01-17-2019, 01:51 AM
(01-16-2019, 09:45 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Serious question: what do you think Obama should have done?
As you actually posit serious questions I will answer. To begin one must understand one's opponent. Putin respects only strength, he views western leaders as weak willed and unwilling to risk much, if anything, to achieve their aims. Putin annexed the Crimea because he, correctly, deduced that Obama would take no action other than the diplomatic, and temporary. Worst case scenario he traded temporary sanctions for a land grab unparalleled in modern history.
Putin knew Obama would never risk direct military action, even for a brazen annexation of territory from a sovereign nation. The answer is simple, disprove him of his theory or reinforce it. Obama, predictably, took the easy way out and let Putin have his way while being able to, superficially, save face with the, ultimately, empty consequence of sanctions. This is exactly what totalitarian regimes like Russia, China, Iran and others depend on when dealing with the western democracies. They are superficially willing to risk total war because they know that is something the west will never countenance. In this regard they mirror Hitler and his constant, until Poland, emasculation of western diplomatic efforts. What people like Obama, and some on this board, fail to realize, is that regimes like this only respect force and the willingness to use it.
Yes, in so doing you risk broader, and escalated, conflict. The alternative is slow capitulation to an opponent who knows you are unwilling to risk what they are willing to risk. An opponent that knows you like the fortitude and willpower to confront their aggression in any meaningful way. In short, one must decide to be Chamberlain or Churchill. The choice made thus far is rather clear.
