View original postWe also promised the Russians in that memorandum that we wouldn't be intervening in the Ukraine, and we most certainly did. The memorandum is essentially like a contract, and the general principle of contract law is that breach by one side allows the other side to stop performing.
You might have point even if it was weak point if not for the fact that you pointing where you believe the US violated the agreement but it is Ukraine that was invaded. Did they violate the agreement ?
View original postYour characterization of the situation is also flawed: the Crimean referendum is not a "bogus referendum", nor are parts of the Ukraine being "stolen". These are parts of the nation that no longer want to be parts of the nation. If memory serves, we supported "bogus referenda" and the "theft" of Kosovo from Serbia, East Timor from Indonesia and South Sudan from Sudan. In Serbia, the US decided to bomb Serbia for a few months with no real authorization from any international bodies, and in the other cases the US used threats of the same. We also invaded the sovereign state of Iraq on the flimsiest of pretexts.
First the invasion of Iraq wasnot done on flimsy circumstances, there was decade of gross violation of the armistice they had signed. We bad more than enough jusrification to invade regarless of how many talking heads ranted about illegal wars.
Of course is bogus, as are your comparisons. If the US were to invade Canada shut down the local, ban forgiven observer's and then held a referendum qnd claimed Canadian territory would anyone accpept that? In all the US cases you sited there were gross human violations but despire Putin's claims of protecting his citzens I have seen evidence of widespread violience.
View original postThe question that I then pose is this: if the US can do as it wishes without any international authorization, why can Russia not act to defend its core national interests (naval base at Sevastopol) and its citizens (many in Crimea already have Russian passports), as well as people who are Russians but not citizens solely because they ended up on the wrong side of an arbitrary border in 1991? I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer to this question.
I have yet to how the US getting involved in some instances justifeis Russia violating agreements and seizing territory from a sovereign nation. Even the referendum was being conducted in an open manner it would not be valid and Russia has shown little tolerance for parts of its territory that want to break away.
View original postThe simple fact is that if US citizens and they US national interest were as directly threatened as Russia's is right now, we wouldn't even be as careful as Russia has been - we would have already overthrown the country and invaded it.
There is nothingto support argument. First the only Russian interest that were threatened was their ability to dictate to Ukraine. There was no talk of shutting down the bases there and little to no evidience that Russian citizens were being threatened.