[Archived] Is world war 3 about to kick off, starting in Ukraine

[yoda]

getting a bit techy now

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26405635

[Jock]

Arms dealers rubbing their hands

[yoda]

Arms dealers rubbing their hands

doubt it, to late anyway

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26424738

What is Putin playing at?

[Steve Moss]

What is Putin playing at?

I'm not an expert on Putin, but it appears to me that he thinks the leaders of the Western powers are spineless and weak-kneed. He knows they won't counter his invasion of the Crimea, because they didn't with his invasion of Georgia.

At most some rhetoric will be thrown his way and some might impose sanctions of one sort or another. None of which will bother Russia. It has oil. Europe, especially if it continues to oppose fracking, needs oil.

So Putin wins again.

If we had spine (we don't), we wouldn't send in armed troops immediately but:

1. We'd extend the missile defense shield which was put on hold in 2009, at Putin's request.

2. We'd move a fleet into the Baltic and Black Seas on a full-time basis.

3. We'd re-arm Japan (which has extensive history with China and Russia).

4. We'd expel Russia from the G8.

5. We'd seize Russia's overseas accounts and the accounts of its citizen (this may adversely impact Chelsea FC but we'll just have to bear it).

6. We'd prohibit travel between USA/EU and Russia.

7. We'd expel the Russia team from the World Cup.

8. I would engage with the Ukraine, Poland and other neighbors of Russia to determine whether the will exists to counter-invade the Crimea and Georgia for the purposes of expelling Russian troops. If those countries offered significant combat and financial support (i.e. a million troops or more), I'd throw up to 500,000 American forces toward the project. The key is that we don't actually invade (though we might have to) but Putin sees a coalition of his neighbors preparing to fight and acting as if they will fight, push comes to shove. Nos. 1-7 makes no. 8 look more likely, especially if the conversation and process is very above board and open.

Does that make WWIII more likely? Maybe. But I believe demonstrating weakness makes WWIII even more likely. So we need to make Putin back up. And he will, one way or the other, if we act like men. Which we won't.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Get real Steve, none of that is going to happen nor should it. Wiser councils need to prevail as they did in the Cuban Missile crisis for instance. If Kennedy et al had have gone down the sort of road you're advocating we probably wouldn't be having this conversation now.

The UK stopped being the Worlds policeman about a century ago, it's time the US followed our example.

[Steve Moss]

It has nothing to do with being the world's policeman. It has everything to do with backing our allies.

If we get the reputation of being a soft friend, we soon won't have any friends.

[thenodrog]

The UK stopped being the Worlds policeman about a century ago, it's time the US followed our example.

And who do you think would step into the breach?

[somersetrover]

The UK stopped being the Worlds policeman about a century ago, it's time the US followed our example.

Libya.

I'm not an expert on Putin, but it appears to me that he thinks the leaders of the Western powers are spineless and weak-kneed. He knows they won't counter his invasion of the Crimea, because they didn't with his invasion of Georgia.

At most some rhetoric will be thrown his way and some might impose sanctions of one sort or another. None of which will bother Russia. It has oil. Europe, especially if it continues to oppose fracking, needs oil.

So Putin wins again.

If we had spine (we don't), we wouldn't send in armed troops immediately but:

1. We'd extend the missile defense shield which was put on hold in 2009, at Putin's request.

2. We'd move a fleet into the Baltic and Black Seas on a full-time basis.

3. We'd re-arm Japan (which has extensive history with China and Russia).

4. We'd expel Russia from the G8.

5. We'd seize Russia's overseas accounts and the accounts of its citizen (this may adversely impact Chelsea FC but we'll just have to bear it).

6. We'd prohibit travel between USA/EU and Russia.

7. We'd expel the Russia team from the World Cup.

8. I would engage with the Ukraine, Poland and other neighbors of Russia to determine whether the will exists to counter-invade the Crimea and Georgia for the purposes of expelling Russian troops. If those countries offered significant combat and financial support (i.e. a million troops or more), I'd throw up to 500,000 American forces toward the project. The key is that we don't actually invade (though we might have to) but Putin sees a coalition of his neighbors preparing to fight and acting as if they will fight, push comes to shove. Nos. 1-7 makes no. 8 look more likely, especially if the conversation and process is very above board and open.

Does that make WWIII more likely? Maybe. But I believe demonstrating weakness makes WWIII even more likely. So we need to make Putin back up. And he will, one way or the other, if we act like men. Which we won't.

Typical Yankee attitude getting involved in a part of the world that they know nothing about and that is thousands off miles away, what happens in Crimea is between its people the Russian's and the Ukrainian's. Also let me assure you this is not like going to war with Iraq, Libya, Bosnia, 'Kosovo', or other countries that you have desecrated in the past. Going to war with Russia would end up for you like when you went to war with Vietnam, Cuba or DPRK when you came up against well organised Militaries and you retreated with your tails between your legs. And you talk about maybe having to invade I certainly wouldn't advise that as I don't give much for your chances Napoleon couldn't defeat Russians in that region and neither could the 3rd Reich. So unless you have a Genghis Khan up your sleeve you would leave there with your tail between your legs and highly doubt you have one of those in your military otherwise you wouldn't be still fighting in Afghanistan after 13 years with victory now way near in sight.

What really gets me though about this is the hypocrisy of the British press and politicians who say the say the Malvinas must remain British as that is what the people want, but the people of Crimea want to be part of Russia that logic does not apply.

[Steve Moss]

Typical Yankee attitude getting involved in a part of the world that they know nothing about and that is thousands off miles away, what happens in Crimea is between its people the Russian's and the Ukrainian's.

So applying this logic, the next time the Germans (or the equivalent) come knocking on the UK's door, we Yankees should just stay home?

Though to be fair, Germany seems to have ditched the idea of taking over Europe with tanks and is instead doing it through your monetary policies.

[somersetrover]

So applying this logic, the next time the Germans (or the equivalent) come knocking on the UK's door, we Yankees should just stay home?

Well you did last time when the Blitz and Battle of Britain were taking place you were still debating whether or not go to War with Germany. And then you only went to war with them after they declared war on you on December 11th 1941, by which time Britain and the Soviet Union were already at war with Germany.

[Steve Moss]

You have a very interesting world-view. Have you forgotten lend-lease or the many other pre-war activities that we undertook on behalf of the UK?

Or is America acting in such a fashion on behalf of its allies, short of full out declarations of war, only to assist the UK?

And in order to educate you a bit, here's some of the American run-up to WW2:

Last half of 1939, the USA begins the Manhattan project.

Sept., 1939 the USA declares its "neutrality".

Starting October, 1939 the USA declares a Pan-American security zone- the USA effectively relieves the British Navy and provides naval security to British convoys.

Starting Nov. 1940 the USA begins to sell weapons to Britian and France, but excludes Germany and Italy, despite its asserted neutrality..

Throughout 1940:

The USA plans the production of 50,000 planes/year.

The USA begins the expansion of the Navy.

The USA begins to expand the Army.

The USA transfers 50 destroyers to Britian.

The USA institutes the draft of 16 million men.

The USA placed an embargo on shipping metal to Japan.

The USA announces lend-lease.

The USA announces that it will become "the arsenal of democracy".

Starting March, 1941 lend-lease aid is provided to Britian, Russia, China.

March 30, 1941, all German and Italian ships in the USA are seized.

Apr. 9, 1941, the USA assumes the defense of Greenland.

Apr. 10, the USA ship Niblack drops depth charges on German U-Boat.

June 14, the USA freezes all Italian and German assets.

June 16, the USA orders all Italian and German consulates closed.

July 7, the USA assumes the defense of Iceland freeing 25,000 British troops to fight.

July 26, the USA freezes all Japanese assets.

August 1941, Roosevelt and Churchill outline their post-war goals in the Atlantic Charter.

Sept. 1941, the USA destroys German weather station in Greenland.

Sept. 1941, the USA begins to pre-preemptively destroy German and Italian vessels in the Atlantic, if perceived as a threat.

December, 1941, the USA officially enters WW2.

So if we really are the good guys, why aren't we doing one or more of the above for the benefit of the Ukraine?

[Audax]

I'm not an expert on Putin, but it appears to me that he thinks the leaders of the Western powers are spineless and weak-kneed. He knows they won't counter his invasion of the Crimea, because they didn't with his invasion of Georgia.

At most some rhetoric will be thrown his way and some might impose sanctions of one sort or another. None of which will bother Russia. It has oil. Europe, especially if it continues to oppose fracking, needs oil.

So Putin wins again.

If we had spine (we don't), we wouldn't send in armed troops immediately but:

1. We'd extend the missile defense shield which was put on hold in 2009, at Putin's request.

2. We'd move a fleet into the Baltic and Black Seas on a full-time basis.

3. We'd re-arm Japan (which has extensive history with China and Russia).

4. We'd expel Russia from the G8.

5. We'd seize Russia's overseas accounts and the accounts of its citizen (this may adversely impact Chelsea FC but we'll just have to bear it).

6. We'd prohibit travel between USA/EU and Russia.

7. We'd expel the Russia team from the World Cup.

8. I would engage with the Ukraine, Poland and other neighbors of Russia to determine whether the will exists to counter-invade the Crimea and Georgia for the purposes of expelling Russian troops. If those countries offered significant combat and financial support (i.e. a million troops or more), I'd throw up to 500,000 American forces toward the project. The key is that we don't actually invade (though we might have to) but Putin sees a coalition of his neighbors preparing to fight and acting as if they will fight, push comes to shove. Nos. 1-7 makes no. 8 look more likely, especially if the conversation and process is very above board and open.

Does that make WWIII more likely? Maybe. But I believe demonstrating weakness makes WWIII even more likely. So we need to make Putin back up. And he will, one way or the other, if we act like men. Which we won't.

This is a good post and what people are talking about, the Ruple could be trampled on and "Barbarians" are not meant to be in the G8.

[Audax]

How about that. USA was scheduled to play vs. Ukraine on Wednesday there. http://int.soccerway.com/matches/2014/03/05/world/friendlies/ukraine/united-states-of-america/1635745/?ICID=HP_MS_01_19

Just found out it was originally scheduled for Karkhiv, rescheduled for Cyprus but now appears it will not be played at all.

http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsoccer/usa/story/according-to-reports-usmnt-friendly-in-ukraine-to-be-moved-to-cyprus-022513

[Steve Moss]

Very cool.

President Obama should watch the game with the Ukrainian chief of state. They should discuss the Ukrainian-Russian problem very openly, and publicly, and then Obama should announce the first phase of consequences, including but not limited to the freezing of Putin's oil cronies' accounts and assets.

[perthblue02]

You have a very interesting world-view. Have you forgotten lend-lease or the many other pre-war activities that we undertook on behalf of the UK?

Or is America acting in such a fashion on behalf of its allies, short of full out declarations of war, only to assist the UK?

Of which Britain as well as repaying the debt had to hand over many of it's trading routes and agreements in countries as well as strategic land in exchange for lend lease agreements, to which initially America sent their defective ships . Wasn't it referred to by the Yanks as "The Arsenal of Democracy"? basically spivy arms dealers and profiteer's out for what they could get and protect what they had already got without getting their hands dirty at the same time boosting their own economy whilst letting others defend freedom..

Interesting despite coming on as half time subs, they managed to make it in force to the after war carve up party and claim all the glory.

Interesting to see that some of those lend lease equipment and supplies to the Russian's turn up in Vietnam a few years later which according to the official source of history for most American's, Hollywood, you won .,

So let's not pretend lend lease was done out of the goodness of your hearts, it was a calculated business move for America, a tentative step to self proclaim themselves rulers of the world and grab anything you could..A fact ratified by the way the lend -lease agreement was unexpectedly terminated and a new loan agreement was made which Britain did not finish paying for until 2006.

Anyway off to see the Monuments Men tonight to see how a British unit becomes American and the burger munchers save all the art works in the world all by themselves, hope it's as realistic as U-571.

As for the Ukraine, Believe the US peace delegation is arriving there on Tuesday, call me cynical but equates to trying to light a cigarette at a gas leak

[Audax]

Here is the USA Today article where it sounds like the match will not take place.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/soccer/world/2014/03/03/usmnt-us-soccer-roster-ukraine-cypress/5994039/

Sorry for the interlude into sports news.

[Paul]

I'm not sure going back to WW2 is helpful in this discussion and my knowledge is far too limited to remark on that other than Americas ability to re-write and believe their public's perception of history is jaw-dropping.

I have to say I find the attitude expressed by SM in this thread arrogant and insulting. It is one many Europeans, the people of Europe not our governments, see as typical of a nation which is inward looking, belligerent and entirely self-interested.

I don't know if you have ever travelled outside of the US Steve, your attitude suggests not, but if you have you clearly did not grasp the feeling many have towards your country.

I pray Obama is capable of commonsense rather than outright aggression. If not it would be better if America stayed home or found someone else to beat up, again. The attitudes expressed in this thread are not welcomed by large portions of Europe. It's all very well committing 500,000 troops to the Ukraine in some kind of stand off. The problem being if Putin thinks it's for real we will have WW3 on our hands.

Generations of Americans have no experience of modern warfare in their homeland, neither have I but I am old enough to have known the generation who lived and fought through WW2. If you believe Europe is weak-kneed I would suggest its because we've been there and millions still know or remember people who understood through direct experience the consequences.

For me the attitude you express is unwelcome and, yes, the Yankees should stay home.

My father-in-law was Ukranian, his wife Italian (she thought Mussolini was right). His and his family's treatment at the hands of the Germans and Russians, plus an ingrained hatred of Jews, is something we are all very fortunate not to have experienced. He had a real hatred of both nations till his death - as an aside this is why I object to people using the word "hate" in day to day language. To explain how deep this feeling was he could not understand how we allowed our children to learn German at school or why we would have German exchange students in our house. That is what war, brutality and persecution do to people. I wish he was around to discuss this.

Consequently my wife's heritage is Ukranian, many family and friends are Ukranian or part, her view of the Crimea is simple "let Russia have it."

[wilyrover]

Price of gas has risen 10% since Friday. Looks like we depend on Russia now. Forget sanctions.

[Adam C]

Found this graphic in The Guardian...

http://i.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/3/1/1393706908545/61d48bfb-1ad1-4d81-a47d-554b8ac020dc-620x372.png?width=620&height=-&quality=95

Seemingly we don't have such a reliance on Russian oil and gas. I must say that I opposed fracking even a couple of weeks ago but when you see the consequences of not knowing where your energy supply is coming from it makes it easier to accept some environmental damage.

I don't see this developing into WWIII; I think that Russia will get the Crimea and hope to God that they don't decide to push on into Ukraine in search of the new USSR. It is just nasty to see a country being bullied by a superpower acting without restraint. I guess people across the Middle East and South America are aiming wry smiles our way at this very minute.

edit: That bar chart is up to ten years out of date - now Russia provides 1/2 of Europe's gas rather than 1/3. Qatar has also become a gas supplier to Europe in the interim.

[somersetrover]

Found this graphic in The Guardian...

http://i.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/3/1/1393706908545/61d48bfb-1ad1-4d81-a47d-554b8ac020dc-620x372.png?width=620&height=-&quality=95

Seemingly we don't have such a reliance on Russian oil and gas. I must say that I opposed fracking even a couple of weeks ago but when you see the consequences of not knowing where your energy supply is coming from it makes it easier to accept some environmental damage.

I don't see this developing into WWIII; I think that Russia will get the Crimea and hope to God that they don't decide to push on into Ukraine in search of the new USSR. It is just nasty to see a country being bullied by a superpower acting without restraint. I guess people across the Middle East and South America are aiming wry smiles our way at this very minute.

edit: That bar chart is up to ten years out of date - now Russia provides 1/2 of Europe's gas rather than 1/3. Qatar has also become a gas supplier to Europe in the interim.

Ah Qatar that well known bastion of Human Rights and Democracy.

[thenodrog]

Libya.

Typical Yankee attitude getting involved in a part of the world that they know nothing about and that is thousands off miles away, what happens in Crimea is between its people the Russian's and the Ukrainian's. Also let me assure you this is not like going to war with Iraq, Libya, Bosnia, 'Kosovo', or other countries that you have desecrated in the past. Going to war with Russia would end up for you like when you went to war with Vietnam, Cuba or DPRK when you came up against well organised Militaries and you retreated with your tails between your legs. And you talk about maybe having to invade I certainly wouldn't advise that as I don't give much for your chances Napoleon couldn't defeat Russians in that region and neither could the 3rd Reich. So unless you have a Genghis Khan up your sleeve you would leave there with your tail between your legs and highly doubt you have one of those in your military otherwise you wouldn't be still fighting in Afghanistan after 13 years with victory now way near in sight.

What really gets me though about this is the hypocrisy of the British press and politicians who say the say the Malvinas must remain British as that is what the people want, but the people of Crimea want to be part of Russia that logic does not apply.

Russians? Why the Russians? They have nothing to do with the Ukraine. Study the Budapest manifesto.

[Steve Moss]

I'm not sure going back to WW2 is helpful in this discussion and my knowledge is far too limited to remark on that other than Americas ability to re-write and believe their public's perception of history is jaw-dropping. I have to say I find the attitude expressed by SM in this thread arrogant and insulting. It is one many Europeans, the people of Europe not our governments, see as typical of a nation which is inward looking, belligerent and entirely self-interested. I don't know if you have ever travelled outside of the US Steve, your attitude suggests not, but if you have you clearly did not grasp the feeling many have towards your country. I pray Obama is capable of commonsense rather than outright aggression. If not it would be better if America stayed home or found someone else to beat up, again. The attitudes expressed in this thread are not welcomed by large portions of Europe. It's all very well committing 500,000 troops to the Ukraine in some kind of stand off. The problem being if Putin thinks it's for real we will have WW3 on our hands. Generations of Americans have no experience of modern warfare in their homeland, neither have I but I am old enough to have known the generation who lived and fought through WW2. If you believe Europe is weak-kneed I would suggest its because we've been there and millions still know or remember people who understood through direct experience the consequences. For me the attitude you express is unwelcome and, yes, the Yankees should stay home. My father-in-law was Ukranian, his wife Italian (she thought Mussolini was right). His and his family's treatment at the hands of the Germans and Russians, plus an ingrained hatred of Jews, is something we are all very fortunate not to have experienced. He had a real hatred of both nations till his death - as an aside this is why I object to people using the word "hate" in day to day language. To explain how deep this feeling was he could not understand how we allowed our children to learn German at school or why we would have German exchange students in our house. That is what war, brutality and persecution do to people. I wish he was around to discuss this. Consequently my wife's heritage is Ukranian, many family and friends are Ukranian or part, her view of the Crimea is simple "let Russia have it."

1. Arrogant and insulting? I thought I was pointing out the obvious. Twice within a decade, Russia has invaded another European nation. I predicted Russia will get away with it this time, as it did last, as the Western powers (including the USA) are too weak-willed to do anything about it. We'll soon see if I am right, but if I am correct its a sad state of affairs where supposedly rational human beings believe the truth is "arrogant and insulting".

2. I believe I have traveled extensively compared to many, including: Japan (6 months), Philippines (6 months), S. Korea (6 months), Norway (3 months), Scotland (1 month, two 2 week trips), Mexico (about 1 month), England (10 days) and Canada (roughly a weekend a month for about 10 years). I have also lived in about 8 of the 50 American states. Now what does my travel, or lack of travel, have to do with my observation the Western powers will do little or nothing to Putin for his invasion of the Crimea?

3. I could care less about the feelings of others toward my country. What I care about is that other countries KNOW that if they screw with America or an American ally that there will be hell to pay. Incidentally, this world view of mine greatly benefited the UK in the past and may benefit it in the future, so don't be so quick to hope the Yanks make a habit of staying home.

4. It seems to me that balance of your post supports the assertion that Europe is weak. It is likely that the USA is weak also (at least under President Obama), but I hope to be proved wrong. If Putin's invasion of Crimea (and previously, Georgia) results in a net benefit to Russia, he'll do it again and again. When do you suggest that the line in the sand be drawn?

[Steve Moss]

Of which Britain as well as repaying the debt had to hand over many of it's trading routes and agreements in countries as well as strategic land in exchange for lend lease agreements, to which initially America sent their defective ships . Wasn't it referred to by the Yanks as "The Arsenal of Democracy"? basically spivy arms dealers and profiteer's out for what they could get and protect what they had already got without getting their hands dirty at the same time boosting their own economy whilst letting others defend freedom..

Interesting despite coming on as half time subs, they managed to make it in force to the after war carve up party and claim all the glory.

Interesting to see that some of those lend lease equipment and supplies to the Russian's turn up in Vietnam a few years later which according to the official source of history for most American's, Hollywood, you won .,

So let's not pretend lend lease was done out of the goodness of your hearts, it was a calculated business move for America, a tentative step to self proclaim themselves rulers of the world and grab anything you could..A fact ratified by the way the lend -lease agreement was unexpectedly terminated and a new loan agreement was made which Britain did not finish paying for until 2006.

Anyway off to see the Monuments Men tonight to see how a British unit becomes American and the burger munchers save all the art works in the world all by themselves, hope it's as realistic as U-571.

As for the Ukraine, Believe the US peace delegation is arriving there on Tuesday, call me cynical but equates to trying to light a cigarette at a gas leak

It is true that the 50 destroyers we gave you under lend-lease were crap. But that's because its all we had to give. And you took it because that was all that was available.

We did not start rebuilding our Navy until 1937-38 and most of our active fleet at the time of Pearl Harbor was pretty antiquated (there was little or no new construction following WW1). I read one report where it opined the Japanese did us a favor sinking those ships as it paved the way to replace them with far better vessels which were pivotal in winning the war.

I also believe that when Churchill mentioned the poor state of the 50 destroyers provided, Roosevelt then transferred an additional 10 vessels which were in much better shape.

As to the financial arrangements, there were two that I can recall. One was lend-lease which was very favorable to Britain, Russia and China. For example, the transfer of bases that you described were not exclusive to America. We shared them with you, all you did was allow us access. And then we improved them. And then after the war your priorities shifted and you abandoned the bulk of them.

After the war, the second financial arrangement was a 50 year loan at 2% interest. We also allowed 5 years of differed payment. And the real crown jewel of the deal was that we sold you the military equipment you wanted at 10% of the real value. How is that taking advantage of an ally? I suspect 99% of the nation's of the world would bite our hands off, including the Ukraine, if we offered a similar deal.

And yes, we did demand that Britain's markets be opened. Are you suggesting that the UK would have preferred to keep its former colonies in a state of economic dependency? For shame.

And it is true that we waited two years before entering the war. But if you followed the time-line I laid out: 1) we were neutral only in theory; and, 2) we used the time we bought to prepare for war. And it is that time which allowed the West (via America, on that occasion) to win the war. So don't knock it if we (on paper) put a practical goal, achieving victory, ahead of an idealistic world-view (bailing you out at the beginning, which we were at that time ill-prepared to do).

End result, you had to chose between Empire and the Welfare State. You chose the Welfare State. Don't be too forlorn, however, as it looks like the USA is creeping toward the same conclusion.

[Adam C]

Ah Qatar that well known bastion of Human Rights and Democracy.

I hope you don't think I was saying hurray for Qatar... I was trying to point out that we aren't totally dependent on Russian energy supplies and at least we have options if it comes to sanctions, diplomatic efforts or, at last resort, war.

[somersetrover]

1. Arrogant and insulting? I thought I was pointing out the obvious. Twice within a decade, Russia has invaded another European nation. I predicted Russia will get away with it this time, as it did last, as the Western powers (including the USA) are too weak-willed to do anything about it. We'll soon see if I am right, but if I am correct its a sad state of affairs where supposedly rational human beings believe the truth is "arrogant and insulting".

Oh the irony of that comment coming from an American.

I hope you don't think I was saying hurray for Qatar... I was trying to point out that we aren't totally dependent on Russian energy supplies and at least we have options if it comes to sanctions, diplomatic efforts or, at last resort, war.

I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of western governments. And as I said in an earlier post that last thing that this country needs is a war with Russia as it wouldn't be a happy ending for Britain.