The Monday Morning Quarterbacking Of the Russian Situation.
In the days leading up to the Russian incursion of Ukraine, there has been much talk of what America's role should be to handle Russia. At best of times, dealing with Russia, a fellow nuclear power, is always dicey. It takes a combination of rewards and punishments, without an actual engagement. One looks to the President of both countries to get a read. The book does not read well.
In conservative circles, much has been said of President Biden's undoing President Trump's policy regarding the lifting of sanctions on Nord Stream 2. There are two factors for doing this. Our ally Germany asked us to do so, and it did qualify as a carrot to Putin. How Putin took it, is a whole different matter, but either way, the US was going to do this for Germany.
History needs to be added at this point. Russia has never gotten over the loss of Ukraine. And just like what happened in Crimea, there are parts of Ukraine that consider themselves Russian. That being said, most of the country is glad to be free of the yoke of Russia with a passion. Russia knows this. It also knows that Ukraine wants to be part of NATO.
So people ask why now? Why not under Trump.
Well, the pipeline is no longer an issue. Germany has just agreed to close off Nord Stream 2. Biden said he would get it closed and he did. That was the major sanction that Trump had on Russia and now it is back in place. So we are back to base one.
The reason that this is happening now is part actual actions and part cat and mouse.
The actions were started in Ukraine on February 21, 2019, when Ukraine amended its Constitution that stated the strategic course of Ukraine would be for membership in the European Union and NATO and made it part of the preamble of the Basic Law, three articles, and transitional provisions. This might have been a bit jarring for Russia, but we were about to be thrown into a pandemic and so it got sidelined until a plague was dealt with.
Biden becomes President of the US as a matter of course.
Then in June, at the 2021 Brussels Summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP) as an integral part of the process and Ukraine's right to determine its own future and foreign policy, of course without outside interference. NATO clearly stated that Russia would not be in the position to veto Ukraine's accession to NATO.
This was something that Russia was not going to take lightly. Having NATO on his doorstep was something he was not going to put up with, in a country he considered part of Mother Russia.
In the meanwhile, the eastern part of Ukraine had a growing separatist movement to rejoin Russia. Of course, this has been helped along by Russia. Obviously, the end game would be to not only gain those regions back but also the rest of Ukraine.
All of the above is a matter of timing. Had Trump been in office, and everything else had gone forward as it has, Putin would have done the same.
The cat and mouse part is the dicey thing. Of course from his bold moves, Putin does perceive an unworthy candidate in Biden. He might have felt the same way about Trump, or he might have deemed him a wild card, but either way, he was not going to have NATO on his doorstep with a country he never thought of as NOT being Russian.
What should the world do? All the choices are dicey. When dealing with nuclear superpowers, escalation is something to avoid. On the other hand, Russia should not be able to dictate world policy. But making it hurt enough for them to stop, is tough at best. We have their biggest export now sanctioned off and have armed the Ukraine fighters, but committing troops is a whole different matter.
How things will move from here is hard to predict, but the one thing that was predictable was that Putin would have done this, no matter who was in office. How he proceeds has to do with how he perceives Biden. How we proceed is a whole different issue and one yet to play out.
Tags
Who is online
52 visitors
I have not written an article in a while. House Rules apply. There will be strict enforcement of removal of off-topic, nasty language, and trolling. All intelligent comments, welcome.
"How things will move from here is hard to predict, but the one thing that was predictable was that Putin would have done this, no matter who was in office."
Very true, but this is not our battle. We can't even protect our own border. Collectively, Europe must step up, especially Germany. After the debacles of Iraq and Afghanistan, the American people will not tolerate even one American life being lost over a territorial dispute
Of course it will. The lessons of Chamberlain kissing Hitlers arse are not forgotten
and Putin's speech was off the wall crazy.
It is so gravely "funny" to look at the size of Russia and 'back' to the size of Ukraine and metaphorically envision Russia 'engulfing' more territory. At once , I can see Ukraine getting swallowed up and this image comes to mind:
Playing devil's advocate, isn't that what we said about WWII?
Here I would have to agree, but given that every venture that Putin has been involved in, has been a win for him, he is truly becoming dangerous to the western world. One day we might not have a choice, and the war could be decided on his terms. But again, this is all speculation.
I would have to agree.
Speculation or not, History does tend to repeat itself doesn't it?
It does indeed, and this is what worries me the most.
Misreading the room completely. The first US soldier coming home in a body bag will be the effective end of Biden's presidency. Outside of the media and politicians most people don't give a rats ass about Ukraine. We are more concerned about things going on within the US; than some third world shit hole that isn't a true democracy. Once those sanctions kick in and oil heads north of $150 a barrel- there will be no hiding for Biden. Remember when the US was energy independent? Another thing we can thank Joe for, making the US reliant on Russian oil. Cut off Russian oil and both Europe and the US will suffer. Pissed off Americans will be in the news far more than Ukraine.
Please tell that to NATO. Especially the Germans. This is their fight. It is what they were created for. Unfortunately, as proven in Libya, NATO is nothing w/o the US doing all of the heavy lifting. Seems that NATO countries scrimping on their military budgets will finally bite them in the ass. We should be concentrating on China; instead of dealing with Russia. China takes Taiwan and the whole world will be suffering. Putin takes Ukraine; and what happens exactly again? Maybe NATO finally wakes up and realizes that it needs to be an effective fighting force w/o the US.
Listened to the bumbling fool in the White House lately? How about VP Harris; who is trying to out Biden Biden. Putin is stating clearly what he is going to do. He is defying Ukraine to attack the Russian military as they secure the separatist provinces. He is also sending a clear message to NATO and the US that he isn't afraid of either of them. But I guess crazy works. Hopefully NATO/US will think he is crazy enough to end the planet if they push him too far.
I miss the good old days when the left thought that Trump was going to put the US in a war that would end the world. No new wars under Trump; but Biden is heading for one with Russia, and potentially one with China. A twofer with countries that have nuclear weapons and that are sick of US hegemony.
That happened in August.
I certainly can appreciate trying to swim uphill in a river of dissent regarding this administration's catastrophic domestic and foreign policy blunders.
That being said the hasty decision to curb domestic energy production has opened the eyes to even those Americans who typically ignore the divisive political climate in this country. It doesn't take an economic expert to see how much these hasty decisions affect our foreign policy or ability to portray relevance on the world stage.
We cannot lead a world away from war and demand diplomacy when we hand all of our cards over to a despot like Vladimir Putin. No one takes the administration seriously when numerous times our administration has begged other nations to increase oil production all while opening our ports to the despots oil. Useless sanctions all while dependent are easily to identify even to the visually politically impaired.
Those defending reckless policy should admit the administration made mistakes and apply the pressure to the administration to increase domestic energy production until the time comes we are in a position domestically and globally to shift focus away from fossil fuels. Until such times conflicts such as these should be expected with little to no effective deterrent from the United States.
That is not the point to this article. There is no denial that this administration has made some awful mistakes, probably Afganastan the worst, but not everything they do is wrong.
Yes he has curbed domestic drilling on Federal lands. But riddle me this. Why are we still exporting oil?
I am unclear why this is going on. We should just stop exporting.
The sanctions are not only on oil, but investments and banks, including Putin's pals. I'm not sure if it will be enough to stop Putin, but it will give him some pause.
I agree. We should have energy independence. Fossil fuels have been the undoing of the world since it was first found in Baku, Russia. It's amazing how things really never change. But carmakers are getting on board with making electric cars, and that is a huge step in the right direction.
For some time now I've kept hearing (from the Trump supporters in Congress as well as those folks over at Faux News) how "its not our battle. How we should stay out of it, not aid the Ukrainians .... after all what happens over there doesn't effect us.
Not our battle? Doesn't effect us?
So for those who actually believe that, I have one question: How are your stocks doing since Russia attacked?
When you say "third world shit hole", are you referring to Ukraine-- or Putin's Russia?
(Or both?)
Well, apparently that is the prevalent view of many of the "experts" (that what Putin want is to conquer and annex the two separatist provinces).
But there's a a possibility that he may to conquer the entire Ukraine and make it part of Russia.
???
Do you really believe that Biden will actually put American troops in harm's way by sending them to the Ukraine?
(Or that perhaps he's already been doing that?)
Ronin2 is passing on political "bs" in a time of great complexity in the world. Everybody understands that war involves injuries and death-it is the details that matter! So that specific ASSERTION-it's just political (art) rhetoric. Some 'patriots' would love nothing better than to 'piss' on an American president while Russia's President is 'making it rain missiles and doom' on Ukraine. Never miss opportunities to NOT be onboard the train heading in the right direction. /s
Also....How is $10/gal for gas working for ya?
Neither was WWII...until Japan attacked us.
Well if that happened way back in August...and this statement is true:
The first US soldier coming home in a body bag will be the effective end of Biden's presidency.
Then "effectively" the Biden Presidency is now over!
I am shocked-- shocked I tell you!
Passing on political "bs" in a time of great complexity in the world?
After all, while that's the sort of thing one would expect only on a Social Media site . . .
This line tells me all I need to Know:
"All of the above is a matter of timing. Had Trump been in office, and everything else had gone forward as it has, Putin would have done the same."
No way Perrie. For 5 years we couldn't have an honest dialogue in this country about Russia because of a lie that was told by a lying media and swallowed & believed by our indoctrinated leaders. Here is the history you missed: Biden ran on getting tough on Russia. Russia began putting troops on the Ukraine border in March. Biden uttered not a word, nor lifted a finger. That was the time for sanctions. On top of that, Biden cut and ran from Afghanistan, which Vladimir Putin surely noticed. Biden's energy policy is what drove oil to almost $95 a barrel which has helped to finance Putin's massive military operation. Those are the key parts of the history the New York Times won't print but the New York Post will. Thus the narrative to explain away the foreign policy which has been so disastrous relative to the policy of the man you all irrationally loathe.
As for Trump, Gen. Qassem Soleimani would be able to tell you how Trump dealt with America's enemies if only he were still in one piece. There is no way you can say Putin would have done the same! Putin made two moves on Ukraine. One before Trump and one after Trump.
I totally disagree Vic. I am not going by anything the media said. I do my own research always.
I know what Russia was doing in March. Please tell me what Trump would have done differently. Maybe sanctions would have worked if done earlier, or maybe not, because Putin wants the old Russia back as part of his legacy and because there was no way he was going to have NATO on his doorstep. He actually said that you know.
And yes when Biden dropped oil production it did drive up the price and Russia did benefit, this I don't deny and again, in 20/20 hindsight it was not a good move. But he did that long before March, and Russia has had a presence there since 2014.
Well given that he had troops there since 2014, and NATO was moving forward with MAP, these two things would have pushed Putin over the edge. You keep forgetting that Putin has said what he wants. Do you think he would want something different under Trump? I doubt it.
The Presidency doesn't control oil production. Biden paused NEW drilling leases on federal lands when he took office AND then a year later outpaced Trump in the number of permits approved that had already been submitted prior to the freeze. Oil production was down in 2021 because of lower demand and a steep market drop in barrel price because of the pandemic. This was from record highs (production numbers) prior to the pandemic.
EDIT: Corrected spelling... (mumble... mumble... dammed autocorrect.)
I stand corrected.
No Perrie, Donald trump wouldn't have waited for Putin to invade two Republics and then impose sanctions on those two Republics like the empty suit in the WH.
The proof is in the pudding. Putin behaved himself when Trump was President.
End of story.
You cannot possibly know what the Trump administration would have done in these circumstances. Nobody knows; one can only speculate.
There is a missing observation here too. The conservatives are doing what it is they do: oppose everything first and look for a pretext to sustain it.
President Trump did not oppose President Putin during his years in office, even when COMPELLED to sanction Russia. Moreover, Trump recently issued a statement about Putin's "savvy-ness" in this situation. That can not be construed as disagreeing with Russia's conduct in the same 'situation.' It is indicative of support and encouragement!
Trump, like Fox News, some conservative pundits (for example: Tucker Carlson, and more) and some 'local' commenters on NT are EXPRESSING AFFIRMATION for Russia taking Ukraine over.
The question being why is supporting Russia in this situation CONSISTENT with republican and conservative conscious thought: (I will hold that theory of the case in reserve for now.)
Tell that to Perrie, she made the claim in her article.
I have a direct question for you: Does your political party support U.S. taking a "hands off" approach to Ukraine in this Russo-Ukraine dilemma?
No, never mind what could have happened. Most of you here voted for this big pile of poop. And you still try to defend him.
Where did Perrie claim that she knew what Trump would do?
I never claimed what the Trump administration would have done in these circumstances.
I said that this was the likely outcome given what is going on with NATO and Ukraine.
Please stop trying to make this personal, Vic.
No thank you, I don't want any, please. Send Vic back in, can you?
Ain't that about it?
He would've done what he's always done (saying wonderful things about Putin).
Nope.
Says the Trumper who voted for a big pile of poop twice and still defends him.
Is that your title on this article?
He kept the peace for 4 years. He does not belong in an article involving this invasion.
I think that little bird on the left got in your ear.
Kept the peace?
He didn't do anything, but he did praise Putin today which is utterly disgusting. The pandemic did it all for him. And do please tell me what you think Trump would do differently? How do you deter Putin?
Look, I am not thrilled with Biden, but at least he doesn't praise our enemy for an invasion and putting world peace in question.
And no birdy is in my ear. Frankly, I am hoping NATO does something. Otherwise, we know what will happen to Taiwan.
Today? When did you write the article?
And do please tell me what you think Trump would do differently? How do you deter Putin?
I'll say it again, Trump does not belong in an article on the invasion. He was President - Putin behaved!
Look, I am not thrilled with Biden, but at least he doesn't praise our enemy for an invasion and putting world peace in question.
He DESTROYED THE COUNTRY PERRIE! Has Long Island become a cave? We have runaway inflation, wide open borders and rampant crime and you are worried about something that was said????
And no birdy is in my ear.
I'm afraid so. As I advised someone else: be careful who you associate with.
Frankly, I am hoping NATO does something.
LIKE WHAT?
Otherwise, we know what will happen to Taiwan.
That is a certainty.
This is such obvious partisan-blinded 'reasoning'.
By this 'reasoning', one could suggest that China did not plunge the world into a pandemic when Obama was PotUS.
Partisan 'reasoning' often leads to foolish conclusions.
Perrie doesn't need anyone to speak for her.
Yes, today.
First of all, my article so I will decide the content. btw... read up. You brought Trump into the discussion, not me.
Vic, the entire world is suffering from runaway inflation. We also have high employment numbers, and before this invasion, the stock market was up. There is a border issue, but it is not wide open. Crime is an issue, but it was also becoming an issue under Trump. It had to do wth the pandemic. As for what he said, it was disgusting, given the current situation. Btw, the country is hardly destroyed.
This is the second time I had to warn you about getting personal. I associate with almost all the members here. My views are mine alone.
Gee, there are lots of options. As Trump what he would do.
At least we agree on Taiwan.
Tig I totally agree with you.
It's not "reasoning" it's stating a fact.
You didn't write the article today. You had Donald Trump in it before he made the statement.
First of all, my article so I will decide the content. btw... read up. You brought Trump into the discussion, not me.
No Perrie, you brought him in on sentence five, which began the second paragraph. It's not only you, there are about 4 seeds that prefer to make the invasion about Trump. Biden is the president. You were a supporter of his. Now you try to defend him by saying anybody would do the same. The facts say otherwise. Putin only made moves on Ukraine when two of the most radical progressive presidents were in office. That's where the blame goes.
Vic, the entire world is suffering from runaway inflation. We also have high employment numbers, and before this invasion, the stock market was up. There is a border issue, but it is not wide open. Crime is an issue, but it was also becoming an issue under Trump. It had to do wth the pandemic. As for what he said, it was disgusting, given the current situation. Btw, the country is hardly destroyed.
Perrie, those $Trillion Dollar relief/ infrastructure bills plus all the pandemic spending and the moronic green energy policy is what caused inflation in the US. Extreme woke policies! The border is wide open. Crime is a major issue. Crime is not related to the pandemic. It was caused by demonizing the police, defunding the police, progressive DA's and democrat governors. You don't think the country is destroyed? Have you noticed the direction of recent elections? You do know what is going to happen in the midterms, right? Are you wondering why the American people have turned so hard on democrats? Can't understand why?
This is the second time I had to warn you about getting personal.
Good, now I can ask you who your title was directed at?
Gee, there are lots of options.
No answer to that one?
Vic,
Your comment from yesterday found here:
And the first time Trump was mentioned was here:
So I never brought up Trump, but the rules are once a comment has been responded to and the author allows it (and I did) then it is on the table.
You're correct, I chose Biden over Trump. And in this case, there is not much anyone could have done or can do, other than send over supplies. Biden is hardly a radical progressive. Had there been no pandemic Putin would have probably done the same at this point, since he explained why. He is not going to have NATO on his doorstep.
First of all, the infrastructure bill didn't cause inflation. Pandemic spending was done also under Trump, but you seem to forget that. I was meh on the green energy, but if this invasion proved one thing, it is that we have to stop being dependent on oil and move towards alternatives, so I will give that 50/50 but still not the reason for inflation. You might want to read this article:
And I don't do woke.
Everyone.
I was not speaking for Perrie, I was speaking for myself in direct reply to your ill-conceived 'reasoning'.
Perrie you brought him up in your article. I'm saying he doesn't belong in it. BTW, nobody is trying to declare him off topic. I'm saying it's a deflection from the real problem here which is Biden's weakness.
You're correct, I chose Biden over Trump. And in this case, there is not much anyone could have done or can do, other than send over supplies.
Biden proved weakness to Putin when he left everybody & everything in Afghanistan, when he ran out of there like a thief in the night, dismissing the recommendations of the military. Then he confirmed that weakness in March when Putin first began putting troops on the Ukraine border and Biden said nothing and did nothing.
Biden is hardly a radical progressive.
I can't believe you said that. I'm not going to go there Perrie. Then we would have a real problem.
Had there been no pandemic Putin would have probably done the same at this point, since he explained why. He is not going to have NATO on his doorstep.
What does the pandemic have to do with Putin wanting a regime change in Ukraine (That's the final phase btw. I'll have an article on that which many won't like as well).
First of all, the infrastructure bill didn't cause inflation.
It was a huge factor in it. It came after we already had massive spending.
Pandemic spending was done also under Trump, but you seem to forget that.
I haven't forgotten anything.
I was meh on the green energy, but if this invasion proved one thing, it is that we have to stop being dependent on oil and move towards alternatives, so I will give that 50/50 but still not the reason for inflation.
We have no alternatives yet to the traditional sources, which we have in abundance. The crazies on the left don't understand that. Biden followed their orders, thus the energy crisis.....thus the $100 per barrel price of oil that benefits & finances Russia.
You might want to read this article: investopedia
Right after supper
And I don't do woke.
See that you don't and have a good night. It was nice talking to you.
The fact argues that because Putin did not invade Ukraine under Trump's watch this means that Trump prevented the invasion.
By this 'reasoning', one could suggest that China did not plunge the world into a pandemic when Obama was PotUS thus Obama prevented China from causing the pandemic.
Surely you understood this.
OK, I did. But not to make him the topic, but as a reason for the timing of this. After all, it was obvious from previous articles posted here, is that was going to be where this was going to go.
You keep talking about Biden's weakness, but again, what are the choices? That is not a deflection. That is a fact. Anyone in office right now, would have the same choices. Biden didn't tell Putin to go ahead with this. IN FACT, he said the opposite. He is doing what he can given the situation.
Trump also said he was going to leave Afghanistan at the time that Biden did. Now here is the difference between a partisan and an independent. Biden botched the departure from there. That being said, there is no way to say that is what caused Putin to invade, but it probably didn't help it either.
It has to do with timing. Had we had no pandemic, NATO would have moved ahead with MAP under Trump and Putin would not have to deal with the Pandemic which would have left him time to do this. You seem to miss that we were coming out of the pandemic at the same time that this started.
Of course, we do. Almost every automaker is making affordable electric cars. We are still producing oil.
Well, have a nice supper.
You can not argue from silence. What portion of that don't you understand?!!! Using that logic (silence) you could say that President Putin made strategic short and/or long-term plans to invade Ukraine blindly (a 'gray' figure) without any knowledge whom the democrat in office would be at the time!
Sorry, it is not possible to ideally schedule a war based on third-party leadership potential.
Good point!
The GOP is in no way responsible for their own actions...
After all those who were vaccinated were subject to the gubmint surrepticiously placing tiny electronic devices in the vaccine which when shot into a person's body which means those vaccintees no longer had freewill-- but were rather totally controlled by our "Socialist" (and godless!) gubmint.
{Do I really need to post a "sarcasm" label here?)
Great article, Perrie.
There is no question that Putin's goal is to terminate democratic governments on Russia's border, and to reintegrate Ukraine into a new Russian Empire. Even if there was no potential that Ukraine might join NATO, Putin's actions would be the same.
I'm not sure Putin would have done anything had both Ukraine and NATO made it perfectly clear that Ukraine's endgame would be to be part of NATO, or if the previous Russian Pres was still in power, but all things given, I think that this is the logical conclusion to these events.
Ukraine has been clear that its goal is to join NATO. NATO has been hesitant for various reasons. I'm not certain that had Ukraine's potential membership in NATO been more definitively determined that would have mattered to Putin. Maybe.
If NATO agrees now to accept Ukraine as a member, do you think that would forestall further action by Russia?
There is a big distance to go for NATO to accept any country at this point, and I doubt they would now, given that would mean us being in a war with Russia. That being said, it's hard to get into Putin's head. He really does consider Ukraine part of Russia. I think he is busy building a legacy.
I've been trying to tell people for weeks now that the end of the MAP is admission to NATO as a full member.. That is already a fact, it IS why both Germany and France have repeatedly said that Ukraine WILL become a member... (and Russia cannot stop that)
Putin is not stupid, he combines individual diplomacy with military action... By recognizing the votes the two regions took to separate from Ukraine as independent nations, all it took was diplomatic recognition of that claimed status as separate nations, Then just as he did with the Crimea had them invite Russian troops into their "Nation" by executing a mutual aid pact... At this point, any military resistance by the Ukraine would be an act of aggression against nations Russia recognizes as independent nations... Ukraine's hands are tied, unless they want to fire the first shots in what would eventually become WWIII....
So he gets what he wants, but, Ukraine will still become a Nato nation, as will Georgia which is also under a MAP as well as Sweden and Finland...
The question becomes do we respond militarily here or let it go... If the Russians go beyond the territory of those two "Nations" then they are the invaders and military assistance treaties of several of Ukraine's neighbors take effect all of them NATO nations...
If that scenario comes to pass and several NATO countries get involved militarily, the call will go out for NATO assistance to those nations.. (namely Poland, Romania and Bulgaria) At that point the 30 nations of NATO will have a vote on assistance....
And from what I understand, the US, Germany and France will lose that vote...
A whole lot rides on Putin's next move.... one misstep and we will be in WWIII... Unless we wish to abandon NATO...
Militarily the US alone would crush Russia, they are not a superpower anymore, yes it would take some time and there is their nuclear arsenal to worry about... MAD isn't so much assured as it used to be.... And there is no telling what other treaty powers will do...
A very dangerous situation...
I'm in agreement with what you have written above. I do have a question about your question:
WWII was supposed to have stopped with Poland... it didn't. So I guess my question to you, is if by letting these two "Nations" go, won't people perceive Biden as weak again, as some say here about Obama and Crimea? Might we not be emboldening Putin to go further?
That is what happened with Hitler and Chamberlain...
And it is the million dollar question... He has sworn that Ukraine will not become a NATO nation... (and also remember Georgia, putatively former Russian territory as well)
So I would take the position of back off now but strengthen every NATO nation on the border of Russia and Ukraine... This has already been done with the Baltic States, Poland, Rumania and Bulgaria... We have actual troops in all those nations...
A clear message needs to be sent, be happy with what you have, try for more at your peril... It has reached the point where Ukraine cannot be abandoned...
I heard a report that Germany has relented on allowing nuclear cruise missiles into their country, Germany appears like it is stepping up to the plate...
So yeah it is up to Putin, past policies certainly has emboldened him...
If that is the case, (which is a possibility) it is our own damned fault...
Dreams of Soviet! (Union)? Can you imagine the joy he would have getting it done-in large part? Legacy, yes. SARS-2 Covid 19 has demonstrated to tyrants and rulers alike just how 'fungible' life is. I have heard Russian troops are (yet) getting sick with the virus.
Which begs the question: President Obama put sanctions in place against Russia's 'ingesting' of Crimea. It would have been politically disastrous for a unique president like Obama to 'stumble' into a new arms race or world war. Kinda of where we 'land' in ten years time two whole presidents later. Would Europe have accepted war in its territories over and beyond relative peace in 2014?
Who knows CB?
I would venture every 'problem' comes equipped with its own season. This comment is directed at the train of discussion happening in the thread. What drives people to want to manufacture a 'blood-bath' for expansion? Also, it is oddly interesting that Russia's President timing for this coincides with the U.S.A. freeing itself of binding operations and contractual obligations in Afghanistan. (Another 'puzzling piece.')
Putin is getting old too. It's possibly his final 'season' - length of time in power and he needs to act decisively while he still can sell the dream! (But what do I know about that Russian on the other side of the world - not much! )
Since I am floating scenarios. . . Putin could have been waiting for his manipulations of the 'American psyche' to ultimately arrive: for the U.S to have its internal 'conflict' or get embroiled in a second civil war which has so far failed to materialize and actuate! NATO would have been 'impotent' without us.
And, now he has to act (alone).
What does that say about republicans and democrats 'rowing' together again? Huh?
I'm not sure Putin would have done anything had both Ukraine and NATO made it perfectly clear that Ukraine's endgame would be to be part of NATO
This argument makes no sense to me, Russia does not want NATO on its border, but Russia will take over Ukraine and move its borders to NATO? This sounds like more of an excuse than anything else..
I think you missed my point.
Yes, Russia does not want Ukraine to be a member of NATO, since then the missiles are on his doorstep. Putin has said this. He is feel squeezed in by what he deems as what should be part of Russia already. These are not my words, they are Putin's.
You are correct, of course, that Putin has said he doesn't want a NATO Ukraine (and missiles in Eastern Europe). But I think Putin's biggest agenda is regaining the glory of Russia before the fall and the weakening of US global influence. Putin is getting hammered by political dissidents inside of Russia as the economy has been going to shit and the pandemic is raging across Russia. As that has been ramping up over the last 2 years so has Putin's rhetoric on Ukraine until it's now too late to turn back.
5100 people were arrested in protests across Russia last February after Alexei Navalny was poisoned. Those protests and arrests ( hundreds at a time ) continued through the whole of last year mainly in the South. With the lack of spending on health care and the increased spending on this military action even many of the older people who had been supporting Putin are turning away. I think this has become a make or break moment for Putin. He has to be seen as THE Russian hero.
Come to the head of the class! It's a great point for consideration. Why? Because at the same time Russia is 'praying' for a buffer-zone, for a reconstitution of Soviet 'glory,' for even say, better timing. . . Putin has to be FULLY AWARE where Russia 'ends' to its west . . . NATO can clasp and distribute itself. Many 'states' are consciousness-multipliers right now!
I know this is what Putin has said, and I think he is blowing smoke. The real reason he wants Ukraine, is Uranium deposits, shale gas reserves and it has the largest amount of arable land in Europe, and it exports about 15% of its product to China as of 2020, hence why Putin and Xi have been getting friendly.
He doesn't need the oil in Ukraine.
And China and Russia are friendly because they are two of a kind. Ex-communist dictatorships, both involved in trying to take what is not theirs.
If that scenario comes to pass and several NATO countries get involved militarily
Actually I think different people interpret the phrase "get involved militarily" differently.
Some talk of Americans kids "coming home in a body bag"-- for these people that phrase means sending in American troops to actually confront Russian troops and engaging in combat.
But there's another meaning to "getting involved militarily"-- and that is sending weapons (but not troops) to Ukraine for use against Russian forces.
And then again-- another meaning. Perhaps actually sending Americans troops (and heavy armaments) to the general area--- not for the purpose of engaging Russia in combat now but rather sending them to allied nations in the area to warn that attacking these countries would be quite dangerous.(the Baltics, Poland, etc).
Yes!
And another factor which IIRC hasn't been discussed here much:
I believe amongst those watching this whole scenario closely is China. They were waiting to see how the U.S. (and other NATO nations) respond.
Would they take substantial action to try to stop Putin taking over a country by force? (Which of course we/they haven't done).
And the sanctions? Actually meaningless to Putin despite what much of the talking heads are saying.... (The sanctions are bullshit as far as Putin is concerned).
The type of responses Putin's action get (from the U.S. NATO, etc) may well influence China's actions (or inaction) on deciding whether or not to attack its "renegade province" (AKA Taiwan). And China is waiting to see if attacking Taiwan in an attempt to annex it by force will be met by significant opposition from the world or not...
[To put it another way, there's a lot more at stake here than just the fate of the Ukraine].
More than Russia?
Thank you for that excellent post. It brought up some excellent points.
And yes, China is watching!
I 'm going to reserve judgement on that 'till I see how this all plays out.
After all, "It Ain't Over Til its over"!
It strikes me that MAD, Mutually Agreed Destruction, is about to face a test. Apparently, a nuclear power wants to 'test' how far it can push the world with aggression to get something it wants. In a lot of ways this reminds me of the 'Cuban Missile Crisis' where the United States demanded Russia remove or do not place its missiles within 'immediate" reach of the U.S. homeland. In this one regard, I can understand Russia's predicament.
But then I look at the size of Russia and I wonder how much more (damn) land does it need to 'worry' over again. Ouch. This is tough policy-making at its best!
You would think that MAD would be a deterrent.
It was once part of Russia. It's where my grandmother came from. So to them, it is much more about pride than land.
Kudos to your grandmother! (Smile.) Now then, I will have to look at this from a different perspective (because my "people" lack a precise accounting of 'prior placement.' Were I to think of the United States abandoning its 'union,' I am left wondering would I be "Lincoln-ess" enough to orchestrate spilling blood to draw it together into one nation again! The think about MAD is its deterrence works admirably. But, "STRONGMEN simply can not disperse their "drives" through through threats—apparently, all this 'potential' is bubbly up inside Putin and may be other 'strong-men' too!
You would think that MAD would be enough... but some like to roll the dice.
I really wrote that 'rough' didn't I (looking back on it now?. Distractions are everywhere!
Odessa?
Well so far there's has really been no significant opposition to Putin's plans. (And IMO that won't change even if Putin conquers and annexes all of the Ukraine!
(There will be a lot of talk, and some totally ineffective symbolic actions like sanctions-- but no significant actions...by anyone!)
If Russia only annexes the separatists rebel region of Ukraine and stops there then this all may pass...
If Ukraine must defend its nationhood watch out!
My read is that would be a long and bloody battle.
I'm not sure how this plays out. One part of me says if the world allows Russia to chip away at nearby nations, they won't stop. Nothing breeds success like success.
On the other hand, I am not sure if the world has the stomach for war.
There are ways to punish Putin without bombs. Crippling economic sanctions plus the cost of a long war combined could end up breaking Putin's grasp on political power. Remember Afghanistan? Russia is not invincible...
Ukraine may fight harder and longer than Putin expects. My experience with Ukrainians is that they are tough, determined and hard headed. They have experienced Russian rule and independence. They may put up quite a fight...
Afghanistan was not the only reason for the USSR's fall. People don't realize that Chernobyl hurt them a whole lot more economically than a prolonged war could.
I agree, they might, but there is little chance that they can't be taken by Russia, unless we have another unforeseen event kick in.
When I was a kid we were told that if Vietnam fell the rest of Asia would fall like dominoes.
Putin is a SOB, but he wants Russia to be a part of the world economy. Time will tell but I don't believe Ukraine losing rebel regions that now claim independence necessarily means that all of Eastern Europe is up for grabs...
Putin is bound and determined to revive the Soviet empire no matter what and I don't think he is too concerned about the eventual cost, either in lives lost or monetarily. He is working himself up eventually to the megalomania level of Stalin.
You may be entirely right Ed, but only time will tell.
Not to mention trying to keep up with the US mlitarily. That helped bankrupt their economy. It has taken them this long to build their military back into a semi credible force.
Very True, Ed!
There are runs on the gun stores in the Ukraine. The citizens might go down, but they will go down fighting.
Well, look what Hitler did. As he conquered one nation after another, what did the U.S. do?
Many people erroneously give us credit for choosing to fight to stop the spread the forced expansion of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan-- as if Americans wanted to go to war to stop them.
But that's false-- American opinion was overwhelmingly isolationist. "Its not our struggle" type of thinking was prevalent. (That and the fact that we had two large oceans to protect us from the Axis powers...or so most Americans thought).
The only reason we "decided" to go to war is that we were attacked by an Axis power (Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor). Of course after that we could hardly remain neutral.
Japan declared WAR upon us,,, WE did not declare war until we were clearly attacked... Although there was a defacto war going on between the Kreigsmarine and US Navy in the Atlantic, WE did not declare war on Germany... Germany declared WAR on us...
WE do not go off half blind declaring war on anyone... Never have, never will..
WE don't start wars, we finish them....
Al Qaida was the last example...
Putin isn't stupid, he doesn't want a WAR with the US... (in any way shape or form)
Did you forget about Vietnam and Iraq?
Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan we didn't finish those.
Nope, I didn't forget about them...
Tough enough to shoot down Russian missiles...using their rifles? Tough enough to go up against a Russian tank (or tanks!)...
(Of course if they run out of bullets they could always try throwing stones at the tanks. And if they run out of stones they could take off their shoes and throw them at the tanks...now that's tough!
Well, prediction is difficult-- especially about the future!
On one hand, if that's true, they won't stop.
Or perhaps they won't stop trying.
People like Stalin and Hitler, to name but two, did keep trying ...but they eventually did stop.
Or perhaps more accurately-- while they didn't want to stop -- but "circumstances" forced them to stop!
Actually re: Afghanistan, IIRC specifically in the case of Afghanistan, it probably wasn't the economic pain as much as it was the Russian population who eventually became tired of "seeing their kids come home in a box":
Country Joe & the Fish -- Vietnam song
It is a group formed by Country Joe Mcdonal and Bary Melton nicknamed Fish They are known for their presentation at Woodstock with "I Feel Like I'm Fixin' to die
Lyrics:
Intro Spoken
Give me an "F! ..."F"! give me a "U"! ..."U"!
Give me a "C"! ..."C" Give me a "K"! ..."K"!
WHATS THAT SPELL? ..."FUCK!" (x5)
Well come on all of you big strong men, Uncle Sam needs your help again,
he got himself in a terrible jam, way down yonder in Vietnam,
put down your books and pick up a gun, we're gunna have a whole lotta fun.
CHORUS
and its 1,2,3 what are we fightin for?
don't ask me i don't give a dam, the next stop is Vietnam,
now come on wall street don't be slow, why man this's war a-go-go,
there's plenty good money to be made, supplyin' the army with the tools of the trade,
just hope and pray that when they drop the bomb, they drop it on the Vietcong.
CHORUS
now come on generals lets move fast, your big chance is here at last.
nite you go out and get those reds cuz the only good commie is one thats dead,
you know that peace can only be won, when you blow em all to kingdom come.
CHORUS
(spoken)- listen people i dont know you expect to ever stop the war if you cant sing any better than that... theres about 300,000 of you fuc|ers out there.. i want you to start singing..
CHORUS
now come on mothers throughout the land, pack your boys off to vietnam,
come on fathers don't hesitate, send your sons off before its too late,
be the first one on your block, to have your boy come home in a box
CHORUS
Alrite !!!!!!!
Over time, "Mothers throughout the Land" were getting tired of having to see "their boy come home home in a box..."
(And despite harsh reprisals from Putin's "Nazi Gestapos"... its obvious that many Russians are not to happy about having to send off their kids to fight-- and often refurned dead or severely maimed for life)
How would Americans feel if some foreign power attacked, forceably conquered, and annexed part of America?
(Conquered part of the U.S. ...but "only" part)
For example, if the "only" annexed, say, California, Oregon, and Washington state.
Or if they "only" conquered & forceably annexed, say, Texas, and Arizona? Or "only" annexed Mississippi, and Florida?
And after all, if that was" only" all they conquered...and then they stopped?
Do you seriously think Americans would gladly "let it pass"?
Despite the attempts by the idiots over at Faux News to paint Biden as some some of radical Socialist, he really isn't.
But what if America had a president who was far to the left of Biden-- in fact, an actual Socialist?
Of course that's not merely hypothetical-- we did have a president who was a real Socialist!
And-- under his administration,...we actually were attacked by a hostile foreign power!
(Many people would've been even more "Very worried" about that-- but what are the "True Facts"? Was Socialist FDR"s response really cause for worry????)
Honestly, would anybody miss them? Well, I know the left would. Those seem to be their base of stupidity.
Well, there are some people in Mexico that are convinced to this day that the lower half of CA, AZ, and NM still belong to Mexico and that the Gadsden Purchase was invalid.
There are still people in Mexico that resent the fact that the US didn't annex all of Mexico after the Mexican-American war in 1848.... Most of the people in Mexico Including Santa Ana thought that was the best resolution...
Yeah there are Mexican nationalists that think that, they are just as insane as those that claim this is a racist nation since we stepped off the boat...
If FDR was actually a socialist then they might have, but since he wasn't, it's a non-issue...
Yep!
As was the Guadalupe Hildago Treaty of 1848, where Mexico ceded 55 percent of its territory, including parts of present-day Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas, Colorado, Nevada, and Utah, to the United States.
FDR was a liberal, but he definitely was not a socialist!
Empire building? Please. Right about now: we might be surprised if "we" hold together the states we have unified! The so-called, "patriots" would like to oppress the heaven out of all who will not comply to their idealism. Mexico-Mexicans don't impress me that they would like to be U.S.
Well this is 2022, not 1848 isn't it? did you miss the historical context?
Looks like it.
Ed and I aren't confused... {chuckle}
And you SAID that to say what? It's an "A and B conversation, and all others can just step off? Anyway, let me take this phone call. Bye! (Chuckles.)
Not in the least... Lol
I think of him as a Socialist-- but I'm not going to waste my time arguing about it.
(I have had much experience with Socialists and learned there are degrees of Socialism...and even things like Social Security are Socialist concepts).
Many years ago when I was in college (still undergrad) I joined a Socialist political organization,,, so long ago I can't remember the name.
And I have lived in a Socialist community (a Kibbutz in Israel) and also a different Kibbuttz that was pretty much bordering on Communism (Democratic Communism which is generally considered to be a contradiction in terms. But it did exist in small communities-- the kibbutzim in Israel, and some hippy communes in Oregon in the 60's)
Ever hear of Orange County?
Re: would anyone ever miss CA and specifically Orange county CA:
Ever hear of Orange County?
From the mid-20th century until the 2010s, Orange County was known as a Republican stronghold and consistently sent Republican representatives to the state and federal legislatures — so strongly so, that Ronald Reagan described it as the place that "all the good Republicans go to die.
Republican majorities in Orange County helped deliver California's electoral votes to Republican nominees Richard Nixon in 1960, 1968, and 1972; Gerald Ford in 1976; Reagan in 1980 and 1984; and George H. W. Bush in 1988.
There's no surer sign of a failed Presidency than avalanche of "it's not his fault" stories.
There's no "Monday morning Quarterbacking" involved in criticizing Biden. His critics are on record from a decade ago pointing out that Putin was a bad actor and critizing Biden for being soft on him. Who can forget 2012, when Obama and Biden repeatedly pounded Romney for claiming Russia was a threat. Remember the "80's called and want their foreign policy back" line that liberal fell all over themselves celebrating. It was the "line of the three debates" per the Post's reporter at the time. And 2012 was just the beginning of the Obama/Biden pandering to Russia, whose help they wanted with Iran.
This invasion was made possible by the Obama/Biden complicity in the 2014 invasion. They even refused to give the Ukrainians defensive arms to defend themselves. Think about that. Plenty of people knew that allowing Russia to invade another country without so much as a token attempt to help resist it would lead to more aggression. No Monday morning quarterbacking about that.
So Joe Biden, a man with a long and documented history of playing patsy to Putin is elected and what's does he almost immediately do? Waive the sanctions on the Gulfstream pipeline that Trump put in place. And what happens when Republicans vote for new sanctions on the pipeline? Biden's party filibusters them.
Is it any wonder that Putin saw Joe Biden in the White House and said, "now's the time to invade!"
one thing that was predictable was that Putin would have done this, no matter who was in office
Not at all. That's just a guess. Maybe he would have tried something in Trump's second term, but he certainly made no move towards Ukraine while Trump was in office. Maybe he viewed Trump as a madman whose reaction was unpredictable. That's just as possible. We do know Biden's history and we do know that Putin chose to invade while Biden was in office, and not Trump.
What is really fucked up is far rightwing Americans in the gop who are not supporting our President during this time of international crisis because they are still so damn butthurt that their disgraced orange hued savior lost so badly to Biden in 2020!
Unlike the fucked up left wing whose loyalty is to their party, I support the country, not the President. Why you equate telling the truth with "not supporting the President" is bizarre and telling.
OK guys, stop with the partisan bickering.
The left is behind America and Ukraine now!
This is a time we should be pulling together...
I have the utmost respect and support for the office if the president. Show me a law anywhere that says I am required to respect and support the man or woman sitting in that office, because I don't.
And, what about the six years that the Dems/Libs were "not supporting our President during times of international crisis because they are still so damn butthurt that their Queen of BS lost badly to Trump in 2016!" Yeah - you forgot about that part, eh?
Trump was president for four years, not six.
Which international crisis are you speaking of?
His critics have been on record for everything real and imagined. Kind of like the reverse of TDS.
Maybe.
Apparently, Biden has. He is giving the Ukrainians weapons. And I'm sorry, but in 2014 Obama was president, not Biden. It might be perceived by Putin as one in the same, you and I know that isn't the true.
Please list the long documented history of playing patsy to Putin. As for the Gulfstream pipeline, we did that for the Germans. It's been closed again, along with a lot of assets worldwide.
Sean, as I spelled out, Putin was never going to have NATO on his doorstep (he basically said so) and he always considered both the Crimea and Ukraine as part of Mother Russia. The fate was sealed the moment NATO started to go forward with letting Ukraine in. This would have been true no matter who was in office.
I'm not sure what that means. Biden's record towards Putin is not imagined. Just in May of this year he was trying for another "reset"
Biden Has a Second Chance at Russia Reset - Bloomberg
Apparently, Biden has. He is giving the Ukrainians weapons.
I agree, Biden has learned from the Obama administration's mistakes. That's am improvement
Ple ase list the long documented history of playing patsy to Putin.
Where do you want to start? The reset he pushed for, because George Bush, of all people, was too hard on the Russians? Pushing for Russian membership in the WTO?
doing essentially nothing after the first Ukraine invasion?
Opposing the Magnitisky act? supporting the pullout of missile defense systems in our eastern European allies? The list goes on and on.....
he fate was sealed the moment NATO started to go forward with letting Ukraine in.
What has NATO done towards admitting Ukraine? Their admission isn't even on the drawing board at this point. Ukraine hasn't even been invited to apply. George Bush was in favor of it at the end of his term, but France and Germany objected and it's been on deep freeze since then.
I have to differ with you brother Ukraine is on a MAP, which means when complete, it becomes a member, it's been topsy turvey over the last 20 or so years, but about 8 years ago they got their crap together...
There is a path to NATO military involvement in the Ukraine.. It's a convoluted path but it does exist......
Sean,
A reset in relations real or for appearances is not a bad thing and means that both parties are agreeing to the same things, hence why there was a meeting. Nothing was signed. All was just lip service.
I disagreed with Pushing for Russian membership in the WTO.
First of all repeating a fact twice doesn't mean it happened twice. The Russo-Ukrainian War was during Obama's administration and was a lot more complex than even this one. btw... your link is broken.
I can't find a single claim of that. It was enacted under Obama. You might want to read this:
Again, something I can't find.
What has NATO done towards admitting Ukraine? Their admission isn't even on the drawing board at this point.
Again I am not sure what you are talking about. This from wiki:
So yes France and Germany have their reservations, but apparently that has changed and more important is how Ukraine feels and they want to be...
Well yes, when you are dealing with someone like Putin, it's a bad thing to to say, "sorry Trump was too tough on you. Don't worry, you don't have to do anything, we'll lift sanctions on your prized pipeline."
It's staggering to me, knowing what we know, that anyone would claim "resetting" to warmer relations with Putin has ever been a good idea. How many countries does he need to invade before it becomes clear he is a dangerous foe?
First of all repeating a fact twice doesn't mean it happened twice .
But it's the elephant in the room. It is a direct precedent to the current situation. Do you imagine Putin didn't factor in our response to his last invasion in deciding to whether to go forward with this one?
Downplaying doesn't make it go away.
I can't find a single claim of that.
Weird. It's all over the internet. It took two seconds to google.
Again, something I can't find.
Obama scraps Bush missile-defense plan - ABC News (go.com)
A gain I am not sure what you are talking about.
There are no plans to admit Ukraine to NATO. It's not up to Ukraine so I'm not sure what relevance polling their population is. The point is Russia didn't invade to because Ukraine was joining NATO.
a nd Germany have their reservations, but apparently that has changed and more important is how Ukraine feels and they want to be ..
I have no idea what you are talking about. There are no currently no plans for Ukraine to join NATO.
I'm sorry, I don't remember Biden saying he was sorry for Trump, so please stop with the hyperbole. The sanctions were lifted for the Germans, not Putin. They are back in place.
The resetting was just diplomatic talk. Do you actually think that anyone and that including Russians think that Putin is a good guy?
The elephant everyone can see. Of course, Putin put that into the equation. But Biden isn't Obama and I am sure he knows that, too. And who is downplaying this? Not me. I think this is very serious and I hope we and the world are up to the job and make the right choices.
Again, you are addressing something the Obama administration did, in an article from 2014 which was already addressed. Biden is presently considering using Magnitsky Act This is not 2014.
And yeah I couldn't find what you were talking about since I thought you were talking about Biden, not Obama.
Odd since on Putin's list of demands was:
Sean, I already addressed this.
Sorry Sean, this is completely incorrect...
Ukraine-NATO relations.. (wiki)
At the June 2021 Brussels Summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP) as an integral part of the process and Ukraine's right to determine its own future and foreign policy course without outside interference.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also stressed that Russia will not be able to veto Ukraine's accession to NATO, as we will not return to the era of spheres of interest, when large countries decide what smaller ones should do:
On 28 June 2021, Ukraine and NATO forces launched joint naval drills in the Black Sea codenamed Sea Breeze 2021. Russia had condemned the drills, with the Russian Defence Ministry saying it would closely monitor them.
On January 11, 2022, it became known that a group of Republican congressmen intended to introduce a bill declaring Ukraine a NATO-plus country and initiating a review of the advisability of declaring Russia a state sponsor of terrorism. The authors of the bill argue that recognizing Ukraine as a "NATO+ country" will make it possible to quickly make decisions on the provision and sale of American defense goods and services to Ukraine. In particular, according to Mike Rogers, co-author of the bill, this rule concerns the provision of anti-ship and air defense systems. In addition, this bill proposes to create a mechanism for the rapid imposition of sanctions against Nord Stream 2 in the event of a full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. The authors of the bill are convinced that in this way they will forever block its commissioning. Also, if adopted, the United States is obliged to consider and vote on whether to grant Russia the status of a "country-sponsor of international terrorism."
On January 14, 2022, Andrii Yermak, Chairman of the Office of the President of Ukraine, said that the Ukrainian authorities hope to hear specific conditions for joining the North Atlantic Alliance:
The head of the President's Office also praised the preparation of sanctions in the event of a Russian invasion, but warned that such an invasion "would be a great tragedy."
On Wednesday, February 16 2022, NATO's commanders have been instructed by Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to work out the details of a battlegroup deployment to the alliance's southeastern flank because there are no signs of a Russian de-escalation yet.
There have also been funds set up to aid Ukraine's accession to NATO totalling in the billions of Euro's
Ukraine will not only become a member of NATO, they have been working on it for ten years..
Thank you for your clarity on the issue.
Sorry Sean, this is completely incorrect...
No, it's not. 14 years after the aspirational declaration, Ukraine, as your post points out, is in the exact same place it was in 2008. "On January 14, 2022, Andrii Yermak, Chairman of the Office of th President of Ukraine, said that the Ukrainian authorities hope to hear specific conditions for joining the North Atlantic Alliance:" So 14 years later Ukraine still doesn't even know what it has to do join the alliance. They are in limbo and and there are no current plans, timelines or even a list of prerequisites for Ukraine to join the alliance.
The idea that Russia attacked because of some imminent plan for Ukraine to join NATO is simply false. As you point out, Ukraine has been in the exact same position since 2008, and there is no sign of it changing.
don't remember Biden saying he was sorry for Trump, so please stop with the hyperbo
Perrie you are the one defending Biden's attempted reset with Russia because Trump was too harsh.
ain, you are addressing something the Obama administration did,
Again, I posted this because Biden was in the Obama admisntration and you claimed they never opposed the Magnitsky Act. They did, and to claim that wasn't in Russian's interest is bizarre. You asked for a list of actions taken for Russia's benefit and I provided it. Don't get mad because I responded to your request. But by all means, point of Biden dissenting from the policies of the admisntration he was VP of.
Sean, I already addressed this.
IF you say so. A poll of Ukrainians isn't really relevant to anything but whatever.
Ukraine is on a MAP, which means when complete there will be a formal invite and then a vote of all current NATO countries. The vote must be unanimous. It was never a given that Ukraine would join NATO, but now the current situation may surely swing that pendulum in Ukraine's favor.
Also if this just becomes about the Donbas region then it'll be a long drawn out shit-show between Russia and Ukraine. If Russia moves on Kiev then all bets are off and I don't see NATO being neutral for long.
Actually EG, the vote was already taken, all that is left is for the member nations to acknowledge that Ukraine has met all the requirements... While the process of the MAP is happening Ukraine has been receiving technical training and advice on the requirements of, Systems Intregration with, and how to be a Nato member... This has been ongoing since 2008... Once all the members approve individually of Ukraine's integration and ability to handle it's responsibilities as a member state, An official vote is taken by either the Ukrainian parliament or people to join Nato if approved by the Parliament or the Citizens, they are officially recognized as a member...
I believe they already have some 22 of the member nations that have given their approval of Ukraine's progress, leaving 8 to go... The unanimous vote to start the process was done back in 2008....
All that is left is for them is to complete the integration plan (MAP) to the acceptance of the last 8 nations and then, on their own, vote themselves in...
This is why the leader of NATO is saying that it doesn't matter what anyone says at this point, when the plan is complete Ukraine is the only one that can reject NATO membership.. By their own vote...
The invite and formal unanimous vote has already happened... NATO officially is willing to have them as long as they complete the MAP to the satisfaction of all the members and then vote to approve the accession to NATO...
Ukraine is the only nation that can keep them out at this point...
Because they are still primarily a Russian military with a reputation ( greatly reduced) for corruption.
That military will be greatly degraded if not annihilated in a matter of weeks if not sooner
unless Poland/UN crosses the western border, then who knows?
just another fucking war with body bags.....
We never learn
Nope we never do...
WTF?
I've lived under several presidents, both Democrats and republicans. And in each case members of their party often repeated "its not his fault" when there were setbacks.
Under the type of "logic" in your comment-- that would mean that every one of those presidents (of both parties) were total failures!
Anyone can say "its not his fault"-- even extremely uninformed people. And they're entitled to their opinion. But because a lot of people say that-- does that "prove" (no surer sign) that that president is a failure?
"no surer sign .. . than an avalanche of . . . stories" ???
Sounds to me like once again people are attempting to play that tired old "People Are Saying Card"!
Well, none other than the late, great, Sophie Tucker weighs in with her opinion on the matter!
Fifty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong
That's a very valid point. For the past many presidents now, the standard line has been to cast the blame on their predecessor. With the poor choices for leadership that we are given in elections to choose from, this standard is definitely easier for them then to stand there and admit they share any of the blame. After all, for all of Washington it's party for everything else...
nder the type of "logic" in your comment-- that would mean that every one of those presidents (of both parties) were total failures!
Of course that's not true. When things are going well, then Presidents and their supporters are taking credit for things. When they are not, they blame. It's a question of proportion. So when, as now, the premise is always "it's someone else's fault" than the President is failing.
Now?
I reckon that with the exception of George Washington (PBUH) every president has attempted to pass the blame to prior presidents!
(Well, those of the other party of course)
With one notable exception, of course-- the god-like Donald Trump never passed to blame to anyone else.
JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR
Nope.
Never!
In fact he always took responsibility for his own numerous fuckups!
(One little, two little, three little sarcasms
)
The Speech In Which Putin Told Us Who He Was
Tell me, who was president in 2007?
Putin was going to invade no matter who was/is president. That is not something that concerns him. All of this talk of Obama, Trump, Biden is so short-sighted.
Your and others bickering about who is at fault? Putin has you right where he wants you.
George Bush... At least he had the excuse of "fool me once." Obama, of course, responded with the "reset" and the parade of toadying I mentioned.
hat is not something that concerns him.
Of course it is. How fucking dumb do you think he is? Of course he factors in expected responses when making decisions.
It's mind-blowing that anyone could think Putin, a KGB man, wouldn't take his opponents into account when deciding strategy. He'd be too survive, let alone rule Russia if he didn't.
All of this talk of Obama, Trump, Biden is so short-sighted.
Nonsense. This is a long term problem and understanding how we got here is critical. These are the discussions that we should have been having for the last decade, but made up stories of piss tapes get more clicks.
Putin has you right where he wants you.
Discussion is healthy. Silencing discussion is not. So stop mimicking Putin .
His opponents were within the Kremlin in 1999, when he was first elected. He went about removing that threat. Then, like Hitler, began rebuilding the army. He, like Hitler, doesn't give a rat's ass who is 'the leader' of a western country. In his view they are decadent and weak anyway. Whoever is leading. Putin will kill whomever he needs to in order to build back the Russian hegemony it once had. He will be the uncrowned first Tsar of the new Russian Empire. That will be his legacy.
He has you where he wants you because rather than fighting him, you are fighting other Americans.
e, like Hitler, doesn't give a rat's ass who is 'the leader' of a western country
Lol.. Do you think Hitler, or Putin, operates in a vacuum or controls what happens?
Of course Hitler measured his opponents and tailored his actions accordingly. Start with the occupation of the Ruhr. He believed the English and French were not willing to defend it, and he gambled his position and likely his life that they would let the occupation stand. And they of course did.
Hitler and Putin are probably the best examples of leaders who relied on their assessments of their opponents when making decisions. I don't know how anyone familiar with either could think otherwise.
. In his view they are decadent and weak anyway.
Exactly, which is why he is emboldened to act.
He has you where he wants you because rather than fighting him
So, in your mind, people like Churchill who criticized Chamberlain after the invasion of Czechoslovakia were helping Hitler?
I am confident that people can walk and chew gum at the same time. They can both criticize the actions of the American government, and fight Putin.
Quite simply, I do not believe you understand history.
Parade of toadying?
Well, at least there's one thing we can be greatful for-- at least there's no toadying on the part of the MAGA-Cultists!
(Yes, today I'm in the mood for..sarcasm! But tomorrow... who knows?)
That's fine. Just try and be coherent. Try and put some thought behind your replies.
Apparently some History courses taught in American schools skip over the part about the rulers of ancient Egypt?
Or those of the Persian Empire?
Or ancient Greece?
Or the Roman Empire?
Songhai and Mali Empires?
The greatest Indian Empires below our current border...Aztecs, Mayans, Incas...?
And...Good grief...I don't know how many powerful ancient Chinese Dynasties! (Where is Buzz when you need him?)
Ever hear of Ghengis Khan?
Nope..none of these their assessments of their opponents when making decisions..
Absolutely not!
/here I go again with the sarcasm...
And I'm sure I've missed a few...going back a ways there are so many.
(Why is the American education system so bad...?)
[Deleted]
We also know that FDR was in office when Japan decided to attack Pearl Harbour. But does that mean that FDR was responsible for that attack?
Nope.
Its obvious that what you've just read in my post is totally inaccurate!
(Krisha..once again playing the "Back 'Atcha Card!)
Good point-- there's never, ever been a single person who ever criticized Joe Biden-- or who was uninformed.
Nevah-- not even one!
/sarc
d point-- there's never, ever been a single person who ever criticized Joe Biden-- or who was uninforme
do you not understand English? Or do you just argue against strawmen of your own creation and reply to me for some reason?
December 2019
President Donald Trump has signed a law that will impose sanctions on any firm that helps Russia's state-owned gas company, Gazprom, finish a pipeline into the European Union.
The sanctions target firms building Nord Stream 2, an undersea pipeline that will allow Russia to increase gas exports to Germany.
The sanctions did not stop the building of Nord Stream 2, it was completed in Sept 2021.
That aside the only country that could stop the pipeline was Germany, who as of today stated that it would not issue the final approval.
Next, what do our armchair generals think that we should do at this point. Ukraine is not a NATO member so there is no commitment on our part to come to their aid. The question is, what should we do.
1. Financial support and defense weapons
2. Financial support, intelligence support and send them offensive weapons
3. All of the above and put US troops in Ukraine
3. Ignore the situation and let the chips fall where they may
4. continue diplomatic meetings to find a solution.
putin probably thinks he is invincible. He kills or jails any opposition to him and even poisons people around the world.
I think any change in Russia would have to come from the people rising up in numbers that overwhelmed him.
I don't see that happening any time soon.
I think you are right, Ender.
I don't see that happening now or in the future, Ender.
Not yet enough to overwhelm him-- but on the first (or was it the second?) day of the shooting war and invasion breaking out, the numbers were surprisingly large. And remember...that was just as the invasion really started-- my guess is that the Russian people's opposition to the war will only grow as dead soldiers continue to go back to Russia...
(And those maimed for life . . . ).
Here's an important article I seeded on that very subject.
(But one which for some reason most people on this site are avoiding):
Massive Protests Erupted In Putin's Hometown Of St. Petersburg As Russians Voice Opposition To War In Ukraine
Correct on the pipelines.
As for how we might go forward, we have already done 1&2.
We might give Ukraine strategic support in manpower, but only if Europe does.
I don't think we can let the chips fall where they may, since as I said Putin so far all his campaigns have proven to be fruitful, and success does breed success.
And of course, we all hope for diplomatic meetings to find a solution but as of tonight, all have been officially called off. Who knows what goes on in the backwaters.
We could send them more potent and deadly offensive weapons. Missiles, long range artiliry, tanks etc.
IMO, I think that Ukraine made a mistake in giving up their nuclear weapons.
I would have to agree.
Actually that might not be the best thing. Rather than manpower, IMO we never gave the Ukrainians adequate weapons.
From the start my thoughts were: Why hasn't Biden given Ukraine the fantastic Iron Dome anti-missile weapons system like Obama did for Israel when their civilian areas were threatened with deadly rocket attack by the crazies in Palestinian-ruled Hamastan?
Israel's 'Iron Dome' missile defense system an Obama administration legacy
President Obama answered Israel's call to shore up defenses against Hamas by collaborating with U.S.-Israeli companies to develop 'Iron Dome'
AKA "The Gaza Strip".
(Propaganda by the so-called "Palestinians" and other extremist Arab regimes would have you believe that all of the land they claim is "occupied". But in fact there is a self-governing Arab-ruled "Palestine". This independent Arab ruled area is the area formerly occupied by Egypt and then Israel after them. But since the Israeli occupation is now totally over, since the end of the Israeli occupation Gaza" is now ruled by the horrendous totalitarian regime of the Arab terror group Hamas-- hence the nickname "Hamastan".
Every once in a while these Hamas nutcases think they can successfully attack Israel-- and create a "Judenfrei" area there. So they try-- resulting in a huge number of Gaza casualties.
At first their rockets had a very limited range...but over the years they gotten more and more sophisticated rockets...IIRC mainly from another brutal totalitarian regime-- Iran. In the last war they could've exterminated a significant number of israeli civilians.
But Hamas' plans were thwarted thanks to Obama.
Which leads to the conclusion of my long rant-- why haven't we sent these systems to the Ukraine? Not only would it have wrecked havoc on Russian missiles (and even large artillery shells) but it might have actually turned back the Russian advance.
Doing this without having to send in American kids to die in the Ukraine...
So why didn't Biden do for Ukraine what Obama did for Israel?
(Perhaps he received poor advice from the Pentagon?)
Frankly I don't give a damn what happens there. As far as I am concerned Ukraine accepting NATO membership is tantamount to Russia having placed missiles in Cuba - the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was a threat to the security of the USA. How did Kennedy and his government and Americans generally feel about that? America did a blockade and Russia backed off. When Gorbachev "tore down that wall" Russia was assured security, and now, breaking that promise NATO intends to put a military outpost aimed at Russia next door to it. Well, is everyone totally obtuse? What did they expect Russia to do, invite them in for tea? But everyone has to save face and show how big their balls are - NOT do what Russia did in the Cuba Missile Crisis, and back off, but push harder. I'm not at all surprised at how Putin reacted and I'm not at all horrified at what is happening. Absolutely none of this would have happened if Zelenskyy had said NO to NATO. There would have been no war - where was the threat of it? There would have been no people dying. There would have been no destruction WHAT A STUPID FUCKING WASTE ALL BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S GOT TO SHOW OFF THEIR BIG BALLS.
I'm sure the American arms manufacturers are gleefully licking their chops.
Sanctions were removed by Joe Biden in May 2021.
Yes, they were and were put back into place now. Let's see what they do.
I'm aware that Biden removed them in May of 2021. Between December of 2019 and May of 2021 the construction continued.
1. and 4.
2. If 1. and 4. don't work.
I choose a combo: 1and 4! Definitely not 2 or 3! It's way to early in this to set the stage for Russia to unleash its 'kraken' offensive weaponry upon Ukraine due to Ukraine handicapping Russia in some way.
Well said!
If Russia can take land, China can take Hong Kong, I say we take Cuba.
LOL, I know most Cubans wouldn't mind.
Cubans, the citizens mind you, if given the chance would vote for statehood right about now I suspect... {chuckle}
Oh hell, throw in Venezuela as well.
Why not just start at Mexico and head south? That is what this is coming to.
All kidding aside. Did you think Afghanistan was a long-term waste of 'warfare,' time, energy, and lives? Mexican people are fierce, beautiful, savvy, and they know their country side. This would not end well (for us) politically. And, it's a sick joke. Ditto for Venezuela (I'd imagine.).
I call dibs on Pitcairn Island.
Been there, tried that:
Bay of Pigs Invasion
Actually we didn't. While we said that we would give naval support and air support that the free Cubans needed, Kennedy canceled that support at the last minute
Sandwich Cubanos Para Todos!
(And Oh-- those wonderful vintage American cars!)
Cuban sandwiches? Vintage American cars? Ok, but... It's the Cuban music!!!
Yep, that too!
I totally agree..
(Actually there are 3 countries that are on the top of my Bucket List-- after The Trump Virus slows down, I would like to travel...and on my list of countries I will see first, one of them is Cuba!!!)
Unfortunately all three currently have "difficult' relationship with the U.S. and currently may not be too safe for Americans, although Cuba is probably currently the safest of the lot.
There is no such thing as the " Trump virus" get your facts straight.
Let me guess. The others are among these. North Korea, Venezuela, Communist China, and Putin's Russia or Iran
Putin's ego is at the heart of this. I am confident that his strategy is primarily based on how he, Putin, will be remembered ... his legacy. If so then it would seem that Putin will continue to push until he gets a level of satisfaction that makes him look good in the history books.
He has until 2024 to keep up the pressure so this is ultimately a long gambit for him. Trouble is, he has amassed 150,000 troops who cannot stay local and ready indefinitely without taking hostile action. Putin must act with these troops within weeks. Withdrawing without winning enough to bolster Putin's legacy (and ego) does not seem likely; he is not in this to lose. So sanctions alone are clearly not going to end this situation. No way will Putin put forth this much force only to cave to sanctions.
The question is: what is the minimum requirement to give to Putin? The sanctions and urgency to act likely will make him more cooperative (and he of course anticipated this kind of action) so what minimum win can he carve out of this?
Why? So long as they are in Russia he can shift them around however he pleases. Think the troops are going to rebel or something? Chances are they have families scattered throughout Russia. Putin might not have a way of affecting the troops directly; but being former KGB he knows how to hit their families. He has already proven with dissidents that he is not above using KGB tactics.
He has already carved out the two Russian separatists areas and cut them loose of Ukraine. He is sending troops in now to stabilize them. Want to lay odds that Ukraine isn't going to accept this the way NATO and the US have? Ukraine attacks Russian troops; and by extent the Russian people they are protecting; and it will be war. A war that Ukraine started (whether anyone outside of Russia believes that doesn't matter); giving Russia full justification to invade and put a hostile Ukrainian regime inserted by the West down.
Goes back to his ego. Having a massive troop deployment that does nothing, endlessly, makes Putin look weak. He has put a huge troop deployment out there (equivalent to the total of all USA worldwide deployments), visibly, for the entire world (and his nation) to see. One can rattle sabers only so long before one starts looking ridiculous. Again, if you were to follow my point, I am suggesting that analysis should "follow Putin's ego".
Of course not. I did not even hint that. They are not going to die of starvation and cold either. My point was about Putin's ego, not his military's ability to maintain a supply chain and discipline when deployed.
People are demonstrably capable of believing anything. USA politics and the pandemic have made that clear. But it is quite a sell for Putin to take his deployment of 150,000 troops, declaration that Ukraine is part of Russia, etc. and turn that into Ukraine being the initial aggressor.
He doesn't need to sell the whole world. Just the people that keep him in charge; and the Russian people to a lesser extent.
It also depends on how the US and NATO react. Ukraine attacking Russian forces is going to be a hard sell. No one wants a war with Russia. Non response would be the same as acceptance.
I am hoping Ukraine is smart enough not to take the bait; but Brandon has had their President amped up for several weeks now. He in turn has been amping up the Ukrainian people. There may be no choice for them but to attack Russian forces; or the Ukrainian president might risk ouster. Would be poetic justice in a way. Obama backed a coup ousting a duly elected pro Russian government; and Putin brings about a coup perhaps even a second internal civil war in Ukraine because their president backed down to Russia; and made to look weak.
I think Putin would accept Ukrainians killing each other as a form of victory. If they threaten Russian civilians in Ukraine Putin will have another excuse to invade.
Again, Ronin, my point is about Putin and his legacy aspirations. I am explicitly suggesting that one analyze this situation in terms of the long term consequences as they apply to Putin's legacy rather than the short term consequences of power.
The Ukraine is not going to start a war. They will at most defend themselves from attack.
The Ukraine is no match for Russia. Of course there is a choice. If Russia does not attack the Ukraine, the Ukraine will not engage in military actions.
Depending upon how it is framed. That is clearly not his desire but it might serve to help him save face if his gambit fails. Putin wants Ukranian territory (he wants all of the Ukraine but I suspect he knows that would require a major war with costs to Russia and himself that he likely does not want to incur). It certainly seems that expanding his control in territory adjacent to Crimea (Donetsk and Luhansk) is his realistic short-term goal. But if he were to accomplish that goal, the balance of the Ukraine would very likely be accepted by the U.N. and make it even more difficult to pursue the Ukraine in the future.
Perhaps its time for (sigh) another partition wall? I hate to mention it. But Ukraine may have to consider partitioning itself behind a wall and put the wannabe Russian separatists on the other side of the partition. Construct a zone: "Shall NOT Pass!"
All who seek to ignore the wall's stated intend face punishment of arrest and death! I hate the concept of a partitioning/wall almost as much as having to bring this "cheesy' gif out of storage. (Great scene for the movie, nevertheless.)
Ukraine doesn't have the money for a wall. But I am sure they really wish they could dump all of the Russians in their country behind one; considering the fascist actions they have taken since becoming a Pro Western government.
Too bad Russia isn't the Palestinians. They can easily go over, around, and through any wall the Ukrainians could manage to erect. Or are you making a jab at our wide open Southern border?
U.S. borders are not in this or my mind. I am thinking of a "Berlin Wall" type option alone.
I don't think that's what he wants at all. It seems obvious that what he wants is to set up a Russian puppet state that controls all of Ukraine. (If a lot of Ukrainians die-- or even in none died but he could set up a puppet government there he'd be satisfied.
And probably soon Moldova as well...
There's not the slightest doubt in my mind that Putin will stop at nothing short of conquering all of the Ukraine and setting up a puppet government there. And Moldova as well.
And BTW it should happen quickly and easily. Check out the sheer number of Russian troops arrayed vs the small number of Ukrainians.
And then yuge number of advanced weapons the Russians have...against the porrly armed Ukrainians.
(To say nothing of the fact that while many Ukrainians are choosing to stay and fight the Russian planes, missiles, Tanks etc using their rifles, many have decided to leave and are crossing over into neighbouring countries-- further reducing their man power.
And then there's the Russians amazing ability at Cyber-warfare...)
Given the current events he is clearly going for all of the Ukraine.
Just like the war that American patriots started whne we were subject to harsh colonial rule by the Brits!
(Is it time to party-- can I offer you a spot of Boston tea, perhaps?)
Yes-- but that was way back in 1990!
And-- can you really blame them? (If I was Ukrainian at the time I would have totally supported it-- and enthusiastically!)
Who's Brandon?
Why?
In many cases, walls save lives!
When it gets too heavy I rub the furry wall. That wall has saved my life a few times.
True. But. Partitioning separates people and families and "generations" all over a lack of compromise.
Josef Stalin felt the same way!
He can totally conquer Ukraine, and then sucessfully set up a Russian Puppet government there.
(I could be wrong, but I don't think he'll settle for anything less).
You are speaking from hindsight. It is now obvious what he intends to do since he is attacking the capital city.
Yep, he's playing a life sized game of capture the king...
He want's Zelensky across the table to intimidate him... With a military the size of his he hasn't taken Kiev yet? Only 100 miles from the border? The Ukrainians are doing better than everyone thought...
Russia has an army yes, is it the Red Army of old? No, in fact Hell No... They better hurry up before the Ukrainians realize they are stronger than it first appears...
If Zelensky can hold out for a week, against the purported power of Russia, he's won... WE could be seeing the final demise of the old soviet ideal...
A bridge to far...
Yes-- I was sure of that some time ago-- when the media reporting was wondering whether Putin would take any military action at al-- or whether he would only attack those two pro-Russian areas.
Nope.
WTF???
He wants him (and his family) dead.
After some horrendous torture!
Why would he want him "across the table'/
(Do you actually believe what Trump has said about how wonderful Putin really is?)
Actually he has a list of Ukrainians who are/were in their government, and other Ukrainians who wanted independece.
They will get "special treatment" from this ex-KGB man (Putin) and his sycophants).
If.
There's an old saying:
If my grandmother had a wheel and two handles..she's be a wheelbarrow.
(IF!!!)
I totally agree. Hence why we have the barechested Putin riding a white horse. The man's ego is endless.
I tend to agree with you. Also after 2014, they took actions to minimize the results of sanctions.
That is the million-dollar question. I think Putin will take those regions he can and leave.. for now. It may be a short-term win though because I think it will speed up getting Ukraine into NATO, the very thing he didn't want.
Well informed sources say the sanctions are meaningless.and pose no threat to Russia:
How Russia's Elite May Have A Financial Shield Against International Sanctions
What he wants is a pro-Russian Country there.
There's no need for his troops to stay-- that would be costly in more ways then one.
But there is a wsay where he "can have his Borscht and eat it two"> And its been done before:
Simply conquesr all of Ukraine. MTorture, imprison and/or murder all oppositiopn.
Then isntall a pro-Russian puppet government. Arm them.
Then pull out Russian forces (or maybe leave a very small, well armed force just in case).
He doesn't want to occupy UKraine-- he merely want it to have a pro-Russian governmemt.
(Remember all those "pro-Russian" countries-- "Satellite countries" in Europe when the USSR still existed?)
Why should anyone care what Putin wants?
Good point.
Especially the Ukrainians.
Their attitude is...If the Russians want to attack us, murder and torture our leaders..and kill innocent civilians...no problema!
The Ukranians especially don't care...they are a mellow lot!
/sarc
I think Biden is doing a good job trying to manage this crisis from the point of view of the United States not sending combat troops into the situation
Without doing the fighting yourself there's only so much a country can do .
I think for the sake of everyone we may end up seeing Russia keep those two provinces , areas that Putin has declared as independent countries in the southeastern portion of Ukraine. They constitute a small part of Ukraine. and even though it seems like appeasement, giving Putin those two areas might be the best that can be done at this time.
Russia is a third-rate country but they do have the military strength to take Ukraine . Ukraine has no military allies they have no treaties with anyone that's going to go in there and actively intercede in the fighting so they're going to lose.
What has to be done is this situation has to be managed by the Western powers in a way that ensures that it doesn't spread and hopefully you know over the next decade or two Ukraine will get back to being the independent democracy that everyone hopes it will be.
I'm not sure if that sends the right message. We already allowed him to take Crimea and by letting him keep those two provinces we might be encouraging him to chip away at what he wants. Again, only time will tell.
I think you underestimate Russia. That is a country built on resolve. You seem to forget that Hitler had better war machines, but ultimately, the USSR won because of their tenacity. Never underestimate your opponent.
There we agree, but the big question is managing Russia. I think we will soon find out.
And guys, though I tack this to Perrie's comment, the thought comes to me after reading JR's comment: China is in the 'audience' sitting several rows deep taking all of this in: Taiwan-thinking. Seeking: Best time to act!
In my opinion Putin will not stop at just those two provinces. He wants the whole enchilada of Ukraine and beyond if he thinks he can get away with it. His increasing megalomania will not allow anything less.
Well, it worked when we let Hitler just walk in and get the Sudetenland.
/sarc
(Remeber what happened next???)
What actions would you suggest?
I don't.
I think he "wants it all"!
And will get it...
And just how, exactly, would you suggest they do that?
(So far their record on preventing Russian expansion hasn't been to good...for starters, what do you think of their performance re: The Crimea "Situation"?
If anyone'snot familiar with what happened there I highly recommend they goodle it
(Or..doodle it?)
This would not even be an issue if Biden had left things as they were. But because the Democrats are still crying over Trump the sanctions were lifted and here we are.
In a nutshell, this whole situation has nothing to do with the US. I'm sure that many can speculate some outside reasons and possibly be correct. We don't need to be in this fight.
Well, the sanctions plus are back in place. I don't see Russia backing off yet, so obviously, it was never over sanctions.
Russia is the world's problem, not just a US one, and while I agree that I don't want any of our boys going over there, we also can't just ignore Putin either. Chamberlin tried that.
Should have never bee lifted in the first place.
Having a coward in office doesn't help.
And right up to the moment Biden took office that problem wasn't as bad as it is right now. Russia knew Biden was weak. It became more apparent when he was VP. Now that he's POTUS, it is a perfect time to do something like this. Couple that with the fact NATO won't do anything with out the US carrying the majority of the burden. And the UN has been a joke for decades. There won't be a damn thing coming from them.
Why? What difference did it make? Obviously none.
Again, what does that mean? What do you think Trump would have done? Are you for an invasion?
Pro-Russia militants, backed by Russia were there even during Trump's administration. And yes, Russia is probably counting on NATO doing nothing, which would have been the same under Trump. The UN is useless, and not even part of this equation. What is really disgusting is the fact that Trump is now praising Putin. That is really messed up.
trump is jonesing for his own autocracy. He hates democracy and America.
Say that again!
He dares calling Biden a coward when he is a card carrying member of Cpt Bone Spurs army?
That seems to be the Democrat go to excuse right after they fuck something up.
if you remember correctly, During Obama's time as POTUS, there were issues with Crimea. Trump takes office, stands up to Putin and Russia is quiet. Biden takes office, gives Putin some leeway and all hell breaks loose in Ukraine. So take a look at what Trump did and what Obama and Biden didn't.
Reality of it is, NATO nor the UN are going to do a damn thing. They're in no position. The UN hasn't been relevelant in decades and NATO won't do anything without the US taking the lead. Well, to take the lead we need strong leadership. That is the downfall. Biden is weak.
Yes I did. [deleted]
I supported Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama (another utter fucking train wreck) the same way I supported Trump all throughout my military career. Luckily I retired before this latest train wreck took office.
I'm not a democrat.
You still didn't answer my question. What do you think Trump would have done differently?
I agree with you about the UN (I think most people would) but you kind of missed the whole NATO point. The possibility of Ukraine entering NATO was the issue for Russia, and since it is not a member, NATO is under no obligation to help them. Without man power, there are limitations on how the world can help, and the US is not going to go it alone, given the isolationist sentiment in our country right now.
I never said you were.
Exactly what he did from 2016 to 2020.
Joe Biden had five consecutive deferments from 1961 up until 1969 when he paid a physician to write a letter citing childhood asthma to avoid military service. Funny thing is he was active in multiple sports growing up and in college. As far as deferments go to avoid military service, he ain't got nothing on Trump.
Two Words - Bone Spurs...
Actually I'm not surprised that so many people here think appeasement (of dictators) is OK...
T hat sounds about right. Funny, the left had no problem with Clinton ran to another country to avoid his military obligation and even said he loathed the military.
"Issues"?
Well, nothing important actually.
Russia merely invaded and annexed it by use of force.
But no one cared-- except for some Ukrainians living there who wanted to remain part of the Ukraine...or who were killed by the armed forces of Trump's BFF.
Biden's failed domestic energy policy has the US dependent on Russian oil. Several times the Biden administration has requested OPEC increase production to no avail.
This defines the current conflict with Russia. The sanctions imposed were redundant and several were already in place.
Meh, we are still the world's largest producer of oil, the problem is demand continues to increase. Every drop that is produced is purchased by someone on the global market. We can pump all we want but we will inevitably hit the point where demand outpaces supply, that is just the nature of a finite resource.
Who's "We"?
Their policies are not determined so much by "We" (the American people) as they are determined by the "We" of the oil companies.
The oil companies decide how much they want to pump.And IIRC< some of them may be now holding back pumping a bit-- in order to raise prices.(When prices increase enough they probably will begin to pump more-- selling it at even higher prices).
Are you totally unaware of the fact that OPEC consists of soverign countries, and as such they put their own self-interests over the "requests" of other countries to act differently.
As soverign countries, why should they listen to what the U.S. wants-- and put the U.S> needs above their own self-interest?
(Or the "requests" of any other non-Opec country for that matter???
I still say our best bet is to sanction the hell out of Russia, continue to arm the Ukranian government, and if Russia does decide to actually invade and occupy, arm and train a Ukranian insurgency. This is not a veyr popular move in Russia, Putin does not have the broad support of the Russian population, and if Russians start coming home in body bags and there is no meaningful progress to be shown for it, Putin will start to have serious issues back home.
I agree that I am not on board with sending our boys over. But I will differ with you over this. Russian mentality accepts a certain number of deaths for a cause. I doubt that will be a deterrent either.
Morning Perrie...yep agree my SIL is Ukrainian and talking to her rellies now...
I do hope Putin has not forgotten there are 4 million Ukrainians living in Russia at the moment...he can expect alot of domestic trouble if they decide it is pay back time...🇦🇺🇺🇦
Here's to posturing: As with the Cuban Missile Crisis and Kennedy: there are times in life when you simply have no other play but to tell a 'dog' if it dares bite it will leave you no choice but to lift its head from its shoulders. And, permit Russia to see the steel resolve in Ukraine's heart to do 'it.'
Well, as I read this I heard on the news that Russia is bombing Kyiv. This is worse than we thought.
It's not a surprise to me. I expect only the worst from Putin.
I've been recommending "The Road to Unfreedom" by Prof. Timothy Snyder from Yale to everyone for two years. It is one of the most informative books I have ever read and will tell you a whole lot about Putin, his philosophy and his goals. I have already read it four times, and each time I learn more. I'm about to start reading it again as soon as I finish the book I am reading now.
I am going to get that book. It sounds like a must read now.
It is a must read. I look forward to discussing it with you.
Anoon...yes reporting the same thing here plus other cities...
Will have to wait and see the outcome of all this, but we back Ukraine all the way...
Where is the virus when you need most in the Kremlin...🇺🇦🇺🇦
We see crazy examples of what different people claim to believe every day here.
Putin's last three speeches were pure lunacy, but maybe he believes it's the truth.
A whole country full of reporters says otherwise....hmmm.
I did catch the Ukranian Ambassadors tongue lashing of the Russian President of the Security Council and
agreed with him wholeheartedly. Russia should at least abandon the Security Council Seat, especially the Presidency
Imagine the Russians saying it's just an "emergency military action" and not a war...
like how many times has the US pulled that card?
, but we were always right, lol...
This is probably going to wreck a country and a fuel delivery system, if not by the attackers,
then by the defenders to deny Putin a few rubles
and it could go on for years, or centuries, again...
Orders for electric vehicles just got another push.
I watched the Ukrainian ambassador, too. Powerful moment.
as of 10 minutes ago CNN is reporting missile strikes in Kiev... If true, this is going to escalate rapidly....
8 minutes ago...
- Explosions heard in Kyiv and Kharkiv, as well as Dnipro, Kramatorsk, Kharkiv, Odessa and Mariupol
- Russian troops have landed in Odessa and crossed the border near the city of Kharkiv, according to Ukrainian official
- Footage of gunfire, missiles, explosions, shelling, as well as people fleeing Kyiv, posted to Twitter
Ukraine crisis: Russia declares war on Ukraine; reports of explosions in Kyiv; Putin sends warning about interference
Unconfirmed reports..
Ukraine's forces attacked by Russian and Belarusian forces
Reports from CNN's Matthew Chance (who was seen donning his flak jacket earlier live) that Ukraine border forces have been attacked by both Russian and Belarusian forces.
Putin threatens anyone "tempted to intervene"
In a thinly disguised threat of launching a nuclear attack on anyone who gets involved to try and stop Russia invading Ukraine, Vladimir Putin threatened "those who might be tempted to intervene."
"Now a few important, very important words for those who may be tempted to intervene in ongoing events from the outside. Whoever tries to interfere with us, and even more so to create threats to our country, to our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never experienced in your history. We are ready for any development of events. All necessary decisions in this regard have been made. I hope that I will be heard."
Well, If he is planning on launching a Nuclear attack, that would not bode well for his chances of being remembered as the Great Re-uniter of the Russian Empire.
I would tend to think more in the terms of cyber attacks against military and commercial targets. I think he has some special tricks left up his sleeve that he has not revealed yet in that area.
Who is "we"?
I have expected total war from the beginning. And vs the entire country, not just 2 provinces.
But it will get worse after Russia takes over the entire country, and hunts down members of the former Ukrainian government, those that are anti-Russian, etc-- and brutally tortures them to death.
(Despite trump's constant praise of Putin, let's admit it-- Putin is not a nice guy!)
I'm wondering why that came as such a surprise to you...IMO it was obvious all along that he'd do this.
But its only just begun-- the atrocities will really begin on a large scale very soon...
Why on earth would you even believe that?
C'mon-- why use nukes when he's got such a YUGE amount ot heavily aremed treeops surrounding Ukraine? And missiles and tanks...
(And anyway-- why have you not even looked at a map--- if Ukraine get's nuked,right across its border lies Russia-- why would Putin want to rain radioactivity down on his own people?
Sheesh....
He was not going to nuke Ukraine and I did not suggest he was going to. He was sabre rattling about anyone who "Interferes" with his plan. I don't think that he directly mentioned using nukes, either. That is why I made the comment that I did.
I look at maps all the time. They are one of my favorite things because they have the potential to display so much information. In this case, I do not think that things bode well for the continued existence of Ukraine as a free state.
Yes!
And apparently there are a lot of Non-Ukrainians-- regular 'ole Russians in Russia-- who are very opposed to that war.
(Despite harsh penalties in Russia for doing so):
Massive Protests Erupted In Putin's Hometown Of St. Petersburg As Russians Voice Opposition To War In Ukraine
Massive protests erupted on Thursday in Russian President Vladimir Putin's hometown of St. Petersburg, as people voiced their opposition to the invasion of Ukraine.
Videos posted to Twitter show a sea of people gathered in a section of St. Petersburg, Russia's second-largest city, chanting and holding signs to object to Russia's offensive in Ukraine.
NEXTA, a Belarusian media channel on the social network Telegram, posted a video showing an enormous bloc of people outside what appeared to be a Russian government building with busses lining the street adjacent to the protest.
And apparently there are a lot of Non-Ukrainians-- regular 'ole Russians in Russia-- who are very opposed to that war.
(Despite harsh penalties in Russia for doing so):
Massive Protests Erupted In Putin's Hometown Of St. Petersburg As Russians Voice Opposition To War In Ukraine
Rachel Maddow just did an excellent programme on the subject:
Anti-War Protests In Russia Test Putin's Dictator Privilege
x
The Cold War posturing is rather quaint but not illuminating. The west won the Cold War, remember? Germany was reunited in 1990. The Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. The European Union was created in 1993.
And then there was the Bosnia/Herzegovina War, in Europe, from 1992 to 1995. United Nations military forces were deployed to Europe (including Russian forces). Yugoslavia was dissolved and partitioned. The Croats, Serbs, Slavs, and various other ethnic groups obtained their autonomy and their own countries.
NATO was created in 1949 for the sole purpose of defending Europe against the Soviet Union. But there hasn't been a Soviet Union since 1991. Europe was on the winning side of the Cold War, remember? NATO no longer has a purpose; the Cold War is over. NATO did not stop the Bosnia/Herzegovina War in Europe. International intervention was required because Europe and NATO could not resolve the conflict.
No one has explained how Ukraine is any different than what happened in Yugoslavia. No one has explained how NATO is doing any more today in Ukraine than it did in Yugoslavia. The war in Donbas has been going on since the Euromaidan insurrection in 2014. The Euromaidan insurrection destabilized Ukraine which why Russia annexed Crimea. And the United States and Europe has been meddling in Ukraine after the Euromaidan insurrection. Remember Joe Biden's quid pro quo demands as official representative of European and US interests?
Ukraine is divided internally just as was Yugoslavia. So, what exactly are we hoping to accomplish with a conflict over Ukraine? And why should we expect a result different than what happened to Yugoslavia? The Biden administration has dumped tons of munitions into Ukraine and those munitions will obviously be used for the war in Donbas. What will that accomplish? And why isn't US involvement just as aggressive as Russia recognizing the independence (and partitioning) of regions in Donbas? Why is Ukraine different than Yugoslavia?
Yes and I also remember when it looked like Russia was going to be a free and democratic state, and now we are back to a dictatorship and a dangerous one at that. NOW you think it's a good time to end NATO? Be glad we have it.
That was a civil war brought about by the bad judgment of making Yugoslvaia. NATO does not get involved with internal confilcts.
Yugoslavia was an invention of a post war world. It was never a real region or country prior. Ukraine, like Poland and Finland, were independent countries. You might want to take a look at the history of conquests of Russia:
The rest of your post is not a true comparison. You have to really know the history of the region to see that.
Ukraine evolved before World War II as a result of the Bolshevik revolution. Before World War I, Ukraine was part of Russia. Ukraine was one of the founding members of the Soviet Union.
People in eastern Ukraine really have been fighting a war to obtain autonomy since the 2014 Euromaidan insurrection. The history of Ukraine is more similar to that of Yugoslavia than is being acknowledged.
The democratic approach would be to allow the people in the Donbas region a voice through a political process. But that's not the approach the west has adopted. Eastern Ukraine is being forced into submission by military means. The United States has been dumping military arms into Ukraine on the pretext of defending against a Russian invasion. Ukraine becoming a member of NATO will not unify Ukraine because, as you point out, NATO does not involve itself in internal conflicts. But Ukrainian membership in NATO does provide access to military arms that can be used to subdue eastern Ukraine by military means.
Just as is the United States . . .
So what, exactly, is your point?
The United States was providing the arms and munitions to subdue eastern Ukraine militarily. The United States was not urging Ukraine to engage in a democratic political process. The government of the United States views the world in terms of 'winners' and 'losers'. And 'losers' don't have a place or voice in democracy.
I believe you might be confusing how The United States views the world...with how Donald Trump views the world.
(But what a lot of MAGA)groupies fail to realize is that Donald Trump si not, and does not, represent the United States' thinking. (Maybe 30% of the U.S....but that a minority).
In your "expert" opinion of course....
Nearly eighty years ago, George Kennan wrote , “The jealous and intolerant eye of the Kremlin can distinguish, in the end, only vassals and enemies, and the neighbors of Russia, if they do not wish to be one, must reconcile themselves to being the other.”
“ In the days leading up to the Russian incursion of Ukraine, there has been much talk of what America's role should be to handle Russia. At best of times, dealing with Russia, a fellow nuclear power, is always dicey. “
The first question I have about all of this is, does Putin see himself as the first Tsar of a new Russian Empire?
Most Americans are used to looking at history in, oh, perhaps 100 sometimes up to 200 year increments. But even then, they only really deal with periods of 5 to 10 years. But history has a much longer stride.
To truly understand why Russia is where it is now, one must go back 1000, 1500 years. Time periods most Americans are unfamiliar with.
But in this period, a pattern can be seen. If not of the Russian people, at least its leaders. Russia has, seemingly, always been driven by a certain paranoia. It seemingly could never keep the other far enough away. It has always expanded its boundaries.
And so it is now.
Many will say we are where we are because,...Obama...Trump...Biden...blah, blah, blah. These are exceedingly short sighted and unhelpful statements.
So what can, or should we do?
Shall we be isolationist? Read your history, say 1914 to 1918. We gave it shot and went to war in the end. Why do we think it will be different this time?
Shall we jump into the fray now? Again, history. We haven't done very well in a fight since 1945.
I believe the best we can do, short of actual war, is, along with whatever allies we can garner, attempt a containment or restraint of Russian expansion.
However, you can bet whether it is Putin or someone else, there will be constant pushing, if for no other reason than just to see how far they take things.
Absolutely, and supposedly skimmed $200 Billion for the Russian economy,
now he will get a cut of the Ukranian fuel transfer fees if the UKE's don't destroy the infrastructure first.
I just did a limited google search on the demographics of Ukraine. On the surface, it appears the country has been severely mismanaged by whatever poses as its government. This begs the question "shouldn't we know what kind of government we are supporting instead of only focusing on what kind of government we are opposing?"
and
and
Good point, but ultimately it should be the people of Ukraine who decide to be part of Russia. It is always wrong for one nation to conquer another.
Although I agree it is always wrong, it has been the standard throughout mankind's history - including the present.
We have the European nations and the US conquering and splitting up the Ottoman empire. Our nation conquering is still causing endless wars that the European nations and the US are still involved in.
When do the US citizens quit supporting empire building under the guise of spreading democracy or being humanitarian?
But he speaks Russian.....not Ukranian.
kind of remarkable that they have separate languages even though Putin claims it's "always" been Russian
territory.
Taiwan is next...
I have to agree.
Russian is still spoken by most people in Ukraine- thanks to their time in the Soviet Union; and large Russian population.
Ukraine did take a stab and trying to get rid of Russian; which went over well./S
This is the type of government we are backing in Ukraine.
No, they speak Russian because they share a 1,300 mile border with Russia and have always been bilingual
west of the Dnieper...becuase Russia is their largest trading partner.
Oh the horror.../s
This is the type of government we support in the USA
Constitutional Topic: Official Language - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
English-Only Laws | The First Amendment Encyclopedia (mtsu.edu)
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States establishing English as the official language of the United States. (2007; 110th Congress H.J.Res. 17) - GovTrack.us
H.J.Res.81 - 101st Congress (1989-1990): Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States establishing English as the official language of the United States. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Text - H.J.Res.16 - 107th Congress (2001-2002): Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States establishing English as the official language of the United States. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
On top of that 31 States have English only laws.
English-only movement - Wikipedia
But what about what comment #16 says-- the Ukrainians are obvious an inferior race-- from that data that's obvious. So they should be ruled (with an iron fist) by the Russians! (When dealing with inferior races, you must never let them have self rule....)
I realize you are upset but you are unfairly putting words in people's mouths they neither said nor inferred. Focus your anger on Putin...
Well, you realize wrong!
(Not that there's anything wrong with that).
I am not upset-- in fact I've been in an unusually good mood today (for reasons having nothing to do with the Ukraine situation-- a very challenging project I've been working on for some time has suddenly started to take shape). People are different-- when I'm happy I like to get a bit silly...
I freely admit up until recently I knew next to nothing about Ukraine. I am trying to understand the role of the US government of propping up a corrupt government in the Ukraine to the detriment of its citizens.
The US has a history of destabilizing nations and creating the conditions that make war possible, if not inevitable. If this is by accident or design, I don't know, but I believe that I have a duty to myself and others to know as much as I can before I support more wars.
I just found the following lecture. I am trying to understand who, what and why contributed to this situation because I think that is the only way there might be a way to help the citizens of Ukraine to govern themselves and have any hope of lasting peace.
It's less about propping up Ukraine and more about standing against Russia. Other than selling arms to Ukraine the US hasn't done much for them except try to keep them on the path to NATO status. That mainly means more work on anti-corruption efforts.
Thank you.
This is why I mostly avoid reading or commenting on social media.
Agree or disagree, the video explains why bringing Ukraine into NATO could be viewed as an act of aggression by Russia. It could be viewed as being on the same level of aggression as the USSR placing nuclear weapons in Cuba in our backyard. The US did not allow it. I have my doubts that the Russian people want Allied weapons on their border either.
Maybe, some people dream that the Russian people want a government just like ours and will overthrow their government. Some people thought that was true in the Middle East. I believe that people want stability - even if it is less than optimum. Being alive is preferable to being dead seems to be their viewpoint. The world is weary of disease and death. The US needs to lead to the world in diplomacy at this time if we really want to gain esteem on the world stage.
The video also explains why it would be best to have Russia for an ally against China because China is where the greatest threat to the US and Europe really is. This video was 2015. I can't see where Mearsheimer is wrong.
Who could ever defeat a united Russia/China?
The US... Hands down... in a conventional war... Full Nuclear war would still destroy both sides..
China has the numbers game down pat. . . .
I don't know how or why the US government would ever be insane enough to choose war over diplomacy with any nation that has nuclear weapons...or biological ones as might be the case with covid.
I don't believe that Russia (or any other nation) would willingly choose to fight the US in a conventional war - a conventional war meaning that we cross their borders, bomb their cities and infrastructure and kill their civilians. I can well understand that Putin (and the Russian people) will choose nuclear over being treated the same as other countries that they have witnessed fighting "conventional war" against the US. I really hope that I am wrong.
I'm watching videos trying to understand how this situation with Russia has evolved since the early 1990s when the Soviet Union was dissolved.
Currently, I'm about halfway through the one below. I was born in 1956. I thought that I was fairly aware of major political events during my adulthood. It turns out I had a very limited overview to what was actually happening internationally and how the US foreign policy (or lack thereof) has resulted in us being on the brink of nuclear war.
Many people have a very limited view, you not alone in that respect...
And we are here today cause it's our own damned fault... But one thing we CANNOT do is back down to a bully... September 1939 shows where that leads to...
Definitely.
Uh, is it possible the US is the bully and should have honored the agreement not to expand NATO into Russia's backyard? Would we allow Russia or China to put their military bases in Mexico or Canada? Isn't compromise the only logical solution? JFK did not just back down Russia, JFK compromised in regards to nuclear weapons in Turkey.
Not even close. The other side did not have nuclear weapons.
Does anyone here keep up with the declassified information our government periodically releases?
No one had Nuclear Weapons in 1939.... They were only a theory at that time...
Yes, The soviet Union tried to put potentially nuclear armed offensive missiles in Cuba, would it be so hard to realize that the Russian General in charge of the soviet forces in Cuba had tactical nuclear weapons and authorization to use them? And once Khrushchev backed down, Kennedy agreed to pull our nuclear Missiles out of Turkey....
And yes I try to keep up with declassified info... And the questions posed by US Nuclear weapons security on a US airbase in a NATO ally nation relates to this how?
It might surprise you that the US is not responsible.. Actually the US has until recently been the largest feet dragger on accepting Ukraine into NATO... Ukraine's application to NATO came after THEY breached the Minsk agreement with Russia when they applied for Nato membership...
How could we be the bully? Moscow is pissed at Kiev for wanting to join NATO and seriously wants to keep them out of NATO... They would prefer that Ukraine become a demilitarized zone under their influence...
As an Independent Nation doesn't Ukraine have the right to decide what IT wants to be? who it wants to ally itself with? Or, is it supposed to be a subject state of Russia and only free as long as they submit to Russian demands?
If they don't, Russia has the right to invade and take over?
You really want to send international relations back 40 years? Go back to the old Soviet style of diplomacy at the barrel of a gun?
Ukraine asked to join, it is their right, they convinced all 30 members (28 at the time) that they were sincere and it was voted by all member to give then an accession plan....
Russia is trying to subjugate and intimidate a free nation...
Are you saying that we should allow it?
So in today's world, the US would allow nuclear weapons to be housed in Cuba because it is a free, independent nation?
What is very concerning to me is that the US and other nations are reported to be considering scenario where "limited" use of nuclear weapons may be necessary to frighten our opponents into submission. What is even more concerning to be is that one (or more) of those "limited" strikes might be on US soil.
How did the citizens of the United States become the world's police force and armorer?
The citizens of the United States are supporting dictators in China and Saudi Arabia.
The citizens of the United States have supported and are supporting various unethical and immoral governments around the world. It is just that most of us don't have a clue what is really going on.
I am loathe to continue to support wars that only result in even more wars because the end goal was never about helping the citizens.
Would you be surprised to know that when the Russians pulled the ballistic missiles out of Cuba, that the Russian planes still had nuclear weapons they could deliver? That being the case, having deliverable nuclear weapons on a US airbase in Turkey isn't that much of a big deal is it?
The issue over Cuba was Ballistic missiles of which there was no defense against being in Cuba which gave them a flight time of 10 minutes to Florida and 20 minutes to Washington.....
Several days ago I commented that MAD is not so MAD anymore... ie not the deterrence it one was... What was predicted in the 70's has come true... The belief in a survivable (or winnable) nuclear war....
The sad thing is, the advances in nuclear weapons technology, and the several nuclear power plant accidents that have been monitored very very closely... Have given some people the idea that Nuclear Explosions are survivable for a general population.... The target can kiss their asses goodby, but the general population is basically safe......
Eventually we, (the human race) are going to have another general war, and nuclear weapons will be used...
Today it's a fact of life...
The end of WWII... The Marshall Plan? remember those? the US was the only industrial power that remained untouched...
During the entirety of WWII, we supported Joesf Stalin and the Soviet Union... are you aware that the Red Army went to war riding in trucks named Dodge, Diamond, White and Chevrolet? the had four division of armored troops driving M3 & M4 tanks, That almost the entire production of P-39 & P-400 Aircobras went to the Soviet Union?
And yes, the Russians called it the Great Patriotic War, and yes they scrubbed the history of any reference to American aid which they wouldn't have able to do what they did without...
Without US support the Russians would have taken at least three more years to reach Germany than the way they did...
The world made us their policeman, and the type of government a nation has doesn't matter when it comes to defense treaties....
Just the cold hard facts of a world that doesn't really like us...
What do our citizens gain by being the world's mercenaries and armorer?
Not a goddamned thing directly.... Lots indirectly... American self sufficiency angers the world, they view it as arrogance... The arrogance of unlimited power... we play the silly diplomatic game with everyone else only so they cannot accuse us of being the bully, and the fact that we really believe in freedom and independence...
But we also believe that we cannot impose our beliefs on anyone else... Unfortunately as we are seeing in Ukraine the rest of the world don't view things the same way...
Have no doubt about it, since the end of WWII WE, the US, are the dominate power on the planet, and that hasn't changed one bit over the years... in fact we have become even more dominate than we were after WWII... You ask how this is true, we have so many people that think Russia and China are so powerful...
Donald Trump, as president, proved it beyond any shadow of doubt... just by turning the oil production tap a little bit farther open...
WE are our own worst enemies... We debase ourselves, our country and society to serve the interests of the world cause we view ourselves as better than them, without us there was be a serious level of wars the like we have never seen before...
What does it gain the Citizens of the USA,
Not a goddamned thing...
For two years, I have spent most of my waking hours researching the evolution of human behavior. In retrospect, I believe it was my need to try to understand the various factions of the US that drove me to spend a lot of time reading comments on Newsvine.
I now understand why the human animal can be considered to be the most dangerous and unpredictable animal on Earth - especially when they feel their survival is threatened.
The "us versus them" mentality is crucial to keep the citizens of various sects, organizations, communities, countries, etc. under control of their various leaders. Many, if not most, leaders have high narcissistic traits. This is probably almost a necessary personality trait for a leader because most people are not going to take orders or advice from someone who does not exude self-confidence. Other than psychopaths, people must believe in what they are peddling in order to sell it.
However, the "us versus them" mentality is also somewhat flexible when we believe it benefits our odds of survival. This is why I believe the US has failed at nation building.
We tell people in other countries that they are not "free" and they will be "happier", "successful", "wealthy", etc. if they have a government like ours. Is that really true? Are people in the US "happier", "successful" "wealthy", etc?
In today's world, few people can even sell that to the citizens of the United States.
Are there many advantages to being a citizen of the United States? Certainly. But, are the US citizens the happiest, most successful, wealthiest? Look at who is selling this hype and look at who is buying it versus the people who don't.
We need leaders who understand how and desire to help people instead of using/enslaving them for self-gain. We also need people to demand that kind of leader. If not, then we have little choice except to bend the will of the narcissists, psychopaths, sociopaths and puppets that we continue to allow to have authority over our lives.
Understanding world problems means understanding world societies. It takes a lot more effort to understand people than annihilate them.
VERY well said girl, very well said... me I didn't get my understandings looking at human behaviors so much as studying history... the two fields do overlap quite a bit though, you really cannot understand one without gaining at least a passing understanding of the other... As behaviors create/drive the history...
I agree with your analysis above 100%, we both have the same beliefs, ....
Amen sister, Let freedom ring...
I researched human behavior in order to survive being married to a psychopath. A person, on Newstalkers, directed me to research narcissism. This explained some of what I was experiencing, but not all by far. I branched into sociopaths/psychopaths. I began by researching to understand my husband's manipulative and violent personality. Then I learned why my own personality defects allowed me to even be in the relationship to begin with. One of my worst flaws is the need to analyze and improve processes when that need is applied to people. My strength is working on processes - not people. My confident ego said otherwise.
Narcissists love the attention and hoops that a person like me will go through in order to understand and "help" them. I don't give up on projects easily, but once I do, I know that I have given it my best shot and it needs to be given to someone with more capability.
Now, that I have figured out whatever I am capable of understanding about the dynamics of my life, I try to make the best of what I have and appreciate it all the more.
It always surprises me when I find a kindred spirit. I have met few in life. It could be that they are introverts like me or that they are just too weary of being misunderstood to open themselves up to many people.
Amen.
That's me sister, it's why so many have a very hard time putting a finger on what I actually believe... I've found it is best to allow everyone else to expound what they want/desire as reality and just go about working on myself... There are more of us here, but it is up to them to come forward...
Thank you for this conversation... I suspect there are a lot more like us in the world than not...
It could be because of their tendency (or their only ability) to use binary thinking vs more complex thinking. Learn the three types of binary thinking (clearerthinking.org)
((((((((((Hugs)))))))) I empathize.
Nice to know. I hope to interact more with them when we can.
Thank you. It has been the most pleasant, informative and pleasurable exchange of possibilities, ideas and facts that I've had with anyone in a very long time.
I apologize if my comments were overly critical.
Actually I have a Jewish friend whose mother was a Holocaust survivor. Later in life she was curious and researched the Holocaust extensively.
One of the things she told me is that amongst the societies where virulent anti-Semitism was prevalent over time were Poland, Ukraine and Russia-- often every bit as bad as it is in many Arab countries!
(Interestingly, in Germany it has at time varied. A bit of trivia-- that was a while ago, don't know if has changed, but when Israelis intend to live abroad for a period of time, there first choice is often Berlin. Which I understand is a dynamic city with lots of very creative and tolerant people.
(I've been to parts of Germany, as a young student traveling around Europe, North Africa, and Israe lyears ago, but never made it to Berlin).
Sounds like Canada and their French Quebec population.
Both French AND English are official first languages in Canada. All government documentation is drawn in both languages. Even when I get email notifications here from the Canadian government, they are in both English and French.
No "if" about it. I am married to a narcissist - this is a typical example of the kind of non-apology that narcissists use.
I realize that narcissism might not be at play here so I will try to be helpful and cite some hints from professionals on how to make a sincere apology.
Well, thank goodness we don't have anything like that ever happening here in America!
I think we are now officially on the road to WWIII, the only question is, will Putin actually use Nuclear weapons?
Anoon nowhere....doubt it.. Ukraine is referred to as the bread basket of Europe...25% of its produce goes to Russia..
If he nuked it he would be cutting his own throat...now there is a thought..🇦🇺🇺🇦
Remember all of the stories of how communism failed and tens of thousands starved to death...
I agree, but he wasn't talking about nuking Ukraine, he was talking about nuking NATO and the US...
It will be a difficult aftermath, unless a Brutus saves us from this insanity/////////
One has to question the sanity of Putin... is it a deliberate threat to scare us from responding, or is it real?
I believe that Nato will be forced into it within a week at the outside... I don't see how NATO can avoid it...
There is no Brutus in Russia. Anyone within Putin's inner circle that is able to take him down; and wrestle control of the Russian government after the political fallout will be 100 times worse. Imagine a smarter, deadlier, more powerful version of Putin. Just what the world needs right now./S
If the US/NATO enters Ukraine I believe Putin will start a nuclear war. Not in Ukraine; but attacking the US and NATO countries directly. Putin knows he cannot win an all out convention war against the US. This is the end game for Putin. Either he gets Russia's buffer region against the US/NATO back; or he takes the whole world down with him.
Unless Biden decides to act; and he has repeatedly stated he isn't sending US forces into the Ukraine; NATO isn't going to do anything. This is the one time I hope Biden isn't living in his own reality; and was speaking the truth. Ukraine simply isn't worth it. It offers the US absolutely nothing. NATO can do what it does best, sit by and watch.
This is what we get for poking the Russian bear for the last 40 plus years.
I'd agree. It won't take long before one of the boarder states to find a reason to start shooting.
He probably has a stock pile of food and essentials for himself, enough to last for years.
Are you aware of how radiation froma nuclear explosion is spread throught the planet?
And BTW, do you actually think Putin is stupid enough to nuke the U>S.?
After all the years of hard wordk he's put in to take back some of these countries is finally beginning to happen-- to jeopardize it by starting a nuclear war.
Look how he's planned for this!
Or maybe even a whole street packed full of Russian Brutai:
Massive protests erupted on Thursday in Russian President Vladimir Putin's hometown of St. Petersburg, as people voiced their opposition to the invasion of Ukraine.
Videos posted to Twitter show a sea of people gathered in a section of St. Petersburg, Russia's second-largest city, chanting and holding signs to object to Russia's offensive in Ukraine.
NEXTA, a Belarusian media channel on the social network Telegram, posted a video showing an enormous bloc of people outside what appeared to be a Russian government building with busses lining the street adjacent to the protest.
On what are you basing that bizarrwe assumption on?
NATO countries that can't even all be cajoled into having strong sanctions-- will be willing to actually be drawn into a military confrontation with Russia.
WTF???
I'm sure Putin has his own version of the Greenbrier shelter somewhere in the Urals.
Since "tanks" and other vehicles, nationality unknown, are crossing the border where UK, RS and BS intersect,
I suggest that the UN Ebomb Kalingrad and expel/chase everyone there into northern Belarus.
That should give Putin a small reason to stop and think.
Give up the northern fleet for this nonsense with Ukraine?
What a moroon...
Then his "Khrushchev" moment will be at hand wouldn't it? Use the nuclear option or not...
Amazing that 2 channels are just televising feeds from journalists on the ground and reporting that the UKEs
downed 7 Russian jets and a transport helicopter.
The other channel is reporting that the Russians are reporting the complete take down of the UK air defenses
and demanding an immediate "statement" from Biden.
smh////
Yeah, the propaganda never quits does it...
I think the Russians believe that they can do it quickly and relatively painlessly...
I am having trouble following that line of reasoning...
SP, Russia has a veto in the Security Council. The. U.N. can't do anything but talk unless the General Assembly were to expel Russia, but I believe that can only be done on the recommendation of the Security Council where Russia has a vero. Physically attacking Kaliningrad invites a Russian military response.
What to do?
1. Impose the most severe economic sanctions possible. The time for "targeted"a sanctions, or rolling out sanctions, has passed. Drop the hammer on Russia with sanctions now.
2. Flood the eastern NATO nations with military assets. Continue to supply weapons to the Ukrainians.
3. Expel Russian diplomats from all democratic nations, and break diplomatic relations with Russia. I'm still working through this idea.
4. Terminate Russian landing rights at airports. Create Russian no-fly zones. Terminate Russian docking rights at ports.
5. Encourage Sweden and Finland to join NATO.
6. Conduct cyber operations against Russia while strengthening our defenses.
7. Apply these same measures against Belarus.
And probably more.
Sure that will work; with Russia supplying Europe and the US with oil. Talk about shooting ourselves in the foot.
So keep doing what got us into this mess in the first place. That is sure to deter Putin; or he will just continue to roll west and retake all of the former Soviet states to get the entire buffer zone back. Putin already threatened nuclear war with NATO and the US should they become involved militarily in Ukraine. Also, better take a look at those Eastern NATO countries you want to supply military assets. Many of them don't get a long with each other. They also have governments that we would normally try to depose (Democracy in name only. Much like Ukraine's); if it weren't for them being staunchly anti Russian.
That will show Putin for sure. No talking with Russia- while doing #2 on your list. Why not just declare WWIII and get it over with already.
Again, remember who Russia supplies oil to? Why would we want to shoot ourselves in the foot again? Also, outside of the US, how are you going to enforce this? Is the US Navy going to board and detain all Russian marked cargo ships? How about those heading into/out of Russian ports? Think Putin won't react to that?
That would do what again to influence Russia not to attack? Putin is already upset with the US/NATO being on his back doorstep; and believes it is an attempt to destroy Russia. Strengthening NATO even by that little amount would prove he was right (at least to himself).
Let's make every year 2016 shall we? Think that the US and Russia aren't already doing this to each other every chance they get? Think our government is smart enough and not corrupt enough to secure our vital information and data transmission systems? This is probably the least detrimental of your suggestions. The cyber security part is also the least likely to happen.
At least you are picking a target that can't fight back and has nothing to offer us this time.
When at the brink of nuclear war keep pushing! Forty years plus of poking the Russian bear have brought us to this point. I would hope that calmer heads are in charge in Washington and the NATO countries; but with Biden stoking the Russian hatred to new heights- I am not counting on it. Chances are this is the start of a very hot new cold war.
You should change your name from Ronin2 to Neville Chamberlain, or are you communicating from Moscow?
Of course he will! After all, that would be the fastest and most efficient way to spread nuclear fallout, toxic radiation just over the border in order to poison his own people! Deaths, burns, all sorts of horrible effects of radiation on the Russian population-- what a great idea. Yup-- Putin will definitely use nukes!!
/sarcasm
Do you actually believe that that's the only question now?
(For that matter do you actually think this is the beginning of a World War? Or perhaps you are trying to foolus-- and see who foolish enough to believe that?)
8 minutes ago...
It's escalating...
Estonia triggers Nato contingency signalling security threat
Henry Foy in Brussels
Estonia has triggered Nato Article 4, the western alliance’s contingency for when a member states feel their security is threatened.
Estonia said it had made the move after consultations with Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and other allies, amid fears of how the conflict in Ukraine could spill over into the wider region.
“Russia’s widespread aggression is a threat to the entire world and to all Nato countries, and Nato consultations on strengthening the security of the allies must be initiated to implement additional measures for ensuring the defence of Nato allies,” Estonian prime minister Kaja Kallas said in a statement.
The article is separate from Article 5, which calls for a collective response against an attack on one member.
Is that a distiction without a difference .
or the other way around.
Like I said earlier. Kalingrad is at more risk than Ukraine
I understand that several networks in Latvia and Lithuania have been under russian cyber attack since the start of the invasion... I think that is why they invoked Article 4..
The Estonians and other Baltic states are right to be concerned.
It has to be made perfectly clear to Russia that any attack on a NATO nation will be met with the severest response.
That is Article 5, the danger is an "accidental" attack... and how the react to any kind of military strike in any NATO border nation... We have active troops in all the eastern border nations right now and I suspect more on the way...
Right now, from what I"m getting from a friend in Germany, an alert posture is being taken in Poland, The Baltic States, Rumania and Bulgaria.... Leaves have been canceled in the German military and they are being put on alert...
That should be happening in the US forces over there as well..
Yes, that is Article 5. Obviously, any attack would need to be investigated. If it is determined to be accidental, then it should be dealt with appropriately. Any other attack requires a strict, uncompromising response.
American forces in Europe should be on high alert, and more troops and material should be on the way there now.
Wonder how much Xi payed Putin to do this; or what was promised?
The only country benefiting from all this is China. Which will not have to deal with the US now if Xi decides to take Taiwan.
I really think Biden is looking in the wrong damn direction. The real threat is China. This is what the 2016 Russia, Russia, Russia bs has come to. Deploying a huge amount of our forces to protect weak NATO former Soviet satellite states; while ignoring the real danger that could threaten the entire world production if Taiwan falls to China.
Just a question..
How is China going to take Taiwan?
1/503rd 173rd Airborne is in Latvia now.
Part of the 1/87th 10th Mountain Division is in Poland.
Soldiers of 173rd Airborne Brigade arrive in Latvia
Good.
An alert posture?
Kind of a wishy-washy response, eh?
(I wonder-- do you think someone like Putin will be quaking in his boots when he hears of...one of those dreaded "Alert Postures"?
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/China-turns-up-pressure-on-Taiwan-with-record-warplane-dispatches#:~:text=TAIPEI%20%2D%2D%20China%20is%20ramping,to%20take%20island%20by%20force .
China has the military to take Taiwan at any time; and with the two being in such close proximity- would not need a lot of time to move their military into position.
With the US so concentrated on Russia militarily right now; we couldn't stop China. We cannot fight a two front war with Russia and China; and both know it.
They still have the same problem they had in 1949... How do they get those troops across the Taiwan Strait without massive casualties?
The other problem, the US/Taiwan security treaty, any attack on Taiwan is an attack on the US... (and Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, etc)
WE have two carrier groups there alone as well as the Royal Navy's group...
Any attempt by China to take Taiwan by force is the start of WWIII..
Nato is weak, and nothing will happen when China takes Taiwan except we will pay more for microchips.
How does NATO affect the Taiwan situation?
And as a result of that-- as you so astutely mentioned-- WWIII will begin.
Yup-- just common sense.
(P.S: Did you know-- the sky is falling! Nuclear War! We should all hide under the table-- at once!)
There is now video of Russian forces crossing the Ukrainian border from Crimea...
So yeah, this isn't just going into the Donbas/separatist regions, it's a full blown invasion of the entire country...
The Pentagon is also monitoring Belarussian forces entering the country from Belarus...
Summing up Day One.
The Russian military is not creating the shock and awe anticipated. There are reports of low morale among the Russian troops. That said, the Russian military is reportedly 20 miles from Kyiv and advancing. They are beginning to surround Kyiv.
The Ukrainians are actively resisting. There are reports of intense fighting in areas near Kyiv and reports of Russian military aircraft losses. It could be propaganda. President Zelensky remains in Kyiv and in charge, rallying his people. A profile in courage.
There were anti-war protests in 64 Russian cities with nearly 2,000 arrests. The Russian people do not support invading Ukraine or killing Ukrainians. They also do not believe that the Jewish president of Ukraine is running a Nazi regime.
Some experts (not politicians) believe the additional sanctions announced by Biden today are strong and appropriate. Some think they could have been stronger. NATO is united.
Thanks for the evening update. Hopefully, a miracle will happen.
I had read they blew up some Russian tanks.
Don't know if true or not.
The Ukrainians are going to fight.
russians have already demonstrated that they can't fight a guerilla war. the best way to support the motivated ukrainians is with armed drones and light mobile anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons. getting a shitload of AK's into the hands of the many disaffected in belarus and a few russian cities wouldn't hurt either.
And some believe they don't mean a damn thing. Putin has been preparing for this sort of thing for years-- and could less about these measily little sanctions).
What would you have the US do any differently?
I can imagine the US getting militarily involved...
)))SHUDDER(((
I can imagine lots of scenarios, mostly unlikely.
So ridicule me for saying so, but it isn't over yet.
There are too many wild cards still not revealed.
As for me? I'd fight to death to defend the USA.
Ultimately it depends on Ukrainian resistance...
Why should I ridicule you when your comment in totally aligned with everything I've been saying?
Exactly! I cannot discern any major differences between us, which is why I have been put off by the snarky bitter tone you took with me earlier. I am frustrated, also, and feeling as helpless as everyone else observing it. Putin is a mad man.
This reminds me of The 1967 War when my Mother kept me up all night for days listening to the overnight news reports out of Israel...
here's my summary of the last 48 hours from the FOX perspective -... meh, nothing to be very concerned about ...... it's all biden's fault!!!
I bet Trump's Wall would keep the Russians out!
Wouldn't it be ironic if the Russian were stopped dead in their tracks-- and Russia Withdrew. And if the reason Russia with drew was not because of sanctions, and not because of a tough Ukrainian resistance-- but rather because there suddenly arose massive resistance to Putin's craziness-- back home-- in the heart of the Motherland?
Rich Russians got used to being welcome into polite society in London, Paris and New York.
I live in NY. The number of Russians is crazy big.
They bid up the real estate bad as the Chinese...
Consider this: The dilemma facing former satellite countries of the U.S.S.R. seeking to sustain independence from Russia-especially for Ukraine-will PERPETUALLY be an issue due to Ukraine's desire to decide what's in it own interest and those other former soviet nations' proximity to Russia. Ukraine can not up and move, that is. Of course, China does not want a problem of (new) nuclear weapons potential off its eastern flank either!
One could say this crisis was bound to happen, and keep happening,. . . as long as Ukraine wants to be independent of "soviet conquest" and Russia has aspirations of being more than a 'regional' power.
This is interesting and it just came out (shared):