Jesus H. Christ--- Enough about America going to war over Crimea! It's not our Fight!

snypwsd
reply to post by HardCorps

 

Dick Cheney made pretty much the same threats about using nukes on Russia days before they made that comment.

If USA does not uphold its treaties then when your country is in need of help other countries will turn their backs on you. Your allies will become enemies, and considering USA has a small amount of Allies I dont think that you would want to turn whats left of them into enemies.

As long as Ukraine does not build up nuclear arms then the USA has an obligation to help out. This is different from Iraq or Afganistan because of the paper that Clinton signed back in 94.
That means...... IT IS AMERICA'S FIGHT.

Face it, Your country has started war after war and invaded country after country in the past 13 years. How is it different then what Putin is doing?

Also who said the cold war ended? Its only evolved. Now its not so much having field agents, as its more about what you can get from hacking computer systems and analysing the metadata of your opposing government.

No matter what you want or say its not going to change Bill Clintons signature on that treaty.

Obama has ignored, turned his back on Crimea and the Ukraine.

You speak the truth about the treaty, but to paraphrase Obama, "If you like your treaty, you can trust your treaty".



This is a brave new world, where treaties and Constitutions are little more than toilet paper in the White House lav.

reply to post by snypwsd


Technically, thanks to the NAFTA accords, Canada and Mexico have become our northern and southern security zones. Meaning TPTB have already taken steps to folding our three nations into one big union.
This explains it better than I can

Anyway It's the Good ole boys, club that makes those kinds of decisions about our respective fates. Still we are not all mindless sheep to go willingly to slaughter.

If called into service I will go where sent... But no one said I have to like it or keep my mouth shut and thoughts to myself!

Sending American troops into Crimea is wrong, period...

reply to post by beezzer


You and I have talked about treaties before...
I am Native American--- you know--- the guys who have been dealing with illegal immigration since 1492.

A treaty is just a paper that says we can all live in peace and harmony ... until they want your land or women or natural resources ...

Trust an old 'Red Skin' when he says if someone is holding out a treaty--- you really should be looking for what their hiding in the other hand?

reply to post by HardCorps


Interesting take from a Native American.

I was wondering if you read this thread...

Redskins must change their name...

Make sure to read it to the end. It's only a few lines.

You're right about Treaty's....they mean nothing.

HardCorps
reply to post by InverseLookingGlass

 

Apples and Oranges...
Bulgaria and Estonia are part of NATO
I've even been to Estonia as part of joint Military training op.

That we would have to do something about.
But the Ukraine is not a formal signatory.

I understand your position and won't try to talk you out of your rant. Just consider the way the Crimea thing went down. It wasn't the whole country just one part and there was some kind of hastily arranged referendum where supposedly, the people wanted to change sovereigns. Vlad was there to protect.

All I'm saying is it was pure genius, unprecedented, and that same model can and will be reused. It may not be as cut and dried as being in or out of NATO.

whyamIhere
reply to post by HardCorps

 

Interesting take from a Native American.

I was wondering if you read this thread...

Redskins must change their name...

Make sure to read it to the end. It's only a few lines.

You're right about Treaty's....they mean nothing.

I'm a KC fan myself... but lets keep that to ourselves... I live in Colorado and the Bronco fans here give me hell when I wear my Chiefs jacket.

reply to post by HardCorps


Yes sending troops to crimea would be wrong if everything remains peaceful. I agree with you on that. But if Russian troops start fireing at Ukraine forces or civilians then The USA has an obligation to be there to help the people of Ukraine out.
I dont know how much easier I can make it.

Also I thought NAFTA, the North American Union, the Amero and all that jazz was common sence? Its old news, that still does not change the fact that there is a treaty that says the USA will protect Ukraine against foreign forces as long as they do not build nuclear arms.

It was not my Prime Minister who signed the treaty. So I dont see how NAFTA or the NAU have anything to do with this.

The only thing that my government has to do with this whole situation is that we were also going to boycott the g8 sumit in Russia. As far as I know we are staying absolutley neutral at the moment. So please dont put us in Americans shoes. We dont have silly treaties like that (atleast that I know of).

HardCorps
reply to post by beezzer

 

You and I have talked about treaties before...
I am Native American--- you know--- the guys who have been dealing with illegal immigration since 1492.

A treaty is just a paper that says we can all live in peace and harmony ... until they want your land or women or natural resources ...

Trust an old 'Red Skin' when he says if someone is holding out a treaty--- you really should be looking for what their hiding in the other hand?

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out where we might have some sort of obligation.

If our politicians were honest and had values, ethics, and morals. . . . . .

reply to post by beezzer


And I'm not disagreeing with you Beezer. But, IF our politicians were honest and had values, ethics, and morals, I can't help but wonder how many of those treaties now in existance, would never have been proposed or signed.

A treaty between nations, entered into for the wrong reasons, should not be used to the detriment of the peoples who had no say in said treaty.

If a treaty can not stand up to the light of day, it needs to be reevaluated in it's entirety.

JMOHO...

Des

reply to post by HardCorps


I think the whole point of people mentioning the treaty is because it is not being reported in the media, yet is absolutely fundamental in this situation.
We asked, nay insisted that Ukraine give up nuclear weapons and capabilities and in return, we, the US & UK, would protect and ensure their integrity and their land and back them up should russia do what they are doing.
Crimea was also a big part of this agreement/treaty.

Things have changed and we are probably behind a lot of the trouble out there, not to mention the far right fascist groups who have members in prominent positions in the Ukranian govt.
The situation is hugely complex

I agree 110%. Why should we help them out at all when our economy is #, our education is #, technology has taken a backseat and our health care is going down. I'm sick of us being the world police. No wonder so many countries hate us. And dint say it's because of our freedom because that's being taken away as well. Yes, it could be worse, but, we need to mind our own damn business.

reply to post by Destinyone


Agreed.

The treaty was put into place initially to encourage the Ukraine to get rid of all of its nukes and to reduce it's army.

Imagine if they still had all of that.

Putin might have had second thoughts.

Dead rights it's not your fight. The penny finally drops.

How is it there was not this same sentiment when you intervened in Kuwait, Iraq?