• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Ukrainian Conflict - Donetsk Boogaloo

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure what people want the US to do exactly.

I mean outside of people who have a thirst for a new world war, anything the US would do, militarily, would be a disaster on a global scale.

You do know there are many ways to put pressure on a country outside of sending in an army, right?
 
A joint army for the EU would completely defeat its purpose. The only reason the EU exists is to prevent another European war from happening.
That was the reason the European Coal and Steel Community existed, we've hopefully moved a bit beyond that by now.
 
We already failed at that it seems, maybe it's time to rethink the whole no-army thing.

No it hasn't failed at that.

1) There is no war, and there won't be in this situation.
2) Ukraine, while geographically part of Europe, isn't considered a "true" European country the same way Germany or France are. Neither is Russia. Over time this will hopefully change.

The EU was (partly) made to discourage future war among its members. None of its members are involved in this current crises.
 
Why is the world seemingly in perpetual conflict atm!

ATM? It is the nature of the world and humanity. There has never been a time in human history where there were no ongoing armed conflicts. The Internet, satellite communication and the 24 hour news cycle has only made something that already existed more apparent.

Edit: Thanks, Woorlog!
 
Thats a lot of Mi-24 choppers

mi-24-20000217-f-8825t-002.jpg


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=287_1393605865

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f30_1393584675
 
No it hasn't failed at that.

1) There is no war, and there won't be in this situation.
2) Ukraine, while geographically part of Europe, isn't considered a "true" European country the same way Germany or France are. Neither is Russia. Over time this will hopefully change.

The EU was (partly) made to discourage future war among its members. None of its members are involved in this current crises.

You're really that confident that there won't be a war?
 
..A Kremlin spokesperson tells Reuters that Moscow hopes there will be no further escalation of the situation in Ukraine.. From bbc live updates.

Stop fanning the flames then maybe lol
 
Well it certainly isn't a "legal" invasion. Although I think you can't really argue with a straight face that Russia hasn't "invaded" Ukraine.

I meant if this in terms of international laws and whatnot at this point is recognized as an invasion. Not that the invasion would be legit. I worded it badly :3
 
Really is a shame that Ukraine gave up its nukes. Good luck convincing any other nation to do this now. At the very least (since giving Ukraine its nukes back isn't a good option) the US / NATO could deploy anti-missile batteries all over (remaining) Ukraine should this go down the way it is looking.

Someone needs to play up this story.
 
I'm a little surprised Russia isn't choosing to simply wait things out: let the fervor of the pro-EU factions die down, maybe voice a few platitudes toward the new government, and wait until the disillusionment of the political process sets in before reasserting some control over the government. Intervening now risks uniting most of Ukraine against Russia.
 
Wouldn't it be easiest if Crimea splits out and joins Russia, after a referendum, if majority of its people want to do that? This kind of thing happens all the time it seems, last I remember was Kosovo joining Albania for what seems the same reason - majority of the population wanting to do that. Serbia complains all it wants but the country is supposed to make the people want to live there, not to forcefully try and stop them from separating.
 
Really is a shame that Ukraine gave up its nukes. Good luck convincing any other nation to do this now. At the very least (since giving Ukraine its nukes back isn't a good option) the US / NATO could deploy anti-missile batteries all over (remaining) Ukraine should this go down the way it is looking.


Someone needs to play up this story.

I doubt most former Soviet satellite nations were capable of maintaining their nukes, though. They were more a liability for those countries than they were an asset. Radiation leaks, theft or sale by corrupt forces to terrorist organizations, or God forbid an accidental launch due to equipment failure. Those were the driving concerns.
 
D0WPQiV.jpg


Seriously, it's not our fight. Let them settle this themselves. I'd tired of America sticking its nose into things. America's been screwing up in every campaign in the last decade.

Except the US has committed itself to protecting Ukraine from external aggression, so it has the obligation to come to Ukraine's assistance. This crisis will be a key test for Obama and the United States. If the US fails to respond effectively it will confirm to the Russians, Chinese and Iranians that America is no longer willing to match its commitments with actions and that they can do what they like, knowing they can do what they want without any reprisals from an increasingly isolationist US.
 
Except the US has committed itself to protecting Ukraine from external aggression, so it has the obligation to come to Ukraine's assistance. This crisis will be a key test for Obama and the United States. If the US fails to respond effectively it will confirm to the Russians, Chinese and Iranians that America is no longer willing to match its commitments with actions and that they can do what they like, knowing they can do what they want without any reprisals from an increasingly isolationist US.

stop, just stop this misinformation that is spreading from Reddit. US is not commited to protect anything Ukraine.
 
I can't see how anyone can take the US seriously when they lecture about respecting another countries territorial integrity.
 
Wouldn't it be easiest if Crimea splits out and joins Russia, after a referendum, if majority of its people want to do that? This kind of thing happens all the time it seems, last I remember was Kosovo joining Albania for what seems the same reason - majority of the population wanting to do that. Serbia complains all it wants but the country is supposed to make the people want to live there, not to forcefully try and stop them from separating.
That might have been an option (though no country will usually accept losing territory, so who knows how Ukraine would have reacted), but with the russian army now occupying the land I'd consider any vote result worthless.
 
You do know there are many ways to put pressure on a country outside of sending in an army, right?

Well I would like to know some of these "ways"

You should note that whatever it is that you're gonna name is also supposed to avoid fucking up the global economy at the same time. Considering how important Russia is to Europe and the world in terms of oil and natural gas production, that seems like an impossible task.
 
Wouldn't it be easiest if Crimea splits out and joins Russia, after a referendum, if majority of its people want to do that? This kind of thing happens all the time it seems, last I remember was Kosovo joining Albania for what seems the same reason - majority of the population wanting to do that. Serbia complains all it wants but the country is supposed to make the people want to live there, not to forcefully try and stop them from separating.

Not that simple, is not only Crimea is also the east and south part of the country who also balancing towards Russia and Ukraine can't afford to loose it, because is their only maritime connection, it would be an economical disaster to loose all his ports
 
Wouldn't it be easiest if Crimea splits out and joins Russia, after a referendum, if majority of its people want to do that? This kind of thing happens all the time it seems, last I remember was Kosovo joining Albania for what seems the same reason - majority of the population wanting to do that. Serbia complains all it wants but the country is supposed to make the people want to live there, not to forcefully try and stop them from separating.

Kosovo as it is today never joined Albania nor it ever will. Also, it is impossible to predict what will happen with Kosovo, but I think it will further divide into Serbian and Kosovari parts someday and then we will see will any "unification" happen.
 
Except the US has committed itself to protecting Ukraine from external aggression, so it has the obligation to come to Ukraine's assistance. This crisis will be a key test for Obama and the United States. If the US fails to respond effectively it will confirm to the Russians, Chinese and Iranians that America is no longer willing to match its commitments with actions and that they can do what they like, knowing they can do what they want without any reprisals from an increasingly isolationist US.

Agreements mean nothing without strategic interest. As an example, the US wouldn't fight Russia over Ukraine, but it would over Germany. So words mean nothing, and never have. To believe otherwise is to live in a fantasy world, unfortunately.

WWI was the last time alliances truly had power, and the world learned from that very costly mistake. Now, wars are only fought over true strategic interests or aims, and Ukraine isn't worth enough to the west to warrant war. That's the simple truth, as unfortunate as it is.
 
Except the US has committed itself to protecting Ukraine from external aggression, so it has the obligation to come to Ukraine's assistance. This crisis will be a key test for Obama and the United States. If the US fails to respond effectively it will confirm to the Russians, Chinese and Iranians that America is no longer willing to match its commitments with actions and that they can do what they like, knowing they can do what they want without any reprisals from an increasingly isolationist US.

What is the commitment you are referencing? I think we're more obligated to protect Uruguay.
 
That was the reason the European Coal and Steel Community existed, we've hopefully moved a bit beyond that by now.
Don't see how a joint EU military goes against the purpose of the EU, personally
What is the commitment you are referencing? I think we're more obligated to protect Uruguay.
A treaty the Ukraine signed in return for giving up nukes. And maybe if Argentina were to annex Uruguay or something but right now wtf does Uruguay have to do with anything?
 
Unfortunately Obama has the perception of having no teeth and really won't and can't influence much no matter what is said, talk is cheap. On the other hand why does the US have to do EVERYTHING. What is Europe doing? Can't they do anything? Won't they try? The UN is a joke since Russia can veto any motion made and we know Putin basically wants Russia as it use to be which in the end is likely to end badly for the country eventually if they over play their hand too much.
 
Wouldn't it be easiest if Crimea splits out and joins Russia, after a referendum, if majority of its people want to do that? This kind of thing happens all the time it seems, last I remember was Kosovo joining Albania for what seems the same reason - majority of the population wanting to do that. Serbia complains all it wants but the country is supposed to make the people want to live there, not to forcefully try and stop them from separating.
Kosovo and easiest does not compute though. There are still parts of Kosovo with a serbian majority that dont accept the split and the reason foreign armed forces are still at the border. Kosovo is anything but stable.

Crimea can become another Kosovo, I assume not everyone in Crimea wants the split?
 
Unfortunately Obama has the perception of having no teeth and really won't and can't influence much no matter what is said, talk is cheap. On the other hand why does the US have to do EVERYTHING. What is Europe doing? Can't they do anything? Won't they try? The UN is a joke since Russia can veto any motion made and we know Putin basically wants Russia as it use to be which in the end is likely to end badly for the country eventually if they over play their hand too much.

One of the flaws of the UN is that security council members are still allowed to vote even when they are involved as an aggressor. There should have been a mechanism to force abstention from a UNSC vote if a member nation accuses a UNSC member of something. The other UNSC members would then vote on whether or not the accusation has merit and what to do about it.
 
Except the US has committed itself to protecting Ukraine from external aggression, so it has the obligation to come to Ukraine's assistance. This crisis will be a key test for Obama and the United States. If the US fails to respond effectively it will confirm to the Russians, Chinese and Iranians that America is no longer willing to match its commitments with actions and that they can do what they like, knowing they can do what they want without any reprisals from an increasingly isolationist US.

But so did Russia! The agreement was between the US, Ukraine and Russia. Besides, it wasn't actually an alliance or a promise of military support against foreign aggression. It was a promise not to be the aggressor. The only responsibility the US had is to bring the matter to the Security Council. Which I believe they have.

Really, the only party breaking the agreement is Russia.
 
When has the US ever invaded a country for territorial expansion (in recent history)?

What difference does it make? The US used a bullshit reason to invade Iraq, and lied to the world when doing so. Russia's intentions are at least obvious for the world to see--Both cases, though, are equally reprehensible. Invading a country is almost never justified.
 
..A Kremlin spokesperson tells Reuters that Moscow hopes there will be no further escalation of the situation in Ukraine.. From bbc live updates.

Stop fanning the flames then maybe lol

What the Kremlin is hoping is that they can just take the territory and nobody will do anything. This is a likely situation and in some ways suits the new Ukrainian government. They get rid of a problem and also lessen Russian influence in their affairs. Bonus points awarded for being able to demonise russia as well. After a meeting at the UN yesterday Britain warned people not to travel to the crimea and other areas. Russia was at this meeting and there's a good chance they informed everyone of what was going to happen. So there will be the usual diplomatic merry-go-round of blame and counter blame but every EU government would have suspected or even known that this was going to happen. Russia would also have likely told them through diplomats etc that there should be no cause for concern etc. There will be meetings back and forth over the next few days and gradually the whole thing will disappear from the headlines. Meanwhile Ukraine has to pick up the pieces.
 
Unfortunately Obama has the perception of having no teeth and really won't and can't influence much no matter what is said, talk is cheap. On the other hand why does the US have to do EVERYTHING. What is Europe doing? Can't they do anything? Won't they try? The UN is a joke since Russia can veto any motion made and we know Putin basically wants Russia as it use to be which in the end is likely to end badly for the country eventually if they over play their hand too much.

What are the teeth in this situation? Do people who call Obama or the US spineless really prepared for US troops to attack Russian troops and the fallout that would happen after that? It's easy to talk wargames but a lot harder when actually lives and geopolitical uncertainties are on the line.
 
What difference does it make? The US used a bullshit reason to invade Iraq, and lied to the world when doing so. Both acts are equally reprehensible. Invading a country is almost never justified.

I would like to think that annexing parts of a country is worse than invading it and then leaving but that is my opinion.
 
What are the teeth in this situation? Do people who call Obama or the US spineless really prepared for US troops to attack Russian troops and the fallout that would happen after that? It's easy to talk wargames but a lot harder when actually lives and geopolitical uncertainties are on the line.

That's what's so hilarious when you think about it. It's the US population that has no teeth anymore. Our appetite for any conflict, no matter how justified, is at zero. You can't expect the President and Congress to ignore that completely.
 
People keeping bringing up the US....this is happening in Europe's fucking backyard and they are seemingly mum.
 
Unfortunately Obama has the perception of having no teeth and really won't and can't influence much no matter what is said, talk is cheap. On the other hand why does the US have to do EVERYTHING. What is Europe doing? Can't they do anything? Won't they try? The UN is a joke since Russia can veto any motion made and we know Putin basically wants Russia as it use to be which in the end is likely to end badly for the country eventually if they over play their hand too much.

Perception? Obama has no teeth. His foreign policy has been a debacle. Russia called him on his shit; Putin has been testing the waters for some time now.

And the US does not have to do everything, but for years, the very perception of US strength has been enough to keep a lot of people in line. Many countries have seen the weakening position of the US and are now acting on it.

It isn't just Russia. NK, China, Russia, Iran, Syria etc....they have all been acting like little shit rats for the least few years and all Obama has done is make empty "red-line" threats and speeches that really say nothing one way or the other.

The world is changing, probably for the worse, and I think a lot of it has roots in the weakening global US position both militarily and monetarily. I fully expect to see a MAJOR war at some point before I die, and I am not that young.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom