Saturday, August 30, 2014

UKRAINE vs. RUSSIA: Ball's In Your Court, NATO

Now is time for NATO to put up or shut up. Easy enough to be Big Bad NATO when all you're doing is pushing around dinky little Balkan countries - this is about fighting THE RUSSIAN BEAR and THIS is the reason why NATO was formed in the first place . . . S.L.

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen

NATO Secretary General statement after the extraordinary meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission:

We have just held an extraordinary meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission, following the serious escalation of Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine. The meeting was held at Ukraine’s request.

Despite Moscow’s hollow denials, it is now clear that Russian troops and equipment have illegally crossed the border into eastern and south-eastern Ukraine. This is not an isolated action, but part of a dangerous pattern over many months to destabilise Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

Russian forces are engaged in direct military operations inside Ukraine. Russia continues to supply the separatists with tanks, armoured vehicles, artillery and rocket launchers. Russia has fired on Ukraine from both Russian territory and within Ukraine itself. Moreover, Russia continues to maintain thousands of combat-ready troops close to Ukraine’s borders. This is a blatant violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It defies all diplomatic efforts for a peaceful solution.

Today, we expressed strong solidarity with Ukraine. At the Wales Summit next week, we will meet President Poroshenko to make clear NATO’s unwavering support for Ukraine.

We condemn in the strongest terms Russia’s continued disregard of its international obligations. We urge Russia to cease its illegal military actions, stop its support to armed separatists, and take immediate and verifiable steps towards de-escalation of this grave crisis.

Looks like it's time to put your money where your mouth is NATO or take your bat and ball and go home . . . money talks and bullshit walks . . .



  1. Not quite why they were formed...

    A portion of the USSR is invading another portion of the USSR if looked at from the founding of NATO. NATO wasn't founded to quibble about the internal politics of the USSR.

    1. The USSR ceased to exist 25 years ago but NATO is still going strong ... this is not internal security situation this is a sovereign state being invaded by another ... NATO might find a way to bow out of this fight but if the EU lets this stand then everyone will see the EU is a paper tiger not even worth the paper their charter is written on ...

    2. Odd to say something is a paper tiger and going strong in the same paragraph.

    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    4. At the end of the day the Ukrainians need to brush up on their Russian, because that is their future. We supported a coup that is the bottom line. Like it or not the President was elected by the majority of the people in Ukraine. He went to Kiev in the heart of those who opposed him. They rose up in street riots and drove him from power in Kiev. That is a coup, they went against the majority vote. The protesters then drove all his supporters from parliament so their side could install a new government of their choosing. Now was Yanukovych a shit bag, most likely yes but he was the democratically elected shit bag. Now the new elected leader shit bag has disbanded the parliament and called for new elections. Why because there are to many supporters of the break away east in the parliament blocking his agenda. Just as in Syria there are no good guys just bad guys of different degrees. In conclusion Putin will get what he wants because at the end of the day no American is will to risk war with Russia over Ukraine.

  2. "Stop!"

    Or we'll say "Stop!" again!

  3. Hey Sean,

    Something that isn't 1994 Bill Clinton had the Ukraine give up their nukes...the ones they had when the U.S.S.R fell apart. On the guarantee that we and NATO will protect their sovereignty. It is 20 years later, we have the petulant boy king in the white-house and we are seen as weak and divided..and a resurgent Russia is making moves on their neighbor.

  4. So EU expansionism is OK through their political interference to put in place an undemocratically elected westward-looking government, but Russian support for those in eastern Ukraine who want to be aligned with Russia is not! This whole situation stinks and even although I think Putin is a nasty KGB thug it does not excuse Western (US and EU) interference in a sovereign state.

    BTW - Why the resounding silence from the western press into the investigation of the Malaysian airplane? Another false flag operation gone wrong.

  5. Any way you look at this shit storm, there is no easy way out for anyone. One way or another, this will not end well and may in a worse case scenario be real game changer for the world. Clearly we (as in the USA) are screwed (again) no matter what happens. Great foreign policy by our current politicians.


  6. When offering nothing it is not always better to say more. Given that, the Nato SecGen should have said less. Writing off this as an internal dispute in the old Soviet is sure to panic the Baltics. They were part of the old Soviet and they are part of Nato. Given Putin's not so subtle waving of his nukes and the fecklessness of America and Germany (Nato) the only logical path for Poland the Baltics and Ukraine is to nuke up fast while sending sabotage teams East, and begin destroying pipelines in a scorched earth policy.

  7. Russia acquired the eastern Ukraine in1667 by conquest, the universal way states are formed. This is 40 years before the unification of Scotland and England, more 100 years before the American Revolution and more than 200 years before the establishment of the German and Italian states. The much of the eastern Ukraine, like Crimea, was formally part of Russia itself, before the communists rearranged USSR's internal borders for administrative convenience. There are very strong historical, cultural and economic ties between Russia and Ukraine, and Russia has important security interests there. If you don't get it, please reread the history of the Cuban Missile Crisis and what prompted the US to go to the edge of war.

    Russia is supporting the insurrection in the east, but that insurrection was predictable and justified. The US and EU removed the only democratically elected government in Ukrainian history and replaced it with junta using the extreme right wing (some say Nazi) militias of Right Sektor and Swoboda. The Yanukovych government had won overwhelming electoral victories in the east and Crimea (60% to 90%) and had strong support there. The easterners obviously reject the junta. Yanukovych lost in the west by equally lop-sided margins, but this shows how deeply divided the east and west are.

    Rasmussen, in particular, is our modern Conrad egging Franz Josef on. But there is a chorus of lunatics like Cheney and McCain urging intervention, and European leaders like Cameron, Hollande, Barroso and Van Rompuy are stoking the flames. The only possible outcome of NATO intervention in Ukraine is nuclear war in Europe.

    I think it is clear that NATO itself is a major threat to the security of the US, and that it has the potential to start a European war and to drag us into it. NATO should be disbanded, or failing that we should leave while we still can.

    There is an existential threat the US out there; it is ISIS. Should ISIS gain control of the Middle Eastern oil fields, which is a distinct possibility, it have effective control over the West's economy and could shut it down at will. That is worth an intervention with a large ground army supported by large air forces.

  8. Irish oppression by England for centuries... Britain vs The Falklands... I am not trolling here and I know there are differences... but could someone explain why these were ok and the current Russia move (to do what the people of Ukraine voted they wanted)
    is so wrong? A follow up question is where do we draw the line?