U guys saying that ukraine should give up crimea are just stupid. sorry for offensive words, but you are. because putin is not after crimea. he wants whole ukraine to be under eurasia, his whole project to counter europe union. ukraine would not have joined and u have this situation. Putin does not care about etnic russians, it's like an Ace in his hand. strictly business.
If these certain factors are true as in the case between Crimea & Ukraine 1) Mexico is significantly richer than the US, and the Mexicans are several times richer than Americans. 2) Mexico is overwhelmingly more powerful than the US in terms of both economy and military. 3) The US is in all kind of economic & politic troubles and somehow the Mexicans are being blamed for all these problems. 4) The Mexicans have been the predominant ethnic group in Texas for over 50 years now. than I don't see what the Union can do to stop Texas from seceding. Also isn't this basically how we got Texas in the first place?
I'm not saying Ukraine should give up Crimea, I'm saying Ukraine should let Crimea have a referendum and determine whether they want to be part of Russia or Ukraine. If the result is that Crimea wants to be a part of Russia, there's not a damn thing Ukraine can do to keep it anyways, and if Ukraine try to forcibly keep Crimea it looses it's moral high ground in the process. If the result is that Crimea want to remain a part of Ukraine, than its a powerful weapon against the current Russian occupation.
And I bet you were saying all this about the Cold War, that if we just "got along" with good old Uncle Joe that none of that would have happened.
Agreed. Right now it's about dubious. If you want to coax the West into supporting you militarily against a country as powerful as Russia, you definitely need a strong moral high ground to even began considering it. A referendum does just that.
U just cant understand or are u trolling? I said from russias perspective. Its not only about crimea so referendum, even in russias favor, wont stop the crisis. is it hard to understand? PS. dont forget Turkey.
1. This premise is flawed..just because they are more wealthier 2. More powerful economically and militarily 3. Intrinsically corrupt as a nation 4. or even if Mexicans are a predominant ethnic group... You fail to understand that u just cant take land from someone else without repercussions. The people of Ukraine have to come to that conclusion...Civil war unfortunately is what needs to happen. The US Courts have ruled on the topic of succession...pretty much stating that the Union is indestructible...barring Civil war with the United States, Texas isnt seceding from the Union... Perhaps your Texas History is a little muddled, but Texas fought for independence from Mexico. Texas existed as a republic and was later annexed by the United States. Crimea and its citizens have the right to demand to exist as a republic...however, throughout much of history, something like this will never happen without a civil war. The people of Ukraine have to make a unified decision. They dont need Russia to step into the fray and using its power and influence to yield change...
and you know Putin's perspective how? You speak as if your opinion about Russia is somehow the undisputed fact. Based on your perspective, why did the Russians stop in Georgia? They could have easily took over the entire country instead of just South Ossetia.
Recently Crimea has wanted independence for over 20 years. So if you're going to point the finger, point it at both. Neither side have Crimean national interest, they have their own.
Except you have to recall like the Russians in Crimea Anglo Texans where immigrants that were coming into Texas from the US. Also while the US government didn't directly involve itself in the revolution in Texas many Americans gave aid and traveled to Texas to fight for Texas revolution. The situations obviously aren't similar but I would be very careful about citing the Texas revolution as an argument for why Russia shouldn't be involved the Crimea.
As I've been following the situation I agree that Russia is violating international law with what it is doing in the Ukraine. I further feel that the US is probably obligated to help the Ukraine based on the terms of the treaty removing nukes. All that said I find if very troubling the rush to war that many seem to be embracing including hypberbolic comparisons to Hitler and Joseph Stalin. The last thing we Americans or the rest of the world is war between the US and Russia. I agree that Putin needs to be confronted but this needs to be done very very carefully. We've had 12 years now of Americans dying and coming back maimed in Iraq and Afghanistan do we really want to see that in the Ukraine?
This is one thing that I question about is how much does the EU really want Ukraine? Considering the problems that Greece, Portugal and Ireland have caused could the EU also handle bringing the Ukraine into the EU even under a limited union? As far as food the EU could still buy it and given the agricultural protectionist policies of many EU nations I doubt they are that interested in adding a bread basket. As for warm weather I also doubt that the EU is interested in Crimea for it's beaches. The impression I get is that the EU might be interested in the Ukraine for one of the reasons the Russians are to act as buffer against the other.
Absolutely agree with you rocketsjudoka...Just as Texans fought for its right to exist as a republic, the people of Crimea have to demand that their government(Ukraine) hear those concerns, and if their concerns are ignored...they have to take the steps necessary to make sure their voices are heard. Russia can act as the interested observer on the sidelines providing arms etc... However, it should never initiate a hostile take over in hopes to submit another side with brute force. If discourse can not achieve an amicable solution, let the people of Ukraine fight for their cause; it should be free from the influences of outside governments and agendas...that is democracy in its truest form...
There are many who question the existence of the EU, and there are quite a few political parties (that are getting bigger) that advocate their countries should leave. Bringing more members into the fold is a sign that the EU actually has a future.
Also since the question has come up about the ISS and what happens if things fall apart between the US and Russia here is an article about some options. http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/uk...ace-station-questions-nasa-has-options-n43331 To sum up there are other options to bring astronauts to and from the ISS but they aren't fully developed. These include speeding up development of the Dragon X vehicle to handle people, converting the Japanese robotic cargoship to handle people and inviting the Chinese to work with the ISS.
Yes I am sure there are many who want the EU to grow but can the EU actually afford it? Given anti-austerity protests and even Germans getting tired of supporting many other countries what would most citizens of most EU nations think about adding a bankrupt Ukraine? For that matter while many Ukrainians long for the Ukraine to be more tied to the West would they then be willing to accept the austerity measures that Greece is having to live under as a condition of being part of the EU?
"not fully developed" means not even remotely close to being man rated. ie we are screwed without the Russians. Thanks Obama.
I'm not sure you understand my point. What I am saying is that while the US didn't directly involve itself in Texas independence it wasn't exactly a neutral observer. If Texas is the moral standard then Putin could just say that Russia isn't going to involve itself while meanwhile allowing for Russian volunteer fighters to pour into Crimea along with Russian arms and money.
