Posted on 02/28/2014 10:56:59 AM PST by cornelis
... Obama wants stability, the New York Times reports, quoting internal sources. He sees Ukraine as merely a crisis to be managed rather than an opportunity to alter the increasingly autocratic trajectory of the region, allow Ukrainians to join their destiny to the West, and block Russian neo-imperialism.
Sure, Obama is sympathetic to democracy. But it must come organically, from internal developments, you see. Must not be imposed by outside intervention, but develop on its own. But Ukraine is never on its own. Not with a bear next door. American neutrality doesn’t allow an authentic Ukrainian polity to emerge. It leaves Ukraine naked to Russian pressure.
What Obama doesn’t seem to understand is that American inaction creates a vacuum. His evacuation from Iraq consigned that country to Iranian hegemony, just as Obama’s writing off Syria invited in Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah to reverse the tide of battle.
Putin fully occupies vacuums. In Ukraine, he keeps flaunting his leverage. He’s withdrawn the multibillion-dollar aid package with which he had pulled the now-deposed Ukrainian president away from the EU. He has suddenly mobilized Russian forces bordering Ukraine. His health officials are even questioning the safety of Ukrainian food exports.
This is no dietary-hygiene campaign. This is a message to Kiev: We can shut down your agricultural exports today, your natural-gas supplies tomorrow. We can make you broke, and we can make you freeze.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Maybe. It doesn’t take much understanding to be part of the “who cares” crowd.
That's what he was elected to do, and he's doing it.
Stalin MURDERED 20 million or so of their grandparents and some of them are STILL PISSED at Moscow. Who can blame them.
Wait until obozo gets HIS purges under way here.
I count three.
Obama has two?
Russians are still PO’d at Khrushchev for giving away Crimea, although back then, it really didn’t matter, as Moscow was still calling the shots, anyway.
$15 billion? We don't have the cash. Pressure on Russia? Yeah? Who or what will back the play when Putin calls Obama's bluff, again?
Putin holds all the cards on this one. Stay the hell away.
Well, the EU sent in insurgents who started the initial fighting here, so your point is moot.
As it often is.
Your recent forum history is as someone who posts for trollish contentiousness.
Not because you have a valid intellectual point.
Three, actually.
“Stay-the-hell-away” Obama abandons missile defense in Poland. Private citizens need friends, countries need allies.
Citation, please. And please don’t be offended because I showed you who wears pants on another thread.
Aside from somebody’s posting history, which won’e make it into history books, can you point those of use ignorant of recent history which will make it to history books, to the source of your solid information that EU sent insurgents there, wherever the there is? Is there a secret EU Ministry of Insurgent Deployment?
Geez.
Thanks, I think. ;)
An America that promotes sodomy to the rest of the world, and embraces such abject deviancy as fag marriage, is no better than an enemy.
That’s one way of looking at it: the gunshot victim is no better than the gun-shooting criminal, if . . . .
That means nothing to me, and it means nothing to Putin. For God’s sake [pun intended], he sent Chechens against Georgians. How do you feel about it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.