Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
Had the US and EU acted decisively and firmly this would not have happened.
In what ways could the U.S. have 'acted decisively'? In the way that Russia acted decisively in seizing Crimea and sponsoring the separatists? There is a continuum of commitment levels - first, U.S. soft power intervention in Ukraine's internal unrest, followed by a lightning strike of Russian hard power combined with sponsoring militants and providing political cover, to be followed by what U.S. escalation of commitment? Outlaw suggested providing arms and advisers. What happens when a U.S. adviser is killed by a separatists, or worst, killed by a Russian direct action team? What if it was a U.S. recce aircraft that was shot down instead of a civilian airliner? At that point, the U.S. would have no options but to further escalate its commitment less it risk destroying its credibility. Is that the kind of route we want to take with Russia? The problem is that Russia got in first and beat us to the punch. Further commitments by the U.S. means escalating the conflict, and that means directly confronting Russia. I don't think that's politically feasible for America's own internal politics.