Mr. Krauthammer thinks that the U.S. should run the world. There is no conflict
anywhere in which we should not become engaged. Most Americans disagree.
Let's be honest. This is just another Krauthammer slam job on Obama. He
claims that the U.S. and the EU is dithering and should engage in some sort of
response, but he says nothing as to what we should do? I know Krautahmmer is a
neo-con and favors military action. But what should the West do, invade? the
dynamics are complex, including Russia a critical source of natural gas for
Europe. War with Russia is the worst alternative, and appropriate responses to
Russia do not turn on a dime. These kind of opinion pieces serve absolutely no
purpose. Consider the timing of this piece. Russia sends troops in on Friday
night and Saturday. By Sunday, Krauthammer is attacking Obama and the EU for
not acting fast enough. This piece is not meant to be constructive but to be
improperly critical. It is nothing but partisan jabbering and not worth the
paper (or screen) that it is written on.
Syria...the Ukraine...We've just got to invade something,
And again as pointed out Rome burns while Obama golfs
I generally agree with Krauthammer, but not this time. His only concrete
proposals are for the US and the EU to give the Ukraine $15 billion and
full-voiced support. How would either help against Russian armor and airpower?
Neither the US nor the EU pose any real threat to Russia and Putin knows it.
I'm not sure Krauthammer ever met a military conflict he didn't
support, except maybe when Obama was pushing for an intervention in Syria.
New flash: Krauthammer finds another excuse to blame Obama for everything
that's wrong in the world. Obviously, the situation's a lot more
complex than Charles can bring himself to admit. What are we supposed to do when
the Russians are welcomed with open arms by the majority of Crimeans, who are
more Russian than Ukrainian? The new interim government in Ukraine is favored
mostly in the west, where more people speak Ukrainian and favor Europe. Not so
in the east, where most speak Russian and have loyal ties to Moscow. The worst
thing America could do is act rashly. Thank goodness we have a president who is
more wise and sees a larger picture than certain editorial writers.
Excellent article, recalls the days when they West turned a blind eye to
Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland claiming to protect
the German population and then continued to dither while Hitler's Panzers
rolled up the rest of the country. Putin is certainly an opportunist and
recognizes what is possible....What was that conversation caught on an open mike
a couple of years ago between Putin and Obama referring to?
Thank heavens Mr. Krauthammer knows the history of Europe. This is a very
serious situation. It always comes down to two basic opposing thoughts. One
would rule the world by force the other by freedom to choose. Mr. Putin is
former KGB. If you are not old enough to know what the KGB is you are very
naive about Russia. There can be no Mother Russia without the Ukriane. This
situation is very dangerous. This situation requires a leadership that
understands the implication of Russia filling the vacuum left by the US in the
World. Putin will not back down. Your bank accounts will be drained by the
Russian mob. Like it or not Russia does not want the US to be the leader of the
Free world or any other world for that matter. Next we will see China flex
their muscles. These countries have been patient and are about to change the
world like we have ever known. This was the same tactic Hitler used. Europe
did nothing and it became consumed by Nazi Germany.
"There can be no Mother Russia without the Ukriane. "My son
just spent two years in the Ukraine. I spent a good deal of that time studying
that regions history. Care to explain your comment? I can see that statement
having some weight if you were talking about the Soviet Union. The abuse of the
people of Ukraine under that regime was intense. But Russia? I am lost there.
Please fill in the blanks.twells…. China is already flexing
their muscle… but not militarily… but economically. They are
investing heavily in resource rich African continent. We in the states are just
clueless to what they are doing. We are to obsessed with isolationism. But
this has next to no comparisons with Hitler…. Stalin… yes….
Hitler… no.McMurphy…. I sort of agree with you…
but the only way for Russia to fully and truly grow is to expand the markets for
its vast resources. Not even China wants to see Russia expand it "sphere of
influence". Russia is playing with economic suicide here.
@BU52"What was that conversation caught on an open mike a couple of
years ago between Putin and Obama referring to?"The one about
being more flexible after the elections? That was a reference to nuclear arms
negotiations. Recall that in Dec 2010 a lame duck Congress after the elections
worked and passed a new START treaty for arms reductions with Russia. Obama was
referring to that previous agreement in his comments suggesting that
there'd be more flexibility for him to with Congress to work on those types
issues once the elections and accompanying grandstanding were done (though of
course nothing really came of that in Dec 2012).
China is an economic powerhouse this is true. The muscle flexing will be the
taking back territories China believes belong to her historical past. If the
world watches and does nothing while Putin returns the Ukraine to Russian rule
China will begin returning her lost territories. For an old dog the use of the
term Russia and the former Soviet Union are one and the same. Soviet rule was
not kind to any of its citizens. Stalin reportedly killed 20 million of his own
people. The Russian aka former Soviet Union will not let the needed resources
of the Ukraine looking to the West for independence. Yes Stalin did take
control of the Countries in the East with the goal of obtaining warm sea ports.
Hitler had a similar plan to take control of those countries that he believed
were lost to Germany after World War One and establish the third Reich.
In any event the stability of the World is changing. Our President does not
seem to concerned with the potential change in the balance of power. He seems
to be more concerned with fundraising than leadership.
KJB1It wasn't Charles that wanted to invade Syria, that was a
guy named Barak Obama. Remember how congress had to stop him, and how effective
they were in doing so? No, BO lovers have very selective memory.This
article was written late last week, and now with Russia all out invading
Ukraine, it looks like Charles was spot on.
"It wasn't Charles that wanted to invade Syria, that was a guy named
Barak Obama." In what version of imaginary history was this ever the case.
There never was by anyone a claim we would have boot on the ground in Syria.
All the sanctions proposed were other than direct military intervention. If
you can find a direct quote to the otherwise, I would love to see it.But I know.... facts....... why let them ruin a good story... right? As a
former Republican, this is what bothers me the most about the party. If you
can't win your point with actual facts, then your not ready to debate the
issue. Facts... not rhetoric is what will eventually prevail. Just making
stuff up rarely works long term.
Blue Devil(CNN) -- As President Barack Obama presses his case for a
strike on Syria, a new national survey shows him swimming against a strong tide
of public opinion that doesn't want the United States to get involved.(Time) -- In a rare prime-time address to the nation, President Barack
Obama laid out the case for U.S. intervention in Syria...(The Times
of Israel) -- The Obama administration was so certain that its forces were about
to attack Syria in the chemical weapons crisis at the end of August, that US
officials telephoned Israel’s prime minister and defense minister to give
them “advance warning” the attack was about to take place(NBC News Headline) -- Military strikes on Syria 'as early as
Thursday,' US officials sayYou might notice that except for the
Israeli source, these are your liberal friendly news sources.It
wasn't just sanctions. Military strikes are not sanctions. It is you who is
making up your so-called facts. Help me understand though, is really
all about loving Obama? or is it for party loyalty? I just don't get why
you deny the facts.
Mr. Obama has no options. Threats are low humor. He is powerless.