figure they get the right to do that?

[Xolodno]

21. Where do they figure?

Well lets see....

Bibi tried to tell us dump the negotiations and just start a war with Iran.

Meddling in Syria's civil war.

China does it all the time in the region they have influence....and we never say much.

We used the UN as cover to start a war (two actually, but the first one was pretty legit).

The EU is telling Greece how to handle their finances.

Overall....I think its obvious, international norms, laws, etc. are only enforced by who has the biggest guns or pocket book. Pretty sure the EU doesn't like the idea of "US advisers" in Ukraine either, just when things seem to be settling down and 20 years or so we may read about the back channeling bitching. But just as much you can argue Putin has a vested interest in the cease fire collapsing...you could make the same that certain elements in the USA also have a vested interest for it to collapse. Gun manufacturers need to keep their profits up.

[treestar]

33. They seem to be warning Ukraine not to have US advisors

If Ukraine wants US advisors, why can't they have them?

[Xolodno]

37. Seem to be?

No..they are warning them!

Just like we warned the Palestinian Authority not to up its status in the UN, just like warned Assad in Syria, just like China warns up not to host the Dali Llama, just like India warns Pakistan on its military maneuvers, etc.

Ukraine is free to do what they want....but you have to ask, was that really a good idea to have advisers go in just as the cease fire seems to be holding? Probably would have been more prudent the settle the issues of the civil war first and once peace took hold for awhile, then send in the advisers.

Sending in advisers now is like your telegraphing that you have no intention to hold the cease fire....or maybe that was the intention?

You can look at this in a vacuum and say "Ukraine can do what it wants".....but this isn't a vacuum, there are centuries of wars, mistrust, deeds, etc. in the national conscience here and you have to take them into account and be mindful of that. Ignoring all that is what helped to bring about World War 1.

[Man from Pickens]

30. Hey, it worked in Vietnam, right?

Who's ready for a meat grinder and proxy war that will be fought by conscripts, cost us trillions and end up lost?

[Demeter]

36. Or worse yet, mercenaries

Multiples of the cost, plus the added liabilities when we lose....

[Blue_Tires]

42. Simple...So we make a deal with Russia, then:

Give back Crimea, get the fuck back over the pre-invasion border and STAY there, and we'll remove the trainers...

Then there will be peace for everyone...

[sakabatou]

43. Wasn't Crimea taken back by force last year?

[cstanleytech]

65. No, the Ukrainian government has not been able to expel the invading Russian forces. nt

[sakabatou]

66. I meant the Russian forces taking it back, not the Ukranians

[cstanleytech]

68. How can Russia take back what wasnt theirs?

[sakabatou]

70. You know what, I'm just going to lay down

[AngryAmish]

49. Thus is a terrible idea.

We cant change anything but we have to butt in. Jebbus, the Russians have nukes.

I feel for Ukrainians. But this is not our fight.

[cstanleytech]

69. Oh I agree that options using military force are pretty nil but

there are other ways such as economic pressure can be used if the countries of the world support it which means the US would have to find some way to persuade China to stop enabling Russia because thats weakening the pressure the world can apply to Russia for its actions.

[Turbineguy]

57. Well let's hope

the US guys don't accidentally run into some Russian trainers.