Home The Lodge

The Budapest Memorandum

24

Replies

  • jbillyjbilly Senior Member Posts: 6,020 Senior Member
    Wetdog wrote: »
    Russia is going to feel the consequences.

    How so? Financially? Militarily?
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    Wetdog wrote: »
    And this is said without much thought. Peaceful transition? How was that going to happen. Far as I know their national legislature (whatever they call ill it) acted to remove the president. Not sure if those same individuals were out in the square throwing rocks. Peaceful or not Putin would have done the same. He wouldn't have moved in if his puppet was still there.

    Russia is going to feel the consequences.

    I don't know if that was legal within their constitution. Which is why he can still claim to be the legitimate leader and seek asylum within Russia. The fact remains there is a vacuum and Putin is taking advantage of it.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    jbilly wrote: »
    How so? Financially? Militarily?

    How do you think they should feel it?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 4,372 Senior Member
    Reuters: "The West has gotten a lot better at applying sanctions — largely because of the Iran experience, and also our dealings with North Korea, and before that Serbia. The international community now knows how to do this — how to go after the banking sector, the individual wealth of top Russian leaders, their visa travel rights, and so on.

    We can try to help Europe gain new sources of energy as well, a point Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute wisely made when we appeared together Sunday on Face the Nation. Russia cannot thrive if the Western world collectively seeks to punish Putin and to do so for a considerable period."

    Were the current crisis to escalate to a bad situation — which it hasn’t yet — and Ukraine to face civil warfare and an invasion by Russia to back up one side, then I think these kinds of tools would be applied. They’d be effective and Putin knows it.
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37833.htm


    The ignorance, absence of integrity, and lack of independence of the US media greatly enhances the prospect for war. The picture being drawn for insouciant Americans is totally false. An informed people would have burst out laughing when US Secretary of State John Kerry denounced Russia for “invading Ukraine” in “violation of international law.” Kerry is the foreign minister of a country that has illegally invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, organized the overthrow of the government in Libya, tried to overthrow the government in Syria, attacks the civilian populations of Pakistan and Yemen with drones and missiles, constantly threatens Iran with attack, unleashed the US and Israeli trained Georgian army on the Russian population of South Ossetia, and now threatens Russia with sanctions for standing up for Russians and Russian strategic interests. The Russian government noted that Kerry has raised hypocrisy to a new level.
  • WetdogWetdog Senior Member Posts: 5,967 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Reuters: "The West has gotten a lot better at applying sanctions — largely because of the Iran experience, and also our dealings with North Korea, and before that Serbia. The international community now knows how to do this — how to go after the banking sector, the individual wealth of top Russian leaders, their visa travel rights, and so on.

    We can try to help Europe gain new sources of energy as well, a point Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute wisely made when we appeared together Sunday on Face the Nation. Russia cannot thrive if the Western world collectively seeks to punish Putin and to do so for a considerable period."

    Were the current crisis to escalate to a bad situation — which it hasn’t yet — and Ukraine to face civil warfare and an invasion by Russia to back up one side, then I think these kinds of tools would be applied. They’d be effective and Putin knows it.

    You pretty much have it with one exception...I think Putin figures he can get away with it, and from the response from several EU countries he may again, I hope that will not be the case. Despite what John McCain and Lindsey Graham has been demanding there really nothing that the US can do without solid backing from the EU. Those two idiots seem to want a division of paratroopers dropped in Ukraine.
    I find the assault on free thought disturbing,
    I find the willingness to give it up frightening.
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 4,372 Senior Member
    What remains to be seen is how the Russian Oligarchs will react to this if the sanction start affecting their pocketbooks. Presumably the sanctions will cost them big bucks. Putin only cares about his reputation as a tough guy, but they like the money. How much power do they have?
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    Russia supplies 30 to 40 % of the natural gas used by Europe so they are reluctant to join in sanctions against Russia. Most of the gas goes through pipelines in Ukraine.
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    Some facts about the Russia-Crimea situation.

    http://rt.com/news/russian-troops-crimea-ukraine-816/

    Ukraine’s statement at the UN that ‘16,000 Russian soldiers had been deployed’ across Crimea sparked a MSM feeding frenzy that steadfastly ignored any hard facts that got in their way.

    Especially unwelcome is the fact that the so-called ‘invasion force’ has been there for 15 years already.

    The media many trust described in hysterical tones how the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was under a full-scale Russian invasion with headlines like: “Ukraine says Russia sent 16,000 troops to Crimea”, “Ukraine crisis deepens as Russia sends more troops into Crimea,” as well as “What can Obama do about Russia's invasion of Crimea?”.

    Facts, and ardent statements by top Russian diplomats were totally ignored by the western ‘war press’.

    So here they are, the facts:

    1) A Russian naval presence in Crimea dates to 1783 when the port city of Sevastopol was founded by Russian Prince Grigory Potemkin. Crimea was part of Russia until Nikita Khruschev gave it to Ukraine in 1954.

    2) In 1997, amid the wreckage of the USSR, Russia & Ukraine signed a Partition Treaty determining the fate of the military bases and vessels in Crimea. The deal sparked widespread officer ‘defections’ to Russia and was ratified by the Russian & Ukrainian parliaments in 1999. Russia received 81.7 percent of the fleet’s ships after paying the Ukrainian government US$526.5 million.

    3) The deal allowed the Russian Black Sea Fleet to stay in Crimea until 2017. This was extended by another 25 years to 2042 with a 5-year extension option in 2010.

    4) Moscow annually writes off $97.75 million of Kiev’s debt for the right to use Ukrainian waters and radio frequencies, and to compensate for the Black Sea Fleet’s environmental impact.

    5) The Russian navy is allowed up to

    - 25,000 troops,

    - 24 artillery systems with a caliber smaller than 100 mm,

    - 132 armored vehicles, and

    - 22 military planes, on Crimean territory.
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 49,774 Senior Member
    For the longest time, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I thought you were anti-war, deluded but acting under a good faith belief that our wars were misguided. But actually, you're just anti-whatever the U.S. does. (It must be because we're "hegemonic"). Is there nothing you won't believe so long as the source is something other than the US government?

    Stalin would have loved you. Useful idiot.
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    Resorting to name calling and ad hominem is an indication that you are not able to refute my position on our illegal and immoral foreign policy. I have reported the facts above as opposed to the knee jerk reaction by others and your delusional unquestioning acceptance of the MSM pro war propaganda. I am antiwar and anti U.S. imperial foreign policy which is a valid position in light of the reams of evidence supporting my position.
  • tim_stim_s Senior Member Posts: 2,479 Senior Member
    sometimes reality is a mother fletcher, sherb
    Fly Fishing in Maine - www.flyfishinginmaine.com
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 49,774 Senior Member
    Copying Putin's press release doesn't constitute evidence.
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 4,372 Senior Member
    RT, previously known as Russia Today, is an international multilingual Russian-based television network. It is funded by the federal budget of Russia through the Federal Agency on Press and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation.

    Say Ed, why do you think so many Ukrainians risked their lives to protest Russian connections with their economy? Are they dupes of western propaganda? Or just sick of Russian domination, corruption and incompetence?
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    sherb wrote: »
    Copying Putin's press release doesn't constitute evidence.

    The LATimes says the CIA says Russia has a 1997 treaty with Ukraine that allows them to keep 25,000 troops in Crimea, is that better?

    http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-us-intelligence-russia-ukraine-20140303,0,4657644.story#axzz2v6kTbnnx
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    RT, previously known as Russia Today, is an international multilingual Russian-based television network. It is funded by the federal budget of Russia through the Federal Agency on Press and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation.

    Say Ed, why do you think so many Ukrainians risked their lives to protest Russian connections with their economy? Are they dupes of western propaganda? Or just sick of Russian domination, corruption and incompetence?

    It also has a horrible reputation regarding telling the truth. However what Ed missed was the News Anchor at Russia Today that condemned the invasion.

    What is funny is that if we were to move troops to North Dakota, Ed would call it an invasion. But for some reason the sovereignty of Ukraine is questionable.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    EdB wrote: »
    The LATimes says the CIA says Russia has a 1997 treaty with Ukraine that allows them to keep 25,000 troops in Crimea, is that better?

    http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-us-intelligence-russia-ukraine-20140303,0,4657644.story#axzz2v6kTbnnx

    Does the CIA say that Russian troops have a treaty that allows them to take over the government buildings and shoot at Ukrainian troops?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    It also has a horrible reputation regarding telling the truth. However what Ed missed was the News Anchor at Russia Today that condemned the invasion.

    What is funny is that if we were to move troops to North Dakota, Ed would call it an invasion. But for some reason the sovereignty of Ukraine is questionable.

    No, I didn't miss Abby Martin condemning what's happening in Crimea. That was two days ago, yesterday she had a reporter on saying that yes, Russia has a treaty that allows them to keep 25,000 troops there. Abby is one of the best journalists in the media and she's on rt tv. I respect her independence and applaud her voicing her anti Russian opinion on Russian tv.

    When was the last time an American anchor opposed the U.S. government actions on MSMedia? That question was asked elsewhere and the answer was Phil Donahue and Peter Arnett. Both were fired for speaking against the government.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 11,675 Senior Member
    I'm not siding with either Ed or Vlad the Invader, wish the independent Ukraine well and hope that the West will impose sanctions that hurt.

    But in fairness, the Administration is throwing stones from the balcony of its glass house. We have long considered the Caribbean as mare nostrum and Russia traditionally has felt the same about the Black Sea.

    The most compelling analysis I have read is that Putin, stuck forever in his cold war mentality, fails to understand that Russia's future lies in looking westward, not to the traditional east. He has just thrown away whatever good will and image improvement he bought at Sochi.
    The GOP big tent now is the size of a pup tent, its floor splattered with guano.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    EdB wrote: »
    When was the last time an American anchor opposed the U.S. government actions on MSMedia?

    Wow, just wow.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    Wow, just wow.

    Can't you answer?
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    I don't know Ed, 10 minutes ago on Fox would be my guess.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 4,372 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    I'm not siding with either Ed or Vlad the Invader, wish the independent Ukraine well and hope that the West will impose sanctions that hurt.

    But in fairness, the Administration is throwing stones from the balcony of its glass house. We have long considered the Caribbean as mare nostrum and Russia traditionally has felt the same about the Black Sea.

    The most compelling analysis I have read is that Putin, stuck forever in his cold war mentality, fails to understand that Russia's future lies in looking westward, not to the traditional east. He has just thrown away whatever good will and image improvement he bought at Sochi.

    Well said. Putin seems bent on restoring Russian glory and hegemony, rather than growing the economy beyond resources.
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    Fox only criticizes Obama for not carrying out the neocon war foreign policy well enough, when Bush was in they propagandized for war and praised him.
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 49,774 Senior Member
    I don't know Ed, 10 minutes ago on Fox would be my guess.

    And that's rounding up.
  • JulietJuliet Posts: 49,774 Senior Member
    EdB wrote: »
    The LATimes says the CIA says Russia has a 1997 treaty with Ukraine that allows them to keep 25,000 troops in Crimea, is that better?

    http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-us-intelligence-russia-ukraine-20140303,0,4657644.story#axzz2v6kTbnnx

    This is almost comically stupid. You have to be either delusional, blind or acting in bad faith to cite from that story. The thrust of that story is the complete opposite of your intended point. The Russians are using the treaty as a pretext. that's what the story says.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    I actually made comparison somewhere to Germany. Which I think would be equally apt. There is no way we would allow civil unrest and ambiguity to exist in such a strategic ally without sending in troops of our own. The Ukraine does already have bases there and Ed has one small valid point in that there are agreements in place regarding those bases. There also according to reporters on the ground a great deal of support from the Crimeans regarding this occupation. I also believe that Crimea is a semi-autonomous state. So it is quite possible that Putin's end game is having a referendum in Crimea which has that region declare it's independence from the Ukraine. That way he can maintain those bases. Which are in his mind of vital strategic importance.

    What I find laughable is the assertion that this is happening because of the weakness of this president. We have a 60 year history of avoiding direct confrontation with Russia, more recently in regards to Chechnya and Georgia. Yet somehow this is because of Benghazi. What is more laughable is the fact there is no way in hell this congress would support this president if he decided to take military action. Not to mention the American people would not stand for it and Putin knows that. So what the hell was the President to do to prevent this?
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 26,564 Senior Member
    EdB wrote: »
    Fox only criticizes Obama for not carrying out the neocon war foreign policy well enough, when Bush was in they propagandized for war and praised him.

    Always with the excuses with you.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    sherb wrote: »
    This is almost comically stupid. You have to be either delusional, blind or acting in bad faith to cite from that story. The thrust of that story is the complete opposite of your intended point. The Russians are using the treaty as a pretext. that's what the story says.

    You need to learn to comprehend what you read, Sherb.


    [Updated, 8 p.m., March 3: WASHINGTON — CIA director John Brennan told a senior lawmaker Monday that a 1997 treaty between Russia and Ukraine allows up to 25,000 Russia troops in the vital Crimea region, so Russia may not consider its recent troop movements to be an invasion, U.S. officials said.


    The number of Russian troops that have surged into Ukraine in recent days remains well below that threshold, Brennan said, according to U.S. officials who declined to be named in describing private discussions and declined to name the legislator.



  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 3,099 Senior Member
    Always with the excuses with you.

    Always with the last word with you.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.

Advertisement