All Things Russia & Ukraine

[old salt]

Sometimes sitting it out is best, Pete. Or haven't you noticed that the last several wars we've elected to wage haven't gone well at all?

It's hilarious. After watching Trump say that we're not going to play global cop anymore, and Republicans nodding in agreement.....

..Republicans like Pete think that we've forgotten that Republican voters agreed that we don't have to play global cop anymore when Trump said it was cool...and then think we won't notice when they feign outrage that Biden isn't playing global cop, either.

You may have noticed -- we ARE at war with Russia now.

So is most of the world. How many different countries have sent weapons now? This isn't a 80's proxy war.

I hope you enjoyed the past 3 decades of Pax Americana & our peace dividend.

You lost me. You think we haven't been at war for the last 30 years?

And what peace "dividend".....military spending goes up every year, save the sequester's whopping two years.

This is different, by an order of magnitude. You remain stuck on the backside of the paradigm.

[old salt]

And what peace "dividend".....military spending goes up every year, save the sequester's whopping two years.

It's getting old having to prove this every few years.

https://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/proj ... ldwar.html

[MDlaxfan76]

Chinese bank stops lending to Russia and Belarus.

OK...that's an important signal.

[a fan]

And what peace "dividend".....military spending goes up every year, save the sequester's whopping two years.

It's getting old having to prove this every few years.

https://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/proj ... ldwar.html

As it is getting old telling you that moving the money to different areas, and pretending like "that's not military spending" doesn't fool anyone.

Question: how much did we spend on the VA, and VA alone last year, OS?

[MDlaxfan76]

Boy, wouldn't it be great if the American President really could just control "world stability"?

Man, that'd be terrific, right?

Gosh, gee willikers, what ever might throw a crimp into that?

[runrussellrun]

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you for your Miss America answer, Pete.

Yes, attractive women are ALL stupid..........

can you guys be more hateful to woman....geez.

Riiiiight. Back to trolling again, are we? That didn't take long.

rig
getting the dates wrong is ok, when it comes to history, as long as the sequence of events is retained.

and Blutto was NOT wrong, when he yelled "....when the Germans bombed Pearl harbor" He got every thing right, especially the details that matter to humanity. Pearl Harbor, was in fact bombed. Also, a fact, is that the Germans and Japanese had already filled out lots of paperwork, saying they would be "frenemies" well before Dec. 7th, 1941. Blutto would have technically right if he said Italians, too.

Did the Allies invade the shores of Normandy, or just the "Americans' . So, one could argue, that Blutto was 100% correct. In all aspects.

[cradleandshoot]

Boy, wouldn't it be great if the American President really could just control "world stability"?

Man, that'd be terrific, right?

Gosh, gee willikers, what ever might throw a crimp into that?

There was a poster on the wall of our day room when I was in the army... " Peace through superior firepower" The president may not be able to control world stability. He/ she is obligated to ensure that instability does not migrate into the US of A. The biggest, baddest and meanest dog doesn't get effed with very often. My analogy doesn't work for many people on this forum for sure. How many of you will test a dog snarling at you when you walk up to the front porch?

[runrussellrun]

pos tRump, now calling Putin and his Ukranian invasion a "Holocaust".......doing a complete 180. tRump is bisexual too, just can't make his mind up.

the zealots on "sides" heads are gonna explode

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... ia-to-stop

Trump calls the Russian invasion 'a holocaust,' urges Russia to stop fighting

[runrussellrun]

Boy, wouldn't it be great if the American President really could just control "world stability"?

Man, that'd be terrific, right?

Gosh, gee willikers, what ever might throw a crimp into that?

There was a poster on the wall of our day room when I was in the army... " Peace through superior firepower" The president may not be able to control world stability. He/ she is obligated to ensure that instability does not migrate into the US of A. The biggest, baddest and meanest dog doesn't get effed with very often. My analogy doesn't work for many people on this forum for sure. How many of you will test a dog snarling at you when you walk up to the front porch?

context...... a puppy being possesive, or a carnary mastiff

no, we don't know what you mean........even simple "theoriticals" have tons of scenarios

Do I know the dog'
do I know the dogs owners
do i have food on me
is it summer, or am I bundled up
do I have anything in my hands?
do i have experience with dogs
as a dog walker
dog whisperer
is the dog a golden retriever
am I a mailman, and thats just what dogs do to mail people

[Kismet]

Latest updates

BBC and CNN say they will stop broadcasting from Russia. BBC is indefinite and CNN says "CNN will stop broadcasting in Russia while we continue to evaluate the situation and our next steps moving forward."

Facebook and Twitter have both been blocked in Russia today.

IAEA has asked for access to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine now occupied by Russian forces.

[old salt]

And what peace "dividend".....military spending goes up every year, save the sequester's whopping two years.

It's getting old having to prove this every few years.

https://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/proj ... ldwar.html

As it is getting old telling you that moving the money to different areas, and pretending like "that's not military spending" doesn't fool anyone.

Question: how much did we spend on the VA, and VA alone last year, OS?

Diversion. The peace dividend was taken in the '90's, before the GWOT.

[jhu72]

Apparently 3 assassination attempts on Zelensky have failed in the last week.

[a fan]

And what peace "dividend".....military spending goes up every year, save the sequester's whopping two years.

It's getting old having to prove this every few years.

https://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/proj ... ldwar.html

As it is getting old telling you that moving the money to different areas, and pretending like "that's not military spending" doesn't fool anyone.

Question: how much did we spend on the VA, and VA alone last year, OS?

Diversion. The peace dividend was taken in the '90's, before the GWOT

Peace dividend from....the end of which war? I honestly have no clue what you're talking about here. Military spending goes up every year. Exceptions being two years under Obama.

[old salt]

And what peace "dividend".....military spending goes up every year, save the sequester's whopping two years.

It's getting old having to prove this every few years.

https://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/proj ... ldwar.html

As it is getting old telling you that moving the money to different areas, and pretending like "that's not military spending" doesn't fool anyone.

Question: how much did we spend on the VA, and VA alone last year, OS?

Diversion. The peace dividend was taken in the '90's, before the GWOT

Peace dividend from....the end of which war? I honestly have no clue what you're talking about here. Military spending goes up every year. Exceptions being two years under Obama.

The term peace dividend originated after the end of the Cold War. That is the context in which I have consistently used it.

[old salt]

Boy, wouldn't it be great if the American President really could just control "world stability"?

Man, that'd be terrific, right?

Gosh, gee willikers, what ever might throw a crimp into that?

It Putin offered a cease fire in place if the US sent a delegation chosen & lead by Trump, Mike Flynn, Rand Paul, & Tulsi Gabbard to negotiate a peace deal, would you send them ?

[MDlaxfan76]

Boy, wouldn't it be great if the American President really could just control "world stability"?

Man, that'd be terrific, right?

Gosh, gee willikers, what ever might throw a crimp into that?

It Putin offered a cease fire in place if the US sent a delegation chosen & lead by Trump, Mike Flynn, Rand Paul, & Tulsi Gabbard to negotiate a peace deal, would you send them ?

Well sure. That is they could possibly be trusted for a moment to keep their mouths shut about anything and everything related to the situation and negotiations...but who would trust them to do that...but sure, I'd want a cease fire.

The cease fire would last as long as the "negotiations" did. As I wouldn't give that crew an ounce of actual negotiating authority, just like Putin doesn't give his negotiators an ounce of authority and nothing he says can be trusted anyway, I'd keep my guard up...but if we could give the Ukrainians a break for a few days, that'd be good.

But why would you ask such a ridiculous hypothetical?

You've been pretty darn serious on here, which is much appreciated.

My point is simply, in contrast to Petey's numbnuts contention, that it would be absolutely terrific if our POTUS, whoever they might be, could actually maintain "world stability" simply because they wanted to do so. But there's a whole lot of other players who aren't interested in such, so...

[DocBarrister]

Former Vice President Mike Pence is expected to condemn Republican "apologists" who have complimented Russian President Vladimir Putin amid his invasion of Ukraine, according to excerpts of a Friday speech to top GOP donors, obtained by CNN.

"There is no room in this party for apologists for Putin. There is only room for champions of freedom," Pence is expected to say.

Pence's prepared remarks come just days after former President Donald Trump described the Kremlin leader as "genius" and "savvy" for launching a full-scale invasion in Ukraine, where civilian casualties continue to pile up despite global condemnation of Putin's actions.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/04/politics ... index.html

DocBarrister

[old salt]

But why would you ask such a ridiculous hypothetical?

...testing your commitment to non-partisanship on this subject.

[MDlaxfan76]

But why would you ask such a ridiculous hypothetical?

...testing your commitment to non-partisanship on this subject.

well, I guess ridiculous hypotheticals do at least stretch the imagination, and heck some imagination may be required.

But give me some drones first. And other covert, as needed.

[old salt]

From behind the NRO paywall :

Do We Know What We’re Doing?
by MICHAEL BRENDAN DOUGHERTY, March 4, 2022

Our two interests in this war are to keep the war limited and to see Putin punished. These interests are in direct tension with each other.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has set off a chain reaction in Europe and America. Some of this reaction is quite welcome, namely the German government’s decision to reverse almost every policy of the previous 20 years and commit to a diversity of energy resources and robust investment in its national security. Some of it is quite noble, the outpouring of generosity — particularly from Poland, in assisting the flood of Ukrainian women and children streaming over the border.

But the rest — well, I’m worried.

In President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address, he reassured Americans that everything was going to be okay. And he seemed to reassure Americans that somehow Ukraine would triumph in its conflict with Russia because freedom always wins. He cast it as a worldwide “battle between democracy and autocracy,” but one that American troops absolutely would not fight.

This mirrors the same nonsensical position taken by so much of the American commentariat and the foreign-policy blob, which is that Russia’s assault on Ukraine jeopardizes the entire seven decades of investment in the American-led liberal world order, but the only thing we’re going to do about it is impose sanctions.

This is untenable. And it is precisely what is pushing legislators such as Adam Kinzinger to propose setting up a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which translates into getting into an air-power war with Russia, with all the potential for global escalation that entails.

And let’s talk about those sanctions for a moment. First, they were not joined to positive inducements aimed at Russia. In times of crisis, threats like sanctions are often best paired with potential rewards. Do what we don’t want, and face the consequences. Desist entirely, and achieve something else.

Instead the sanctions were imposed afterward as a punishment. They land most heavily on the Russian people themselves. There was no hint of what Russia could do to cause the sanctions to end. And the kind of damage they did does not end when the sanctions are lifted. It was a kind of financial Hiroshima, instantly lowering the living standards for over 140 million people. The kind of economic collapse that they herald resembles precisely the 1990s meltdown that brought Putin to power and allowed him to transform the Russian state. In our haste to hit back, did we go beyond pressuring the regime to destabilizing it, and making the situation more volatile?

The sanctions are so severe that they may do blowback damage to the global economy, and they carry some downside tail risk to the American-dollar system itself. This sanction of Russia’s Central Bank was an entirely new, and quite devastating, weapon. And the debut of such a weapon will cause a mad race among nations to figure out ways to counter it, or contain its damage. To unveil this terrible power in the global reserve currency is to give every nation on earth (even our own), at least some interest in a Plan B. Perhaps China will take this moment to begin constructing that Plan B in earnest.

There is also no way to escalate from this weapon short of getting troops involved. This means that we are now spectators and have to be even more inventive in the coming weeks if we want to try to influence Russian behavior in the conduct or conclusion of this war.

Speaking of escalation: NATO countries have begun looking for ways of feeding more weapons, possibly even fighter jets, to Ukraine’s army. This is understandable. Russia and America have grudgingly accepted this behavior from each other in previous wars. America did not overtly escalate against Russia or China when those nations were finding ways of supporting the Vietnamese communists. Russia did not go directly after America, though we funded the mujahideen in Afghanistan.

But there is no rule of war that requires Russia to simply treat this behavior as fair play. Russia could declare tomorrow that supplying Ukraine’s army with additional weapons during the war is itself the act of a belligerent.

Our two interests in this war are to keep the war limited and to see Putin punished. These interests are in direct tension with each other and will require determined statesmanship to balance. President Biden has committed himself rhetorically to both of these goals, but our strategy is not yet built to achieve it. We need to be thinking right now about how to give Russia off-ramps between the annihilation of Ukraine and the annihilation of its own government.