here is the ignorance that you share with the right
you believe that in ant manner he has become involved in the ukraine situation in any form other than to say that the US would use political and financial sanctions to distance ourselves from them

it is not our fucking issue that a nation that is a primarily russian population desires to return to russian governance
the have elected to return and in turn our political leaders have determined that we will refuse all future associations with them
but to you that is a crisis???
what crisis? the rich white people in the US wont get to adopt their unwanted russian babies?

 

The USA doesn't believe in defending sovereignty. It hasn't done since at least 2001 when it completely ignored the sovereignty of Afghanistan and invaded without even bothering to come up with an excuse; and did the same in 2003 when it faked evidence against Iraq to try to justify another invasion.

 

And armies. And missiles.

 

But it does mean that Australia has a lot more than just one link to other countries. Just because you can bottleneck the route in from SE Asia doesn't help you, people can bomb you into oblivion via Antarctica and New Zealand...

...the rules of the game are no longer an up-to-date reflection of how to go about conquering the world. That's the only point I was making.

 

By sea the same as tanks trucks bulldozers and such. A few troops can be airlifted in but supplying them by air is a major effort. At best it's a temporary solution. It's still the sea that is the main supply route of the world.

 

The sea is also the most difficult to control such movement. It's a lot different today with satellite technology, but it's not that hard to avoid detection.

 

The UK has also ruled out military action; I'm guessing we had to wait for Obama to do that first, because our entire foreign policy for years now has been "What does America say? Okay, we think that."

Well, we can always support a total boycott of all trade with Russia. That won't hurt the British too much, it'll be Poles, Germans and Hungarians who freeze to death because all of their fuel comes from Gazprom...

 

Now there's an error in your thinking. As you said yourself all those countries get there fuel from somewhere else that will effect prices. This translates to higher fuel prices for us all. You cut the supply but maintain demand prices always go up. A boycott of Russia is just that less oil on the market.

 

The finical markets are being heard....

The ruble is dropping like a rock in currency exchanges and
the Russian stock market is off 15% as foreign investors look for safer places for the money...

 

Well no, it was sarcasm. It will of course adversely impact the UK as well as the rest of Europe.

That's the trouble with imposing a trade boycott on a country when THEY have what YOU need...

 

So.............what do you think the West should do?

You have a habit of criticizing the US for it's foreign policy (or lack thereof), forgive me if I'm wrong but, I can't seem to find any real opinion of what should be done coming from you.

 

There is nothing we can do. We burned that bridge when we abandoned the idea of international law and substituted the idea of "if we want to boot out a regime we'll do it and to hell with what the rest of the world thinks."

Russia is following our example. We have no way of preventing it short of all-out war, and we won't take that option.

 

But, is you answer then to do nothing at all? It seems to be what you are saying.

 

Suppliers in the UK stopped offering prices for gas and elec until the situation becomes clear. They may start to offer rates tomorrow but expect increases of up to 10%

 

That is because the ruble has dropped 10% in value...

Russia has had to raise interest rates 1.5 % to attract investors for liquid currency for trade also....

 

You speak as if it's optional. There is no action we can take that will remove Russian troops from Crimea. Whether or not we WANT to do anything, or SHOULD do anything, is no longer a relevant question.

 

That seems to be an extremely defeatist attitude.

So we do nothing, no economic boycott, no diplomatic freeze out, just tell the Russians, go ahead and take the territory. Is this what you think?

 

If I may - I think the matter of the Ukraine Crisis, no matter what is done by the rest of the world, will come down to a classic 'choice of evils.'

I.e. - no matter what, the solution/s will not be good, palatable, or even easy to know if it will work.

Something has to be done, but what to do that will be effective...?

 

I do see your side of it in this case - The US in Iraq (under Bush Jr) and with Libya (under Obama) plus plans to attempt it in Syria with Assad.

 

Exactly! There's a huge difference between chest-thumping rhetoric and actions. If we went after every bad actor for what they stated they intended to do (without actually following through on their words), we'd have to be up North Korea's ass every other week.

The difference here, RidgeRunner, is that Putin didn't go any further than stating his intentions while Bush was in office. Why he never followed up on those threats before now, no one knows.

The difference here is, Obama pretty much opened the door with his "I didn't set a red line. The WORLD set a red line." Translation: I'm all talk and no action.

Obama before Putin sent troops into the Ukraine: "There will be costs" for any military maneuvers it launches in Ukraine..."

Today during a news conference: "We need to set up international monitors..." and more blah fucking blah fucking blah!

Then again, what message does he send to the world with his very public intention of reducing our military to the pre World War II levels?

And to think just two years ago, he was caught on an open mic telling Medvedev "tell Vladdy I'll be much more flexible after the election." I think Putin now knows just how flexible Obama has become.