I am going to leave this open to all of you to give your reasons WHY Obama will not get involved with stopping Russia's take over of Crimea and Ukraine! :type:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Reasons WHY Obama Will Not Intervene in Ukraine
- Thread starter righteousdude2
- Start date
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
It is nothing but potential trouble. There is nothing to be gained and a lot to lose.
Well, of course, there is freedom to be gained but when has Europe ever stood for freedom in the last 100 years?
The moment to confront Russia passed when the always incompetent totalitarian Obama refused to put missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic as scheduled. Obama told Putin that he would be more flexible with Russia after his re-election. When Putin laughed at Obama, Obama showed his idea of toughness by sending American homosexual athletes to the Olympics in Russia.
As predicted by some in America, Putin moved into Crimea as soon as the Olympics were over.
Now, once again, Russia is looking to smash the freedom of the Baltic States.
Europe has to look the other way because they are at the mercy of Russia for natural gas. Europe, like the totalitarian Democrats in America, wants to return to the days of Don Quixote and derive their electricity from windmills no matter what the costs. Europe is a step down from America.
Obama and the Democrats have so weakened America that Obama can do little except to send a homosexual ambassador to Russia as a symbol of American diversity. Obama actually makes Carter look like a half-good President.
Obama, a communist sympathizer, has no plan; CNN is talking mostly about the missing airplane, not the community organizer's foreign policy plan.
The moment to confront Russia passed when the always incompetent totalitarian Obama refused to put missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic as scheduled. Obama told Putin that he would be more flexible with Russia after his re-election. When Putin laughed at Obama, Obama showed his idea of toughness by sending American homosexual athletes to the Olympics in Russia.
As predicted by some in America, Putin moved into Crimea as soon as the Olympics were over.
Now, once again, Russia is looking to smash the freedom of the Baltic States.
Europe has to look the other way because they are at the mercy of Russia for natural gas. Europe, like the totalitarian Democrats in America, wants to return to the days of Don Quixote and derive their electricity from windmills no matter what the costs. Europe is a step down from America.
Obama and the Democrats have so weakened America that Obama can do little except to send a homosexual ambassador to Russia as a symbol of American diversity. Obama actually makes Carter look like a half-good President.
Obama, a communist sympathizer, has no plan; CNN is talking mostly about the missing airplane, not the community organizer's foreign policy plan.
Send in the USMC.
Sadly, that would be a logistical nightmare.
- Logistics problems ... horrible ones
- Very high casualty rates
- Danger of nuclear war
- European countries have so much at stake in a conventional war
- American people are not in favor of such a war
- No access to the Black Sea. Suicide to try to send ships through the Dardanelles.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks so much for adding to the subject.
A person does not need to be a general to realize the huge logistical problems we would face.
And any person with even an elementary understanding of geography would know that the Dardanelles are very narrow and no one can send ships through them into or out of the Black Sea if Russia or Turkey does not want those ships making such a passage.
Do you know where and what the Dardanelles are?
Which of my suggestions do you disagree with?
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Who's been telling you Russia is trying to take over Ukraine and Crimea?
If you look at all the evidence instead of listening to the TV talking heads it's Washington the EU and the IMF that are trying to take control of Ukraine and Crimea. Russia is trying to stop the globalist take over.
But then what does all the evidence matter when Washington and the media's propaganda campaign plays into our long held prejudices so well?
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
- Crimea is surrounded by water on three sides. There are no "logistical problems" that can't be solved by a carrier group with the U.S.'s superior air power. Supply and resupply couldn't easily be accomplished off the USS Ticonderoga, a Marine helicopter ship.
Subjective opinion unsupportable by the facts of U.S. superior air power and infantry supported by Apache units.
Pffft! Russia isn't that stupid.
They did in WWII as well, and still refused to fight, except for the British.
Tough. There comes a time like this that public opinion is irrelevant.
International waters, not anywhere near Russian coastal waters. Russia doesn't dare attack a U.S. carrier group passing through there, and even so, the Aegean Sea is only 350 miles from Crimea, well within flight coverage of the aircraft aboard a U.S. carrier.
P.S., CTB: Don't attempt a second career as a military strategist.
Now, having said all that, there is only reason the Little Marxist Dictator won't intervene in Ukraine: He doesn't care if Putin controls not only Crimea, but the entire country. He is, after all, a Marxist just like Putin.
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems obvious you do not realize you have to get through the Dardanelles to enter the Black Sea. It can not be done if Russia does not want your ships passing through them.
The Dardanelles are 38 miles long. At their narrowest point they are only 3/4 of a mile wide, even less if you consider you have to stay in the shipping channel. An aircraft carrier could never make a 180 degree turn. An Arleigh Burke class destroyer is 505 feet long. The turning radius is classified, but I bet it could not turn in that part of the Dardanelles. Once committed to going through them there is no turning back. They would be sitting ducks. At their widest they are only 3.73 miles wide. The average depth is only 180 feet. The deepest point is only 338 feet deep.
If you are familiar with the Gallipoli campaign in WW I you would know what a futile idea transiting the Dardanelles would be. England took a severe beating there by a much inferior army ... but that inferior army held the "good ground".
During WW II Turkey did not allow any ships from either side to transit the Dardanelles.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Turkey is a member of NATO. They have no interest in seeing a new USSR under Putin and they control the Dardanelles!
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
During WWI Turkey {The Ottoman Empire} was on the side of Germany.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
The Crimea is lost. Obama should have imposed tough sanctions immediately after Russia invaded. Perhaps this was the flexibility he promised Putin in 2012.
What the US should do now is open the Keystone pipeline, start selling natural gas to Europe, impose tough economic sanctions on the Russian government not a few rich people, and then reinstate the program to install the Missile System in Eastern Europe. If Russia is allowed to take all of Ukraine then we will have the start of a new Cold War. Any student of recent history knows how soft the leftist democrats were on the Soviet Union during the Cold War, some even calling for unilateral nuclear disarmament! Who believes they have changed since then?
What the US should do now is open the Keystone pipeline, start selling natural gas to Europe, impose tough economic sanctions on the Russian government not a few rich people, and then reinstate the program to install the Missile System in Eastern Europe. If Russia is allowed to take all of Ukraine then we will have the start of a new Cold War. Any student of recent history knows how soft the leftist democrats were on the Soviet Union during the Cold War, some even calling for unilateral nuclear disarmament! Who believes they have changed since then?
Yes, the Ottoman Empire was on the German side, much to their later sorrow. That only shows how easy it is to create an impossible situation if anyone wants to transit the Dardanelles. Of course we could not get into the Black Sea and the Russian Black Sea fleet could not get out. However, they would not have to get out to defend the Crimea.
True, but with their air force and their Black Sea fleet we could not enter the Black Sea. Moving an Army across Europe to fight in the Crimea would be a most hazardous operation.
There is no assurance that European countries would permit us to transit their territories.
About the only way from Western Europe to the Crimea would be through the Fulda Gap and beyond that there are not all that many routes that an army could use to move its forces. If Germany allowed us to use their territory the Fulda Gap wold not be a huge problem, but it still would be a problem. Think about it, you would have to transit Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia before you reach western Ukraine. That is probably the shortest route. There are others. Like I said, a logistical nightmare.
Last edited by a moderator:
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
You don't seem to understand that the Dardanelles are international waters and any attempt to prevent international military or commercial shipping from entering the straits is an act of war. Get a clue!
Sorry to have to tell you this, but the Dardanelles belong to Turkey. They separate European [Western] Turkey from Asian [Eastern] Turkey. To try to force a passage would be an act of war against Turkey ... and your ships would not make it through.
Even if they were international it would still be impossible to transit them if Russia did not want you do do so.
Last edited by a moderator:
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
If you were right, that would put them in the jurisidction of a NATO member, rendering your argument moot. However, you're (as usual) wrong. I normally don't quote Even if they were international it would still be impossible to transit them if Russia did not want you do do so. [/QUOTE]You really think if the U.S. wanted to put a fleet in the Black Sea, Russia is capable of preventing them from doing so? As I said earlier, don't attempt a second career as a military strategist.
But as I said earlier as well, the discussion is fruitless, as the Little Marxist Dictator is feckless when it comes to foreign policy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardan...f the mark.[quote="Crabtownboy, post: 2015067http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardan...f the mark.[quote="Crabtownboy, post: 2015067
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
He shouldn't have been listening to the neocons that wanted this mess in the first place then. Now he's just gonna end up backing down and looking stupid like he did after he listened to their advice on Syria.
And another country will burn and bleed needlessly. Once again good goin neocons! Your perfect record of failure will stay intact! Woo Hoo! HOOAHHHHH!
And another country will burn and bleed needlessly. Once again good goin neocons! Your perfect record of failure will stay intact! Woo Hoo! HOOAHHHHH!
Last edited by a moderator: