It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Xcathdra
And for some to constantly blame the west while ignoring Russian actions is a problem.
ColCurious
reply to post by Xcathdra
Xcathdra
And for some to constantly blame the west while ignoring Russian actions is a problem.
On this we can agree. It is a problem... just as much as the other way round.
Deny ignorance.
Xcathdra
If you have 3 tanks, and Vlad has 10k tanks, where would you seek support from?
ColCurious
reply to post by Xcathdra
I have to agree again, especially with the part about meddling in the affairs of a sovereign nation.
Xcathdra
If you have 3 tanks, and Vlad has 10k tanks, where would you seek support from?
If I was Ukrainian I'd still prefer my country to remain independent as much as possible. Maybe even funtion as a bridge between east and west. I don't think the West-Ukrainians have realized yet what they're in for with the EU.
Xcathdra
Until Russia decides to recognize the government of Ukraine as lawful, which I don't see them doing since it serves their purpose, all we have right now is a stalling tactic (imo).
ColCurious
As far as I know/remember, Russia offered not to admit the Republic of Crimea into the Russian Federation as a new constituent region, if we had considered the new leadership in Kiev as illegitimate. That was before facts were made of course.
Xcathdra
Had the west taken that offer, in addition to Crimea, the remainder of Ukraine would have also been taken under the guise of restoring the former President.
Xcathdra
Putin is going to rebuild the Soviet Empire, one sham election at a time.
ColCurious
I know that this is your opinion, which you're entitled to have ofc... but this rhetoric doesn't really help to solve the problem.
I say back to the facts. Back to the legal framework that was established after WWII for good reasons.
ColCurious
reply to post by Xcathdra
Good post - also with a few areas I don't agree with, but we agree about the important part: the fate of Ukraine - for the Ukrainians, not anybody else.
Maybe I should clarify again that I'm in no way pro-Russian, nor pro-Putin (I have to admit though that our bureaucrats look like schoolboys compared to that KGB-agent) I'm just not pro-NATO, either.
Regarding de-escalation:
As I said before, NATO/US/EU are in no position to point fingers at Russia, nor demand anything.
International laws either apply to all, or to none, and we violated said laws.
If we agree rules apply, all sides have to sit down and talk serious.
If not - all bets are off and all is fair game.
Xcathdra
reply to post by rigel4
Absolutely not... Only Ukraine can determine their future, which includes who they choose to ally with. Even more so with all the other BS Putin has going on in the East / South Ukraine and well as Moldova and the latest comments about Finland. Telling Ukraine they cant join NATO while there are 60-80 thousand Russian troops on the border is, again, a choice with a gun held to their head.
I think the NATO issue is coming up because it will throw his time table off. As a member of NATO Putin will have to do whatever it is he is going to do prior to the join date.
I say bring Ukraine into NATO immediately and deploy troops to Ukraine to protect against further Russian aggression.edit on 30-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)edit on 30-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
Xcathdra
I guess the question about law violations is contingent on which side is doing it and the purpose / facts behind the action. In all the years I've done law enforcement I have found laws exist for a reason, and that discretion is required when comparing a law to the actions that violated the law.
VirusGuard
Sounds good to me if both NATO and Russia agree to keep out of the Ukraine and make it a type of DMZ but even if they do the people are still in for a fight because half the public did not agree with the government being removed at the point of a gun and cannot suport the nazi's that helped to take over.
VirusGuard
Public sector wages cut by 65%, Pension by 50% and gas prices up by 50% would ensure riots in any country and the kicker to this is that wages went up in the Crimea along with pensions after they voted to join Russia.
VirusGuard
Russia should stop moving it's continental plates closer to all them missile systems that Americans keep placing all over Europe if you ask me.
ColCurious
Yes, NATO serves a purpose: the purpose of a defensive alliance.
I just don't agree with their stance in context of this current crisis.
ColCurious
I have to mention beforehand that I'm not very knowledgeable about applicable US law, but what you stated here is interesting.
ColCurious
If you'd ask a judge in Germany if a theft of noble motive is not a theft in comparison to a theft of non-, or lesser-noble motive, he will tell you that it stays a theft.
In general, rules must apply regardless of however moral the motives might be, because the inner motive cannot be proven in legally relevant terms (very few exceptions prove the rule, like legitimate self-defence).
Being LEO, you know this is a very delicate issue. It is even more declicate in context of international laws because: through violation of international law - by habitual law - you can alter the applicable international law (!!!)
ColCurious
Precedents and practice are very, very dangerous when it comes to nuclear superpowers.
ColCurious
I think what we're currently witnessing is the era of consequences, following the age of precedents... I'm thinking about making a thread about this.
rigel4
reply to post by Xcathdra
It actually against NATO rules to allow members to join who have
dispute with their neighbors.
So that ends that really.. doesn't it.