In the long run you are correct Red..it is the same reason we won the cold war. There is a difference today though. The west doesn't take Russia seriously enough (for the very reasons you mentioned) and may not unite in a strong enough manner to hold out. Putin unlike the post Stalin commies isn't the risk adverse leader but a gambler. A Reuters report is one of many that indicate Putin is parlaying his bet and pushing to expand his occupation to the eastern Ukraine http://www.businessinsider.com/russ...um=email&utm_source=alerts&nr_email_referer=1. I don't see a quick end to this and it may take more flexing of western economic & military muscle to end Putin's expansionist efforts.
I believe it is quite beyond testicle size. In fact, his may be the size of small peanuts. He is a living, breathing textbook example of megalomania.
I suspect this is posturing. It gives him something to back away from without backing out of Crimea. Putin is better off returning to the status quo. He had the bases already and they were not being threatened by anybody. If he invades and annexes all of Ukraine, he will be facing a far larger insurgency that he has ever seen in Chechnya. Not a muslim insurgency either, but a European one that will get lots of covert Western support in addition to overt economic retaliation. If he invades and annexes half of Ukraine, the other half will almost certainly join NATO. Taking more of Ukraine is a lose-lose scenario for Putin.
That would be nice but that may not be how Putin sees it. A rational leader looking at it in terms of real politic would do as you say. However his talk and actions now and in the past don't show him as such. Red I see his actions in two parts 1) He is an opportunist and sees the Russia as resurgent and the west as weak willed and unwilling to face any pain to stop him. He will take what he can while he can. He did this first in Russia where he has molded a criminal oligarchy and externally in Georgia where he invaded a sovereign country and has occupied parts in spite of treaty and world condemnation. It seems he is repeating his success in Georgia in the Crimea and Ukraine. 2) The motive force behind his action...his faith that the past is the ideal and if he can pull it off somehow it will turn out well for Russia. He has stated time and again that the fall of the Soviet Union was a tragedy and his goal is to reconstitute it as best he can. To him it would be worth the risk and pain. Again he has made this point time after time. I think we should take him at his word. He continues to make aggressive moves and move army and air units close to invasion paths. I suspect he will take and hold what he can as long as he can. I would be surprised if he leaves Crimea. He has stated that Russia will respect the vote of Crimea to join Russia. I have no clue as to the eastern Ukraine but would plan for the worst and develop ways to prevent or deal with it if it happens. Usually a firm stance backed up by the willingness to use what it takes to support it will stop aggression. As has been proven time and time again expectation that a bully or tyrant or madman will act rationally lead to worsening of the situation.
Not that many times and not on this scale, I would say. If Putin is crazy, all bets are off. But if Putin acts like the Soviets acted in the Cold War, he will be bellicose but not imprudent. The Cuban Missile crisis was the last time that the Soviets acted with impunity and it cost them dearly and almost started WWIII. After that both sides were very careful. They did not go to war over our occupations of Vietnam, Lebanon, Grenada or Panama. We did not go to war over the Soviet occupations of their client states Czechoslavakia and Poland and when they make the mistake of invading Afghanistan, we allowed them to do so overtly, while covertly helping their enemies. He may be looking at the world through Soviet glasses, but he has seen the US quickly add his former Warsaw Pact allies to NATO, invade and occupy Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan, conduct air strikes against a dozen countries, and naval strikes against a half-dozen. We have enacted economic sanctions against a number of countries and stuck with them for decades when needed. We have assembled international coalitions several times. We do not have a history of standing idly by and this has not been lost on him. He will certainly push the envelope, but with his current economic and military situation, he is unlikely to push us to war. Invading Ukraine would be a mistake that I don't think he will make. I do not think we should ever take him at his word. He is a overt liar. He is lying right now about Soviet forces inside the Crimea. He is probably lying about invading Ukraine itself. The potential economic blowback could cripple Russia and make his position with his own people untenable. The West has already shown a willingness to take a stand at Ukraine, one he did not expect. The pressure will continue to be ratcheted up. I suspect he will concede to talks with Ukraine and the West and we will give him some way to save face but not invade Ukraine. The economic power of the West is our strength here and I expect us to use it.
When I said take Putin at his word I didn't mean his stop gap lies you are correct in pointing out. I meant his goal of reconstituting the old Russia. Remember Russia before the communists were aggressive expansionists. They ruled Ukraine, Belarus, much of historic Poland west to Prussia (pre WW1 Prussia). The Baltic states were German enclaves that were in the Russian orbit as well and independent Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are boils on his pride. They and Putin consider much to be historic Russia. Kiev is the birthplace of Russian civilization such as it is. Remember Hitler previewed his program in Mein Kampf. Now don't think I am comparing him to Hitler just saying that his actions have followed his preaching as well. I believe he will continue to push. Maybe he will back off this time but he will not stop pushing when he senses weakness or opportunity. Notice the increased positioning he is doing by claiming it is Russia's duty to protect Russians in other countries and he has the right to act as he sees fit to protect them. Apparently he is sending Russians into eastern Ukraine and other areas with enough Russian population to sow trouble. You are right that the full force of sanctions will hit Russia much harder than the west and could cripple it. You are right the Russian military is a rusted hulk. However he has been pretty successful so far. Justified or not he may feel he has the upper hand. Also his success has rallied many Russians to the idea of a return to greatness...a source of pride they have not had since the fall of communism. I agree he and it will not last for all the reasons you note. What I fear is that he doesn't/won't/can't see it the same way and as long as he is in power we will have in him someone who sees us as an enemy and will act accordingly. In action he is closer to Stalin and Hitler than the commies we grew up with, a crook and a predator. Your description of the old commies as conservative was spot on. I see Putin as another breed of cat...one they would fear.
This is a pretty good article that shows why in the long run Russia can't afford a confrontation with the west. Let's hope Putin recognizes the facts. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/14/why-putin-will-buckle-under-sanctions.html
Putin certainly feels that Belarus and Ukraine are Russian vassals, however the people of those countries largely do not. The Germans successfully raised entire SS Divisions there during WWII that fought the Russians. Hitler only needed to send SS officers to Ukraine and he found plenty of willing recruits. Russia has not forgotten this and would love to be able to keep them under thumb as in the old Soviet Union. But the Baltic States and former Warsaw Pact states are now part of NATO and Putin can just forget about getting them back. A dangerous course of action. This is exactly what Hitler said when he annexed the Sudetenland. It was only a pretext for annexing the rest of Czechoslavakia. If he takes over any part of Ukraine he is setting himself up for years of economic sanctions as well as a Ukrainian insurgency. Like Napoleon said . . . "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." Indeed. But many more Russians are dissatisfied with their economic situation and see the West as having a better system. They are also aware of the eroding of their voting rights under Putin, who is emerging as a dictator. And as nationalistic as many Russians are, they are aware of their limitations and would like even less to see another military or political blunder. Putin must be wary of this. It has only been a couple of decades since their last revolution. Kind of a wild card, like Khruschev. But he made his rash move against Kennedy whom he mistakenly thought was weak and discovered that the US is bigger than just one man anyway. His loss of face over Cuba led to his being sacked soon afterwards and replaced with a series of dour but more realistic leaders. Russia is a big place and there exists political opposition to him inside and outside of his party. There exists the possibility that in this crisis lies the catalyst for another change of leadership in Moscow. We must bear this in mind while considering our options. We must do things that divide Russians rather than induce them to all pull together. This is why economic pressure and political ridicule is a better option than military posturing over Crimea.
