Agent Orange Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 ah i see)) just because not everyone thinks the same eh? well its a pity we in the UK dont have a leader like Putin we could certainly do with a leader that has a backbone It's not about everyone thinking the same, or not in this case, it's about you making sweeping statements that hold little or no fact. If I didn't know better, I would say you were saying these things to get a rise out of your fellow forummers As for Putin, be careful for what you wish. One day you might just get a dictator and then you'll be complaining when your civil liberties vanish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 One shot sorry but by who ?.As for China well we are not going to tackle them are we all they would have to do is poisen our no 26 with fried rice throughout England and we would all be dead. Seems to me like double standards? Okay if some super powers invade some countries, but other invasions are a no no. Why? My question is, what really motivates our objection to Russia invading Crimea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn123 Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 He would be no different from the ones we have. Looking after their cronies and making sure that they and their families are on a nce little earner . I find him to be a great, strong leader. Unlike the twigs we have in charge in the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 Seems to me like double standards? Okay if some super powers invade some countries, but other invasions are a no no. Why? My question is, what really motivates our objection to Russia invading Crimea? My bold= I read in a news article that Putin said to his parliament that the west have now rediscovered international law after invading Iraq and Afghanistan. I think he makes a good point because millions were against the Iraq war and we along with the us and others still invaded the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I mean the double standards in terms of our inconsistent response to super powers invading smaller nations. We don't batter an eyelid when it's China invading Tibet, yet when it's Russia invading Crimea, different matter, why? I suspect, in the former, we have nothing to gain or lose; while in the later, we do have something to lose. Possibly, we don't like Russia having a foothold in the area, with new military bases available to them? I don't think it's so much about protecting smaller nations from larger aggressors, as it is about protecting our own self-interests. So what is it specifically, that we have to lose from Russia invading Crimea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I mean the double standards in terms of our inconsistent response to super powers invading smaller nations. We don't batter an eyelid when it's China invading Tibet, yet when it's Russia invading Crimea, different matter, why? I suspect, in the former, we have nothing to gain or lose; while in the later, we do have something to lose. Possibly, we don't like Russia having a foothold in the area, with new military bases available to them? I don't think it's so much about protecting smaller nations from larger aggressors, as it is about protecting our own self-interests. So what is it specifically, that we have to lose from Russia invading Crimea? Didn't Russia already have the use of the naval base at Sevastopol for their Black Sea fleet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I think so truman. I'm not sure it there were any limitations placed on it's use for the Russians though. Maybe that's not the west's main cause for concern here ... but what is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuttsie Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I mean the double standards in terms of our inconsistent response to super powers invading smaller nations. We don't batter an eyelid when it's China invading Tibet, yet when it's Russia invading Crimea, different matter, why? I suspect, in the former, we have nothing to gain or lose; while in the later, we do have something to lose. Possibly, we don't like Russia having a foothold in the area, with new military bases available to them? I don't think it's so much about protecting smaller nations from larger aggressors, as it is about protecting our own self-interests. So what is it specifically, that we have to lose from Russia invading Crimea? Correct as in the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 Maybe that's not the west's main cause for concern here ... but what is? Growing Russian imperialism in the Western sphere of influence, in addition to ongoing Chinese imperialism in the Pacific and African spheres of influence. Brazil and India are the quiet BRICs...for now, as I don't expect that will last either. Unlike China, Russia has long (well, since around 1991) proclaimed and shown itself (to a sizeable extent, and until recently, at least) a democratic country playing by international rules. This Crimean (...for now) business is a straight-up military-driven annexion goose-stepping straight over peaceful EU<>Ukraine commercial negotiations that go back years. If Putin moves to annex the rest of Ukraine right up to the border, now or at any time in the future, Poland will go in with both fists and both feet...and then the EU and NATO will be at war with Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Orange Posted March 19, 2014 Share Posted March 19, 2014 I think so truman. I'm not sure it there were any limitations placed on it's use for the Russians though. Maybe that's not the west's main cause for concern here ... but what is? The naval base was leased to the Russian until 2042 (circa), I believe. Crimea holds great strategical power, I suspect that is the main issue for most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.