I dont know if you understand this, but Russia has no claim to it. If they want it, there is only two possible ways the international community will accept it.

1. Ukraine sells it to them for a price.

2. Democratic referendum.

I worry that this will escalate into something worse. It might be inevitable that democracy and comunism clash in war until one goes. China is beeing very clever staying out of this. I would rather comunism issues be solved with internal disputes. Thats not gonna happen until the oil/gas runs out though.

Zimmerman's handywork troubling us to this day. What a devious character.

Actually no.  I was always against the Iraq war.  I was shocked congress actually voted for it.

I just can just accurately evalutate information from which to give percentages.

   I can also say there is more compelling evidence that Thomas Jefferson was half black then that 9/11 was an insiide job... even though I don't believe either to be true.  

and yes.  That was what you were replying to.  You just didn't pay attention to what you were replying to.

As for Hans Blix.  He mostly just said that to stop war.  His previous statements more or less contradicted what he said earlier, the only difference was that it became apparent the US would go to war.

He said in February there were no problems.

Yet he said in his January report he mentions a number of problems even though they had been cooperative in a few areas.  I wouldn't consider it a reason to go to war, but it certaintly is a lot more proof then the above mentioned snipers.   Call like a 7 % chance of Iraqi WMDS vs 2% chance of Snipers coming out of the US  Ukranian embassy to murder people.

"Iraq has on the whole cooperated rather well so far with UNMOVIC in this field," he does note a number of problems, including Iraq's refusal to guarantee the safety of proposed U.N. U-2 overflights as well as it insistence on sending helicopters into the no-fly zone to transport the Iraqis who serve as the inspectors minders. In addition, Blix notes "some recent disturbing incidents and harassment."

With regard to cooperation on substance, Blix's report is more negative, noting that Iraq has failed to engage in the "active" cooperation called for in Resolution 1441. He questions Iraqi claims concerning the quality, quantity, and disposition of VX nerve gas produced by Iraq as well as claims that Iraq destroyed 8, 500 liters of anthrax. In addition, he reports that Iraq has tested two missiles in excess of the permitted range of 150 kilometers."

So again, at least there was SOME meat for Bush and the rest to grab at.

Hell the look at the two UN resolutions that happened right before war.

February 24, 2003: The United States, United Kingdom, and Spain co-sponsor a new Security Council resolution saying "Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity afforded to it by Resolution 1441."
The same day, Russia and France submit a memorandum stating that military force should be a "last resort" and that force should not yet be used because there is "no evidence" that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. The memorandum also says, however, that "inspections…cannot continue indefinitely. Iraq must disarm." It further adds that Baghdad's cooperation, although improving, is not "yet fully satisfactory."

The memorandum proposes that the inspectors submit a program of work that lists and clearly defines specific disarmament tasks. Such a report is already required under Resolution 1284, which created UNMOVIC in 1999.

The memorandum also suggests "further measures to strengthen inspections," including increasing staff and bolstering technical capabilities. Additionally, it proposes a new timeline mandating regular reporting to the Security Council about inspectors' progress, as well as a progress report to be submitted 120 days after the program of work is adopted.

Neither measure is adopted.

Would i of gone to war over it?  No.  I wouldn't of even asked for inspectors in the first place based on the intellegence.

That said, you can see pretty clearly why it was more believable then the American Ambassodor sniper teams claim.

So we actually agree. American snipers are as unproofed as Yanukovich snipers. WMDs in Iraq were all the time extremely unlikely, but Bush wanted to believe it. The UN inspection in Iraq happened, although it faced some difficulties.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/obama-and-putin-are-trapped-in-a-macho-game-of-chicken-and-the-whole-world-will-pay-the-price

Good article.
US needs to back off for it's own sake.
They should drop Crimea.
Otherwise they would have to worry about Alaska later this year.

China is tired of US hehemony, EU shows signs too, not to mention everyone else, US will be completely alone at one point soon, who would have thought of that scenario before Ukraine crisis? Nobody, typical black swan, and now US digging it's own grave, after all these years, don't think there could have been "Happily ever after".

A democratic referendum about the status of crimea was from the beginning the plan of the pro-russian government of crimea. The referendum is underway, it will already happen in March.

I don't know why you bring up communism, all countries involved are capitalist countries. I don't think there are any communist states left in the world, maybe cuba, but I'm not sure.

Really?

Who invaded Serbia to carve Kosovo out from it?

Who invaded Latin American countries to install dictatorships or indirectly supported them?

Who invaded Iraq on the grounds of imaginary biological weapons? Or Afghanistan for a decade-long occupation after one man?

Who is supporting religious fanatics on the Middle East to grab power?

But hey, Russia invaded a land inhabited by Russians, which was always basically theirs, way after Ukraine basically ceased to function as a single state, and they arrested Pussy Riot, so they are Satan. Yeah.