An analogy

If the state of Texas attempted to exercise the right of the former country of Texas to divide and secede from the US (disregarding how you stand on that issue) and Russia was sending Texas weaponry of any kind (even through an intermediary), what would the position and response of the US government and military be?

The Government would blockade anyone supplying Texas and they would be on the public enemy list. Russian can't afford to get us really good n pissed off

The Government would blockade anyone supplying Texas and they would be on the public enemy list. Russian can't afford to get us really good n pissed off Originally Posted by eyecu2

I suppose you'd say that Russia has no business in our sphere of influence then?

If the state of Texas attempted to exercise the right of the former country of Texas to divide and secede from the US (disregarding how you stand on that issue) and Russia was sending Texas weaponry of any kind (even through an intermediary), what would the position and response of the US government and military be? Originally Posted by Ducbutter

A bad analogy. A better one is

Mexico deciding to invade Texas and take back their territory lost during the texas war for independence. All while Russia is sending weapons and money to support them in their efforts.

What would the US response to that be?

You see Ukraine didn’t secede from the Soviet Union, The Soviet Union broke apart when their government collapsed. Russia had no right to invade any independent country regardless of their historical occupation. And if we let them what does that tell every other country out there that decides that they want to do the same. Every day we hesitate to support the ukrainian people the worse our reputation on the global stage becomes.

This kinda seems relevant, dontcha think?

Russia was a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances signed in December 1994.

"The memoranda... prohibited Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom from threatening or using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, "except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

This kinda seems relevant, dontcha think?

Russia was a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances signed in December 1994.

"The memoranda... prohibited Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom from threatening or using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, "except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum Originally Posted by lustylad

Treaty’s only work if everyone obeys the terms.
Putin obviously could care less what a scrap of paper says. His actions in the Ukraine prove this.

He is a murdering Thug intent on holding power at just about any cost.

A bad analogy. A better one is

Mexico deciding to invade Texas and take back their territory lost during the texas war for independence. All while Russia is sending weapons and money to support them in their efforts.

What would the US response to that be?

You see Ukraine didn’t secede from the Soviet Union, The Soviet Union broke apart when their government collapsed. Russia had no right to invade any independent country regardless of their historical occupation. And if we let them what does that tell every other country out there that decides that they want to do the same. Every day we hesitate to support the ukrainian people the worse our reputation on the global stage becomes. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

See you got the OP to go into stealth mode with your response.