Sure sign your policy needs a revamp

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp#post_3541744
We can't afford to help anyone at this time. We are broke.
Which is why I like the idea of increasing nat gas exports. It helps our economy here while taking away a big stick Russia has over Europe. Prices will go up a little here but compared to having to take some other action when putin decides he wants to take over the eastern part of Ukraine so he has land access to the part of the country he just invaded it's cheap.

 

[aggiealum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp#post_3541751
2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation,
and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political independence of Ukraine, and that none of
their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except
in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the
Charter of the United Nations
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine;
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;
Since russia has broken this agreement, the U.S. through the UN is onbligated to assist in maintaining Ukraine's sovernty. If we do not, we break our agreement to respect their borders. as by doing nothing we are disrespecting their borders. Basically saying russia is good to go and take Crimea.
Therein lies the problem. Why is it always the US that has to pick up the pieces? I don't see England making any noise on this. Ireland? Seriously? What exactly is their dog in this hunt? Where's the rest of the European nations in this "UN obligation"? Why isn't China or any of the Middle East countries getting involved? No as usual, they sit back and let the US drain all their resources and efforts playing world monitor. Then you people sit around complaining how our deficit sky rockets.

 

[darthtang aw]

We can't afford to help anyone at this time.  We are broke.
Economic Sanctions are less costly than war.
The U.S. is the only country that stands to gain from this "conflict". Our natural gas cost is the lowest in the free world. because we have a huge surplus. We can increase our GDP by selling that gas to Europe and minimizing their Ties to Russia. This forces Russia to sell to China and other communist countries at a reduced rate thus harming their influx of money to the government. Their natural Gas is controlled by government and is a huge portion of their budget.
We would never have to fire a single shot, land a single troop, or say a single thing if we went this route.
Russia is concerned with territory and population numbers. I read a report that that all of Europe and Russia will see a net loss in population in the coming years. This is less taxable income. Thus I why I feel they are going after Crimea. it adds money to their coffers via taxation, a critical port and allows them to flex their muscle.

 

[darthtang aw]

Therein lies the problem.  Why is it always the US that has to pick up the pieces?  I don't see England making any noise on this.  Ireland?  Seriously?  What exactly is their dog in this hunt?  Where's the rest of the European nations in this "UN obligation"?  Why isn't China or any of the Middle East countries getting involved?  No as usual, they sit back and let the US drain all their resources and efforts playing world monitor.  Then you people sit around complaining how our deficit sky rockets.
The reason the European Union is not saying as much as they should is the get 80% of their natural gas from Russia. Russia spends huge amounts of money on travel to Europe in those countries as well. Tough comments from them will hurt on a major economic front. As I stated, the cost could be minimal and need not be done militarily.

 

[darthtang aw]

Ignorant statement?  Why?  Please tell me how the US has benefitted from the most useless war in our history.  Iraq is the largest blunder we ever got involved in.  Period.
You stated this.

Give me a break. The Republicans and McCain love a good war. Those idiots stuck in Iraq, trillions of dollars in debt, thousands of lives lost, and for what? Iraq's right back where they were 13 years ago.

1. Republicans and McCain love a good war. Can you back this up? Are there a slew of Republicans calling for war on this forum? There are enough of us. Who in congress is calling for war? How about the conservative media?
2. Iraq is right back where they were 13 years ago. This wrong, Iraq is right back where they were 5-6 years ago. I would explain why, but has no bearing on the current debate. Part of it is the fault of the U.S....but not because we were there. We can save this discussion for another thread if you really wish to discuss it.

 

[beth]

I'm not certain that sending our own finite natural resources overseas is necessarily the answer. Haven't we been securing everyone's else's natural resources for ourselves and our alleged allies so that we could horde our own resources for when times starts to get really rough (with the excuse of saving the environment of course).

If anyone was remotely interested in teaching Russia some kind of lesion, we would impose economic sanctions. USA is Russia 5th export customer, and European countries even more so. I can see why EU doesn't want to go down the economic sanctions road, but we certainly could.




Also, I don't agree that because someone else breaks an agreement with a country that has little to do with the USA requires us to retaliate in some way. Ukraine is hardly a bastion of liberty and democracy; in fact, its a corrupt state with whom we have little dealings. And in my view, the take-over of Crimea was a direct result of Ukraine's very flawed system of government. The country was basically in anarchy and on the verge of civil war prior to Russia showing up; so the USA is obligated to defend a government that came into power via coup? We're supposed to support a coup government making noise about disbanding its judiciary? Nope. Not as far as I'm concerned.

 

[darthtang aw]

I'm not certain that sending our own finite natural resources overseas is necessarily the answer.  Haven't we been securing everyone's else's natural resources for ourselves and our alleged allies so that we could horde our own resources for when times starts to get really rough (with the excuse of saving the environment of course).
If anyone was remotely interested in teaching Russia some kind of lesion, we would impose economic sanctions.  USA is Russia 5th export customer, and European countries even more so.  I can see why EU doesn't want to go down the economic sanctions road, but we certainly could.


Also, I don't agree that because someone else breaks an agreement with a country that has little to do with the USA requires us to retaliate in some way.  Ukraine is hardly a bastion of liberty and democracy; in fact, its a corrupt state with whom we have little dealings.  And in my view, the take-over of Crimea was a direct result of Ukraine's very flawed system of government.  The country was basically in anarchy and on the verge of civil war prior to Russia showing up; so the USA is obligated to defend a government that came into power via coup?  We're supposed to support a coup government making noise about disbanding its judiciary?  Nope.  Not as far as I'm concerned.
Didn't the "coup" come about because the government chose to sever ties with the eu and increase ties with Russia instead? Didn't their parlament oust the previous leader after months of protests and violence because of his leadership? Going against the desire of the people? This doesn't sound like a coup.
I meant to say 80% of russian oil/gas exports go to the EU.

 

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/20#post_3541760
Didn't the "coup" come about because the government chose to sever ties with the eu and increase ties with Russia instead? Didn't their parlament oust the previous leader after months of protests and violence because of his leadership? Going against the desire of the people? This doesn't sound like a coup.
Ukraine’s ousted president was surely no one’s idea of a model politician, but he was in good keeping with all the other corrupt politicians in the Ukraine; a country controlled by sleazy power-hungry billionaire oligarchs who shift allegiances among despicably corrupt politicians.

No one can legitimately argue that the events resulting in the ousting of a legitimately elected government is legal. The current government is attempting to disband the judiciary! Wonder why they want to do that?

The West and Russia have been playing dug of war with this country, and we see the results. Crimea had a degree of autonomy and self-governing rights and they were excluded and did not endorse the coup government that took over in Kiev. Apparently the ousted president was supported by a good many Ukrainians in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, so not all the people are happy with the Kiev coup government nor the ousting of their elected president.

Do you think its ok to change governments via coup?

 

[darthtang aw]

Ukraine’s ousted president was surely no one’s idea of a model politician, but he was in good keeping with all the other corrupt politicians in the Ukraine; a country controlled by sleazy power-hungry billionaire oligarchs who shift  allegiances among despicably corrupt politicians.
No one can legitimately argue that the events resulting in the ousting of a legitimately elected government is legal.  The current government is attempting to disband the judiciary!  Wonder why they want to do that?
The West and Russia have been playing dug of war with this country, and we see the results.  Crimea had a degree of autonomy and self-governing rights and they were excluded and did not endorse the coup government that took over in Kiev.  Apparently the ousted president was supported by a good many Ukrainians in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, so not all the people are happy with the Kiev coup government nor the ousting of their elected president.
Do you think its ok to change governments via coup?
How is a parlamentary vote corrupt? Especially one that was almost 3/4ths in favor of the presidents removal? I think you have your timeline wrong. The judiciary issue was done by the now ousted President back in October....http://ukrainianweek.com/Politics/91830
As far as a coup, in some cases it is a necessary evil. One could argue our own Country was in essence a Coup....Our own President can be removed from Presidential office by a vote from Congress. does that constitute a coup?

 

[2quills]

I'm not certain that sending our own finite natural resources overseas is necessarily the answer.  Haven't we been securing everyone's else's natural resources for ourselves and our alleged allies so that we could horde our own resources for when times starts to get really rough (with the excuse of saving the environment of course).
If anyone was remotely interested in teaching Russia some kind of lesion, we would impose economic sanctions.  USA is Russia 5th export customer, and European countries even more so.  I can see why EU doesn't want to go down the economic sanctions road, but we certainly could.
The plan was already to send most of our export stuff to asia (China) since companies here would get more money for the product vs selling to eu. But I don't see why we couldn't divert a little their way.
Canada is going to start moving forward with the production of their tar sands oil with or without our help. Europe could be an attractive market for them to sell to. We shouldn't pass the opportunity to refine it for them.

 

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW

How is a parlamentary vote corrupt? Especially one that was almost 3/4ths in favor of the presidents removal? I think you have your timeline wrong. The judiciary issue was done by the now ousted President back in October....http://ukrainianweek.com/Politics/91830

As far as a coup, in some cases it is a necessary evil. One could argue our own Country was in essence a Coup....Our own President can be removed from Presidential office by a vote from Congress. does that constitute a coup?
Yanukovych abandoned Kiev under the duress of violently rioting mobs. He left the capital for a location in Eastern Ukraine (a region, along with the Cremea where the majority are ethnic and pro-Russia and who support their elected president). The day before he was driven out of Kiev by the mobs, a tenuous deal had been struck where concessions were made in exchange for ending the street violence. Part of the concession included holding early presidential elections in Dec. (this was Feb.) and a return to Ukranine's 2004 constitution which placed more limits on presidential powers. Amnesty was granted to protesters and the former president representing the opposing party in the Ukraine was released from prison. Police presence was relaxed resulting from the parliamentary approved settlement. By nightfall however, the angry mob re-formed with demands calling for the death and/or removal of Yanukovych. Revolt leaders involved in actually negotiating the aforementioned settlement tried to calm the mob and defend the course that had been decided and approved by parliament. The mob would not hear of it. The "Right Sector," as they called themselves, threatened to violently attack if the president did not resign and leave by 10am the next morning and they shouted that they (the mob in Kiev) were prepared to take charge of the revolution. (This mob had already attained blockade/control over government and public buildings.) The following day, the president left the capital for eastern Ukraine under threat of death. He did not resign and made a public statement to that effect on TV. Regional governors from eastern Ukraine adopted a resolution resisting the authority of Parliament. They said that until matters were resolved, “we have decided to take responsibility for safeguarding the constitutional order, legality, citizens’ rights and their security on our territories.”

The volatile mob was now in charge of Kiev. The opposing party backed by the mob took charge of parliament. The previous settlement which involved a general election process to decide the presidency went out the window and was replaced with an act relieving Yanukovych of his presidency and placing one of their leaders (the current interim president) in charge. The Obama Administration released this statement, "The unshakable principle guiding events must be that the people of Ukraine determine their own future.” Yeah, right.

These events seem like a coup to me. Also, it is clear that large segments of Ukraine were not on the same page as the mob-controlled Parliament in Kiev.

As to the dismissal of constitutional judges by an ACTING un-elected president who came to govern under highly questionable circumstances:

http://www.ukrinform.ua/eng/news/rada_dismisses_constitutional_court_judges_for_oath_breaking_317704

 

[aggiealum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/20#post_3541757
You stated this.
1. Republicans and McCain love a good war. Can you back this up? Are there a slew of Republicans calling for war on this forum? There are enough of us. Who in congress is calling for war? How about the conservative media?
2. Iraq is right back where they were 13 years ago. This wrong, Iraq is right back where they were 5-6 years ago. I would explain why, but has no bearing on the current debate. Part of it is the fault of the U.S....but not because we were there. We can save this discussion for another thread if you really wish to discuss it.
Seriously? What did McCain want to do in Libya? What does he want to do in Iran? Anytime we have some incursion or conflict with some Middle Eastern nation, McCain and the Republicans want to go in guns blazing. How do you think we ended up in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place? The Republican motto is "War Is Good". They have this warped mentality that a good war is good for our economy. I mean, it worked out so well during WW2, why not now right? WRONG.

How is Iraq essentially going back to some radical religious group regime takeover the US's fault? Don't tell me. We're supposed to stay there until the dawn of time holding their hands because their new "democratic government" is too ignorant, and their military has the brains of a tick to figure out how to defend their country we spent TRILLIONS rebuilding for them. Iraq massive cluster from the beginning, and we had no business going in there on the basis of some phantom WMD's. (Oh wait, those were snuck over the Syrian border before we got there). To this day no one has found those suckers, mainly because they never existed in the first place.

 

[bang guy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by AggieAlum http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/20#post_3541774
Seriously? What did McCain want to do in Libya? What does he want to do in Iran? Anytime we have some incursion or conflict with some Middle Eastern nation, McCain and the Republicans want to go in guns blazing. How do you think we ended up in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place? The Republican motto is "War Is Good". They have this warped mentality that a good war is good for our economy. I mean, it worked out so well during WW2, why not now right? WRONG.

How is Iraq essentially going back to some radical religious group regime takeover the US's fault? Don't tell me. We're supposed to stay there until the dawn of time holding their hands because their new "democratic government" is too ignorant, and their military has the brains of a tick to figure out how to defend their country we spent TRILLIONS rebuilding for them. Iraq massive cluster from the beginning, and we had no business going in there on the basis of some phantom WMD's. (Oh wait, those were snuck over the Syrian border before we got there). To this day no one has found those suckers, mainly because they never existed in the first place.

I'll admit I'm still torn on Afghanistan but I agree that Iraq was exactly the wrong way to go. However; I seem to recall some very prominent Democrats saying go for it with their vote. I will never ever vote for anyone that voted yes on that one. Have or will you?

 

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/20#post_3541770
The plan was already to send most of our export stuff to asia (China) since companies here would get more money for the product vs selling to eu. But I don't see why we couldn't divert a little their way.
Canada is going to start moving forward with the production of their tar sands oil with or without our help. Europe could be an attractive market for them to sell to. We shouldn't pass the opportunity to refine it for them.
Refining oil is not selling our own oil (finite resource) away to foreign countries. However, we also have finite refineries. So with more refinery time being taken up by producing exported energy, then you can count on prices going up here at home. You up for that? Not sure higher prices at home to gain an export product is appealing.

 

[2quills]

Refining oil is not selling our own oil (finite resource) away to foreign countries.  However, we also have finite refineries.  So with more refinery time being taken up by producing exported energy, then you can count on prices going up here at home.  You up for that?  Not sure higher prices at home to gain an export product is appealing. 
I'm up for it, yes. And by the way it's starting to sound I think Obama is up for it as well. Putin is most likely going to cut off Ukraine anyhow.
Refineries down here have been under expansion for the last few years in preperation for what's about to come. They're always looking for excuses to raise prices. That's gonna happen whether I like it or not.

 

[bang guy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/20#post_3541755
Economic Sanctions are less costly than war.
The U.S. is the only country that stands to gain from this "conflict". Our natural gas cost is the lowest in the free world. because we have a huge surplus. We can increase our GDP by selling that gas to Europe and minimizing their Ties to Russia. This forces Russia to sell to China and other communist countries at a reduced rate thus harming their influx of money to the government. Their natural Gas is controlled by government and is a huge portion of their budget.
We would never have to fire a single shot, land a single troop, or say a single thing if we went this route.
Russia is concerned with territory and population numbers. I read a report that that all of Europe and Russia will see a net loss in population in the coming years. This is less taxable income. Thus I why I feel they are going after Crimea. it adds money to their coffers via taxation, a critical port and allows them to flex their muscle.
I did some research and you're definitely onto something worthy. It seems we have such an overabundance of natural gas that oil companies are simply burning it off so they don't have to deal with it.

 

[darthtang aw]

How is a parlamentary vote corrupt? Especially one that was almost 3/4ths in favor of the presidents removal? I think you have your timeline wrong. The judiciary issue was done by the now ousted President back in October....http://ukrainianweek.com/Politics/91830Seriously?  What did McCain want to do in Libya? 
The same thing the President and the secretary of state threatened to do. The only reason it was not done was due to push back from the house and senate. Since the house is under republican control, one can assume the republicans did not have a majority that wanted to go in gun blazin.

What does he want to do in Iran? 
More and tougher Sanctions.

Anytime we have some incursion or conflict with some Middle Eastern nation, McCain and the Republicans want to go in guns blazing. 
Really? Links of all the republicans stating a show of force on a grand scale is needed.
How do you think we ended up in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place? 

Because both parties voted for it.
The Republican motto is "War Is Good".  They have this warped mentality that a good war is good for our economy.  I mean, it worked out so well during WW2, why not now right?  WRONG.

Links please.

 

[darthtang aw]

I did some research and you're definitely onto something worthy.  It seems we have such an overabundance of natural gas that oil companies are simply burning it off so they don't have to deal with it. 
Which is a huge monetary waste.

 

[darthtang aw]

How is Iraq essentially going back to some radical religious group regime takeover the US's fault?  Don't tell me.  We're supposed to stay there until the dawn of time holding their hands because their new "democratic government" is too ignorant, and their military has the brains of a tick to figure out how to defend their country we spent TRILLIONS rebuilding for them.  Iraq massive cluster from the beginning, and we had no business going in there on the basis of some phantom WMD's.  (Oh wait, those were snuck over the Syrian border before we got there).  To this day no one has found those suckers, mainly because they never existed in the first place.
If you really want to hash this out, then start a new discussion. I will not cloud this discussion away from the original topic.

 

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/20#post_3541799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/397376/sure-sign-your-policy-needs-a-revamp/30#post_3541789
Refining oil is not selling our own oil (finite resource) away to foreign countries. However, we also have finite refineries. So with more refinery time being taken up by producing exported energy, then you can count on prices going up here at home. You up for that? Not sure higher prices at home to gain an export product is appealing.
I'm up for it, yes. And by the way it's starting to sound I think Obama is up for it as well. Putin is most likely going to cut off Ukraine anyhow.
Refineries down here have been under expansion for the last few years in preperation for what's about to come. They're always looking for excuses to raise prices. That's gonna happen whether I like it or not.
There is talk about exporting natural gas to Europe, which is what I think they are now getting from Russia? I'm not in favor of raising our own fuel prices so that we can have greater influence overseas. The electricity we get in my city comes from natural gas plant. Raising fuel prices will across the board effect our economy as costs on everything raise. I don't see that as a plus for the economy. Americans are strapped as it is. At the end of the day, is our primary goal to globalize the world with the USA at its head?

In any event, the USA can not supply Europe with nat. gas any time soon since there is not infrastructure for it. So, there is no foreseeable solution in the near future.

Frankly, I don't believe Russia is planning any more incursions into the Ukraine. They probably would not have incurred into the Crimea if not for the West meddling into the progressive Kiev political movement (heavily influence and driven by the West) and subsequent takeover of the government by volatile mobs and their political leaders (the country's opposing hard right factions).

As for the downward spiral of Russia's population rate, that is why Russia has implement what it considers anti-family (anti-gay) laws. They have also stopped overseas adoptions of Russian orphans, particularly to the USA. They probably need to curb alcoholism in their country and encourage young women not to seek viable mates outside of their country due to the slim alcohol-sodden pickings in their own country.