Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If Russia, Ukraine and the US could accept a peace deal where all parties cede something, this situation would end.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

Whiterock was careful to distinguish between pro-Western Ukraine and NATO-member Ukraine. Russia probably would have accepted the former, even though it was somewhat of a threat, if it had been in the natural course of things. US interference greatly complicated the issue, especially with regard to Crimea.

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. %A0Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. %A0Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. %A0 France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined%85 $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq%85we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right? %A0

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. %A0 The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** %A0 People make money on wars. %A0That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. %A0 Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. %A0 Neither do they have air superiority. %A0There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. %A0 Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. %A0 Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. %A0Quite the opposite. %A0 Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. %A0Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. %A0 Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. %A0It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. %A0That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. %A0 %A0Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. %A0 %A0That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. %A0I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. %A0 And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. %A0 %A0If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. %A0 %A0But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. %A0 Done. %A0 They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. %A0 %A0 All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. %A0Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. %A0War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! %A0And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. %A0Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is %A0garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." %A0Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. %A0USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. %A0 etc.... %A0

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. %A0It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions. %A0

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If the US could accept a peace deal where all parties cede something, this situation would end.

---

FIFY

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

Then why was virtually everyone surprised Russia invaded? You're justifying after the fact. Russia invaded its neighbor for no good reason. Putin wants to reconstitute as best he can the Soviet Empire, and he thought Ukraine would be a 2-day job. He and his regime are pure evil.

---

Who was surprised?

Pics or it didn't happen.

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If Russia, Ukraine and the US could accept a peace deal where all parties cede something, this situation would end.

---

I'm not averse to that at all.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

Well said …..and correct on all counts .

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

Whiterock was careful to distinguish between pro-Western Ukraine and NATO-member Ukraine. Russia probably would have accepted the former, even though it was somewhat of a threat, if it had been in the natural course of things. US interference complicated greatly complicated the issue, especially with regard to Crimea.

---

Euromaiden was about EU membership, not NATO membership. That seems to be forgotten in all of this. The Russians scuttled a nice trade deal for Ukraine with an EU upside through their puppet Yanukovych.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

So are you justifying or condemning the US? Or is the US only a bad actor and Russia and China are justified? Strange. And that's not getting into the apple vs orange of some of your examples above.

---

I'm simply pointing out that every country has vital interests and spheres of influence.

Great powers especially.

America felt it had vital interests in Afghanistan and Iraq and was willing to go to war over them. Even though they were on the other side of the planet.

If that is the case for the USA…How much more is Russia going to be willing to fight for countries on is very door step?

China of course is the same.

Doc Holliday said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If Russia, Ukraine and the US could accept a peace deal where all parties cede something, this situation would end.

---

Amen

Unfortunately it won't happen but Russia should agree and accept that Ukraine is going to join the EU and eventually NATO.

Ukraine and the USA should understand and accept that Russia is going to keep Crimea and Donbas.

Simple on paper…impossible in reality.

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

Then why was virtually everyone surprised Russia invaded? You're justifying after the fact. Russia invaded its neighbor for no good reason. Putin wants to reconstitute as best he can the Soviet Empire, and he thought Ukraine would be a 2-day job. He and his regime are pure evil.

---

Who was surprised?

Pics or it didn't happen.

---

Just google every publication for the years leading up to the invasion. They don't agree on much, except Russia will not actually invade and try to take over Ukraine.

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

---

What it means is war decision making is directed by profit motive first before anything else.

---

Demonstrable nonsense that presumes there is no such thing as national interest.

National interest drives war making decisions. Yes, profits are made on military policy during and between wars. But that is a necessity, is it not? How can we build, maintain, and use armies & navies if no one makes a profit? Disarm and sing cumbaya to keep the invaders away? Who has ever built a successful model of social contract on that?

Profits are made building federal highways.
Profits are made selling uniforms to park rangers.
Profits are made selling text books to schools.
Profits are made selling homes to government employees.
etc.......

Government spending is about a quarter of GDP. Do profits made on transactions with government mean that all of government is driven solely by profit motive rather than the needs of basic social contract like fire, police, water systems, judiciaries, etc.....?

Massive cause-effect problem with such reasoning.

---

1. National interest most certainly does NOT ALWAYS drive war making decisions.

Indeed we can point to many instances throughout history when the decision to make war was done by small cliques in power, foolish Kings, tyrannical dictators, and directly opposed to the interests of the nation and the people at large.

2. And if all government spending drives positive economic growth...then why not just have the Federal government spend us into a utopia of growth and endless prosperity?

Milton Friedman would tell you why this does not work.

3. [FRIEDMAN: Well, carry that logic on and you're saying that having the government take over the whole economy would be a good way of increasing productivity. That's an argument for socialism. We have quasi-socialism now, where the economy is 50 percent socialist. If you take
ROBINSON: Fifty percent socialist? You don't mean the government already owns the means of production?
FRIEDMAN: Yes, of course I do. What does ownership of the means of production mean? It means you're entitled to the proceeds of the income that they generate.
Take a look at federal, state, and local spending. It amounts to 40 percent of the national income. Then add in all the mandates that government imposes on private spending for instance, when the government insists that you have anti-pollution devices on your car that might as well be on the budget. If you add those costs, plus all the regulations and restrictions on enterprises, that accounts for about another 10 percent. So about 50 percent of the output of the country is controlled by the government, which is equivalent to saying that the government owns 50 percent of the means of production.
FRIEDMAN: There's no doubt that the Pentagon funding has led to research, but you don't know what would have been done with that money if the government hadn't been spending it.
To judge the efficacy of government spending, we have to look at a much broader range. How is it that a place like Hong Kong can have nearly the same average income per person as the United States? Surely it's not because of Hong Kong's plethora of resources? No, it's because government spending in Hong Kong has been about 10 or 15 percent of the national income.
ROBINSON: What is it that is less productive about government spending? When money is spent through the political mechanism, why is that inherently inferior?
FRIEDMAN: Because nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his own. That's a fundamental principle. All government spending is spending somebody else's money. It's Ms. A taking money from Mr. B to give to Mr. C.]

---

again, logical fallacy error.

National interest always drives war decisions. That does not mean leaders always correctly understand national interest, that they properly prioritize what is actually MOST important. Romance often causes these kinds of errors. In this case, Putin's deep-seated feelings about Ukrainian nationality being a contrivance that would crumble at the sight of the first Russian tank was a spectacular miscalculation. As is your continued cause-effect error about the cause of the war. WE did not cause the war. Ukraine did not cause the war. Ukraine was an independent, non-aligned Eurasian nation which posed no threat to Russia. But Putin was tired of fooling with what he deemed an artificial country whose people actually wanted to belong to Russia. So he invaded on what he though would be a pushover operation. Yes, a hostile or Nato-allied Ukraine is an alarming national security situation to Russia, but it circumstances were nowhere near that state, nor were they foreordained to reach that state. Actually, it was highly unlikely that Ukraine would ever get the votes to join Nato. Russia had decades to continue working the problem as they had done the previous two decades. But Putin made an enormously bad strategic calculation and it will cost Russia possibly two centuries of geo-political gains.

If he survives the war, Putin will end it in a worse position than he started. The only question is how bad.

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

So are you justifying or condemning the US? Or is the US only a bad actor and Russia and China are justified? Strange. And that's not getting into the apple vs orange of some of your examples above.

---

I'm simply pointing out that every country has vital interests and spheres of influence.

Great powers especially.

America felt it had vital interests in Afghanistan and Iraq and was willing to go to war over them. Even though they were on the other side of the planet.

If that is the case for the USA…How much more is Russia going to be willing to fight for countries on is very door step?

China of course is the same.

---

Given the number of NATO countries already on Russia's doorstep, do you really think this is all about NATO? Putin and the oligarchs have enormous financial incentives to keep Ukraine away from the West, and have been doing so for decades now through subversion and invasion. Eastern Ukraine isn't about ethnicity, or ties to Mother Russia. It's just cover to keep the energy and economic related assets and access under their control.

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

---

What it means is war decision making is directed by profit motive first before anything else.

---

Demonstrable nonsense that presumes there is no such thing as national interest.

National interest drives war making decisions. Yes, profits are made on military policy during and between wars. But that is a necessity, is it not? How can we build, maintain, and use armies & navies if no one makes a profit? Disarm and sing cumbaya to keep the invaders away? Who has ever built a successful model of social contract on that?

Profits are made building federal highways.
Profits are made selling uniforms to park rangers.
Profits are made selling text books to schools.
Profits are made selling homes to government employees.
etc.......

Government spending is about a quarter of GDP. Do profits made on transactions with government mean that all of government is driven solely by profit motive rather than the needs of basic social contract like fire, police, water systems, judiciaries, etc.....?

Massive cause-effect problem with such reasoning.

---

I don't think you're getting what I'm saying.

The concept is taxes are being spent on services provided by contractors. Those contractors then kickback the money. Giant military industrial megacorps are collectively acquiring billions upon billions in of taxpayer dollars and kicking back money for electoral/political support. This means elected officials are more likely to make UNWARRANTED war decisions for their own person gain.

This happens in ALL government spending. Especially services. You can bet your ass that your local city is hiring contractors that return the favor. They're adding in unnecessary regulations that increase the capital going to contractors.

It's fu cking over taxpayers.

---

Every time I hear a lefty start down the "systemic oppression" narrative, I state "the most oppressed class of peoples in America are taxpayers. They pay enormous sums for largely dysfuntional social contract. If they complain about it, they get denounced as some kind of deplorable."

That does not mean no one ever acts on national interest. Profit motive did not cause us to declare war on Japan. Profit motive did not send us into Afghanistan on a wildly popular (and necessary) operation to root out bin Ladin an dthe Taliban. Profit motive did not cause the Frankfurt School to work Critical Theory, or CTs adherents to make the long march thru institutions. Profit motive did not motivate Marx. Profit motive did not motivate Churchill to will his nation to victory. Etc...... There is a checks & balances effect in such tings. Popular opinion tugs hard on profit motives. So does the analysis and advice of the clerisy, who live & die on the hills of wonkishness. Yes, the donors get cell phone numbers ordinary people don't have. But donor are part of the process. They created a lot of wealth. They know the effects of things. It's a good thing their voices are heard. Profits DO matter. A lot. Just ask the Soviets.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

No law of nature says that such is the natural order which must be obeyed. We have just as much right to want a pro-EU government in Kyiv as Russia does to want a pro-Russian govt in Kyiv. In fact, the penduluum did swing in Kyiv for a number of years. And it was Russian meddling that caused the Maidan Revolution to ensure the will of the Ukrainian people to join EU was honored. And then Russia invaded.

Russia is the aggressor at every step of this process. And not one thing Ukraine did up to that point justified an invasion.

Russia is not entitled to own another sovereign nation. If it tries to do so, it can expect serious repercussions, which it is receiving just now.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

So are you justifying or condemning the US? Or is the US only a bad actor and Russia and China are justified? Strange. And that's not getting into the apple vs orange of some of your examples above.

---

I'm simply pointing out that every country has vital interests and spheres of influence.

Great powers especially.

America felt it had vital interests in Afghanistan and Iraq and was willing to go to war over them. Even though they were on the other side of the planet.

If that is the case for the USA…How much more is Russia going to be willing to fight for countries on is very door step?

China of course is the same.

---

Given the number of NATO countries already on Russia's doorstep, do you really think this is all about NATO? Putin and the oligarchs have enormous financial incentives to keep Ukraine away from the West, and have been doing so for decades now through subversion and invasion. Eastern Ukraine isn't about ethnicity, or ties to Mother Russia. It's just cover to keep the energy and economic related assets and access under their control.

---

Well certainly you will get no argument from me on that.

And America & the Western bloc also have some financial, political, and military incentives to keep Ukraine away from the orbit of Moscow.

My point continues to be ...do you want to fight a 3rd great European war over Ukraine?

Whoever rules in Moscow has a near existential interest in keeping Ukraine in their orbit. This was true of the Czars, it was true of the Bolsheviks-Communists, its true Putin and his regime, and it will be true for whoever comes after Putin.

Does America have anything like that kind of incredible national interest in Ukraine?

Russia has had some interests in Cuba since the communist-socialist revolution there....but nothing like the interest the USA has....nor can Russia ever care as much about Cuba as we do....because Cuba is right on our doorstep.

Russia will always care more about Ukraine than we can or will.

Nothing less than taking out the United States of America is going to prevent us from messing around with Cuba. And nothing short of the abolishment of the Russia state is going to stop them from messing around with Ukraine.

"I'm simply pointing out that every country has vital interests and spheres of influence.


Great powers especially."

You do realize that is the now-infamous Lebensraum argument, right?

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

Ukraine is in a war for survival because its reasonable national aspirations are in conflict with the reasonable national aspirations of a much larger neighbor. A pliable Ukraine affords Russia over 1000 miles of strategic depth, which historically has been what saves Russia every time it's invaded. Napoleon and Hitler launched summer offensives that stalled at the gates of Moscow, and then the Russian winter destroyed their victorious armies. But a hostile Ukraine allows foreign armies a short 200+ mile dash to Moscow, a easy chance to win and consolidate before winter. To Russia, a hostile Ukraine is not a fire ant mound next to the porch. It's like fire ants inside your underwear.

None of that obligates the rest of the world to attend to Russia's concerns and obligate Ukraine to subjugate the rights that peoples all over the world have to forge their own destiny, identity, future. Ukraine as a member of the EU is no threat to Russia. A Ukraine with friendly relations with NATO is no threat to Russia. Finland and Sweden were neutral EU members with formal partnership status with NATO, and Russia never felt a need to invade them because of it.

Russia invaded Ukraine because it mishandled, and then misjudged Ukraine. It considers Ukraine to be proto-Russia, and Ukrainian nationalism to be a completely unserious thing. Russia therefore treated Ukraine as a puppet state rather than with respect. When that didn't work out, it thought Ukraine would collapse the moment Russian armies crossed the border. Didn't turnout that way, did it? Turns out Ukraine is a real thing which does not want to be dictated to by Russia, and has the ability and will to defend itself against Russia.

And NATO nations have rights & interests too. They are under no obligation to attend to every concern of Russia. Matter of fact, they might reasonably conclude that Russia needs to join the modern age and learn to build positive relationships with its neighbors, rather than making them puppet states that threaten western Europe.

the idea that USA instigated the whole thing......conjured up Ukrainian nationalism out of whole cloth, then manipulated it to goad Russia into invading.....is quite self-serving nonsense. Russian worldview hasn't worked out well for Russia in Ukraine. I would advise not paying so much attention to it.

---

We don't have to attend to every concern of Russia, but we are obligated to consider its security interests, particularly in the former Soviet republics. NATO has never had an absolute right to enlarge its membership anywhere and everywhere.

---

Nato has a right to expand where and when it deems appropriate as long as the countries involved meet a long list of requirements, which specifically include A) robust democratic processes, which B) generate a formal request for membership, and C) other Nato members unanimously agree. Certainly, the geopolitical wisdom of expansion on a case by case basis is a major factor in deliberations on item C. And for that reason, most Nato members are not in support of Ukrainian membership in Nato. Nor am I. But I am in favor of supporting the clear majority desire of the Ukrainian people to belong to the EU and have a partner status with Nato as Sweden and Finland had for decades during the Cold War. If such was not a threat to Russia then, then it should not be a threat for Ukraine to reach that status now.

Your arguments, and those of other war policy critics, continue to rest upon the faulty premise that Ukraine had taken an act threatening to Russia. In fact, Ukraine had done nothing that Russia had not been willing to accept from other bordering nations during a time when Russia was far, far stronger.

ATL Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

And what about Russia's exponentially larger involvement in Ukraine, from rigging elections, assassinating local leaders, poisoning Presidents, sabotaging trade deals, to now a third invasion of its territory? I mean, what about that?

---

Haven't you heard? Russia is entitled to do that in countries along its borders, particularly those which have the audacity to have good relationships with Nato countries. And we better not play along with those wascally Ukwainians, or we'll give Russia proper grounds to invade and seize the whole of Ukraine!

Redbrickbear said:

---

.

Quote:

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

but we did accept a hostile regime in Cuba. And we did accept a Taliban regime in Afghanistan. And we did accept a hostile regime in Baghdad. And we did accept a hostile regime in Venezuela, Nicaragua, etc.....

And yes, we would accept a hostile regime in Mexico. We likely would not invade a nation of 180m people to replace a hostile regime with a more pliant one. We would probably use other means to influence events in our direction. That calculation would change if that hostile regime attacked us in some way, conventionally or asymmetrically, but you get the point. Powerful nations have a range of options which do not involve sending armies across borders. We are pretty good at it. Russia sucks at it. That's why they sent their armies across the Ukrainian borders. They suck at that, too. In no small part because we are pretty good at helping others to good work making Russia suck......(wink)

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

No law of nature says that such is the natural order which must be obeyed. We have just as much right to want a pro-EU government in Kyiv as Russia does to want a pro-Russian govt in Kyiv. In fact, the penduluum did swing in Kyiv for a number of years. And it was Russian meddling that caused the Maidan Revolution to ensure the will of the Ukrainian people to join EU was honored. And then Russia invaded.

Russia is the aggressor at every step of this process. And not one thing Ukraine did up to that point justified an invasion.

Russia is not entitled to own another sovereign nation. If it tries to do so, it can expect serious repercussions, which it is receiving just now.

---

As much right to desire it? Well sure I guess.

As much right to it? Come on that is not true.

Moscow and Kyiv have been connected (as allies or in actual political union of various sorts) for 400 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmelnytsky_Uprising#:~:text=The%20Khmelnytsky%20Uprising%2C%20also%20known,the%20creation%20of%20a%20Cossack

And Moscow looks at Kyiv as the foundation of their sense of Slavic-Orthodox nationhood, culture, and civilization. Specifically the conversion of the eastern Slavs to Christianity under Vladimir the Great of Kyiv.

Vladimir was Grand Prince of Kyiv (Ukraine) and Prince of Novgorod (Russia). The Kievan Rus' State spanned much of what is modern Ukraine and modern Russia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Kievan_Rus%CA%B9

To say that we Americans have as much interest in Kyiv as the Russians do... would be like saying that the Russians have as much interest in Jamestown (Virginia) or Boston (Massachusetts) as we Americans do.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

.

Quote:

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

If America would have only accepted a pro-Taliban Afghanistan, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Communist Cuba, none of the parties would be in this situation.

If America would have only accepted a pro-Baathist Iraq, none of the parties would be in this situation.



Come on.....enough with that. Ukraine is right on Russia's borders and within their traditional sphere of influence for hundreds of years...they were never going to accept that without violence.

No more than the USA can accept a hostile regime in Mexico, Canada, or Cuba.

Or China will accept a hostile Mongolia, N. Korea, or foreign forces in Taiwan.

---

but we did accept a hostile regime in Cuba.

And yes, we would accept a hostile regime in Mexico.

---

1. We helped fund a counter-revolutionary invasion of the island to over throw the communists.

We tried to assassinate Castro over 50+ times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_attempts_on_Fidel_Castro#:~:text=In%201976%2C%20President%20Gerald%20Ford,by%20Cuban%20exiles%20in%202000.

We did not have any sort of diplomatic relations with Cuba at all until 2015 and "the United States, however, continues to maintain its commercial, economic, and financial embargo, making it illegal for U.S. corporations to do business with Cuba."


And lets be clear.....I don't criticize any of those moves.

A communist Cuba is a direct threat to the United States and its people.

Washington has every right to oppose any regime in Havana that is not aligned with us....in fact its a vital national interest.


2. We would never accept a hostile regime in Mexico City.

In fact we helped Mexican rebels overthrown Emperor Maximillian just because we though he and his European aligned court might one day be rivals/adversaries of the USA. He was not even actively hostile to the USA and we helped get rid of him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mexican_Empire


[The United States refused to recognize the Empire, and after the end of its own civil war in 1865, began to provide support to Mexican republican forces and the Empire came to an end on 19 June 1867 when Maximilian was executed by the government of the restored Mexican republic]

[The U.S. government refused to recognize the Empire and also ignored Maximilian's correspondence. In December, a thirty million dollar private American loan was approved for Jurez, and American volunteers joined the Mexican republican troops. An unofficial American raid occurred near Brownsville, and Jurez's minister to the United States, Matas Romero, proposed that General Grant or General Sherman intervene in Mexico to help the liberals]

The Feds even set up gun and cash running operations in El Paso to help over throw Maximilian and bring down the Empire.

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

If Russia could have ever excepted a pro Western Ukraine, none of the parties would be in this situation,

---

Whiterock was careful to distinguish between pro-Western Ukraine and NATO-member Ukraine. Russia probably would have accepted the former, even though it was somewhat of a threat, if it had been in the natural course of things. US interference greatly complicated the issue, especially with regard to Crimea.

---

Russia did not meet the standard you spun for them. Ukraine did not formally request Nato membership until six months AFTER the 2022 Russian invasion. Unfortunately, for Russia, their invasion of Ukraine had the unintended effect of strengthening the Ukrainian case for Nato membership.

Interesting article at link shows Nato nations engaging in continued strategic ambiguity on the question.....Stoltenberg speaking platitudinally about "Urkaine's rightful place" and Germany qualifying with "it is not the time to decide now." This places intense pressure on Russia to come to the negotiating table before its position in Ukraine erodes (which it probably will in the coming months.)

Ich bin ein Berliner on this one. I do not support Ukrainian membership in NATO until Ukrainian democratic processes are considerably more robust than they were before the war. The worst thing that could happen to Nato, and by extension our strategic interests in Europe, would be to admit Ukraine and then have the country some few years down the road experience significant political instability that would lead to internal conflict which would beg for either Nato or Russia to intervene militarily. Imagine a Maidan Revolution scenario where pro-Russian military officers seize power and announce a withdrawal from Nato, sending the Ukrainian people into the streets. Who has a right to intervene? Nato, to support democratic processes? Or Russia, to answer the call of a new government in Kyiv? That is a proverbial powder keg.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"I'm simply pointing out that every country has vital interests and spheres of influence.


Great powers especially."

You do realize that is the now-infamous Lebensraum argument, right?

---

There would be a vast different from recognizing that great powers have a prime interest in the states that border them....vs the right to invade 18+ nations and drive their armed forces from Berlin all the way to the Ural mountains.

With the intent of course to replace the native populations with German settlers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum

Saying that America has interests in Canada-Mexico-Cuba. Or that Russia has interests in Ukraine-Belarus-Georgia. And that China has interests in Mongolia-N.Korea-Taiwan....is just common sense.

For an arcuate comparison we would have to say does Putin have the right to invade every country from Moscow to France and repopulate the areas with Russian settlers?

No he does not have that right. Can't militarily accomplish that objective against the forces of NATO. And with a declining-aging population does not have the people to settle the land anyway.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

---

Ludicrous on its face.

An example of that kind of thinking would be some Marxist academic in Guatemala telling us how a 3% import tariff on coffee by the USA in 1888 ruined their economy and caused all their problems (economic, social, political) to this very day.
If you'd lived in the third world, you'd understand how pervasive this thinking is. It's a how they deal with the consequences of their bad decisions.

Instead of the simple answer that Central America states have always been unstable **** holes ruled by corrupt ruling classes that exploit their lower classes.

Now....Pointing out the since the Obama administration the USA has been directly involved in Ukrainian internal politics...has been a key policy maker there...and directly involved in training Ukrainian soldiers, funding the war, and if reports are to be believed actually directing some of the military attacks...then its very reasonable to discuss the overwhelming impact the USA is having in Ukraine right now.

---

A pro-Russian government in Ukraine is not a threat to Nato.
Period.

---

If only we could accept that, we wouldn't be in this situation.

---

No law of nature says that such is the natural order which must be obeyed. We have just as much right to want a pro-EU government in Kyiv as Russia does to want a pro-Russian govt in Kyiv. In fact, the penduluum did swing in Kyiv for a number of years. And it was Russian meddling that caused the Maidan Revolution to ensure the will of the Ukrainian people to join EU was honored. And then Russia invaded.

Russia is the aggressor at every step of this process. And not one thing Ukraine did up to that point justified an invasion.

Russia is not entitled to own another sovereign nation. If it tries to do so, it can expect serious repercussions, which it is receiving just now.

---

I'm a little insulted that you'd expect me to believe this. If you're trotting out naked propaganda, at least put a fig leaf on it.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You sound like you work for the Pentagon or NPR.

Ukraine is being destroyed by this war....all because the USA ruling class was determined to overthrow the pro-Russian regime in Kyiv back in Feb of 2014.

Then not being satisfied with the victory of installing a pro-Western regime in Kyiv they decided to support the Ukrainian government's Don Quixote like quest to retake Crimea and Donbass. War in the Donbass went on for 7 years! And of course directly sparked off the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and outright Russian invasion.

The D.C. political class is now pouring weapons & cash into a conflict that has no foreseeable end. Not to mention our State Department is actively working to throw cold water on any attempts by our European allies to find a diplomatic solution and bring about a cease fire.

So Ukraine (already poor and rapidly depopulating in normal times) gets to become a European Afghanistan...GREAT

---

This line of reasoning is garden-variety 3rd world "omnipotent USA." Everything that happens is caused or approved by USA. USA can do or cause to happen whatever it wants. etc....

Ukraine is in a war for survival because its reasonable national aspirations are in conflict with the reasonable national aspirations of a much larger neighbor. A pliable Ukraine affords Russia over 1000 miles of strategic depth, which historically has been what saves Russia every time it's invaded. Napoleon and Hitler launched summer offensives that stalled at the gates of Moscow, and then the Russian winter destroyed their victorious armies. But a hostile Ukraine allows foreign armies a short 200+ mile dash to Moscow, a easy chance to win and consolidate before winter. To Russia, a hostile Ukraine is not a fire ant mound next to the porch. It's like fire ants inside your underwear.

None of that obligates the rest of the world to attend to Russia's concerns and obligate Ukraine to subjugate the rights that peoples all over the world have to forge their own destiny, identity, future. Ukraine as a member of the EU is no threat to Russia. A Ukraine with friendly relations with NATO is no threat to Russia. Finland and Sweden were neutral EU members with formal partnership status with NATO, and Russia never felt a need to invade them because of it.

Russia invaded Ukraine because it mishandled, and then misjudged Ukraine. It considers Ukraine to be proto-Russia, and Ukrainian nationalism to be a completely unserious thing. Russia therefore treated Ukraine as a puppet state rather than with respect. When that didn't work out, it thought Ukraine would collapse the moment Russian armies crossed the border. Didn't turnout that way, did it? Turns out Ukraine is a real thing which does not want to be dictated to by Russia, and has the ability and will to defend itself against Russia.

And NATO nations have rights & interests too. They are under no obligation to attend to every concern of Russia. Matter of fact, they might reasonably conclude that Russia needs to join the modern age and learn to build positive relationships with its neighbors, rather than making them puppet states that threaten western Europe.

the idea that USA instigated the whole thing......conjured up Ukrainian nationalism out of whole cloth, then manipulated it to goad Russia into invading.....is quite self-serving nonsense. Russian worldview hasn't worked out well for Russia in Ukraine. I would advise not paying so much attention to it.

---

We don't have to attend to every concern of Russia, but we are obligated to consider its security interests, particularly in the former Soviet republics. NATO has never had an absolute right to enlarge its membership anywhere and everywhere.

---

Nato has a right to expand where and when it deems appropriate as long as the countries involved meet a long list of requirements, which specifically include A) robust democratic processes, which B) generate a formal request for membership, and C) other Nato members unanimously agree. Certainly, the geopolitical wisdom of expansion on a case by case basis is a major factor in deliberations on item C. And for that reason, most Nato members are not in support of Ukrainian membership in Nato. Nor am I. But I am in favor of supporting the clear majority desire of the Ukrainian people to belong to the EU and have a partner status with Nato as Sweden and Finland had for decades during the Cold War. If such was not a threat to Russia then, then it should not be a threat for Ukraine to reach that status now.

Your arguments, and those of other war policy critics, continue to rest upon the faulty premise that Ukraine had taken an act threatening to Russia. In fact, Ukraine had done nothing that Russia had not been willing to accept from other bordering nations during a time when Russia was far, far stronger.

---

There has always been tension between the principle of sovereignty and the desire for at least a zone of security, if not a zone of influence. NATO as originally established sought to balance those concerns by assuring that no party would strengthen its security at the expense of others. Your argument sees only half the picture. It rests on an absolutist view of sovereignty to the exclusion of other important goods. While you recognize Russia's concerns, at least in passing, your theory has no way of accounting for them. Yet they exist and are a real part of what's driving events.

"replace the native populations with German settlers."

So it was OK for Hitler to claim Austria and Czechoslovakia, because there were Germans in those places and we wanted to avoid a big war, it was only wrong when he went into Poland?

Oldbear83 said:

---

"replace the native populations with German settlers."

So it was OK for Hitler to claim Austria and Czechoslovakia, because there were Germans in those places and we wanted to avoid a big war, it was only wrong when he went into Poland?

---

Austria is already populated with Germans...has been since the Bronze age.

The Sudetenland was also populated with German people. Had been for hundreds of years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudetenland

Its why the British and French did not feel fighting a war over those areas was the right thing to do.

It was what the whole Munich agreement was about. The Western powers allowed Germany to merge with Austria and incorporate the Sudenteland. With promises that these would be the last territorial demands Hitler would make in Europe.

They specifically told him that any invasion of Poland (non-ethnic German area) would mean war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

When Hitler later violated that agreement Britain and France could and did go to war. Doing so with the knowledge that they had tried to reach a peace deal and been very reasonable.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Strange how the war doesn't get the news coverage it once did .

Maybe the illusions are finally falling away .

---

I'm in the middle of moderate Republican territory...not MAGA country...more like George H. Bush country.

The kind that think Trump is a vulgar barbarian (but better him than a far leftist) and are always down to wave the Flag and support the military almost without question.

And I have not heard a single person say how they like us endlessly funding this Ukraine war or how we should trust the increasingly politically captured Pentagon and top brass.

This new anti-Russian war is gonna be hard to fight with just coastal liberals.

p.s.

I have a buddy (an Officer) who is stationed at a base in Tennessee...says that no one he talks to on base wants to fight a war with Russia and most think Ukraine is gonna lose eventually. Said they are sending back artillery to be repaired and its been shot to hell...so they are using it but not maintaining it.

---

War will be over within 14 months ....on Putin's terms .

---

Never say never but highly doubtful. Why do you think that will be the case?

---

A. Russia has the advantage in troop numbers ,
B. Air superiority
C. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed week by week.
D. Western Europeans are tired of the war's disruption in their daily lives.
E. Americans are tired of paying billions of dollars to Ukraine when they can barely afford their gas/rent/medical bills.
F. The NATO 'alliance' is a sham. France, Germany, Turkey and Italy all want to go back to 'business as usual'.

---

People on this site feel great that Washington war mongers have gotten 100,000 Ukrainians killed and most of the country ruined… $1 trillion dollars in damages.

And just like our utter failures in Afghanistan and Iraq…we won't have much to show for this new military adventure in Eastern Europe.

But hey a bunch of Lobbyists in DC and at the Pentagon got rich right?

---

I feel great that we have helped highly motivated people defend their country. The idea that we foisted it all on them is bull***** People make money on wars. That does not mean wars never need to be fought.

Kaibears list is alternate reality. Russia has not been able to take advantage of its superior population and gain a material advantage in troop numbers where it matters - on the battlefield. Neither do they have air superiority. There's actually not a lot going on in the air war on either side (meaning neither side has superiority) which is a win for Ukraine. Ukraine's infrastructure is being destroyed on the front lines, but not elsewhere. Yes, Europeans are tired of the war, but they are not out in the streets demanding it be stopped either. Quite the opposite. Americans are growing frustrated with what appears to be a never-ending conflict (thanks to poor leadership by the admin), but still on balance support the war. Nato not only remains committed (large amounts of aid still in pipeline), they are adding members. Reality is, Russia launched a big winter offensive with 300k new troops. It made such a splash that it took the world three weeks to realize the slight elevation in intensity was, in fact, the big offensive. That "big offensive" bogged down at the first town it came to and has been mired there ever since. Ukraine totally stymied the big offensive, which has clearly culminated. That has allowed Ukraine to keep troops in reserve and prepare for the big counteroffensive.

We can speculate that the Russian "big offensive" which actually did nothing at all might be a diversion, and most of the deployments were defensive, to protect the approaches to Crimea. I've seen some deployment maps prepared by inveterate bloggers which would be consistent with that. And those deployments clearly seem to anticipate exactly the kind of Ukrainian counter-offensive I've suggested.....a push toward the Sea of Azov and Crimean approaches which would threaten to cut off the entire Russian army along the Kherson front. If Ukraine can do that.....(and it's hardly impossible for them)......then this war will end quite a bit differently than you imagine. But regardless what Ukraine does, Russia is a spent force. Done. They can feed more troops into the maw, but their tactics and strategy and logistics and (the whole ball of wax) is not capable of winning the fight they're in. All Nato has to do is "not lose" and Russia will have no option but to sue for peace. Right now Ukraine is well ahead of benchmarks and has reasonable chances of regaining some/all of pre-2014 positions, assuming their offensive outperforms the Russian one we've been watching, which should be the case.

we will know a lot more in 60 days.

---

You're looking at lines on the map without paying enough attention to what's happening on the ground. Russia generally hasn't bothered to overrun cities with infantry. They're doing so now only because the cities on the front line, from Bakhmut in the north to Marinka in the south and west to Vuldehar, have spent years building underground fortifications that are invulnerable to light artillery. Zelensky, against our advice, has made holding Bakhmut his main priority and a rallying cry for the public. Meanwhile the Russians have surrounded the city and are steadily funneling Ukrainian forces into the grinder. It's a similar situation in Avdiivka to the south. While the US bleeds out the Russian army in Ukraine, Russia is doing the same to the Ukrainian army at key points along the front line. The longer it goes, the more the numbers favor Russia.

---

The Ukrainian command & general staff is running rings around their Russian counterparts.

---

So?

The Confederate command and general staff ran rings around their Union counterparts.

Average Confederate fighting men also just plain out fought Union conscripts on a man to man basis throughout the war.

In the end it did not matter. The superior economic power of the Union, the superior fleets, the greater amount of factories and rail-lines, the greater man power eventually lead to a total Confederate defeat.

Every year the war went on the South had less of a chance at a negotiated victory.

Ukraine is in the same boat. They can out fight the Russians to a stand still. They can even whip their armies for a while. But eventually the overwhelming difference in manpower is going to end up being decisive.

Ukraine needs what the South needed.....intervention by foreign ground troops.

Is the USA-EU going to do that?

Lincoln found some good generals eventually. That and the lack of foreign aid is what sealed the Confederacy's fate in relatively short order. Ukraine is in a somewhat better position, but I think that will only change the timeline and not the result.