Ukrainian Independence

Author: Sum1hugme

Posts

Total: 55
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
If Russia expressed clear intent to fully annex the Ukraine, should America guarantee Ukrainian independence?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
If Russia expressed clear intent to fully annex the Ukraine, should America guarantee Ukrainian independence?
I don't think Russia would express clear intent. They've already invaded the Crimean Peninsula, Donetsk, & Luhansk without expressing any clear intent.  I do think that Ukraine should join NATO which would bind many nations to protecting Ukrainian sovereignty.  I think unilaterally guaranteeing another nation's independence is sort of beyond any nation's mandate but if Ukraine were a signatory to NATO then yes, I think the US should join all of Europe, Canada, Turkey, etc in a campaign to expel the invaders.

Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@oromagi
  I believe Ukraine is trying to join NATO. If they get rejected, I fear Russia will see that as an invitation to annex the rest of the Ukraine. 

  What do you suppose will happen to occupied Crimea if Ukraine joined NATO? Do you think NATO would demand the reintegration of Crimea into the Ukraine?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Sum1hugme
  I believe Ukraine is trying to join NATO. If they get rejected, I fear Russia will see that as an invitation to annex the rest of the Ukraine. 
agreed. Europe would be short-sighted to reject NATO for fear of Putin.   Putin will take advantage of that fear and then Europe will have to confront him anyway.  Better Churchill then Chamberlain.

  What do you suppose will happen to occupied Crimea if Ukraine joined NATO? Do you think NATO would demand the reintegration of Crimea into the Ukraine?
It seems that the best advice is to let Crimea go but again I think that is weak.  Putin is already invading the West- Brexit, 2016 Elections, Jan 6th., the oil and meat packing hacks,  so the arguments for maintaining Russian stability are increasingly less persuasive as Putin keeps making moves.  Personally, I think Putin is Russia's weakest link- travels a lot in the open, spends a lot of time vacationing far from Moscow,  no natural successors and an increasingly restless  populace. Putin has some tragic "accident" and during the ensuing power struggle NATO  re-asserts Ukrainian sovereignty against a resistance without leadership  Putin has got to demonstrate that he can be contained, satisfied with what he has or else  he's just another Hitler.  Or at least that is what I'd point out to Putin before requesting that he draw down at least 60,000 troops from the border before the end of summer.

 

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,275
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Sum1hugme
How do you imagine that  the U.S. could guarantee Ukrainian independence?

Hasn't 70 years of unsuccessfully meddling in foreign affairs taught the U.S. anything?
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
@Sum1hugme
I don't know.

Placement of military assets within the Ukraine.
Draw a clear line.
Strengthen Ukraine military and defenses, then America leaves.

Wouldn't guarantee it, as America might be outmaneuvered politically or in military movement.
Also should war occur, America might lose, might decide not worth effort even if tie or win.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
America could station military assets in the Ukraine so that an attack on the Ukraine would be an attack on the US.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@oromagi
Yeah it was disturbing to me how much the annexation of Crimea was like the Anschluss of Austria.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@oromagi
I can't prove it I guess, But I fear that, being an ex KGB agent, Putin wants to restore the former territorial holdings of the Soviet Union. Probably out of a sense of dishonor after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Sum1hugme
->@oromagi
I can't prove it I guess, But I fear that, being an ex KGB agent, Putin wants to restore the former territorial holdings of the Soviet Union. Probably out of a sense of dishonor after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Russian schoolchildren are taught that Russian history, language,  and culture begins in the Ukraine.  While this is true, Russia has consistently treated Ukraine as subject territory for the last few hundred years rather than a native Russian state.  While Putin seems to realize that restoration of the old Soviet Union is impossible, he regularly asserts that there as natural Russian state of ethnic Russians that extends far into Eastern Europe and he characterizes himself as a liberator of those trapped and oppressed ethnic Russians- very similar to Stalin's justifications for dominating Eastern Europe in the 20th century.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Sum1hugme
If Russia expressed clear intent to fully annex the Ukraine, should America guarantee Ukrainian independence?

Is any interest we have in Ukraine larger than the cost of a potential war with Russia or at the very least a deteriorated relationship with Russia?

I'd say probably not. So..... no.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,122
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Sum1hugme
I hope Russia doesn't get involved in the Republic of Sarah.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@bmdrocks21
That's a good point. Do you think NATO should accept the Ukraine as a member state, or leave them to whatever fate may befall them?
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@bmdrocks21
That does bring the question to mind though, at what point do we draw the line? Should we only help those countries that offer us some clear benefit? Or is it incumbent upon America to help safeguard those friendly sovereign nations who are subject to international bullying by other nations stronger than themselves?
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
Is any interest we have in Ukraine larger than the cost of a potential war with Russia or at the very least a deteriorated relationship with Russia?

I'd say probably not. So..... no.
Was there any US interest in Austria larger than the cost of potential war with Germany? no
Was there any  US interest in Czechoslovakia larger than the the cost of a potential war with Germany?  no
Was there any US interest in Poland larger than the cost of a potential war with Germany? no

Was there any US interest in Nanking larger than the cost of potential war with Japan? no
Was there any  US interest in French Indochina larger than the the cost of a potential war with Japan?  no
Was there any US interest in Hong Kong larger than the cost of a potential war with Japan? no




bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@oromagi
Was there any US interest in Austria larger than the cost of potential war with Germany? no
Was there any  US interest in Czechoslovakia larger than the the cost of a potential war with Germany?  no
Was there any US interest in Poland larger than the cost of a potential war with Germany? no

Was losing our best allies of France and Britain? I think there'd be a good argument for that. But even then, we didn't get involved until the Japanese bombed us. If Germany took over Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia and then stopped there, I would say we shouldn't engage over that.

Maybe Ukraine should be let into NATO. It is a good deterrent for a war, but at the end of the day, I'm not willing to die over an Eastern European land dispute. I'd be interested to see the first time a major country tests that alliance. I'd bet not all of those in the alliance are willing to die to defend Albania in a bloody war.

Was there any US interest in Nanking larger than the cost of potential war with Japan? no
Was there any  US interest in French Indochina larger than the the cost of a potential war with Japan?  no
Was there any US interest in Hong Kong larger than the cost of a potential war with Japan? no
Correct.

Either something benefits us more than it costs or it doesn't. We shouldn't expend our resources to solve other peoples' problems unless solving those problems reaps a large benefit for us.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Sum1hugme
That does bring the question to mind though, at what point do we draw the line? Should we only help those countries that offer us some clear benefit? Or is it incumbent upon America to help safeguard those friendly sovereign nations who are subject to international bullying by other nations stronger than themselves?

Well from my perspective, it is only our duty to help our own citizens. That means any action we take should benefit us more than it hurts us.

It isn't an exact science, though. (how do you put value on dead Americans vs a new trading partner?)
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@bmdrocks21
Well even from a practical perspective, is it worth losing access to Ukrainian natural resources to Russian sanctions if they get annexed? 
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
But even then, we didn't get involved until the Japanese bombed us. If Germany took over Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia and then stopped there, I would say we shouldn't engage over that.
Of course, all of history disagrees with you.

If Alexander stopped at the Hellespont...
If Rome had stopped at Gaul....
If the Mongols stopped at China...
If Spain had stopped at Tenochtitlan....
If Napoleon had stopped at Italy....

when do conquerors stop?  when conquerors are defeated.
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@oromagi
Of course, all of history disagrees with you.

That depends on what class you would put them in. Would some conquerors try to take over the whole world? Yes.

Does every civilization or ruler that has ever acquired land by force want to take over the whole world? Probably not. It seems quite reductionist to believe otherwise.

Ukraine and Russia are very connected. To say that because Russia wants to take over the world because it wants to reclaim an area it has very strong ethnic/linguistic and economic ties (that was a part of its empire for a long time) with seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

Can I see the Ukrainian case not to be ruled by Russia? Sure. Can I see ours to care about it? Hardly.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
What is wrong with russia owning the Ukraine?
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Wylted
What is wrong with russia owning the Ukraine?
Cuz Putin and Trump are best buddies. Orange man bad, so Putin bad by association.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
That's what I figured the argument was
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Wylted
Nah lol. 

The only reason in favor of doing it was from oro, and I guess he thinks that we should stop everyone who tries to conquer other countries because we will have to deal with them sooner or later.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,275
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Sum1hugme
And?




Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 22,962
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
As corrupt as Ukraine is, the people will probably be better off under the rule of another nation's laws.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Wylted
@bmdrocks21
bmd's answer to your question of Russia owning Ukraine ignores a current fact: Ukraine's sovereignty, and that's what's wrong with the argument of Russia's ownership of any land they occupy that is not their current sovereignty, including Crimea. Too damn bad if Russia has no Black Sea port. They have the Pacific and the Bearing Sea. Not sufficient? Too damn bad. Tell me what seaport is had by Switzerland, and numerous other land-locked countries? My State has no seaport, either. 
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@fauxlaw
Why do I care if a relatively insignificant country is sovereign or not?

Are you one of those neocons that wants to spread democracy to the Middle East? I'm not trying to project things on you, just really getting those vibes......
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@fauxlaw
Why give a shit if they take Ukraine by force?
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,569
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
yes(sort of) but i dont want american soldiers dying