Russia-Ukraine Agree "Truce" Until March 21st; White House Warns Putin Stop Playing "Russian Roulette"

Tyler Durden's picture

"President Putin has started a game of Russian roulette and I think the United States and the West have to be very clear in their response," states Sen. Foreign Relations Committed Chair Robert Menendez among a slew of Sunday morning talk-show rhetoric from US politicians with the White House's Dan Pfeiffer adding "President Putin has a choice about what he's going to do here. Is he going to continue to further isolate himself, further hurt his economy, further diminish Russian influence in the world, or is he going to do the right thing?" As the "sham referendum" continues, Reuters, however, reports that Ukraine's acting defense minister believes Russia and Ukraine have agree a truce until March 21st.

 

Sunday Morning Talk-Show Rhetoric... (via AP)

If Russian President Vladimir Putin doesn't back down in Crimea, he will face penalties from the West that will hurt the Russian economy and diminish Moscow's influence in the world, the White House said Sunday.

 

White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said the Obama administration's top priority is supporting the new Ukrainian government "in every way possible." He also said the United States would not recognize the results of a referendum taking place in Crimea Sunday on whether it should become part of Russia.

 

Pfeiffer said everything that Russia has done in Crimea has been a violation of international law and bad for stability in the region.

 

"President Putin has a choice about what he's going to do here. Is he going to continue to further isolate himself, further hurt his economy, further diminish Russian influence in the world, or is he going to do the right thing?" Pfeiffer said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

 

...

 

"President Putin has started a game of Russian roulette and I think the United States and the West have to be very clear in their response because he will calculate about how far he can go," said Sen. Robert Menendez, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

 

Menendez appeared on Fox News Sunday along with the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee. Corker said the U.S. and Europe were entering a "defining moment" in their relationship with Russia.

 

"Putin will continue to do this. He did it in Georgia a few years ago. He's moved into Crimea and he will move into other places unless we show that long-term resolve."

 

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut returned early Sunday from meetings in Ukraine. He called an annexation vote taking place in Crimea a "sham referendum." He said that Ukrainians he talked to, both inside the government and outside, said war could occur if Russia attempts to annex more territory. They indicated that "If Russia really does decide to move beyond Crimea it's going to be bloody and the fight may be long," he said on ABC's "This Week."

But it appears truce has been reached for now...

The defense ministries of Ukraine and Russia have agreed on a truce in Crimea until March 21, Ukraine's acting defense minister said on Sunday.

 

"An agreement has been reached with (Russia's) Black Sea Fleet and the Russian Defense Ministry on a truce in Crimea until March 21," Ihor Tenyukh told journalists on the sidelines of a cabinet meeting.

 

"No measures will be taken against our military facilities in Crimea during that time. Our military sites are therefore proceeding with a replenishment of reserves."

As Ukrainian armed forces appear resigned to the loss:

 

 

 

No confirmation as yet from the Russian authorities... which, it would appear, merely gives Putin more time to arrange his military pieces since for sure he shows no signs of backing down... as the tanks keep rolling

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Winston Churchill's picture

Thought you needed to be fighting before declaring a truce.

gmrpeabody's picture

Putin best not piss Obama off..

Oh..., wait.

Cap Matifou's picture

One of the many things Putin can do, but not Obama:
Vladimir Putin visits the central depository of Russia’s Central Bank, which holds two-thirds of the country’s gold and foreign exchange reserves
http://archive.premier.gov.ru/eng/events/news/13930/

flacon's picture

So stock market will have a HUGE up day tomorrow.... sigh...

disabledvet's picture

that is possible actually.
Clearly this Putin Full Retard into Ukraine does NOT have the support of the Red Army...which has only been able to rebuild itself thanks to...of all peoples...the Americans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj4JCPXQjk8
And we've sacrificed an entire American Generation to do that I might add.

And now we have problems with Command and Control in Russia?

No boots on the Ground?
BULLSHIT. This is "Crazy Colonel" and the USA has no choice BUT to go in.
ALL in actually.

In other words...the AMERICANS are gonna have to occupy and run that "Ukraine thing" now.

Say hello to the Free Shit Army phuckers.

SilverIsKing's picture

Was there really a truce or is this the US gov saying that so if and when Russia moves, the world will believe that they've broken a truce?

AlaricBalth's picture

White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said everything that Russia has done in Crimea has been a violation of international law and bad for stability in the region.

When accusing another nation of international law violations your accusation would have greater impact if you were standing on moral high ground. The list of US violations is long and sordid, the most egregious being the slaughter of innocent civilians, including children via drone strikes.

knukles's picture

... he said before he flew off on a campaign contributor and bundler's private jet for another taxpayer paid junket to bugger young boys in the Caribbean...

Manthong's picture

I can think of certain "leaders" in the west that should get the first 6 trys.

Ifigenia's picture

is refreshing to know what Vitoria Nullan did in Kiev.

Cap Matifou's picture

>Was there really a truce or is this the US gov saying that so if and when Russia moves, the world will believe that they've broken a truce?

In wag-the-dog world with armies of MSM presstitutes it doesn't really matter. They only fear the illusion of "peoples' opinion" shatters by irresponsible vote, like in this German paper:

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/03/the-germans-refuse-to-play-...

"Only a puny four percent, and we know who those are, favoured a military intervention by NATO forces. Whereas a staggering seventy eight percent believed that Western  hacks like Kerry or Merkel were mere hypocrites and that Russia defended indeed legitimate interests."

ThirdWorldDude's picture

I honestly hope you and McStain will get to lead the charge. 

smlbizman's picture

we've put our best man on it....menendez the peodophile,...

Bastiat's picture

 

"RussianRoulette??"   What a moron.

BlindMonkey's picture

You sir are off your meds.   Russians just brought down a drone without firing a shot.  Their SAM capability is the best in the world as well as their anti ship missiles.  How exactly are you suggesting that the U.S. can take control of the Ukraine against them?  Never mind actually.  I have determined that I am not interested in the ramblings of a fool on this matter.  

Spumoni's picture

Interesting thread...but it might also be that Washington is saying, "Hey wait a fuckin' minute...how did we get into this shit? State said there was low probability of a Russian military response! WTF!"

I can't help but wonder whether Diem is reincarnated and back to suck us into yet another blood-sucking bullshit war. Smells just like how we got into 'Nam, Iraq and Afghafartistan. Fire the idiots running State, maybe we can stay outta stupid things like this. Of course, what else can Wall St. do with all that money besides start a war? They can't build an economy on retired folks, and the last three have so screwed up the boys and girls they sent into harm's way that they aren't spending money....and have no jobs to earn it anyhow.

If someone had hired a gang of thugs to destroy the USA, they couldn't have done a better job than the crowd that's been in DC for the last 12 years.

Nationwide strike! Nobody drive, nobody show for work. No taxation without representation!

Perfecthedge's picture

I like your style Sir! Go on.  The country needs more people speaking out.

Ifigenia's picture

dont force people to fight wall street to defend what is left of US democracy

Soul Glow's picture

Because the Fed has no gold.  JPM sold it all to....well, probably Russia.

johngaltfla's picture

Russian Roulette with Vodka is one hell of a lot more fun than golf with 80 Presidential Mulligans. Stupid President, no children are allowed to play in Russia. I thought he was one of America's most intellgent Presidents?

Snidley Whipsnae's picture

Paul Craig Roberts, ex US Treasury Secretary, gives an extensive interview/overview containing his observations on what the US is attempting to accomplish in the Ukraine and what Putin will probably do to counter the US/NATO/EU moves... about 53 minute video titled "US definitely wants war in Ukraine"...

http://usawatchdog.com/united-states-definitely-wants-war-in-ukraine-pau...

This video contains geo-political and economic aspects of actions being taken in the Ukraine by most of the countries involved.

This video could have been titled "the neo-cons won't be happy until the whole damn world is vaporized"... imo

Spumoni's picture

Better yet, Putin can foment a putsch in, say, Honduras, and ask Washington what the difference is...

 

and to quote our state department, "Fuck the EU...:)!

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Obama plays Roullette with Blanks.  Putin does not.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

On July 14 we get to celebrate 100 years since the start of WW1

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

On July 28 we get to celebrate 100 years since the start of WW1.

June 28 was the "Trigger" event, with the shooting of Arch-Duke Ferdinand in Sarajevo.

tony wilson's picture

donte push me i am warning you.

do not push me i am telling you

listen donte do it again ok

listen to me do not push me again ok

ok

listen ok

do not do

ok do not do it again

ok

ok this is it now godamit

push me again vlad and i promise it will be the first straw.

TahoeBilly2012's picture

People who think our Government is only naive or desperate are missing the bigger picture. Powers behind the US want One World Order and an entire new "face" to the world.

Winston Churchill's picture

The best laid plans on mice and men......

slightlyskeptical's picture

I want that too. I just want an entirely different face than the PTB want.

Give everyone full employment at decent wages, inivdual liberties and a financial system that keeps prices in check and I would be in support of whatever it took to get there. Since that does not seem to be the plan, it needs to fail.

Greenskeeper_Carl's picture

I'm surprised this got so many up votes. You want this one world govt to "give everyone full employment and decent wages"? Yet you also want individual liberties and a financial system that keeps prices in check? How would this govt "give" anyone anything with out first taking it from others? So you want a smiley-er redistributionist one world govt that "respects individual liberties"? You can't have both of those things at the same time, my friend. Stealing money/property from one citizen to give others decent wages and full employment is the very opposite of respecting individual liberties. And a financial system that tries to manage prices is exactly what we have now, and it is failing just like every other financial system that attempts to control prices. You sound incredibly naive, like some starry eyed college freshman trying to 'occupy' the campus quad or something.

SofaPapa's picture

Let's hear it for Greenskeepers.  This is exactly what so many people seem incapable of understanding.  Freedom includes that many people fail.  Not everyone is a success, much as modern child-rearing methods might disagree.  In a just world, it is no one's role to "give" anyone a job.  A job is a transaction where there is work that needs doing, and a person who is capable of doing it efficiently produces net wealth, from which he then benefits.  There are no "jobs" in the sense that word continues to be thrown around.  When are people going to learn that government interference (ALL interference, 'positive' or 'negative') can do nothing but distort the reality that work must in the end be about production.  Redistribution of wealth is by definition non-productive.  We are a long long way from understanding that in this country, and seemingly getting no closer, at least based on the MSM narrative.

Quus Ant's picture

Friends- and I say friends because honestly we are all on the same side here regardless of ideology-

I have to respectfully disagree with both of you.  Skeptical and Papa.  You are both advocating/defending

systems that never were and never will be.  Skeptical seems to advocate a feudal system that guarantees

livelihood while incorporating its antithesis- individual liberty.  And Papa- the economy would not exist

without government interference.  How much of GDP is government spending?

As private industry moves closer to what you want Papa- shedding all the extraneous players at the

bottom of the pyramid (while vacuuming all the cash to the top btw) the government MUST step into

the breach.  If it doesn't you will have revolution and Skeptical's dreams will come true- kind of.

 

So we're kind of stuck right now until you two hash this out, because something new is coming. 

I don't know what it is, but it's coming. The whole idea of "work" is anachronistic.  We overproduce.

Deficiencies must be invented so markets will still exist.

Waiting on the new..... waiting on the new...... 

trader1's picture

someone who gets it.  

what would you like to see in the future?

Seer's picture

"what would you like to see in the future?"

I never ask of the future.  I can only say what it's going to be like... most probably don't want to know (because it's not to their liking- well, ain't necessarily to my liking either, but life is about adjusting, that or dying).

trader1's picture

certainly, there are probable outcomes ranging from the extinction of our human race to us colonizing other another planet(s) as our next evolutionary step...

what do you see as most likely given current trajectories and how do you think we could alter that trajectory to the "better" outcome, i.e the one where the human race doesn't die or makes an evolutionary leap shedding the self-destructive habits?

 

Quus Ant's picture

Wow, trader.  Big question. 

The problem I find is that even though I rail against all systems/illusions they are none the less a part of me. 

The fact that I fight them gives them validity and solidity.  My hope is with my son.  That he would be freer than I,

and his child even more so.  And would the world that seems ready to burst at the seams see fit

to give humans a little more time to discover themselves.

Seer's picture

Sigh.... all are viewing this using data sets that will no longer exist in the future.

ALL governing entitties, be they monolithic NWO or be they small-ish tribal ones, all have to face a world in which there are more of us AND there is less to support us.

I have never pretended to know or have suggest a "solution," as attractive as many theories might be, but I DO know what the REAL problem is.  And until we can address the issue of perpetuating the myth that there can be perpetual growth on a finite planet we'll but be continuing to point fingers, blame, and otherwise bash one-another over the head (of drone them).  It's a stark reality, either increase the world's resources (knowing they are finite and with every scoop full we extract we diminish that which is available for the future containing yet more people), or reduce the number of people.  By default, however, it is a certainty that Mother Nature will "resove" this for us...

Spumoni's picture

Well, we will never have a one-world government, for one reason. Tribalism. Okay, two reasons: racism. These days, the tribes are political. The races are all afraid of each other, despite having virtually identical anatomies, intelligence, attitudes and aspirations. As long as there are political boundaries, there will be those who will fight and die for "their country." It used to be valid, I guess, as assumptions go. But what happened when we built the 'global village?' We technically abolished the political boundaries. And we did it before establishing a level playing field, so big money is having a field day with every kind of arbitrage you can imagine. Since it's all about money, nobody gives a crap about the people who actually earn and spend it. Because, as the myth says, money managers are fate-bound to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. 

Resources are finite, and getting finit-er every day. The solution is to quit squabbling over bullshit and get on with empowering the phenomenon known as the human mind (accomplished through education, a living wage, and an infrastructure that doesn't reward greed). Once we find a way off this beaten-up old rock, we can expand our horizons, and if Tony doesn't like the Jews on his planet, he can emigrate. 

We are charged to find solutions, and that is the ingredient lacking in the current stew. My suggestion is Elon Musk on a ticket with Richard Branson. Fuck the Pentagon, the politicians we have, and every stinking idiot bankster on this planet. The first space ship is for them.

trader1's picture

one world government is quite possible, with several ways of getting there.  how to get people to come along for that ride is the challenge, and that faction is not ready to give up anytime soon.  look to the EU/UN as one aspirational model.  there are even other models where autonomy could be distributed to self-governing entities whereby those entities have all the required basics to sustain basic sustenance independently.

ridding oneself of the narrow-minded religious myths that shape consciousness and interactions with one another will be a necessary step towards freedom from the prison many currently see themselves in.  

Seer's picture

It's about the map for continued control.  Fairly well enunciated by Zbignew decades ago...

TahoeBilly2012's picture

Yes but what is at the end of the coninued control? How about a global slave ship run out of Jerusalum?

Seer's picture

It never stops.

And, the target is never acquired.  Things are WAY too dynamic.

You see, to them it's not the destination but the journey, the journey of staying in control (and doing so doesn't necessarily mean you have to have your arms wrapped around something- Edward Bernays provides for a bit of insight here).

If it weren't the Jews (assuming that it is now) then it would be some other group(ing).  I will guarantee that the commonality will/would be a lust for POWER.

Spumoni's picture

Soooo many power brokers are not Jews - and the fools whipping up that sentiment on this site are so blind to fact that their cynicism is worthless. If you can't even recognize who your enemy truly is, you have no hope of a good outcome for yourself.

Get over the racism, you fucking foolish idiots. You are pawns, and you don't have the intelligence to see how you got snookered. Hate to break it to you, but no constellation of ANY of Abraham's children can carry a conspiracy - they are prone to argument and hate (just like the rest of us).

All that good rebellious energy drains away in a pipe made by uninformed, misinformed, ignorant, deliberately stupid and hateful shitheads. Jesus would throw you all into the gates of hell.

socalbeach's picture

Tell me what's wrong with this scenario:  Powers behind the US think they can have a limited nuclear war with Russia that would severly cripple both of them, setting the stage for the world government.  It could work like this - initially conventional warfare that would escalate to tactical nuclear weapons being used. That conflict would escalate further to nuclear attacks on major cities in the US and Russia. The conflict would be stopped by the US shadow government after Russia gets a few last attacks in.  Sounds crazy I know.

BlueStreet's picture

Should also give enough time for the S&P to reach the February low.  Pull up your shorts boys, drop to the ground and give Putin 20 good ones.