US House Votes 348-48 To Arm Ukraine, Russia Warns Lethal Aid Will "Explode The Whole Situation"

originally posted by: works4dhs
thehill.com...

this from 'The Hill' which is pretty official.

I think this is a good idea. We are not provoking aggression, we are enabling people to resist same.
Imagine if someone had given Poland a bunch of tanks and fighters in 1938. might have made a difference?
Not much hope Obama will run with it though. This admin seems to think Russia is a positive and benevolent nation. (Reset!)

At that time we (Polish) had not so bad air forces, but there was awful lack of tanks. Plus our military plans were based on idea, that Germans would have to fight on two fronts (yes, French) and backstab from Russians was unanticipated.

originally posted by: Shadow1024

originally posted by: works4dhs
thehill.com...

this from 'The Hill' which is pretty official.

I think this is a good idea. We are not provoking aggression, we are enabling people to resist same.
Imagine if someone had given Poland a bunch of tanks and fighters in 1938. might have made a difference?
Not much hope Obama will run with it though. This admin seems to think Russia is a positive and benevolent nation. (Reset!)

At that time we (Polish) had not so bad air forces, but there was awful lack of tanks. Plus our military plans were based on idea, that Germans would have to fight on two fronts (yes, French) and backstab from Russians was unanticipated.

France and Britain ultimately entered WWII on behalf of Poland, then sat while Poland got steamrolled. After the war Stalin took it as a slave/client state. Terrible fortune, deserved much better.

originally posted by: anticitizen
a reply to: MysterX

that's right. europe and russia were prettey good neighbors for a long time till the usa got involved with their "divide et impera" tactic.
ukraine has to remain a neutral state! manipulating their politics first and sending nato weapons later is basically like saying "yo ruskies, ukraine now belongs to the west!".
i doubt russia thinks of this as a good idea as well as the missile shield encircling russia more and more.
but who knows...

totally, totally disagree. Putin took over as near-dictator and is the aggressor. Without his neo-imperialism we wouldn't have this conflict. Missile Shield? Irrelevant. shields can't hurt you, they only stop your assaults.
Right now Putin is the only person in the way of a totally peaceful Europe.

I just had a vague memory of that old John Titor material?

Didn't he claim something like this year, amidst with conflicts happening in the middle east, Russia would suddenly attack major US cities with nuclear weapons? (and the US retaliates..) I don't remember real well, but didn't he say this month, or something?

eta- okay, this is a dumb spontaneous addition to the discussion, my apologies. It was just a weird side thought that arose and I regret posting it but have nothing to replace it with.

here is the text of this bill.

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[H. Res. 162 Engrossed in House (EH)] H. Res. 162
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
March 23, 2015.
Whereas the existence of an independent, democratic, and prosperous Ukraine is in the national interest of the United States;

Whereas the Russian Federation under President Vladimir Putin has engaged in relentless political, economic, and military aggression to subvert the independence and violate the territorial integrity of Ukraine;

Whereas this aggression includes the illegal and forcible occupation of Crimea by Russian military and security forces;

Whereas this Russian aggression includes the establishment and control of violent separatist proxies in other areas of Ukraine, including arming them with lethal weapons and other materiel including tanks, artillery, and rockets that have enabled separatist militias to launch and sustain an insurrection that has resulted in over 6,000 dead, 15,000 wounded, and more than a million displaced persons;

Whereas military and security forces of the Russian Federation have been infiltrated into these areas of Ukraine and continue to provide direct combat support to the separatist groups in this conflict;

Whereas failure to stop this aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, especially its unprovoked and armed intervention in a sovereign country, illegal and forcible occupation of its territory, and unilateral efforts to redraw the internationally-recognized borders of Ukraine undermines the foundation of the international order that was established and has been defended at great cost by the United States and its allies in the aftermath of World War II;

Whereas Russian aggression against Ukraine is but the most visible and recent manifestation of a revisionist Kremlin strategy to redraw international borders and impose its will on its neighbors, including NATO allies;

Whereas on September 18, 2014, President Petro Poroshenko addressed a Joint Meeting of Congress at which he thanked the United States for the military assistance it has provided to defend the freedom and territorial integrity of his country and asked for "both non-lethal and lethal'' military assistance, stating that ``one cannot win a war with blankets'';

Whereas the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey stated on March 3, 2015, that "we should absolutely consider providing lethal aid'' to Ukraine;

Whereas Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter stated on February 4, 2015, during his confirmation hearing that he is "very much inclined'' toward providing Ukraine with weapons to defend itself;

Whereas Congress provided the President with the authorization and budgetary resources to provide Ukraine with military assistance to enhance its ability to defend its sovereign territory from the unprovoked and continuing aggression of the Russian Federation, including in the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which was signed into law on December 18, 2014;

Whereas the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014 specifically authorizes the provision of anti-armor weapons, crew-served weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop-operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment;

Whereas even as it faces a massive military assault, Ukraine is confronting an economic crisis that requires both long-term financial and technical assistance by the United States and the international community, especially the countries of the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, as well as fundamental economic and political reforms by the government of Ukraine;

Whereas the United States and its allies should provide assistance to support energy diversification and efficiency initiatives in Ukraine to lessen its vulnerability to coercion by the Russian Federation;

Whereas the United States and its allies should continue to work with Ukrainian officials to develop plans to increase energy production and efficiency in order to increase energy security beyond the short-term;

Whereas the United States, in close cooperation with international donors, has provided Ukraine with macro-economic assistance to boost Ukraine's economy;

and Whereas the United States and its allies need a long-term strategy to expose and challenge Vladimir Putin's corruption and repression at home and his aggression abroad:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives strongly urges the President to fully and immediately exercise the authorities provided by Congress to provide Ukraine with lethal defensive weapon systems to enhance the ability of the people of Ukraine to defend their sovereign territory from the unprovoked and continuing aggression of the Russian Federation.

I just want to know one thing, who is going to fight all these wars? Soon, someone will reinstate the draft in the middle of the night. It is the republicans in charge right now, so they are the ones to blame when this goes bad. I hope Obama does not sign it but it is the defense lobbyists that own all on the hill right now. But, it was voters who put these people in charge, so we have to live with fear and war that everyone is high on in this era.

a reply to: MOMof3

Congress controls the purse strings.

The Commander in Chief is the president.
The chief Diplomat is the President.

Foreign policy belongs to the President.

Trying to blame Congress for Obama's inability to find a spinal cord is sad.

If peace works in Ukraine Obama will take credit for it. If war breaks out he will blame Congress.
If peace works in Iran Obama will claim credit for it. If war breaks out he will blame Congress.

see a pattern yet.

Point out one thing that failed that the President took ownership of.


congress is doing its job based on the Constitution while Obama is busy trying to destroy separation of powers so he can rule by executive Fiat.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Answer
Who exactly are the representatives representing with this vote?

I'm fairly certain that the American people want nothing to do with sending more arms to Ukraine.

The military industrial complex has its claws firmly embedded in U.S. politics.

and here in lies the difference between a democracy, which we are not, and a constitutional representative republic, which we are. If the people have issues then they can fire their respective reps in the next election cycle.

And since the sky is the limit on political donations, Big Money will parade another puppet for the people to "select" from

Tails they win, heads they win

www.opensecrets.org...

Top Contributors to Obama
Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $624,618
Morgan Stanley $512,232
Latham & Watkins $503,295

www.opensecrets.org...
Top Contributors to Romney
Goldman Sachs $1,033,204
Bank of America $1,013,402
Morgan Stanley $911,305
JPMorgan Chase & Co $834,096
Wells Fargo $677,076
Credit Suisse Group $643,120
Citigroup Inc $511,199
Barclays $446,000
Rothman Institute $259,500

Picking someone outside their parade is frowned on in media and is a wasted vote.
They said picking someone like Ron is just "crazy"

a reply to: jacobe001

And no matter what president is put in power
He has to fight with these politicians

www.opensecrets.org...

Revolving Door

69 out of 109 Lockheed Martin lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
40 out of 51 Honeywell International lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
51 out of 67 Raytheon Co lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
96 out of 133 General Dynamics lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
32 out of 49 Northrop Grumman lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
83 out of 115 Boeing Co lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs

a reply to: Xcathdra

In your perfect political imagination it is suppose to work that way. If foreign policy is the pres job then why did congress try to interfere with negotiations with Iran? I have heard and seen the president humbled many times.

You can't fool an old fool. I see what is coming down the pike. Republicans know they can't win the presidency as long as the right wing is in charge. So now, all that power they gave cheney/bush through the patriot act, they don't want the black democrat president to have, or the next democrat president. You go fool the children.

originally posted by: MOMof3
In your perfect political imagination it is suppose to work that way. If foreign policy is the pres job then why did congress try to interfere with negotiations with Iran? I have heard and seen the president humbled many times.

they were wanting details of the agreement since Obama is once again cutting Congress out of the loop. Obama / Kerry are arguing there needs to be no congressional approval of an agreement with Iran.

The flaw is we have sanctions on Iran and only congress can remove them. We have already been down the road of "you have to pass the bill to see whats in it". Congress is not going to make that mistake twice by removing sanctions and then getting to see what agreement was reached.

Congress is within its authority o do what they did. They don't answer to the other 2 branches of government anymore than the executive branch. We have a system of checks and balances in place for this very reason.

originally posted by: MOMof3
You can't fool an old fool. I see what is coming down the pike. Republicans know they can't win the presidency as long as the right wing is in charge. So now, all that power they gave cheney/bush through the patriot act, they don't want the black democrat president to have, or the next democrat president. You go fool the children.

You guys really need to stop blaming the bush administration for Obamas failures. As for winning the presidency I think the midterms sent a clear signal that Obama's policies aren't all that popular. Considering the way he has disgraced his office by acting as a dictator democrats, like in the midterms, are going to get tagged with Obama fatigue.


The constant attempts to blame Bush has blown up in the democrats face and trying to continue that failed strategy only alienates more and more voters who supported Democrats.

The word Obama needs to learn is accountability.

a reply to: Xcathdra

There is no deal yet. Congress as we speak is getting leaks of details and more to come

www.yahoo.com...

a reply to: MOMof3

That's just it.. They should not have to get leaked information.

To me it looks like Obama knows congress is not going to be happy with a deal. A second letter, from the House this time, was sent to Obama talking about the agreement. That list had over a 100 democrats names on it along with their Republican counterparts.

Do I want to see a deal made? absolutely.

However if the agreement has time limits on it, like the 10 years I keep hearing about, then whats the point? Iran has been caught lying about its program which is another reason congress wants to see the agreement before they remove sanctions. The position of Obama and Kerry and their efforts to keep this from going to the Senate for approval scares the hell out of me.

a reply to: Xcathdra

What are we going to do about the other 45 countries wanting nukes if we can't make an agreement with one?:

www.world-nuclear.org...

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xcathdra

What are we going to do about the other 45 countries wanting nukes if we can't make an agreement with one?:

www.world-nuclear.org...

Well for starters you need to read your own source. They are talking about nuclear power and not nuclear bombs.

Over 45 countries are actively considering embarking upon nuclear power programs.

a reply to: Xcathdra

That is what they all say, including Iran. If we believed that, what is to negotiate?

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xcathdra

That is what they all say, including Iran. If we believed that, what is to negotiate?

No that is the excuse Iran is using. If you follow their media you will see they constantly claim the west is trying to deny them the use of nuclear power. The US has already stated Iran has a right to use nuclear energy. The purpose of the negotiations was to find a way for Iran to freely use nuclear power with safeguards in place to prevent them from gaining the ability or actually building a nuclear weapon.

While Iran claims their nuclear program is civilian only, heir actions say something different. For starters they are signatories to the IAEA. Because of that they are required to disclose the locations of their facilities. Iran failed to do that when western nations pointed out they had a secret enrichment facility.

The IAEA has found traces of highly enriched uranium.
They have found software that is designed to look at detonation, which is required for a weapons program and not a civil program.
Of the 12 outstanding issues the IAEA has with Iran, Iran has only engaged in 1 of the 12 issues. All of those issues revolve around their program and possible military elements to it.

Russia and the US relied on MAD to keep things in check. A mutual deterrence.

If Iran gets a bomb it will most likely be used since one could argue their program is not so much a deterrence but a means to following up on their efforts to wipe Israel off the map.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I already know that about Iran. The others will follow. They all want the most powerful weapon on the planet. If we fail to negotiate with one, we might as well give up. Or war.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xcathdra

I already know that about Iran. The others will follow. They all want the most powerful weapon on the planet. If we fail to negotiate with one, we might as well give up. Or war.

Feel free to support that claim with, you know, facts.

a reply to: MOMof3

My proof is Iran. These are the other ME countries wanting to follow Iran's lead. They are not Israel's or US friend either:

•In the Middle East and North Africa: Iran (reactor now operating), Gulf states including UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar & Kuwait, Yemen, Israel, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Sud