Ukraine: military (Aug '14 to mid-June '15) closed

[OUTLAW 09]

Let's measures the accuracy of your characterizations.



Yes, I have stated this fact a number of times. In contrast, you seem to ignore this fact when advocating for continued escalation in confronting Russia or in building an achiveable policy capable of fulfilling U.S. interests.



Incorrect. I have not stated that Russia "owns" eastern Europe. I have, however, stated that Russia, as a state, has material interests that it pursues with rational policy, and that these interests should be taken into account when the U.S. develops policy towards Russia.



Incorrect. I have stated that Ukraine's territorial integrity is not the exclusive nor most important U.S. interest in the world.



Incorrect. I have stated that Ukraine is not a NATO member and by implication, the U.S. has no security obligations towards Ukraine.



What material obligations does that memorandum impose upon the U.S. in this situation?



That would be contrary to the opinion of many leading analysts in government and scholarship.



Settling that region's problems is one thing. Securing U.S. interests is another. And yes - the U.S. has to actively protect its interests in the region.



Incorrect. I never said 'appease'. I said negotiate. It's fully possible to negotiate without 'appeasment'.



Incorrect. I have said repeatedly that it is important to understand the material interests of the Russian state, and what policies they are pursuing to achieve them. Dismissing them out of hand is an error of the first order.



Incorrect. I have in fact pointed out that all of Russia's conflicts since 1991 have involved problems of ethnic nationalism (and normalizing borders and state building). I have also pointed out that Russia historically was and largely remains an imperial state that does not fully conform to the principles of Westphalian nation-statehood.



This has already been addressed more than once. Repeatedly asking the same question does not constitute an argument - it's actually a failure to undersand the argument.



How many wars end with negotiated settlments and how many end with the annihilation of one of the belligerents?

You seem fixated on the idea that I am not aware that Russia has been pursuing acts of aggression of Ukraine. I've acknowledged this many pages ago. It's time to move the argument forward. You have left many questions unanswered about the preferable U.S. outcome, what policy options are available to achieve it, and how to compel Russia to terminate the conlfict.

AP---a lot of words but really nothing said.
there is one simple outcome with a few side steps in it.

1. the current Putin doctrine which can in fact be used now by any country if not stopped is as follows---I can on my own and under no international law declare any of my former and current ethnic citizens in another country to be in "distress and discriminated against" therefore I can without again any international law occupy who I want to in the defense of those perceived distressed ethnic citizens of mine

2. reestablish in central Europe the thesis that national borders as they existed in 1994 and recognized even by the former Soviets now Russians exist and sovereign territories are to not be used for proxy wars which actually was the state of Europe until Russian took control of Moldavian and Georgian territory and then the Crimea and now eastern/southern Ukraine

3. reestablish the simple fact that a major nuclear power actually threatens their neighbors--and understand what drives that threat---ethno nationalist imperialism from an unresolved historical breakup caused not by the West but by their own leaders---see this is the difference between us --you tend to blame the West I tend to say Putin is in fact trying to turn back the clock on decisions made by former Soviet Communist leaders who lead the SU until 1994.

Here is the difference between you writing tons of words and myself--I have read and fully understand their eight phase UW strategy called the New Generational Warfare and I fully understand how they use political warfare. You still have not agreed that Russia/Putin is already in phase six of that UW strategy.

And I different from you fully understand the US/NATO/EU have no general strategy against the current Russian UW as being practiced currently inside the Ukraine.

Answer your question?

By the way noticed you have come off the negotiation bit.