Why is Crimean vote bad?

[Gina B]

From what I read, the people voted to join Russia.

Why is Russia the "bad guy" in this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ec2132-acd4-11e3-a06a-e3230a43d6cb_story.html

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/pol...ver-crimean-vote-to-leave-ukraine-339634.html

Isn't this exactly what the Ukraine wanted - the people to have a voice? Now they have one, and Crimea appears to want to join Russia.

Why would Ukraine fight this, and why would anyone fight Russia on this? If it's what the people voted on and want, what about it calls for sanctions and arms and calling Putin "evil" for doing this? If they want to put themselves under Russia again, why should anyone tell them they need to be "free" and start shooting at them to force them to be so? What gives anyone that right?

Please explain this.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

... Crimea appears to want to join Russia.

More people "voted" than actually live in the province.

Why would Ukraine fight this, and why would anyone fight Russia on this?

Ukraine is a sovereign country, and it does not have a Constitution that permits secession. Russia invaded Crimea, a province of Ukraine, claiming "ethnic Russians were being abused by the rebel government" that kicked Viktor Yanukovych out of his presidential office. They said this twelve hours after Yanukovych fled Kiev, before the rebels even knew the crook was gone. Russian president Vladimir Putin is ex-KGB administration, ex-spook, ex-thug, ex-old line Soviet. Nothing he says is true, and this ...

If it's what the people voted on and want ...

... is just plain laughable. It isn't what most people in Crimea wanted, as they flew Ukrainian flags during Sundays vote, and yet "97% of more people than even live there" voted to join Russia? Yeah, and I've got beachfront property in New Mexico for sale if you're interested.

... what about it calls for sanctions and arms and calling Putin "evil" for doing this?

Really? I would think you'd have to be Rip Van Winkle, asleep since the Civil War, to ask this question. Nonetheless, sanctions are the least of what the situation calls for. It calls for more than that, but our Little Marxist Dictator in the White House is 1) in Putin's pocket, and 2) too gutless. Therefore, despite what should be done, nothing will be done. His "sanctions"? Utterly stupid! The ten people he "sanctioned" don't even have accounts, holdings or property in the United States!

 

[Gina B]

Don't need your sarcasm or replies, so for anyone else...

I'm pretty ignorant on how everything in that area works, so if someone here can give a solid, simple explanation of it, I'd appreciate it. I'm attempting to get a grasp on all of this in a week and go from there. It's not easy to do while everything is in upheaval. We were talking and starting to wonder about direct news sources out of the country and if they are still able to be trusted or if Russian sources may be responsible for some of what is coming out of their news now. Any ideas on that, and what news to trust on happenings that are going on over there now?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Don't need your sarcasm or replies ...

Fine. Happy to ignore you. Please feel free to do the same.

By the way, you're gonna get the same answer I gave.

 

[Lewis]

Don't need your sarcasm or replies, so for anyone else...

I'm pretty ignorant on how everything in that area works, so if someone here can give a solid, simple explanation of it, I'd appreciate it. I'm attempting to get a grasp on all of this in a week and go from there. It's not easy to do while everything is in upheaval. We were talking and starting to wonder about direct news sources out of the country and if they are still able to be trusted or if Russian sources may be responsible for some of what is coming out of their news now. Any ideas on that, and what news to trust on happenings that are going on over there now?

For one thing, there were thousands of Russian troops occupying Crimea at the time of the voting. This would obviously put a damper any votes to oppose uniting with Russia.

Anyway, the urge to merge with Russia, such as it exists in Crimea, is a generational matter. Many older voters consider themselves of Russian heritage, while younger ones do not.

LINK - Sunday’s vote, however, threatened to split society in numerous, and perhaps unexpected, ways. In addition to Crimean Tatars, who make up about 12 percent of the population and generally oppose becoming part of Russia, many young Crimeans, born after Ukrainian independence, have come out strongly against the referendum, putting them in conflict with their parents and grandparents, some of whom have fond memories of the Soviet Union.

“The vote is fiction,” said Kseniya Zaplantinskaya, 19, a philosophy student. “In my family there are different opinions; my parents are for Russia.”
Anastasia Sherbina, 21, a medical student, said she would vote for Crimea to remain part of Ukraine, the only national identity she has ever known. “I was born here,” Ms. Sherbina said. “I’ve lived here. I want to be a Ukrainian.”

Putin may have won this thing. But now how will he supply Crimea and pay for pensions of Ukrainian retirees etc? Good luck with that.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

For one thing, there were thousands of Russian troops occupying Crimea at the time of the voting. This would obviously put a damper any votes to oppose uniting with Russia.

Yeah, armed guys in uniform outside a voting location do tend to make voters think twice about the ballot they are about to cast. :tonofbricks:

Anyway, the urge to merge with Russia, such as it exists in Crimea, is a generational matter. Many older voters consider themselves of Russian heritage, while younger ones do not.

Exactly. And the population is not an aging one. Just over 70% of Ukrainians are between 15-64, and the 18-54 demographic is just under 45%. There are more people in Crimea who supported the Orange Revolution than there are in certain rural areas of the country as a whole. The vote was a joke. In the entire country of 23 million, just nine and a half percent are Russian -- about 2.2 million. Yet nearly that many voted in the "election" that officials in the province claim went 97% for rejoining Russia.

Yeah, that's a fair vote. Still have that New Mexico beachfront property if anyone's interested. :laugh:

LINK - “The vote is fiction,” said Kseniya Zaplantinskaya, 19, a philosophy student. “In my family there are different opinions; my parents are for Russia.”
Anastasia Sherbina, 21, a medical student, said she would vote for Crimea to remain part of Ukraine, the only national identity she has ever known. “I was born here,” Ms. Sherbina said. “I’ve lived here. I want to be a Ukrainian.”

There is a map in [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/12/09/this-one-map-helps-explain-ukraines-protests/]this story[/URL] on The Washington Post website that illustrates what these voters told the Times quite well. I'd post it (in fact, I tried) but it's much too big to leave up as a stand-alone here.

 

[ShagNappy]

In short, because people see this as Putin, ex KGB and very pro return to being the Soviet Union, as rebuilding the motherland and he won't stop here. He will eventually use force in Ukraine, and then maybe Moldova, etc., etc.

Crimea is a political mess and not as simple as some make it out to be. They are an autonomous nation that is part of Ukraine by not much more than a handshake. Ukraine has made many concessions since 1992 to keep Crimea from returning to Russia, which was given to them in 1954 by Khrushchev. Crimea keeps declaring itself independent, gets concessions from Ukraine, then goes back. This time Putin recognized it and offered troops to make it a bit more permanent.

Regardless of made up statistics, 81.3% of the population turned out for this vote and voted overwhelmingly to return to Russia. But it has long been known that this is what Crimea wants, along with almost 50% of Ukraine's population. Ukraine is split pretty evenly East vs. West is their support of Russia vs EU.

 

[ktn4eg]

Although the region of the Black Sea's Crimean Peninsula legally lies within the borders of what once was designated as the Soviet Union's "Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic" doing the Marxist dictatorships of Lenin, Stalin, and their very tyrannical and oppressive successors, most of the actual inhabitants of that region considered themselves to be "native" Russians rather than "native" Ukrainians.

The bogus and blatantly illegal (at least in the eyes of most of the rest of the world) "referendum" that took place over this past weekend [March 15-16] was basically a propaganda tool to promote the foreign policy goals of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Putin--who for many years during the Soviet Union's oppressive control of their so-called "Constituent 'Republics'" held several high-ranking offices in the Soviet-style "secret police" organizations such as the notorious KGB--has (at several public occasions) made it known that it has been his desire to re-absorb what were once Soviet "satellites" that were ostensibly run by men who were, for all intents and purposes, mere "puppets" of the Kremlin.

News reports also stated that some of the eastern provinces of the Ukraine that border "Mother Russia" are being pressured into seceding from the Ukraine and "re-unite" with Russia.

How successful that will be remains to be seen, but many Western news commentators have pointed out that Russian military "war games[?]" that are currently underway right next to these eastern Ukrainian provinces are, in reality, more of a "show of force" by the Russians than a set of mere military "defensive measures."

How much the United States and its NATO Treaty partners will actually do in this crisis is, for the most part, unknown.

For one thing, there seems to be much disunity within the ranks of most of the NATO nations when it comes to dealing with this situation.

Then, too, many Western Europeans have serious doubts about the real legitimacy of the current Ukrainian political leadership--due to the fact that most of them attained their current positions of governmental authority and power by means of, shall we say, "less than highly ethical means." :smilewinkgrin:

Will the United States of America do much to actually stop Putin's "saber-rattling and bullying" in this current series of crises?

I seriously doubt it. FWIW, IMHO the current administration appears to be rather dead-set on dismantling not only our already seriously depleted military forces, but also, has rather consistently made our nation to become the "laughing stock" in the estimation(s) of the rest of the world's "eyes."

Moreover, I personally contend that the United States needs to stop acting as the so-called "World's Policeman" and start resolving some of our own nation's very critical (and costly) challenges.

Over the past 125 or so years, we wasted both our nation's human and our fiscal resources on what (for the most part) have been wasteful and ill-advised intrusions into what are basically other nations' internal affairs in which the USA really has had no business interfering.

FWIW, IMHO, the idea of getting the United States out of the United Nations (which over the past 70 years has become merely an international forum of both anti-American and anti-Semitic third-rate nations ruled by a bunch of dictatorial thugs) and vice versa has become more and more appealing to me. :thumbsup::BangHead::tonofbricks:

 

[InTheLight]

I'm pretty ignorant on how everything in that area works, so if someone here can give a solid, simple explanation of it, I'd appreciate it. I'm attempting to get a grasp on all of this in a week and go from there. It's not easy to do while everything is in upheaval.

Political thought in Ukraine is split between east and west. The western part of the country favors closer ties with Europe; the eastern and southern areas look to Russia. Culture is different, language is different, etc.

After the Soviet Union fell in 1991, Ukraine became a nuclear power because of USSR nuclear weapons staged there. In 1994 a treaty was signed between the US, Britain, Russia, and Ukraine stating that Ukraine would dismantle their nuclear weapons and the other countries would pledge to honor Ukraine's "territorial integrity". When Russia sent troops into Crimea, that seems to me to be a violation of this treaty. The presence of Russian troops were needed to ensure there would be a vote on unification of Crimea with Russia. You also need to know that there is a Russian naval base in Crimea, so there already were Russian military in the country.

Ukraine is going broke and is looking for financial aid. Back in November 2013 then president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich spurned western banks and in December decided to sign a loan agreement with Russia that would get Ukraine $15B in loans and a 30% cut in the price of natural gas supplies from Russia. Russia had threatened trade sanctions if Ukraine did not sign their loan agreement. So Putin basically blackmailed Ukraine into accepting loans from Russia. This agreement with Putin infuriated the western sections of Ukraine and demonstrations in Kiev that had been going since Yanukovich rejected western financial aid ramped up.

About a month ago with the demonstrations in Kiev getting more violent and police shooting and killing protestors the Ukraine parliament essentially ousted president Yanukovich and installed a pro-Western president. This led to fighting in the eastern parts of Ukraine and Crimea between pro-western factions and pro-Russian factions. This is when Putin decided to send troops into Crimea to "protect the ethnic Russians from pro-Western demonstrators". He also declared that there would be a referendum in 30 days for Crimea to "democratically vote" on how they wished to align their province. Once Yankukovich was removed from power Putin announced the loan program was on hold and would be resumed after the dust cleared and the vote taken in Crimea. So Putin is essentially blackmailing Crimea.

You asked why Putin is the bad guy here. Well, he dangles a financial aid package to Ukraine and blackmails them with trade sanctions (about 30% of Ukraine's exports go into Russia) then he blackmails them again by suspending the loans pending a positive outcome of a vote in Crimea.

This is the background to the vote on Sunday. Most observers say the vote was corrupt and staged. Also, the presence of armed troops probably put a damper on pro-Western voters going to the polls.

We were talking and starting to wonder about direct news sources out of the country and if they are still able to be trusted or if Russian sources may be responsible for some of what is coming out of their news now. Any ideas on that, and what news to trust on happenings that are going on over there now?

This site is definitely anti-Russian but has good information on it. It seems to be pro-Western but only because they loathe the Russians so much. When I say pro-Western in regards to this web site I mean western countries like Poland, Germany, France, etc. and not necessarily the U.S.

http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-liveblog-day-29-russia-annexes-crimea/#1804

 

[poncho]

For one thing, there were thousands of Russian troops occupying Crimea at the time of the voting. This would obviously put a damper any votes to oppose uniting with Russia.

Anyway, the urge to merge with Russia, such as it exists in Crimea, is a generational matter. Many older voters consider themselves of Russian heritage, while younger ones do not.

LINK - Sunday’s vote, however, threatened to split society in numerous, and perhaps unexpected, ways. In addition to Crimean Tatars, who make up about 12 percent of the population and generally oppose becoming part of Russia, many young Crimeans, born after Ukrainian independence, have come out strongly against the referendum, putting them in conflict with their parents and grandparents, some of whom have fond memories of the Soviet Union.

“The vote is fiction,” said Kseniya Zaplantinskaya, 19, a philosophy student. “In my family there are different opinions; my parents are for Russia.”
Anastasia Sherbina, 21, a medical student, said she would vote for Crimea to remain part of Ukraine, the only national identity she has ever known. “I was born here,” Ms. Sherbina said. “I’ve lived here. I want to be a Ukrainian.”

Putin may have won this thing. But now how will he supply Crimea and pay for pensions of Ukrainian retirees etc? Good luck with that.

Love them talking points or what?

The Russians have had a treaty to keep troops there for a long time.

Are there Russians there? Yes they've been there legally all along. They are not an "occupying force".

 

[poncho]

More people "voted" than actually live in the province. Ukraine is a sovereign country, and it does not have a Constitution that permits secession. Russia invaded Crimea, a province of Ukraine, claiming "ethnic Russians were being abused by the rebel government" that kicked Viktor Yanukovych out of his presidential office. They said this twelve hours after Yanukovych fled Kiev, before the rebels even knew the crook was gone. Russian president Vladimir Putin is ex-KGB administration, ex-spook, ex-thug, ex-old line Soviet. Nothing he says is true, and this ... ... is just plain laughable. It isn't what most people in Crimea wanted, as they flew Ukrainian flags during Sundays vote, and yet "97% of more people than even live there" voted to join Russia? Yeah, and I've got beachfront property in New Mexico for sale if you're interested.Really? I would think you'd have to be Rip Van Winkle, asleep since the Civil War, to ask this question. Nonetheless, sanctions are the least of what the situation calls for. It calls for more than that, but our Little Marxist Dictator in the White House is 1) in Putin's pocket, and 2) too gutless. Therefore, despite what should be done, nothing will be done. His "sanctions"? Utterly stupid! The ten people he "sanctioned" don't even have accounts, holdings or property in the United States!

How about some sources for all this?

Yeah yeah yeah you got it from Fox News that goes without saying but who is Fox getting this info from? Who are it's sources? Where and from whom is all this "information" coming from? Name some names.

 

[Lewis]

Love them talking points or what?

The Russians have had a treaty to keep troops there for a long time.

Are there Russians there? Yes they've been there legally all along. They are not an "occupying force".

These Russian troops are legally allowed to surround and attack Ukranian military posts? Only in the world of Russophiles.

 

[poncho]

These Russian troops are legally allowed to surround and attack Ukranian military posts? Only in the world of Russophiles.

Says who? Show me your sources and who they're getting their information from. If it's coming the Ukrainian coup govt keep in mind they believe 80 Russian troops crossing the border amounts to a full scale invasion.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=92594

In other words show me all the evidence. Let's do some detective work before we start jumping to conclusions.

You said . . . "For one thing, there were thousands of Russian troops occupying Crimea at the time of the voting." If by occupying you mean "taking up space" then you would be correct, there have been Russians taking up space in Crimea for a long time. If by "occupying" you meant having control over you would be trying to sensationalize something that has been taking place for a long time.

We were talking about Crimea then you jump to Ukraine. One is not the other.

Ukraine is not Crimea. Crimea is not Ukraine.

 

[Lewis]

Says who? Show me your sources and who they're getting their information from.

LINK - [I]"Troops sent from Russia by the president, Vladimir Putin, surround a military base in Perevalnoye, Crimea. Despite Kiev officials ordering a halt to the invasion of the volatile region, 16,000 extra soldiers have entered. Ukrainian troops holed up inside the base have refused to surrender"[/I]

LINK - [I]"Russian generals led their troops to three bases in the region Sunday, demanding Ukrainian forces surrender and hand over their weapons, Vladislav Seleznyov, spokesman for the Crimean Media Center of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, told CNN.

By late Sunday, Russian forces had "complete operational control of the Crimean Peninsula," a senior U.S. administration official said. The United States estimates there are 6,000 Russian ground and naval forces in the region, the official said."[/I]

Ukraine is not Crimea. Crimea is not Ukraine.

Crimea was ceded to Ukraine in 1954.

 

[poncho]

LINK - [I]"Troops sent from Russia by the president, Vladimir Putin, surround a military base in Perevalnoye, Crimea. Despite Kiev officials ordering a halt to the invasion of the volatile region, 16,000 extra soldiers have entered. Ukrainian troops holed up inside the base have refused to surrender"[/I]

I see some dudes dressed in green uniforms with no insignias marching around. Where was it taken? When was it taken? By who was it taken by? Who posted it? When was it posted? Where was it posted?

This is your proof? :laugh:

LINK - [I]"Russian generals led their troops to three bases in the region Sunday, demanding Ukrainian forces surrender and hand over their weapons, Vladislav Seleznyov, spokesman for the Crimean Media Center of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, told CNN.

By late Sunday, Russian forces had "complete operational control of the Crimean Peninsula," a senior U.S. administration official said. The United States estimates there are 6,000 Russian ground and naval forces in the region, the official said."[/I]

No sources? Where are the sources? I asked for sources. You know what a source is right? The Prime Minister said "thus and such" or General Sherman of the Light Infantry Brigade said, "charge!" Or "several eye witnesses claim Babe Ruth hit another one of the park" last night around 8 pm EST.

Those are sources. What you posted is just blah blah blah.

It's an opinion piece from a liberal news outlet that is famous for fabricating story lines and lying about where their "reporters" are actually reporting from.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFcqjQlpMHQ

C'mon if CNN would fake this can it really be trusted to tell the truth?

Crimea was ceded to Ukraine in 1954.

It's called the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

Autonomous means . . .

: existing or acting separately from other things or people

: having the power or right to govern itself

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autonomous

So you are evidently taking the same stance as the Ukraine coup govt aka racist thugs that overthrew the elected govt the EU and Washington that Crimeans have no right to self determination. Is that correct?

You are aware that these are the same people who constantly preach on how everyone in the world should have a right to self determination aren't you?

You don't see any hint of hypocrisy in that at all, correct?

 

[Lewis]

Ok Poncho, my sources were not Lew Rockwelll so I guess that makes them invalid

Russian troops are allowed by treaty to maintain and protect Russian naval base at Sevastapol. That did not give them the right to take operational control of the Crimean penensula, which they have done, or to demand Ukranian posts in Crimea to surrender their weapons. Notably at the time of voting. Hmmm...nothing fishy there!

 

[poncho]

Ok Poncho, my sources were not Lew Rockwelll so I guess that makes them invalid

Russian troops are allowed by treaty to maintain and protect Russian naval base at Sevastapol. That did not give them the right to take operational control of the Crimean penensula, which they have done, or to demand Ukranian posts in Crimea to surrender their weapons. Notably at the time of voting. Hmmm...nothing fishy there!

Just show me something with substance. Is that so hard?

The first thing that goes out the window in times of war is the truth. There's enough hype and propaganda flying around from all sides. I want to know what's is really going on.

Who's behind what. You know what I mean? This side accuses that side and the other side accuses another side, blah blah blah.

I want facts verified facts. I want evidence from credible unbiased sources or at least from sources that don't have a dog in the hunt. I want eye witness accounts and lots of them and I want names! This unamed "government official" stuff shouldn't even be printed. I want documents, lots of them. Youtube videos? Yeah right I can post a video on youtube and claim to be the King of Siam and these rough looking bikers standing around picking their noses just invaded my palace.

And without doubt the minute John McCain viewed it he'd fly off to get his picture taken with the bikers and demand Obama and the congress start giving them money and weapons to help secure the "right of self determination" for the poor oppressed bikers of Siam. And the EU and the IMF would be at the ready to hand out massive loans they can never hope to repay and they'd have to put their bikes up for collateral take big pay cuts and live in the slums just to make the interest payments on the loans.

All these important events have started to take on a cartoonish character that just keeps repeating over and over and over. You have to be for em because, you have to be against em because . . . ask for facts and evidence and you get chuckles and insults.

Nothing against you okay. I just want the facts maybe toss a little history in there to put them in context. I'm tired of all the teleprompter reading talking heads reading from the same script trying to convince me to think this way or that way.

I want to know who the players are, I want to know their history, I want to know what's what's who's who's and who's funding them.

I want to be able to make up my own mind about what to think I don't need someone else to make up my mind for me.

Do you?

 

[Gina B]

You guys are awesome - thank you for the replies! I made it make more sense in my head by putting Puerto Rico and Spain in place of them and imagining the situation. Not quite the same, I know, but the overall concept is there.

I'm still trying to figure out how this vote happened. Who exactly held it, to make it illegal and have other nations refuse to recognize it? I saw this link that only names one person and isn't too helpful: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...6d8a46-a520-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html

And another question - if this is indeed as it appears - a powerful country stepping into a fragile area and taking advantage of political unrest to seize control, which countries care? Do enough care and have enough power to do anything, or will this one just go as is? If it is an obvious violation and will trigger mass repercussions, why do you think Russia is bothering? It doesn't seem as if there is much to gain. They had what they needed with the treaty, and I'm not seeing any major exports or reasons why this area would be especially profitable, or am I wrong there? If the people were truly a concern to them, why not set up a special policy to allow absorption of willing Crimeans into Russia, rather than step in and take over, having the mess of those who wish to retain the citizenship they have now or have no citizenship, as it's been said they will be able to do?

Short of nostalgia...or flexing their muscles, what is Russia gaining from this? Do they think nobody will bother with it, or do you think they are using it as a trigger for something more major?

As far as people saying Obama is not doing anything - it seems to me that he has been quietly doing little things with Russia over the years. (reminds me of little things siblings to do try to get the other ticked off) Annoying things, and I've wondered if he was trying to stir things up. I'm rather surprised at the view of many Americans saying he's too friendly with Russia to do anything. Do people on this board seem to think that's true? Conservative Christian view might be different than that of the general population...

 

[righteousdude2]

My View on the Commentator

Don't need your sarcasm or replies, so for anyone else...

Don't take the sarcasm personally ... this brother is often spiritually abrasive, and I am beginning to think that he may not realize he is so rough on the edges when it comes to talking with others. All we can do is pray he cool his jets and reread his comments, trying to edit out abrasive tones! :thumbsup:

Actually, you have some good points, and I think many feel as you. The problem is, Russia, seems to have taken it upon themselves to militarily go to the region, and by disguising their invasion as a simple ploy to protect their fellow Russians, they hold a militarily ran vote.

I would think that if those with strong Russian ties hated the Ukraine government as they claimed, they simply rent a U-Haul and move back to the motherland!

It would be like America going into Puerto Rico, with military, following a major riot and let's say the overthrow of the present leadership of that sovereign nation, and under the guise/cover of protecting Americans on that Island, they hold an election and use the outcome as a reason to seize and annex Puerto Rico for America, making it our 53rd state.

In fact, if Obama did this to a few more countries, like some in Baja California, Canada or Cuba, he might get up to the 56, or 57 states he thought were in the union while campaigning for POTUS in 2008. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[righteousdude2]

You guys are awesome - thank you for the replies! I made it make more sense in my head by putting Puerto Rico and Spain in place of them and imagining the situation. Not quite the same, I know, but the overall concept is there.

I'm still trying to figure out how this vote happened. Who exactly held it, to make it illegal and have other nations refuse to recognize it? I saw this link that only names one person and isn't too helpful: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...6d8a46-a520-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html

And another question - if this is indeed as it appears - a powerful country stepping into a fragile area and taking advantage of political unrest to seize control, which countries care? Do enough care and have enough power to do anything, or will this one just go as is? If it is an obvious violation and will trigger mass repercussions, why do you think Russia is bothering? It doesn't seem as if there is much to gain. They had what they needed with the treaty, and I'm not seeing any major exports or reasons why this area would be especially profitable, or am I wrong there? If the people were truly a concern to them, why not set up a special policy to allow absorption of willing Crimeans into Russia, rather than step in and take over, having the mess of those who wish to retain the citizenship they have now or have no citizenship, as it's been said they will be able to do?

Short of nostalgia...or flexing their muscles, what is Russia gaining from this? Do they think nobody will bother with it, or do you think they are using it as a trigger for something more major?

As far as people saying Obama is not doing anything - it seems to me that he has been quietly doing little things with Russia over the years. (reminds me of little things siblings to do try to get the other ticked off) Annoying things, and I've wondered if he was trying to stir things up. I'm rather surprised at the view of many Americans saying he's too friendly with Russia to do anything. Do people on this board seem to think that's true? Conservative Christian view might be different than that of the general population...

... I think Obama and his staff and advisors [remember John Kerry ran for POTUS and was beaten, and for a good reason - he was weak on foreign policy] are way in over their heads.

If you read about the build up to the WW2, you may begin to see some vague similarities taking place. The rest of the world is extremely passive, and they all have their own problems, or as some say, "Fish to fry!" making it easy for Russia to make the moves it is making. Putin can look around and clearly see, what Hitler saw, and that is a soft response by a weak Eurpoe, a Europe that is more likely to talk it over and do passive things to avoid getting blood on their hands, and as for America, he sees a weak leader with poor advisors, so the world is his to do what he wants with.

What is scary and should be scary to the rest of us is that we have China wanting to annex Twiwan, and some Japanesee islands? Iran wanting to take down Israel... and there is really no one to stand in their way. These are the ingredients needed for a massive world war, just waiting for the parties [above] to start stirring up!

Every time the west gets complacent and self-absorbed, they become weak, and suspectable for the bullies of the world to test out their life long dreams of evil!

Someone once said that "History repeats itself!" And I often thought that was strange to assert such a thing, but the longer I live the more truth I see in this adage! It is kind of like an abused woman ... she can get out of one bad relationship; rehab herself through counseling and time, and chances are, when she's ready to jump back into the relationship thing, the odds are she will pick a personality similar to the one; she escaped from years ago!

I am not being a male chauvinist, just pointing out, that humans are prone to more often than not, choose a similar situation, and get right back into the war they fought so hard to get out of! It is a sad scenario, but it has its truths!