Ukrainians were already protesting to join the EU, though. And Ukraine provides about as much for Russia as North Korea does for China.

Everyone will say Putin because he talks big and dictates. That's all people need to see to determine who's stronger. Guys who appear tough will always be deemed tough over a more reasonable person. That's just human nature. Appearances trump almost everything.

Putin is a man and leader even if I dont agree with him, he will defend and stand up for his country and not apologize to his enemies and bow to dictators.

Obama is a If Obama treated Putin like he does the american working taxpayer we wouldnt have any problems with him expanding anywhere.

                          ASS^      HOLE^

If only the United States were a dictatorship, the world be a better place and everyone would be much happier...

Since when do we applaud dictators? I thought Americans were defenders of freedom and enemies of dictators and tyrants. When did it become cool to just do whatever you want with no regard for consequences? Putin isn't strong, he just doesn't give a damn...

Also, I would just like to say that the USA would be a much better place if we threw away the designations of "Republican" and "Democrat". All it does it create tension and give people a set of beliefs that they have to adhere to just to oppose the other guy...

Well Putin has far less checks on him. So obviously Putin.


Now an MMA fight between the two would be interesting. Putin is better trained, but 10 years older...

and while Obama SEEMS like the kind of guy that would cringe after a punch... I want to say he used to fight.

Exactly how does Obama treat the average American tax payer? 

We applaud dictators if we think it's going to make Obama look bad. Putin is oppressing people but they want to call opression strong leadership because they think it reflects negatively on President Obama. Heck, they call Barack Obama an oppressive dictator every turn of the dime. 

The eastern and rural Ukrainian population is very pro Russian and represents a larger part of the overall Ukrainian population, the smaller urban pro EU part that lives in Kiev did not like that there candidate lost and so staged a coup that was then backed by the US and EU.

This is why for all the rhetoric coming from Kiev most of the country is not up in arms about the Crimea.

But typically the western media only focus's in how the capital's population reacts.

It's been one facepalm after another for Obama. There's no way he's the "stronger" leader, at least not in the international sense. Obama is clearly out of his depth, because he really appears clueless on how to respond.

And in this instance I don't particularly fault him. I know I have conservative leanings and I typically criticize Obama's methods and policies, but I really don't have a good idea what to do about Crimea, either. Contrast this with Obamacare, where I had a laundry-list of reasonably specific faults and a clear "I would do this instead" plan.

Yanukovych was far from a Russian puppet. He was friendlier to Russia than some of the alternatives, but he was hardly Moscow's man any more than Tymoshenko was Moscow's woman (as despite perceptions, Tymoshenko was pretty good at playing nice with Russia even without getting over-cozy).

Nor will America spend that much on Ukraine because Ukraine is outside our sphere of influence, and still is a ways from getting in there, despite current perceptions.

I wouldn't say Crimea was invaded out of desperation, either. It wasn't a very smart or strategic move, it was highly opportunistic: taking advantage of the instability in the country to grab some territory that had a clear Russian majority as well as strategic importance for Russia.