Russia only ever wanted peace. US/NATO forced this war upon them first via a coup, then by using Minsk Agreements as a means to buy time and then launch a conflict to draw Russia in. This will ONLY settle on Russian terms. Any other such ideas are fantasy or the path to WWIII.
Post WWII the US kept troops in countries all over the world 🌎. Currently has like 18 bases in Germany alone. I’m quite sure Cuba would like Guantanamo back. And no one invited us into Syria.
Oh contraire Pierre! There never was a real chance for peace. Russians have been bitching since Nikita gave Ukraine limited autonomy. The mayor of Moscow was agitating on Sevastopol in the mid-90's. Years before Russia's former fraternal Warsaw Pact buddies decided they preferred NATO to the bear hug. (Makes partial mockery of your NATO argument.)
Minsk? Both sides played fast and loose. And you and I know that's a fact. To pretend otherwise is just pure intellectual dishonesty.
The endgame? Yes, it will settle on Russian terms. And it will only make them more arrogant and decide they don't have to live with previous agreements. What country do you think Putin will seize under the declaration of anschluss?
Had we not provided the USSR w/Lend-Lease the Allies would have had to face the bulk of the ~2.5 million German soldiers that the USSR killed. w/o Lend-Lease it is likely that the USSR would have reached a peace agreement w/Germany. Many "ifs", to be expected.
If we hadn't provided Lend-Lease they would have starved, had no radio communication to speak off, lost 50% of their explosives and still relied on horse drawn logistics.
They would have engaged in a war of attrition in Soviet territory and never moved into Eastern Europe.
People forget they were Nazi allies for the first 1/3rd of the war.
No one forgets the Nazi Soviet pact. But let us also not forget that England ignored the opportunity to form an alliance with the USSR as late as 1939.
Why would they? Russia had an active espionage establishment in England and was aggressively supporting English Communists. It wasn't exactly unicorns and skittles between the two. And it was well known that Russia was allowing the Illegal Germany army and Luftwaffe to train on Russian territory since the early '20's.
You are correct that Putin did not want peace. His casus belli was nothing but a pack of lies. Given Russia's poor performance, and how much they have wasted in 20 months of war, it is unlikely to settle on Russia's terms, much less anything Putin likes.
Lavrov is now saying they will leave Ukraine of Ukraine abjures any military alliances. If Ukraine keeps the pressure on, that is likely to change as well. Peace will start when the Russians get out of all of Ukraine. Crimea will have to be given up as that is within the internationally recognized boundaries of Ukraine.
So, you want the war to stop, even if that creates conditions that hurt the US?
You don't care that Russia has been bombing Ukrainian cities and raping and murdering civilians, your OK with that?
OK, since you read and post here, how do you feel about the lives of US sailors?
Because if the US withdraws support for Ukraine, that will 100% encourage China to believe we will fold on Taiwan.
It would tell Xi without question that he better strike Taiwan while Biden is in office, since he may just fold there as well.
But for all Biden's faults (and they are legion) he isn't actually in charge, and the NatSec state would probably actually stand for Taiwan, and that would mean a war with China that we are not preparred for.
So, IF people like you, with your failure to read and understand history, insist on letting Russia win (because ANYTHING other than helping Ukraine win = letting Russia win) THEN the 10,000+ American sailors and Marines who will die in the first month of war with China over Taiwan will be on YOUR HEAD.
We live in an interconnected world. Pull your head out of the ground and deal with reality, not your isolationist heat-fantasy.
This who propaganda spin of “if Russia wins than China will invade Taiwan” makes my head spin. Seriously. At the present time we couldn’t win a conventional war against Russia OR China, let alone the both of them in the shotgun marriage WE created. For God’s sake engage your grey matter, man. This is just more propaganda to keep the likes of you all excited.
If we continue to “support” Ukraine the final loss will be far greater than if an agreement is cut now. As to China, if you think they’re just waiting around until we ramp a war on them, you’re sorely mistaken. I expect with the first shots fired upon them, every US base, carrier group, and ship within firing distance will be inundated with hypersonic missiles. Any troop carriers (of our new & improved “woke” military) will rapidly find the bottom of the South China Sea. And if they could land, China has literally millions they could send in waves against any landing parties.
Our problem isn’t Ukraine, or Taiwan, or the fantasy of “Putin reassembling the USSR”... it’s that we’re led by midwits who’ve never been involved in kinetic war, and still believe the US is as mighty as it was in the 80’s & 90’s. Nothing could be further from the truth. China is not Japan, technology has changed, and short of nukes killing us all, an attack on China will destroy our forces in no time.
Did you really write that we couldn't win a conventional war against Russia?
I agree there is room to doubt and debate on China, which is why most of us are here in the first place.
But with almost 2 years of Russia in Ukraine, and all the evidence, you really think we could not defeat them in a straight up conventional fight?
If so, then I cannot debate with you, because you are either blinded by dogma or incapable of seeing basic truth.
Our military has major problems - again, that's why we are here on Sal's substack talking. But there is ZERO rational debate on the current state of Russian conventional forces. They are a joke.
Now, WHERE and WHY would we fight Russia certainly matters.
But it is pretty clear that while China can give us a run for our money, Russian Naval, Air and Ground forces are an order of magnitude less capable than our most optimistic threat assessments over the last decade+
Russian air forces are incapable of executing coordinated air battle in support of the ground combat element.
The Russian Navy is losing the naval battle of the Black Sea to a country without a Navy!
But honestly, your comments show a lack of sophistication and a linguistic bent strongly suggestive you are nothing more than a Chinese or Russian provocateur.
"We" would fire the first shot? That's PRC/CCP propaganda.
They have been gather info for medical personnel. Women have already been serving a such, without being drafted.
Whether you like it or not, Putin's war does affect the US strategic position. If Putin prevails in Ukraine, although very unlikely, it would lead to problems in the first tier of NATO countries because Putin's long term goals lie in those states. You are simply being short sighted.
It is an RU/Ukraine problem that could have been solved long ago through negotiations and no outside interference from the US. As long as they keep it in their sphere RU can do as it wishes.
There is no solving the problem. The problem is over one hundred years old. And you know what the problem is? Reread your last sentence. Russia is and always has been the problem.
You seem to have the outlook so many have which blithely ignores one side of a two-sided situation. Of courses it is convenient but it ignores historical fact. Take for instance the US involvement in supporting OUN/neo-nazis in Ukraine since 1945 because they hated Russians...the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This minority now exerts huge influence on everyday life since the US sponsored coup in 2014...they run the Ministry of Education (re-wrote all textbooks to glorify Banderite and Russophobic thought for example. The pivotla moment you ignore is that Franc, Germany , Russia, and Ukrainian President Yushchenko agreed on referendum elections in 90 days. "Fck-the-EU Nuland wouldn't stand for that and pulled the pin on the neo-nazis to release armed gangs to hunt him down...he fled. His "crime"? He realized the EU association trade agreement would bury Ukraine economically...an "incentive" of $3 billion was offered to join EU and turn away from the Customs Union (CIS) which supported Ukraine's economy to the tune of HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of $! Where the hell was Ukraine gonna sell all that heavy machinery rolling out all the non-compatible with NATO engine and armored vehicle components products from Sich Motors (and Kharkov Tank works) , rocket engines, Anatov cargo airplanes, etc (hint: it was Russia who was their major customer). Sure enough, Ukriaine's economy fell apart quickly and began selling their crown jewels to the West for next to nothing...culminating recently in selling its sacred cow... the best agricultural land on the planet. That my wife's family who lived in Donbas was being shelled daily was absent from your awareness. That some 10,ooo Ukrainians were butchered by their own government for speaking Russian goes unmentioned. How can you pretend to know anything about what happened if you ignore these blockbuster events?
Where did these Russian speakers come from? And why would Ukrainians (like the Finns) choose the Nazis over Stalin? Personally? I don't particularly care to see Ukraine or several other countries tainted by Russia in either NATO or the EU. The fact remains Putin started the aggression via another attempt at Russification.
Russification of the area began under Stalin moving more native russians into Ukrainie along with deportating tens of thousands of Ukrainians. Putin restarted Russification of the contested areas by moving more native Russians in.
I keep hearing this, and it's the worst sort of BS. "There was a goal in mind for Dugin when he wrote this in 1997: ”As for the former union republics of the USSR situated within Europe, they all, in Dugin's view, (with the exception of Estonia) should be absorbed by Eurasia-Russia. "Belarus," Dugin asserts flatly, "should be seen as a part of Russia" (377). In similar fashion, Moldova is seen as a part of what Dugin calls "the Russian South" (343). On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions," he warns, "represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics" (348). And he adds that, "[T]he independent existence of Ukraine (especially within its present borders) can make sense only as a 'sanitary cordon'" (379). However, as we have seen, for Dugin all such "sanitary cordons" are inadmissible. Dugin speculates that three extreme western regions of Ukraine--Volynia, Galicia, and TransCarpathia--heavily populated with Uniates and other Catholics, could be permitted to form an independent "Western Ukrainian Federation." But this area must not under any circumstances be permitted to fall under Atlanticist control (382). With the exception of these three western regions, Ukraine, like Belorussia, is seen as an integral part of Eurasia-Russia.” https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics
This is the playbook Putin has been following since 2007. Ukraine is just another brick in the wall. And the ultimate enemy is the US, and Dugin has a prescription for the US as well, which Putin (and others, including China) has followed: “Within the United States itself, there is a need for the Russian special services and their allies "to provoke all forms of instability and separatism within the borders of the United States (it is possible to make use of the political forces of Afro-American racists)" (248). "It is especially important," Dugin adds, "to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements--extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics" (367)." Ibid.
That is utter nonsense. What really happened in Antalya last year is part of an article at American Spectator. Lavrov offered nothing and was utterly unserious, as Russia has been on Ukraine for a long time.
Russia claimed it was 'threatened' by NATO expansion, and so it... withdrew 80% of it's front line troops from its border with NATO?
The only difference between Russia and the USSR is that Russia has less resources and crony capitalism. In all other respects, they are nearly indistinguishable.
Russia has made contradictory claims about NATO for decades.
Russia has never ACTUALLY been afraid of NATO aggression.
Rather, Russia believes it has the right to bully and pressure it's neighbors however it wants, and Russia resents that NATO constrains or limits this.
NATO and the west are not perfect, and the Biden admin is a case-study in Western corruption.
But Russia is orders of magnitude worse on the scale of morality.
Russia is and always will be a threat to Europe.
You can hate Ukraine and Joe Biden all you want, but helping Russia is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
"Russia has never ACTUALLY been afraid of NATO aggression."
You might want to talk to Billy Burns. The CIA director guy right now. He was in Moscow in 2008 as the US Ambassador. He might be able to fill you in with some of his impressions about Russian thinking on this subject. Scratch that. He will give you the Standard Ukrainian Neocon Narrative SUNN but at the time he wrote this cable that leaked. I tend to believe 2008 Billy rather than cabinet level Billy.
Burns is an absolute idiot, he was an idiot when he was ambassador to Russia. He is still an idiot today. the fact that Biden picked him should ore than tell you anything you need to know about his past thinking.
He was parroting the Bush/Cheney nonsense that Russia could be a friend, because the idiots at Foggy Bottom are always eager to display their fantasy-land wishcasting based on assuming other countries will think like we do.
When was the last time Foggy Bottom was on the right side of a major diplomatic issue?
Burns was trying to cover for Bush2's stupidity in thinking he could 'see into Vlad's soul' when he looked him in the eyes.
Anyone who has studied Russia for more than 30 seconds and still has their head screwed on straight knows these actions are par for course, Russia will NEVER accept anything less than the ability to terrorize and bully their neighbors.
Guess we will have to disagree. I spent a decent chunk of my life training to fight the Soviet Union. I despise communism and socialism. I speak decent Russian. Much refreshed now that I've been watching youtube Becti a lot since the invasion, er CBO. We needlessly antagonized Russia. A colossal strategic blunder that will go down in the history books as a product of profound hubris and greed. That's the point Billy Burns was making. He talked to their elites, he says at one point that even the opposition to Putin, the western leaning liberals felt the Ukraine was a red line, an existential threat issue. Is Burns an idiot? Probably. Nuland, Blinken and Sullivan certainly are. Maybe Burns might have some useful opinions on this though as far as relaying what Russian Nat Sec circles believed? I think it's likely. I assess Russia's threat of conquering its near Euro neighbors as zero.
Do I want to sing kum ba ya with Vlad? Hardly. But we're on our way to pushing our chips all in for Ukraine. I personally think the more pressing issue is the you know actual real totalitarian communist country with the social credit system and labor camps. The one rapidly expanding their navy while ours is deteriorating before our eyes. Playing ball for Ukraine is not a vital national interest. It shouldn't have been pushed by our Uniparty idiots, but I think the grifting was just too tempting. We are all going to see though probably in the next couple of years. Interesting times and all that.
My contention is that what Russian elites have told American diplomats has always been what Russian elites wanted us to believe.
I do not accept that we needlessly antagonized Russia, because I do not accept that Russia has some 'right' to dictate the course of events for it's neighbors.
Russia has claimed NATO as a threat since about 30 seconds after the USSR ceased to exist. But there BEHAVIOR has never followed their words.
Because the Russian elites KNOW that NATO could never agree to take offensive aggressive, unprovoked action against Russia. They know how divided we are, they have played us against each other for years.
Look at how much pathetic hand wringing NATO went through just to send Ukraine weapons. "Oh No's, we'll provoke Russia".
Russia's elite, were in fact, convinced NATO leaders would let it happen - that's how much they actually feared us. And truth be told, most NATO leaders WOULD have let it happen if Ukraine had started to fold. It was a near thing.
And again, Russia has stripped it's border with NATO of conventional troops for Ukraine. Those are not the actions of a government or elite that truly fears NATO aggression.
No, Russia is the text-book definition of a Bully-state. They impose their will on their neighbors and the only threat NATO ever presented to Russia was the threat that we might prevent them from imposing their will militarily on their neighbors.
But at the end of the day, Ukraine did not want to be a Russian vasal state.
Have we really fallen so far, that we simply ignore when a tyrant bombs cities and attempts to simply invade and take over a free people, whatever other faults those free people might have?
If that's what it takes to make America great, I want no part of it.
And BTW, I voted Trump twice, and I'll pinch my nose and do it again if he gets the nom, though i really cannot stand the man, because 'Never Trump' is just as stupid.
I say it depends on how long the war lasts. But Frozen War is most likely outcome. One could even make a case it's the best outcome for the US. Give the Ukrainians gear as we wear it out so we don't need to dispose of it. Keep Russians obsessed over reclaiming Ukraine, so they don't bother the Eastern Flank of NATO. Keep the Europeans thinking about defending themselves, and we pour money into thinks to keep the Pacific region free.
I watched this video when it came out over the weekend. Colonel Tölke seems to be preparing the German audience for a Russia that has sufficient munitions for this year and next at the current burn rate. He starts talking logistics at the 22:15 point. Black Sea discussion runs from 11:25 to 18:10 for the occasional navalist here on the Porch. ;<)
Russia is wildly outstripping their ammo production. That is why Shoigu went to the NorKs seeking ammo. The last time the west saw the NorKs try their hand at shelling a part of the ROK, they launcher over 200 shells, and less than 40 arrives at the island, with less than 40 detonating. The shells were a greater hazard to the NorKs than to the ROK.
Ukraine relies on the United States to pay for its entire civil government. But yep.. Ukraine is winning. We can’t even keep a speaker of the house in office.
They are, but making artillery rounds is not high tech, it's over a hundred year-old technology.. So they can solve this problem and are working on it. This takes time due to the scale required and the lead times, but simple large-scale production of forged steel is something that plays to Russian strengths.
How many million rounds will the EU deliver to Ukraine this year? What is their current production rate?
Saw a video 2 days ago of Russian artillerymen complaining that their new 152mm shells from NK arrives without any explosive filler. The were hollow metal shells. he pulled the fuze and the fuze header, and filmed the interior. Clean as the day it left the lathe in the factory.
Putin ordered an invasion for his neocolonial empire. It was a fight a lot of people, including me, thought he would win quickly. Putin is the aggressor and Ukraine the defender. Your analogies are simply silly.
The Norns of history never sleep. This year marks the 250th anniversary of the Polish Diet agreeing to partitioning by the great powers. They would cede lands to Russia in the east that are today within Belarus. While they surely did not know it at the time, in a mere 20 years they would be ceding an even larger portion to Russia in the east and Prussia in the west. This greater bite would lead to the uprising by Major General Tadeusz Kościuszko, who would ultimately lose at the Battle of Maciejowice and Poland would cease to exist.
I wonder if the Germans think this war might be an opportunity for them to regain Prussia and Silesia. at the expense of Poland. Could you imgaine a secret pact between Russia and Germany?
Americans focus on what victory looks like. It would be prudent - prior to entering or supporting a conflict - to identify what defeat looks like too. What ranges of defeat are acceptable in the Ukraine fracas not only to Ukraine but to the UK - to Canada - to the US - to Israel - to all the co-belligerents? The Ukraine is not the only country that will be impacted by the scope of their defeat. On a simplistic note, what chance is there of the funds expended by the West to be repaid? How will the marketing of Western arms need to change based on their performance in the conflict? Russia has continued to sell diesel fuel, uranium for reactors and natural gas to the EU throughout the conflict, despite sanctions. How would this and other trade be impacted by different takes on a Ukrainian defeat.
FYI, the name of the country in question is "Ukraine" not "The Ukraine".
"The Ukraine" is a pro-Russian talking point that seeped into western usage through our idiot media suggesting it is just an 'area' or 'territory', like 'the Sahara' or 'the Midwest'.
yeah, 50 years, as in, under Soviet and current Russian propaganda.
Lenin and Stalin both attempted to cull the population of Ukraine of those who were independent and free thinkers, those who resisted Soviet domination.
Stalin killed more than 6 million of them with the Holodomor, the manufactured famine that the liberal socialist sympathizers at the NY Times tried so hard to cover-up at the time.
Since it's independence in 1991, Ukraine has made clear that the name of the nation is "Ukraine".
Most of those who use the term 'the Ukraine' do not do it out of a desire to spite Ukraine, they simply do not stop to think about the connotation.
But make no mistake, Russia wants you to think of it that way, because it supports their imperialistic design on the entire former Soviet empire.
and we dislike Russian things because of Russian behavior. Actions have consequences. Their leaders have been murderous thugs for a century and a half, with few exceptions.
Comparing our mistakes and errors to their deliberate and wanton barbaric slaughter is the highest form of self-deluding moral equivalency.
Russia and China represent a world based on "Might makes right" and pure "end justifies the means"
If you want to live in that world, by all means, have at it, but it is the antithesis of what the USA has always stood for, even if at many times, we did it imperfectly.
You cannot be an American patriot, who believes in and celebrates the Constitution and the Declaration, and support brutal thugs like Russia and China.
We can have reasoned debate over how and of to support countries like Ukraine and Israel.
We cannot have reasoned debate over the merits of supporting or aligning with Russia or China. That is evil, and that will not stand.
"Lenin and Stalin both attempted to cull the population of Ukraine of those who were independent and free thinkers, those who resisted Soviet domination."
Good grief. You do realize they did the same for the entire Soviet Union, right? And wherever else they could.
"Their leaders have been murderous thugs for a century and a half, with few exceptions."
A lot longer than a century and a half.
"You cannot be an American patriot, who believes in and celebrates the Constitution and the Declaration, and support brutal thugs like Russia and China."
1)Show me where I have "supported" either Russia or China
2) You do not have the qualifications to judge my patriotism or lack thereof.
1) it was a definitive statement, not an accusation, as in, you are free to chose if it applies to you or not. I did not state that YOU support Russia or China.
2) it is my opinion. By definition. This is a comments section. Anything posted is opinion. My opinion is that anyone supporting China or Russia has long lost anything remotely resembling a cognitive connection to principled Constitutional conservatism.
3) If you do not know the history of Russia well enough to know that what happened in Ukraine was special, and considerably worse than what happened in the rest of the USSR, then you need to read a little more - what happened in Ukraine during the Holodomor was notable because in a country marked by repression, murder and purges, it stood out, and alone. Between 6 and 9 million dead in 3 years due to a famine that was not a natural occurrence, but the deliberate results of Soviet food policies designed to produce the very famine it did.
The invasion of Ukraine slows down, the weather mandates a "frozen" situation, embers banked. Meanwhile, WAR (a spirit all its own) moves on to warmer climes; as the extremely, extremely, EXTREMELY more impactful, awful, volatile; and inevitable conflagration sparked by Iran vs Israel heats up, and draws in, in order......Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Turkey,.....and yep, Russia/China, et. al.
The Ukrainians have said they will keep fighting. The rasputitsa will slow things down, but not stop them. Winter is not the ally of Russia pro-Putinists thought it would be. While it is unlikely that Russia will reach their victory conditions, any General staff worth its salt will have given thought to that outcome.
Not complicated at all from my perspective. Pull the plug on Zelensky and his fellow grifters. What happens in or to Ukraine is none of our concern no more than our own Civil War was the concern of England and France who had the good sense not to get involved. The money we sent to Ukraine would have been better spent in East Palestine and Maui.
Coming from a man sold out to the propaganda of Putin, that is just funny. You used to seem like a sensible man. You've changed that perception.
You want a flame war and to denigrate anyone that listens to the facts about the war. This is the end. I will not pay attention to any more of your childish nonsense. Have a ball on your own time. I won't give you credit for anything approaching good sense anymore.
I have used critical thinking to realize that the Ukrainians have lost their army, have no industrial capacity, rely on corrupt and bankrupt EU for military equipment and armaments, are fighting an army that enjoys close lines of communication ( and a popular war in their own nation) and cannot continue. You’re the one that believes what he sees on TV, believes what Zeihan asserts to his Nostradamus like cult following. You attack any opinion other than “I stand with Ukraine”. Funny. I bet you’re not only vaccinated… likely 3 times boosted.
Thinking like that caused WWII when your fellow short-sided isolationist peaceniks thought Hitler would stop with the Sudetenland.
When will you realize that people like Putin will lie and say whatever they have to in order to drive a wedge between western countries to get what they want.
If you think that won't affect you, you are, with respect, far too intellectually challenged to be reading and posting on this forum.
Russia in position to threaten Eastern Europe will always cost us money.
If the west suddenly withdrew support from Ukraine like you claim you want, it would be short and certain road to war with China, because it would tell Xi we have no spine, and we will fold, and he would in turn finally start that war over Taiwan.
So sure, bail on Ukraine, and get 10,000 American sailors and Marines killed in the pacific in return.
We are defeating Russia without ANY US lives spent, and using weapons that were DESIGNED AND PURCHASED for the purpose of FIGHTING RUSSIA.
When ever someone starts insulting those who disagree with him then I realize he has nothing of value to say and any further discussion is a waste of time.
Which Ukraine are we talking about? The one that elected Yanukovych? The one that elected that guy who played the piano with his John Hancock on a soft line approach, dare I say a peace platform with Russia? The one that shelled their "supposedly" own citizens in the Donbas for 8 years? Or maybe the run by Vicky?
This is pretty simple "real politics" at this point. If I was Putin, I wouldn't trust NATO. I would grab Odesssa, Kharkhov and a bunch of other oblasts all the way up to Kiev. I'd make sure whatever NATO wants to admit is a rump disaster. The Poles will be thrilled with the grain trade from whatever is left. I'd then sit back and laugh as I slowly built alternatives to the GX trade blocks. Someday I'd dethrone the dollar with my BRICS friends and the southern hemisphere that look North and see a drunken sailor with 60 trillion in inflated away Tbills on the balance sheet.
The neocons (I shudder at using the word, but I have to admit at this point it's true and I would have been described as one myself back in 2003) have played the worst game of poker possible leading up to this. Putin is not the Fuhrer. Russia did not have to be turned into this farcical big bad wolf. Poland and the Fulda Gap are not next on the Kremlin band's world tour. Our nat sec elite did this to us and we are going to be scratching our heads wondering how this all went to shit. Horrendous casualties, a hundred or two hundred billion burned, Russia and China stronger, US weaker. But we had to protect Democracy. FFS. Just the newspeak they throw around should give you a clue.
Putin may conclude that an independent Ukraine in any form is a threat and may swallow it up completely. The neocons may have created a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They say he doesn't want to "swallow a porcupine" and deal with the certain insurgency and ethnic issues. Control policing would be bloody. That's the reasoning behind leaving just a rump basket case that the EU can deal with. But I agree with you about the iron clad law of unintended consequences.
Putin may take Ukraine, but he will not hold it. It took Stalin to the mid 50s to completely put down the Bandera faction in Ukraine. Putin does not have the ability to fight such a battle. Putin does not have the ability to fight the Ukraine war much longer. he has wasted far too much manpower and other resources to keep going.
Exactly. The neoclowns get us into these conflicts, ramp up the media propaganda circus, tell us it’s all for “democracy” (which in Ukraine does not exist), we spend gov’s of money, the MICC gets richer, the people poorer, and we eventually leave yet another mess behind.
Everyone uses the term neocon, but for me the biggest stumbling block in U.S. foreign policy are the so-called “best and brightest” working for SecState.
When I worked in the DC area, on days where (nearly any amount of ) snow was predicted, and all government “non-essential personnel” were encouraged to stay home, I thought of them.
It is far more than that. Peter Zeihan went into the long term goals of Putin in a presentation to a group of Officers at Fort Benning February of last year. He also goes into far more of what the US will face directly. he did not deal with what is coming across the border and what the possible results of that will be.
And you base this "judgment" on what exactly? You're entitled to an opinion, no matter how uninformed it is, informed people will not accept such stupidity as your "judgment" on the man.
See I would have said Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, then maybe Pakistan and the Baja Peninsula because the fishing is great there and I have had my eye on a beach house. But a lack of ethnic?/cultural? Americans really put the kibosh on the that imperial irredentist master plans despite all the foolish "nation building." Guess we are still trying to build an Assadless nation in Syria.
Russia is not the Soviet Union. It's not N@zi Germany. It's a nation state with a lot of history and vital national interests. They explicitly kept trying to tell everybody what those EXISTENTIAL non-negotiable interests were. This is from Billy Burns (CIA Director with a cabinet seat) cable when he was the ambassador to Russia in 2008.
“Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia's influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.”
CDR, seems like you are going bi-polar on us. Yesterday, you were berating the DOD and political leaders for the misjudgment that we were a "continental land power" and ignoring our Mahanist roots. As one of those guys who drew my Sabre and was a steely-eyed tanky guy staring down the Russian hordes and my doom, I've got more land power creds than sea power, though I sit 100 feet from the mighty Pacific right now. Let me postulate a few things that we should and should not try:
1. nation building, aka playing Elliott Ness trying to clean up Chi-town. Let the EU take the lead on most of this. They've got skin in the game, are more experienced in the region, and it keeps their interest up in NATO.
2. Don't do what Biden and the idiots he has at State and Defense, talk stupid $hit about regime change, war criminals, and total victory. Don't we have enough lessons from history about how that hardens enemy hearts and convinces them to fight on. Thinking the Nazis, Japanese, Norks, and a dozen others here. Less Cato ("Carthago delenda est") and more Scipio after Zama is needed. Don't talk of war criminals until you stand on the rubble of the enemy's Capital staring at the big pile of their swords.
3. Whatever we decide, avoid burning huge piles of dollas we don't have in the near term. The Taiwan thing is going to resolve itself in under 5 years. China is imploding demographically and economically in under 10. Even buying ships is a gamble on our part unless we have extra Burke capacity. Spend our Biden bucks on smart munitions, missiles and mines
The "end game" for the present conflict will only be the starting point for the next conflict over Ukraine. We foolishly tend to think that lines drawn on a map yesterday, today or tomorrow will be there forever. In reality, national borders tend to ebb and flow, especially on the continent of Europe.
Strong men (or occasional women) will rise to power, and by leadership or brutal repression they will extend their domination over neighbors. Religious, ethnic or cultural affinities will unite to divide regions into new alignments for or against other regions.
Covetous neighbors seek geographic advantages of ports or rivers; natural defensive borders; agrarian lands to feed their masses or export for profit; industrial infrastructure; populations to enslave; or treasure to plunder.
None of this started two years ago with Putin's "Special Military Operation", or the seizure of Crimea in 2014, or with Ukraine's independence in 1991, or with Russian domination after WW2, or German occupation during that war. Remember that British and French armies and treasure were wasted in Crimea in the 1850s, trying to stop Russian domination of the region. "Onward, into the valley of death" was a futile tactic then, and is still such.
Domination of Ukraine has constantly shifted for nearly a millennia (or several hundred WW2s, if you like that unit of time.) Past masters have included variously Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Mongols, Slavs, Poland, Lithuania, Cossacks, Russia and Germany. Intermittent periods of local Ukranian control also occurred, until they were crushed.
It is a very bloody region, with Russian-like levels of death- about 6 million Ukraines died in WW2, including the murder of 1.5 million Jews. Life is cheap in that neighborhood.
There will be no "end game in Ukraine" only a temporary period of low level hostility until one group or another rises up again. And, again.
This is a matter of vital national interest to Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, Romanians and some others in the region. It is NOT A VITAL U.S. NATIONAL INTEREST if corrupt and brutal thugs looting the Ukraine speak Russian or some other language.
Yes, Russia will still lust after warm water ports, breadbaskets, and energy sources beyond their present borders or spheres of influence.
Until we secure our own borders against millions of invaders illegally entering our bankrupt country we cannot be distracted by wavering lines on maps of Ukraine.
Provide aid in the form of hardware or ammo, if we like, accepting that much of it will be stolen or wasted, but do not send "advisors" or "accountants" or "peace keepers" there.
Thinking we can prevent changes in European borders, especially in Ukraine, is as arrogant and ignorant as King Canute thinking his royal decree would prevent the rising of the tide.
"Frozen war" appears to be the Biden Administration objective, giving Ukraine just enough to hold the Russians off but not enough to push the Russians out.
Of the three possibilities, Russia wins, Frozen war, Ukraine wins, "Frozen war" appears to me to be the ultimate amoral ending, but that describes Biden's party to a "T", doesn't it?
This war will end on Russian terms. Ukraine has already lost. The numbers of Ukrainian causalities, that even our conservative best estimates place at over 450,000 - 500,000 including up to 80,000 KIA, is reminiscent of the manpower gaps from the Napoleonic wars. Ukraine women and orphans won’t be able to rebuild their nation. Western European countries are bankrupt and dealing with de-industrialization, massive immigration invasions and recessions building on suicidal economic and climate policies. To think of a Ukrainian victory is disingenuous when faced with actual math. Russia is thriving and wishcasting for Putin to be overthrown and that somehow that will change the game is akin to placing all the chips left on the table to a couple of dozen F16’s donated by Dutch and Danish with the explicit expectation that they will receive the F35 in lieu of….
Seems like everyone is eating from the Ukrainian trough.
Russia will be Russia. And it’s inhumane for the United States to continue to insist on Ukraine success on the battlefield when they are demonstrating they are incapable of victory. You simply cannot win a war without industrial capacity and manpower.
I was wrong in my estimation that Russia would take Kharkov by May. The reasons this hasn’t occurred is Russia adjusted to the reality on the ground and is winning the attrition. Russia has a massive opportunity for an offensive. It is coming. Only the Russians know when.
As for negotiation and peace… the United States and the west are polarized against Russia and China. There remains no credible nation, bloc or power to negotiate a peace. So that means there will be war until Russia achieves it stated objectives. I have said before what the off ramp will look like. Ukraine will be lucky to escape partition and annexation by Poland and Russia.
"I have said before what the off ramp will look like. Ukraine will be lucky to escape partition and annexation by Poland and Russia."
Returning to a princedom of Kyiv. Luxembourg on the Dnipro River. A nice little tourist getaway for eastern Europeans. Accessible by rail for those concerned with their carbon footprint. Make the Convention and Visitors Bureau a ministerial level position in the prince's court.
Ukraine will not be partitioned. Putin's goal is all of Ukraine. Given is supposed goals, he can not demilitarize or "denazify" Ukraine without taking it all. Also, His longer term goals lie on the other side of Ukraine and Belarus. Lukashenko has already sold his country to Moscow, and Ukraine is just in the way of the others.
You're being childish and simply parroting what Putin says. It is Putin's war. He started the war, no one else. His public casus belli is nothing but a pack of transparent lies. he has said they are fighting for ancestral lands. he is also positioning himself for conquest of the Baltics, The narrows of the Polish gap of the European Plain and Bessarabian gap.
Your position is not even up to middle school level.
You’re blinded by your own bias. You’re parroting the fool Zeihan by restating his brief he made to the US military. His analysis is so full of holes it wouldn’t hold rice. But you keep believing.
2014 color revolution and NATO encroachment after 91-96 is what started this war. False hope in western brokered Minsk agreements is what started this war. Attacking ethnic Russian civilians in the Donbass as a matter of government policy and purging Russian culture is what started this war. It’s intellectual retarded to simply claim its Putin’s war and his fault. Makes your argument about as interesting as an Andy Warhol painting.
There was no "color war" in 2014, nor was their a color revolution. The color revolution took place in 2004. When Girkin went tot eh Donbas from Crimea, in 2014, he brought a number of Russian troops with him, and imported even more. Recently it has come out there were no separatists, they were all Russian imports. They then brought in the heavy weapons that were used on both sides of the line of contact. Those 14,000 "Russians" that were killed in the Donbas were Ukrainian and they were killed by Russian forces in the Donbas.
Frankly, all you do is spew Putin's idiocy and pretend it is fact. Putin started the war for his own imperial ambitions. His casus belli was nothing but a pack of transparent lies. Putin started the war, and that is the simply the facts of the matter. It matters not how much of Putin's propaganda you spew. None of it changes a thing.
Russia’s goal was not and is not all of Ukraine. They desire a buffer against NATO. They will settle for Odessa, the Dnipro boundary and Kiev. Although Kiev will likely be split as Berlin was. Russia decides.
No, thier objectives are geographically defensible borders. Which means mountains or the ocean. Like in Poland, along with all the Baltics, parts of Hungary…
False. Your position has already been debunked Zeihan and others. You regard such people as "shills" regardless of how well informed they are. They don't spew anything convenient to your narrative, so you don't like them.
Russia is not close to winning. It is not likely they will win either. Putin's primary accomplishment is the wastage of his manpower and other resources.
You're are right. That's why I won't argue with you. You just spew Putin's propaganda, and like so many of your ilk, nothing will change your mind, no matter what facts are placed in front of you. You didn't call a spade a spade, no matter how much you wish it to be.
“Your ilk”. Lol. I don’t carry the water for Russia. But I won’t align with the WEF washing machine known as Ukraine. Ukraine has been used more than a Subic Bay bar girl when the fleet pulled in back in the 70’s. You don’t like the fact that people critically think and won’t tow the “I stand with Ukraine” bullshit.
Thought provoking post. A couple thoughts occur. With the political setup in Russia, it is doubtful they will relent and go home as long as Putin or one of his senior staff (are there any left at this point?) are in charge, so the decision to stop rests with Ukraine. With the long history of strife between them, that’s doubtful. That’s the other thing to keep in mind - we have trouble understanding conflicts that go on for decades, even with our Cold War experience, but for much of the world, this sort of thing stretching on for a generation or two is ops normal. So it’s not really frozen - just moving at a very slow pace. I agree wholeheartedly that Ukraine needs to reform and that reforms should be going on now where they can - and the same goes for Russia. But seriously, with the level of disruption and disorder, how can there not be corruption as people are merely trying to survive?
Russia only ever wanted peace. US/NATO forced this war upon them first via a coup, then by using Minsk Agreements as a means to buy time and then launch a conflict to draw Russia in. This will ONLY settle on Russian terms. Any other such ideas are fantasy or the path to WWIII.
Russia's actions in Moldova during the Soviet breakup and in Georgia in the late oughts should have made it very obvious that this is nonsense.
You confuse post-Soviet Russia with pre-Soviet Russia. Georgia was also a mini version of what occurred in Ukraine. Some reality for you right here. https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxBfGHGJeNzq0kRBMgTTLqQOt4wa35LZbI?si=5o1pwJzGwMYZw05a
And yet...post-Soviet Russia kept its troops in Moldova. Weird. It's almost like there's continuity between Soviet Russia and post-Soviet Russia.
How many places has America intervened in since the breakup of the USSR?
Several. Which does not change the fact that DK's attempts to distinguish between Soviet Russia and post-Soviet Russia fail the smell test.
How many proxy wars has Russia fought via its proxies?
I didn't see any Russians in Iraq looking for nonexistent WMD.
Post WWII the US kept troops in countries all over the world 🌎. Currently has like 18 bases in Germany alone. I’m quite sure Cuba would like Guantanamo back. And no one invited us into Syria.
And in none of those countries did we do what Russia has done in Moldova.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria
You could at least try to make your allegiance less obvious.
My “allegiance” to to ending stupid, expensive, foreign entanglements put together by neoclowns for the benefit of the MICC. What’s yours? https://youtu.be/KP1OAD9jSaI?si=PnrS-TBlbCc7UK-i
It's not allegiance it's stating what the poster sees as facts.
Fanbois are blind to what is and isn't by allegiance.
Moldavia is not the war we are concerned about now that war is settled.
If you think 18 is a lot, you should have been in Germany in the 60s when I was.
Why not? There is some continuity between pre-Soviet and Soviet Russia, why not between Soviet and post-Soviet Russia?
Oh contraire Pierre! There never was a real chance for peace. Russians have been bitching since Nikita gave Ukraine limited autonomy. The mayor of Moscow was agitating on Sevastopol in the mid-90's. Years before Russia's former fraternal Warsaw Pact buddies decided they preferred NATO to the bear hug. (Makes partial mockery of your NATO argument.)
Minsk? Both sides played fast and loose. And you and I know that's a fact. To pretend otherwise is just pure intellectual dishonesty.
The endgame? Yes, it will settle on Russian terms. And it will only make them more arrogant and decide they don't have to live with previous agreements. What country do you think Putin will seize under the declaration of anschluss?
(Lend-Lease to Soviet Russia was a huge mistake.)
Had we not provided the USSR w/Lend-Lease the Allies would have had to face the bulk of the ~2.5 million German soldiers that the USSR killed. w/o Lend-Lease it is likely that the USSR would have reached a peace agreement w/Germany. Many "ifs", to be expected.
If we hadn't provided Lend-Lease they would have starved, had no radio communication to speak off, lost 50% of their explosives and still relied on horse drawn logistics.
They would have engaged in a war of attrition in Soviet territory and never moved into Eastern Europe.
People forget they were Nazi allies for the first 1/3rd of the war.
No one forgets the Nazi Soviet pact. But let us also not forget that England ignored the opportunity to form an alliance with the USSR as late as 1939.
Why would they? Russia had an active espionage establishment in England and was aggressively supporting English Communists. It wasn't exactly unicorns and skittles between the two. And it was well known that Russia was allowing the Illegal Germany army and Luftwaffe to train on Russian territory since the early '20's.
And Ukraine for even longer.
And the US would have been delivered a ballistic present to the Chancellor of the Reich in August 1945, followed by many more.
Only if the US had been drawn in to the European war.
Luckily the Gröfaz took care of that by declaring war. Thank you, Karl Dönitz.
You are correct that Putin did not want peace. His casus belli was nothing but a pack of lies. Given Russia's poor performance, and how much they have wasted in 20 months of war, it is unlikely to settle on Russia's terms, much less anything Putin likes.
Lavrov is now saying they will leave Ukraine of Ukraine abjures any military alliances. If Ukraine keeps the pressure on, that is likely to change as well. Peace will start when the Russians get out of all of Ukraine. Crimea will have to be given up as that is within the internationally recognized boundaries of Ukraine.
Ukraine is drafting women now.
They are running out of men.
EU/US/NATO is growing tired of Zelinsky openly criticizing him for demanding weapons, tanks Air and wants boots on the ground from us.
US and NATO are running out of weapons to give them.
Money the US can print.
I am not on either side, I don't want US troops on the ground there and I want this war to stop.
I don't care what Putin or Zelinsky say and do, it's their war.
So, you want the war to stop, even if that creates conditions that hurt the US?
You don't care that Russia has been bombing Ukrainian cities and raping and murdering civilians, your OK with that?
OK, since you read and post here, how do you feel about the lives of US sailors?
Because if the US withdraws support for Ukraine, that will 100% encourage China to believe we will fold on Taiwan.
It would tell Xi without question that he better strike Taiwan while Biden is in office, since he may just fold there as well.
But for all Biden's faults (and they are legion) he isn't actually in charge, and the NatSec state would probably actually stand for Taiwan, and that would mean a war with China that we are not preparred for.
So, IF people like you, with your failure to read and understand history, insist on letting Russia win (because ANYTHING other than helping Ukraine win = letting Russia win) THEN the 10,000+ American sailors and Marines who will die in the first month of war with China over Taiwan will be on YOUR HEAD.
We live in an interconnected world. Pull your head out of the ground and deal with reality, not your isolationist heat-fantasy.
This who propaganda spin of “if Russia wins than China will invade Taiwan” makes my head spin. Seriously. At the present time we couldn’t win a conventional war against Russia OR China, let alone the both of them in the shotgun marriage WE created. For God’s sake engage your grey matter, man. This is just more propaganda to keep the likes of you all excited.
If we continue to “support” Ukraine the final loss will be far greater than if an agreement is cut now. As to China, if you think they’re just waiting around until we ramp a war on them, you’re sorely mistaken. I expect with the first shots fired upon them, every US base, carrier group, and ship within firing distance will be inundated with hypersonic missiles. Any troop carriers (of our new & improved “woke” military) will rapidly find the bottom of the South China Sea. And if they could land, China has literally millions they could send in waves against any landing parties.
Our problem isn’t Ukraine, or Taiwan, or the fantasy of “Putin reassembling the USSR”... it’s that we’re led by midwits who’ve never been involved in kinetic war, and still believe the US is as mighty as it was in the 80’s & 90’s. Nothing could be further from the truth. China is not Japan, technology has changed, and short of nukes killing us all, an attack on China will destroy our forces in no time.
Did you really write that we couldn't win a conventional war against Russia?
I agree there is room to doubt and debate on China, which is why most of us are here in the first place.
But with almost 2 years of Russia in Ukraine, and all the evidence, you really think we could not defeat them in a straight up conventional fight?
If so, then I cannot debate with you, because you are either blinded by dogma or incapable of seeing basic truth.
Our military has major problems - again, that's why we are here on Sal's substack talking. But there is ZERO rational debate on the current state of Russian conventional forces. They are a joke.
Now, WHERE and WHY would we fight Russia certainly matters.
But it is pretty clear that while China can give us a run for our money, Russian Naval, Air and Ground forces are an order of magnitude less capable than our most optimistic threat assessments over the last decade+
Russian air forces are incapable of executing coordinated air battle in support of the ground combat element.
The Russian Navy is losing the naval battle of the Black Sea to a country without a Navy!
But honestly, your comments show a lack of sophistication and a linguistic bent strongly suggestive you are nothing more than a Chinese or Russian provocateur.
"We" would fire the first shot? That's PRC/CCP propaganda.
Thanks for playing, try again.
Putin propaganda, check.
Russians raping civilians, check.
Ukraine falls Taiwan falls, check.
Russian army is bad, US can defeat them conventionally, check.
Dugin, check.
That's a BINGO!
They have been gather info for medical personnel. Women have already been serving a such, without being drafted.
Whether you like it or not, Putin's war does affect the US strategic position. If Putin prevails in Ukraine, although very unlikely, it would lead to problems in the first tier of NATO countries because Putin's long term goals lie in those states. You are simply being short sighted.
The Budapest Agreement made it our war to some extent.
I don't care one bit about any agreements.
It is an RU/Ukraine problem that could have been solved long ago through negotiations and no outside interference from the US. As long as they keep it in their sphere RU can do as it wishes.
There is no solving the problem. The problem is over one hundred years old. And you know what the problem is? Reread your last sentence. Russia is and always has been the problem.
You seem to have the outlook so many have which blithely ignores one side of a two-sided situation. Of courses it is convenient but it ignores historical fact. Take for instance the US involvement in supporting OUN/neo-nazis in Ukraine since 1945 because they hated Russians...the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This minority now exerts huge influence on everyday life since the US sponsored coup in 2014...they run the Ministry of Education (re-wrote all textbooks to glorify Banderite and Russophobic thought for example. The pivotla moment you ignore is that Franc, Germany , Russia, and Ukrainian President Yushchenko agreed on referendum elections in 90 days. "Fck-the-EU Nuland wouldn't stand for that and pulled the pin on the neo-nazis to release armed gangs to hunt him down...he fled. His "crime"? He realized the EU association trade agreement would bury Ukraine economically...an "incentive" of $3 billion was offered to join EU and turn away from the Customs Union (CIS) which supported Ukraine's economy to the tune of HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of $! Where the hell was Ukraine gonna sell all that heavy machinery rolling out all the non-compatible with NATO engine and armored vehicle components products from Sich Motors (and Kharkov Tank works) , rocket engines, Anatov cargo airplanes, etc (hint: it was Russia who was their major customer). Sure enough, Ukriaine's economy fell apart quickly and began selling their crown jewels to the West for next to nothing...culminating recently in selling its sacred cow... the best agricultural land on the planet. That my wife's family who lived in Donbas was being shelled daily was absent from your awareness. That some 10,ooo Ukrainians were butchered by their own government for speaking Russian goes unmentioned. How can you pretend to know anything about what happened if you ignore these blockbuster events?
Where did these Russian speakers come from? And why would Ukrainians (like the Finns) choose the Nazis over Stalin? Personally? I don't particularly care to see Ukraine or several other countries tainted by Russia in either NATO or the EU. The fact remains Putin started the aggression via another attempt at Russification.
"Where did these Russian speakers come from? "
Their ancestors were probably there before the borders were. Where did the German/French speakers in Alsace-Lorraine come from?
Russification of the area began under Stalin moving more native russians into Ukrainie along with deportating tens of thousands of Ukrainians. Putin restarted Russification of the contested areas by moving more native Russians in.
Like asking where all the spanish speakers in Texas came from. It's a border area, so it's very complicated.
I keep hearing this, and it's the worst sort of BS. "There was a goal in mind for Dugin when he wrote this in 1997: ”As for the former union republics of the USSR situated within Europe, they all, in Dugin's view, (with the exception of Estonia) should be absorbed by Eurasia-Russia. "Belarus," Dugin asserts flatly, "should be seen as a part of Russia" (377). In similar fashion, Moldova is seen as a part of what Dugin calls "the Russian South" (343). On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). "Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions," he warns, "represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics" (348). And he adds that, "[T]he independent existence of Ukraine (especially within its present borders) can make sense only as a 'sanitary cordon'" (379). However, as we have seen, for Dugin all such "sanitary cordons" are inadmissible. Dugin speculates that three extreme western regions of Ukraine--Volynia, Galicia, and TransCarpathia--heavily populated with Uniates and other Catholics, could be permitted to form an independent "Western Ukrainian Federation." But this area must not under any circumstances be permitted to fall under Atlanticist control (382). With the exception of these three western regions, Ukraine, like Belorussia, is seen as an integral part of Eurasia-Russia.” https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics
This is the playbook Putin has been following since 2007. Ukraine is just another brick in the wall. And the ultimate enemy is the US, and Dugin has a prescription for the US as well, which Putin (and others, including China) has followed: “Within the United States itself, there is a need for the Russian special services and their allies "to provoke all forms of instability and separatism within the borders of the United States (it is possible to make use of the political forces of Afro-American racists)" (248). "It is especially important," Dugin adds, "to introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements--extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics" (367)." Ibid.
Given who has been coming over the border, that is a prediction that is likely to come true, even if Blacks are not the largest component.
That is utter nonsense. What really happened in Antalya last year is part of an article at American Spectator. Lavrov offered nothing and was utterly unserious, as Russia has been on Ukraine for a long time.
https://spectator.org/the-cohesion-of-error-russias-rationales-for-war/
NATO had nothing to do with it. What you are spewing is nothing more than Putin's agitprop.
Russia claimed it was 'threatened' by NATO expansion, and so it... withdrew 80% of it's front line troops from its border with NATO?
The only difference between Russia and the USSR is that Russia has less resources and crony capitalism. In all other respects, they are nearly indistinguishable.
Russia has made contradictory claims about NATO for decades.
Russia has never ACTUALLY been afraid of NATO aggression.
Rather, Russia believes it has the right to bully and pressure it's neighbors however it wants, and Russia resents that NATO constrains or limits this.
NATO and the west are not perfect, and the Biden admin is a case-study in Western corruption.
But Russia is orders of magnitude worse on the scale of morality.
Russia is and always will be a threat to Europe.
You can hate Ukraine and Joe Biden all you want, but helping Russia is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
An amazing list of assertions.
"Russia has never ACTUALLY been afraid of NATO aggression."
You might want to talk to Billy Burns. The CIA director guy right now. He was in Moscow in 2008 as the US Ambassador. He might be able to fill you in with some of his impressions about Russian thinking on this subject. Scratch that. He will give you the Standard Ukrainian Neocon Narrative SUNN but at the time he wrote this cable that leaked. I tend to believe 2008 Billy rather than cabinet level Billy.
Burns is an absolute idiot, he was an idiot when he was ambassador to Russia. He is still an idiot today. the fact that Biden picked him should ore than tell you anything you need to know about his past thinking.
He was parroting the Bush/Cheney nonsense that Russia could be a friend, because the idiots at Foggy Bottom are always eager to display their fantasy-land wishcasting based on assuming other countries will think like we do.
When was the last time Foggy Bottom was on the right side of a major diplomatic issue?
Burns was trying to cover for Bush2's stupidity in thinking he could 'see into Vlad's soul' when he looked him in the eyes.
Anyone who has studied Russia for more than 30 seconds and still has their head screwed on straight knows these actions are par for course, Russia will NEVER accept anything less than the ability to terrorize and bully their neighbors.
Guess we will have to disagree. I spent a decent chunk of my life training to fight the Soviet Union. I despise communism and socialism. I speak decent Russian. Much refreshed now that I've been watching youtube Becti a lot since the invasion, er CBO. We needlessly antagonized Russia. A colossal strategic blunder that will go down in the history books as a product of profound hubris and greed. That's the point Billy Burns was making. He talked to their elites, he says at one point that even the opposition to Putin, the western leaning liberals felt the Ukraine was a red line, an existential threat issue. Is Burns an idiot? Probably. Nuland, Blinken and Sullivan certainly are. Maybe Burns might have some useful opinions on this though as far as relaying what Russian Nat Sec circles believed? I think it's likely. I assess Russia's threat of conquering its near Euro neighbors as zero.
Do I want to sing kum ba ya with Vlad? Hardly. But we're on our way to pushing our chips all in for Ukraine. I personally think the more pressing issue is the you know actual real totalitarian communist country with the social credit system and labor camps. The one rapidly expanding their navy while ours is deteriorating before our eyes. Playing ball for Ukraine is not a vital national interest. It shouldn't have been pushed by our Uniparty idiots, but I think the grifting was just too tempting. We are all going to see though probably in the next couple of years. Interesting times and all that.
We probably agree on 90% of worldview here.
My contention is that what Russian elites have told American diplomats has always been what Russian elites wanted us to believe.
I do not accept that we needlessly antagonized Russia, because I do not accept that Russia has some 'right' to dictate the course of events for it's neighbors.
Russia has claimed NATO as a threat since about 30 seconds after the USSR ceased to exist. But there BEHAVIOR has never followed their words.
Because the Russian elites KNOW that NATO could never agree to take offensive aggressive, unprovoked action against Russia. They know how divided we are, they have played us against each other for years.
Look at how much pathetic hand wringing NATO went through just to send Ukraine weapons. "Oh No's, we'll provoke Russia".
Russia's elite, were in fact, convinced NATO leaders would let it happen - that's how much they actually feared us. And truth be told, most NATO leaders WOULD have let it happen if Ukraine had started to fold. It was a near thing.
And again, Russia has stripped it's border with NATO of conventional troops for Ukraine. Those are not the actions of a government or elite that truly fears NATO aggression.
No, Russia is the text-book definition of a Bully-state. They impose their will on their neighbors and the only threat NATO ever presented to Russia was the threat that we might prevent them from imposing their will militarily on their neighbors.
But at the end of the day, Ukraine did not want to be a Russian vasal state.
Have we really fallen so far, that we simply ignore when a tyrant bombs cities and attempts to simply invade and take over a free people, whatever other faults those free people might have?
If that's what it takes to make America great, I want no part of it.
And BTW, I voted Trump twice, and I'll pinch my nose and do it again if he gets the nom, though i really cannot stand the man, because 'Never Trump' is just as stupid.
Hundo! Concur absolutely.
I say it depends on how long the war lasts. But Frozen War is most likely outcome. One could even make a case it's the best outcome for the US. Give the Ukrainians gear as we wear it out so we don't need to dispose of it. Keep Russians obsessed over reclaiming Ukraine, so they don't bother the Eastern Flank of NATO. Keep the Europeans thinking about defending themselves, and we pour money into thinks to keep the Pacific region free.
This is exactly why there will be no “frozen conflict”.
At this point, that is the best outcome the Russians can hope for.
Old truths are often eternal truths: Russia is never as weak or as strong as she appears. We forget these things at our peril.
"..but never discount the Russian ability to bounce back.."
Repeating m'self again, ...truer words have ne'er been spoken!
And never discount the collapse of the West.
I watched this video when it came out over the weekend. Colonel Tölke seems to be preparing the German audience for a Russia that has sufficient munitions for this year and next at the current burn rate. He starts talking logistics at the 22:15 point. Black Sea discussion runs from 11:25 to 18:10 for the occasional navalist here on the Porch. ;<)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oroBvnANPS0
Russia is wildly outstripping their ammo production. That is why Shoigu went to the NorKs seeking ammo. The last time the west saw the NorKs try their hand at shelling a part of the ROK, they launcher over 200 shells, and less than 40 arrives at the island, with less than 40 detonating. The shells were a greater hazard to the NorKs than to the ROK.
Ukraine relies on the United States to pay for its entire civil government. But yep.. Ukraine is winning. We can’t even keep a speaker of the house in office.
Well, maybe if the Republicans didn't pick a lying weasel, he could have stayed longer.
They are, but making artillery rounds is not high tech, it's over a hundred year-old technology.. So they can solve this problem and are working on it. This takes time due to the scale required and the lead times, but simple large-scale production of forged steel is something that plays to Russian strengths.
How many million rounds will the EU deliver to Ukraine this year? What is their current production rate?
Yeah, it's low tech, so why are the NorKs shipping shells with no explosive filler? Historically the NorKs have been mediocre producers.
Saw a video 2 days ago of Russian artillerymen complaining that their new 152mm shells from NK arrives without any explosive filler. The were hollow metal shells. he pulled the fuze and the fuze header, and filmed the interior. Clean as the day it left the lathe in the factory.
RUS buying NK munitions = bad/desperate. US giving UKR munitions IRN purchased from NK = good/compassionate. Professional diplomat mentality.
https://news.usni.org/2023/10/04/u-s-send-1m-rounds-of-seized-iranian-ammo-seized-to-ukraine
Putin ordered an invasion for his neocolonial empire. It was a fight a lot of people, including me, thought he would win quickly. Putin is the aggressor and Ukraine the defender. Your analogies are simply silly.
Empire? We have over 750 bases around the US. How many does Russia have?
You obviously have no idea what an empire is.
The Norns of history never sleep. This year marks the 250th anniversary of the Polish Diet agreeing to partitioning by the great powers. They would cede lands to Russia in the east that are today within Belarus. While they surely did not know it at the time, in a mere 20 years they would be ceding an even larger portion to Russia in the east and Prussia in the west. This greater bite would lead to the uprising by Major General Tadeusz Kościuszko, who would ultimately lose at the Battle of Maciejowice and Poland would cease to exist.
I wonder if the Germans think this war might be an opportunity for them to regain Prussia and Silesia. at the expense of Poland. Could you imgaine a secret pact between Russia and Germany?
Can you imagine how the German Army, with a grand total of 20,000 artillery rounds, will do in a war with Poland?
Americans focus on what victory looks like. It would be prudent - prior to entering or supporting a conflict - to identify what defeat looks like too. What ranges of defeat are acceptable in the Ukraine fracas not only to Ukraine but to the UK - to Canada - to the US - to Israel - to all the co-belligerents? The Ukraine is not the only country that will be impacted by the scope of their defeat. On a simplistic note, what chance is there of the funds expended by the West to be repaid? How will the marketing of Western arms need to change based on their performance in the conflict? Russia has continued to sell diesel fuel, uranium for reactors and natural gas to the EU throughout the conflict, despite sanctions. How would this and other trade be impacted by different takes on a Ukrainian defeat.
FYI, the name of the country in question is "Ukraine" not "The Ukraine".
"The Ukraine" is a pro-Russian talking point that seeped into western usage through our idiot media suggesting it is just an 'area' or 'territory', like 'the Sahara' or 'the Midwest'.
Ukraine, The Ukraine, soon to be Country 404.
No, "The Ukraine" has been a standard expression for at least 50 years that I can (sort of) remember. As has a standard dislike of all things Russian.
yeah, 50 years, as in, under Soviet and current Russian propaganda.
Lenin and Stalin both attempted to cull the population of Ukraine of those who were independent and free thinkers, those who resisted Soviet domination.
Stalin killed more than 6 million of them with the Holodomor, the manufactured famine that the liberal socialist sympathizers at the NY Times tried so hard to cover-up at the time.
Since it's independence in 1991, Ukraine has made clear that the name of the nation is "Ukraine".
Most of those who use the term 'the Ukraine' do not do it out of a desire to spite Ukraine, they simply do not stop to think about the connotation.
But make no mistake, Russia wants you to think of it that way, because it supports their imperialistic design on the entire former Soviet empire.
and we dislike Russian things because of Russian behavior. Actions have consequences. Their leaders have been murderous thugs for a century and a half, with few exceptions.
Comparing our mistakes and errors to their deliberate and wanton barbaric slaughter is the highest form of self-deluding moral equivalency.
Russia and China represent a world based on "Might makes right" and pure "end justifies the means"
If you want to live in that world, by all means, have at it, but it is the antithesis of what the USA has always stood for, even if at many times, we did it imperfectly.
You cannot be an American patriot, who believes in and celebrates the Constitution and the Declaration, and support brutal thugs like Russia and China.
We can have reasoned debate over how and of to support countries like Ukraine and Israel.
We cannot have reasoned debate over the merits of supporting or aligning with Russia or China. That is evil, and that will not stand.
"Lenin and Stalin both attempted to cull the population of Ukraine of those who were independent and free thinkers, those who resisted Soviet domination."
Good grief. You do realize they did the same for the entire Soviet Union, right? And wherever else they could.
"Their leaders have been murderous thugs for a century and a half, with few exceptions."
A lot longer than a century and a half.
"You cannot be an American patriot, who believes in and celebrates the Constitution and the Declaration, and support brutal thugs like Russia and China."
1)Show me where I have "supported" either Russia or China
2) You do not have the qualifications to judge my patriotism or lack thereof.
1) it was a definitive statement, not an accusation, as in, you are free to chose if it applies to you or not. I did not state that YOU support Russia or China.
2) it is my opinion. By definition. This is a comments section. Anything posted is opinion. My opinion is that anyone supporting China or Russia has long lost anything remotely resembling a cognitive connection to principled Constitutional conservatism.
3) If you do not know the history of Russia well enough to know that what happened in Ukraine was special, and considerably worse than what happened in the rest of the USSR, then you need to read a little more - what happened in Ukraine during the Holodomor was notable because in a country marked by repression, murder and purges, it stood out, and alone. Between 6 and 9 million dead in 3 years due to a famine that was not a natural occurrence, but the deliberate results of Soviet food policies designed to produce the very famine it did.
Winter is coming.
The invasion of Ukraine slows down, the weather mandates a "frozen" situation, embers banked. Meanwhile, WAR (a spirit all its own) moves on to warmer climes; as the extremely, extremely, EXTREMELY more impactful, awful, volatile; and inevitable conflagration sparked by Iran vs Israel heats up, and draws in, in order......Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Turkey,.....and yep, Russia/China, et. al.
The Ukrainians have said they will keep fighting. The rasputitsa will slow things down, but not stop them. Winter is not the ally of Russia pro-Putinists thought it would be. While it is unlikely that Russia will reach their victory conditions, any General staff worth its salt will have given thought to that outcome.
Both sides think time is on their side. I suspect they are both wrong, but we'll see.
I think the Ukrainians realize time is not on their side. At present, it is probable that Putin is beginning to realize it.
Not complicated at all from my perspective. Pull the plug on Zelensky and his fellow grifters. What happens in or to Ukraine is none of our concern no more than our own Civil War was the concern of England and France who had the good sense not to get involved. The money we sent to Ukraine would have been better spent in East Palestine and Maui.
I agree. And/but you discount the purpose of the US. The purpose of the US is war. Varied, endless, and costly.
And very profitable to the select few.
CSS Alabama ring a bell?
Zelensky is not a grifter. That is simply propaganda.
Lol. Your bias has bias. Keep getting your news from ABC.
Coming from a man sold out to the propaganda of Putin, that is just funny. You used to seem like a sensible man. You've changed that perception.
You want a flame war and to denigrate anyone that listens to the facts about the war. This is the end. I will not pay attention to any more of your childish nonsense. Have a ball on your own time. I won't give you credit for anything approaching good sense anymore.
Well… bye….
I have used critical thinking to realize that the Ukrainians have lost their army, have no industrial capacity, rely on corrupt and bankrupt EU for military equipment and armaments, are fighting an army that enjoys close lines of communication ( and a popular war in their own nation) and cannot continue. You’re the one that believes what he sees on TV, believes what Zeihan asserts to his Nostradamus like cult following. You attack any opinion other than “I stand with Ukraine”. Funny. I bet you’re not only vaccinated… likely 3 times boosted.
Yo dawg, we heard you like bias, so we put some bias in your bias so you can bias when newsing your bias,
Good description of you.
Thinking like that caused WWII when your fellow short-sided isolationist peaceniks thought Hitler would stop with the Sudetenland.
When will you realize that people like Putin will lie and say whatever they have to in order to drive a wedge between western countries to get what they want.
If you think that won't affect you, you are, with respect, far too intellectually challenged to be reading and posting on this forum.
Russia in position to threaten Eastern Europe will always cost us money.
If the west suddenly withdrew support from Ukraine like you claim you want, it would be short and certain road to war with China, because it would tell Xi we have no spine, and we will fold, and he would in turn finally start that war over Taiwan.
So sure, bail on Ukraine, and get 10,000 American sailors and Marines killed in the pacific in return.
We are defeating Russia without ANY US lives spent, and using weapons that were DESIGNED AND PURCHASED for the purpose of FIGHTING RUSSIA.
When ever someone starts insulting those who disagree with him then I realize he has nothing of value to say and any further discussion is a waste of time.
If the Chamberlain mask fits...
Not everything ties back to Hitler. You may want to broaden your historical perspective.
Which Ukraine are we talking about? The one that elected Yanukovych? The one that elected that guy who played the piano with his John Hancock on a soft line approach, dare I say a peace platform with Russia? The one that shelled their "supposedly" own citizens in the Donbas for 8 years? Or maybe the run by Vicky?
This is pretty simple "real politics" at this point. If I was Putin, I wouldn't trust NATO. I would grab Odesssa, Kharkhov and a bunch of other oblasts all the way up to Kiev. I'd make sure whatever NATO wants to admit is a rump disaster. The Poles will be thrilled with the grain trade from whatever is left. I'd then sit back and laugh as I slowly built alternatives to the GX trade blocks. Someday I'd dethrone the dollar with my BRICS friends and the southern hemisphere that look North and see a drunken sailor with 60 trillion in inflated away Tbills on the balance sheet.
The neocons (I shudder at using the word, but I have to admit at this point it's true and I would have been described as one myself back in 2003) have played the worst game of poker possible leading up to this. Putin is not the Fuhrer. Russia did not have to be turned into this farcical big bad wolf. Poland and the Fulda Gap are not next on the Kremlin band's world tour. Our nat sec elite did this to us and we are going to be scratching our heads wondering how this all went to shit. Horrendous casualties, a hundred or two hundred billion burned, Russia and China stronger, US weaker. But we had to protect Democracy. FFS. Just the newspeak they throw around should give you a clue.
Putin may conclude that an independent Ukraine in any form is a threat and may swallow it up completely. The neocons may have created a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They say he doesn't want to "swallow a porcupine" and deal with the certain insurgency and ethnic issues. Control policing would be bloody. That's the reasoning behind leaving just a rump basket case that the EU can deal with. But I agree with you about the iron clad law of unintended consequences.
Putin may take Ukraine, but he will not hold it. It took Stalin to the mid 50s to completely put down the Bandera faction in Ukraine. Putin does not have the ability to fight such a battle. Putin does not have the ability to fight the Ukraine war much longer. he has wasted far too much manpower and other resources to keep going.
Yeah, he like ran out of missiles last year or something...
I've never claimed that.
You're too dense to ridicule.
You're hilarious. You have no ammo.
Exactly. The neoclowns get us into these conflicts, ramp up the media propaganda circus, tell us it’s all for “democracy” (which in Ukraine does not exist), we spend gov’s of money, the MICC gets richer, the people poorer, and we eventually leave yet another mess behind.
We need a better class of elite.
Everyone uses the term neocon, but for me the biggest stumbling block in U.S. foreign policy are the so-called “best and brightest” working for SecState.
It's been that way for a long time.
No idea why that double posted.
When I worked in the DC area, on days where (nearly any amount of ) snow was predicted, and all government “non-essential personnel” were encouraged to stay home, I thought of them.
Baltic States, part of Romanian territory, then Poland would be the probable order if Russia can take Ukraine.
It is far more than that. Peter Zeihan went into the long term goals of Putin in a presentation to a group of Officers at Fort Benning February of last year. He also goes into far more of what the US will face directly. he did not deal with what is coming across the border and what the possible results of that will be.
Changing Character of War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0CQsifJrMc
Peter Zeihan is an idiot. The only reason to listen to him to be warned of what fools are up to.
And you base this "judgment" on what exactly? You're entitled to an opinion, no matter how uninformed it is, informed people will not accept such stupidity as your "judgment" on the man.
See I would have said Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, then maybe Pakistan and the Baja Peninsula because the fishing is great there and I have had my eye on a beach house. But a lack of ethnic?/cultural? Americans really put the kibosh on the that imperial irredentist master plans despite all the foolish "nation building." Guess we are still trying to build an Assadless nation in Syria.
Russia is not the Soviet Union. It's not N@zi Germany. It's a nation state with a lot of history and vital national interests. They explicitly kept trying to tell everybody what those EXISTENTIAL non-negotiable interests were. This is from Billy Burns (CIA Director with a cabinet seat) cable when he was the ambassador to Russia in 2008.
“Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia's influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.”
"But we had to protect Democracy"
Well at least make it easier for the alphabet people degenerates.
CDR, seems like you are going bi-polar on us. Yesterday, you were berating the DOD and political leaders for the misjudgment that we were a "continental land power" and ignoring our Mahanist roots. As one of those guys who drew my Sabre and was a steely-eyed tanky guy staring down the Russian hordes and my doom, I've got more land power creds than sea power, though I sit 100 feet from the mighty Pacific right now. Let me postulate a few things that we should and should not try:
1. nation building, aka playing Elliott Ness trying to clean up Chi-town. Let the EU take the lead on most of this. They've got skin in the game, are more experienced in the region, and it keeps their interest up in NATO.
2. Don't do what Biden and the idiots he has at State and Defense, talk stupid $hit about regime change, war criminals, and total victory. Don't we have enough lessons from history about how that hardens enemy hearts and convinces them to fight on. Thinking the Nazis, Japanese, Norks, and a dozen others here. Less Cato ("Carthago delenda est") and more Scipio after Zama is needed. Don't talk of war criminals until you stand on the rubble of the enemy's Capital staring at the big pile of their swords.
3. Whatever we decide, avoid burning huge piles of dollas we don't have in the near term. The Taiwan thing is going to resolve itself in under 5 years. China is imploding demographically and economically in under 10. Even buying ships is a gamble on our part unless we have extra Burke capacity. Spend our Biden bucks on smart munitions, missiles and mines
The "end game" for the present conflict will only be the starting point for the next conflict over Ukraine. We foolishly tend to think that lines drawn on a map yesterday, today or tomorrow will be there forever. In reality, national borders tend to ebb and flow, especially on the continent of Europe.
Strong men (or occasional women) will rise to power, and by leadership or brutal repression they will extend their domination over neighbors. Religious, ethnic or cultural affinities will unite to divide regions into new alignments for or against other regions.
Covetous neighbors seek geographic advantages of ports or rivers; natural defensive borders; agrarian lands to feed their masses or export for profit; industrial infrastructure; populations to enslave; or treasure to plunder.
None of this started two years ago with Putin's "Special Military Operation", or the seizure of Crimea in 2014, or with Ukraine's independence in 1991, or with Russian domination after WW2, or German occupation during that war. Remember that British and French armies and treasure were wasted in Crimea in the 1850s, trying to stop Russian domination of the region. "Onward, into the valley of death" was a futile tactic then, and is still such.
Domination of Ukraine has constantly shifted for nearly a millennia (or several hundred WW2s, if you like that unit of time.) Past masters have included variously Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Mongols, Slavs, Poland, Lithuania, Cossacks, Russia and Germany. Intermittent periods of local Ukranian control also occurred, until they were crushed.
It is a very bloody region, with Russian-like levels of death- about 6 million Ukraines died in WW2, including the murder of 1.5 million Jews. Life is cheap in that neighborhood.
There will be no "end game in Ukraine" only a temporary period of low level hostility until one group or another rises up again. And, again.
This is a matter of vital national interest to Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, Romanians and some others in the region. It is NOT A VITAL U.S. NATIONAL INTEREST if corrupt and brutal thugs looting the Ukraine speak Russian or some other language.
Yes, Russia will still lust after warm water ports, breadbaskets, and energy sources beyond their present borders or spheres of influence.
Until we secure our own borders against millions of invaders illegally entering our bankrupt country we cannot be distracted by wavering lines on maps of Ukraine.
Provide aid in the form of hardware or ammo, if we like, accepting that much of it will be stolen or wasted, but do not send "advisors" or "accountants" or "peace keepers" there.
Thinking we can prevent changes in European borders, especially in Ukraine, is as arrogant and ignorant as King Canute thinking his royal decree would prevent the rising of the tide.
"Frozen war" appears to be the Biden Administration objective, giving Ukraine just enough to hold the Russians off but not enough to push the Russians out.
Of the three possibilities, Russia wins, Frozen war, Ukraine wins, "Frozen war" appears to me to be the ultimate amoral ending, but that describes Biden's party to a "T", doesn't it?
Time to rebump this must read...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XC9WFZD/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin
The fires now are reflash of this conflagration...
This war will end on Russian terms. Ukraine has already lost. The numbers of Ukrainian causalities, that even our conservative best estimates place at over 450,000 - 500,000 including up to 80,000 KIA, is reminiscent of the manpower gaps from the Napoleonic wars. Ukraine women and orphans won’t be able to rebuild their nation. Western European countries are bankrupt and dealing with de-industrialization, massive immigration invasions and recessions building on suicidal economic and climate policies. To think of a Ukrainian victory is disingenuous when faced with actual math. Russia is thriving and wishcasting for Putin to be overthrown and that somehow that will change the game is akin to placing all the chips left on the table to a couple of dozen F16’s donated by Dutch and Danish with the explicit expectation that they will receive the F35 in lieu of….
Seems like everyone is eating from the Ukrainian trough.
Russia will be Russia. And it’s inhumane for the United States to continue to insist on Ukraine success on the battlefield when they are demonstrating they are incapable of victory. You simply cannot win a war without industrial capacity and manpower.
I was wrong in my estimation that Russia would take Kharkov by May. The reasons this hasn’t occurred is Russia adjusted to the reality on the ground and is winning the attrition. Russia has a massive opportunity for an offensive. It is coming. Only the Russians know when.
As for negotiation and peace… the United States and the west are polarized against Russia and China. There remains no credible nation, bloc or power to negotiate a peace. So that means there will be war until Russia achieves it stated objectives. I have said before what the off ramp will look like. Ukraine will be lucky to escape partition and annexation by Poland and Russia.
"I have said before what the off ramp will look like. Ukraine will be lucky to escape partition and annexation by Poland and Russia."
Returning to a princedom of Kyiv. Luxembourg on the Dnipro River. A nice little tourist getaway for eastern Europeans. Accessible by rail for those concerned with their carbon footprint. Make the Convention and Visitors Bureau a ministerial level position in the prince's court.
Ukraine will not be partitioned. Putin's goal is all of Ukraine. Given is supposed goals, he can not demilitarize or "denazify" Ukraine without taking it all. Also, His longer term goals lie on the other side of Ukraine and Belarus. Lukashenko has already sold his country to Moscow, and Ukraine is just in the way of the others.
"Difficult to see. Always in motion the future is."
Your Russophobia is on display. This is bigger than Putin. Ascribing it “Putin’s” war is middle school think.
You're being childish and simply parroting what Putin says. It is Putin's war. He started the war, no one else. His public casus belli is nothing but a pack of transparent lies. he has said they are fighting for ancestral lands. he is also positioning himself for conquest of the Baltics, The narrows of the Polish gap of the European Plain and Bessarabian gap.
Your position is not even up to middle school level.
You’re blinded by your own bias. You’re parroting the fool Zeihan by restating his brief he made to the US military. His analysis is so full of holes it wouldn’t hold rice. But you keep believing.
Wrong. If I am "blinded" by anything it is the facts. You keep believing Putin's propaganda.
I did not say that I agree with everything that Zeihan says, but one this is more than clear, he is far better informed than you could hope to be.
2014 color revolution and NATO encroachment after 91-96 is what started this war. False hope in western brokered Minsk agreements is what started this war. Attacking ethnic Russian civilians in the Donbass as a matter of government policy and purging Russian culture is what started this war. It’s intellectual retarded to simply claim its Putin’s war and his fault. Makes your argument about as interesting as an Andy Warhol painting.
There was no "color war" in 2014, nor was their a color revolution. The color revolution took place in 2004. When Girkin went tot eh Donbas from Crimea, in 2014, he brought a number of Russian troops with him, and imported even more. Recently it has come out there were no separatists, they were all Russian imports. They then brought in the heavy weapons that were used on both sides of the line of contact. Those 14,000 "Russians" that were killed in the Donbas were Ukrainian and they were killed by Russian forces in the Donbas.
Frankly, all you do is spew Putin's idiocy and pretend it is fact. Putin started the war for his own imperial ambitions. His casus belli was nothing but a pack of transparent lies. Putin started the war, and that is the simply the facts of the matter. It matters not how much of Putin's propaganda you spew. None of it changes a thing.
Russia’s goal was not and is not all of Ukraine. They desire a buffer against NATO. They will settle for Odessa, the Dnipro boundary and Kiev. Although Kiev will likely be split as Berlin was. Russia decides.
No, thier objectives are geographically defensible borders. Which means mountains or the ocean. Like in Poland, along with all the Baltics, parts of Hungary…
Flat prairie and rivers are defensible boundaries.
Tank country wide enough to support a multi-corps assault is not the ideal terrain to fight an enemy who will likely also have air superiority.
(Laughs in Mongolian)
False. Your position has already been debunked Zeihan and others. You regard such people as "shills" regardless of how well informed they are. They don't spew anything convenient to your narrative, so you don't like them.
Pot your black. Go carry Zeihan’s water somewhere else. He’s an CIA asset.
You can wish that as much as you like. That's Putin's nonsense as well.
Russia is not close to winning. It is not likely they will win either. Putin's primary accomplishment is the wastage of his manpower and other resources.
Can’t. Even.
So what? All that matters to you is your hero's narrative. so yeah, you can't even. No surprise.
No the “can’t even is” I cannot argue with a 2 year old. Like your commentary. Anyone calling a spade a spade is a Russian shill. Lol.
You're are right. That's why I won't argue with you. You just spew Putin's propaganda, and like so many of your ilk, nothing will change your mind, no matter what facts are placed in front of you. You didn't call a spade a spade, no matter how much you wish it to be.
“Your ilk”. Lol. I don’t carry the water for Russia. But I won’t align with the WEF washing machine known as Ukraine. Ukraine has been used more than a Subic Bay bar girl when the fleet pulled in back in the 70’s. You don’t like the fact that people critically think and won’t tow the “I stand with Ukraine” bullshit.
Dear CDR Salamander, have you ever been in Eastern Europe?
Yes he has.
Thought provoking post. A couple thoughts occur. With the political setup in Russia, it is doubtful they will relent and go home as long as Putin or one of his senior staff (are there any left at this point?) are in charge, so the decision to stop rests with Ukraine. With the long history of strife between them, that’s doubtful. That’s the other thing to keep in mind - we have trouble understanding conflicts that go on for decades, even with our Cold War experience, but for much of the world, this sort of thing stretching on for a generation or two is ops normal. So it’s not really frozen - just moving at a very slow pace. I agree wholeheartedly that Ukraine needs to reform and that reforms should be going on now where they can - and the same goes for Russia. But seriously, with the level of disruption and disorder, how can there not be corruption as people are merely trying to survive?