The Russians sold Alaska to the US fair and square. We have the receipt.

Yes, everything Putin has done with Crimea is rotten, but there's a world of difference between Russia invading Crimea and Russia invading eastern Ukraine--a distinction that we in the USA with our own problems would have a hard time appreciating. Crimea was historically part of Russia; it's a major base of their naval operations; it's a peninsula that has some geographic separation from the rest of Ukraine; and it doesn't have much of an economy of its own--oh, and as illegitimate as that referendum was, probably most of the Crimean population wants to be part of Russia.

Ukraine can continue to be Ukraine without Crimea. Now, if Russia seizes on some fake provocation to decide occupy eastern Ukraine, that's a different story. And the United States and the EU need to get their act together and not let multinational corporations' bottom lines be the arbiter of everything and put together a real economic deterrent that will convey to the Russians in no uncertain that there will be economic consequences if they try to split Ukraine.

We should respond by helping the Ukraine out economically and helping expedite their desired entry into the EU (unless that's actually a punishment)

I will say, its encouraging that they felt the need to stage a referendum. On the other hand, they didn't bother to concoct plausible results so that's maybe kind of like they were scratching their nose with their middle finger.

Some perspective on Crimea from Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times from a couple weeks ago:

Russia has just driven Ukraine into the West’s orbit and acquired a long-term headache. Russia is already pouring billions of dollars into the bits of Georgia and Moldova that it pilfered, and now it’ll have to subsidize Crimea (which depends on Ukraine for water and electricity).

Putin’s other problem: If Crimea becomes independent, its pro-Russian population will no longer vote in Ukrainian elections. The upshot would be Ukraine skewing even more to the West.

So yes, let Putin have Crimea. It was a foregone conclusion anyway. And yes, we can afford to have a little faux in our outrage over Crimea. My worry now is whether the West can convey to Russia that the next line they cross really is the red line. And it's not so much Obama and our dysfunctional government I'm worried about, it's Angela Merkel and the EU. Russia's economic ties with the EU are multiples greater than its economic ties with the United States.

Can we give @2 a little "troll" tag so everyone knows he's talking out his ass?

@3: They've already marched into parts of Eastern Ukraine. They stormed a refinery or gas processing town a few days ago.

Venomlash @10, true enough. That incursion was seemingly to secure gas supplies to Crimea, so there's still the possibility that the Russians will stop there and it's not the harbinger of Russian troops marching into Donetsk and Kharkiv and Odessa. Even then, it raises the question, if the Russians want to stop at Crimea, do they now want to redraw the Crimean border with Ukraine?

The Ukrainians are in such a touchy situation because eventually there has to be some Russian provocation for which they cannot turn the other cheek. They can't just let the Russians keep establishing facts on the ground. But then, the moment the Ukrainians fight back, that gives the Russians the excuse they need to advance just as far as they want to--if advancing is what they want.

Putin would invade Lithuania and the Baltic states, if anything.

This is why I helped arm and train the First Nations peoples of the Yukon and BC - in case of a Russian invasion.

What is it with dictators and their sham elections? Why can't they ever with satisfied with results in the low 70's or 80's? Why does it always have to be 90+%? 93% of the Crimean voters "voted" 93% in favor of joining Russia. Bashar Assad won Syria's election in 2007 with 97% of the vote...

For anyone interested in learning more about the rich history of some of these seemingly remote places, this recently published book about Odessa comes to mind:
Odessa: Genius and Death in a City of Dr…

To make a long story short, Russia has nowhere near the cultural or historical claim on a city like Odessa that it does on Crimea.

@14 They're both rank amateurs. The Great Leader of North Korea Kim Jung Un received %100 of the vote.

Poland should seize Kaliningrad, then we can call it even.

I think the Alaska Native population might dispute that the Russians were there first.

This is shitty journalism. No context. NATO? Warsaw? Like the US is in any position to judge this sort of imperialism? The constitution Paul Bremer wrote for Iraq is less credible than the Crimea secession vote...

@3 The idea that Crimea was a part of Russia is a nonsensical justification of Putin's invasion. Ukraine as an autonomous entity came into existence at the end of World War 1. A 30+ year difference with Crimea. If the fact that Russia controlled Crimea for hundreds of years is a good excuse, then Russia can lay claim to central Poland, all the Stans except Afghanistan and Pakistan, Finland, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and the Baltics. Which is why those nations, especially Poland and the Baltics, are so worried.

@20 as long as the US doesn't have their NGO's foment street revolts to overthrow their governments - giving Putin his pretext - and if the citizens don't then vote to join Russia, I think Poland and the Baltic states have nothing to worry about. But if we really wanted to ease Russia's concerns over her neighbors, we could also consider keeping the promise we made during the breakup of the USSR to not further extend NATO closer to Russia's borders encompassing its former states