At least Sarah Palin could see Russia

[Doc]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... ld-you-so/

Palin on Ukraine: I told you so
politicalmugshot
Posted by
CNN Political Unit

(CNN) - Sarah Palin may be having a bragging rights moment.

In 2008, when she was the GOP vice presidential nominee, Palin questioned in a speech whether then-Sen. Barack Obama would have the foreign policy credentials to handle a scenario in which Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.

"After the Russian army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama's reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence – the kind of response that would only encourage Russia's Putin to invade Ukraine next," she said in Reno, Nevada on October 21, 2008.

The former Alaska governor was happy to highlight her prediction on Friday and scold those who criticized her 2008 comments.

"Yes, I could see this one from Alaska," she said on Facebook. That remark was a reference to a 2008 interview in which Palin argued that Alaska's proximity to Russia helped boost her foreign policy experience.

Saturday Night Live parodied her remarks in a now-famous sketch with Tina Fey, who played Palin on the show, saying "I can see Russia from my house."

On Facebook, Palin continued to explain how she anticipated a growing crisis between Russia and Ukraine, where there has now been an uncontested arrival of Russian military forces by air at a Russian base in Ukraine's Crimea region. They are believed to be Russian land forces, according to a U.S. assessment.

Political tension grows in Ukraine's Crimea region

"I'm usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as 'an extremely far-fetched scenario' by the 'high-brow' Foreign Policy magazine."

In October 2008, Foreign Policy labeled Palin's prediction as "strange."

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Am sure she doesn't know where Ukraine is, wanna bet ?

Moto should be Sarah Palin and not Hillery next Madame La Presidente

Disaster after disaster for our beloved America

[Doc]

.

Am sure she doesn't know where Ukraine is, wanna bet ?

Hmmm where have I heard that before?

"I'm usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as 'an extremely far-fetched scenario' by the 'high-brow' Foreign Policy magazine."

In October 2008, Foreign Policy labeled Palin's prediction as "strange."

Moto should be Sarah Palin and not Hillery next Madame La Presidente

Disaster after disaster for our beloved America[/quote]n President Barrack Benghazi Obama

[Doc]

.

Am sure she doesn't know where Ukraine is, wanna bet ?

Hmmm where have I heard that before?

"I'm usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as 'an extremely far-fetched scenario' by the 'high-brow' Foreign Policy magazine."

In October 2008, Foreign Policy labeled Palin's prediction as "strange."

Moto should be Sarah Palin and not Hillery next Madame La Presidente

Disaster after disaster for our beloved America

But don't get me wrong it isn't that I am a big fan of Palin. Just that Obama is so much worse. And besides Palin was right about the Ukraine. She nailed it in 2008 And once again the left in America was 100% wrong. Waiting for the apology to Sarah Palin........

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

But don't get me wrong it isn't that I am a big fan of Palin. Just that Obama is so much worse. And besides Palin was right about the Ukraine. She nailed it in 2008 And once again the left in America was 100% wrong. Waiting for the apology to Sarah Palin........

.

Palin was right about Putin WHAT ? ? ?

Doc, what happened is, after USSR fall America (West) used Yelsin idi*t to fu*k Russia .. Gorbi was fooled or knowingly betrayed Russia

Nato was advanced to mother Russian borders, using Iran threat as excuse

Now, Puttin rollin all back

why the complain ? ? ?

deal was NATO stays where it was .. that deal was not kep

Now, West is weak and Russia/China/Iran/India/Brazil/Turkey/Egypt/"and a few others" payin back

BTW, Karzai saying US started Afghan war for own interests

Karzai says the US and its Western allies launched the war in Afghanistan for their own interests.

“Afghans died in a war that’s not ours,” Karzai said in an interview with the Washington Post published on Sunday.

He said that the 12-year-old war was “for the US security and for the Western interest.”

[monster_gardener]

.

Am sure she doesn't know where Ukraine is, wanna bet ?

Hmmm where have I heard that before?

"I'm usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as 'an extremely far-fetched scenario' by the 'high-brow' Foreign Policy magazine."

In October 2008, Foreign Policy labeled Palin's prediction as "strange."

Moto should be Sarah Palin and not Hillery next Madame La Presidente

Disaster after disaster for our beloved America

n President Barrack Benghazi Obama

But don't get me wrong it isn't that I am a big fan of Palin. Just that Obama is so much worse. And besides Palin was right about the Ukraine. She nailed it in 2008 And once again the left in America was 100% wrong. Waiting for the apology to Sarah Palin........

Palin was right about Putin WHAT ? ? ?

Doc, what happened is, after USSR fall America (West) used Yelsin idi*t to fu*k Russia .. Gorbi was fooled or knowingly betrayed Russia

Nato was advanced to mother Russian borders, using Iran threat as excuse

Now, Puttin rollin all back

why the complain ? ? ?

deal was NATO stays where it was .. that deal was not kep

Now, West is weak and Russia/China/Iran/India/Brazil/Turkey/Egypt/"and a few others" payin back

BTW, Karzai saying US started Afghan war for own interests

Karzai says the US and its Western allies launched the war in Afghanistan for their own interests.

“Afghans died in a war that’s not ours,” Karzai said in an interview with the Washington Post published on Sunday.

He said that the 12-year-old war was “for the US security and for the Western interest.”

Thank You Very Much for your post, Azari.

Karzai says the US and its Western allies launched the war in Afghanistan for their own interests

Like Duh !

When commandos from bases in Afghanistan use passenger jets turned into cruise missiles against US, what do you expect to happen.....


Like in a similar way Russia, in its security interest, is effectively annexing Crimea and maybe part of Ukraine.

“Afghans died in a war that’s not ours,”

The Afghans made it their war when they betrayed their benefactors in the West who saved them from being eaten for Breakfast by the Russian Bears by allowing Osama bin Ladin & Al Queda to launch the 911 and other attacked and did not hand him/them over to the West.....

Looking back maybe we should have helped/Armed the Bears

He said that the 12-year-old war was “for the US security and for the Western interest.”

Not as much as it should have been.....

Way too much spent on infrastructure like roads, hospitals & soccer stadiums trying with bribes to win the hearts & minds of the Afghan men......

Should have been just Break & Leave...... Repeat if needed/any signs of rebuilding.....

Or maybe we should have to win the hearts & minds of Afghan women with free guns and gun training to change the power equation in Islamic society

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Karzai was a CIA man (same as Khalilzad), from US Oil interest

puzzled what changed him to flip

that phenomena happens often

West grooms traitors to betray their own nations

but when those (traitors) firmly in place, they turn against west

and, Monster .. you saying America, NATO spending Billions last 10 yrs killing so many civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq for that "Inside Job" 9/11

[YMix]

(CNN) - Sarah Palin may be having a bragging rights moment.

No, she doesn't.

[Doc]

(CNN) - Sarah Palin may be having a bragging rights moment.

No, she doesn't.

Why not? She certainly took the heat when she made the prediction. Now that it has turned out she was 100% correct I would think she has every right to brag as much as she wants.

[YMix]

Aside from the fact that we don't know what's being done behind the scenes, what exactly should be a decisive response? War against the Russian Federation?

[Doc]

Aside from the fact that we don't know what's being done behind the scenes, what exactly should be a decisive response? War against the Russian Federation?

Obama is a wimp on foreign policy. Rather than acting he allowed a US Ambassador to be murdered in a US diplomatic compound. That was when Putin decided to roll tanks into Ukraine when the opportunity arose or in actuality Putin caused the opportunity to arise

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/co ... y_taking_a

Battenfeld: Prez’s foreign policy credibility taking a beating
Obama Budget.1.jpg
Photo by:
The Associated Press
TROUBLE: President Obama warned Russia on Friday, ‘There will be costs’ to intervention in the Ukraine. Vladimir Putin moved troops in yesterday(Saturday).

By:
Joe Battenfeld

Vladimir Putin is ignoring him. Sarah Palin is bragging about outsmarting him.

The Cold War-style crisis in the Ukraine is exposing President Obama’s lack of foreign policy respect to new lows. Hours after Obama’s toothless threat to Putin to stay out, Russia’s military moved in uncontested.

So what was Obama’s response to this bold show of military force by Putin? He made a phone call to the Russian leader and pulled out of planning meetings for the next G-8 summit in Sochi.

No, not the actual summit. Just the planning meetings.

Wow, Putin must be shaking in his shoe lifts. The Russian president, on the heels of the successful Sochi Olympics, is now maneuvering his military forces into Crimea virtually unchallenged. While Obama was holding a press conference to warn Russia “there will be costs” to intervention in the Ukraine, Putin was getting his rubber stamp Parliament to approve military action.

Turns out there were no costs. What’s next? Threatening to revoke Russia’s gold medals?

Things are so bad for Obama’s foreign policy cred that Palin is taking to Facebook to remind the world that she was mocked for saying during the 2008 campaign that Russia might invade Ukraine. Now Palin is gloating about her diplomatic foresight, while the Obama administration is scrambling to prevent Russia from invading the rest of the Ukraine.

The next few days and weeks will be a severe test for the president. Obama has been a few steps behind during this latest version of a Cold War standoff, and the world is looking for some kind of strong response to Putin’s show of muscle.

The president’s critics could see this one coming. In an interview with Boston Herald Radio last week, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton mocked Obama’s initial call for Russia to stay out of the Ukraine crisis.

Bolton accurately predicted it was “naive” of Obama to think that Russia would stand down in a region where it had major economic and military interests.

“Russia’s going to be involved — you can just count on it,” Bolton said. “The question is whether we’ll be involved.”

The question is what will Obama do? Just write off Ukraine and hope Russia doesn’t launch a total invasion?

Bolton said this latest crisis is the result of Obama showing little interest in re-establishing U.S. foreign policy muscle in hot spots like Ukraine and Syria. Now may be the time for Obama to call Putin’s bluff, and show he is paying attention.

[YMix]

Same question. What would constitute a strong and decisive response? It's pretty clear that Putin won't give up on Russia's access to the Black Sea without a fight. Are you ready for WWIII?

[Doc]

Same question. What would constitute a strong and decisive response? It's pretty clear that Putin won't give up on Russia's access to the Black Sea without a fight. Are you ready for WWIII?

A strong decisive response? At this point in time nothing short of warming up the ICBMs and letting them fly if Putin doesn't back down. Ukraine was lost at Benghazi. Lost in Syria... It is all but too late at this point without risking WWIII. Obama let the Ukrainians down in a big big way. Just like he let so many others down. Threatening to let teh ICBMs fly and then doing nothing being at least a magnitude worse.

[YMix]

Ah, so you want a nuclear war because the Russian Federation has deployed troops to Crimea. That would definitely help the people of Ukraine.

[kmich]

Same question. What would constitute a strong and decisive response? It's pretty clear that Putin won't give up on Russia's access to the Black Sea without a fight. Are you ready for WWIII?

A strong decisive response? At this point in time nothing short of warming up the ICBMs and letting them fly if Putin doesn't back down. Ukraine was lost at Benghazi. Lost in Syria... It is all but too late at this point without risking WWIII. Obama let the Ukrainians down in a big big way. Just like he let so many others down. Threatening to let teh ICBMs fly and then doing nothing being at least a magnitude worse.

Will Sarah accompany General "Buck"Turgidson into the War Room to make her case?

I have a better idea. Can't Palin and Putin get their gear together, meet up in Siberia for another "Survivor" Reality Show?

If Sarah surives, the US and the EU get to pick the economic carcass of Ukraine, if Putin wins, Russia gets the honors. I'd tune in.

[Doc]

http://www.juancole.com/2014/03/crimean-war-update.html

The Crimean Crisis and the Middle East: Will Syria & Iran be the Winners?
By Juan Cole | Mar. 3, 2014 |

(By Juan Cole)

The Russian intervention in the Crimea is more direct and dramatic than the one in Syria, with actual troops deployed. But there are similarities. One of the little-noted rationales for Russian support for the Baath government in Damascus is that it is seen as more favorable, being secular and minority-dominated, toward Syria’s roughly 2-3 million Christians, the bulk of them Eastern Orthodox (i.e. the same branch of Christianity that predominates in Russia and among ethnic Russians in the Ukraine). Indeed, there are more Eastern Orthodox Christians in Syria than in Crimea. Russian President Vladimir Putin is giving as a rationale for troop deployments in Crimea that the ethnic Russian population there is in danger from Ukrainian nationalists.

In both cases, Russia is exaggerating. The vast majority of Syrians who rose up against the Baath were moderates. Only when the regime of Bashar al-Assad responded to peaceful protests with massive military force did the opposition militarize, at which point Sunni extremists and al-Qaeda affiliates came to the fore as seasoned fighters with substantial Gulf money. Most oppositionists are still moderates and most Syrians want more freedoms, not a Taliban state on the Euphrates. The Russian official press often slams those who oppose its provision of huge amounts of money and arms to al-Assad as backing “al-Qaeda,” but that is propaganda.

Likewise the popular movement in Ukraine against President Viktor Yanukovych was not primarily led or fueled by nationalist extremists. Most who went to the streets in Kyiv were disturbed at Yanukovych’s neo-authoritarian tendencies, his acquiescence in Moscow’s demand that he move away from the European Union, and his jailing of his opponent in the 2010 elections (Yulia Tymoshenko) on what seem likely to have been trumped up charges. There is zero evidence of ethnic Russians in Crimea being menaced by Ukrainian nationalists, but plenty of evidence of foreign Russian forces intervening there. Of course, now that Putin has violated Ukrainian sovereignty so blatantly, there could be a backlash against Ukrainian Russians; Putin might even secretly hope for such polarization as a pretext for further intervention.

Those in the Middle East opposed to Russian backing for the Baath regime in Syria are also unhappy about the Russian intervention in Crimea.

Turkey is the country with most at stake. In essence, it is surrounded by countries it which Russia has intervened, with Syria to its south and Crimea just across the Black Sea to its north. Turkey has a special interest in Crimea. Today, on the order of 12% of the 2 million residents of the peninsular are Tatars, i.e. Turkic-speaking Muslims, though before Russia’s annexation of the territory from the Ottoman Empire in 1784, it was all Tatar. Russians immigrated in (they are now almost 60% of the population, with a quarter being ethnically Ukrainian). Stalin ethnically cleansed the Crimean Tatars during WW II, but after the fall of the Soviet Union some 300,000 have gradually returned. Turkey is as interested in the fate of the Crimean Tatars as Russia is in that of the Crimean Russians.

turkey-map

Moreover, Turkey is opposed to Russian policy in Syria. So it is no surprise that Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu was in Kyiv this weekend consulting with the new Ukrainian interim government. Turkey is the world’s 17th largest economy (by nominal GDP), but cannot really offer Ukraine much beyond moral support itself. Still, it is part of NATO and the Crimea crisis will increase its worth in the eyes of that organization. Because the Turkish navy is on the Black Sea, NATO is on the Black Sea.

Iran is likely to side strongly with Moscow in this crisis, and may benefit from it substantially. Of course, Iran is also concerned about the welfare of the Crimean Muslim community. But it should be remembered that Tehran has backed Christian Armenia against Muslim-majority Azerbaijan, so you can’t read off its foreign policy from its supposed Islamic commitments.

The conservative Iranian daily Hemayat editorialized on Sunday:

“Hemayat [conservative]: “Many consider Ukraine as the new battleground between the West and Russia. Now that Russia is mulling military action against Ukraine, there are a few points that Russia is taking into consideration with regards to Ukraine. First, Ukraine’s economy, especially its energy sector, is dependent on Russia. Half of Europe’s gas supplies are imported from Russia via Ukraine’s soil. Therefore, Ukraine cannot ignore Moscow and the West cannot exclude Moscow from Ukraine’s equations either. The West will try to use the new Ukrainian government to enhance its bargaining leverage against Moscow. Being aware of this, Moscow will try to maintain its interests in Ukraine, especially since the economic crisis in the West has made it unable to provide considerable assistance to Ukraine. [Western officials'] current remarks are just aimed at helping the self-declared rulers of Ukraine establish their power.” (Editorial by Ali Tatmaj headlined: “Moscow’s strategies”)”

(h/t BBC Monitoring)

President Obama is threatening Russia with the same kinds of international sanctions Washington has applied to Iran over the latter’s pro-Palestinian stance and its civilian nuclear enrichment program.

China more or less defies the US on those Treasury Department sanctions, but Russia had in the past been willing to allow UN Security Council votes against Iran, which involved sanctions. If Putin now faces the same techniques from Treasury as Tehran has suffered from, he may well start protecting Iran at the UNSC and allowing Russian banks to do more open business there. (Before, they had to worry about being sanctioned by the US, but if they are already sanctioned, they may as well make some money in Iran). Russian firms like Gazprom may also decide to go in to develop Iranian natural gas, if they are under sanctions anyway.

Moreover, an attempt by President Obama to sanction the world’s 9th largest economy could well permanently blunt US financial power. Who would want the dollar as a reserve currency and who would want a US-dominated international currency exchange regime if you knew at any moment it could be weaponized against you? Russia and possibly China together could begin working on an alternative to US stranglehold over global finance.

Russia, China and Central Asia have formed the Shanghai Cooperation Council as an implicit challenge to the Bretton Woods institutions. Iran applied for membership but was only given observer status. If Putin feels that SCO has to up its game in response to US sanctions on the Russian Federation, perhaps he’d push to admit Iran.

With rumors flying that Iraq may break US sanctions by purchasing Iranian weaponry, the current crisis could be another impetus toward Iranian reassertion, with Russian backing.

Saudi Arabia and the Sunni Gulf oil monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Council are already at odds with Russia over its Syria policy. They are also upset about the Obama administration’s negotiations with Iran. They are complaining about US disengagement from the region and ‘weakness,’ although the US has never intervened directly in eastern Europe and cannot be expected to. The GCC’s quiet support for the US invasion and occupation of Iraq demonstrates where they want to take US policy, and they seem unrepentant about that disaster, desiring a repeat in Syria.

Egypt’s interim government is miffed at US criticisms of the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government of Muhammad Morsi last July 3. It has declared the Brotherhood a terrorist organization and has mobilized against Sunni extremists in the Sinai. Cairo has swung its support to Bashar al-Assad, who is struggling in Syria against the Muslim Brotherhood and Sunni extremists. (This is an awkward situation, since Egypt’s major financial patron is Saudi Arabia, which wants the Baath government in Syria gone, but also does not want to see the Brotherhood come to power in Damascus, since Saudi conservative monarchism is challenged by the Brotherhood’s republican populism.)

Egypt has sent delegations to Moscow in search of Russian weapons and support, and as a way of diversifying from its mainly American and Gulf patrons. To my knowledge the foreign minister, Nabil Fahmy (kept over in the new Ibrahim Mehleb cabinet just formed) has not said anything about Crimea. Likely Cairo will try to avoid annoying Putin, whose capitalist, nationalist neo-authoritarianism may be seen as a model for Egypt by its current elites. Still, if the US does sanction Russia, Egypt may be forced to reconsider buying arms from the latter.

If Russia is pushed further into Tehran’s arms by US sanctions then ironically Bashar al-Assad and Sayyid Ali Khamenei may be the biggest winners of the Crimean crisis. At the same time, Turkey could also be a winner in the sense that its value to NATO, the US and the European Union will be much enhanced because of its Black Sea presence and its own historical interests in Crimea

.

[Doc]

Same question. What would constitute a strong and decisive response? It's pretty clear that Putin won't give up on Russia's access to the Black Sea without a fight. Are you ready for WWIII?

A strong decisive response? At this point in time nothing short of warming up the ICBMs and letting them fly if Putin doesn't back down. Ukraine was lost at Benghazi. Lost in Syria... It is all but too late at this point without risking WWIII. Obama let the Ukrainians down in a big big way. Just like he let so many others down. Threatening to let teh ICBMs fly and then doing nothing being at least a magnitude worse.

Will Sarah accompany General "Buck"Turgidson into the War Room to make her case?

I have a better idea. Can't Palin and Putin get their gear together, meet up in Siberia for another "Survivor" Reality Show?

If Sarah surives, the US and the EU get to pick the economic carcass of Ukraine, if Putin wins, Russia gets the honors. I'd tune in.

A quarter million NATO troops in Poland about a week or two ago, with no NATO member complaints, would have worked out much better.

[monster_gardener]

.

Karzai was a CIA man (same as Khalilzad), from US Oil interest

puzzled what changed him to flip

that phenomena happens often

West grooms traitors to betray their own nations

but when those (traitors) firmly in place, they turn against west

and, Monster .. you saying America, NATO spending Billions last 10 yrs killing so many civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq for that "Inside Job" 9/11

Thank You Very Much for your post, Azari.

but when those (traitors) firmly in place, they turn against west

I'm not at all sure Karzai is firmly in place. When I heard that the GOLFTUS POTUS was talking about pulling out of Trash oops I mean Afghanistan, I considered posting that we should start a dead pool for Karzai....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_pool

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

but when those (traitors) firmly in place, they turn against west

I'm not at all sure Karzai is firmly in place. When I heard that the GOLFTUS POTUS was talking about pulling out of Trash oops I mean Afghanistan, I considered posting that we should start a dead pool for Karzai....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_pool

Karzai done his job, he retiring

He knew America rather sooner then later will move on, leave .. But Iran next door will be always there .. he shook hand with Iran, Afghan part of Persian family of nations, look at the map below

Greater_Iran.gif (57.59 KiB) Viewed 1489 times

It was naive for America to think otherwise

unless, Monster, unless America was preparing the way for Iranians

entirely possible

otherwise things do not make sense

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Biden & Yanukovych.jpg (48.38 KiB) Viewed 1469 times

WJS : Behind the West's Miscalculations in Ukraine

Many European diplomats felt that while the U.S. portrayed itself as acting tough in recent weeks, the Americans had left them alone on the Ukraine issue for far too long, preferring to prioritize Washington's own ties with Moscow.

..

The White House decision to rely on Europe to cement ties with Ukraine was shaped by a foreign-policy doctrine meant to give international partners more responsibility for the world's challenges, U.S. officials said. By divvying up responsibilities, these officials said, the U.S. could focus on issues at home after more than a decade of costly wars abroad.

There also was initial skepticism within the Obama administration that Mr. Yanukovych was serious about moving toward Europe. Few administration policy makers believed Ukraine should be an American responsibility because the issue was more important to Russia and Europe than to the U.S.

..

To bring Mr. Yanukovych closer to the West without provoking Russia, the U.S. and the EU settled on an informal division of labor, U.S. and European officials said.

The EU's job was to get the pact signed by a November 2013 deadline. The U.S. would work with the International Monetary Fund to get Kiev to agree to tough economic reforms.

The last thing the Obama administration wanted was another flashpoint with Russia. Relations between the two countries were already fraught over Russian President Vladimir Putin's support for the Assad regime in Syria and the decision to grant asylum to alleged National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden.
Crisis in Ukraine: Who's Who
View Graphics

Russia began pressuring Ukraine to resist the pact by reducing Russian imports from Ukraine during the first three months of 2013. Russia followed with a targeted trade war to hurt Ukrainian oligarchs who favored European engagement.

Unease was growing within the U.S. administration. The EU wasn't paying enough attention to Kiev's economic troubles and pressure from Russia, government analysts privately warned policy makers, U.S. officials said.

Anxiety in Brussels surfaced in September, when Armenia, which had negotiated a similar trade and political deal with the EU, backed out and instead pledged to join the Russian customs union under pressure from Moscow.

EU officials saw Armenia, which also faced economic and political pressure from Russia, as a warning sign and stepped up contacts with Ukraine. EU leaders expressed confidence the Ukraine deal would be signed, believing Mr. Yanukovych wouldn't reverse course after coming this far.

At an October meeting of the Commonwealth of Independent States in Minsk, Mr. Yanukovych made his last strong defense of the European pact. He also had a brief meeting with Mr. Putin that day, and U.S. officials believe that was when a more forceful Russian campaign began.

European divisions over Ukraine, with EU member states worried about antagonizing Russia, weakened the bloc's ability to influence Kiev's decisions, some diplomats said. Many member states believed the roadblock to a final agreement wasn't Russian pressure, but Kiev's refusal to meet European demands that it release—at least temporarily—imprisoned former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko to receive medical treatment in Berlin.

U.S. officials believe Russian officials persuaded Mr. Yanukovych to finally reverse course in a series of meetings in Sochi in early November.

..

In one of those meetings, the Russians presented the Ukrainian delegation with a dossier spelling out potential damage to Ukraine's economy if the government moved ahead with the EU agreement, Mr. Yanukovych's advisers told U.S. officials. The dossier, U.S. officials said, set out specific financial losses and percentage declines in such sectors as aerospace and defense.

While top European officials were meeting almost weekly with their Ukrainian counterparts, the U.S. had little in the way of high-level contacts.

But on Nov. 18, a few days after Ambassador Pyatt's unexpected conversation with Mr. Lyovochkyn in the presidential office complex in Kiev, Vice President Joe Biden called Mr. Yanukovych, suggesting the U.S. could help counter Mr. Putin's offer.

..

Mr. Biden, during a visit to Ukraine in 2009, had gotten along well with Mr. Yanukovych, a senior administration official said. He seemed receptive to Mr. Biden's blunt style, the official added.

Mr. Biden's message was that the U.S. was prepared to work with both the IMF and the EU "to deliver the support Ukraine needed to get through the economic troubles," said a senior administration official briefed on the call, which Mr. Biden made while visiting Houston.

The next day, Mr. Yanukovych met Stefan Füle, a former Czech foreign minister who was the bloc's point man on the deal, at the presidential palace. As the two officials sipped tea surrounded by top aides, Mr. Yanukovych presented new figures amounting to tens of billions of euros Ukraine would need to see through the reforms embedded in the EU deal.

Frustrated by a fumbling translator and determined to convey a clear message to Mr. Yanukovych, Mr. Füle, who studied in Moscow in the early 1980s, switched into Russian during his response. The EU official rejected the numbers the president was citing and questioned whether Mr. Yanukovych was looking for excuses to justify his reversal.

Mr. Yanukovych didn't respond to the appeals. On Nov. 21, the Ukrainian government announced it was putting the EU deal on hold, blaming the EU for failing to offer enough economic support.

Even then, some European officials hoped Mr. Yanukovych would make a last-gasp change of heart when he arrived at a summit in the Lithuanian capital on Nov. 28, where he was supposed to have signed the deal.

Those hopes were finally dashed that evening in a 75-minute meeting in a sparse meeting room on the ground floor of the Kempinski Hotel in Vilnius' central square.

Mr. Yanukovych told the EU's two top officials he could advance the bilateral deal but offered no time frame for signing it, and demanded three-way talks with Russia and the EU in the meantime, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

Those were deal-breakers for European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, who refused to give Moscow direct say over the fate of a bilateral EU-Ukraine pact.

The meeting ended in farce the next day. After the summit was formally over and faced with growing protests at home over his U-turn on the EU deal, Mr. Yanukovych rushed over to Mr. Van Rompuy and Mr. Barroso to urge them to agree to a Ukrainian drafted joint statement saying talks would continue. It is too late, the EU leaders told him.

U.S. officials said they believed Mr. Yanukovych was looking for the easiest way to raise cash, regardless of the strings attached. EU officials said they weren't prepared to match the eventual $15 billion loan package from Moscow.
View Slideshow

U.S. officials tried to convince Mr. Yanukovych it was a bad deal. Moscow offered Ukraine cheap natural gas for three months. After that, prices would rise and Ukraine would be required to buy more, increasing the country's dependence on Russia.

In his calls, Mr. Biden warned the besieged Ukrainian leader that he was "behind the curve" and putting himself in an "impossible position," said a senior administration official briefed on the calls.

U.S. officials said Mr. Yanukovych was responsive at times, reversing some of the government's anti-protest laws after one of Mr. Biden's calls. "But it would always be grudging and halfhearted and too late," a senior administration official said.

In Washington, Mr. Biden pushed to "wield the threat of sanctions" if Mr. Yanukovych decided to crack down on protesters, a message the vice president conveyed directly in a Dec. 6 call. But the Europeans were torn about sanctions, arguing against the risk of backing the Ukrainian leader into a corner.

U.S. officials said the tipping point came on Jan. 16, when Mr. Yanukovych pushed through laws that effectively banned peaceful protests and outlawed opposition group activities. State Department officials and intelligence analysts warned the White House that Ukraine could be engulfed in civil war.

In the last week of January, at a Situation Room meeting at the White House, Mr. Biden urged the administration to spell out in more detail what financial aid would be provided if Mr. Yanukovych and the opposition cut a deal, said U.S. officials briefed on the session. Mr. Biden was backed by Secretary of State John Kerry, officials said, and President Barack Obama agreed.

A few days later, Mr. Kerry huddled with senior European officials on the sidelines of a security conference in Munich and delivered Mr. Obama's message: Get money ready, according to officials briefed on the discussions.

In February, EU foreign ministers closed ranks with the U.S., saying they would respond quickly if the situation deteriorated, and, later, agreeing on sanctions.

Vladimir Putin attended Russian military exercises near St. Petersburg on Monday as tensions rose over Russian troops in Crimea. Via The Foreign Bureau, WSJ's global news update. Photo: AP

Mr. Kerry was in Paris in the third week of February for meetings when his French, German and Polish counterparts decided to fly to Kiev to try to broker a deal between Mr. Yanukovych and opposition leaders. The U.S. was skeptical, but Mr. Kerry and Mr. Biden agreed to help behind the scenes.

In the end, U.S. officials said, they believed Mr. Yanukovych got cold feet about the power-sharing proposals, and then he disappeared. Many street protesters, meanwhile, resented the U.S. for saying it wanted to work with Mr. Yanukovych instead of booting him.

The Obama administration is now preparing sanctions to respond to Russia's military intervention. "We're not putting Europe in the lead on this anymore," a senior U.S. official said.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Look,

West, NATO, America, too much dependent on Russia in Syria, Iran, central Asia, Afghanistan, KavKaz and and and

add to this China backing Russia in this

well, 4get Ukraine, it's done .. you guys tried to fool Vladimiro and lost Ukraine, get over it

next game please, deal cards

Ukraine.jpg (174.77 KiB) Viewed 1467 times

[Doc]

.

Look,

West, NATO, America, too much dependent on Russia in Syria, Iran, central Asia, Afghanistan, KavKaz and and and

add to this China backing Russia in this

Last time I checked China was certainly not backing Russia in this

http://www.voanews.com/content/china-of ... 63631.html

well, 4get Ukraine, it's done .. you guys tried to fool Vladimiro and lost Ukraine, get over it

next game please, deal cards

Yes deal the cards. Lets see what other of Russia's neighbor can Putin invade?

Ukraine.jpg

[Heracleum Persicum]

add to this China backing Russia in this

Last time I checked China was certainly not backing Russia in this

Your information not acurate

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/ ... GE20140303

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukraine-crisis ... ea-1438650

http://news.sky.com/story/1219922/russi ... er-ukraine

http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/china-ba ... n-ukraine/

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/ ... forthright

[Enki]

[Doc]

add to this China backing Russia in this

Last time I checked China was certainly not backing Russia in this

Your information not acurate

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/ ... GE20140303

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukraine-crisis ... ea-1438650

http://news.sky.com/story/1219922/russi ... er-ukraine

http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/china-ba ... n-ukraine/

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/ ... forthright

All are about what Russia is claiming. Mine is from a couple of hours ago. I guess they forgot to ask China ooops!!!

You can read about it at the link I posted which you deleted

http://www.voanews.com/content/china-of ... 63631.html