Barack Obama To Offer Lethal Aid To The Ukrainian Government

[Uranus]

This is just...yea.


The Ukraine Freedom Support Act signed into law near the end of 2014 called on President Barack Obama to offer Ukraine lethal aid in support of its fight with Vladimir Putin and Russia. Senator Rob Portman recently spoke on the senate floor about the importance of providing the U.S. military for Ukraine and asked what Obama intended to do.


In a related report by the Inquisitr, less than a month ago, Ron Paul declared that a “reckless” Congress essentially declared war on Vladimir Putin and Russia based upon U.S. House Resolution 758, which authorized President Obama to give Ukraine lethal aid. The U.S. Senate passed similar legislation not too long afterward.

After signing the bill into law on December 18, 2014, President Obama was given two months to enact the actions required by the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, which would give $350 million in military aid to Ukraine. The law specifically outlined a list of military aid to be provided, including “anti-tank and anti-armor weapons, crew weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars to identify and target artillery batteries, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop-operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment.” It also authorizes President Obama to use additional economic sanctions against Russia in addition to countering Russian propaganda.

U.S. Senator Rob Portman of Ohio was an early cosponsor of the Ukraine Freedom Support Act and now he’s openly asking President Obama what his intentions are in regards to giving Ukraine military aid.

“While I applaud the President for signing this bill into law, I urge him to utilize the tools it gives him to support Ukraine and deter Russian aggression,” Portman said. “In particular, I look forward to hearing from the President how he intends to provide the additional lethal and non-lethal defensive military assistance the law authorizes.”

As of this publishing, the White House has not released any documents specifying plans for giving Ukraine lethal aid. Since 17 days have passed, President Obama has 43 days to produce these documents, meaning that the Obama administration has until February 16, 2015 to comply with the law.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is hoping to hit the “reset button” with Vladimir Putin according to Global Research.

Source ~
http://www.inquisitr.com/1725945/ukraine-lethal-aid-will-counter-russia-claims-congress-will-obama-take-on-vladimir-putin/

[SethfromMI]

It will be interesting to see what happens from here, that's for sure

[thatcountrykid]

I doubt it'll happen but if we go to war it'll be interesting. It would turn into world war three and would essentially be the world versus Russia, China, North Korea and maybe, maybe, Iran.

[Vlerchan]

I have no idea why some people seem to think that some Russia-China axis of evil exists.

China's perfectly happy (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/10725643/Putins-Russia-caught-in-US-and-Chinese-double-pincer.html?fb) to sit this one out. It doesn't want (http://blogs.euobserver.com/popescu/2014/03/17/ukraine-the-view-from-china/) Russia to be a resurgent power because that would compromise it's position in Central Asia (http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/10/china-is-pivoting-to-central-asia-but-is-washington-paying-attention/280921/) - here's a better article (http://nationalinterest.org/article/chinas-inadvertent-empire-7615) but it's pay-wall'd - which would put their whole New Silk Road project (http://thediplomat.com/tag/silk-road-economic-belt/) in trouble.

[Uranus]

I will say this.

Nothing to worry about, Russia has made many threats over the years, And even though the Russian government hasn't made very smart choices in the past, even they're smart enough to not risk their own country at this level.. Worrying about this is pointless.

They have no economic backing to start a war, nor the want to, Putin, despite his over inflated ego doesn't want to start a war that would destroy most of the world, including part of his own country.

[SethfromMI]

even when the cold war "officially" ended, tensions have always been high with Russia.

[HUSTLEMAN]

Can we just leave this one alone.

[orchadork]

Two things I need to say to you King, First look at the quote in your sig. It says "George Bush isn't smart enough to understand how to do an inside job" Based on this statement and where we live, I'm going to say that you support Obama. This article is a blatant attack on Obama, and this discussion Rustles your Jimmies.

Second, NO WE CAN NOT! This is a world issue and should be treated as such.

I agree with Vlerchan to an extent. I don't believe that Russia would start a war just to start a war. If they had proper Economic, Social, and Ally backing sure they could launch a war against the USA. Will nations join sides? Not sure, but to be honest not too many countries are Allies with Russia or the USA anymore. Friends? sure. Ally? not so much. Honestly a war being launched on the USA might have an effect, a small fraction of the Military is over in the ME and depending on if which country takes offensive and starts raids then we could be up a creek without a paddle.

[normalperson]

if a war does come out of this unfortunately Russia will most likely win.

[orchadork]

Not ness.

Bright said that they don't have an economic backing, but they could gain potential allies, for example most of the Middle East. Most of them hate us, and Israel is working their way towards that end of the spectrum.

[Exocet]

if a war does come out of this unfortunately Russia will most likely win.

The russian conventional forces aren't really strong. corruption,soldiers that are not well trained,and old soviet equipment,and old,weak strategies.
The russian army became a joke since the disintegration of the USSR,if the red army was still here,i will be really worried.
But in a nuclear war,yes,they'll crush everyone.

[normalperson]

The russian conventional forces aren't really strong. corruption,soldiers that are not well trained,and old soviet equipment,and old,weak strategies.
The russian army became a joke since the disintegration of the USSR,if the red army was still here,i will be really worried.
But in a nuclear war,yes,they'll crush everyone.

maybe the army isn't as strong as USA's is but it's people are tougher and it would take a lot more to get them to surrender then USA's citizens. one small interruption in the American system will lead to another and another until the whole rotted facade comes crumbling down around them. the plain fact is that soon after the first Russian boots touch American soil the country will fall into utter chaos and will destroy itself, America is weak, Russia is strong. therefor i believe Russia can win the war without nuclear weapons.

[orchadork]

maybe the army isn't as strong as USA's is but it's people are tougher and it would take a lot more to get them to surrender then USA's citizens. one small interruption in the American system will lead to another and another until the whole rotted facade comes crumbling down around them. the plain fact is that soon after the first Russian boots touch American soil the country will fall into utter chaos and will destroy itself, America is weak, Russia is strong. therefor i believe Russia can win the war without nuclear weapons.

*rubs temples* OK America is not the strongest nation militarily, but we do have will. We won't just give up like the french did in WWII. We will fight, until we can't anymore. We are NOT what the world thinks we are. We are NOT a bunch of fat people waddling around oozing grease, and eating McDonald's for all our meals. Actually many americans HATE McDonald's there are a few who like it, and a few who tolerate it, and some who just LOVE their fries (me). I'm not saying that I'm proud of my country because I'm not, everything is down hill towards a brick wall at top speed. HOWEVER we've broken that speed barrier when going towards a lead wall, but we recovered and completely avoided the wall. We've done it before we can do it again damn it.

[Exocet]

We won't just give up like the french did in WWII.

The mentality of the Americans still seem to be in 2003. (Thank god,Chirac didn't follow the USA to the hellhole called iraq just for oil,wmd what a joke.)
Say it in front of a french soldier if you got the guts.
My dad (who worked with us soldiers in afghanistan) said that Many american soldiers were thinking like you,but when they were fighting together with the french troops,their thoughts radically changed.
But there are still some morons..

----

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/27/world/africa/27military.html

And.... didn't the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" help 'MURICAH,to get its independence ?

[normalperson]

sorry my computer messed up and i accidentaly double posted. i don't know how to delete this.

[normalperson]

*rubs temples* OK America is not the strongest nation militarily, but we do have will. We won't just give up like the french did in WWII. We will fight, until we can't anymore. We are NOT what the world thinks we are. We are NOT a bunch of fat people waddling around oozing grease, and eating McDonald's for all our meals. Actually many americans HATE McDonald's there are a few who like it, and a few who tolerate it, and some who just LOVE their fries (me). I'm not saying that I'm proud of my country because I'm not, everything is down hill towards a brick wall at top speed. HOWEVER we've broken that speed barrier when going towards a lead wall, but we recovered and completely avoided the wall. We've done it before we can do it again damn it.


1. yes china is the worlds strongest military power.

2. i too love taking cheap shots at frances inability to win wars since 1809.

3. well it's easy for Americans to say that they will not give up considering i) that they have never had to deal with strategic bombing (a-la Britain and Germany) ii) they have never had to contend with foreign invasion (a-la Russia) and iii) practical genocide of their own people on their own territory (also a-la Russia) not to mention the fact that after years of being so dependent on an export and import capitalist system one little problem and shit goes to shit.

4. i also don't agree with how foreign media portrays America as a fat McDonalds full country (although they are the largest consumer of McDonalds) nor did i make mention of any of these stereotypes.

5. i don't get the whole lead wall metaphor.

6. America has never won any war in which it was in from the beginning. it lost the Korean war (got their ass handed to them by the chinese dragon), the vietnam war (they were beaten by an old man and some lightly armed communist partisan goons and vietnam is still a communist country) and the war on terror. also please do not mention the Iraqi wars or some other crap because those were not real wars they were only short skirmishes in which they literally had every advantage.

---

sorry if i left anything out.

[normalperson]

(Thank god,Chirac didn't follow the USA to the hellhole called iraq just for oil,wmd what a joke.)

i don't know what chirac is but i do agree that the whole reason the U.S. kicked Iraqis ass was made up shit.

My dad (who worked with us soldiers in afghanistan) said that Many american soldiers were thinking like you,but when they were fighting together with the french troops,their thoughts radically changed.
But there are still some morons..

anyone can be brave when they outnumber and outgun their opponent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/27/world/africa/27military.html

And.... didn't the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" help 'MURICAH,to get its independence ?

no they didn't, they would easily have kept north America for themselves if Britain hadn't kicked their ass off the east side of the continent, but when they were defeated they turned nice to america and pretended to be it's friend until... well they actually became friends through the napoleon era. P.S. you forgot the heavy-smoking part in "heavy-smoking cheese-eating surrender monkeys" ;)

[SethfromMI]

people nobody will win a nuclear war

[Uranus]

people nobody will win a nuclear war

Exactly what I am thinking!
And if any government did come out victorious, it'd be with a major loss, resulting in no victory.

[SethfromMI]

Exactly what I am thinking!
And if any government did come out victorious, it'd be with a major loss, resulting in no victory.

yea if Russia or the USA even had somewhat of a country left over, those who did remain would not probably want to be. and such a war effects more than just the two respective countries. the arms race was more or less a way of telling each other "if I am going down, I am taking you down with me."

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

For some weird reason this makes me think of Adventure Time and that giant crater where North America is supposed to be. Weird...

[Exocet]

anyone can be brave when they outnumber and outgun their opponent.


Do you really know who are the Talibans ?
I don't think so.
If u want to know,in Afghanistan,these "outnumber and outgun opponents"killed more than 3.000 NATO (more than 2.000 americans) soldiers,so what ?
But yeah Sure,'MURICAH is so strong attacking weak countries while they suffered massive embargo and massive airstrikes. (before the 2003 war,and this is just an exemple.)

[Vlerchan]

Oh god.

This article is a blatant attack on Obama, and this discussion Rustles your Jimmies.
I don't think his Jimmies are resutled.

I think he just believes that engaging in a war with Russia would be as stupid as it gets.

Which it would be.

Second, NO WE CAN NOT! This is a world issue and should be treated as such.
Russia are a regional power and the Ukraine Crisis is a regional squabble.

However I do think the US should pressure Russia for different reasons.

Not sure, but to be honest not too many countries are Allies with Russia or the USA anymore.
USA. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO)

Russia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organization#Member_states)

but they could gain potential allies, for example most of the Middle East.
I don't think a single country in the Middle East would form an alliance with Russia against the US.

Perhaps Iran. But I'd still consider that unlikely.

---

if a war does come out of this unfortunately Russia will most likely win.
http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=United-States-of-America&country2=Russia&Submit=COMPARE

The US are also more efficient.

maybe the army isn't as strong as USA's is but it's people are tougher and it would take a lot more to get them to surrender then USA's citizens.
What are you basing "it's people being stronger" on other than opinion?

one small interruption in the American system will lead to another and another until the whole rotted facade comes crumbling down around them.
Example please.

therefor i believe Russia can win the war without nuclear weapons.
If either country was close to losing then it would go nuclear.

[US will lose because:] i) that they have never had to deal with strategic bombing (a-la Britain and Germany)
That tends to bring a nation together. It certainly did in Britain.

[US will lose because:] they have never had to contend with foreign invasion (a-la Russia)
They have. Just not in recent memory.

However I have no idea why them not having dealt with it in recent memory means they can't deal with it in the future.

Not that Russia would get close.

[US will lose because:] [they never had:] practical genocide of their own people on their own territory (also a-la Russia)
I have no idea why this would have any bearing either.

[US will lose because:] after years of being so dependent on an export and import capitalist system one little problem and shit goes to shit.
Do you think many of these (http://www.trade.gov/mas/ian/build/groups/public/@tg_ian/documents/webcontent/tg_ian_003364.pdf) will side with Russia?

America has never won any war in which it was in from the beginning.
It's won a tonne where it's been in since the start. Even in recent memory.

it lost the Korean war (got their ass handed to them by the chinese dragon)
It drew a stalemate.

the vietnam war (they were beaten by an old man and some lightly armed communist partisan goons and vietnam is still a communist country)
Ok. So, one.

I can name two more (Russia - 1920 & Cuba - 1960-whatever) and I'm being generous with the latter.

the war on terror.
Is ongoing.

[orchadork]

I don't think his Jimmies are resutled.

I think he just believes that engaging in a war with Russia would be as stupid as it gets.

Which it would be.

Don't get me wrong a war with Russia is bad, both nation's economy would plummet even further, citizens die, soldiers die, and overall the only good thing that comes from wars are future movie ideas and peace between the two nations.

Russia are a regional power and the Ukraine Crisis is a regional squabble.

However I do think the US should pressure Russia for different reasons.


USA. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO)

Russia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Organization#Member_states)

Alright let's use a WWII example. The German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact was signed, but it was broken and the germans began to expand into Russian territory, but ultimately failed. The point being that Treaties have been signed in the past that have been broken, and who's to say it won't happen again?

I don't think a single country in the Middle East would form an alliance with Russia against the US.

Perhaps Iran. But I'd still consider that unlikely.

Iran, Iraq, Syria, and maybe Jordan and Lebanon. All of them don't like america that much, especially Syria since we pointed rockets at them recently. I feel that at the very least Iran, and Iraq would join Russia. If you consider ISIS/ISIL to be a nation then they might too.

[Vlerchan]

The German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact was signed, but it was broken and the germans began to expand into Russian territory, but ultimately failed.
I don't think this is a valid comparison at all.

First, NATO and CSTO's are alliances, the Non-aggression pact was not.

Second, these countries stand to gain from the alliance, and so maintain it's upkeep.

However I admit that NATO is a lot firmer than CSTO and a lot less likely o break down in-face of something serious.

Iran[1], Iraq[2], Syria[3], and maybe Jordan[4] and Lebanon[5].
[1]: Is pivoting West-wards to replace Russia's position as out key gas supplier. Not something they want to ruin.

[2]: Forgetting the state that Iraq is in, it's close-enough allied with the US since the US overthrew their previous government, and has a strong position in its national politics.

[3]: Syria has enough problems without the world's largest military in its borders.

[4]: US ally.

[5]: Not without Iran. Which won't happen.

If you consider ISIS/ISIL to be a nation then they might too.
You think ISIL would ally with Iraq?

[orchadork]

It depends if Isis is to join at all they might with Iraq. I'm not sure on ISIS's whole 'political' relations, but they are going to join the side where the leading power is more on the ally side (which ever they hate less). And that's assuming that they would join at all.

the point of the reference was that Alliances can be easily broken just as a non-aggression pact can be broken. We have no idea what the governments of other nations think of the USA, we know what they tell us which could be lies, we don't know, and we have no way of telling.

[Vlerchan]

It depends if Isis is to join at all they might with Iraq.
I asked because Iraqi soldiers and ISIS militants are currently shooting at each other whilst we speak, whilst Iranians bomb their positions, and Syrian's bomb their positions with Russian arms.

the point of the reference was that Alliances can be easily broken just as a non-aggression pact can be broken.
I still not think it's valid to compare the arguably most successful alliances in the world's history and a pact formed between two ideologically-opposed countries for reasons that had nothing to do with solidarity.

[orchadork]

I knew Iraq, Iran, and syria were fighting back. But I didn't know that Syrians are using Russian weapons, perhaps I'm wrong.

OK maybe you're right about that, but you missed the point of what I'm trying to get at.

[Human]

I think in this time where the West has plenty of other enemies like ISIS, the US should stay out of this one and focus elsewhere