Russia is naughty America is comical

Russia G8 status at risk over 'incredible act of aggression' in Crimea, says Kerry

 

Russia could be expelled from the G8 and face economic sanctions, unless President Vladimir Putin halts his “incredible act of aggression” and withdraws forces from Ukraine, the US secretary of state, John Kerry, warned on Sunday.

Speaking as western nations began suspending preparations for a summit of the eight leading industrialised countries in the Russian city of Sochi in June, Kerry said Moscow could be forced out of the group altogether and face a string of other penalties.

“He is not going to have a Sochi G8, he may not even remain in the G8 if this continues,” Kerry told NBC‘s Meet the Press. “He may find himself with asset freezes, on Russian business, American business may pull back, there may be a further tumble of the ruble.”

On Sunday afternoon, a White House official said President Barack Obama was continuing to be briefed by his national security team on the crisis, and was scheduled to hold telephone calls with British prime minister David Cameron and other allied leaders later in the day.

Claiming Moscow was already isolated in the face of united condemnation from western allies, Kerry told ABC‘s This Week that Putin was inviting “very serious repercussions” such as visa bans and asset freezes for Russian leaders and even economic sanctions.

On CBS‘s Face the Nation, he reiterated: “They‘re prepared to put sanctions in place, they‘re prepared to isolate Russia economically.”

The warnings from America‘s most senior diplomat came after Russian forces effectively seized control of the Ukrainian Black Sea peninsula of Crimea. Putin told Obama during a phone call on Saturday that he reserved the right to take further military action in eastern Ukraine.

As the White House struggled to impose pressure on Putin, Kerry accused the Russian leader of acting “in 19th-century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext”.

“It‘s an incredible act of aggression,” he told CBS. “It is really a stunning, wilful choice by President Putin to invade another country. Russia is in violation of the sovereignty of Ukraine. Russia is in violation of its international obligations.”

Western governments on Sunday threatened to boycott June‘s G8 summit in Sochi, which was supposed to be a crowning glory for the Russian Winter Olympic host city, where the Games recently concluded. Kerry told ABC it was a “distinct possibility” that the US would end up not attending.

William Hague, the British foreign secretary, said en route to Kiev that the UK would not attend a planning meeting for the summit that had already been abandoned by France and the US.

Obama and Kerry nonetheless faced sharp criticism for their handling of Putin from Republicans, who claim weakness from the White House overseas in recent years had invited aggression from the Kremlin.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a longstanding critic of Obama‘s foreign policy credentials, urged the president to “do something” rather than deliver what he called empty threats to “thugs and dictators”.

“Every time the president goes on television and threatens someone like Putin, everybody‘s eyes roll, including mine,” Graham told CNN. “We have a weak and indecisive president that invites aggression.”

Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a potential Republican presidential contender in 2016, declared Russia “an enemy of the United States” and said that it would be “important to learn from the errors of the last few years” in Obama‘s policy towards Russia.

“They‘re not interested in building an international norm that nations conduct themselves under,” Rubio told NBC. “They‘re interested in reconstituting Russian power and Russian prestige, often at the expense of US national interests.”

Denouncing Putin‘s administration as a “government of liars”, Rubio urged Obama to “strengthen the interim government in Kiev” and revive former president George W Bush‘s plans for a missile defence shield in Poland, which were shelved when Obama entered office.

Graham also called for the missile shield to be revived, and advocated the creation of “a democratic noose around Putin‘s Russia” through aid to neighbouring countries such as Georgia.

Also on Sunday, the Ukrainian ambassador to the United Nations, Yuriy Sergeyev, told CNN: “If aggravation is going in that way, when the Russian troops are enlarging their quantity with every coming hour, naturally we will ask for military support and other kind of support.”

Kerry played down any suggestion that the US military could become involved in the crisis.

“The last thing anybody wants is a military option in this kind of situation. We want a peaceful resolution through the normal processes of international relations,” he told NBC.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/02/john-kerry-russia-putin-crimea-ukraine

Yep, Michael Moore tweeted just about every line of Kerry's speech with a big ole' LOL after it.

Pretty much sums it up.

So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict?  US hypocritical much?

tumblr_lut2g1yIpS1r6tf8io1_500.gif

So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict?  US hypocritical much?

IT, there are a few concepts that America finds almost impossible to grasp. Subtlety is one, irony is another.

 

So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict?  US hypocritical much?

IT, there are a few concepts that America finds almost impossible to grasp. Subtlety is one, irony is another.

 

very true


So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict? US hypocritical much?

IT, there are a few concepts that America finds almost impossible to grasp. Subtlety is one, irony is another.

How did they become "world boss"? Military power I gather.

What's Russia's pretext for the invasion?

 

I assumed they wanted to help keep the current pro-Russian government in power (which was struggling from the rioting), taking over the sea ports looks like they have much grander intentions.

What's Russia's pretext for the invasion?

 

I assumed they wanted to help keep the current pro-Russian government in power (which was struggling from the rioting), taking over the sea ports looks like they have much grander intentions.

If I am correct Ukraine has the gas pipeline that runs right through their land to Europe, plus a number of processing plants along the way.  Selling their gas is Russia's highest priority to continue paying the bills.  What they do not need is a Ukrainian government that is actually hostile to them.

What's Russia's pretext for the invasion?

 

I assumed they wanted to help keep the current pro-Russian government in power (which was struggling from the rioting), taking over the sea ports looks like they have much grander intentions.

Pretext 1) is that ethnic Russians are being oppressed/neglected by the new govt (the removal of Russian as one of the offical languages of the Ukraine being one - supremely stupid and pointless - piece of evidence to support this).  Pretext 2) is that this is driven entirely by ethnic Russians in the Crimea (of which there are a considerable majority, since Stalin deported the Tartars and repop[ulated the area with more politically reliable Russians) and that Russian forces are only responding to the appeals from a region that has undergone a popular rising among its people and armed forces and decided to become independent from the Ukraine, and coincidentally, more Russian-aligned than the current Ukrainian govt looks like being.

 

Prediction - Putin's fait accompli will stand.  The Crimea will remain nominally independent but in all practical senses a Russian province.  Ukraine have no got anything like the military power to contest it even if they wanted to take the risk (Russia is still a nuclear superpower, after all...), and their heavily ethnic Russian military can't be relied on to fight the Russians anyway.  The West will make loud disapproving noises, because that's all they can do, which Putin will ignore.  The new Ukrainian govt might not actually mind that much, since they've gotten rid of a large percentage of their Russian population in those ethnic Russian areas which are LEAST economically productive, and so have shored up their vote while not hitting their industrial capacity too hard.  Expect them to push hard for membership of NATO, and for them to watch the other ethnic-Russian-majority areas of eastern Ukraine like particularly paranoid hawks.  Ukraine's current semi-coalition govt of relatively pro-western intellectuals, ■■■■■■-off ordinary people with no set agenda, and virulent fascists is profoundly unstable and unpredictable, and Putin will be keeping an opportunistic eye out for more missteps so he can snip off more of Ukraine's more industrialised eastern regions.

 

What's Russia's pretext for the invasion?

 

I assumed they wanted to help keep the current pro-Russian government in power (which was struggling from the rioting), taking over the sea ports looks like they have much grander intentions.

Pretext 1) is that ethnic Russians are being oppressed/neglected by the new govt (the removal of Russian as one of the offical languages of the Ukraine being one - supremely stupid and pointless - piece of evidence to support this).  Pretext 2) is that this is driven entirely by ethnic Russians in the Crimea (of which there are a considerable majority, since Stalin deported the Tartars and repop[ulated the area with more politically reliable Russians) and that Russian forces are only responding to the appeals from a region that has undergone a popular rising among its people and armed forces and decided to become independent from the Ukraine, and coincidentally, more Russian-aligned than the current Ukrainian govt looks like being.

 

Prediction - Putin's fait accompli will stand.  The Crimea will remain nominally independent but in all practical senses a Russian province.  Ukraine have no got anything like the military power to contest it even if they wanted to take the risk (Russia is still a nuclear superpower, after all...), and their heavily ethnic Russian military can't be relied on to fight the Russians anyway.  The West will make loud disapproving noises, because that's all they can do, which Putin will ignore.  The new Ukrainian govt might not actually mind that much, since they've gotten rid of a large percentage of their Russian population in those ethnic Russian areas which are LEAST economically productive, and so have shored up their vote while not hitting their industrial capacity too hard.  Expect them to push hard for membership of NATO, and for them to watch the other ethnic-Russian-majority areas of eastern Ukraine like particularly paranoid hawks.  Ukraine's current semi-coalition govt of relatively pro-western intellectuals, ■■■■■■-off ordinary people with no set agenda, and virulent fascists is profoundly unstable and unpredictable, and Putin will be keeping an opportunistic eye out for more missteps so he can snip off more of Ukraine's more industrialised eastern regions.

 

OK thanks for all of that.

 

But from what Ive been reading the curent government is pro-Russian, was even helped get into government by Russia, and seeks to align itself with Russia rather than the west (EU). The protesters (anti-Russia) believe that by aligning with the EU they will get better living conditions etc, and they were incensed when the Ukraine government recently declined to sign an agreement with the EU (for a loan) which they had said they would to appease what appears to be a general consensus.

 

This conflicts with your view that the current Ukraine govt is (supposedly) picking on the poor ethnic Russians live in Ukraine, but who ever said a pre-text had to be logical, if it was it probably wouldn't be a pre-text!

 

Either way I agree that no one in the west will stand up to Putin, and that the current govt will remain in power or the next one will be to Russia's liking. Apparently Russia (Putin) loaned (or agreed to loan) USD15 billion to the Ukrainian govt in December to help with their budget shortfall so whoever comes to power won't be turning their back on Russia in a hurry - especially copnsidering half their population doesn't want them to.

 

Edit: I just realised the governtment had the option to borrow the money from Russia or the EU, and chose Russia. so the new govt could still get the funds from the EU if they wanted to. Also I only just realised an interim govt was already in place, so there is f-all chance of the old presient being back and in charge anytime soon...

There'll be military retirement villages where old-time hawks will be saying "should've nuked those godless commies during the Cold War".

 

When I was listening to Kerry, I wondered whether he remember Iraq. At least if you're going to make such blatantly hypocritical statements, at least make them about things that happened back BE (before Elvis).

Ukraine's navy chief Denis Berezovsky defects as NATO convenes emergency meeting

Updated 19 minutes ago

VIDEO: Correspondent Matt Brown reports from Kiev(ABC News)
PHOTO: Armed men in military fatigues block access to a Ukrainian border guards base. (AFP: Genya Savilov)
MAP: Ukraine

The newly appointed head of Ukraine's navy has sworn allegiance to Crimea in front of the region's unrecognised pro-Russian leader, as Russian forces consolidate their hold on the Black Sea peninsula.

Ukraine has put its military on highest alert, with the defence ministry calling up army reservists, after Russian president Vladimir Putin declared he had the right to invade the country in Moscow's biggest confrontation with the West since the Cold War.

On Sunday, they surrounded several small Ukrainian military outposts and demanded the Ukrainian troops disarm. Some refused, leading to standoffs, although no shots were fired.

All eyes are now on whether Russia makes a military move in predominantly Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine, where pro-Moscow demonstrators have marched and raised Russian flags over public buildings in several cities in the last two days.

Seven things to know about Crimea
  • The Crimean Peninsula is rich in arable land and occupies a strategically important location on the Black Sea.
  • Crimea has a population of 2.3 million, 58 per cent of whom speak Russian and identify themselves as ethnic Russians.
  • The Soviet Union transferred authority over Crimea to Ukraine in 1954.
  • Ukraine retained control after the collapse of the USSR in a 1994 agreement brokered by the US, UK and France.
  • Russia's major naval base is located in Sevastopol and is the base for their Black Sea Fleet. Russia's lease on the base expires in 2042.
  • The lease states that Russian personnel may not remove military equipment or vehicles outside the base without permission from Ukraine.
  • The region was a stronghold for ousted president Viktor Yanukovych.

 

Meanwhile, Ukraine has launched a treason case against its head of navy, Denis Berezovsky, after he surrendered his headquarters at the port of Sevastopol on Sunday on his second day on the job.

The declaration came as Kiev authorities appeared to be losing control of the Russian-speaking Crimean Peninsula, which has plunged further and further into disarray since the ousting of Kremlin-backed president Viktor Yanukovych last weekend.

"I swear to execute the orders of the [pro-Russia] commander-in-chief of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea," Rear Admiral Berezovsky said in a televised statement from inside the Crimean headquarters of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, adding that he "swears allegiance to the residents of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea".

It is unclear why and how Rear Admiral Berezovsky switched his allegiance, but Crimea's newly appointed pro-Russia prime minister Sergiy Aksyonov, who is not recognised by Kiev, said the announcement was an "historic event" at a joint press conference with the navy chief.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-03/ukraine-navy-chief-defects-nato-convenes-emergency-meeting/5293838

Personally I think re-starting the Russia vs America conflict is a great idea. We haven’t had a decent espionage novel since the Cold War ended. Is John le Carré dead yet? Just think, we could have another “Spy Who Came in from the Cold”!

 

 

So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict? US hypocritical much?

IT, there are a few concepts that America finds almost impossible to grasp. Subtlety is one, irony is another.

How did they become "world boss"? Military power I gather.

 

Waited until the Krauts were beaten & the Poms were broke to get in on the two world wars.

What's Russia's pretext for the invasion?

 

I assumed they wanted to help keep the current pro-Russian government in power (which was struggling from the rioting), taking over the sea ports looks like they have much grander intentions.

Some Polish Ukrainian soldiers attacked a German Russian border crossing?

I just read the book so I know how this will end

 

Command Authority by Tom Clancy and some other guy.

 

 

The Yanks win in the end again !!

I just read the book so I know how this will end

 

Command Authority by Tom Clancy and some other guy.

 

 

The Yanks win in the end again !!

Go back to Red Storm Rising....that was his first or second.

 

 

 

So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict? US hypocritical much?

IT, there are a few concepts that America finds almost impossible to grasp. Subtlety is one, irony is another.

How did they become "world boss"? Military power I gather.

 

Waited until the Krauts were beaten & the Poms were broke to get in on the two world wars.

 

Should never have been involved in WW1.

 

But then, neither should the Poms.

 

 

 

 

So Russia is wrong to be getting involved in another countries internal conflict? US hypocritical much?

IT, there are a few concepts that America finds almost impossible to grasp. Subtlety is one, irony is another.

How did they become "world boss"? Military power I gather.

 

Waited until the Krauts were beaten & the Poms were broke to get in on the two world wars.

 

Should never have been involved in WW1.

 

But then, neither should the Poms.

 

WW1 was coming, regardless.  Post German unification, with massive naval arms races happening all over the place and the Kaiser a nutso militarist who would actually go to church and pray for an excuse to unleash his army on someone - it was only a matter of time before Germany and Britain started shooting.

 

If it didn't start in 1914 because some Austrian twit got himself shot, then it would have started in 1915, 1919, 1922 or something instead, for some equally trivial reason.