Should the US Arm Ukraine?

[Stratford57]

Arm Ukraine if you wanna creep closer to an extinction event. Putin could've had Kiev in 4 days if he had truly wanted it at any time in over the last year but didn't do it.
If Russia is really the aggressor, then why do the vast majority of refugees from the fighting areas flee into Russia as opposed to heading to Kiev?

Former inspector general of the German army and chair of the NATO military council, Harald Kujat agrees with you.
In a talk show on German television hosted by Gunther Jauch, Kujat described it as “idiotic” for the West to consider a military solution: if Russia wanted, it could end the war within 48 hours by sending regular troops in to Ukraine. The other guests on the show including Martin Shulz, President of the European Parliament, kept talking about "Russian aggression".

General Kujat doesn't buy it. Here's what he said:

• It's lot of speculation. Proof of Russia's involvement with regular force has not come to my attention so far.

• For example, the announcement of the Ukrainian President that 23 Russian armed vehicles have been destroyed on Ukrainian soil. There are no photos of surviving Russian soldiers nor of killed Russian soldiers.

• We have been shown five satellite pictures as a proof that Russian Forces are in the Ukraine. Three of them were marked officially as "on Russian territory". Two of them are marked as "on Ukraine territory". The Russian pictures are marked with the exact location, while the Ukrainian ones have no mention of location and coordinates.

• We have to be very careful about what the Ukraine and the West says.

Choose any link you want:
Ex-general NATO has failed blatantly in Ukraine Europe DW.DE 03.09.2014
Top German General Western Evidence of Russian Invasion is Baloney - Russia Insider
(video)
German media backs confrontation with Russia over Ukraine - World Socialist Web Site

Also Ron Paul warned: arming Ukraine will affect American taxpayers.
Ron Paul No Doubt American Taxpayers Will be Robbed to Arm Poroshenko Sputnik International

 

[gipper]

Arm Ukraine if you wanna creep closer to an extinction event. Putin could've had Kiev in 4 days if he had truly wanted it at any time in over the last year but didn't do it.
If Russia is really the aggressor, then why do the vast majority of refugees from the fighting areas flee into Russia as opposed to heading to Kiev?

Those two sentences say much, however you won't find such logical statements in most of the American media. As such, even the few Americans paying attention to events in Ukraine, most will claim Putin is the aggressor.

This lack of factual reporting by our media and the propaganda promoted by our government that Russia is the aggressor, would seem to indicate a desire by the power elite for war in Ukraine.

War is the health of the State...too bad many Americans are unaware of this profound truth.

 

[JWBooth]

Be careful what you wish for:
"Ukraine – Ukrainian government officials confirmed a nuclear blast was detected in Ukraine Sunday. No other news is coming out of the area.

"Three videos just uploaded show the small nuclear blast below. Nothing more is known at this time, including who launched the weapon or against which target.

"The materials appear to have originated from the war-torn region of Ukraine, where separatists are attempting to return control of the former Soviet nation to Russia.

"The attack comes after Britain’s defense minister voiced concerns Russia may have 'lowered the threshold' for using nuclear weapons."

Nuclear bomb detonated in Ukraine 8211 nuclear blast detected The Internet Chronicle

Which, by the way, didnt really happen, not that the war/fear mongers will care.

 

[JWBooth]

Should the US Arm Ukraine?

No, no arms for the neocon backed nazi regeme in Kiev. No more neocon backed wars where there are no US strategic interests at stake.

 

[georgephillip]

Why would the US government want war in Ukraine?
"The US wants to push NATO to Russia’s western border. It wants a land-bridge to Asia to spread US military bases across the continent.

"It wants to control the pipeline corridors from Russia to Europe to monitor Moscow’s revenues and to ensure that gas continues to be denominated in dollars.

"And it wants a weaker, unstable Russia that is more prone to regime change, fragmentation and, ultimately, foreign control. These objectives cannot be achieved peacefully..."
The same criminal financial element that drove two world wars in the 20th century has its sights set on Eurasia, from Palestine to Petrograd. Putin is a corrupt, corporate tool who's not all that different from Obama, but both puppets have their nationalists to deal with, and Russia's patriots won't tolerate subservience to a foreign power anymore than Americans would.
The Fallujah Option for East Ukraine CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

 

[Stratford57]

Trying to stop the war by supplying one side with more weapons is the same as trying to stop the fire with pouring more gasoline into it.

 

[georgephillip]

Trying to stop the war by supplying one side with more weapons is the same as trying to stop the fire with pouring more gasoline into it.

I don't think the US has any intention of stopping war anywhere in the world since conflict seems to be highly profitable for a lucky few.
"And Washington isn’t worried about the costs either.

"Despite botched military interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and half a dozen other countries around the world; US stocks are still soaring, foreign investment in US Treasuries is at record levels,, the US economy is growing at a faster pace than any of its global competitors, and the dollar has risen an eye-watering 13 percent against a basket of foreign currencies since last June.

"America has paid nothing for decimating vast swathes of the planet and killing more than a million people.

"Why would they stop now?"
The Fallujah Option for East Ukraine CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

 

[Stratford57]

Should the US Arm Ukraine?

No, no arms for the neocon backed nazi regeme in Kiev. No more neocon backed wars where there are no US strategic interests at stake.

Are you sure it's a good idea to arm THAT KIND of PEOPLE??

^Translation:
Millions years of evolution for some Ukrainians were in vain....

 

[buddhallah_the_christ]

Should the US arm Ukraine?
It all depends on what goals the United States wants to achieve
when goal is a long conflict along the border with Russia, we can continue to supply guns and artillery

 

[sealybobo]

For a debate between a retired USAF General and John Mearsheimer on what could possibly go wrong with arming the Kiev government, please listen to this twenty-seven minute segment of DemocracyNow!

"As fighting continues in Ukraine, President Obama said Monday he has not ruled out arming the Ukrainian military against Russian-backed rebels. Meeting with Obama at the White House, German Chancellor Angela Merkel reiterated her opposition to arming Ukraine, saying the conflict could not be resolved militarily. Merkel is set to hold talks in Minsk on Wednesday with the leaders of Russia, Ukraine and France in a bid to end the crisis that has killed thousands and displaced 1.5 million people over the past year. Should the United States escalate its role in the conflict by arming Ukraine? We host a debate between retired Air Force general Charles Wald, the former deputy commander of U.S. European Command, and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer."
Playing with Fire A Debate on U.S. Arming Ukraine NATO Expansion to Russia s Border Democracy Now

No its a regional issue let them have Ukraine

 

[skye]

NO

Hussein should not arm Ukraine

Whats wrong with this half witted President/Community leader? he should learn a thing or two from Angela Merkel!

This Barack idiot only knows how to aggravate everybody!

 

[Politico]

Should the US Arm Ukraine?

No.

 

[Kondor3]

Arm Ukraine if you wanna creep closer to an extinction event. Putin could've had Kiev in 4 days if he had truly wanted it at any time in over the last year but didn't do it.
If Russia is really the aggressor, then why do the vast majority of refugees from the fighting areas flee into Russia as opposed to heading to Kiev?

Ummmmm... because the eastern section of Ukraine contains vast numbers of ethnic Russians, rather than Ukrainians?

Courtesy of the Soviet ethnic cleansings and population transfers of the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s - with regions dominated by Ukrainians a century ago now dominated by the descendants of transplanted Soviet Russians, arriving in those decades?

 

[Kondor3]

The West and Russian are locked in the early stages of a fight over Ukraine.

We (The West) held-out the promise of membership in The Club (EU, NATO) to the Ukrainians.

The Russians freaked, in light of how quickly the old Warsaw Pact members bailed on them, and joined with The West at the speed of light.

Then again, the Russians have nobody to blame but themselves, for alienating Eastern Europe and neighboring regions, throughout the Soviet Era, and even stretching back in some instances into Czarist (pre-Soviet) times. They just can't keep their hands off of agricultural lands and industrial resources in that area, and, of course, after fighting two extremely costly wars in the 20th Century, they're desperate to create and maintain territorial buffers between themselves and Europe, against any potential European attack.

The Russians are a lot like a clever, obnoxious, bellicose, drunken party crasher, who shows up every so often at a gathering, offends and bullies a number of guests, drinks-up half the punch bowl, belches and farts continuously and clears half the rooms in the gathering-place, and has to be shown the door and have the door slammed in its face.

It's dangerous, but, as with most bullies, you can't play limp-wrist or door-mat and let the bully walk all over you.

At some point, you've got to stand up to the bastard.

Given that the belching, farting bully has a nuclear arsenal, and has been chipping the rust off his armed forces and building new military assets in recent years to replace the old Soviet-Era stuff that is on its last legs or already in the equipment graveyards, standing up to The Bully is dangerous, and tricky, and timing and Western unity are important.

It's also a question of whether the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are the place-and-time to make that stand, and draw that line in the sand; I'm not sure about that, myself, but, unlike one or two others here, I don't think it would be wise to allow the Russians to re-acquire the rest of their old Eastern European (Warsaw Pack) empire without serious challenge.

Furthermore, there is the question of Credibility or Believability, in our present leadership. Drawing lines in the sand doesn't seem to be his strong suit.

Perhaps we wait until after January 20, 2017, and try, alongside the EU-NATO, to help the Ukrainians to hold onto the Western half of their country, until either (a) we get lucky through diplomacy and can actually settle things peaceably, or (b) we get somebody in the White House, backed by Congress, whom Putin will actually respect and deal with.

It's a puzzle, alright.

 

[Kondor3]

Why should we arm the usurpers who overthrew the elected government?

If the next Edward Snowden provides proof of US involvement in overthrowing a corrupt, yet elected, Ukrainian president, the US government will lose its moral high ground in this debate. Should a majority of US voters come to the conclusion that Republicans AND Democrats alike serve the interests of Empire instead of what's best for the majority of citizens, we might fire the second shot heard 'round the world.

The squabble over the Ukraine isn't going to start any sort of revolution here in America... although that is, no doubt, your hope.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, just don't see the Ukraine as worth having a war over.

Let's recap. The Ukraine had an election that both ethnic Ukrainians and ethnic Russians participated in, and the pro-Russian guy won. He considered both offers from the EU and Russia, and Russia made a much better economic offer. And frankly, just looking at what the EU did to Greece, you'd probably want to avoid them like the plague.

Well, a mob of Ukrainian assholes overthrew that guy,and lo and behold, the Ethnic Russians decided they had quite enough of this shit. Who could blame them, really.

The best solution. Redraw the borders. The Crimea and the Eastern provinces become part of Russia, the rest remains the Ukraine.

 

[gipper]

The West and Russian are locked in the early stages of a fight over Ukraine.

We (The West) held-out the promise of membership in The Club (EU, NATO) to the Ukrainians.

The Russians freaked, in light of how quickly the old Warsaw Pact members bailed on them, and joined with The West at the speed of light.

Then again, the Russians have nobody to blame but themselves, for alienating Eastern Europe and neighboring regions, throughout the Soviet Era, and even stretching back in some instances into Czarist (pre-Soviet) times. They just can't keep their hands off of agricultural lands and industrial resources in that area, and, of course, after fighting two extremely costly wars in the 20th Century, they're desperate to create and maintain territorial buffers between themselves and Europe, against any potential European attack.

The Russians are a lot like a clever, obnoxious, bellicose, drunken party crasher, who shows up every so often at a gathering, offends and bullies a number of guests, drinks-up half the punch bowl, belches and farts continuously and clears half the rooms in the gathering-place, and has to be shown the door and have the door slammed in its face.

It's dangerous, but, as with most bullies, you can't play limp-wrist or door-mat and let the bully walk all over you.

At some point, you've got to stand up to the bastard.

Given that the belching, farting bully has a nuclear arsenal, and has been chipping the rust off his armed forces and building new military assets in recent years to replace the old Soviet-Era stuff that is on its last legs or already in the equipment graveyards, standing up to The Bully is dangerous, and tricky, and timing and Western unity are important.

It's also a question of whether the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are the place-and-time to make that stand, and draw that line in the sand; I'm not sure about that, myself, but, unlike one or two others here, I don't think it would be wise to allow the Russians to re-acquire the rest of their old Eastern European (Warsaw Pack) empire without serious challenge.

Furthermore, there is the question of Credibility or Believability, in our present leadership. Drawing lines in the sand doesn't seem to be his strong suit.

Perhaps we wait until after January 20, 2017, and try, alongside the EU-NATO, to help the Ukrainians to hold onto the Western half of their country, until either (a) we get lucky through diplomacy and can actually settle things peaceably, or (b) we get somebody in the White House, backed by Congress, whom Putin will actually respect and deal with.

It's a puzzle, alright.

The bully in this situation is Nato and the West, while some criticism of Russia is valid, this crisis would never occurred had the West (particularly the US) not intervened.

 

[JWBooth]

The bully in this situation is Nato and the West, while some criticism of Russia is valid, this crisis would never occurred had the West (particularly the US) not intervened.

Damn skippy

 

[georgephillip]

The squabble over the Ukraine isn't going to start any sort of revolution here in America... although that is, no doubt, your hope

Not in your neighborhood, perhaps. Should the squabble reach the stage of tactical nuclear weapons, as some experts believe, it will qualify as radical change for some.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Not 30 years ago Ukraine had nuclear missiles aimed at the US. Now we're supposed to give a shit if Russia takes them back?