There has been no 'invasion' of the Ukraine, yet our M$M seems to want everyone to believe there was

[Wet Willie]

When the local democratically elected government invites you in, there is no invasion, nor a violation of Ukraine's "Territorial integrity".

Do western planners truly believe that Russia will let an long time ally's government be violently over thrown, and walk away when assistance is requested to keep the peace?

I don't think so, and so I am really curious where our planners think they are taking us with all this saber rattling.

I sure hope that is all this is, because we do not have a legal leg to stand on here.

What say's DU?

[RobertEarl]

1. The MSM?

The same jackals that endorsed the invasion of Iraq?

The same warmongers that wanted us to bomb Syria?

And what's with your 'Violent overthrow' schtick? That's an MSM meme right there. You are just repeating their BS. There was no violent overthrow in the Ukraine. The president was duly and democratically impeached.

As for Russia, they will not invade. No reason to invade. Peace reigns in the Ukraine and the Russian people like it that way.

[Wet Willie]

2. I know, what do I expect from them jackals?

Not much, true.

But I believe it is important to always call out their BS, especially in real time.

And they are having a field day with this so-called 'military invasion' of the Crimea, by Russia, for the most part disregarding the fact that they were invited in, not to mention that the democratically elected head of state was violently over-thrown by a group of tea-partyish thugs.

And now they are acting like we in the west need to ride in, guns blazing, to the aide of this illegitimate gang of thugs posing as a democratically elected government.

crazy, ain't it... especially watching it being played out in the news.

:shakes-head:

[mythology]

5. If a foreign country had soldiers in this country without the government's approval

I'd call that an invasion. It might be limited, but if as is seemingly the case, Russia has armed soldiers in the Crimea, then they have already invaded.

And Russia doesn't want a peaceful Ukraine. Russia (and by this I mean Putin) wants a Ukraine that is beholden to him. It enhances his power, regionally and in the world as a whole. Much of the protests in Ukraine were due to the previous President getting a sweetheart deal on fossil fuels from Russia in order to prevent Ukraine from entering into closer deals with the EU.

[RobertEarl]

9. It is a battle, yes

Ukrainians are caught in between. But they have shown they are sick and tired of the Russian oppression. So we shouldn't look for more of the same. Rather look for real changes and those toward more freedom.

The Russian people want peace. Their leaders will follow. Putting aside the new 'Pearl Harbor' event, the US people feel the same. Peace is desirable, and Obama is desiring such. The old ways are changing.

[pampango]

3. I don't think that state/provincial governments get to invite foreign armies in.

Do western planners truly believe that Russia will let an long time ally's government be violently over thrown, and walk away when assistance is requested to keep the peace?

How do you figure that Yanukovych was "violently overthrown"?

After months of massive, sustained public protests through a Ukrainian winter, he agreed to remain in office until early elections in December and to use security forces to protect public buildings.

What did he do? Rather than remain in office and do his job with the protection of the security forces but likely lose the election, he decided to pursue a different strategy.

Within hours of signing the agreement with the protesters (with the police, army and security forces firmly under his control), he hastily abandoned his residence and left Kiev. Before leaving he ordered security forces to not protect public buildings. Why issue an order contradicting the agreement he had just signed? He (and Putin?) hoped that images of mobs burning and looting public buildings would create an image of lawlessness and violence that could be used to justify military intervention. Of course the looting and burning did not happen (much to the surprise of Yanukovych and Putin), but that did not change the spin.

If he had simply lived up to the agreement he signed with the protesters 8 days ago, he would be sitting in Kiev running the government pending elections in December.

I don't think so, and so I am really curious where our planners think they are taking us with all this saber rattling.

What saber rattling have you head. I have not heard one government official say one word about using the military to respond to Russia's use of the military.

[Wet Willie]

7. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea's local government & the democratically elected leader of Ukraine

seem to think they do.

Have you not see the videos of the violent, armed, protestors in Kiev?

How many cops did they kidnap, and kill again? I notice that doesn't get much press anymore.

How many government buildings, and vehicles did they fire bomb exactly?

You can probably still google them, and believe me they were violent.

Also, I have heard threats from almost all western governments, Obama even gave an unannounced press conf on Friday threatening Russia by saying that there will be costs if they move their troops into the Ukraine, and especially from the illegitimate gov in Kiev who are threatening to team up with terrorist and re-arm their nuclear weapons if their demands aren't met.

My question stands though, were is the west heading with all this spin?

Another proxy war with Russia?

As we all know, we will not challenge them directly, as we kinda got our hands full right now, not to mention that there is no doubt about WMDs in Russia.

Will there be another UBL?

[pampango]

10. The Governor of Alabama may think he can invite in foreign armies. That does not mean he can.

And unless Yanukovych has said something since his press conference in Russia, he did not request Russian military intervention. He said that Russia should do something, but stopped short of requesting military help.

Also, I have heard threats from almost all western governments, Obama even gave an unannounced press conf on Friday threatening Russia by saying that there will be costs if they move their troops into the Ukraine, and especially from the illegitimate gov in Kiev who are threatening to team up with terrorist and re-arm their nuclear weapons if their demands aren't met.

You have heard threats of the use of military force from "almost all western governments"? A few links please.

And Obama stated that there would be 'costs' for the Russian invasion. Can you not imagine 'costs' that do not involve the military?

Have you not see the videos of the violent, armed, protestors in Kiev?

Of course. Have you not seen videos of huge numbers of unarmed protesters? Some police were killed and that is bad. Many times more protesters were killed, so that is worse.

Some guys with rifles did not 'violently overthrow' Yanukovych. His security forces were highly disciplined and had effectively contained the protesters for months. After he signed the agreement with the protesters, all he had to do was order those security forces to protect government buildings (something he specifically agreed to do in the document he signed) and he would still be in Kiev today running the government. When protesters occupied government buildings, after Yanukovych decided that running was easier than staying, there was no violence involved because there did not have to be. He had ordered security forces to not protect the buildings.

He was not 'violently overthrown'. He 'overthrew' himself. He told security forces to let the protesters take over the government and then ran away. I hear Putin is pretty pissed with him. Can't say that I blame him.

My question stands though, were is the west heading with all this spin?

Where is the West headed with this Russian army takeover of one province of Ukraine? Perhaps Putin won't stop with just Crimea. What is the West trying to accomplish if Russia responds to more invitations from provincial, city, county or maybe a precinct official in parts of eastern Ukraine?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

52. I read up on Crimea. It's governing is entirely subordinated

To Ukrainian Constitution,laws, and executive.

Special zone that it might be, its regional
Government has no legitimate authority or right to request or accept entry into Ukrainian territory.

You are spreading false information. Until you adequately put blame on Putin for provocative actions by Russian military since Yanakovich, I'll have to assume you are promoting a specific pro Russia agenda here.

[okaawhatever]

50. thank you for a reasonable response to the Putin propaganda. There are many who have

suddenly popped up on this site to make the case for Putin and Russia. I guess they didn't get the memo that he's a murdering, oppressing, walking, talking human rights violator.

[Adrahil]

4. Comrade Putin appreciates your support. NT

[polly7]

32. I think such an OTT & rude post should come with some proof, it'll be interesting to see yours. nt.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

34. Here you go

[polly7]

35. Just as I thought. But I bet it felt great! Good for you. nt.

[cali]

6. Look, the majority in the Crimea welcome Russian troops but

pretending as you are that being invited in by a region that is part of another nation, is being invited in by said nation, is cheap and silly material for your argument.

keep up the rah rah Russia is doing what's right shit. but please try more persuasive arguments.

[Wet Willie]

8. Don't forget

It's not just the Autonomous Republic of Crimea's local government but also the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who was illegally removed from power by a violent coup d'etat.

I am not "rah rah" anyone, I am simply pointing out the facts as I see them, and excuse me, but simply because you disagree does not make you the sole arbiter of truth.

Can no one discuss this issue with out making everything personal?

:shakes-head:

[Adrahil]

48. Yanukovych was impeached.

Even members of his own ruling coalition bailed on him.

And documents since then prove he was a criminal.

[Jake Stern]

11. Considering our how many countries we've stuck our noses (and military) into

Obama's criticism of Russian intervention in Ukraine is pure chutzpah.

It always amazes me how our government acts indignant when other countries do the same thing we do.

Maybe we don't like competition?

[Jake Stern]

30. One area where Libertarians have Democrats beat: Anti-Interventionism

If the UN wishes to get involved, they can do it with someone else's troops. Our troops have bled enough. It's time to bring them home and keep them home.

[dionysus]

42. .

[Jenoch]

12. Russia has tanks on the ground in Ukraine

and you do not think that resembles an invasion?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

17. The guy has been a member since today

Why do YOU think he's saying this stuff?

[Jenoch]

33. I am mostly posting from an iPod,

so I am not seeing things like the number of posts done by each user. I suppose I should crack open the laptop for some of these threads.

It's sort of amazing how things have changed from desktops to laptops to mobile devices to tablets.

Doesn't anyone 'write' anything anymore?

I still mostly use my laptop for writing actual words using Word. I wish I were not a small minority of computer users.

[Chan790]

16. Here may be the source of your confusion.

The deposed leader who chose to flee into exile rather than be hung from a lamppost and dragged through the street by a donkey cart a la Mussolini no longer has the authority to invite anybody to do anything as a representative of the government.

Deposed statesmen no longer represent the government. He wasn't exiled or overthrown, he fled justice across the international border from a validly-issued warrant for his arrest. Functionally, he removed himself from authority. He's not the President anymore. He could have stayed and fought the charges...but there was likely a donkey-cart in his future.

Russia's recognition, fervent as it may be, is not legitimate or legal.

[stevenleser]

25. He was impeached by a vote of the Ukrainian parliament. That kinda destroys your argument. nt

[stevenleser]

29. That has no bearing on the impeachment. He has no part in that process even if he had been there.

You have no argument.

[stevenleser]

36. Now you are raising the Ukrainian protesters to the status of "armed insurrection"? LMAO!

[Pretzel_Warrior]

19. Nice statements. Well put. But this poster

Is not open to reason.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

22. It's like Bagdhad Bob in reverse

[Pretzel_Warrior]

27. If you contribute to DU, the ignore feature is available

Alternatively, you could just not read my posts.

What I used was a simile. Your saying Russia has not invaded Ukraine even as pictures and video contradict you is LIKE Bagdhad Bob who was on TV announcing they had stopped "the infidels" far outside the city even as US tanks rolled past behind him.

Unintentional comedy gold.

[stevenleser]

37. It just got even better. The Ukrainian protesters were an "armed insurrection"!

[Fumesucker]

28. I think what Pretzel Warrior is trying to say is that he/she trusts the M$M

After all, would the M$M lie to us about something as serious as war and peace?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

38. It's funny. When Ukrainians were protesting

DU had multiple posters putting up live streams showing the violence going on as government started cracking down on them. Now that protesters succeeded, no news or information can be trusted. Your own eyes should be subjugated to reading and accepting RT links and the irrational posts of a guy that just started posting today.

[Fumesucker]

39. I've spent a long time trying just to understand politics in the USA with limited success

I don't pretend to understand politics anywhere else, I can't say that I have an opinion either way as to what's going on in Ukraine since I simply have no point of reference.

There's plenty of posters who have been here for years that if they told me the sky was blue I'd want to go and check to make sure.

Watching a live stream of protesters is one thing, understanding who they are and what they want is entirely another.

[dionysus]

43. da, comrade willie.

[stevenleser]

24. There are always reasons to justify unprovoked wars of aggression. Just ask George W. Bush. nt

[Fumesucker]

44. Thankfully the M$M saved us by pointing out all the untruths the Cheney regency was telling

Never in the course of human conflict have so many owed so much to so few.

All hail the amazing moral courage of the M$M.

[Maedhros]

46. I think the United States is wholly unsuited to comment on ANY country's invasion of another.

We ginned up laughable "evidence" to launch a war based entirely on lies and cultural bigotry, invaded a sovereign nation that posed absolutely no threat to ours and then proceeded to twist the knife in that nation's guts for seven years.

Who are we to pontificate on the legitimacy of Russian involvement in the Ukraine?

(Myself, I am wholly in favor of the Ukrainian people deciding for themselves how they wish to be governed. I am categorically opposed to military intervention except in extreme circumstances, and I don't believe the situation in Ukraine has reached such a horrid state that Russian intervention is warranted. However, I did want to point out that this is exactly why illegitimate actions such as the Iraqi Occupation are to be avoided by the government of the United States - by engaging in such nakedly self-serving and short-sighted endeavors, a country's legitimacy in foreign relations is diminished.)

[Pretzel_Warrior]

51. Your unwillingness to call out Putin's actions says it all

Regarding one-sided and one dimensional arguments.

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. Putin sure gets a lotta love on DU these days. Say hi to Comrade Eddie!

Oh, and welcome back!