First—These things happen in wars. It was a terrible and grim event but not one planned for by any side—only Ukraine gains by this—sympathy (ie Money and supplies) and support against the evil Putin-Hitler character. Second, what can we really do? Go to war with Russia? What will Germany, France and England do? Go to war? Sanctions that do not work? What should we do? Meet with Putin and cut a deal—give him the old rebellious states—put law and order in them—stop the bloodshed—so Russia will have its land bridge to Criema. Give Ukrain some aid and help them set up a stable nation—maybe let them into NATO so Russia can’t nibble up more land.
WHAT SHOULD U.S. DO? ONE WORD FUNCTION
1st- Fact NO DECLARATION of war by Ukraine
2nd- Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is a political agreement signed in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994: gave security assurances signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the UNITED STATES of America, and the United Kingdom. China and France gave weaker versions.
“The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine Ukraine gave up the world’s third largest nuclear weapons stockpile.”
The memorandum grouped a set of assurances that Ukraine already held from the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) Final Act, United Nations Charter and Non-Proliferation Treaty.
3rd- 113th Congress Public Law 95: SUPPORT FOR THE SOVEREIGNTY, INTEGRITY, DEMOCRACY, AND ECONOMIC: STABILITY OF UKRAINE ACT OF 2014, Page 128 STAT. 1088
Public Law 113-95
113th Congress
(a) In General.—The President shall, subject to the availability of appropriations—
(1) enhance security cooperation efforts and relationships amongst countries in Central and Eastern Europe and among the United States, the European Union, and countries in Central and Eastern Europe;
(2) provide additional security assistance, including DEFENSE ARTICLES and DEFENSE SERVICES (as those terms are defined in section 47 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2794)) and MILITARY TRAINING, to countries in Central and Eastern Europe, including Ukraine; and
(3) support greater reform, professionalism, and capacity-building efforts within the military, intelligence, and security services in Central and Eastern Europe, including Ukraine.
APPROVED April 3, 2014. OBAMA SIGNED INTO LAW April 3, 2014
4. 1941 STATE OF THE UNION MESSAGE President Franklin Roosevelt: http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/pdfs/fftext.pdf
“Today it is abundantly evident that American citizens everywhere are demanding and supporting speedy and complete action in recognition of obvious danger.
EXERPT: “Therefore, the immediate need is a swift and driving increase in our armament production.
Leaders of industry and labor have responded to our summons. Goals of speed have been set. In some cases these goals are being reached ahead of time; in some cases we are on schedule; in other cases there are slight but not serious delays; and in some cases—and I am sorry to say very important cases—we are all concerned by the slowness of the accomplishment of our plans.
The Army and Navy, however, have made substantial progress during the past year. Actual experience is improving and speeding up our methods of production with every passing day. And today’s best is not good enough for tomorrow.
I am not satisfied with the progress thus far made. The men in charge of the program represent the best in training, in ability, and in patriotism. They are not satisfied with the progress thus far made. None of us will be satisfied until the job is done.
No matter whether the original goal was set too high or too low, our objective is quicker and better results. To give you two illustrations:
We are behind schedule in turning out finished airplanes; we are working day and night to solve the innumerable problems and to catch up.
We are ahead of schedule in building warships but we are working to get even further ahead of that schedule.
To change a whole nation from a basis of peacetime production of implements of peace to a basis of wartime production of implements of war is no small task. And the greatest difficulty comes at the beginning of the program, when new tools, new plant facilities, new assembly lines, and new ship ways must first be constructed before the actual materiel begins to flow steadily and speedily from them.
The Congress, of course, must rightly keep itself informed at all times of the progress of the program. However, there is certain information, as the Congress itself will readily recognize, which, in the interests of our own security and those of the nations that we are supporting, must of needs be kept in confidence.
New circumstances are constantly begetting new needs for our safety. I shall ask this Congress for greatly increased new appropriations and authorizations to carry on what we have begun.
I also ask this Congress for authority and for funds sufficient to manufacture additional munitions and war supplies of many kinds, to be turned over to those nations which are now in actual war with aggressor nations.
Our most useful and immediate role is to act as an arsenal for them as well as for ourselves. They do not need man power, but they do need billions of dollars worth of the weapons of defense. The time is near when they will not be able to pay for them all in ready cash. We cannot, and we will not, tell them that they must surrender, merely because of present inability to pay for the weapons which we know they must have.
I do not recommend that we make them a loan of dollars with which to pay for these weapons—a loan to be repaid in dollars.
I recommend that we make it possible for those nations to continue to obtain war materials in the United States, fitting their orders into our own program. Nearly all their materiel would, if the time ever came, be useful for our own defense.
Taking counsel of expert military and naval authorities, considering what is best for our own security, we are free to decide how much should be kept here and how much should be sent abroad to our friends who by their determined and heroic resistance are giving us time in which to make ready our own defense.
For what we send abroad, we shall be repaid within a reasonable time following the close of hostilities, in similar materials, or, at our option, in other goods of many kinds, which they can produce and which we need.
Let us say to the democracies: “We Americans are vitally concerned in your defense of freedom. We are putting forth our energies, our resources and our organizing powers to give you the strength to regain and maintain a free world. We shall send you, in ever-increasing numbers, ships, planes, tanks, guns. This is our purpose and our pledge.”
In fulfillment of this purpose we will not be intimidated by the threats of dictators that they will regard as a breach of international law or as an act of war our aid to the democracies which dare to resist their aggression. Such aid is not an act of war, even if a dictator should unilaterally proclaim it so to be.
When the dictators, if the dictators, are ready to make war upon us, they will not wait for an act of war on our part. They did not wait for Norway or Belgium or the Netherlands to commit an act of war.
Their only interest is in a new one-way international law, which lacks mutuality in its observance, and, therefore, becomes an instrument of oppression.”
If by "we" you mean the United States, then "we" should not do anything since what happens in Ukraine is none of our business and nothing that happens there can have any impact upon our national security. We have already meddled enough by helping to overthrow a democratically elected government in Kiev, and we should not pretend to be surprised that Putin has reacted to protect Russia's newly-threatened economic and security interests in Crimea and eastern Ukraine. We helped to shape this mess, and we should be careful not to help make it even worse.
There is absolutely no benefit to Russia from the shoot-down of the Malaysian B777, and therefore no logical basis to believe that Russia would have had any intentional hand in it. On the other hand, Kiev is most definitely benefiting from having the blame placed upon Russia, since the Ukraine regime suffers from a floundering economy, demographic tensions, and an uphill fight against the pro-Russian separatists in the eastern oblasts. I still believe the most likely explanation is that the separatists mistook the MH B777 for a Ukrainian Air Force transport, similar to the AN-26 that they shoot down from 21,000 feet earlier this week. That would be a tragic wartime mistake, but not an atrocity.