The United States hints at that Ukraine should give up with Crimea for Donbass

USA-Ukraine

The end of the Russian military aggression in Donbass is possible in exchange for Ukraine’s recognition of the occupied Crimea part of Russia. This was assumed by American Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter in an interview to the Voice of America.

“Are Ukrainians ready to concede Russia the point of Crimea, recognizing that many Russians and a lot of people who feel close to Russia live there? As well as recognizing that Russians want to build a military base there, which they will not lose. What do Ukrainians want? Do they want the United States to invade Crimea? It’s impossible! But what is possible? Is it bad if Russians are not ready to leave Crimea, but ready to leave the Eastern Ukraine?” wondered the Congressman.

In addition, Hunter suggested that elected President of the United States Donald Trump would sign a draft law to provide the Ukrainian army with help. He noted that the United States wanted to equip Ukrainians not only with night vision devices and clothing, but with anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry as well as with anti-drones systems and counterbattery radars too.

“We want to make Russians know that it will be costly if they move to the West. Putin will not be able to block it, he will not be allowed to,” said the US Congressman and added that he believed it would be fair.

The Congressman also claims that Trump will be able to agree with Putin so that the situation in Ukraine will not at least worsen. Besides, he says, Ukrainians must be present at the negotiating table and Crimea must be among the possible give-ons.

13 Comments on The United States hints at that Ukraine should give up with Crimea for Donbass

  1. Congressman Duncan is the ONLY Congressman who agrees with Putin 100% of the time, as in this case where he repeating Putin’s words.

  2. “Russia’s not going to invade the United States — we’re not going to take over Russia,” said Trump surrogate Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), noting that Putin was “a good partner” to help defeat “radical Islam.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/09/08/graham-says-trumps-putin-comments-unnerves-me-to-my-core/

    • Sandy miller // December 8, 2016 at 07:06 // Reply

      Tell Duncan to go home and shut up. He knows nothing and has no business with Ukraine. No mr trump you can’t make that deal with Ukraine.

  3. robert hansen // December 6, 2016 at 22:10 // Reply

    possibke exchange recognition of crimea s part of Russia for bombed out Donbasthis is not just a bad deal it is extortion .. Let me understand this some thugs take control of your house and your garage and then they tell you they will be nice to you, if you except that they take the house then they will give you back your garage

  4. robert hansen // December 6, 2016 at 22:12 // Reply

    THE WEST AND THE US. IS OBLIGATED TO GIVE UKRAINE WEAPONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances agreement…

    Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for the grantee from the USA and and the United Kingdom that they will protect the Ukrainian nation from invasion…

    The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is a political agreement signed in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994, providing security assurances by its signatories relating to Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The Memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.

    The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus and Kazakhstan. As a result, Ukraine gave up the world’s third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996, of which Ukraine had physical control.

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

  5. robert hansen // December 6, 2016 at 22:13 // Reply

    NOT GIVING WEAPONS TO UKRAINE SO SHE CAN PROTECT HER SELF ! Is like saying to the 25 year old young beautiful innocent virgin girl, that just got raped and got forcefully impiregnated by the ugly disgusting vodka drikking drunk old psychopathic Mongoloid Russian call Putin from Moscow .

    That YOU MUST now make your self look as pretty as possible, sitt at his dinner table, smile sexy, be polite and tell him how you just love his cooking and be very very very nice to him.

    After all he has got a big gun and nukes; So just stop being a B%$^%$tch and except what he wants and stop shouting about the fact you just got raped, by the disgusting drunk old vodka drinking psycho and marry the guy and give birth to his rape children called Crimea, DPR, LPR ….

    If you don’t marry the rapist we will make you marry him and give birth to his rape children in the interest of what we call Pro-Peace in the community of Europe.. After all he has a big gun !

    This is NOT Pro-Peace !!!!! It is Pro – Abuse it is Pro- Slavery its Pro- Terrorisme It is pro-RAPE !!!!

  6. it was usa (one of signers, guarantors Budapest Memorandum) who’s warships sneaked away from Black Sea at time of invasion from Muscovy and Obama administration refused to call it invasion for a year, 10.000 deaths just to let USA sell more weapons to EU(rope) , not one signer of BM, kept their promise. Only China, not one of signers btw, kept its promise in a later non-military agreement to support Ukraine. USA is as much and perhaps even more accountable for war in/against Ukraine, since USA knew BEFORE it happened, that it would happen. USA and Germany its puppet advised when invasion happened to Ukraine to not intervene. Does USA really want another war in Europe like WW2, when grandad of GW Bush Prescott became financier of Hitler? Poroshenko said earlier: A friend in need is a friend indeed, but he should have added: but I didn’t forsee my friends GREED.

  7. Daria Jmill // December 7, 2016 at 03:32 // Reply

    No way! Forget it!

  8. Patrick Verhoeven // December 7, 2016 at 06:36 // Reply

    Naive ! Does this Congresman really think Russia will give up Donbas ? Of course not ! Maybe they “do” it in a way the outside world thinks they give up on Donbas but they won’t really do it. The occupation of Donbas is not the first step in a negotiation Donbas for Crimea. The plans of Moscow go much further than Crimea, they also go much further then Donbas. I am pretty sure that when Putin thinks he will get away with it he will strike again and more territory will be conquered. This can happen in case he sees that Trump will allow this or in case several governments in the EU will become populist governments. Allowing Putin to get away with aggression will only invoke more aggression !

  9. Why was Putin so angry about Ukraine’s missile tests near Crimea? Because it showed how vunerable it was, Ukraine has more then enough missiles to block Crimea from all sides, keep all planes from Crimea on the ground, in effect Ukraine can keep Putin from attacking Mariupol, south Ukraine from Crimea. Odessa can’t be attacked from Transnistria anymore. If Putin attacks from Crimea, Ukraine can, cause Crimea is not covered by Minsk, return fire on that attack, target Kerch bridge and ferry and block access to Crimea and then the fireworks begin. Then it can also with missiles attack occupied border and interconnecting railays between RF and Ukraine in east Ukraine and let it “rain”, and then all RF soldiers and mercs (mercenaries) are blocked from supplies, fuel and munition, while Ukraine can target any RF plane from RF or Crimea. AND that will happen next January IF Putin dares to attack from Crimea. USA thinks world doesn’t see its GREEDY plan, to sell a 21 st century war, weapons to EUrope and earn BIG TIME, and play oh so sorry with its CNN and FOX media, but people can’t be fooled like in WW2.

  10. This will start WWIII if justice is not served. Russia out of Ukraine.

  11. Ukraine better follow/see Minsk as a tit for (two) tat(s) strategy, since no sanctions for not following Minsk agreement are included in it.
    Sofar RF side didn’t abide by any rule in it from start, tit for (two) tats can solve that beter then socalled Normandy talks-disengagement.

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

    We all know (beforehand) Merkel – Hollande would fail (failed) since RF Putin didn’t want to keep his promises.

    tit for tat means if RF as agressor uses it, Ukraine as victim can use them too, tit for two tats means Ukraine can use even bigger weapons, to force other in this agressor RF to cease using them, in ideal circumstances number of projectiles should be equal.

    CW

  12. Given time can Ukraine not manufacture it’s own weapons ?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*