Crimea votes to join Russia, accelerating Ukraine crisis

[singe22]

Once people posting on here crossed over from "US stay out" to defending the Russian invasion, noninterventism becomes a code word for Russian nationalism. That is what is being called out.

Sure thing blue falcon. I'm not defending a Russian invasion. What i posted does say US stay Out. Your the one acting like you have the almighty morality stick that says when its ok to for the U.S. get in other nations business.

 

[eduardo89]

I don't think you can find one person on here supporting US intervention but there are a lot supporting Russian intervention.

I'm not 100% anti-intervention. I think there are times a nation must intervene militarily to protect its strategic and economic interests. In this case, I view what Russia is doing as completely legitimate and necessary to secure their interests. An example of a US intervention I would have agreed with is if the US had re-annexed the Panama Canal Zone when they invaded Panama in 1989. I think the US should have never given up control of the Canal.

 

[Constitutional Paulicy]

Sure thing blue falcon. I'm not defending a Russian invasion. What i posted does say US stay Out. Your the one acting like you have the almighty morality stick that says when its ok to for the U.S. get in other nations business.

Funny that's not the way he came across to me.

 

[Mini-Me]

From now on, if anyone (ahem) feels like making more collectivist judgments against the forum, will they please place eduardo in a separate category for being a special case? He actually is a Russian nationalist rather than a noninterventionist, so it's not fair to lump him together with the people who oppose all intervention but make qualified defenses of the circumstances of Russia's occupation of Crimea compared to the circumstances of US interventions. What Russia did in Chechnya was evil, like what we did in Iraq. All things considered, what Russia is doing here appears to be rather tame by interventionist standards, i.e. something that only we noninterventionists would ever find consistently wrong, and the ferocity of criticism naturally adjusts to the circumstances. Distinguishing between interventions of different scales and natures and saying "Not all crimes are equal" is still perfectly compatible with noninterventionism.

 

[klamath]

Sure thing blue falcon. I'm not defending a Russian invasion. What i posted does say US stay Out. Your the one acting like you have the almighty morality stick that says when its ok to for the U.S. get in other nations business.

I didn't say you did. I am just pointing out why I am calling others to task. If you haven't seen the out and out defense of the Russian invasion you are not on the same forum.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Crimea's government asked Russia to take over. Crimea's majority is Russian. Not a single shot has been fired since Russian troops took over Crimea.

Does that sound like a people who are having a will imposed on them?

I spoke with some people in Odessa and northwest of Odessa... per their comments, they would side with Russia over the; Ukraine, EU, IMF, Central Bankers, et al. They also mentioned the thugs and agents in Kiev causing the violence and starting all of this. They also realize energy prices, inflation, and too many laws will be imposed by the EU/US.

I was quite surprised how informed they were of whats happening on all sides, oh, and they were also aware of John McCain and what he does in countries. They are worried, even though they serve their military conscription, they're considered in the Ukraine reserves and being called to serve in the military again, because the new leadership has stated they are ready to fight Russia.

 

[gwax23]

I live in Taiwan. The citizens of this country speak Chinese, eat Chinese food, celebrate traditional (not nationalistic) Chinese customs, sing Chinese songs, and are very Taiwanese in their understanding of the politics of mainland China. That doesn't mean they don't prefer by the vast majority to remain Taiwanese and independent of China.

Just because the majority of the Ukrainians speak Russian, eat Russian food, celebrate traditional (not nationalistic) Russian customs, sing Russian songs, and are very Ukrainian in their understanding of the politics of mother Russia, That doesn't mean they don't prefer by the vast majority to remain Ukrainian and independent of Russia.

We were once American colonist from England. Did we favor unification with England simply because we spoke the language and mirrored the culture?

I have a friend here in Taiwan who is from Belarus. He identifies with the Ukrainians. He is proud of his ethnicity as an ethic Russian, but also proud of his nationality as a Belarusian not a Bel-a-Russian.

Taiwan is completely different.

Its not just that they are ethnic russians, speak russian, have Russian culture etc etc. They also want to BE PART OF RUSSIA. Crime was part of Russia long before the US even existed. Wars and blood was split for Crimea. It was handed to Ukraine in a political move by Kruschev in the 50's (he was ukranian) The parliament voted in favor of a Referendum. If it passes than their self determination should be respected, which Is what Putin is trying to do. He isnt invading and imposing his will on a populace that doesnt want him. He is freeing an area that has been oppressed by the central government in Kiev. Kiev has limited their autonomy squashed their culture and language and their economic policies have lead them to ruin. They have every reason and right to be part of Russia if they so desire.

Obama that fucking hypocritical schmuck talks about Democracy and all that shit. Then says he wont respect a referendum of the PEOPLE OF CRIMEA!!!??? People buy this bs? They are democratically voting in a referendum to leave Ukraine. Russia has no moral argument or case for opposing this. He talks about maintain the borders of Ukraine??? Who gives a shit about lines in the sand these are people who want to free themselves from an oppressive central government.

Did the Colonists ask the British parliament for permission? Did we appeal to international law? What a joke my country has become.

International law be damned. Anytime Obama or any leader begins to quote International law you can be sure as hell whatever else comes out of their mouth is going to be bullshit. International law doesnt care about the natural rights of the people or their own views and wants. International law is designed to preserve the status quo and protect the elites and the bureaucrats who benefit from it. Who cares what some old treaty or document says about the borders. The views of the people living within those artificial man made borders are more important.

Obama talks about constitutionality but removing Yanukovitch (who I dont even like) was unconstitutional. Russia is not aggression it is protecting and standing up as a counter balance to the US and EU dominance. I dont agree with Putin on everything but at least theres something keeping Washington from dominating everything. Putin has all the cards. He wont fold. The US wants to set sanctions? They want to hurt the Russian people and make them suffer? That is the real aggression. Sanctions and pushing the region and the world closer to war. Which is what our government did.

Belarus has been wanting to be part of Russia for some time. I hope they do. It would be better than being ruled by the incompetent dictator that they currently have.

The Ukranians can have independence and have a nation in areas that want to be part of Ukraine. They have no right to force their rule on other Russians. Whatever rump state is left can be free to join the EU and become Debt Slaves to Brussels. I dont want to stop people from making bad choices (like doing drugs) and I dont want to stop nations doing the same.

 

[klamath]

From now on, if anyone (ahem) feels like making more collectivist judgments against the forum, will they please place eduardo in a separate category for being a special case? He actually is a Russian nationalist rather than a non-interventionist, so it's not fair to lump him together with the people who oppose all intervention but make qualified defenses of the circumstances of Russia's occupation of Crimea compared to the circumstances of US interventions. What Russia did in Chechnya was evil, like what we did in Iraq. All things considered, what Russia is doing here appears to be rather tame by interventionist standards, i.e. something that only we noninterventionists would ever find consistently wrong, and the ferocity of criticism naturally adjusts to the circumstances. Distinguishing between interventions of different scales and natures and saying "Not all crimes are equal" is still perfectly compatible with noninterventionism.

Any support of troops crossing borders is hypocrisy. If the troops roving the streets of Ukraine weren't in the backdrop of what Putin did to Chechnya you might have a small point. America gets called out for intervention no matter how small, Russia should as well or it makes nonintervention a joke that will be held against true world wide noninterventists is any debate.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Former Democratic Congressman(Dennis Kucinich) accuses US of provoking Ukrainian crsis

Former Democratic presidential candidate(Dennis Kucinich) accuses US of provoking Ukrainian crisis

http://rt.com/usa/kucinich-blames-us-ukrainian-crisis-986/
Published time: March 05, 2014 17:28

Get short URL

Dennis Kucinich.(Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)
Tags
Arms, Army, Clashes, Conflict, History, Military, NATO, Politics, Security, USA

Diverting from the typical Western line against "Russia’s invasion of Crimea," former Ohio congressman and Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said it was driven by covert action by the United States.
Kucinich made the comments Tuesday evening while speaking to Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, arguing American meddling in Ukraine’s affairs is what sparked the current situation in the first place and that Ukrainians were being exploited by Western powers.
Asked how he’d handle the tense standoff if he were president, Kucinich said the following:
"What I'd do is not have USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy working with U.S. taxpayers' money to knock off an elected government in Ukraine, which is what they did. I wouldn't try to force the people of Ukraine into a deal with NATO against their interest or into a deal with the European Union, which is against their economic interest."

"So, it's the USA's fault that Putin rolled in? We made them do it?" O'Reilly asked.

"Bill O'Reilly, if you don't believe in cause and effect, I don't know what I can do for you," Kucinich said.

In February, Kucinich penned a column for the Huffington Post in which he argued the Association Agreement floated between by the European Union would be used to draw Ukraine “into the broad military arrangement with EU nations,” ultimately giving NATO positioning in a country bordering Russia.
When now-ousted President Viktor Yanukovich turned down the EU agreement to move closer to Moscow, pro-Western protests erupted in Kiev. Eventually, Yanukovich fled the country, resulting in a split between pro-Russian populations in Ukraine and those in favor of closer ties to Europe.

"From what I'm hearing, you're blaming the USA for subverting Ukraine in the first place, thereby giving Putin a pass to go in and invade," O’Reilly said.

"That's close," Kucinich responded. "We should be concerned about the Ukrainian people, because they're being used right now. They would be used by the IMF in a new austerity program, by NATO to go on the doorstep of Russia."

Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is no consensus between the United States and Russia regarding whether or not the troops in Crimea constitute an invading force. Russian President Vladimir Putin dismissed the idea on Tuesday, saying the soldiers are part of Crimea’s self-defense forces and that Moscow is not looking to go to war with Ukraine.
According to the Associated Press, a White House official said the US is not demanding a full withdrawal by Russia. Instead, he said the US is calling for Moscow to pull its troops back to their normal operating positions and reduce their number to the 11,000 sanctioned by its agreement with Ukraine. According to a report by RT on Tuesday, however, the Russian navy is permitted up to 25,000 troops on the Crimean peninsula.

Here's the only vid on the exchange I could find on YT

 

[Peace&Freedom]

It will be a test but maybe not what they prefer. Russian troops roaming the streets would make one that is pro Ukraine think twice about putting their name on a list in a voting booth. They are going to be quite aware what Putin did in Chechnya.
I have seen it posted many time that the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan are puppet US dictated elected government around here...

And if there were no Russia troops involved, the new Ukrainian government has made it clear its troops would have shut down attempts by Crimea to hold a referendum in the first place.

There is no evidence of US covert OPs.

Denial. Facepalm. Headdesk.

 

[klamath]

I'm not 100% anti-intervention. I think there are times a nation must intervene militarily to protect its strategic and economic interests. In this case, I view what Russia is doing as completely legitimate and necessary to secure their interests. An example of a US intervention I would have agreed with is if the US had re-annexed the Panama Canal Zone when they invaded Panama in 1989. I think the US should have never given up control of the Canal.

You are not 100% non interventionist But yes I believe you would be consistent. I disagree with you but you are not a hypocrite in my book.

 

[klamath]

And if there were no Russia troops involved, the new Ukrainian government has made it clear its troops would have shut down attempts by Crimea to hold a referendum in the first place.

Then Crimea could fight for its own independence.

 

[Constitutional Paulicy]

Belarus has been wanting to be part of Russia for some time. I hope they do. It would be better than being ruled by the incompetent dictator that they currently have.

There is an expat community of Belarusians here where I live. They all despise Lukashenko. They also don't want to reunite with Russia. They want free elections and an independent Belarus. I doubt they are unique to the majority of Belarusians.

 

[gwax23]

There is an expat community of Belarusians here where I live. They all despise Lukashenko. They also don't want to reunite with Russia. They want free elections and an independent Belarus. I doubt they are unique to the majority of Belarusians.

Fair enough if true. I was under a different impression. Lukashenk is destroying Bealrus. Free Elections would be better but unlikely, United with Russia second best and more likely.

 

[pcosmar]

I don't think you can find one person on here supporting US intervention but there are a lot supporting Russian intervention.

ETA; it is making a joke out of noninterventism.

No it is not. I am not proposeing any intervention,,though it is far too late for that to be prevented. The US was already involved. (intervening)

I am observing. the talking heads and media spin, and doing a bit of background research out of curiosity. It is observation.

It seems some are here still have old Cold War Blinders on.

 

[Mini-Me]

Any support of troops crossing borders is hypocrisy. If the troops roving the streets of Ukraine weren't in the backdrop of what Putin did to Chechnya you might have a small point. America gets called out for intervention no matter how small, Russia should as well or it makes nonintervention a joke that will be held against true world wide noninterventists is any debate.

I think you're partially forgetting WHY we (most of us*) are strict noninterventionists, i.e. why we oppose "genuinely humanitarian" wars in addition to others: Imagine US intervention did right by people in other countries, and imagine we were invited over a "legitimate" government (whatever the hell that means) or some majority or supermajority threshold of people, making the intervention compatible with national sovereignty. We'd still be unwelcome in the eyes of their minority constituents, sure, but so would their own local government, so only a voluntaryist could consistently take issue over that. The bigger issue is that it STILL doesn't do right by US soldiers and taxpayers, and moreover, that's directly relevant to our own situation and fate as a country. Russia is doing something similar right now in their abuse of Russian taxpayers and soldiers, and they also seem to be placing Crimea under a martial law scenario, which is wrong whether most Crimeans want them there or not. Right now, what Russia is doing in Crimea is a problem for Russian and Crimean citizens to concern themselves with.

However, some other government committing a wrong on the other side of the world is simply not the biggest problem on our plate right now. Focusing on condemning Russian intervention would be idle moral judgment for its own sake, and while there's a time and a place for that, it's a hell of a lot less relevant to the problems we're facing as a country. Barring reckless interventionism, we can't do anything about Russian intervention...but we can and must denounce and oppose US intervention for our own sakes. Should we really have to point out "and Russia's wrong too" every single post just to keep up our street cred while we're worrying about the direct impact US intervention will have on Americans? Of course Russia's wrong, just like every government in the history of the world has been wrong for virtually everything it has ever done...but is it really any wonder why people worry more about continued US intervention threatening the future of the United States than Russian intervention violating the NAP and arguably national sovereignty on the other side of the world?

*I haven't been clear about this point, so I'll concede a point: While the forum majority is strictly noninterventionist, we've always had a big tent from the beginning. There have always been some paleocons and such who support intervention under limited circumstances (such as if we're invited by a "legitimate" government/majority and it's simultaneously in our "national interests"), but who still agree with Ron Paul's foreign policy as a general rule and condemn the all-consuming pursuit of a global empire. pcosmar's views for instance are more along these lines. I'd rather they were strict noninterventionists, but is it really fair to lump them in with those who "like Ron Paul on everything but foreign policy" and compare them to neocons or Russian nationalists (except e.g. eduardo) and attack the forum's credibility over it? Their opinions will differ from the lockstep libertarian and lockstep Ron Paul take on the issue, but it hardly makes the movement "fake" just because not everyone is in lockstep, and it's also unfair to paint the forum with a broad brush and besmirch people who are strict noninterventionists...which most of us are.

 

[pcosmar]

Then Crimea could fight for its own independence.

Are they allowed to invite an ally? Especially since they are a small Provence against a larger EU backed adversary

Or do the have to have the Nazi fascism forced on them?

 

[Pericles]

So its one illegitimate coup vs. another.

Sounds like were up for a big heaping helping of MIGHT MAKES RIGHT

Sometimes you run across a situation in which there are no good guys. I suspect this is the case here.

 

[69360]

I don't think you can find one person on here supporting US intervention but there are a lot supporting Russian intervention.

ETA; it is making a joke out of noninterventism.

If the Russian are wanted there by the people of Crimea, which it sure seems they are, it's not an intervention.

 

[juleswin]

Two words: covert ops. The US doesn't need overt troops where covert operations will do, as confirmed by multiple reports covering the Ukrainian "revolution" (read coup).

Meanwhile, NO violence reported concerning the Russian troops in Crimea, no evidence the people there don't want them around, no confirmed evidence of covert ops by the Russian government. You appear to be making no distinctions whatsoever based on these details.

There was a picture on the web showing a representative from Yanukovic's party being assaulted on the street. I have looked for it but I just cannot find it. When the police have surrenders and the police killing mobs are at the door, there is no wonder why the vote was unanimous.

Until I see evidence of Russia troops intimidating Crimea politicians, I will continue to say that this set of vote is different from the shotgun style vote they had in Kiev.