Ukraine War Escalation

[eddiememphis]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/nov/19/russia-ukraine-war-live-moscow-kyiv-volodymyr-zelenskyy-latest-news-updates
https://www.foxnews.com/world/ukraine-fires-first-barrage-us-made-long-range-missiles-russia-kremlin-says

President Joe Biden has authorized Ukraine to use U.S.-supplied missiles to strike deeper inside Russia

"Aggression against Russia by any nonnuclear state, but with the support of a nuclear state, is proposed to be considered as their joint attack on Russia," he (Putin) said during a televised meeting of Russia's Security Council.

"Russia will also consider the possibility of using nuclear weapons when receiving reliable information about a massive launch of means of aerospace attack and their crossing of our state border."


1000 days into this debacle, do those of you that were in favor of American assistance to Ukraine still support it?

[bellavite1]

Never was, never will be.
We need to mind our own damn business.
WE have (or can manufacture) everything we need.
Let the rest of the world figure it out.

[Scanker19]

Well it’s what CNN told them to support, so yes.

[DDT951]

And Ukraine used the missiles today.

Russia says they shot them all down. Ukraine says they hit a military base.

And stock markets in Europe dropped after that. Gold in Europe went up.

[Mick-Boy]

I, for one, think risking nuclear war over which corrupt regime rules south east Ukraine is totally reasonable.

[FoxtArt]

I for one side with the people who can no longer speak.

And I'm talking about all those from 1935+ that died from similar sentiments by mainstream Americans. "the war in Europe is not our problem".

We should've taken the gloves off from Ukraine years ago, and then this wouldn't be going on for 1000 days. American's don't win wars anymore, we masterbate politicians and bureacrats.

Russia isn't going to nuke anything. But if we did what the communist sympathizing party wanted (GOP), Russia would've steamed through Ukraine, and then the next eventual conflict, after we also ignored the invasion of Poland, we'd be paying 4-5x as much, and expending lives as well.

Very intelligent GOP members have received intelligence briefings on these matters and don't base their opinions on a Russian propaganda war, they base it on actual US Intelligence and facts, and it's far cheaper to pay our US Companys and have Ukrainians sacrifice their lives, than the alternative. (The vast, vast majority of the financial aid has stayed right here in the US of A, paying Defense contractors and wages).

I'd much rather be paying for this than the "stimmy" crap that trump signed, which had every mouth-breathing fake business scamming the US Gov for "paycheck protection loans" that have all largely been forgiven, letting people keep their fancy cars and expensive vacations. If you want to see real corruption, look here first.

[BushMasterBoy]

When a $2000 drone can knock out a million dollar tank, tactics have changed. If Baghdad had this tech, it would have been a catastrophe. Dumb Russians could have bought Ukraine with what they wasted. That being said, we need to concentrate on US internal security. We are too lax on who we let in.

[Sawin]

Great. Should be interesting, huh?

[Clint45]

Putin may be a lot of things, but he isn't stupid.

He is not likely to do more than bluster, and possibly fire a few tacnukes into Kyiv... which now would be deemed justifiable if missile strikes inside Russia continue.

Most Americans realize that at least a third of the cash transfers to Ukraine were misappropriated and diverted to offshore accounts... and they'll never be audited or held accountable.

[TEAMRICO]

I for one side with the people who can no longer speak.

And I'm talking about all those from 1935+ that died from similar sentiments by mainstream Americans. "the war in Europe is not our problem".

We should've taken the gloves off from Ukraine years ago, and then this wouldn't be going on for 1000 days. American's don't win wars anymore, we masterbate politicians and bureacrats.

Russia isn't going to nuke anything. But if we did what the communist sympathizing party wanted (GOP), Russia would've steamed through Ukraine, and then the next eventual conflict, after we also ignored the invasion of Poland, we'd be paying 4-5x as much, and expending lives as well.

Very intelligent GOP members have received intelligence briefings on these matters and don't base their opinions on a Russian propaganda war, they base it on actual US Intelligence and facts, and it's far cheaper to pay our US Companys and have Ukrainians sacrifice their lives, than the alternative. (The vast, vast majority of the financial aid has stayed right here in the US of A, paying Defense contractors and wages).

I'd much rather be paying for this than the "stimmy" crap that trump signed, which had every mouth-breathing fake business scamming the US Gov for "paycheck protection loans" that have all largely been forgiven, letting people keep their fancy cars and expensive vacations. If you want to see real corruption, look here first.


Well grab your rifle and go fight.
I could care less about Europe.

[Wolfshoon]

Jon Bolton has entered the chatroom……….?

[hurley842002]

Well grab your rifle and go fight.
I could care less about Europe.

Couldn?t care less, but yes I agree with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FoxtArt]

Yeah, "couldnt care less" is what Americans are known for. Same idiocy in the 30s and early 40s cost us far more financially and in AMERICAN lives. Live for today all you want, al that matters is you get to draw your SSN and die in a medicaid bed. Who cares what kids and grandkids get to deal with.

[Clint45]

Yeah, "couldnt care less" is what Americans are known for. Same idiocy in the 30s and early 40s cost us far more financially and in AMERICAN lives. Live for today all you want, al that matters is you get to draw your SSN and die in a medicaid bed. Who cares what kids and grandkids get to deal with.

Americans sent Ukraine $67 Billion in military aid, as of October 21st, per Department of State.

That seems rather generous.

[hurley842002]

Yeah, "couldnt care less" is what Americans are known for. Same idiocy in the 30s and early 40s cost us far more financially and in AMERICAN lives. Live for today all you want, al that matters is you get to draw your SSN and die in a medicaid bed. Who cares what kids and grandkids get to deal with.

I realize you are the self proclaimed ?expert? on? well, all things, but we are not well as a country, people that are normally okay are hurting. So my question to you, and hopefully you can post some facts, is how long do we continue to take care of other countries, while our own citizens suffer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FoxtArt]

Here you go.

https://www.investopedia.com/united-states-military-spending-by-war-8696931#:~:text=When%20adjusted%20to%202024%20doll ars,11%20Iraq%20and%20Afghanistan%20wars.

WW2 is 5.7 Trillion. 100 times more expensive than the Ukraine War.

Iraq/Afganistan were 3.6 Trillion. 62 times more expensive than the Ukraine War.

Donald Trump's presidency added 8 trillion in deficit spending during his first term. 137 times more expensive than the Ukraine War.

They paycheck protection program was a 953 billion debacle that saw hundreds of billions burned in absolute corruption. Maybe some members here even "benefited" and got to buy some cars and guns for whatever "businesses" they were getting "paycheck protection" with.

So tell me, how 58 billion, is just so unreasonably expensive that its far worse than 5.6 fucking trillion dollars when America ignores international conflicts within a global economy and with issues such as Tiawan looming on the horizon.

Guess what, time keeps marching on well past tomorrow, and we have to pay for ALL OF IT. If China determines we will half ass Tiawan, you're paying for WWIII at a cost of probably 10 Trillion. If Russia continues on into Poland and beyond, your paying for WWIII at a cost of probably 10 Trillion.

A country cannot be successful and isolated, the very reason you live in the richest country in the world is because of everything we do internationally.

But go ahead, keep repeating Soviet talking points, when inevitably isolationism fails as it always has, and we have a powerful Iran, China, USSR alliance expanding, I hope you're contributing 100% of your paycheck and YOUR sons.

Me personally, I like supporting our US Defense industry, paying American wages, to build American things, all while we don't lose a single damn soldier at a cost less than 1/60th of our wars. Because I'm not a ostrich, I know problems only get worse when they get ignored.

[hurley842002]

Here you go.

https://www.investopedia.com/united-states-military-spending-by-war-8696931#:~:text=When%20adjusted%20to%202024%20doll ars,11%20Iraq%20and%20Afghanistan%20wars.

WW2 is 5.7 Trillion. 100 times more expensive than the Ukraine War.

Iraq/Afganistan were 3.6 Trillion. 62 times more expensive than the Ukraine War.

Donald Trump's presidency added 8 trillion in deficit spending during his first term. 137 times more expensive than the Ukraine War.

They paycheck protection program was a 953 billion debacle that saw hundreds of billions burned in absolute corruption. Maybe some members here even "benefited" and got to buy some cars and guns for whatever "businesses" they were getting "paycheck protection" with.

So tell me, how 58 billion, is just so unreasonably expensive that its far worse than 5.6 fucking trillion dollars when America ignores international conflicts within a global economy and with issues such as Tiawan looming on the horizon.

Guess what, time keeps marching on well past tomorrow, and we have to pay for ALL OF IT. If China determines we will half ass Tiawan, you're paying for WWIII at a cost of probably 10 Trillion. If Russia continues on into Poland and beyond, your paying for WWIII at a cost of probably 10 Trillion.

A country cannot be successful and isolated, the very reason you live in the richest country in the world is because of everything we do internationally.

But go ahead, keep repeating Soviet talking points, when inevitably isolationism fails as it always has, and we have a powerful Iran, China, USSR alliance expanding, I hope you're contributing 100% of your paycheck and YOUR sons.

Me personally, I like supporting our US Defense industry, paying American wages, to build American things, all while we don't lose a single damn soldier at a cost less than 1/60th of our wars. Because I'm not a ostrich, I know problems only get worse when they get ignored.

Y?all can ban me for this, but fuck you FoxtArt, you keep my sons out of your fucking mouth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bailey Guns]

Wish we had a like button...

[bellavite1]

Same.

[Mick-Boy]

https://ildu.com.ua/

Put your money where your mouth is.

[eddiememphis]

Americans sent Ukraine $67 Billion in military aid, as of October 21st, per Department of State.

That seems rather generous.

https://www.gao.gov/blog/ukraine-aid-important-so-oversight-funding-and-assistance#:~:text=As%20of%20April%2C%20Congress%2 0has,countries%20affected%20by%20the%20invasion.

As of April, Congress has appropriated more than $174 billion to assist Ukraine. This includes funding to purchase missiles, ammunition, and combat vehicles for Ukraine. It also includes economic and humanitarian assistance to help those in Ukraine and neighboring countries affected by the invasion.

67... 174... Who cares? We'll just print more!

[BushMasterBoy]

Nuclear weapons are a terrible thing. I used to work on a nuclear weapons system. My father worked on a nuclear weapons system and it killed him with a rare blood cancer. When the weapon explodes it create radionuclides or fallout.
When the weather distributes the fallout around the globe, the fallout descends to the ground. Cows end up eating the fallout. Kids will ingest the fallout concentrated in the cows milk.
To prevent this scenario, I can see the alphabets and the .mil getting involved. The US has just evacuated the embassy in Kyiv. This is a sign.


https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-issues-warning-us-with-new-nuclear-doctrine-2024-11-19/

[FoxtArt]

Y?all can ban me for this, but fuck you FoxtArt, you keep my sons out of your fucking mouth.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chill. Case was made - international enemies and problems don't disappear by ignoring them. We tried that leading up to WWII. It lead to the biggest war the world had ever seen, and America lost many sons.
We're in the equivalent of the 1930's now. China is spending more on aerospace development in the next 6 years than we have since the space race.

I won't see mine at risk either because if this idiocy, clearly you don't want to risk yours. At the end of the day, discussion matters little as DC will do whatever the heck they want in any event.

The sun nevertheless rises and sets. Have a good day.

[FoxtArt]

Nuclear weapons are a terrible thing. I used to work on a nuclear weapons system. My father worked on a nuclear weapons system and it killed him with a rare blood cancer. When the weapon explodes it create radionuclides or fallout.
When the weather distributes the fallout around the globe, the fallout descends to the ground. Cows end up eating the fallout. Kids will ingest the fallout concentrated in the cows milk.
To prevent this scenario, I can see the alphabets and the .mil getting involved. The US has just evacuated the embassy in Kyiv. This is a sign.


https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-issues-warning-us-with-new-nuclear-doctrine-2024-11-19/

https://ua.usembassy.gov/mascot-update-u-s-embassy-kyiv-ukraine/

I wouldn't call it an evacuation, sounds like intel of missles/drones to me. I would think we'd be flying them out if nukes were anticipated.

[BushMasterBoy]

https://ua.usembassy.gov/mascot-update-u-s-embassy-kyiv-ukraine/

I wouldn't call it an evacuation, sounds like intel of missles/drones to me. I would think we'd be flying them out if nukes were anticipated.

Zaporhiza nuclear plant goes into meltdown and you will have a disaster. The Rus has been attacking the power grid.
The nuclear plant is huge. The area will be scorched earth and unusable for a long time.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-targets-ukraine-power-grid-massive-missile-strike-rcna180458

[Mick-Boy]

WW2 was, objectively, the worst thing humans have ever done. Maybe, just maybe, the lesson isn't that appeasement doesn't work. Maybe the lesson is that we should be looking for off ramps and deescalating conflicts at every opportunity so that we avoid 60million dead. Buchanan's book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168) offers a lot of support for that case. If you're not much of a reader, you can listed to Buchanan talk about it here (https://beta.c-span.org/program/book-tv/churchill-hitler-and-the-unnecessary-war/193817).

However, setting aside lazy WW2 metaphors, the war in Ukraine was instigated by the west.

You can listen to John Mearsheimer talk about the history in this video from 2014 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4&t=127s). You can read a blow by blow from Geopolitical Economy (https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2022/02/27/us-nato-expansion-ukraine-russia-intervene/). You can read Jeffery Sachs go through the history (https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4741597-save-ukraine-from-american-meddling/). You can read the 2008 confidential memo from the current CIA director that the entry of Ukraine into NATO was a red line for Russia (https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html). You can read the NATO secretary general (https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm?selectedLocale=en) talk about how Russia went to war to "prevent NATO, more NATO, close to their borders". You can also learn about the peace deals that were scuttled (https://mronline.org/2023/02/07/former-israeli-pm-bennett-says-u-s-blocked-his-attempts-at-a-russia-ukraine-peace-deal/) by the US foreign policy establishment.

I would highly recommend Scott Horton's new book Provoked (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1733647376?ref_=cm_sw_r_ffobk_cp_ud_dp_K2D6KFC8MSG XNW6HWGTV&peakEvent=1&dealEvent=0&skipTwisterOG=1&bestFormat=true) if you want it all laid out sequentially and loaded with footnotes.

Ukrainian neutrality could have prevented this war. Ukrainian neutrality could still probably end it. All those dead Ukrainians and Russians, who can't speak for themselves, would be alive except for the complete and unearned hubris of the neocons in positions of power. That same hubris is certain that Russia will not resort to using nuclear weapons (https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-fires-us-made-long-range-missiles-at-russia-hours-after-putin-lowers-nuclear-weapon-threshold-13256672).

I hope they're right. At the same time, I think it's insane to be risking the complete destruction of our country over who controls South East Ukraine... On Russia's border.... over 5000 miles from DC.

[Sawin]

Has anyone given actual thought to the possibility that wars and pandemics are "allowed to happen" if not actually orchestrated, with the intention of killing millions of people?

[DDT951]

https://ua.usembassy.gov/mascot-update-u-s-embassy-kyiv-ukraine/

I wouldn't call it an evacuation, sounds like intel of missles/drones to me. I would think we'd be flying them out if nukes were anticipated.

What I am seeing on TV is that it is expected that Russia is the next days will launch one or more hypersonic ballistic missiles capable of carrying nukes at Kyiv. It is belived Russia show they would and have the capability to nuke Kyiv.

It being reported that both sides say the war will end when Trump comes in.

Both sides are jockeying for the best negotiating power.

The thinking is slightly that Ukraine wants to trade Kursk for land in Eastern Ukraine. That is why the ATACMS are vital. To keep Russia out of Kursk.

[DDT951]

Has anyone given actual thought to the possibility that wars and pandemics are "allowed to happen" if not actually orchestrated, with the intention of killing millions of people?

No. The extraterrestrials wouldn’t allow that to happen.

[rondog]

Has anyone given actual thought to the possibility that wars and pandemics are "allowed to happen" if not actually orchestrated, with the intention of killing millions of people?

Well, duh. New World Order, one world government, ethnic cleansing, etc. The scary part is someday they may get it right.

[eddiememphis]

WW2 was, objectively, the worst thing humans have ever done.

I guess you didn't hear that Trump won again.

[Clint45]

Well, duh. New World Order, one world government, ethnic cleansing, etc. The scary part is someday they may get it right.

This planet might be better with 75% less people on it.

I am starting a list, lol.

[hollohas]

Me personally, I like supporting our US Defense industry

You mean depleting our defenses.


paying American wages

With unnecessary deficit spending and increased costs on American taxpayers.


And now we've given one of our biggest adversaries all the training and information they could possibly ever dream of to defeat many of our weapons.

At the same time, Russia has hit stride, absolute peak defense production.

Russia is producing more than 3 times more munitions than we are, as a result of being forced to to keep up the fight. If this fight does expand to us, we're not prepared and we've given our enemy everything they need to have the jump on us.

3.5 million Russians are working in the defense sector. Double compared to before the war. Their factories are running 24/7.

Russia production is outpacing ours by 3 fold and our stockpiles are empty. We're not hurting Russia, we're HELPING them gain an even stronger war footing. We're hurting ourselves.

But sure. Let's push our own defense supply into critical levels at a time the American taxpayer is fucked all because war is "great for factories" . That's some boneheaded bullshit.

[eddiememphis]

This planet might be better with 75% less people on it.

I am starting a list, lol.

Who is #1?

[Scanker19]

Can it be me? I?ve always wanted to be first at something

[Aloha_Shooter]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/nov/19/russia-ukraine-war-live-moscow-kyiv-volodymyr-zelenskyy-latest-news-updates
https://www.foxnews.com/world/ukraine-fires-first-barrage-us-made-long-range-missiles-russia-kremlin-says

President Joe Biden has authorized Ukraine to use U.S.-supplied missiles to strike deeper inside Russia

"Aggression against Russia by any nonnuclear state, but with the support of a nuclear state, is proposed to be considered as their joint attack on Russia," he (Putin) said during a televised meeting of Russia's Security Council.

"Russia will also consider the possibility of using nuclear weapons when receiving reliable information about a massive launch of means of aerospace attack and their crossing of our state border."


1000 days into this debacle, do those of you that were in favor of American assistance to Ukraine still support it?

Yes. What I don't support is the blank check approach. Putin is aggressive when he thinks he can get away with it -- he didn't try anything when Trump was in power and he'll probably seek a face-saving way to end this now. I still maintain he only moved in on Ukraine because he expected Biden and the rest of the West to just rollover and accept his annexation.

[FoxtArt]

Yeah. People forget that Russia didn't invade to reclaim eastern Ukraine or have recognition for Crimea.

They sped towards Kiev with everything they had, they were going to blitz the entire country. At the time, Ukraine had no support from the US or Europe because we expected Russia to quickly prevail, and we didn't want Russia recovering western supplies.

But... Ukraine beat them back. THEN the support came in.

Since then, Russia has depleted half of it's armor and a tremendous amount of Artillery. It does not have the production capability or the economy to replace either in quantity. Modern arms are expensive and low-quantity. Russia's battlefield tactic has always surrounded sheer number and expendibility. Russia has always had a tremendous stockpile of artillery and armor. This war has tought us the value in artillery and hybrid, combination battlefields, and western nations have been ramping up production of munitions which takes time. These are much better lessons to learn when there are no US lives being lost as a consequence; if we found ourselves in a China/NK/Russia confrontation prior to this war, the lession would have been expensive, as it still would've taken us a couple years to appropriately ramp up where it matters.

Most importantly, it has lent us a lession to be prepared for drone warefare, and to not overly invest in armor. China would've happily lent us that lession a few years from now, we'd have had no defenses for the drone swarms they could produce.

Outside of munitions, we have not been sending newly produced equipment to Ukraine. We've largely been sending them assets that we would've decommissioned. Those assets come with a price tag attached, and yes, technically deplete our stockpile, but would've been sent for scrap before our next near-peer war regardless.

That's not to say it's been cheap; but the ROI of taking out half of Russia's armor and artillary and the lessions WE have learned have come at a cost of 1/60th what we paid to fight against a 3rd world, insurgent population that had no access to armor or artillary, at a cost of 60,000 US casualties (7k+ fatalities).

Our adversaries have also learned that the world won't ignore a new expansion and restoration of the USSR, and that their own confidence in their own capabilities is grossly misplaced. We have shown that even our old equipment from the 90's can kick their ass, and learned any weaknesses in the process. We have not shown them what we, ourselves, would do to them.

[BushMasterBoy]

Just think what STRATCOM could do with a Starship 150 ton payload. Whoever has the weapons, makes the rules.

[DDT951]

And Russia has launched an ICBM at Ukraine today…

[eddiememphis]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2d1lj3nwqo

US President Joe Biden has agreed to give Ukraine anti-personnel land mines, a US defence official told the BBC, a move seen as an attempt to slow Russian troops who have been steadily advancing in Ukraine's east in recent months.

Russia and the US are not signatories to the Ottawa Convention banning the use or transfer of anti-personnel landmines, although Ukraine is.

Trump said he would end this war on day one if elected. Is the current administration so petty and spiteful as to sabotage those efforts?

[buffalobo]

Yes.

If you're unarmed, you are a victim.

[Clint45]

Who is #1?

No names, more a list of geographical regions.

[BushMasterBoy]

Putin says he is taking the conflict global. Not sure what he means by that. If he attacks a NATO base, then game on.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-says-russia-fired-hypersonic-174448527.html

[Joe_K]

Praying the war ends as soon as possible, with the fewest lives lost. It cannot end soon enough.

[FoxtArt]

Putin says he is taking the conflict global. Not sure what he means by that. If he attacks a NATO base, then game on.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-says-russia-fired-hypersonic-174448527.html

"Could". Honestly he is less likely to over escalate than NATO is. Why? Escalation poses more risk to RU than anyone else. Russian isnt near peer and can hardly fight Ukraine. For those wondering too, the threat of nukes is not too likely an actual risk.
Not because of the US or NATO but because of China. To China's credit, they WILL NOT let putin use nukes offensively, in any case. And a lot of that is because they depend on that mutual consideration being unbroken when they invade Tiawan down the road... Iran and China do not want the international threshold for usage being lowered by their buddy pootie.

[Scanker19]

I only own part of a globe so my reference isn’t the best, but isn’t the fact that North Korea is assisting Russia, and NATO (US, UK, Germany, et al) assisting Ukraine kind of, partially, probably global?

[Sawin]

"Could". Honestly he is less likely to over escalate than NATO is. Why? Escalation poses more risk to RU than anyone else. Russian isnt near peer and can hardly fight Ukraine. For those wondering too, the threat of nukes is not too likely an actual risk.
Not because of the US or NATO but because of China. To China's credit, they WILL NOT let putin use nukes offensively, in any case. And a lot of that is because they depend on that mutual consideration being unbroken when they invade Tiawan down the road... Iran and China do not want the international threshold for usage being lowered by their buddy pootie.

Ummm Putin does what Putin wants… if you actually believe what you’re saying about China and Iran not letting him, you’re even more naive than I already thought.

[FoxtArt]

Ummm Putin does what Putin wants… if you actually believe what you’re saying about China and Iran not letting him, you’re even more naive than I already thought.

If you look at all of Rusisa's red lines that have been crossed, and the sabre rattling and threats that have shifted on over 30 times, they would've nuked Ukraine already if Putin could do whatever he wanted willy nilly. Is the US stopping him? No, NATO isn't going to return fire with nukes if he launches a tactical at Ukraine. And no, Putin doesn't do what he wants, whenever he wants, because he is critically dependant on China. They have resorted to NK assitance in munitions/equipment/soldiers for f's sake, which screams desparation far more than "control". If he pisses of China, he promptly loses the war. Economically and for certain war supplies/electronics, it's the only source he has. And China has vested interest in Russian territory as well. (some of it is historically Chinese....). They are slightly better than frenemies, but not by a whole lot. Research China's nuclear doctrine and some of the deeper news; when we wanted to discourage the use of Nukes in this war, where did we go?... China.

[BushMasterBoy]

I am expecting a coup. The Rus peoples are going to revolt at the cost of the incursion. What happened to his chef will happen to him. A study of Napoleon would be a good start. A failed military expedition ending in exile or even more severe. History repeats itself.

[tmckay2]

If you look at all of Rusisa's red lines that have been crossed, and the sabre rattling and threats that have shifted on over 30 times, they would've nuked Ukraine already if Putin could do whatever he wanted willy nilly. Is the US stopping him? No, NATO isn't going to return fire with nukes if he launches a tactical at Ukraine. And no, Putin doesn't do what he wants, whenever he wants, because he is critically dependant on China. They have resorted to NK assitance in munitions/equipment/soldiers for f's sake, which screams desparation far more than "control". If he pisses of China, he promptly loses the war. Economically and for certain war supplies/electronics, it's the only source he has. And China has vested interest in Russian territory as well. (some of it is historically Chinese....). They are slightly better than frenemies, but not by a whole lot. Research China's nuclear doctrine and some of the deeper news; when we wanted to discourage the use of Nukes in this war, where did we go?... China.


What exactly do you see being the end game? Putin has pretty clearly shown he will burn as many Russian lives as needed to dig his heels in. Right now it's like a ww1 meat grinder where an entire generation of male citizens are being chewed up on both sides without much of an end in sight. I'm not sure why leftists are so against trying to end that killing before it escalates further. Neither side is going to be thrilled with a compromise but we dripped the ball when we disnt adequately respond to the invasion of crimea. At that point the land was lost but we should have reinforced ukraine to the point that further incursions aren't possible. Maybe that's nato membership, maybe that's a base, maybe that's "joint training exercises" and you drop a brigade in the country making it impossible for putin to invade without risking the death of a nato soldier. But instead we did nothing and got what anyone could expect.

Sure, there have been strategic and tactical advantages for our military in this whole deal, but its pretty twisted to use that as a rationale to send more young men into the grinder. Whether they are Russian or Ukrainian they're still people, most of whom likely don't really want to be there.

As far as the money, yeah it's not nearly as much of a waste as that we typically do to flush money down the toilet but we do have a lot of problems state side and we cant police the entire world indefinitely. Patrolling the seas is already starting to become a problem and with China saber rattling we can't just keep dumping money and more importantly armaments indefinitely. I dont know where that limit is but one does exist.

Ultimately to me, I'm pretty open to options, but all I see is leftists lamenting the idea of trying to negotiate a truce (which would undoubtedly require ukraine to give up territory in exchange for nato protection, and not just words but troops) but yet they never put forth any rational idea as to how they see this ending. Russia isn't going to just tuck tail and run to 2021 borders. Ukraine doesn't have the man power to completely remove Russian troops if they dig in. So is the plan to just let people die until someone runs out? I mean unless the plan is a putin assassination, which is fine by me, I dont really see why dragging iut the stalemate is a good idea. At some point someone is going to get stupid and really up the ante.

[FoxtArt]

Cant disagree. It does need a negotiated end. I dont see Russia resorting to nukes, but I do see it continuing to use wwii doctrine. Even if casualties were 5:1 Russia is just more willing to send people to die into perpetuity. Completely agree that the entire war wouldve been prevented by a post Crimea strategy as well. We always seem to intervene too late, and then let bureacrats hose it further. I dont really think the US is capable of winning wars, in part because policrats think they can make it a moral affair with rules and regulation.

[FoxtArt]

I think the best solution as of today would be akin to the DMZ and Truce as seen in the Korean war. Would both sides go for it? What we do need to avoid is a Russian feeling of victory. It's fine if they walk away with a "stalemate". The consequences of this feeling rewarding in any way to the "new" axis powers could be staggering.