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.
Vladimir Putin cannot be left to do what he likes and simply invade other countries like he has done with Ukraine. He needs to be sent a clear and consistent message that his actions will not be tolerated in the 21st century. If there was just a shred of legitimacy in Putin's actions no-one would care. Quite frankly our politicians need to grow a pair instead of sending 'strongly worded' statements, they need to show Putin they are willing to use all available options.
Wookiep
reply to post by hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Perhaps, but I don't think Putin would be stupid enough to start WWIII. The answer would be simple, stay out of Ukraine proper. If he wanted to start WWIII by advancing then I believe the whole world would be against him.
It's not so easy to tell NATO to stay out when they signed a treaty for this specific purpose. WWIII could be caused by NOT intervening, IMO. Because of things like THIS. (Read the link)
I do agree with Phoenix, it IS messy, but there are huge implications here on both sides. I truly believe this is up to Putin. He won Crimea, he better be happy with that and stay out of Ukraine.
edit on 17-3-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)
Wookiep
reply to post by hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Perhaps, but I don't think Putin would be stupid enough to start WWIII. The answer would be simple, stay out of Ukraine proper. If he wanted to start WWIII by advancing then I believe the whole world would be against him.
It's not so easy to tell NATO to stay out when they signed a treaty with Ukraine for this specific purpose. WWIII could be caused by NOT intervening, IMO. Because of things like THIS. (Read the link)
I do agree with Phoenix, it IS messy, but there are huge implications here on both sides. I truly believe this is up to Putin. He won Crimea, he better be happy with that and stay out of Ukraine.
edit on 17-3-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)
Wookiep
reply to post by ProfessorT
At this point I agree. I think it's more destructive to allow Putin to continue this, whether it be in Ukraine or elsewhere. This is why NATO needs to bring in a defensive force and support the Ukraine army at defending it's borders. Unfortunately, we do have a very spineless and weak president, one of which Putin has played like a harp.
This is quite simple, if Obama and company don't get some balls soon then the entire world will see that NATO is useless. Treaties aren't signed and nukes aren't rid of based on broken promises.
Foxtrot7x
Why are you all babbling about NATO and US being diff and missing the rest of the post . US is a NATO member right and a superpower ? Does he need to tell you about how its goes from obama to nato allies and then lot of thinking and then its NATO as a whole ?
Wookiep
reply to post by shappy
It's called the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -
U.S. Department of State
Ukrained joined the treaty in 1994
Foxtrot7x
Lol keep thinking that way . What does member& influential mean then lol . If you will see a lot of US allies are also NATO members. And I think we are pretty sure other countires nearby russia are wary of it . didnt you hear of sweden wanting to join NATO because of this? You can't keep us out of this and thus not NATO as most NATO members will follow US lead since Russia has scared them.
Wookiep
reply to post by hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Um, well first I said Obama and company. Second, the U.S. has always had a huge geopolitical influence since the creation of NATO and a huge influence with decisions concerning NATO from day 1. C'mon.edit on 17-3-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)
hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Wookiep
reply to post by hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Um, well first I said Obama and company. Second, the U.S. has always had a huge geopolitical influence since the creation of NATO and a huge influence with decisions concerning NATO from day 1. C'mon.edit on 17-3-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)
influence yes...but obama being week does that make NATO weak by association ?
hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Wookiep
reply to post by hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Um, well first I said Obama and company. Second, the U.S. has always had a huge geopolitical influence since the creation of NATO and a huge influence with decisions concerning NATO from day 1. C'mon.edit on 17-3-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)
influence yes...but obama being week does that make NATO weak by association ?