Why can't Russia give back Ukraine's territory in exchange for Ukraine's promise never to join NATO?

[Otis Mayfield]

So, Russia has taken Crimea and parts of the Donbas territory from Ukraine. That's pretty much an invasion.

Why can't they work out a deal where Russia agrees to give back Donbas and Crimea to Ukraine and Ukraine agrees to never join NATO?

Seems easy enough.

 

[martybegan]

Russia has desired a port on the Black Sea for centuries, they will never willingly give it up. They only lost it in 1991 because of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and they were in no condition to try to get it back at the time.

Americans have a habit of downplaying the historical wants of European countries due to our relative youth as a country.

 

[Harry Dresden]

i give up otis.....why cant they?.....

 

[fncceo]

Americans have been involving ourselves in Europe's wars for over a century and it's probably time to put an end to that.

Dissolve NATO and bring US troops back from European (as well as Asian and Middle East) bases.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Russia has desired a port on the Black Sea for centuries, they will never willingly give it up. They only lost it in 1991 because of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and they were in no condition to try to get it back at the time.

Americans have a habit of downplaying the historical wants of European countries due to our relative youth as a country.

Well, maybe they can give the Russians that peninsula that's over towards Russia and the Ukrainians get to keep the rest of Crimea.

 

[martybegan]

Well, maybe they can give the Russians that peninsula that's over towards Russia and the Ukrainians get to keep the rest of Crimea.

Russians don't give up land willingly, and they always want it back after they lose it.

It's why they still covet the Baltic States when the Baltic States want nothing to do with them.

Russians were Russians long before they were Soviets, while they were Soviets, and still after they were Soviets.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Americans have been involving ourselves in Europe's wars for over a century and it's probably time to put an end to that.

Dissolve NATO and bring US troops back from European (as well as Asian and Middle East) bases.

I think if we Americans did that, the Russians would be running Europe in short notice.

It might even start WWIII.

You can make a case that American isolationism is partly to blame for WWII.

 

[martybegan]

I think if we Americans did that, the Russians would be running Europe in short notice.

It might even start WWIII.

You can make a case that American isolationism is partly to blame for WWII.

it sure didn't help, but it was not a surprising reaction to a country that took 3 years to involve itself in WWI.

Isolationism was strong in the US from the time of the founders, died down a bit during colonialism (but only to get colonies without much of a fight).

The Spanish American war was an aberration based on our history up until that point.

 

[fncceo]

You can make a case that American isolationism is partly to blame for WWII.

No, I put the blame squarely on 2,000 years of European greed, barbarism, superstition, cowardice, and stupidity. Don't blame it on our Coca-Cola bottles. Europe was a going brothel long before we came to town.

 

[marvin martian]

So, Russia has taken Crimea and parts of the Donbas territory from Ukraine. That's pretty much an invasion.

Why can't they work out a deal where Russia agrees to give back Donbas and Crimea to Ukraine and Ukraine agrees to never join NATO?

Seems easy enough.

Don't worry, your president has his top people working on this.

 

[fncceo]

but it was not a surprising reaction to a country that took 3 years to involve itself in WWI.

We should never have been involved in the First World War.

 

[fncceo]

The Spanish American war was an aberration based on our history up until that point.

At least the Spanish American War was in our own hemisphere (mostly) and in defense of The Monroe Doctrine.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The Crimean people voted to become part of Russia. Any attempt to force Crimea back to the Ukraine would be an immediate Civil war.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

The Crimean people voted to become part of Russia. Any attempt to force Crimea back to the Ukraine would be an immediate Civil war.

What if Montana voted to become part of Canada?

We'd never let that happen.

 

[martybegan]

We should never have been involved in the First World War.

Debatable. Germany was being asses about the unrestricted submarine warfare.

Now a winning Germany would have left a superpower in central Europe, a Rump France, and a Rump Russia. I doubt England would have been conqured.

Very different 20th century at that point.

 

[martybegan]

At least the Spanish American War was in our own hemisphere (mostly) and in defense of The Monroe Doctrine.

Agreed, but typically threats kept Europe out once they left.

To be fair Spain was barely a European power at that point, their glory days were long gone.

 

[braalian]

Because the majority Russians who populate the Crimea probably don’t *want* to go back to the Ukraine.

 

[fncceo]

Debatable. Germany was being asses about the unrestricted submarine warfare.

Now a winning Germany would have left a superpower in central Europe, a Rump France, and a Rump Russia. I doubt England would have been conqured.

Very different 20th century at that point.

Debating alternative histories is pointless, too many potential factors to calculate. You can make a case either way that the million man force the Americans sent to Europe won the war for The Allies or had no impact.

It's more difficult to make the case that the nearly $1 Billion America contributed to the war made little or no difference.

In either case, when the war was over, Europeans rejected any American involvement in their internal politics and set the chess board for the entire thing to start over again.

In the 70+ years since the end of the last war, Europeans have willingly taken Trillions of American dollars for their defense but have virulently rejected any American involvement in European politics.

If World War III starts again in Europe, it won't be because Americans started it.

 

[martybegan]

Debating alternative histories is pointless, too many potential factors to calculate. You can make a case either way that the million man force the Americans sent to Europe won the war for The Allies or had no impact.

It's more difficult to make the case that the nearly $1 Billion America contributed to the war made little or no difference.

In either case, when the war was over, Europeans rejected any American involvement in their internal politics and set the chess board for the entire thing to start over again.

In the 70+ years since the end of the last war, Europeans have willingly taken Trillions of American dollars for their defense but have virulently rejected any American involvement in European politics.

If World War III starts again in Europe, it won't be because Americans started it.

The real question is if we would have had to fight Japan anyway.

I have a soft spot for speculative history.

The Europeans asked us to join the League of Nations, we didn't because it didn't pass the Senate.

They did ignore Wilson's 14 points because the French were pretty vengeful at that point, and rightly so.

The biggest impact was the breakup of Austria-Hungary, which removed a central stabilizing force in central europe.

Not beating the bolsheviks was also a mistake, but understandable due to war fatigue and the Spanish Flu.

 

[fncceo]

The real question is if we would have had to fight Japan anyway.

I have a soft spot for speculative history.

The Europeans asked us to join the League of Nations, we didn't because it didn't pass the Senate.

They did ignore Wilson's 14 points because the French were pretty vengeful at that point, and rightly so.

The biggest impact was the breakup of Austria-Hungary, which removed a central stabilizing force in central europe.

Not beating the bolsheviks was also a mistake, but understandable due to war fatigue and the Spanish Flu.

We would probably have gone to war with Japan in any case if for no other reason than they attacked us. Japan has had designs on a modern empire since 1900 and were emboldened by their destruction of the Russian Naval Fleet in 1905 and their subsequent colonization of Korea and Manchuria.

There is no basis to argue that the toothless talking shop inaccurately called "The League of Nations" would have had any influence over Japanese ambitions in Asia if we had been involved.

The existence of Austria-Hungary Empire provided no stabilization to prevent The Seven Years War (the first actual World War in global history) or any other of the dozen or so European conflicts that occurred in the intervening years.

Germany was a violent, aggressive neighbor long before the unification of the German States in 1871, having attacked and conquered Austria, France and Balkan States in the years prior.

I submit there is nothing Americans can do to prevent Europeans from killing each other that wouldn't be more damaging to our own country than just staying out of their shenanigans.