What the heck are we doing in Ukraine?

[Nightshade]

Yes, Putin is a thug. Yes, taking Crimea as Russian territory from another sovereign state was also criminal- but what are we doing in Ukraine?

A Russian puppet government leader was knocked out of power in Ukraine in a coup- but a coup we have no business supporting. There are no 'good guys' in Ukraine at the moment- only suffering people- and we're "backing" a corrupt and increasingly tyrannical and bankrupt government in Kiev.

Why are we there training their mercenary bands of thugs with US advisors?





We have NO national security interest at stake- and we are only antagonizing a nuclear armed thug.

Russia's military is a shadow of its former Soviet self and could not conventionally take and hold much territory against a modern army like the US or even some of our NATO allies- but conventional forces are not the issue.

Russia still has a large nuclear weapon stockpile and is quite capable of reducing the US and the west to smoking cinders.

Putin and his generals have repeatedly warned that in the case of being overwhelmed by even conventional forces- they would use nuclear weapons immediately.

That presumably also means territory currently held by Russian backed ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

Trip wires are being set up on both sides that would lead us to nuclear war.

Is this really necessary?

http://www.inquisitr.com/2029683/russia ... -fighting/

[Vander]

Why are we there training their mercenary bands of thugs with US advisors?

That's our jam!

[Will Robinson]

We had convinced the leadership to disarm themselves of nuclear weapons in return for NATO protection.
They agreed.
Then they needed protection and we balked.
Putin sensed Obama wasn't going to challenge him so he flipped the middle finger up and is now methodically retaking the region.

So do we render NATO a questionable tool for incentivizing potential allies and enemies?

Short answer: we are shooting ourselves in the foot

[woodchip]

Putin is responding much like Hitler. And of course the present administration is reacting like Chamberlain. Weakness only fuels the dictators in the world and it holds true today as much as it did in the late thirty's.

[Tunnelcat]

Only when NATO aircraft will fly in the U.S. with hundreds of bodies of American soldiers, then maybe politicians will come to their senses.

Actually, George W Bush hid the bodies of our troops from public view and the media during his 2 wars. He didn't want Americans seeing those flag draped coffins day after day and then all get upset about it, which would have been very bad press for his little wars of choice.

[Will Robinson]

Only when NATO aircraft will fly in the U.S. with hundreds of bodies of American soldiers, then maybe politicians will come to their senses.

Actually, George W Bush hid the bodies of our troops from public view and the media during his 2 wars. He didn't want Americans seeing those flag draped coffins day after day and then all get upset about it, which would have been very bad press for his little wars of choice.

I think you got that a little off. It was during his fathers administration that photographs of returning coffins from overseas was banned at the military air bases because it was seen as exploiting the suffering of the families who hadn't even had a chance to receive the remains yet.

Exploitation/exposure eventually won out and lots of people on both sides of the political spectrum disagreed with the decision to lift the ban. Regardless of that, and your characterization of it, we have pretty high visibility for our dead soldiers. A pretty good public accounting of it.

[Foil]

[Mod] Reminder: Keep it professional, discuss the topic. But the "international trash talk" will be removed.[/Mod]

[Tunnelcat]

Only when NATO aircraft will fly in the U.S. with hundreds of bodies of American soldiers, then maybe politicians will come to their senses.

Actually, George W Bush hid the bodies of our troops from public view and the media during his 2 wars. He didn't want Americans seeing those flag draped coffins day after day and then all get upset about it, which would have been very bad press for his little wars of choice.

I think you got that a little off. It was during his fathers administration that photographs of returning coffins from overseas was banned at the military air bases because it was seen as exploiting the suffering of the families who hadn't even had a chance to receive the remains yet.

Exploitation/exposure eventually won out and lots of people on both sides of the political spectrum disagreed with the decision to lift the ban. Regardless of that, and your characterization of it, we have pretty high visibility for our dead soldiers. A pretty good public accounting of it.

By God, you're right. It was put in place in 1991, under HW Bush. My bad. BUT, little Goergie Bush renewed it while in office. Like father like son. Obama was the one who lifted it finally. If we don't want war, the government should never hide the human cost of any war. It makes it too impersonal and antiseptic, negating any public input to end that war.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29410258/ns/u ... in-photos/

[Nightshade]

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/rus ... -war-12662

Could a U.S. response to Russia’s actions in Ukraine provoke a confrontation that leads to a U.S.-Russian war? Such a possibility seems almost inconceivable. But when judging something to be “inconceivable,” we should always remind ourselves that this is a statement not about what is possible in the world, but about what we can imagine. As Iraq, Libya and Syria demonstrate, political leaders often have difficulties envisioning events they find uncomfortable, disturbing or inconvenient.

Prevailing views of the current confrontation with Russia over Ukraine fit this pattern. Since removing Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and Muammar el-Qaddafi from power had limited direct impact on most Americans, it is perhaps not surprising that most Washington policy makers and analysts assume that challenging Russia over Ukraine and seeking to isolate Moscow internationally and cripple it economically will not come at a significant cost, much less pose real dangers to America. After all, the most common refrain in Washington when the topic of Russia comes up is that “Russia doesn’t matter anymore.” No one in the capital enjoys attempting to humiliate Putin more than President Barack Obama, who repeatedly includes Russia in his list of current scourges alongside the Islamic State and Ebola. And there can be no question that as a petrostate, Russia is vulnerable economically and has very few, if any, genuine allies. Moreover, many among its business and intellectual elites are as enthusiastic as the Washington Post editorial page to see Putin leave office. Ukrainians with the same view of former Ukrainian president Viktor F. Yanukovych successfully ousted him with limited Western help, so, it is argued, perhaps Putin is vulnerable, too.

Nevertheless, Russia is very different from the other countries where the United States has supported regime change.

[Will Robinson]

...
If we don't want war, the government should never hide the human cost of any war. It makes it too impersonal and antiseptic, negating any public input to end that war.

There is a big gap between banning the photo's taken of caskets as they unload from overseas return flight...and....'hiding the cost of war', 'hiding the death toll', etc. a cost/toll that is always made quite apparant to our citizens without those particular photo's.

You are trying awfully hard to bridge that gap with rhetoric. Do you really need to suspend your integrity from such a tenuous construction?

[Spidey]

The NewsHour has been posting the photos, names and ranks of all the soldiers killed in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

(when they become available, that's their little caveat)

[sigma]

The NewsHour has been posting the photos, names and ranks of all the soldiers killed in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

(when they become available, that's their little caveat)

This is not the soldiers who defend their homeland... I mercilessly shoot him, even if he tells me that he has seven children

[callmeslick]

funny thing, amidst all this bluster, Putin has apparently been reaching out to try and work with the US in cooling things down, behind the scenes. I read a few reports in the past month about this.

[Tunnelcat]

...
If we don't want war, the government should never hide the human cost of any war. It makes it too impersonal and antiseptic, negating any public input to end that war.

There is a big gap between banning the photo's taken of caskets as they unload from overseas return flight...and....'hiding the cost of war', 'hiding the death toll', etc. a cost/toll that is always made quite apparant to our citizens without those particular photo's.

You are trying awfully hard to bridge that gap with rhetoric. Do you really need to suspend your integrity from such a tenuous construction?

No rhetoric, other than the fact I think Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. didn't want the bad press and let the American people to see how many of our soldiers were being killed in these 3 wars. Showing lots of flag draped coffin photos can have quite the impact. The Vietnam War was the first war to show the general public the actual carnage and destruction that war brings to a country. I think that had a lot to do with the unpopularity of that war and the decision to end that war, which was a damn good thing, or we'd probably still be there the way things were going.

[Nightshade]

funny thing, amidst all this bluster, Putin has apparently been reaching out to try and work with the US in cooling things down, behind the scenes. I read a few reports in the past month about this.

I really hope so. I'm just wondering if the US government is actually trying to cool things off too.

[vision]

I really hope so. I'm just wondering if the US government is actually trying to cool things off too.

Depends on how much money is involved. We only act when it's in our best financial interest.