Ukraine - what's at stake.

1
Load these data points into your Random Access Memory

1 - Russia’s military is incompetent, and doesn’t have a chance against the West.
2 - Russia’s military has ALWAYS been incompetent, and they have always known that. Which is why their WW3 scenarios always include tactical nukes, they have no other way to “win”.
3 – Russians are completely convinced they only way they can secure their nation from invasion is to go back to the old Soviet lines (and then some). They feel an existential threat as long as they have their current borders.
4 – They will ALWAYS be a threat to eastern European nations because they want them as a buffer against the west, they are NOT going to let this go for the foreseeable future. (note- this doesn’t have to be rational to be so)
5 – If Russa and any NATO nation end up fighting, Russia is going to get stomped, which leaves them with what option?

Conclusions
1 – It is absolutely imperative Ukraine wins this war, because they will just shift to the next country if they win, and the cycle continues.
2 – NATO troops cannot fight this war.
3 – Putin thinks there’s a chance the Republicans can pull a win out for him, and cut funding…but…
4 - US support for Ukraine is important, but not critical. If the idiots in the Republican party manage to turn off the spigot, Europe will step in…because they have to…because they know they’re next. And they’ll hate us for it.

I also think its time for the US to go big and public with nuclear deterrence. Russia has to constantly be reminded that we are ready, willing, and able to commit MAD. We need to demonstrate that our nuclear readiness level is 10x theirs. Again, deterrence. The best war is the one you don’t have to fight.
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

2
All very good points. I’d like to make another point.

As long as a “pro-US interest” president is in office; the president has a lot of legal authority to add security assistance to Ukraine. In The Foreign Assistance Act; the president basically has the authority to drawdown US war stocks whereas it’s in the interest of national security. This is in addition to any congressional appropriated security assistance. The president doesn’t have the authority to procure new items (without appropriations,) but he can make the determination to transfer existing stock, training and services.

So we have at least to the end of the Biden Presidency to continue significant security assistance, regardless of the additional appropriations from congress.

Of course more capacity is better & hopefully the rest of this year and next is enough to ensure that the US has a significant, enduring effect on Ukrainian security assistance. If a trumpy pro-Russian, Republican gets elected to the US presidency then, yes it will be entirely on European states to close the gap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

4
I actually don't see the Republican Party turning off the spigot for Ukraine assistance, and that includes Trump, should he get reelected in 2024. Whatever people might think of him, it is true that Putin (Khuilo!) didn't try any of this when Trump was in office. Putin first tried it during Obama's second term, and then he waited until Biden got into office to try it again.
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

6
The great tragedies of the late 20th and early 21st centuries were:
1) That Russia didn't seek to be part of NATO and the EU, and be safe and get far wealthier, because, well, Putin. Under Yeltsin it looked VERY possible that Russia would join NATO and work to join the EU--Imagine what that would have meant for Russian prosperity and the West's access to Russia's vast natural resources. It was the OBVIOUS step but the KGB operatchik, Putin was sickened by it.
2) The GREAT natural alliance in the Middle East SHOULD be Israel and Iran. Think about it. Both are surrounded by Arab countries while neither is. Israel is only about 20% Arab, the rest Ashkanazy and Sephardic Jews. Persia, ie, Iran, is the nation of the TRUE Aryans--that's why it's "Iran". Shi'ite Persians and Jewish Ashkanazy and Sephadic Jews with Arab Sunni Muslims between them. The Shah saw this but the ayatollahs don't.

Ukraine is the gateway to conquering Europe. Next comes non-aligned Moldova, then the Baltic States, then Poland, etc. Expansion doesn't stop until IT IS STOPPED!
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

7
I don’t know. Even if Putin succeeds in making the Russian Army squeak out a win in Ukraine, I doubt he would have the fortitude to start another war anywhere else. The only reason Russia is still in Ukraine is because Putin is too proud to retreat, or too scared to show weakness to his pack of wolves. But really, there is no easy victories to be found in Ukraine, not with the entire western world backing their defense.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

8
CowboyT wrote: Thu Jan 12, 2023 10:09 pm I actually don't see the Republican Party turning off the spigot for Ukraine assistance, and that includes Trump, should he get reelected in 2024. Whatever people might think of him, it is true that Putin (Khuilo!) didn't try any of this when Trump was in office. Putin first tried it during Obama's second term, and then he waited until Biden got into office to try it again.
Something really weird is gonna have to happen for us to see another Trump presidency. If Trump does become president again, something tells me we're going to have bigger problems than just Ukraine.
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

9
Bisbee wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 2:15 am I don’t know. Even if Putin succeeds in making the Russian Army squeak out a win in Ukraine, I doubt he would have the fortitude to start another war anywhere else. The only reason Russia is still in Ukraine is because Putin is too proud to retreat, or too scared to show weakness to his pack of wolves. But really, there is no easy victories to be found in Ukraine, not with the entire western world backing their defense.
Putin is not going to win in Ukraine, period. There will be a full nuclear exchange before that happens. NATO is going to back Ukraine with all the weapons and training they can use. Eventually when Ukrainian soldiers are trained up on more advanced western weapons systems, they'll receive those. Sometime this year, expect to see M1 tanks heading to Ukraine...Ukrainian soldiers are training in them now. They're about to receive Leopard tanks in the next week.

I said back during the Obama Administration when he was talking about their great pivot to the Pacific that it was a mistake. Russia was then, and remains now the biggest threat. Their GDP has been going down every year since 2008-ish. Putin is a revisionist, imperialist dictator who wants his place in history and re-gaining the old Soviet empire is his highest priority. He is FAR more dangerous than XI because he has to make something big happen. Whereas XI just has to not fuck up, and he will become the largest world economy. To gain his goals, Putin has to create chaos; its his only route. So he is the most dangerous man in the world until he's dead.

He wants to go down in history as the guy who started the process to take it all back. Putin wants one people, one language, and one religion for all of Easter Europe...who does that remind you of? And someone remind me, how do you get to "one religion"? Genocide
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

10
Bisbee wrote:I don’t know. Even if Putin succeeds in making the Russian Army squeak out a win in Ukraine, I doubt he would have the fortitude to start another war anywhere else. The only reason Russia is still in Ukraine is because Putin is too proud to retreat, or too scared to show weakness to his pack of wolves. But really, there is no easy victories to be found in Ukraine, not with the entire western world backing their defense.
I think he can force a stalemate, where his army still holds a significant amount of Ukrainian territory, including the “land bridge” to Crimea. I think that’s his modified goal now. He has zero qualms about killing 100s of thousands of Russian soldiers to do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

11
Putin is on the receiving in of what other dictators in history, Napoleon and Hitler, found out about when they invaded Russia. You can't win. The Ukraine is Putin's Russia or in more modern times our Vietnam or his/our Afghanistan. He can't win and the war is becoming more and more unpopular in Russia. As the bodies come home or the MIAs mount the dissension will grow and grow till Putin will be removed one way or another. An example Russia in Afghanistan.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

12
Kevin McCarthy talked about Ukraine investigations if Republicans won the House, he also got criticized by many Republicans who strongly support the Ukrainians. The House Republicans will be busy investigating the Bidens, but I don't think they are going to oppose support for Ukraine or sending more arms. Our allies will keep supporting Ukraine, they are closer to the fighting than we are and have stayed fairly united with the US. They have more to lose if the Russian bear marches into Western Europe. The US is sending Patriot missiles along with armored vehicles and EU countries are also sending armored vehicles. The whole world is watching and Russia isn't proving to be a super power, really the only thing they have to threaten with are nuclear arms.

The EU has no standing army, they are dependent on France, Germany and other EU countries, while NATO is a single unified organization that is integrated and ready to act if Russia enters NATO countries. The fact that Finland and Sweden ditched their anti-war stances and applied to NATO, says that they're really concerned about Russia and what Putin could do.

Putin has now appointed Gen Valery Gerasimov as the commander over the Ukraine war, Gerasimov is the chief of the General Staff.
Gen Gerasimov was made chief of the Russian defence staff in 2012, shortly after he had written a landmark article describing a far-reaching form of total warfare which used every tool at Russia’s disposal - both on and off the battlefield - to achieve its military goals. He played key roles in the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and in providing a lifeline of military support for President Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian civil war. After an extensive aerial bombing campaign targeting Ukrainian infrastructure failed to turn the tide of the war in Moscow’s favour, analysts now expect Gen Gerasimov to ditch the defensive posture adopted by General Sergei Surovikin and use more aggressive tactics.

For Gen Gerasimov, the war in Ukraine is also personal. He not only designed the invasion plans with Putin that so badly backfired, but he also has revenge on his mind after surviving an assassination attempt in April. Mark Galeotti, a London-based Russian analyst, described appointment as head of Russian forces in Ukraine as a “poisoned chalice” for the loyal Gen Gerasimov. “It’s now on him,” he said. “And I suspect Putin has unrealistic expectations.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/ ... n-victory/

The Ukraine war is becoming another Afghanistan for Russia.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

13
INVICTVS138 wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 11:50 am
Bisbee wrote:I don’t know. Even if Putin succeeds in making the Russian Army squeak out a win in Ukraine, I doubt he would have the fortitude to start another war anywhere else. The only reason Russia is still in Ukraine is because Putin is too proud to retreat, or too scared to show weakness to his pack of wolves. But really, there is no easy victories to be found in Ukraine, not with the entire western world backing their defense.
I think he can force a stalemate, where his army still holds a significant amount of Ukrainian territory, including the “land bridge” to Crimea. I think that’s his modified goal now. He has zero qualms about killing 100s of thousands of Russian soldiers to do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think this is the most likely scenario, some kind of stalemate with Russia occupying some small amount of Ukrainian territory until Putin dies or falls from a window into a wood chipper. I don't think Putin will engage any nukes, instead relying on occupying border areas with many troops. The West will continue to strangle Russia, bringing the date with the wood chipper closer and closer.

CDFingers
Crazy cat peekin' through a lace bandana
like a one-eyed Cheshire, like a diamond-eyed Jack

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

15
The idea that Putin will stop with Ukraine is, respectfully, ludicrous. Don't be fooled...stopping is just biding time to restock armaments--and men. Then he'll move again.

The UK has just announced it will be providing Ukraine with Challenger II tanks, their main battle tanks, ahead of the US providing M1 tanks. In case nobody noticed, this 2023's version of FDR's "Lend-Lease" program--if your neighbor's house is on fire it makes sense to lend him your hose!
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

16
Putin has effectively been stopped by the international support for Ukraine. We all now see that all things being equal, a defending army is far stronger than an invading army. It takes so much more training, supplies, and logistics to make an actual invasion work that it’s virtually impossible in this day and age.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

17
Bisbee wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:16 pm Putin has effectively been stopped by the international support for Ukraine. We all now see that all things being equal, a defending army is far stronger than an invading army. It takes so much more training, supplies, and logistics to make an actual invasion work that it’s virtually impossible in this day and age.
Unless you live next door.
I think we proved we could invade half a world away.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,”

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

18
Probably the only way Putin will be stopped is if his power base in the Kremlin, among the oligarchs and with the Russian military shifts. I don't think average Russians are willing to go back to the Soviet era with queues everywhere, after they've experienced Western technology and goods and have traveled in Western Europe and the US. Europeans would rather fight Putin through supplying Ukraine than fight Putin in their countries and trigger a possible nuclear war. We don't know what the US and European intelligence agencies are doing behind the scenes to destabilize Putin and his cronies. Biden revealed a lot of US intelligence in the lead up to the war to try and avert it, I doubt he'll do that again.

There are Russian troops in Moldova on Ukraine's western border, so that country is a domino that could fall to Putin, it's not NATO. Putin and the Russian military forces are looking weaker and weaker and China and the former soviet republics are looking stronger. Reporters have noted that Russia has been recruiting and calling up reservists from poorer areas and villages in Russia and among minorities. Mass call ups in major metro areas could be destabilizing and Putin seems to be avoiding it.

And Erdogan is still delaying approval of Sweden and Finland's membership in NATO, he's playing game after game. NATO members should make known to Erdogan that they'd consider expelling Turkey from NATO if he delays any longer and start slowly freezing him out of NATO activities.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

19
Expelling Turkiye is the worst thing NATO could do in this case. Erdogan may be a bastard playing all sides for power, but he's better as an ally than an enemy. Turkiye has some of the strongest armed forces in NATO and is strategically placed to control energy flow from the Caucasus region into Europe. If he were allied to Russia it would be destabilizing if not catastrophic for Ukraine, the Balkans, and the Middle East.

Finland and Sweden are already fully integrated partners with NATO and have independent alliances with the countries that are most relevant to their mutual defense.

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

20
Partners and members are different in NATO, Russia was even a partner of NATO. Erdogan is still smarting from not getting EU membership and has blamed it on discrimination against Turks and Muslims. The EU already has problems with Hungary, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria that are token democracies, they don't need more from Erdogan.

At this time only Hungary and Turkey haven't approved Sweden and Finland's NATO membership, Orban said in November that Hungary would approve it in 2023. The EU has financial leverage over Orban, they don't over Erdogan. NATO has no mechanism to expel members, but I assume NATO countries could stop sharing intelligence and stop participating in joint maneuvers with Turkey.

The US and the UK have defense agreements with Sweden and Finland, but that's not the same as NATO membership, it's not an Article 5.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

21
wings wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 7:55 am Expelling Turkiye is the worst thing NATO could do in this case. Erdogan may be a bastard playing all sides for power, but he's better as an ally than an enemy. Turkiye has some of the strongest armed forces in NATO and is strategically placed to control energy flow from the Caucasus region into Europe. If he were allied to Russia it would be destabilizing if not catastrophic for Ukraine, the Balkans, and the Middle East.

Finland and Sweden are already fully integrated partners with NATO and have independent alliances with the countries that are most relevant to their mutual defense.
Better to deny him the military equipment and support and extort HIM into accepting Sweden and Finland than let HIM extort us. It takes fucking GALL to demand that a Democracy give up a dissident to a dictator who simply wants to shut him up in prison--which is what Erdoğan intends to do. Little Putin!
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

22
Also Turkey has control of the only passage to and from the Black Sea and as long as they control it and remain on our side the Russian Black Sea Fleet might as well be Oligarch's Yachts.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

23
TrueTexan wrote:Also Turkey has control of the only passage to and from the Black Sea and as long as they control it and remain on our side the Russian Black Sea Fleet might as well be Oligarch's Yachts.
The Dardanelles have always been one of the world’s most strategic straits to control. Unfortunately, we need Erdogan more than he needs us & he knows it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Ukraine - what's at stake.

24
Turkey was given jurisdiction over the Bosporus and the Dardanelles by the Montreux Convention of 1936, but the US never signed that agreement or any agreement concerning those Straits. The Straits give ocean access to Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, Bulgaria and Georgia and are the division between Europe and Asia. Erdogan's EU application was based on the small amount of territory Turkey holds in Europe.

Erdogan is holding up NATO ratification because it wants "130 terrorists" extradited from Sweden.
Ankara has dragged its feet on pledging support for the accession bid, seeking conditions for its approval. Sweden and Finland inked a deal last June to ease Turkey’s concerns over their alleged support to Kurdish organizations. Last month, a Swedish court blocked the extradition of an exiled Turkish journalist identified by Erdoğan as one of the individuals Stockholm had to extradite to get Turkey’s approval.

“Turkey sometimes names people that they would like to have extradited from Sweden, and it’s well-known that Swedish legislation on that … is very clear: that courts [make] those decisions, there is no room for changing that,” Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said last Wednesday in reaction. “I don’t think that should shadow the fact that things are going well,” he added with regard to Sweden’s NATO accession bid.
Tensions between the two countries were heightened last week after protesters in Stockholm hung an effigy of Erdoğan, leading the Turkish Foreign Ministry to summon Sweden’s ambassador to Ankara. Kristersson later said the effigy was an “act of sabotage” aimed at hampering Sweden’s efforts to join NATO. Finland has not received a new list of people Turkey would like to see extradited, Finnish Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto said in a radio interview on Monday according to public broadcaster Yle.

Haavisto said Ankara’s new demands are likely a reaction to the recent demonstration in Stockholm. According to a “senior Turkish official” quoted by the Guardian last Saturday, Turkey is unlikely to sign off on the two Nordic countries’ accession before the next Turkish general elections, which are scheduled for June but may take place in April or May.
https://www.politico.eu/article/recep-t ... embership/
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 3 guests