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

[JMA]

And that's the fundamental problem coursing through this thread; there's a dissonance between the idea that Russia is a third-rate country that can be pushed around and that Russia a major threat to U.S. security. So there's advocacy for aggressive, punitive policies ("emasculation" in the words of JMA) without an honest assessment of how Russia, given its capabilities, will respond.

Nah AP, you are way out in left field again.

The problem with this thread is that Outlaw is making the running and offering his take on the situation given the facts (and his career experience) at his disposal... and there are a few Obama apologists chirping from the bleachers.

What is clear is that Russia would not have attempted what they have - in annexing Crimea and invading eastern Ukraine - unless they were sure they would get away with it. Putin correctly assessed the US ability to influence the EU to the extent of presenting a unified front against the aggressor is a thing of the past. He also correctly understands that the greatest fear in the US is of Russian nukes.

While the incremental sanctions may be having some effect as they are increased they are a day late and a dollar short in preventing the annexation of Crimea and the invasion of eastern Ukraine (and the shooting down of a commercial airliner). That I suggest how the reaction to Russian actions should be assessed. Will they lead to the restoration of the pre-invasion status quo with appropriate reparations?

Once this has been achieved steps should be talken to ensure Russia is in no position to repeat this terriorial aggression ever again.

When faced with unconditional surrender or with ultimatums, how do states respond? The answer to that question depends on that state's perception of its relative strength compared to its adversaries.

Who said anything about "unconditional surrender or with ultimatums"? You are making this up as you go along aren't you.