Could the White House have given Russia Crimea in exchange for...?

I know it's far out there, relax. But we do all remember this...

The exchange between the US and Russian presidents was picked up by microphone without either leader apparently knowing.
Mr Medvedev, who steps down in May, said he would pass on Mr Obama's message to his successor Vladimir Putin, according to an audio recording of comments the two leaders made during a meeting in Seoul, South Korea.
Mr Obama says: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defence, this, this can be solved but it's important for him to give me space."
Mr Medvedev replies: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you …"
Mr Obama retorts: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

We all can assume there are plenty of back door deals that happen on a global scale between different country's leaders. For the sake of argument, let's say that there was this idea brewing between Putin and Obama where Putin can have strategic Crimea (After a bunch of staged blows back and forth to make it seem real), and then the White House gets something in return.

Now I think the idea obviously gains more traction if there was something obvious that Putin could help secure for Obama. My mind is racing with ideas. One thought could be the reemergence of the missile defense system that by we pulled back on. Maybe help with the Dollar?

My original thought that these things are staged events and in this day An age, there are far less surprises of this magnitude.
[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9167332/Barack-Obama-microphone-gaffe-Ill-have-more-flexibility-after-election.html]Source[ /url]

Could it be possible that this is merely an exchange made to look like a conflict?

Crazier things have happened. I don't necessarily believe this, but I thought it would be very ATS to consider.

Any other ideas that could be a fair exchange?

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9167332/Barack-Obama-microphone-gaffe-Ill-have-more-flexibility-after-election.html]Link[/u rl]

AAC.

Crimea wasn't ours to give. Just because someone took control of the Ukraine, doesn't mean it is a legitimate government. You know if the USA had anything to do with this new government, we will someday be sending soldiers into that country to overthrow who we put in power. Looking at history, that is almost guaranteed.

Perfect for a couple of banker wars then.....surely its crossed your mind that there could be some machiavallian plot between Russian Bankers and western bankers.....
Or it could be tit for tat...you get crimea....we get the LNG for europe contract through Syria.....

Maybe he traded it for guaranteed political asylum if he ever has to face prosecution... Snowden style......

rickymouse
Crimea wasn't ours to give. Just because someone took control of the Ukraine, doesn't mean it is a legitimate government. You know if the USA had anything to do with this new government, we will someday be sending soldiers into that country to overthrow who we put in power. Looking at history, that is almost guaranteed.

Of course it's not our to give. Perhaps I should've added "allowed them to have", but I thought it was implied.

People just don't take land these days without repercussions (besides Israel). I mean all we did was sanction some of the Russian Billionaires that were hiding Money in America. That played perfectly into Putins hand as he was already demanding these oligarchs bring their money home.

Even so, it's just an idea.

AAC

Russian recently compared Kosovo referendum with the one in Crimea.

Kosovo voted to gain indipendence from Serbia, and consequently moved closer to Nato and the Eu.

here is a very good read about it and the comparison with Crimea

rt.com...

AnAbsoluteCreation

rickymouse
Crimea wasn't ours to give. Just because someone took control of the Ukraine, doesn't mean it is a legitimate government. You know if the USA had anything to do with this new government, we will someday be sending soldiers into that country to overthrow who we put in power. Looking at history, that is almost guaranteed.

Of course it's not our to give. Perhaps I should've added "allowed them to have", but I thought it was implied.

People just don't take land these days without repercussions (besides Israel). I mean all we did was sanction some of the Russian Billionaires that were hiding Money in America. That played perfectly into Putins hand as he was already demanding these oligarchs bring their money home.

Even so, it's just an idea.

AAC

I like fresh ideas. Most times there is some truth in everything. Even though it was not ours to give, it doesn't mean that someone may have BS'ed someone into thinking it was so some desired benefit could be realized. I can't say this is a wrong idea, in fact I feel we should keep this in consideration. I just said the US had no right to do this.

reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation

My original thought that these things are staged events and in this day An age, there are far less surprises of this magnitude.
... Source...

Could it be possible that this is merely an exchange made to look like a conflict?

Crazier things have happened. I don't necessarily believe this, but I thought it would be very ATS to consider.

Any other ideas that could be a fair exchange?

Link

Ukraine owes Russia billion$.

Ukraine gets a regime change "suddenly".

ex Ukraine President "flees" to Crimea.

Crimea votes to "secede" and "easily" becomes part of Russia.

The "Western" IMF and EU etc. "arranges" loans to new Ukraine.

Russia will get paid and will continue to sell gas to and through Ukraine.

Russia keeps and expands a solid military base in Crimea.

IMO the whole thing reeks of Rothschild/Soros/Jealousy banking exploitation tactics.

related topic a few weeks ago Soros behind Ukraine?