Obama may look out of his depth and bested by Putin at every turn.
But he has a long history with Ukraine:
As a U.S. senator, Barack Obama won $48 million in federal funding to help Ukraine destroy thousands of tons of guns and ammunition – weapons which are now unavailable to the Ukrainian army as it faces down Russian President Vladimir Putin during his invasion of Crimea.
In August 2005, just seven months after his swearing-in, Obama traveled to Donetsk in Eastern Ukraine with then-Indiana Republican Senator Dick Lugar, touring a conventional weapons site.
The two met in Kiev with President Victor Yushchenko, making the case that an existing Cooperative Threat Reduction Program covering the destruction of nuclear weapons should be expanded to include artillery, small arms, anti-aircraft weapons, and conventional ammunition of all kinds.
After a stopover in London, the senators returned to Washington and declared that the U.S. should devote funds to speed up the destruction of more than 400,000 small arms, 1,000 anti-aircraft missiles, and more than 15,000 tons of ammunition.
Many of the artillery shells shown in photographs from Donetsk, multiple weapons experts told MailOnline, would be the same types of ammunition required to repel advancing Russian divisions as they advanced to the west, had they not been destroyed.
Imagine Obama seeking to cut a nation’s military to a level at which it couldn’t defend itself. It can’t happen here!
‘Vast stocks of conventional munitions and military supplies have accumulated in Ukraine,’ Obama said in am August 30, 2005 statement from Donetsk. ‘Some of this stockpile dates from World War I and II, yet most dates from Cold War buildup and the stocks left behind by Soviet withdrawals from East Germany, the Czech Republic, Hungry and Poland.’
‘We need to eliminate these stockpiles for the safety of the Ukrainian people and people around world, by keeping them out of conflicts around the world.’
Making the world safe from Ukrainian hegemony? Was he on drugs? (Never mind, he’d just plead the fifth.)
Obama said then that the existing Cooperative Threat Reduction Program ‘has effectively disposed of thousands of weapons of mass destruction, but we must do far more to keep deadly conventional weapons like anti-aircraft missiles out of the hands of terrorists.’
How’d that work out? So glad you asked:
Much of the Ukrainian small-arms supply was ultimately exported, not scrapped, by a Yushchenko regime that chose revenue from arms dealing over the cost of melting down metal.
In 2008 the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported that between 2004 and 2007, the Ukrainian Export Control Service told the UN that it sent 721,777 small arms and light weapons to 27 different countries.
The United States was the top recipient, with more than 260,000 of those weapons, followed by the UK and Libya, which each imported more than 101,000.
Could it be that Senator Obama’s imbecility in 2005 led to the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods in 2012—on President Obama’s watch? Sounds like. And two years later, Crimea fell.
I heard a caller on talk radio make the point that Putin is ex-KGB (once KGB, always KGB). As such, he would have had mountains of material—opposition research, if you will—on the Left in America. Heck, they funded much of it. They would have known who Barack Obama was, merely from his associations with Bill Ayers, with Jeremiah Wright, with Derrick Bell. And they would have had a whole folder filled with pictures and clippings of this episode alone.
Putin took no risk invading Crimea. He knew Obama wouldn’t oppose him; it sounds like Obama supports him. “We need to eliminate these stockpiles for the safety of the Ukrainian people and people around world, by keeping them out of conflicts around the world.”
Obama was right: after eliminating Ukraine’s means of self defense, it had to no choice but to stay out of conflict. And Putin just laughs. Bashar Assad told him it would be easy, but he didn’t believe him.