Catalyst Gaming
General => General Discussion => Table Talk => Topic started by: Eas on March 02, 2014, 01:04:23 PM
-
So how does everyone feel about what's going on in the Ukraine right now?
Do you think the U.S. should do something about it?
Do you think Putin should just give up and let the people have what they want?
Should the protesters use violence to get their message across?
Should the police use violence to get their message across?
(http://i.imgur.com/WBc53Fv.jpg)
-
If the Russians didn't get involved, I would have to say no. However, Putin has already landed troops in the Crimea and is openly supporting Yanukovich's reinstatement. Still, I don't think America should act alone in this; this requires a full response by NATO as Russia has belligerently invaded Ukraine.
-
If the Russians didn't get involved, I would have to say no. However, Putin has already landed troops in the Crimea and is openly supporting Yanukovich's reinstatement. Still, I don't think America should act alone in this; this requires a full response by NATO as Russia has belligerently invaded Ukraine.
Do you think Russia would back off if NATO got involved? Or it would it just create more tension?
-
If Putin believes that Russian speakers are in danger, or if in power can keep Ukraine from joining NATO, he will try all that he can to justify meddling in this. (Which he is already set to doing, one naval base and a couple key airports in the Crimea are already seized by assumedly Russian forces, perhaps he intends to use the Crimea as a staging ground for further Russian deployments.) With the tension that's already going down in the Ukraine, I think it's safe to assume that if Putin puts Yanukovich back on the proverbial throne, some fuckery is going to ensue.
If something more than just the usual moaning and bitching happens, say, a serious militia-based conflict arousing over the issue, then NATO is most definitely going to get involved, which means we will as well. Whether Putin backs down if they do is anybody's game.
-
While it is possible that Putin is getting involved because of the large ethnic Russian population in Ukraine, I'm not about to assume it's his top priority considering how the Russian army bombed Chechen and Russian villages indiscriminately during both Chechen wars. I think it has more to do with keeping his puppet in power. Whether both sides want to admit it or not, Cold War era tensions still run between NATO and Russia, and Putin is starting to run out of allies. What you're seeing in Ukraine is simply Russian imperialism at work, and it is only a matter of time before NATO gets involved. As Reimer said, whether or not the Russians back down is fair game.
-
A lot more Russians just came into the Crimea by way of aforementioned naval base and airports, now they seem to be hovering around remaining Ukrainian military bases. Ethnic Russians are staging protests and asking Putin for protection, and Kiev is considering calling out the reserves. This is getting interesting.
-
By definition, NATO is already involved. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland all invoked Article 4 of the NATO treaty.
-
America just needs to stay the fuck away from this. Russia and Ukraine will do whatever they do, and after that we'll see what should happen. Police will most likely use violence if they seem fit. And Protestors will act accordingly. Putin will do what his advisors advice him to do.
-
America just needs to stay the fuck away from this. Russia and Ukraine will do whatever they do, and after that we'll see what should happen. Police will most likely use violence if they seem fit. And Protestors will act accordingly. Putin will do what his advisors advice him to do.
Violence has already happened. I read that a few protesters were accidentally killed by rubber bullets from Police guns, and protesters have started arming themselves in some sporadic cases.
-
I was talking with my Russian language professor today about this. According to her, the Ukrainian "rebels" (If you want to call them that for lack of a better word) aren't exactly the type of people the West would want to get cozy with. Quite a few of them are far-right ultranationalists who wish to marginalize all non-Ukrainian Catholic ethnicities, such as Russians and Jews. There is even a more radical party of neonazis, Svoboda, that has seized a small but noticeable number of chairs in the Ukrainian parliament. Many of their policies would include forcibly deporting all non-Ukrainian Catholics, cutting off all diplomatic ties with both the East and West, and returning to "traditional Ukrainian family values". There are even rumors that the Ukrainian paramilitary snipers that shot and killed protesters were actually Svoboda party members that were trying to inflame public support against Yanukovich.
More information can be found here: http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-stance-on-ukraine-2014-3
-
There was a report floating around about a Russian armored vehicle breaking through the gates of a Ukrainian military base in the Crimea, if it's true, they're demanding surrender from everybody inside around now. Crimea and Russia's legislatures are both trying to make Crimea's secession from Ukraine a reality, which would bring sanctions from the United States, which they have threatened would "boomerang" on us.
-
There was a report floating around about a Russian armored vehicle breaking through the gates of a Ukrainian military base in the Crimea, if it's true, they're demanding surrender from everybody inside around now. Crimea and Russia's legislatures are both trying to make Crimea's secession from Ukraine a reality, which would bring sanctions from the United States, which they have threatened would "boomerang" on us.
The more I read about this conflict, the more I backpedal from my original statement. In many places across eastern Ukraine and on the Crimean peninsula, the ethnic russian majority has lowered Ukrainian flags and raised Russian ones. If it's going to be a simple secession, then I think the US should stay out of it. If Russia ends up declaring war on Ukraine, however, NATO is not going to sit by.
-
I still think that Russia has no business moving more military groups into Crimea. That's a Ukrainian issue, and the region is a part of the Ukraine. Obviously, if those people were all Russian citizens (which they aren't, they're just ethnically Russians), and they were being threatened, then I'd see that being okay. But regardless of that, Ukraine isn't threatening the security of the Crimean people in anyway; in fact, I'd argue that Russia's actions are placing them in more danger than Ukraine's pro-European uprising did.
But yes, I'd agree that NATO isn't going to stand idle should Russia declare war on Ukraine (which they technically already have done by moving troops onto Ukrainian soil). Russia did almost exactly the same thing in Georgia back in 2008, and that wasn't connected with Europe at all. Ukraine, however, is a much more local issue, and I highly doubt that NATO/the EU are going to sit back and pick daisies while Russia plays around in the sandbox that is Crimea. Sanctions are a start, but honestly, if WWIII were to happen, this could be a very legitimate place that it could start.
-
I still think that Russia has no business moving more military groups into Crimea. That's a Ukrainian issue, and the region is a part of the Ukraine. Obviously, if those people were all Russian citizens (which they aren't, they're just ethnically Russians), and they were being threatened, then I'd see that being okay. But regardless of that, Ukraine isn't threatening the security of the Crimean people in anyway; in fact, I'd argue that Russia's actions are placing them in more danger than Ukraine's pro-European uprising did.
But yes, I'd agree that NATO isn't going to stand idle should Russia declare war on Ukraine (which they technically already have done by moving troops onto Ukrainian soil). Russia did almost exactly the same thing in Georgia back in 2008, and that wasn't connected with Europe at all. Ukraine, however, is a much more local issue, and I highly doubt that NATO/the EU are going to sit back and pick daisies while Russia plays around in the sandbox that is Crimea. Sanctions are a start, but honestly, if WWIII were to happen, this could be a very legitimate place that it could start.
The Georgian war of 2008 was similar, but not the same. Abkhazia and South Ossetia declared their independence from Georgia and Russia guaranteed that independence, which resulted in Georgia invading both.
Also, even though those russian ethnics are Ukrainian citizens, that means nothing to them. They feel the government does not represent them and that they should be a part of Russia. There isn't really any "New World" issue that I can use as an analogy, but the closest I can come is to suggest that Miami no longer wants to be a part of Florida and, instead, wishes to consider itself a New Jersian city.
Not only does the majority of the Crimea and eastern Ukraine support the Russian invasion, they've gone so far as to physically drag/throw Ukrainian officials out of local government buildings. My aunt is a Russian-Ukrainian and I've been planning to ask her for her opinion of the crisis.
-
I still think that Russia has no business moving more military groups into Crimea. That's a Ukrainian issue, and the region is a part of the Ukraine. Obviously, if those people were all Russian citizens (which they aren't, they're just ethnically Russians), and they were being threatened, then I'd see that being okay. But regardless of that, Ukraine isn't threatening the security of the Crimean people in anyway; in fact, I'd argue that Russia's actions are placing them in more danger than Ukraine's pro-European uprising did.
But yes, I'd agree that NATO isn't going to stand idle should Russia declare war on Ukraine (which they technically already have done by moving troops onto Ukrainian soil). Russia did almost exactly the same thing in Georgia back in 2008, and that wasn't connected with Europe at all. Ukraine, however, is a much more local issue, and I highly doubt that NATO/the EU are going to sit back and pick daisies while Russia plays around in the sandbox that is Crimea. Sanctions are a start, but honestly, if WWIII were to happen, this could be a very legitimate place that it could start.
The Georgian war of 2008 was similar, but not the same. Abkhazia and South Ossetia declared their independence from Georgia and Russia guaranteed that independence, which resulted in Georgia invading both.
Also, even though those russian ethnics are Ukrainian citizens, that means nothing to them. They feel the government does not represent them and that they should be a part of Russia. There isn't really any "New World" issue that I can use as an analogy, but the closest I can come is to suggest that Miami no longer wants to be a part of Florida and, instead, wishes to consider itself a New Jersian city.
Not only does the majority of the Crimea and eastern Ukraine support the Russian invasion, they've gone so far as to physically drag/throw Ukrainian officials out of local government buildings. My aunt is a Russian-Ukrainian and I've been planning to ask her for her opinion of the crisis.
Oh no, yeah, I don't doubt that the Crimean region is very pro-Russian, and I've also been keeping up on how they've been protesting and resisting the pro-European government that Ukraine now has. But if the United States and NATO are expected to stay out of this issue, Russia should NOT be involved. I can't say I have a solid stance on the issue as a whole, but I'd say I'm more in the boat that the Ukrainians should be allowed to play this out among themselves. I've got a close friend that grew up just outside Kerson (I think that's how it's spelled?), which is pretty close to Crimea. She's ethnic Russian, but supports the government in Kiev.
I guess overall, I really think world powers should stay out of this one. If Crimea really wants to separate, let them deal with Kiev over it. I don't agree that Russia needs to come in and fight the Ukrainian military, because at this rate, that's what I believe is going to happen.
-
I do have to agree that I still think Russia actually deploying troops in Crimea before it has seceded is rather unsettling, but doesn't surprise me considering how they reacted to Abkhazia and South Ossetia declaring independence.
-
I do have to agree that I still think Russia actually deploying troops in Crimea before it has seceded is rather unsettling, but doesn't surprise me considering how they reacted to Abkhazia and South Ossetia declaring independence.
Yeah. But I do feel a bit hypocritical pointing fingers at Russia for it; I mean, we in the U.S. did that on a few occasions (Panama, Granada, Iraq/Afghanistan). Given the circumstances were different in those cases, but its not as if we haven't invaded countries without 100% precedent.
But eh, it's Russia right? Nobody likes them, so that makes it not okay! Right?
-
I knew someone was going to use that argument sooner or later :-\ In every case, we had a reason to be there that affected our national security or the security of US citizens: Panamian soldiers opened fire on a car filled with US servicemen and killed one of them, US citizens were studying at the local university on Granada, the Taliban government of Afghanistan was sheltering Al-Qaeda, and (false) intel suggested that Saddam was planning on selling chemical weapons to the Taliban. I'm not about to lionize the US or any NATO country, but Russia has absolutely no reason to be deploying troops in Crimea, which is still considered the sovereign territory of Ukraine.
-
Doesn't matter what happens.. Obama is still going to get involved in it. He has to stick his nose in everything.
Thanks, Obama.