The Obama Years- A GOP love story

Lol it's so funny people just jump to "start a war". Like I said above, we are not going to war,...is war the only option?

So I guess the Obama supporters will continue to advocate our strategy: "sitting on our hands"

So what would you recommend be done?

So what would you recommend be done?

Sanctions, sit on hands, mean email to Putin. The status quo.

So what would you recommend be done?

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9VA4W1wDMAk

Remember when we had a president who stood up to things?

So you want a strongly worded public address?

So you want a strongly worded public address?

Lol yeah. That's exactly how Reagan handled the Russians. :laughing2

Lol yeah. That's exactly how Reagan handled the Russians. :laughing2

So you think the appropriate response would be to join/create/participate in another cold war?

You've yet to answer the question. Give me something actionable as a response to this. If you were president, what would you do?

So you think the appropriate response would be to join/create/participate in another cold war?

You've yet to answer the question. Give me something actionable as a response to this. If you were president, what would you do?
It is dumb to presume any internet user could craft the specific response the US President ought to make. We do not have the access to the intelligence and readiness status of forces in the area. That said, the Russians are not a superpower yet, and if we through back channels used our strengths against their weaker areas(directly or indirectly related to Ukraine) we could create a condition which let the Russian president know that we find their current path unacceptable. Most likely this should have been in the form of deeper sanctions earlier, but forgetting hindsight and rrecognizing that a passenger air liner being shot down should be a game changer where we should call for immediate UN peacekeepers on the ground in eastern Ukraine.

Soviet Russia was already on the brink by the time Regan got into office. The best you could attribute to Regan was he may have sped up the collapse by a couple of years and even that seems generous.

I'd argue that the Chernobyl incident with it's tremendous cost and the animosity created by the subsequent cover up did more damage to Soviet Russia then Reagan could have ever hoped to take credit for. And even then with a $15 billion direct loss it was a small part of the eventual collapse.

The Soviets dedication to communism, as least in principle, is what did them in. I remember seeing documentaries about East Germany where a child recalled asking his teacher when the world would be rid of currency and the teacher something akin to likely by the turn of the century. Such was the mindset of the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact countries though it was no secret that the party members were living well.

Had they embraced the hybrid system that China did post-Mao they likely would still be a major world power.

Personally in regards to Russia I would prefer to stick with the international community and let Russia make a fool of itself. The end result of Russia messing up is likely to happen regardless. Military action at this point will likely only cost American lives and if anything serve as propaganda fodder for the Ultra Nationalist in Russia which could possibly lead to a more dangerous conflict. Plus keep in mind the Ukraine crisis is currently costing Russia a lot of money in direct cost (ie not including possible embargos and sanctions). This latest incident is going to make the situation worse for Russia across the board.

After all it doesn't matter what your intent is. When a child sees an American solider in his back yard it doesn't take much for an adult to convince them that they're evil imperialist hell bent on taking over the world. Also another thing to keep in mind is that many Putin supporters are ultra nationalist hoping for a chance to cry victim should America exceed its reach. Part of the reason Putin has been able to keep power up to this point is that he's convinced the Russian people that everyones out to get them, particularly the US, and only a "strong" leader such as himself can protect the people. You know someone like.....
gncW1zqMFgs
For the lulz. By the way this wasn't a parody, it was a random song praising Putin that was embraced by Putin and his camp following the songs popularity in 2002 (http://boingboing.net/2010/09/16/vladimir-putins-pop.html).

In other words to give Regan credit for taking down the Soviet Union by employing a 'tough foreign policy' is akin to giving Clinton full credit for the tech boom in the mid to late 90's. The point being Presidents get way to much credit and blame for virtually everything that takes place when they're in office. Especially when there are billions of other factors in play for any given situation.

It is dumb to presume any internet user could craft the specific response the US President ought to make. We do not have the access to the intelligence and readiness status of forces in the area. That said, the Russians are not a superpower yet, and if we through back channels used our strengths against their weaker areas(directly or indirectly related to Ukraine) we could create a condition which let the Russian president know that we find their current path unacceptable. Most likely this should have been in the form of deeper sanctions earlier, but forgetting hindsight and rrecognizing that a passenger air liner being shot down should be a game changer where we should call for immediate UN peacekeepers on the ground in eastern Ukraine.

Thank you.

So, basically, you think we should be doing exactly what we're probably doing. If we're not doing it, there's certainly no evidence that we're not and there ideally never would be until well after the issue is over.

Thank you.

So, basically, you think we should be doing exactly what we're probably doing. If we're not doing it, there's certainly no evidence that we're not and there ideally never would be until well after the issue is over.
No I didn't say that at all. The president was at fund raisers tonight and still hadn't commented on the plane being shot down. We are not advocating UN peacekeepers, which I think should atleast be in the discussion, and we are not putting any (real) pressure on Putin to change his tactics. We also aren't taking a leading role in denouncing the russian occupation of Crimea, nor are we assisting with meaningful defensive assistance a government in Kiev that has staked its future on a strong relationship with us. Because I don't sit in on national intelligence briefs I can't speak with any specificity of how some of these steps would happen, but I can certainly tell you that we are not publicly and repeatedly denouncing the Crimean debacle, that the House has not pushed forward an appropriations bill funding defensive weapons sales to Kiev(nor has the president sought one) and by Putin's actions you can infer that we are not putting pressure on any points that he respects or would cause him to cease and desist with his realpolitik approach to international rules and laws.