In the news today

[Animeniax]

It's really not shocking at all when you take into account three things:

I actually think Russia is in the right here. They've intervened and will cause a stabilizing (if moderately threatening) effect on Ukraine, provided they stay put in Crimea. There was a legitimate concern for Russia about their Black Sea Fleet lease, similar to the situation where the US was evicted from Uzbekistan during the Afghan War. Losing that base would put Russia in a substantial strategic conundrum (where to relocate to, loss of a really well positioned base, etc.)

I also don't think for a second that the US wouldn't perform a similar military intervention if there was substantial political unrest in Bahrain or if Okinawa actually attempted to secede from Japan.

edit:
It is pretty funny watching Obama make an ass of himself three times in a row toward Russia's actions (Georgia's crisis with South Ossetia, Syria's "Red Line" with chemical weapons and Russia's peaceful intervention there, and now Crimea). All talk. He should have delegated this to our UN representative. It's their job to make strongly worded statements about how angry we are.

I love how conservatives use any and all reactions/actions from the Obama administration to attack him. He can do no right in your eyes. If he had said nothing, he looks weak. If he said something, he said it too late. In this situation, there isn't much the US (under any administration) could do besides make harsh statements.

Like I said, what with the Olympics just finishing and being a success and all, it is shocking to see Russia go and invade another country.

[Ryllharu]

I love how conservatives use any and all reactions/actions from the Obama administration to attack him. He can do no right in your eyes. If he had said nothing, he looks weak. If he said something, he said it too late. In this situation, there isn't much the US (under any administration) could do besides make harsh statements.

It's funny how you just make assumptions of my political leanings.

Obama not saying anything would not have made him look weak. It would have been the right decision, and only idiot pundits would have criticized him.

What he said made him look weak. What he said should have been said by the UN representative, because everyone there can say a lot of things without being taken too seriously. That's what the UN is there for, negotiating between nations via proxy ambassadors/diplomats.

Obama said, "And, indeed, the United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine," if Russia entered the Crimea.

Well, Russia did, and honestly who really believes the US will do anything? Economic sanctions? Russia can simply cut off the natural gas to Europe during the winter. They did it to the Ukraine in 2009. They did it to Belarus when they didn't pay. They'll can do it to Europe as a whole in revenge.

Why do you think Russia intervened in Georgia? Why do you think they have an investment in Syria's reigning government?

Gazprom.

This is big picture stuff. Russia's been playing the long game for a while. Outside of the North Sea, Russia owns the rest.

----------

Obama's a shitty president. It's not about liberal versus conservative. It's about credibility. He makes impassioned speeches...but does nothing, both foreign and domestic. The more a person says they'll act, but don't...the less people believe it the subsequent times. Every time Obama promises that the US will act, and the US doesn't, the US loses face. Over time, a country gets reduced to a saber-rattling little dog, yapping at the heels of other countries who know when to keep their mouths shut.

The "crossing a red line" in Syria about chemical weapons was the worst one. He said, swore, the US would intervene once UN inspectors confirmed chemical weapons were used. They were used, and confirmed. The US did nothing. They were used again months later. Confirmed again by the UN. The US did little, trying to ramp up military intervention. The UK rejected it, sentiment in the US was overwhelmingly negative, but Obama and Kerry couldn't back down after all the shit they both said. Then a reporter threw out the possibility of peaceful disarmament to Kerry, the Russians stepped in. The Obama Administration had their out.

Everyone is comparing this to the chemical weapons red line.

[Animeniax]

It's funny how you just make assumptions of my political leanings...

Obama's a shitty president. It's not about liberal versus conservative. It's about credibility. He makes impassioned speeches...but does nothing, both foreign and domestic...

It's pretty easy to tell your political leanings after reading your posts for a few years now. While I regret pigeon-holing you as a right wing nut, Obama has been president most of the time I've known you or paid attention to your posts, so your criticisms of his administration are duly noted.

His critics love to slam Obama saying that he doesn't follow through with promises. They conveniently forget all the obstruction and bs that he has to go through to get the same things all the previous administrations got without the nonsense, like appointees and raising the debt ceiling, and a fiscal budget. So while his intent and message are clear, getting laws passed and a consensus for action have been almost impossible during his administration. It's pretty amazing what he has accomplished, considering "conservatives" have dogged his every step and worked to make his plan fail. Nevermind the mess he inherited to begin with...

I'm a conservative and not Obama's biggest fan, but for entirely different reasons from Ryllharu. I think the President had to give a statement(s) considering the media attention directed towards him. As Animeniax said, he would be called weak with or without a response. At the same time, he probably has to be careful whenever addressing Russia's interventions because we've lost our moral high ground after having invaded Iraq (not saying the U.S. is as bad as Russia, but it certainly isn't a moral authority).

Ryllharu mentioned Russia cutting off energy exports to to the EU, but you have to remember that it's a two way street and would equally hurt Russia's economy. Perhaps the EU is in a bit more of a desperate situation trying to keep the Eurozone from collapsing, but half a trillion dollars in trade is no joke to Russia.

I'm a fiscal conservative but I see bs for what it is. I don't agree with all of Obama's plans (higher minimum wage for one) but I also see what the political right has tried to do during his administration all while blaming him for the failures.

Economic sanctions are nothing to take lightly. As you said, it's a two way street, and in these global times it's more like a spaghetti highway. Beyond a lose-lose situation with a military response and a mild reprimand from the UN, economic sanctions are the best tool we have in this kind of situation.