Putin intervention in Ukraine vs Bush Intervention in Iraq

Post Reply New Topic

Neither were grounded by any credible, or at least standard, casus belli and both have unintended costs associated with them. The difference at the moment is one of scale. Putin's adventure is a relatively minor effort. Going further will get him into the weeds. He'll have a war with Ukraine and poison his relations with his neighbors further. All of the Iraqi predictions failed and when it was over it was clearly not worth a trillion plus dollars, thousands of soldiers, a hit to our reputation and a strengthened Iran. But we don't yet know how Putin's result will shake out.

Well, I'm a liberal, too. I'm also a student of history (literally - I majored in history in college), and while Lincoln had indeed played fast and loose with the constitution, it has to be recalled that he was living in far from normal times, and the country was facing it's greatest crisis in the form of the Civil War. It's either get the job done by hook or by crook, or just be a good boy, follow the rules, and don't get it done.
And concerning the points you made with Pawlek - sure, Lincoln's racial views that he had voiced during the Lincoln/Douglas sound unenlightened today. But that was the 19th century - I doubt that there were any whites in those days with acceptable racial views back then. Plus, Lincoln had to downplay his ideas that were to us today surprisingly enlightened, but were radical for his day, as he was running for public office (not that it mattered in the end, as he lost). But Lincoln's racial ideas definitely had evolved, till when in his last speech of his life, he said he was going to give freed blacks American citizenship and voting rights. And c'mon, the guy freed millions of people from involuntary servitude; it's sort of hard to find fault with that - unless you're a Neo-Confederate nutbar, or a Fox Noise dumbass. You don't seriously want to be counted in that number, do yuh?

I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge his good points. But I won't ignore his bad ones. He, even later in life, didn't think black and white people could live side by side peacefully

Until that last speech he gave. There, it was obvious he had realized whites would have to learn to live with blacks. It was also the speech that had gotten him killed, as John Wilkes Boothe was in the audience that day, and he was barely able to contain his rage.

Though he wasn't without his faults, I admit that the country would have been in a much better condition had he not have died. Reconstruction was promising until Johnson tainted it

^^^
Absolutely correct. Johnson was a barely literate, alcoholic racist, and he showed his true colors (people had thought he hated and resented the big plantation owners) after he succeeded Lincoln, and hampered Reconstruction and the Freedman's Bureau at every turn. Unfortunately, the Radical Republicans discovered you can't get rid of a President just because he's an as*hole.

This discussion was to be about the American war in Iraq and the Russian intervention in the Crimea, and we are debating about the American Civil War and Lincoln

Well if you have already touched on slavery, and we can talk about serfdom
Tsar Alexander II abolished serfdom in Russia,

Well the thing is, in Ukraine, there's been a strange coup detat but no actual civil war has broken out. Iraq did invade Kuwait. President Bush's invasion of Iraq was barely tolerated by the congress and if it wasn't for nine eleven, you guessed it, Iraq wouldn't have been invaded period unless something else happened.

none of those options.

as for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, they had them , they trucked them into Syria during the invasion , that's where syria got their chemical weapons from. even so, I don't think we should have invaded Iraq. He was a horrible person, he did horrible things, but the time to take him out was desert storm when we promised the Iraqis we would.

Putin in Ukraine is all about the navy port. There were no action or sign of action against the Russian speaking people in Ukraine to justify invading. Now Russia is moving to claim all Russian speakers the world over. Can we claim protection of all the English speakers all over?
its a similar case to the Falklands war. clearly the islands belonged to Argentina. The people there wanted to be with the UK though.
In that case though they were attacked by the Argentinians. the Ukraine military didn't attack, and the people there didn't start asking to be part of Russia until after Russian troops had already invaded.

either of them a psycho, no get back to me when they start hacking people up or eating people etc. I'm also not a head doctor.

Lol!

Yes. The discussion has certainly skidded sideways.

And its a bad analogy: Russian Republic=the USA, Ukraine= the Southern Conferacy, Crimea = West Virginia.

If you need to compare the situation to something in the English speaking world a better analogy would be: The Old Soviet Union = the Old British Empire, Modern Russian Republic = England, Ukraine = Ireland, Crimea = Ulster. Long story short: its leftover business from the fall a vast colonial empire. Nothing like our war between the states.

Imperial Russia is just trying to stop western expansion.

Putin defends a Navel Base that is a Treaty between Nations.

Bush starts the Second Gulf War by bombing every post Office, Power Station, Water Plant, Sewer Works, and a lot of other things. Shock and Awe!

The rubble in Kiev is their own doing.

Putin is defending Ukrainians from an unelected government takeover, after the people agreed to a EU lead caretaker government and new elections.

Libya was a UN deal for a no fly zone that Russia agreed to. It turned into a bombing mission to destroy the government.

The new government has lost the east to the same rebels that were being protected from the old government, who have taken over the oil fields and shipping ports. No protests from the EU, NATO, US.

The governments of Afganistan, Iraq, Libya, are not in control of their countries.

The EU, US, NATO, have a track record of making a mess, then leaving.

Putin is doing just what happened in Kiev, protesters form a new government in Crimea.

Neither government is fully legal. One takes over the Nation and wants to sign long term deals with the IMF, EU, before elections, the other wants Local elections first, to establish the will of the people.

What is important is the next National election. Free, Fair, anyone can run, and the question of partition on the ballot.

The Russian speakers won the last election, and under the rules, 50.1% can partition the country.

This is also in the US Constitution, by a simple majority vote the people reserve the right to change the government.

The only people who have any rights are the 46 million Ukraines that live there.

Let the people chose what is best for them.