Opinions on Ukraine

[Anomalocaris]

What are your opinions about Ukraine and their current civil war? who is right? who is justified? who's the victim? who benefits?

I wonder if a solution to the crisis is just to accept two Ukraines, one in the west where the people want independence and a western part that is either annexed by Russia or a pro-Russian Ukraine, as seems to be popular sentiment there.

This would be a peace proposal that would not play well in the American media, especially if a Democrat is the one to propose it, but it does seem to be the most fair solution based on the limited information I have.

Please note my heavy disclaimer that I'm hardly an expert on that part of the world and would welcome correction if I'm wrong on anything I just wrote.

I don't believe any 2 Ukraine solution attainable and acceptable now could be stable. Russia has shown itself to be both more subtle and more ruthless than any other player in this contest. Russia will never let any settlement stand which does not contain loopholes to allow Russia to continue to try to constrain and destabilize the pro-western half and expand the pro-Russian half. And Russia will ruthlessly exploit any loophole to do these things.

---

...And it's situation is being unstable ever since - to the point where the Ukranians actually supported the German invasion of 1941 until they saw the Germans hadn't come to liberate them from the Soviets but to keep them as slaves.

A "what if" scenario I have imagined is what if the Germans had not tried to annex any territory when they attacked the Soviet Union but instead offered to the Ukrainians and Baltics their own independent countries, no strings attached, if they helped in the fight against Stalin. Germany would have destroyed its only rival power on the continent and the Ukrainians and various Baltic people would have gotten their independent countries.

Of course, such a scenario precludes the Nazi mentality that the Germans were the master race destined to rule the world and thus precluded the whole second world war in the first place.

Hitler wouldn't have attacked Russia if total subjugation of Ukraine, as in all Ukrainians having been starved or worked to death over about 20 years so Germans could claim the land as exclusive inhabitants, had not been one of Germany's fundamental war aims.

For Hitler lebensraum trumped even anti-communism.

---

Ukraine, the prelude to a new cold war.

Putin hankers for the "old days".

I don't think Putin wants a cold war. I think Putin is determined to stop Russia from keep on losing the post cold war. What Putin is hankering for is Russia holding her ground, which is a rather understandable thing to hanker for.

It is the United States that is tore between the seeking comforting self-righteous purposefulness of a new cold war with china, and being able to buy cheap electronics in Warmart and potentially export to a billion newly middle class consumers.

Russia as the fallen power is no longer strong enough, or its strength appear durable enough, to form a long lasting opponent capable of exciting existential fears in the US needed to support a real cold war.

China, on the other hand, is a rising power with realistic possibilities of displacing the US from the position of the leading power in the world. For a power accustomed to do whatever it liked whereever it liked this is an existential crisis.

[simplemoss]

are you truly saying you see a neo-nazi government controlling the largest country in Europe is not a big deal?

No. I'm saying it is not America's problem to solve. It is the wrong battle, at the wrong time, in the wrong place, with the wrong opponent. If Russia has a problem with one of its border states, they can choose to settle it peacefully, or by using force. America, on the other hand, cannot solve anything there. Our diplomacy has nothing to support it except for sanctions, which have already proved impotent.

Please, I'm writing exactly what I mean. Read it as it is, and respond to what I'm writing, rather than imputing views I haven't expressed. I'm not doing that to you, and I expect the same courtesy in return.

nobody's "imputing" anybody, you said if Ukraine wants an independent fascist nazis government they should get one. I must assume you feel the way about Isis, that the people of that region should get whatever government "they" want and its nobody else's business but the poor unfortunate few who live in it's borders

[Anomalocaris]

The difference is Ukraine is already an independent, universally recognized, and sovereign nation. Ukraine is not a mere insurrection against a recognized sovereign state seeking to set up a new, as yet unrecognized, state, as ISIS attempts to do. It is generally frowned upon for one established state to attack another because it didn't like the victim state's government.

If Ukraine wants independent fascist nazis government, whether they should get one is of no consequence. It is considered to be against the rules to prevent by force their getting one.

[simplemoss]

So what your advocating for chuck is "free the nazis!"?

[Thumpalumpacus]

nobody's "imputing" anybody, you said if Ukraine wants an independent fascist nazis government they should get one.

Who am I, an American, to tell the Ukrainians what sort of government they should have? If they voted for this or that government, no matter its leanings, why should my country expend lives and treasure to overturn it when it doesn't present a threat to my country? And if they took to the streets to overthrow a government that wasn't acting in their best interests, that too is a vote of sorts, insofar as it expresses the will of the people (albeit an obnoxious form of expression). If you're going to argue that Ukraine being fascist is a big deal, back that up: how will it affect us, as Americans? I have no family there. I have no investments there. I do have family in our armed forces, though; and I'd just as soon not see their lives squandered.

The Russians, as I said, are throwing their weight around; they obviously want to recover Ukraine into their nation. Their policies and actions seem to be getting that task accomplished, too. At that point, your point about the Ukrainian government being fascist loses its weight, because the Russians will take take of that by force of events. American intervention would be idiotic, and if you read what I've been writing, that has been my point in this discussion.

I must assume you feel the way about Isis, that the people of that region should get whatever government "they" want and its nobody else's business but the poor unfortunate few who live in it's borders

This is an appeal to emotion, not a rational argument. When you can put up videos of Ukrainians beheading Americans, your comparison might be valid.

I am against wanton intervention in the internal affairs of other countries. That applies to my own country as well as others. I am especially against such measures when they face the insuperable difficulties any putative intervention in Ukraine would certainly entail.

---

So what your advocating for chuck is "free the nazis!"?

The Russians seem to be doing a fine job of hamstringing Ukrainian fascism. Why should America do anything at all? Let the Russians do the fighting; it is, after all, much more their own national interest.

Also, you're imputing a position Chuck hasn't advocated here. Advocating disinterest is not picking a side.

[The Grand Nudger]

Okay, oversimplification I'm sure, but doesn't the vast majority of Russia's interests in the Ukraine boil down to Sevastapool? Understanding why Russia seeks to gain purchase in Ukraine would seem to be the first step into understanding how to move forward?

If anyone much more versed in this (I assume there are a few of you here) could add to the list of reasons that Russia is even interested in Ukraine, I'd appreciate it.

[abaris]

Okay, oversimplification I'm sure, but doesn't the vast majority of Russia's interests in the Ukraine boil down to Sevastapool? Understanding why Russia seeks to gain purchase in Ukraine would seem to be the first step into understanding how to move forward?

Their main interest is their Black Sea fleet and, probably, having a land corridor to supply it. The land corridor also seems vital for economic interests at the Crimean peninsula. That's probably what Putin's after.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Historically, Russia has wanted access to the Bosporus; warm-water ports are distinctly scarce.

[Anomalocaris]

So what your advocating for chuck is "free the nazis!"?

No, I am advacating a big aggressive power with geopolitical reach and a large arsenal it is willing to use on its neighbors is a much more serious threat to its neighbors than any small poor local nation that does qualify as any sort of power, regardless of what makes up its governing coalition.

This is doubly true when the big power throws around the term Nazi just to justify beating up on the small country, as if the small miserable country, even if led by bonafide neo-Nazis (as opposed to Russian notion of the Nazi, which is basically anyone who advocates parts of former soviet union should not remain vassels to Russia), would have been much of a threat to anyone.

---

Okay, oversimplification I'm sure, but doesn't the vast majority of Russia's interests in the Ukraine boil down to Sevastapool? Understanding why Russia seeks to gain purchase in Ukraine would seem to be the first step into understanding how to move forward?

If anyone much more versed in this (I assume there are a few of you here) could add to the list of reasons that Russia is even interested in Ukraine, I'd appreciate it.

No, I think Russia's interest in Ukraine is much more extensive than Sevastapol. The three really big ones, much more important than Sevestapol and black sea fleet, are:

1. Having Ukraine free of western surveillance assets and anti-missile asset is vital to the credibility of Russian nuclear deterrence against NATO. The main reason why the US would incite a color revolution in Ukraine is precisely to reduce the value and viability of Russia's deterrence against NATO, and this reduce Russia's ability to act as any sort of great power able to defy US will. Russians are not fools. It follows anyone who think Russia ought to retain the ability to act independently on the world stage would never permit Ukraine to possess any form of government which may either want to open the possibility for NATO gaining any sort of military foothood in Ukraine, or could be susceptible to future NATO pressure to put a military foot hold in Ukraine.

2. Russia would also want to be able to use Ukraine to protect Russia's vulnerable southern flank, so would want the ability to establish military presence there itself when it feels the need, and would like a pro-Russian Ukrainian government which would be amenable to that possibility during any moment of real crisis.

3. Ukrainian military industrial complex was a large and vital part of the former Soviet military industrial complex, and remain an important part of many military supply chain of Russia. Russia would like to Ukraine to possess the sort of government which would ensure Russia continues to have the ability to leverage these industrial infrastructrue for use in its own supply chain. It seem highly unlikely that any western sponsored Ukrainian government would long resist western, particular US, pressure to gradually shut these down.

[simplemoss]

I am not advocating an American intervention, I am saying one has already happened. They installed well known prominent leaders of Neo nazis groups too powerful positions in the Ukrainian govt USA organized violent coup against the elected leader of a country who had done nothing wrong other then signing a deal with Russia instead of the EU.

I'm advocating America stay out of Ukraine