War in Ukraine

[McDad]

I'm not sure Russian corruption having a detrimental affect on the their battlefield efficiency has any real bearing on the core of Russia's expansionist policy.

You can get into all kinds of details about how warfare changed when Germany invaded, outdated modes of fighting by the Allies, technological advancement by Germany, political appeasement for the sake of "peace", etc, significantly contributing to the early success of the blitzkrieg in 1939; the reality is much more nuanced.

Whether you think it has bearing is inconsequential to my opinion on it.

Even with the dynamics of invasion and takeover being radically different today compared to 90 +/- years ago, we didn't enter the war until after we were attacked. I would be in favor of the same approach this time around.

I want to see Ukraine succeed. Go Ukraine et al...we're rooting for you. Fight for your sovereignty.

I personally don't find isolationist historical arguments to be compelling. I believe in the ability of the more-democratic countries in Europe to figure this out if they want.

 

[hog88]

Whether you think it has bearing is inconsequential to my opinion on it.

Even with the dynamics of invasion and takeover being radically different today compared to 90 +/- years ago, we didn't enter the war until after we were attacked. I would be in favor of the same approach this time around.

I want to see Ukraine succeed. Go Ukraine et al...we're rooting for you. Fight for your sovereignty.

I personally don't find isolationist historical arguments to be compelling. I believe in the ability of the more-democratic countries in Europe to figure this out if they want.

This is my basic view on it. It's a European problem and they should be funding Ukraine's defense if they believe a Russian victory there will lead to further aggression.

 

[McDad]

This is my basic view on it. It's a European problem and they should be funding Ukraine's defense if they believe a Russian victory there will lead to further aggression.

At minimum the "ia" countries and the "stan" countries can form a coalition to fight alongside Ukraine. That would be too formidable for Russia to handle. And if the strong countries like Germany, England, Spain, Sweden, and other want to jump in, it will be over faster.

If they can't be compelled to help after 10-15 years of Russian expansionist creep, I don't why we should be.

 

[CobbVol]

Whether you think it has bearing is inconsequential to my opinion on it.

Even with the dynamics of invasion and takeover being radically different today compared to 90 +/- years ago, we didn't enter the war until after we were attacked. I would be in favor of the same approach this time around.

I want to see Ukraine succeed. Go Ukraine et al...we're rooting for you. Fight for your sovereignty.

I personally don't find isolationist historical arguments to be compelling. I believe in the ability of the more-democratic countries in Europe to figure this out if they want.

Agreed. The EU countries need to do more because based on their levels of spending they view climate change as more of a threat.

 

[hog88]

At minimum the "ia" countries and the "stan" countries can form a coalition to fight alongside Ukraine. That would be too formidable for Russia to handle. And if the strong countries like Germany, England, Spain, Sweden, and other want to jump in, it will be over faster.

If they can't be compelled to help after 10-15 years of Russian expansionist creep, I don't why we should be.

I guess another reason I feel that Europe should be footing the bill is (and I know it's silly) is I'm sick and tired of the neckbeards whining about how Europe has "free healthcare" and we're about the only western nation without socialized healthcare. Well maybe if we weren't subsidizing their defense things would be different.

 

[McDad]

I guess another reason I feel that Europe should be footing the bill is (and I know it's silly) is I'm sick and tired of the neckbeards whining about how Europe has "free healthcare" and we're about the only western nation without socialized healthcare. Well maybe if we weren't subsidizing their defense things would be different.

Agreed. The EU countries need to do more because based on their levels of spending they view climate change as more of a threat.

Understood.

I think I understand why folks like Bearded are eager for us to financially support or get involved. Russia has been a bad actor for decades and our "enemy" for a long time. But they aren't what they used to be. Russia and Ukraine are so poor, I am not sure they are much of a threat to each other let alone the world.

 

[hog88]

Understood.

I think I understand why folks like Bearded are eager for us to financially support or get involved. Russia has been a bad actor for decades and our "enemy" for a long time. But they aren't what they used to be. Russia and Ukraine are so poor, I am not sure they are much of a threat to each other let alone the world.

Oh I think Bearded's support goes much deeper into party politics than that.

 

[BeardedVol]

Understood.

I think I understand why folks like Bearded are eager for us to financially support or get involved. Russia has been a bad actor for decades and our "enemy" for a long time. But they aren't what they used to be. Russia and Ukraine are so poor, I am not sure they are much of a threat to each other let alone the world.

I'm eager for us to uphold our end of the bargain of the Budapest Memorandum, given that Ukraine complied with our demands that they destroy or return to Russia, the very weapons that would have given them an umbrella of protection from Russian invasion, since we didn't allow them in NATO either.

 

[BeardedVol]

Oh I think Bearded's support goes much deeper into party politics than that.

Not everyone ascribes to your level of hyper-partisanship.

 

[hog88]

Not everyone ascribes to your level of hyper-partisanship.

This post shows you don't pay attention.

 

[McDad]

Oh I think Bearded's support goes much deeper into party politics than that.

I don't do much in this thread so I don't have a frame of reference for his politics. Plus you are frequently wrong, as Mrs Hog has confirmed, so we can't trust your judgement on Bearded's politics.

To further discuss your point about allocation of financial resources in Europe. America has adopted a 'protect everyone under our umbrella' approach. The socialism in those countries wouldn't be sustainable if they had to be on a defensive guard at all times.
Or, Ukraine could become like Switzerland...be neutral with impeccable banking laws. Combine that with true capitalism and that country could be wealthy in a few decades. Switzerland has about the same population as TN and twice the GDP.

 

[McDad]

I'm eager for us to uphold our end of the bargain of the Budapest Memorandum, given that Ukraine complied with our demands that they destroy or return to Russia, the very weapons that would have given them an umbrella of protection from Russian invasion, since we didn't allow them in NATO either.

Did we not do that? I though we gave them 60 billion or so of equipment already.

 

[McDad]

Not everyone ascribes to your level of hyper-partisanship.

You tell him.

He's rarely right about anything.

 

[hog88]

I don't do much in this thread so I don't have a frame of reference for his politics. Plus you are frequently wrong, as Mrs Hog has confirmed, so we can't trust your judgement on Bearded's politics.

To further discuss your point about allocation of financial resources in Europe. America has adopted a 'protect everyone under our umbrella' approach. The socialism in those countries wouldn't be sustainable if they had to be on a defensive guard at all times.
Or, Ukraine could become like Switzerland...be neutral with impeccable banking laws. Combine that with true capitalism and that country could be wealthy in a few decades. Switzerland has about the same population as TN and twice the GDP.

I think if we want to continue our "protect everyone under our umbrella" philosophy we have to start attaching some massive strings.

And I'm never wrong just not always right.

 

[CobbVol]

I'm eager for us to uphold our end of the bargain of the Budapest Memorandum, given that Ukraine complied with our demands that they destroy or return to Russia, the very weapons that would have given them an umbrella of protection from Russian invasion, since we didn't allow them in NATO either.

Guarantee typically refers to a formal commitment that certain conditions will be met or that a product will perform to a certain standard.

On the other hand, assure generally involves conveying confidence to someone about a future event or outcome.

 

[whodeycin85]

Why exactly does being conquered or colonized by Russia at some point in a country's history, make it acceptable for modern Russia to invade and occupy that country today?

By that logic, you'd support the UK invading the original 13 US colonies.

I'm asking because the moves seems to be to get back what was broken apart. Not to take over the world as you are fear mongering about

 

[BeardedVol]

Did we not do that? I though we gave them 60 billion or so of equipment already.

I personally wouldn't call what we've given them, compensation for the nuclear weapons, long range missiles, and long range bombers that they gave up, that would have given Russia pause in deciding to invade them.

Especially so given the limitations we put in their use, and the fact that we trickled the hardware in at a rate that made it nearly impossible for Ukraine to leverage effectively.

I'd go as far as to say that I don't think the Biden administration actually wants Ukraine to succeed in retaking any of the currently occupied territory, as it will probably mean the collapse of Russia in its current form, which fills Jake Sullivan with so much dread that he'd rather sacrifice all of eastern Europe to keep it from happening.

 

[BeardedVol]

Guarantee typically refers to a formal commitment that certain conditions will be met or that a product will perform to a certain standard.

On the other hand, assure generally involves conveying confidence to someone about a future event or outcome.

Ukraine complied with a material response to the agreement of destroying weapons and giving nuclear materials to Russia.

If we aren't going to uphold our end of the bargain, then we can return those weapons or the equivalent. Since the former is impossible, we'll have to settle for the latter.

Ukraine Eliminates Last of Its Strategic Bombers | Arms Control Association

www.armscontrol.org

 

[whodeycin85]

Every considered the reason why the test of Europe is half assing thier support of cuz they know Russia will not invade others?

 

[BeardedVol]

I'm asking because the moves seems to be to get back what was broken apart. Not to take over the world as you are fear mongering about

So again, why wouldn't the UK be justified in reconstituting their empire?

After all, they would only be taking back the parts that were 'broken apart'

 

[whodeycin85]

So again, why wouldn't the UK be justified in reconstituting their empire?

After all, they would only be taking back the parts that were 'broken apart'

Didn't say they wouldn't be. Russia hasn't been aggressive to anyone but those countries that broke away correct?? What proof beside corporate media fear mongering has shown any other aggression??

 

[CobbVol]

Ukraine complied with a material response to the agreement of destroying weapons and giving nuclear materials to Russia.

If we aren't going to uphold our end of the bargain, then we can return those weapons or the equivalent. Since the former is impossible, we'll have to settle for the latter.

Ukraine Eliminates Last of Its Strategic Bombers | Arms Control Association

www.armscontrol.org

Details about the agreement ...

Memorandum Language and Assurances: Binding or Not?

One of the valuable insights about the Budapest Memorandum’s security assurances that we gleaned from the event was that, as former U.S. diplomats explained, Washington was simply not prepared in the early 1990s to accept a legally binding document with provisions akin to NATO’s Article 5. In contrast, Ukrainian officials had hoped for security guarantees, rather than mere assurances, and many of them have been deeply disappointed that the memorandum’s Western signatories have not done more to protect Ukraine, especially in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Crimea, according to the Ukrainian diplomats in attendance.

James Timbie, part of the State Department negotiating team who readied the memorandum for signing, remembers “vividly” that then-Secretary of State James Baker was “adamant” that the U.S. would not provide Ukraine with security guarantees—one of the three things Kyiv had wanted, along with assistance in dismantling its nuclear-weapons complex and compensation for the enriched uranium and plutonium on its territory. For the U.S., a top priority after the Soviet break-up was to have only one nuclear state succeed the USSR; Washington wouldn’t agree to a legally binding document on Ukraine’s security, Timbie said. What Baker did agree to eventually was to reaffirm earlier U.S. commitments made in documents like the Helsinki Final Act, the U.N. Charter and the Charter of Paris. This is why, Timbie explained, the Budapest Memorandum says its signatories “reaffirm” various commitments and obligations, rather than agreeing to new ones. There was a lot of checking with lawyers on language, he added.

Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who also took part in the memorandum negotiations, expanded on Timbie’s point, highlighting that the document offers “assurances” not “guarantees”—a meaningful distinction in American legalese.

 

[McDad]

I personally wouldn't call what we've given them, compensation for the nuclear weapons, long range missiles, and long range bombers that they gave up, that would have given Russia pause in deciding to invade them.

Especially so given the limitations we put in their use, and the fact that we trickled the hardware in at a rate that made it nearly impossible for Ukraine to leverage effectively.

I'd go as far as to say that I don't think the Biden administration actually wants Ukraine to succeed in retaking any of the currently occupied territory, as it will probably mean the collapse of Russia in its current form, which fills Jake Sullivan with so much dread that he'd rather sacrifice all of eastern Europe to keep it from happening.

From what you have shared earlier we have entered into an agreement with Ukraine to guarantee certain things. Someone else used the word assure. In an effort to not to quibble on semantics, has what we have guaranteed or assured Ukraine been specified in totals (financial support, equipment, etc)? And has the speed or pace we will uphold our end of the agreement been specified?

 

[BeardedVol]

Didn't say they wouldn't be. Russia hasn't been aggressive to anyone but those countries that broke away correct?? What proof beside corporate media fear mongering has shown any other aggression??

I don't see how that's relevant.

If your justification for allowing Russia to invade any territory that was once a part of Russia, and have "broken away" as you so erroneously put it, you're going to have to allow a lot of countries to be invaded, including current NATO members.

But why are we stopping with Russia? Why can't everyone reclaim former colonies?

You guys want to talk about "endless wars" out of one side of your mouth, while essentially espousing a return to Victorian era colonial conquest and spheres of influence by 'great powers' out of the other..

 

[whodeycin85]

I don't see how that's relevant.

If your justification for allowing Russia to invade any territory that was once a part of Russia, and have "broken away" as you so erroneously put it, you're going to have to allow a lot of countries to be invaded, including current NATO members.

But why are we stopping with Russia? Why can't everyone reclaim former colonies?

You guys want to talk about "endless wars" out of one side of your mouth, while essentially espousing a return to Victorian era colonial conquest and spheres of influence by 'great powers' out of the other..

The point of the question was not support of Russia..it simply that they are going after those that left the Soviet Union less then 30 years ago..and haven't made an aggressive move against anyone but them...so why would I need to find a war with Russia...when we have worked with them previously..stop funding those wars and watch them go away one way or another mid then attack the US then we are involved but until then stop wasting money on forgien wars..if Europe was worried about Russian aggression they would act like instead of letting us foot the hill.. that tells me they are not.