Posted on 03/24/2014 8:17:01 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
~Send them some Warthogs.~
Not exactly the best platform for this conflict.
“I am not sure Ukraine is a nation. Its a multi-ethnic appendage that fell off a leprous and dying Soviet Union. It also has the lowest birth rate in Europe. They sound rather like a group of cynical people who don’t have much interest in surviving as a nation.”
There is certainly enough of a common heritage, language, etc. for a nation, though I don’t know it would have the size/shape it currently has. In the south in particular, I don’t know how many people are “Ukrainian”.
“And all their best assets ended up in hands of anyone willing to pay a dime.”
I remember when this was happening. At the time the wall came down and the Soviet Union crumbled, analysts said the new (and newly independent) former republics and Warsaw Pact nations had to make a decision: Quickly abandon the central planning of communism, resulting in short-term pain for a long-term benefit (which Poland chose), or face weak economic conditions in the long run (which Ukraine opted for). The sale of military assets was to bolster state coffers - a short-term solution to a long-term problem.
Sounds like America in two or three years.
There are numerous things Ukraine can do though, in the event of a major Russian military push. They can start getting the roadside bombs ready. I remember in Iraq, the insurgents managed to stop entire convoys of trucks and even heavy tanks by merely putting suspicious looking devices on the side of major roadways. Snipers are also effective. The Ukrainian military can get out of their uniforms and go full blown insurgent mode. That with funneled in surface to air missiles and other assorted nasty surprises we learned the hard way to deal with in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Russian military can once again be forced to reevaluate what they are doing like the Mujaheddin forced them to do at earlier point in Russian military history.
Hey D, good buddy... "left alone" is the key phrase there. Left alone to work out the details of their Nationhood, their own internal problems, etc., but that isn't going to happen. All through their history, someone or other has been putting a boot on them.
Check out Elena Filatova's site when you get the chance. Links down the center of the page are week-by-week updates. She's a Ukrainian photojournalist and is there at street level. Website below:
http://www.elenafilatova.com/index.html
I’m active duty, and you’re recent military, so I would rather engage here than with some of the other nonsense I’ve seen thus far.
I think that you and I can both agree that what you are suggesting is sound logic, but I think that what you are mentioning will never happen in Ukraine. Iraq, Afghanistan, etc are all areas with a high desire to become martyrs for whatever ill-conceived reason. It is literally a cult of death, built on pure hatred and sustained by high birthrates.
Ukraine, on the other hand, is the exact opposite. They can sit in a square in Kiev, they can cry for government intervention, but they won’t fight Russia. Despite all of the Orthodox priests at the protests, a vast majority of the population is Atheist. Their birthrate is one of the lowest in Europe, and they are an economic basketcase due to ongoing Soviet attitudes of pure laziness. They can’t even create a functional government. Remember, before Yunukovych, we had the backstabbing alliances of Yushchenko and Tymoschenko.
Moral of the story: they don’t have the “fire in the belly” of the people you and I have fought. Insurgents made us bleed over Fallujah with nothing more than homemade explosives, 30 year old assault rifles, and Chinese hand grenades. Ukraine had a multitude of military bases in the Crimea equipped with naval vessels, fighter jets, APCs, and tanks. They literally gave it up WITHOUT A FIGHT. Troops stayed in their bases, and then sang their national anthem while being overrun.
The point? Ukraine won’t fight for itself. Like every other weak-willed country in the world, they want America to come fight for them. Or the EU. Or anyone else.
America doesn’t need to shed blood for a country that let an entire region be annexed by “irregulars” or unsupported light infantry, because they were too weak to defend themselves. Any country who’s idea of independence starts with “let the Americans come save us” are not worthy of Independence.
Moral of the story: I don’t like the people you and I have fought against, but I respect them. They’ll die for what they believe in. They might fight dirty while doing it, but at least they fight. Ukraine is full of weak-willed pansies. If they can’t fight for themselves, then they deserve to live under the Russian boot.
True. I would add that opposition (to ousted gov’t) leader Yulia Tymoshenko, of the party “Batkivshchyna”, spoke primarily Russian until she was 36. The notion that all Russian speakers in Ukraine are supportive of Putin’s actions is rather misleading. Just exactly what that split is could prove to be important.
On the other side of it, Tymoshenko & Putin got along reasonably well, while she was in power. I suppose having a Russian puppet gov’t throw you in prison, and then have Russia slice off part of your country, could affect one’s attitude.
Gross oversimplification.
Are we any better? We can't even get them (Ukraine) batteries (or a way to obtain them) in under several weeks? Putin must be LHAO.
Maybe not, but the USA can't defend the entire world. And Yes, Putin sees this as a cake-walk. Ukraine has been independent for 20 years, and they have faced Putin for nearly 15 of them. If they have no sense of trying to maintain their own culture and uniqueness among nations, have had no fear of Russia in that time, and their government has instead spent its time trying to see how much money they can steal, then its really not a nation - and its a fantasy for the USA to think it can be defended.
Obama is a reactionary, and he really doesn’t give a carp at all about the situation in the Ukraine. If it humiliates the West, he couldn’t be happier.
The only reason why he’s acting like he cares at all, is because the public perception weighs heavily on him. If he just blows it off, he becomes a total idiot in the eyes of the public.
If he acts like he gives a rip, he can at least play the “well there’s only so much we can do” card. Then he can go upstairs, put up his feet land laugh out loud, “As if I give a rat’s ass!”
I don’t think it’ wise to play up the differences within the Ukraine. The country has lasted 22 years. It hasn’t been a hot-bed of trouble. For the most part it has been reasonably well adjusted. I agree that it’s government has made mistakes. Frankly, look at ours over the last 22 years.
The Ukraine deserves at the very least, our moral support. If Putin sees a complete rejection of his actions, and the perception building in the West that he is coming very close to looking like Hitler in the 1930s, it may cause him to weigh his actions more heavily.
We should not as Conservatives be telegraphing a green light by trashing the Ukraine every chance we get. Perhaps there’s some reason to. Is it going to be productive right now to do the dirty laundry in public?
What Russia did was wrong.
The Ukraine needs to get back on track, and left alone it will. Russia needs to pull it’s nose back onto it’s face and back off.
This is a very good post; and I agree completely with it!
I do have to admit, however, that I got a chuckle out of the part about President Obama's not giving "a carp" about the future of Ukraine, as if this rough fish might have anything to do with it.
(Okay, I admit it: I, too, have made my share of typos on posts to various political forums.)
I would think that if anyone knows the smell of smoke from a smoldering conflict about to explode into a major war, it would be Poland.
Well, you've just made a point that most of the Maydan protestors were trying to make: Ukraine has essentially never been out from under Russia's thumb. On the political side, there was fear of Russia by some: In 1992 Prime Minister of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma argued for keeping some of their nukes, but apparently was overruled or arm-twisted otherwise. Later, somewhat more independent President Viktor Yushchenko was poisoned, and most recently, President Viktor Yanukovych proved to be a complete Russian puppet / stooge, erasing any gains that had been made. Ukraine has never been free of heavy-handed Russian interference, but that (and the corruption, not to mention beatings of initially peaceful protesters) is what most of the protesters at the large Maydan demonstrations turned out against.
At present? WE are the ones telling Ukraine not to fight, both by our words, and more strongly, by not giving any meaningful support at all.
The other argument, that the USA can't defend the entire world, is irrelevant. There is no need to. By emphatically defending allies or parties to security agreements now and then, preferably with other allies helping out or contributing financially, the need for such actions is greatly reduced overall. The converse is also true: If we prove worthless as an ally, weak, and untrustworthy, arms escalations and conflicts will break out everywhere. THAT we cannot stop, and it will certainly cause great damage to us. I presently expect, barring a strong President and US resurgence beginning in 2016, a minimum of a mid-level nuclear war by 2050. The one alternative outside of the US that might prevent such is a very rapid climb to global dominance by a Russian / Chinese alliance. I suppose that is a little better outcome than a nuclear war.
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.