What's Russian for "Anschluss"?

[nosborne48]

So. Vlad the Terrible is doing something none of his Soviet predecessors dared to do; he's calling the West's nuclear bluff.

He's right. We won't use the ultimate weapon to protect the independence of some Eastern European country no one has ever heard of, right? Even if that country is an ally, I'll bet.

Unfortunately, that lesson once learned cannot be unlearned. Vlad now knows that he can do whatever he likes and we are powerless to stop him.

Thirty-five years ago as a Cold Warrior keeping watch at sea I wondered if the Soviets would ever figure it out, that we would never actually use the arsenal we'd created. (Much bigger then than now and still bigger than we need, in my opinion.) The Soviets foreswore First Use but we refused to offer even that meaningless assurance to the nervous world.

Maybe we should let Iran develop their Bomb after all. They may need it. Meanwhile, WE need to develop a clear protocol. What will we do in response to THIS but not in response to THAT.

[SteveFoerster]

So. Vlad the Terrible is doing something none of his Soviet predecessors dared to do; he's calling the West's nuclear bluff. He's right. We won't use the ultimate weapon to protect the independence of some Eastern European country no one has ever heard of, right? Even if that country is an ally, I'll bet.

The situations aren't quite analogous, but since you mentioned Soviet precedent, neither did the West do much during Hungary's uprising in 1956 or the Prague Spring of 1968. But more to the point, why in the world would the West nuke the Russians over Crimea?

[nosborne48]

Or the rest of Ukraine? Or the Baltic Republics? Or Finland? Or Kazakhstan? That's what I'm saying. What is our protocol? I'm sure there IS a protocol and I understand why it's secret but I wish I had some idea of how far is too far.

France maybe. Or Germany. Probably not Poland?

[SteveFoerster]

Or the rest of Ukraine? Or the Baltic Republics? Or Finland? Or Kazakhstan? That's what I'm saying. What is our protocol? I'm sure there IS a protocol and I understand why it's secret but I wish I had some idea of how far is too far. France maybe. Or Germany. Probably not Poland?

Well, Poland's a NATO member, and so are all three of the Baltic countries. If this administration does have a line in the sand, perhaps NATO membership is it. If not, then it means that alliances with the U.S. really do mean nothing.

I suppose one can make the case that Crimea is exceptional, since it used to be part of Russia in living memory and since it has a majority Russian speaking population who for whatever reason actually want to be Putin's subjects. But even so it's not like there's no reason for Russia's other neighbors to be concerned. I mean, this is the second neighbor in the last few years of which they've taken a piece.

[Rich Douglas]

Ah, the domino theory returns. But the world is a very different place now, and so is Russia.

The way to get at Putin is through the oligarchs. They'll tolerate him--even support him--as long as his actions are in their interests. (I have to think seizing Crimea is a "yes.") So if the West can put an economic squeeze on them--not Putin, "them"--then they'll stop him like they stopped supporting the Soviet regime. They, not Reagan, ended the USSR and the Cold War. They'll do it again, even more quickly, if Putin gets out of hand.

[johann]

Nosborne: What's Russian for "Anschluss?"

Johann: They, too, use "аншлюс" - which would be pronounced roughly like "Anschluss." Yep - I Googled the Russian transliteration - loads of talk!

Other than that, I came up with a two-banger, "occupation and annexation," which would be pronounced roughly "okupatsiya i anneksiya"

оккупация и аннексия

Don't really know any Russian. I officially have High School - Grade 9 (first year) Ukrainian, here in Canada - learned in my 40s. Don't think I'd last long in Russia - don't drink vodka anymore. I understand that in Russia, a large number - predominantly men, drink themselves to death by their 50s or around 60. It's a really widespread problem.

Sadly,with people like Putin at the helm, I don't blame Russians for drinking themselves insensible -- no, not one bit.

Johann

[Eric]

So. Vlad the Terrible is doing something none of his Soviet predecessors dared to do; he's calling the West's nuclear bluff.

He's right. We won't use the ultimate weapon to protect the independence of some Eastern European country no one has ever heard of, right? Even if that country is an ally, I'll bet.

Unfortunately, that lesson once learned cannot be unlearned. Vlad now knows that he can do whatever he likes and we are powerless to stop him.

Thirty-five years ago as a Cold Warrior keeping watch at sea I wondered if the Soviets would ever figure it out, that we would never actually use the arsenal we'd created. (Much bigger then than now and still bigger than we need, in my opinion.) The Soviets foreswore First Use but we refused to offer even that meaningless assurance to the nervous world.

Maybe we should let Iran develop their Bomb after all. They may need it. Meanwhile, WE need to develop a clear protocol. What will we do in response to THIS but not in response to THAT.

Iran, Russia and all our "friends" smell the blood. Some one made this nation apologetic and perceived weak.

I doubt that Putin would have done this if strong national conservative was in in the WH in the last 5+ years.
He is boldly sending a message to the world.

I see his poker face do . This is his moment to in to history even more then "keeper" - "Hozyain" who rescued Russian Federation from kayos of 90's.
Maybe he watches NBA and LA Lakers give him perspective and isea.

How do you think we should respond?

[Rich Douglas]

So. Vlad the Terrible is doing something none of his Soviet predecessors dared to do; he's calling the West's nuclear bluff.

He's right. We won't use the ultimate weapon to protect the independence of some Eastern European country no one has ever heard of, right? Even if that country is an ally, I'll bet.

Unfortunately, that lesson once learned cannot be unlearned. Vlad now knows that he can do whatever he likes and we are powerless to stop him.

Thirty-five years ago as a Cold Warrior keeping watch at sea I wondered if the Soviets would ever figure it out, that we would never actually use the arsenal we'd created. (Much bigger then than now and still bigger than we need, in my opinion.) The Soviets foreswore First Use but we refused to offer even that meaningless assurance to the nervous world.

Maybe we should let Iran develop their Bomb after all. They may need it. Meanwhile, WE need to develop a clear protocol. What will we do in response to THIS but not in response to THAT.

Iran, Russia and all our "friends" smell the blood. Some one made this nation apologetic and perceived weak.

I doubt that Putin would have done this if strong national conservative was in in the WH in the last 5+ years.
He is boldly sending a message to the world.

I see his poker face do . This is his moment to in to history even more then "keeper" - "Hozyain" who rescued Russian Federation from kayos of 90's.
Maybe he watches NBA and LA Lakers give him perspective and isea.

How do you think we should respond?

Please tell me what a President should have done that this one has not done. Please share, and be specific. (This usually ends the argument.)

Hint: Don't use the previous "strong national conservative" who preceded this President. You know, when the Russians invaded (invaded!) Georgia.

Seriously, what should the President do that he's not already doing?

[Eric]

So. Vlad the Terrible is doing something none of his Soviet predecessors dared to do; he's calling the West's nuclear bluff.

He's right. We won't use the ultimate weapon to protect the independence of some Eastern European country no one has ever heard of, right? Even if that country is an ally, I'll bet.

Unfortunately, that lesson once learned cannot be unlearned. Vlad now knows that he can do whatever he likes and we are powerless to stop him.

Thirty-five years ago as a Cold Warrior keeping watch at sea I wondered if the Soviets would ever figure it out, that we would never actually use the arsenal we'd created. (Much bigger then than now and still bigger than we need, in my opinion.) The Soviets foreswore First Use but we refused to offer even that meaningless assurance to the nervous world.

Maybe we should let Iran develop their Bomb after all. They may need it. Meanwhile, WE need to develop a clear protocol. What will we do in response to THIS but not in response to THAT.

Iran, Russia and all our "friends" smell the blood. Some one made this nation apologetic and perceived weak.

I doubt that Putin would have done this if strong national conservative was in in the WH in the last 5+ years.
He is boldly sending a message to the world.

I see his poker face do . This is his moment to in to history even more then "keeper" - "Hozyain" who rescued Russian Federation from kayos of 90's.
Maybe he watches NBA and LA Lakers give him perspective and isea.

How do you think we should respond?

Please tell me what a President should have done that this one has not done. Please share, and be specific. (This usually ends the argument.)

Hint: Don't use the previous "strong national conservative" who preceded this President. You know, when the Russians invaded (invaded!) Georgia.

Seriously, what should the President do that he's not already doing?

We need an appropriate deterrent against what Putin is engaging in, and that we can't be weak here.
President Obama is unilaterally disarming us across the globe, Russia is on the move and not holding back.

Next Republican Presidential candidate must be - including being unapologetic for America, and to do the right thing for America and its allies.
Building not cutting military and other agencies responsible for our security, CIA, NSA, FBI to name a few.
We can limit Putin and Russia - be it with natural gas, or economically - that is how we begin to fight back. Real action, not lip service. Again from my observation especially about ACA our President seems to care more about Ukraine’s constitution more than he does America’s.

I get impression the president is more upset at his own people, economic system and military, than other countries such as Russia.
After all as I see it most of the Dems want to unravel the US Constitutional order and the social compact and have the state rule over the people.

Here is what our allies are thinking, especially Israel. They are holding on and trying to wait out Obama's term because they can't trust him.
GWB made a mistake calling them a friend- We need to see Putin for what he is - an ex KGB operative who doesn't care about the rest of the world.

We've been here before as conservatives.
We've had to challenge and take on the Establishment - Ronald Reagan had to do it. The media, the Establishment, and the Republican heads hated Reagan in the beginning because he was threatening the balance of power.
We must use what he did and take on those that are standing in our way today.

I'm not surprised that the media and RINOs are attacking conservatives as extreme.
They are doing this because they are grasping to hold onto their power when the American people are moving away from the elitists.
a few weeks ego they' were going after Sen. Ted Cruz as if he's done something wrong or if he's a radical.
But all he wants is to follow the Constitution and the law of the land.

[Rich Douglas]

But what should the President DO that he isn't already? Funny how specifics never seem to emerge, just vague complaints.

[Eric]

But what should the President DO that he isn't already? Funny how specifics never seem to emerge, just vague complaints.

There were things that he should have been done when there was a window of opportunity for diplomacy with the new elected government of Ukraine.
And like the Biblical Law it has commandments what to do and what not to do.
What not to do some of it is to late.

Some specifics:

1. Not to cut in our military and important agencies as mentioned earlier.
2, Should have worked through the OSCE to approve and deploy a large civilian monitoring mission in eastern Ukraine that could have helped set the record straight about alleged threats to ethnic Russians and reveal Putin's effort to inflame the situation as an excuse for further aggression.
3. Enhance NATO's force presence, security cooperation, and military exercises, especially in Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic countries.
4. immediately within NATO to take all necessary steps that can prepare for the expansion of the alliance to include countries such as Georgia and Montenegro as soon as possible.
5. Permit and enhance the exportation of U.S. oil and natural gas, especially to NATO allies and other European partners who rely on Russia for those natural resources.

Ukrainian people had a legitimate reason to protest against Yanukovich’s power, considering the overwhelming corruption and other faults of his presidency.
But did current Ukrainian leadership emerged as a result of an unconstitutional coup, without national mandate, - What do you think?

[Rich Douglas]

But what should the President DO that he isn't already? Funny how specifics never seem to emerge, just vague complaints.

There were things that he should have been done when there was a window of opportunity for diplomacy with the new elected government of Ukraine.
And like the Biblical Law it has commandments what to do and what not to do.
What not to do some of it is to late.

Some specifics:

1. Not to cut in our military and important agencies as mentioned earlier.

The U.S. has the largest military in the world, by far. Larger or smaller, it would not have prevented Putin from taking Crimea. Also, changes to the size of the military are not done unilaterally by the President.

2, Should have worked through the OSCE to approve and deploy a large civilian monitoring mission in eastern Ukraine that could have helped set the record straight about alleged threats to ethnic Russians and reveal Putin's effort to inflame the situation as an excuse for further aggression.

Are you suggesting Putin invaded because of imperfect information?

3. Enhance NATO's force presence, security cooperation, and military exercises, especially in Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic countries.[\quote]

We're already there. The Baltic states are now NATO members.

4. immediately within NATO to take all necessary steps that can prepare for the expansion of the alliance to include countries such as Georgia and Montenegro as soon as possible.
5. Permit and enhance the exportation of U.S. oil and natural gas, especially to NATO allies and other European partners who rely on Russia for those natural resources.

Ukrainian people had a legitimate reason to protest against Yanukovich’s power, considering the overwhelming corruption and other faults of his presidency.
But did current Ukrainian leadership emerged as a result of an unconstitutional coup, without national mandate, - What do you think?

You seem to think we could have dissuaded Putin with a larger military presence in the area. Sorry, but that doesn't work. No one is going to war over the Ukraine. Putin knows this. You know it. Everyone knows it.

Whether or not the Ukrainians are doing the right thing is another story, not ours.

[Eric]

But what should the President DO that he isn't already? Funny how specifics never seem to emerge, just vague complaints.

There were things that he should have been done when there was a window of opportunity for diplomacy with the new elected government of Ukraine.
And like the Biblical Law it has commandments what to do and what not to do.
What not to do some of it is to late.

Some specifics:

1. Not to cut in our military and important agencies as mentioned earlier.

The U.S. has the largest military in the world, by far. Larger or smaller, it would not have prevented Putin from taking Crimea. Also, changes to the size of the military are not done unilaterally by the President.

2, Should have worked through the OSCE to approve and deploy a large civilian monitoring mission in eastern Ukraine that could have helped set the record straight about alleged threats to ethnic Russians and reveal Putin's effort to inflame the situation as an excuse for further aggression.

Are you suggesting Putin invaded because of imperfect information?

3. Enhance NATO's force presence, security cooperation, and military exercises, especially in Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic countries.[\quote]

We're already there. The Baltic states are now NATO members.

4. immediately within NATO to take all necessary steps that can prepare for the expansion of the alliance to include countries such as Georgia and Montenegro as soon as possible.
5. Permit and enhance the exportation of U.S. oil and natural gas, especially to NATO allies and other European partners who rely on Russia for those natural resources.

Ukrainian people had a legitimate reason to protest against Yanukovich’s power, considering the overwhelming corruption and other faults of his presidency.
But did current Ukrainian leadership emerged as a result of an unconstitutional coup, without national mandate, - What do you think?

You seem to think we could have dissuaded Putin with a larger military presence in the area. Sorry, but that doesn't work. No one is going to war over the Ukraine. Putin knows this. You know it. Everyone knows it.

Whether or not the Ukrainians are doing the right thing is another story, not ours.

I'm Ukrainian born, so I show higher interest.
I'm from the what used to be Austria Hungary and As my parents told me it used to be Polish and later Romanian and after WW it was annexed to become Soviet Union.

I agree that no one is going to war over Ukraine but I hold different view about Russian defiance as it displayed today. Many other Ukrainian cities held rallies in support of joining Russian Federation. Russian Duma held meetings about what they called in the past NovoRasia - New Russia are that includes big parts of bordering Ukraine.

I think we made good progress in Russia US relationships until end of 2012.
One area that Russian didn't like was our support of removing Qaddafi.

Putin's greatest leverage lies in Ukraine.
The U.S. needs him as a partner to complete major objectives with regard to Iran nuclear talks, the Syrian war, and negotiations between Israel and Palestine.

"Everyone wants to avoid confrontation with Putin, pretend he’s an ally or at least that he can be worked with,"

Garry Kasparov — a former grand chess master and loud critic of Putin and the Obama administration's strategy toward Russia — told Business Insider. "This has always been a myth, and now everyone is finally realizing what a dangerous myth it was."

[Eric]

http://news.yahoo.com/sizeable-russian- ... .html?vp=1

Ukraine fears Russia 'ready to attack'

Kiev (AFP) - Ukraine's Western-backed leaders voiced fears of an imminent Russian invasion of the industrial heartland, as NATO's top commander warned of a "very sizeable" Russian troop presence on Ukraine's eastern border.

Putin signs Crimea treaty as Ukraine serviceman dies in attack Reuters
The warnings came a day after Kremlin troops seized Ukraine's last airbase in Crimea, deploying armoured personnel carriers and stun grenades in a spectacular show of force after sealing the peninsula's annexation.

The interim leaders in Kiev fear that Russian President Vladimir Putin is developing a sense of impunity after being hit by only limited EU and US sanctions for taking the Black Sea cape.

"The aim of Putin is not Crimea but all of Ukraine.... His troops massed at the border are ready to attack at any moment," Ukraine's National Security and Defence Council chief Andriy Parubiy told a mass unity rally in Kiev.