Is Putin set to invade the rest of Ukraine?

[SPQR]

Well, as Wikipedia notes:

But Tito believed in a communism rising from within each individual nation--he was a devout nationalist--and this does not seem to dovetail very nicely with traditional Marxist doctrine.  In fact, it was this heterodox belief that ultimately led to the breakup of the onetime friendship between Stalin and Tito (before the former tried, several times, to have the latter assassinated).

You are neglecting the fact that he was President of of Non-Aligned Movemnent. The Non Aligned Movement were neither either communist or for the west.The organization was founded in Belgrade(Yugoslavia) in 1961, and was largely conceived by India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru; Indonesia's first president, Sukarno; Egypt's second president, Gamal Abdel Nasser; Ghana's first president Kwame Nkrumah; and Yugoslavia's president, Josip Broz Tito. All five leaders were prominent advocates of a middle course for states in the Developing World between the Western and Eastern blocs in the Cold War. The phrase itself was first used to represent the doctrine by Indian diplomat V. K. Krishna Menon in 1953, at the United Nations. We can conclude he was neither and decided to reform his beliefs. Remember,Stalin's successor, Nikita Khrushchev, later commented that "Tito was next on Stalin's list, after Korea."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement

[pjohns]

Wouldn't being a communist, hence socialist, and a nationalist have put him into the same category as Mussolini and Hitler?

I have already noted, in a prior post in this thread, that Tito appears to have been roughly a cross between Stalin and Hitler.  (And yes, Hitler was, indeed, a socialist--in fact, the word, "socialist," even appears in National Socialist, or "Nazi" for short--and he railed against capitalism.  So he was certainly not a creature of the extreme right.) 

[pjohns]

You are neglecting the fact that he was President of of Non-Aligned Movemnent. The Non Aligned Movement were neither either communist or for the west.The organization was founded in Belgrade(Yugoslavia) in 1961, and was largely conceived by India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru; Indonesia's first president, Sukarno; Egypt's second president, Gamal Abdel Nasser; Ghana's first president Kwame Nkrumah; and Yugoslavia's president, Josip Broz Tito. All five leaders were prominent advocates of a middle course for states in the Developing World between the Western and Eastern blocs in the Cold War. The phrase itself was first used to represent the doctrine by Indian diplomat V. K. Krishna Menon in 1953, at the United Nations. We can conclude he was neither and decided to reform his beliefs. Remember,Stalin's successor, Nikita Khrushchev, later commented that "Tito was next on Stalin's list, after Korea."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement

I thoroughly agree with almost all of your post.

The only point of (slight) contention is this:  I really do not believe that Tito would have simply withered away, had Stalin come after Yugoslavia.  (Stalin actually backed off in 1949, when the Soviets and the Hungarians--essentially, Soviet puppets--were massed along Yugoslavia's northern border.  And Tito briskly warned Stalin, in 1950, against Stalin's continued assassination attempts, lest he--Tito--should have Stalin assassinated, instead. 

[SPQR]

I thoroughly agree with almost all of your post.

The only point of (slight) contention is this:  I really do not believe that Tito would have simply withered away, had Stalin come after Yugoslavia.  (Stalin actually backed off in 1949, when the Soviets and the Hungarians--essentially, Soviet puppets--were massed along Yugoslavia's northern border.  And Tito briskly warned Stalin, in 1950, against Stalin's continued assassination attempts, lest he--Tito--should have Stalin assassinated, instead.

I can agree with some of your points.