Engineering Better Outcomes in the Ukraine

Probably not.

I suspect that Ukraine will be next in the dominos to be absorbed by Russia's expansion or at the minimum under their political thumb.

The problem is not communication, but the lack of will of the US and the dependence of Europe to prevent this.

The real crux of the problem is that the US is simply not interested in taking a lead role in world affairs anymore, Europe badly needs energy from Russia and is economically weak, and Russia badly needs buffer countries to protect themselves from the West.

More than likely we will see a slow reabsorption of the former Eastern Block into the sphere of Russian control and no one will stop it.

Putin has decided that he wants to be Czar of Russia and control that part of the world, and there's no one who can stop him.

Certainly no one in that part of the world or anywhere else.

He's the new 800 pound gorilla in the world, and the USA is in no position to even slow him down.

Lack of will, or lack of resources, it doesn't matter. We've just been subjected to two unfunded trillion dollar wars from which there is NO financial recovery.

We still have military superiority, in theory, but China and Putin's empire could both outlast us in a shooting war.

I don't blame Obama, entirely, for this but if Bush Cheney were still in power I don't see much difference. Well, maybe more uncontrolled deficit spending.

Well, the history shows the real spending was the present administration. Bush did his share, but I guess anything Bush could do, Obama can do better. 1 Trillion for the wars is far less than what has been squandered in the last 5 or so years. Spending is an ongoing problem regardless of who is in the White House, but the current spending spree is an even larger problem.

Putin wants to try to protect Russia. History has been a problem for Russia with constant invasions from the West. Recent history shows Napoleon and Hitler as prime examples. There are no geographic hurdles to prevent invasion, except cold weather, so the more space between the West and Russia, the better.

By annexing the Easter Block countries again Russia gets that needed land buffer. That's Russia's immediate goal. It also helps with Russia's declining population problem to some extent.

People say that the world has changed and the old issues with land invasions are gone, but that is a false belief.

This is why the US foreign policy is seated in fantasy and we are currently perceived as weak. In the longer run this is going to come back and bite us and our allies in the butt. Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China will all seize the opportunity we have presented. Watch and mark those words.

Kerry's comment about Russia's annexing Crimea, saying that this isn't what we do in the 21st century is simply and example of how out of touch the administration is. The reality is that the 21st century is really no different then the previous and Russia, Syria, Iran, China, and North Korea only prove that. The world just sees the US rhetoric as toothless cognitive dissidence. Unfortunately, they are right.

Your vision of history swings from yesterday and Obama outdoing Bush on spending which is debatable, as is the benefit gained from their different binges, to Napoleon.

Horses don't carry soldiers into battle any more, so Putin's zeal for a cushion is no longer valid and not a modern day consideration, except to historians.

US foreign policy is befuddled by impotence, whose origin/fault is debatable, but not fatal.

Only a sea change in foreign policy, and "defense" spending will reinstate the USA as the world's dominant military power. We don't have the money, or the will.

I am not saying we should be always playing the hawk, but we can't always be passive either,

I have to agree, It has to be brought under control....... and when it is, you can not move to something else.

And when its under control, which it was. then its actually just a maintenance issue. and its the more competence diplomats and statesman that realize this.

Public debt percent gdp world map

We can debate the reasons all day long.

Fact is Russia will do as it pleases in their corner of the world and nothing, or no one, will deter them.

Fact is Russia will do as it pleases in their corner of the world and nothing, or no one, will deter them.

Not correct......... They can be deterred, and have been in the past, its just that we currently do not have anyone in power that is capable of it.

When you negotiate, you have to be consistence and most importantly, you have to follow through.......... drawing and declaring 'Red Lines' does not do it, as already found out......

Don't kid yourself.

Never mind your extremely low opinion of the current administration (right or wrong), Putin is not like any of his recent predecessors.

I don't care who is in office in this country, Putin is the new 800 pound gorilla on the planet.

I don't care who is in office in this country, Putin is the new 800 pound gorilla on the planet.

Exactly, to deal with a leader like that, you have to be direct and consistent. Not communicate in a electronic message, not over the phone. It has to be when its Face to face.

And when it is face to face, you can not show your hand that they could do more for Putin after the election......... you can't blame Putin, that is who he is.......... or defend Obama for that matter, Obama encourage Putin.

Putin is not foolish, nor is he stupid. And he understand Obama, nothing can be worse than that.

I am not surprised what has happened. It was even predicted.

yes, this I am very disappointed about this administration in its handling of its foreign policies...

Russia is our biggest geopolitical foe, and now Obama now realizes it (too late) and will no longer make a joke of it. Hopefully he will take it serious, but so far, he hasn't.

Actually, no.

Russia is in terrible economic shape. They have a military and it has been fortified through the years, but Russia does not have the economic strength to withstand any real sanctions to their economy or banking system.

It's just a card that no one in the West is willing to play, so Putin just looks like he is the 800 pound gorilla and as long as his opposition is willing to do little, then they have bestowed that virtual title to him.

Russia holds sufficient economic sway over the EU to do as they please, without major hardship.

If Putin needs to raise an army, and equip it, he will find a way.

I still doubt that this is anything for the USA to meddle with. What would we really do?

Oh well, don't worry. After the next presidential election, Hillary will go over there and kick some Russian butt.

Lyn, where are you getting this information?

Things just do not appear out of thin air, on top of that, the amount of consequences on comprises for it to happen are just too great......

In my opinion, one can look at it that this is nothing but a game of chess between Putin and Obama, and Obama demonstrated to Putin that he does not know how to play.

Here's some info on Russia's economics as well as some other pertinent information......

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rs.html

In stead of Hillary, This country will be better off with substance instead of symbolism...... Just waiting for that person to show him/herself.

Not sure where you're going here. Information? What information do you question?

Of course it's chess game, until it isn't. But it's not a two player game.

Putin hasn't begun to flex his muscles.

Information I question?, yours, it sounds more emotional fear mongering.......

Is it tough, dam right it is, I'll give you another example.

Russian respected Reagan, why, because when Reagan said something, they did not want to take a chance to challenge him? Why? Because his actions were consistent with his words enough that they'd rather handle things with diplomacy.

With Obama, Putin doesn't have to flex his muscles...... He only has to do it when he has to and with Obama he knows that Obama is just talk, which Obama demonstrated .......

Remember, Putin salvage Obama's with the Syria's red line.....

And as far as Putin being a gorilla, that is perception, it's solid, and no one that's weak wants to challenge it, with the exception of empty words..... Putin has a lot to lose, he does not want to experienced what he experienced in the late 80's. But because there is no one with a strong enough conviction and competence to temper Putin, Putin. is just going to keep on bullying.

Emotional fear mongering? You are sooooooooooo wrong. Reality may be hard for you to deal with.

You say, "Russian respected Reagan" well, what is "Russian"?

Reagan had nothing to do with the relationship between Russia and the US, that's a total misconception on your part!!! (Understandable, knowing your political leanings)

Gorbachev was a real statesman. He dealt with people as equals. Putin is a KGB thug.

If you think for a second that Gorbachev is anything like Putin,or vice versa, you are deluding yourself.

Putin would have laughed off the actor turned pretend president in a heartbeat.

It's all moot, because we can do nothing about it anyway. If you think that Reagan would have "handled" Putin and put him in his place, fine.

It is a chess game, after all.

Now your stretching things with half truths to fit your position........ Gorbachev was a good leader, or I should say diplomat. but he really had very little choice, you see, Reagan did not show his hand, Gorbachev did not know what our real capabilities were, but he knew that the USSR could not keep up with a technology race with the US.... Unlike Obama who shows his hand intentional and unintentional.

And as far as Gorbachev being a good leader, that is only our perspective, there was a lot of soviets at the time that didn't think that way.

As far as Reagan as an actor, he was a damn good one with Gorbachev, wasn't he. And again, your guessing what Putin would have done with a person like Reagan.

As far as Russian, it was meant as Russia or at that time USSR. But at least your were correct in pointing that out, thanks

My recollection on history was that Reagan initiated another arms race with the Soviet Union. The rational was that the Soviet Union would not be able to keep pace if enough effort by the US was applied. The STI and other programs were pushed forward as a means to raise the stakes. That's one half of the story and I will get back to that.

The Soviet Union was in tatters economically, but was forced to reply. The axe fell on February of 1991 when the US invaded Iraq (first Gulf war).

The Soviet Union saw this as a test of US strength and the effectiveness of Soviet antiaircraft systems, which were installed and manned by Soviets.

The US F117s both shocked and surprised the Soviets with their superior ability to punch through both the radar systems and the anti-aircraft systems the Soviets had deployed and render them useless.

The writing was on the wall. The Soviet Union would not be able to match the development of the West as it was no longer a contest.

Financially broken, the Soviet Union unravelled in August with Yeltsin's speech in front of a tank and formally dissolved that December (1991) just after Ukraine voted for independence and Russia descended into chaos.

Now, it would be wrong to ignore Gorbachev's contributions here. Gorbachev wanted to take the Soviet Union away from its traditional role of militarization and divert focus toward rebuilding the Soviet Union's economy. Gorbachev was the right man at the right time for this transition and Reagan realized this, too.

Reagan saw what Gorbachev was trying to accomplish and I believed it was a balance of both carrot and stick that finally saw the Soviet Union dissolve. The carrot was in the form of private reassurances that the US would be supportive of Gorbachev's path and the stick being the rhetoric about arms development.

Well, we haven't recovered from the last two wars, financially, and Putin is no position to do much without further harm to Russia. He'd do it if he needed to to bluff Obama, but Obama isn't going to sit down at the table.

Putin isn't Gorbechev/Yelstin and Obama is no Reagan. I liked Reagan, but that was a different era, with vastly different circumstances at play.

So, Obama isn't going to do anything but talk and Putin will have his way.

If this swings the "balance of power", that's the way it goes.

We're howling at the moon anyway, for all the good this discussion is doing.

When I was in high school, I had read Sun Tzu's 'Art of War', I was never much for sayings, quips or motto's. But there was one thing even at a young age, was that this combined with strategy that I was impressed by. Especially the sting from our war in Vietnam that we were receiving……….,

There were a lot of quotes that I favored, but one stood out. This isn't exact but it went something like this.

"No country have profited by an extend war, if a war is started it must end as quickly as possible."

This made so much sense, and I believe those two wars shows this.

And I think there was another along the lines ...

do not start a war that you cannot win.

I've used something to the effect....

Something like that....... Choose your battles, and when you do, choose the ones you can win.....

I have to go through it again...... so to not grammatically mutilate it too badly

That's how Colin Powell would have fought wars.

Rumsfeld, who served under both Clinton and Bush thought otherwise and look where that got us.

Viet Nam was a disaster from the first day.

I feel an "Engineer's Creed" developing here ... a list of sayings etc to solve issues, deal with the mundane and ensure that the customer pays .... while we save the world and don't take ourselves too seriously!

We're all impotent when it comes to solving real world problems.

Opinions here are free and you get what you pay for.

As far as saying,..... it cam be clever, but at times that is all it is, little catch phases. When it does that, I feel it loses its essence.

I had a turn with another member of Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' with the application or uses.

I mentioned it at the time, that could or should be applied to business also.

Surprising as it is, I felt because there was a lot of integrity as well as ethics in this.

Or basically for its leadership values. And as longs as you use it as a foundation, one still has to develop detail strategy.

Just thought this was interesting, And recently I'm beginning to revisit it.

You are close.

But do not forget Chernobil rated @ 600 Billion plus those days. Just to remain in Ukraine.

I have to agree with lyn on this one.

The level of disrespect and distrust that the president has brought us, is so great, that I think Russia would have an easier time forming alliances than us...especially with their energy resources.

Aside from our European allies, on which our relationship is built on appeasement of radicalized Muslims, global warming, and gay rights...who else do we have on our side?

They just don't understand that we just want to get along with everybody _{^{and spy on them}}

_{and kill them with drones.}

That is true, but my point is that Putin and Russia are not a strong country. They are very vulnerable economically.

However, no one will play that card seriously because President Obama wants to avoid conflicts at all costs and Putin can stir up conflict in Syria or Iran with a wave of his hand. Europe needs energy and Germany inked a deal with Russia after committing to divest themselves of all nuclear power. So kicking the Russian beehive is not in their interest.

Despite the fragile economies of Europe and to a lessor extent the US, Russia's economy is far worse off and any serious sanctions would be more devastating to Russia than the West.

So, it isn't a game of who has more power, but who is willing to use it.

The entire situation, not just in Ukraine, but virtually everything, (you name it), has me more nervous than a cat in a rocking chair factory.

We don't have the people in place to play these games...none of them.

We're in a very uncomfortable place. I think I preferred the cold war to what we have now.

You don't care whose in office.

Please Lyn, why do you try to fool anyone with that, with a passive aggressive rhetoric of saying "why doesn't everyone just get along, as long as you see it my way".

Don't try passing yourself off as middle of the road. Just Be your self.

And yes, you are right, I consider myself a conservative, but not today's definition of a conservative. At least I am consistent.

But now this is getting personal, but I will let you get the last word in.

When I said, "I don't care who's in office in this country" I meant in the context of having to deal with Putin, the KGB thug, and world issues in general.

We won't even go into the disaster we have here in the USA.

I care very much who is in office, but I see no one who can win who will be a respected leader without some trial by fire.

Don't put words in my mouth and don't characterize me by your standards.

Let's just agree that we can talk about this, but do nothing to resolve the burning issues we face.

"Since c. 700 BC, the peninsula has changed hands several times, with all or part having been controlled by Cimmerians, Bulgars, Greeks,Scythians, Romans, Goths, Huns, Khazars, Kievan Rus' (the historical precursor to the modern states of Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia^[16]), the Byzantine Empire, Venice, Genoa, Kipchaks, the Golden Horde, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, Germany, Ukraine, and now, perhaps, the Russian Federation."

Crimea is 10,000 sq mi (about the size of Massachusetts) with a population of 2mil....They are an autonomous parliamentary republic that has voted to secede to Russia...I don't see any reason to stop them...If any of the Crimean's feel strongly against it, I'm sure they can sell out and relocate....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

Ukraine has the most at risk, if there is any risk....frankly I don't see much difference between Russia or Ukraine claiming Crimea....Ukraine has the largest military in Europe, second only to Russia...I don't think Russia wants war, and I don't think Putin is the reincarnation of Hitler....and I might add Crimea voted for annexation into Russia...This cannot be compared to Poland and Germany....When Russia invades a major country against their will, then you might have a point....until then I just see this as a tempest in a teapot...

I agree that the Crimean vote makes the difference. But I won't be making any bets on the Ukrainian military.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/03/ukraine-outmoded-and-underfunded-military-no-match-for-russia/

"...and I might add Crimea voted for annexation into Russia"

Don't be naive about what is happening here. You really expect that vote to have been legitimate and representative?

However, let's take your position here and sit and wait to see what happens over the long run.

• There scope creep,
• Spending Creep
• domination creep

all of this starts out mild, that it isn't even noticed.....

little here, but since that is not value, thats ok.

A little there, we don't need that.

Something over there, only a little bigger, just to test the tolerances....... and by the time it hits the tolerance trigger. Its an issue.

A very good example is recognizing it and being proactive. And dealing with it, before it becomes an issue.

Russia invading the Ukraine what brought out as a strong possibility about 2 years ago, But it was brushed off and made into a joke. And now, its not so funny anymore.

And the ones that joked about it, is drawing red lines all over......... repeatedly.

Just name me one good reason why Russia wants to invade anyone problematic?

Going to (direction) Europe means less prosperity and income. These are the clients that make the economy work. GDP comparisons are total nonsense in this case. Russia's production costs are just 30% of the west or lower. Their defense is a lot cheaper in analogy. Why should Russia expand? For minerals, technology? They have everything in abundance, more than anyone else and consumer technology is just an invitation away. Don't underestimate the high tech of Russia. They have the hackers around the corner to make our worst fantasies come true.

The hidden agenda seems to be just the opposite: former politicians didn't even lie about it. Colonization became economy and has a more modern name now.

On the other hand, Russians had hard lessons. The last world war has taken 42 million people away from them, leaving a void of males, even now 70 years later. After the war orphans were plenty and were raised as disciplined cadets for army and science. They deserve the credit for 85% winning the war and that has been denied for years.

They are immune for sanctions and will soon joke these away.

They lost one war over Crimea against a never seen alliance in the beginning days. For the rest all wars on its soil were bitter tests for the invaders.

The economic sanctions will turn out to be a mistake. If taken further, just as example: VW's, BMW, Audi and Mercedes will be sold at dump prices soon or production capacity will have to be cut in half at the cost of Europe.

The reality is that everyone who has dollars (internationally spoken) pays for the economic policy of globalization. We had that with the Pond Sterling and now since the early 1900's with the dollar.

This is to show one example of how the USSR became a vulnerable prey for the west in 1989.

One can ask now how much a president means, who he is presiding and who is really in power and how much the governments are understanding and listen to vox populi. Switzerland is ruling on referendums and a referendum is:

1. give the population the correct information

2. let them vote and act accordingly.

In the west none of these 2 conditions is met. Parallel and independent news sources show other interpretations and the awareness of the population make them think, instead of swallow propaganda.

I didn't want to become too political, because this is a taboo topic for this forum, but there are many sources on the internet that use a calculator instead of a fairy tale story book.

I think that all that's being done, is to place sanctions on individuals, which is laughable.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/20/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/index.html

I don't think anything will be solved here. I'm no Russian/Soviet expert, but I think there a lot of people over there that associate the oligarchy that came after the collapse of the Soviet Union, with western capitalism, and there just may be a lot of them that yearn for the old days.

What happened to the "Is Crimea a prologue to World War III" post?

Crimea is done.

Ukraine may be a better candidate.

This has engineering in its title.

I was wondering the same thing.

One of the admin crew started a political thread, and changed their minds. It's gone.

Things around here just get curiouser and curiouser....

I read this article today on Yahoo, of all places.

http://news.yahoo.com/why-obama-scares-070000477.html

Are the lefties starting to worry too?

Oh, no.

Another one's about to bite the dust.

I put 'engineering' in the title, because that is hopefully how we can make a difference. I started by suggesting improved practical communication hardware in support of more clear information and exchange channels without the political contrived spin. If Vodafone could introduce remote banking using cell phones starting in Kenya, then maybe the same could be engineered in the Ukraine so survival is not dependent on the political masters.

Take Turkey this week and the attempt by its prime minister to stop Twitter. While I am not a Facebook or Twitter person, these social channels need to be supported and not silenced. Same thing for the Ukraine. The same outcome may still have happened but one would hope that it could be an informed decision, not as a result of ignorance and suppression like in the past.

And in aiming for better education to achieve a more reasonable world, isn't it the cheap tablets and laptops developed by engineers that hold the promise of change.
Ideas please!

Russia Staring at Recession on Sanctions That Could Get Tougher

BamBam will take care of it all...

Cute.

That may be wishful thinking.

If memory serves the only sanctions so far are about 30 Russian individuals have been cited and their US assets frozen. It's purely a symbolic.

Europe's sanctions are even more innocuous.

It will be hard for the US to increase sanctions as the blow back is probably not something we are prepared to deal with. That would mean that any cooperation we are getting with Iran and Syria would evaporate with the help of Russia.

Europe is beholden to Russia for energy (natural gas) and Europe can't afford price hikes or slowdowns as Europe is already in a second recession.

As I said before, the Russian economy is already a mess, but no one wants to pay the price for standing up to them.

Putin is good, really, really, good, at what he does:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2587559/Nato-alarm-woman-minister-urges-Putin-invade-country-Military-commander-speaks-concerns-threat-breakaway-region-near-Moldovan-border.html

I would not give Putin that much credit. When everyone is sitting down, even a short man looks tall when standing.

Putin wants to reestablish the former East Europe boarders as a security measure for Russia.

Russia believes that the US was the primary force behind the recent regime change in Ukraine (probably correctly) and Putin views that as a threat to Russian interests. Russia probably also believes that the US intends to try to undermine Russian power and has a long standing campaign to keep the US busy in the Mid East as a mechanism to minimize that effect.

By reestablishing the former Eastern Block as buffer countries, Russia gets its security zone once more and has better control over internal affairs in those countries.

The US foreign policy has been one of avoiding conflicts at all costs and just let matters take their own course. Putin and the rest of the world are well aware of this and this is why the US is perceived as weak.

The symbolic sanctions aimed at about 30 individuals demonstrate this. We could do much more, but I don't believe we will as it will likely lead to more Russian meddling in the Middle East that would secure Iran's quest for nuclear weapons and more chaos in Syria. Obama would like to have a peaceful resolution with Iran and he wants history to record that he did that - thus why we see the lifting of the trade sanctions in Iran as a step in that direction.

Europe does not want to engage the Russian bear because Europe needs Russian energy somewhat more than Russia needs to sell it to them.

So the apparent plan is to only pay rhetorical lip service to Russia and see what develops.

Makes want to think or at least wonder, if any intelligence Edward Snowden provided prompted any of Putin's actions.

I very much the strategy has been changed. Maybe some of the tactics, but this has been a long standing issue for Russia and the West.

It never did really go away...... Its just that for a while, it was just a maintenance issue...... since that lapse, it now a Minor??? confrontational issue.