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

[JMA]

You don't get it do you?

Yes the US has military and economic power and probably will maintain its position in this regard... but what the US have already lost and which will never be regained is the moral stature of a super power acting for the 'good'.

It is the likes of your generation AP, who have squandered the legacy and sacrifice of your Greatest Generation and taken the US not to the next level of greatness but rather an unprecedented level of arrogance.

The U.S. remains far ahead of any (near) peer competitor in both economic performance and military capabilities. That won't change over the next ten years. America's first rank superpower status is not at risk any time soon - what's changing is that other countries are approaching super-power status and they're not particularly pleased with the structure of the international system. This is made evidently clear by Russia's intervention in Ukraine. Just because the U.S. does not have the hegemonic power to unilaterally dictate terms to all other states does not mean the U.S. is not (or no longer) a super-power.

[OUTLAW 09]

AP---do you really know the multiple reasons that Putin used in his Duma speech on the Crimea that he threw in the face of the West that he used as his justification for moving into the Crimea and wanting eastern Ukraine?

Do you really think he is going to just negotiate those driving ideas of his that he expressed to the Russian people in front of the assembled Duma--away?

He views this current struggle a Russian resistance to the decadent values of the West and his deep fear of the Colored Revolts.

Then you do not understand the current Russian ethnic nationalist imperialism which some call a Russian form of fascism.

When was the last time the US ever got an armed nationalist or a war of liberation movement to "negotiate" heck we cannot even get the Israeli's to halt the bombing of civilians in UN flagged schools.

That is the "moral" power that JMA writes about.

[OUTLAW 09]

AP--with this announcement today from Russian FSB officer Girkin--- Putin has a choice---cross over and provoke a war with the Ukraine and far more serious sanctions or pull back and lose his reelection.

Do you honestly think he will negotiate his way out? He has been offered a number of times from the West an exit ramp--did he take those offers?

DONETSK, Ukraine — The enigmatic commander-in-chief of Russian-backed rebels in this separatist stronghold conceded on Saturday that Ukrainian forces had seized control of a strategically important city in neighboring Luhansk region, and now has his fighters “completely surrounded.”

Igor Girkin, a Russian citizen better known by his nom de guerre Strelkov or “The Shooter,” said Krasnyi Luch, a town located at a junction of important east-west highways and has been a main artery for the rebels to transport reinforcements from Russia into the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, “has been taken by the enemy.”

“The Donetsk-Horlivka group of the fighters of Novorossiya is completely surrounded,” Girkin said, using the term meaning “New Russia.” Horlivka, another rebel stronghold some 20 miles north of Donetsk, has been under siege by Ukrainian forces for weeks. In previous days, they have heavily shelled the city of 250,000, resulting in dozens of civilian deaths and severe damage to infrastructure.

In announcing the loss, which Girkin said was “nothing strange” since he had “repeatedly warned” it would happen, the pencil-mustachioed self-declared defense minister of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic recognized the significant advancements made by government troops in recent days.

[davidbfpo]

JMA posted and cited in part:

Yes the US has military and economic power and probably will maintain its position in this regard... but what the US have already lost and which will never be regained is the moral stature of a super power acting for the 'good'.

When was this period of moral 'good'?

[JMA]

JMA posted and cited in part:

When was this period of moral 'good'?

So you too misquote me.

I said:

... the moral stature of a super power acting for the 'good'.

There is no doubt the US can take credit and the kudos for bringing Soviet Russia to its knees. That was good for the world as a whole. that good work done the yanks then went soft on Russia and failed to take the necessary action to make sure that Russia would never again be able to threaten neighbouring states and nations. This represents yet another US foreign policy failure.

[OUTLAW 09]

So you too misquote me.

I said:



There is no doubt the US can take credit and the kudos for bringing Soviet Russia to its knees. That was good for the world as a whole. that good work done the yanks then went soft on Russia and failed to take the necessary action to make sure that Russia would never again be able to threaten neighbouring states and nations. This represents yet another US foreign policy failure.

JMA---notice the Russian FM comments on "receiving the US call" concerning the "humanitarian convoy" that was not an "invasion force" from my previous link.

Cryptic was all one can say about his comment--would have been interesting to have learned what the US told Russia on that call? Word has it that just minutes after the US called the Russians informed the US that the convoy had indeed stopped.

Secondly, I for one believe the reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union was the price of Russian sour crude collapsing under pressure of the KSA that opened the flow of sour crude and drove the price down for a long period thus denying Russian an extremely large amount of cash flow that they had planned for their internal budget.

Thus the SU collapse---now what is interesting is who together with the KSA thought up that pricing maneuver?

[OUTLAW 09]

For those that speak German---this link confirms the hardness of the US call placed to Putin indicating that the "humanitarian invasion" bluff was off the table.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/auslan...-a-985353.html

Appears both Germany and the US coordinated the response which is as follows: crossing into the Ukraine under the supposedly guise of "a needed humanitarian operation under control of Russian troops" is a red line that cannot be crossed and Germany followed up that message when Merkel evidently called as well.

I appears that the argument by both the Russian mercenaries and the Russians that the humanitarian conditions in both the surrounded cities is a disaster meaning no food, medical supplies, eater or electricity has been disproved by a number of videos have come out today depicting full food store shelves and from residents that state yes there is water and electricity off and on but in general it still works.

So the Russian bluff has been called by the Ukrainians---now will be interesting to see how Putin responds as his mercenaries are actually losing.

[Dayuhan]

JMA---notice the Russian FM comments on "receiving the US call" concerning the "humanitarian convoy" that was not an "invasion force" from my previous link.

Cryptic was all one can say about his comment--would have been interesting to have learned what the US told Russia on that call? Word has it that just minutes after the US called the Russians informed the US that the convoy had indeed stopped.

If a mere phone call from the US can force the Russians to abort a plan, they must be seriously running scared, and whatever the US is doing must be working.

Secondly, I for one believe the reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union was the price of Russian sour crude collapsing under pressure of the KSA that opened the flow of sour crude and drove the price down for a long period thus denying Russian an extremely large amount of cash flow that they had planned for their internal budget.

Thus the SU collapse---now what is interesting is who together with the KSA thought up that pricing maneuver?

The oil glut and the price crash were certainly a major cause of the Soviet collapse, but nobody "thought it up". If you look at the data it wasn't just the KSA that increased production: almost all producers did. The price started dropping, and producers pumped more to try to cover their budgets, depressing the price further. OPEC tried to stop it by tightening quotas, but the quotas were ignored, across the board. Classic case of short-term thinking and distrust for other members of the cartel: the interests of all would have been best served if everybody had cut production to support the price, but nobody trusted the others to follow their quotas and nobody wanted to be the fool who cut production and then got shot down by the combination of low production and a lower price.

The oil glut was catastrophic for all producers, including the Saudis; I don't think there's a serious oil analyst anywhere who believes that it was deliberately contrived as a weapon.