War in Ukraine

our top folks are not even trying to talk to their top folks - it's like the Ukrainians gave us a gift (of their lives and infrastructure) to stick it to the Ruskies

We could do a round of Paris Peace Talks v.57; but by the time they got the tables and chairs satisfactorily arranged, the war in Ukraine would probably be resolved.
 
Gary Johnson really and truly was a clown. In reality he was part of the old Bush GOP wing.

Some people have claimed they were libertarian the past few years simply because they didn't want to identify as democrat or Republican. The problem is they are trying to bring those ideals with them and many of them do not line up with actual Libertarian principles.

Second. Many people claim they are libertarians because they say they are for small government. However, libertarianism is not the only political philosophy that believes in small government. If one actually would read Conscience of a Conservative by Barry Goldwater they will find out that he advocated for small government. From my understanding many conservatives at the time did as well. Therefore one main conservative principle is small government as well as individual liberty. However conservatism often gets mixed with religious right theocracy. Those are not the same political philosophy.

I actually voted for Goldwater; but according to most "expert" voters, he was likely to nuke somebody or start WW3.

Most professed libertarians I've met were out and out fruitcakes, and it also seemed that all of them were trying to become Amway entrepreneurs with dreams of having a branch at the pointy end of a pyramid.
 
hearing more and more about a group of resistance guerrilla fighters in the south. They claim to have taken out trains and killed several russian officers. Another phone call transcript was posted where a russian soldier tells his mom that the russians in Ukraine are the fascists. 🫢

also, Putins health is being scrutinized on state tv. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world...tches-through-meeting-27002438?int_source=nba
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
No sh!t, but you work it out behind the scenes and present a united front in public. Finland/Sweden are being humiliated and now at risk from giving up Russian neutrality. Look, I find it comical, but they are idiots.

No, Turkey, the new girl on the block, is being exposed as an extortionist. Let them in the club and they stink it up with their ME ethics. Screw Turkey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel
Anybody heard a U.S. President speak of Ukraine as Biden is on Sweden or Finland joining NATO? Who’s the aggressor?
 
Your answer is fiction. Russia would annex Crimea and Donbas. Ukraine WOULDNT be destroyed but they would also be neutral in regards to NATO.

So you're OK when one country comes along and takes a bite out of another without blowback? There's a word for that - a couple really - "precedent" and "appeasement"; and they both lead to bad habits and bad historical outcomes.
 
Russia Reportedly Burning Through $15.5M Per Hour in Three-Month War With Ukraine

Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which dates back to Feb. 24, has apparently come with an exorbitant price tag.

According to Russian Ministry of Finance data released Tuesday, Russia has spent nearly 1 billion rubles — or a burn rate of approximately $15.5 million per hour — on the Ukraine war.

The data also reveals Russia invested 628 billion rubles into the war effort during April, which breaks down to 21 billion rubles per day, citing a report from The Moscow Times.

That daily amount alone might be comparable to the annual budget of some entire regions in Russia, according to the Times.

Russia Reportedly Burning Through $15.5M Per Hour in Three-Month War With Ukraine
 
Russia one month ago on NATO expansion:


“Finland's accession to NATO will cause serious damage to bilateral Russian-Finnish relations and the maintaining of stability and security in the Northern European region,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said earlier this month. “Russia will be forced to take retaliatory steps, both of a military-technical and other nature, in order to neutralize the threats to its national security that arise from this.”



Russia now:

“As for the expansion, including the accession of two prospective new members, Finland and Sweden, I would like to inform you, colleagues, that Russia has no problems with these states,” Putin said Monday at a summit of the Russian-led military alliance, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). “No problems at all!”



The reason for the 180? Putin had to save face with the people he overlords. And it's not like he can do anything about it even if he wanted to. Clowns.
I guess Putin forgot about the handshake agreement Rasputin keeps bringing up...
 


Heh. Funny stuff.

You can add to Russia's stellar record the following achievement as well: They've lost nearly TWICE as many men in less than 3 months than they did in their entire 10 year war with Afghanistan. Bravo, Mr. Fletcher!

Most pundits are expecting a stalemate for the next couple months for various reasons. Seems reasonable.

I suspect by later this summer - when Ukraine has another 50 to 100K fresh troops or so added to its ranks - that's when Ukraine will begin advancing in earnest and claw back the land taken by Russia. Between now and then, of course, the Russian army will likely actually continue to shrink, since Putin has failed to go all in on conscription like Ukraine. And, oh yeah,, 15-20 tanks explodied/abandoned per day equals over 1,000 more tanks gone in 2-3 months. Pity.

With the huge influx of heavy weapons from the west (including Harpoon missiles as of today), it'll take awhile to train their troops, get their ducks in a row and pivot to full-on offense. But I'm confident that when this happens - barring WMDs - Ukraine will pound the static Russian lines backwards with artillery and various other means until they simply dissolve altogether.

In the meantime, mid-Donbas is gonna be a meat grinder for both sides. Ukraine is playing defense, which means Russia will suffer around 3X more casualties than they will.

Time to simply bleed Putin dry.
 
Last edited:
We could do a round of Paris Peace Talks v.57; but by the time they got the tables and chairs satisfactorily arranged, the war in Ukraine would probably be resolved.
LOL. I forgot that it took a couple of months for the participants to agree on the shape of the table they would set around to negotiate. It was actually given the moniker "The Battle of the Tables.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
I do think Russia eventually takes Ukraine unless Putin is removed but once they occupy the country it will become a quasi Afghan/Vietnam scenario where there are constant losses and eventually it’s just not worth it and they leave. I don’t see a scenario where they engulf Ukraine into part of Russia long term.
You would be correct about it being a quagmire if they occupied Western Ukraine. But that is what the Poles and Hungarians are for.

But with regards to the east and south, there won't be any problems at all. Crimea should show you that thus far. No insurgency uprisings or anything of the sort there.
 
Last edited:


How do you explain why they didn't use more resources in the beginning when things went awry? It better be good though. You'll never convince me that Russia wanted this to play out the way it has. It also begs for an explanation as to why they don't just go in and finish it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64

This is what gets Russia to the peace table. If Russia can invade with no negative consequences (other than casualties) they have nothing to lose. Otherwise it's like bargaining with someone who isn't interested in what you are selling or trading. As long as the negotiations are over Ukrainian territory, Russia is in a win-win proposition. If they lose completely, Russia loses nothing because Ukrainian soil didn't belong to them in the first place; if they win, they got Ukrainian soil by simply by invading and bullying a smaller country.
 
Putin doesn't have to be reasonable; he just has to perceive an advantage for himself. Without pursuing every diplomatic option we are guaranteed to never find something he may perceive so.

I never said it was our fault. I am saying that the sentiment I hear from some on this board and from some of our leaders is that this war helps us because it causes grave harm to Putin. Accordingly, feeding the war with weapons vs trying to ease the war with at least a concurrent and strong diplomatic effort appears to put our needs above those of the Ukrainians. My personal belief is we've made a calculus to use this as a proxy war and the longer it goes the more it helps us. I find that pretty deplorable.

What is the harm in an all out diplomatic effort?

If the diplomatic effort doesn't require Russia to leave all of Ukraine to Ukraine, then it's wrong to begin with. Otherwise it's a negotiated capitulation of Ukrainian soil to an aggressor which can be repeated again and again. Why would you try diplomacy when the other side has nothing to lose and you have a decent chance of improving your position by continued fighting? Or are we just saying it's OK to chew off a bit of a neighboring country every now and then because you feel like it and they have something you want?
 
How do you explain why they didn't use more resources in the beginning when things went awry? It better be good though. You'll never convince me that Russia wanted this to play out the way it has. It also begs for an explanation as to why they don't just go in and finish it now.

Why didnt they declare war, fully mobilize and crush Ukraine in a month? Is that what you are asking?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
Advertisement

Back
Top