War in Ukraine

[Orangeslice13]

because they aren't invading any of our allies. we aren't the world's police, we have spent too many lives, too much money, made too many enemies, and not gotten the credit due of efforts….

This is all you had to say. The rest is piling on

 

[NorthDallas40]

Then why was she there

To hand out cookies? Mission accomplished then!

 

[NorthDallas40]

you mean the Democratically elected leader who promised closer ties with the West?

Yanukovych Wins Ukraine’s Presidential Election

www.oscepa.org

"Yanukovych has also promised to move ahead to meet EU requirements for signing a so-called Association Agreement, including a free-trade package that would help exporters gain more market share in the 27-nation bloc."

he ran on a pro-western campaign. he defeated the more Russian friendly incumbent. he was all pro west until literally the weak of signing the deal with the west which was extremely popular. then suddenly at the 11.5 hour he tears up the western agreement, and signs a new deal with Russia that hadn't even been brought in front of their Rada.

The same Rada that followed their constitution to impeach/remove Yanukovych AFTER he fled to a Russian villa. The same Yanukovych who had previously signed a deal with the Rada to hold a special election on the matter of the trade deals. by running to Russia he crawfished on that too.

I figured it was only a matter of time before you jumped on this coup and Nuland dumbassery.

 

[PKT_VOL]

sure, it sounds like we agree on why Russia is doing this. It’s a catastrophe for them if Ukraine aligns with the west for several reasons, all the ones you’ve listen chief among them.

Where we disagree is that I think the United States totally provoked this conflict, prolonged it, and have the blood of an entire generation of Ukrainians on their hands because of it.

Boris Johnson was sent to keep Zelensky from negotiating. This war could’ve been over a year and a half ago.

What do we get out of this? Russia is going to win. Hundreds of billions of dollars spent for nothing more than weapons manufacturers and politicians pockets getting fatter.

You say there’s no strategic reason for Russia to do this, but there’s absolutely no strategic reason for us to be involved at all. Ukraine means nothing to our national defense. They do nothing for us.

Even if putin isn’t justified in invading ukraine, and should’ve just let a military alliance that should’ve dissolved in 1991 March to his doorstep.. we should’ve never been involved in this.

I never said there wasn't a strategic reason for Russia to do this. It is quite the opposite actually.

Pre-invasion, Russia had massive strategic reasons for wanting control Ukraine and other non-NATO former USSR countries. However, the difference is that these reasons rested on economic, political, agricultural, and demographic reasons. Very different than strategic defensive Russian reasons (worried about NATO missiles). NATO membership was a redline because it took military options off the table for Putin leaving only political and economic subversive methods of influence which they utilize with former USSR countries in NATO, western European NATO countries, and the US.

Post-invasion, given how the invasion has played out, Putin made a massive, massive strategic geopolitical mistake. He gambled hoping for a quick victory in Ukraine. If he was able to achieve a quick victory, Putin thought he could continue to drive a wedge in NATO, have his army in tact, weather some sanctions (which he took years to prepare for), and plot his next move. Now, his army has been technologically neutered, loss 10's of thousands of military hardware assets, the officer core has been wiped out, and its been reduced to throwing bodies into a war of attrition. Meanwhile, NATO has expanded a 832-mile border with Russia, closed off the Baltic Sea to Russia, added 2 technologically advanced countries, and now have a wealth of information on Russian military capabilities (or lack thereof). Politically, the West + Asian allies are more aligned than ever before while Russia's geopolitical relationships are strained more than ever before (look at their relationships with Central Asia, China, India playing them like a fiddle, and Ukraine is united in their hatred of Russia). Economically, the sanctions imposed by the West are a lot stronger and lasting longer than Putin has planned for. Domestically, he has hundred of thousands of casualties, a weakening economy, sped up demographic collapse, and outright challenges to his power; all of which are getting worse by the day. In short, its been an absolute geopolitical disaster.

As for NATO dissolving in 1991, that's a uniquely naïve American perspective. For us, the Cold War ended with the collapse of the USSR. It didn't end for the Russians and it didn't end for the countries which have been dealing with Russia for hundreds of years. For them, it was momentary pause in their tumultuous relationship.

As for what we get out of this, we get the destruction of the Russian army for pennies on the dollar without the loss of a single US solider. As a country, we have paid trillions over decades in preparation for an eventual war defending Europe from Russia. Luckily, that war never happened through a combination of proxy wars and deterrence. Now, after only having to ship some cold-war era military technology to Ukraine, we eliminated one of our biggest geopolitical risks without any loss of life to the US. That's what geopolitical dreams are made of.

 

[PKT_VOL]

It won't happen at all until there is a currency and an economy that is perceived to be safer and more stable than ours.

That's not happening with China any time soon, nor is it going to happen for the EU.
View attachment 626459

Infographic: U.S. Dollar Defends Role as Global Currency

This chart shows the share of the United States/the U.S. dollar in the global economy and global financial transactions.

www.statista.com

It basically boils down to the fact that although the US has problems, the rest of the world's similar problems are almost always worse.

Our biggest strategic risk is assuming that will always be the case. We have unsustainable problems could easily reverse this trend.

 

[volgr]

Oh you are so sad

Not an argument.

 

[volgr]

Then why was she there

You are wasting your time with these NAFO like trolls in this thread. They live in an alternate reality.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You are wasting your time with these NAFO like trolls in this thread. They live in an alternate reality.

Oh the irony, Larry, the pure irony in this statement

 

[LouderVol]

You are wasting your time with these NAFO like trolls in this thread. They live in an alternate reality.

Yanukovych Wins Ukraine’s Presidential Election

www.oscepa.org

"Yanukovych has also promised to move ahead to meet EU requirements for signing a so-called Association Agreement, including a free-trade package that would help exporters gain more market share in the 27-nation bloc."

 

[utvolpj]

As for what we get out of this, we get the destruction of the Russian army for pennies on the dollar without the loss of a single US solider. As a country, we have paid trillions over decades in preparation for an eventual war defending Europe from Russia. Luckily, that war never happened through a combination of proxy wars and deterrence. Now, after only having to ship some cold-war era military technology to Ukraine, we eliminated one of our biggest geopolitical risks without any loss of life to the US. That's what geopolitical dreams are made of.

At the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. But hey, they ain't murican so all good. At what point do we get embarrassed at using other humans for war fodder in our names?

We decimated Ukraine and will now use it for a Corp money laundering operation. It's like they've done this before

 

[hog88]

At the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. But hey, they ain't murican so all good. At what point do we get embarrassed at using other humans for war fodder in our names?

We decimated Ukraine and will now use it for a Corp money laundering operation. It's like they've done this before

We decimated Ukraine? Please explain this one.

 

[tvolsfan]

The 2014 invasion was caused by a popular revolution followed by a legal procedure to remove a Russian puppet.

Fixed

 

[utvolpj]

We decimated Ukraine? Please explain this one.

By telling them they had a chance and supplying them with just enough to fight back. Our foreign policy actions in the country for over the last decade+ were leading to this outcome. The US would have reacted the same way

 

[tvolsfan]

It's amazing how some people act as though Ukraine should just be some buffer state that Russia is allowed to rule.

 

[tvolsfan]

you mean the Democratically elected leader who promised closer ties with the West?

Yanukovych Wins Ukraine’s Presidential Election

www.oscepa.org

"Yanukovych has also promised to move ahead to meet EU requirements for signing a so-called Association Agreement, including a free-trade package that would help exporters gain more market share in the 27-nation bloc."

he ran on a pro-western campaign. he defeated the more Russian friendly incumbent. he was all pro west until literally the weak of signing the deal with the west which was extremely popular. then suddenly at the 11.5 hour he tears up the western agreement, and signs a new deal with Russia that hadn't even been brought in front of their Rada.

The same Rada that followed their constitution to impeach/remove Yanukovych AFTER he fled to a Russian villa. The same Yanukovych who had previously signed a deal with the Rada to hold a special election on the matter of the trade deals. by running to Russia he crawfished on that too.

All indisputable.

 

[hog88]

By telling them they had a chance and supplying them with just enough to fight back. Our foreign policy actions in the country for over the last decade+ were leading to this outcome. The US would have reacted the same way

We are not forcing Ukraine to fight so your entire argument that WE are destroying Ukraine is asinine. Actually it's beyond asinine, it's Luther level dumb.

Now, I agree that we shouldn't be giving Ukraine sh^t. We should be selling arms and material to European nations and since they are supposedly under threat they could be supplying Ukraine. I also agree that Ukraine is and has been a giant money laundering operation but there is only 1 country responsible for the destruction of Ukraine and that is Russia. Saying anything to the contrary is idiotic.

 

[utvolpj]

We are not forcing Ukraine to fight so your entire argument that WE are destroying Ukraine is asinine. Actually it's beyond asinine, it's Luther level dumb.

Now, I agree that we shouldn't be giving Ukraine sh^t. We should be selling arms and material to European nations and since they are supposedly under threat they could be supplying Ukraine. I also agree that Ukraine is and has been a giant money laundering operation but there is only 1 country responsible for the destruction of Ukraine and that is Russia. Saying anything to the contrary is idiotic.

The us set them up. They either fight or get assimilated and that fight would have been much different without weapons being moved into that country for the past decade+. We were told this was coming if we continued and acted shocked when it did. This is a multi-admin FP failure that decimated a proxy country

 

[hog88]

The us set them up. They either fight or get assimilated and that fight would have been much different without weapons being moved into that country for the past decade+. We were told this was coming if we continued and acted shocked when it did. This is a multi-admin FP failure that decimated a proxy country

We didn't provide Ukraine arms until 2020.

If they weren't provided arms after Russia attacked they would have already lost/surrendered so again, we are not forcing them to fight. You cannot arm hundreds of thousands of men within walking distance of home and force them to fight. If those men didn't want to fight this would have been over in 3 months regardless of any arms provided to them. You sound like Ras and his stooges.

 

[PKT_VOL]

At the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives. But hey, they ain't murican so all good. At what point do we get embarrassed at using other humans for war fodder in our names?

We decimated Ukraine and will now use it for a Corp money laundering operation. It's like they've done this before

This is absolutely fair criticism.

The Ukrainians make this point in their appeal for more military support; Western European countries are (seemingly) coming around to this point of view.

The US/German concern for providing too much support (but reducing Ukrainian casualties) is that it would result in a clear humiliating defeat of Russia and back Putin into a very dangerous corner. Although the US doesn't like Putin, they view him better than the alternatives (another leader or the breakup of the Russian Federation). The US/Germany had hoped that Russia would have had enough by now but underestimated their glutenous desire for punishment. That clearly isn't the case and Ukraine can't sustain a war of attrition indefinitely.

 

[LouderVol]

By telling them they had a chance and supplying them with just enough to fight back. Our foreign policy actions in the country for over the last decade+ were leading to this outcome. The US would have reacted the same way

of course they had a chance. there is always a chance. plenty of military upsets exist.

the only question is: is Ukraine willing to suffer what it takes to win. until that point comes we haven't forced them to do anything.

 

[utvolpj]

We didn't provide Ukraine arms until 2020.

If they weren't provided arms after Russia attacked they would have already lost/surrendered so again, we are not forcing them to fight. You cannot arm hundreds of thousands of men within walking distance of home and force them to fight. If those men didn't want to fight this would have been over in 3 months regardless of any arms provided to them. You sound like Ras and his stooges.

The US and allies subverted any attempt to end this conflict. Yes we're absolutely pushing the continued fight, death and destruction

 

[utvolpj]

of course they had a chance. there is always a chance. plenty of military upsets exist.

the only question is: is Ukraine willing to suffer what it takes to win. until that point comes we haven't forced them to do anything.

They had no chance without a massive import of western weapons. Even that can only last so long given the Russian military's historical strategy of overwhelming with numbers. The math just didn't hold up

 

[hog88]

The US and allies subverted any attempt to end this conflict. Yes we're absolutely pushing the continued fight, death and destruction

Yes, we are encouraging them to fight but in no form or fashion are we forcing them to fight or responsible for their destruction.

You think that if Russia would have ran through them in the beginning Ukraine wouldn't have been destroyed?

 

[utvolpj]

Yes, we are encouraging them to fight but in no form or fashion are we forcing them to fight or responsible for their destruction.

You think that if Russia would have ran through them in the beginning Ukraine wouldn't have been destroyed?

We set them up to be a proxy and broke up any chance of talks. Outside of simply giving up what were their options?

 

[LouderVol]

The US and allies subverted any attempt to end this conflict. Yes we're absolutely pushing the continued fight, death and destruction

no we didn't subvert it. we didn't cancel any meetings, we didn't give Ukraine an ultimatum of fight Russia or fight NATO, we didn't instigate any proxy act to back their war support.

we told Ukraine IF they chose to fight we would support them.

as hog pointed out, what would be our leverage to keep Ukraine fighting? If we told them we would stop providing aid if they didn't fight, they could just stop fighting and not need the aid. if we stopped trading with them they could just go right back to Russia.