All Things Russia & Ukraine

[DocBarrister]

Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR because that is the ONLY WAY THIS WAR CAN END.

We've already seen this movie, Doc. Remember how we "needed" to arm and fund Saddam to keep him from letting Iran do its thing.

How'd that work out?

THAT is why Biden isn't giving Zelensky enough to win the war. Well that, and----what will Putin do if backed into a corner? Who the F knows, but I'm not itching to find out.

Ukraine could wind up being Putin Two, Electric Boogaloo if we're not careful.

Completely different situations.

Putin is not going to end this war until he is forced to end this war.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand this war.

DocBarrister

[DocBarrister]

The best evidence that sanctions are working, albeit slowly, comes from Russian officials themselves. “The situation is not easy,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov acknowledged last month. Herman Gref, the head of Sberbank, Russia’s largest, warned: “We may need around a decade to return [the] economy to the 2021 levels.” He told journalists recently that cargo shipments to Russia had fallen sixfold because of Western sanctions.

… The Russian military is losing equipment rapidly, and replacements won’t be easy. According to published Ukrainian reports (hardly unbiased but worth noting), Russia has halted or limited tank production at Uralvagonzavod Corporation and at Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, and it has halted production of surface-to-air missiles at Ulyanovsk Mechanical Plant. Major Russian shipyards have also been affected.

… Sanctions “have practically broken all the logistics in our country,” according to Russian Transport Minister Vitaly Savelyev. Take aviation: The United States and Europe have banned parts or services for the several hundred Boeing and Airbus jets operating in Russia, forcing Russian airlines to sharply curtail flights and cannibalize their fleets. A European Union aviation regulator said last month he was “very worried” about safety of these Western jets in Russia.

Let’s imagine that somehow, despite the sanctions, Russia staggers on with its bloody assault of Ukraine. What then? To think about Putin’s potential problems, just look at a map. Russia is the largest country in the world, by far. To support his reckless, illegal war in Ukraine, Putin has stripped forces from the Far East, the Baltic, the vast underbelly that borders South Asia. He has a country that’s in slow-motion collapse, and too few people to protect it.

Putin plays his hand boldly. But he’s holding fewer high cards than it might appear.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... ons-biden/

DocBarrister

[old salt]

So now you're a Cold War denier & think 9-11 was faked.

Nope. I'm a smart man like you, who thinks before we send our own people to their death for no reason.

Pop Quiz: we sent our troops to die over "communism", and had a Cold War over it with the Soviets.

How come we didn't have one with China? Take your time, think about it, and then explain why we HAD to go to Vietnam. Or we HAD to arm the future AlQ with Charlie Wilson's stupid game.

James Baker summed it up -- jobs. You didn't wait in the gas lines of the '70's.

Yes. I did. And you're telling me that you aren't smart enough that you can't figure out how to get energy to the US without sending troops to the ME?
I don't believe you.

All in 1990, in a few months, before Iraq invaded Kuwait. The technology was not avail then, or now, & takes decades to implement

Want me to solve your fake problem here, and still get oil from the ME?

Buy oil from Saddam. You remember him, right? You know: the guy Reagan bankrolled and armed? Why wouldn't we simply buy oil from "our guy"? As if all the wankers we get oil from in that region aren't corrupt ***holes, OS.

But setting that aside....you're "plan" from the gas lines until 1990 is to do nothing about US Energy policy. 15 years of doing nothing.

You really mangle history. 15 years of doing nothing ? You fail to acknowledge the changes made in our energy policy. We are no longer in the position that the EU still is. We are now much more energy self-sufficient.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil ... xports.php

The United States was a total petroleum net exporter in 2020 and 2021

In 2021, the United States exported about 8.63 million barrels per day (b/d) and imported about 8.47 million b/d of petroleum,1 making the United States an annual total petroleum net exporter for the second year in a row since at least 1949. Total petroleum net exports were about 0.16 million b/d in 2021, and total petroleum net exports in 2020 were 0.63 million b/d. Also in 2021, the United States produced2 about 18.66 million b/d of petroleum and consumed3 about 19.78 million b/d. Even though U.S. annual total petroleum exports were greater than total petroleum imports in 2020 and 2021, the United States still imported some crude oil and petroleum products from other countries to help to supply domestic demand for petroleum and to supply international markets.

The United States remained a net crude oil importer in 2021, importing about 6.11 million b/d of crude oil and exporting about 2.90 million b/d. However, some of the crude oil that the U.S. imports is refined by U.S. refineries into petroleum products—such as gasoline, heating oil, diesel fuel, and jet fuel—that the U.S. exports. Also, some of imported petroleum may be stored and subsequently exported.

[a fan]

You really mangle history. 15 years of doing nothing ?

YOU made this claim. Don't like it? Don't make the claim. You said that we HAD to do all that stuff in the ME because of the gas lines of the 1970's.

If you changed your mind? Fine.

So which is it? Did we HAVE to do all the stupid stuff we did in the ME in 1990-2000, or not? You tell me.

[a fan]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

[old salt]

You really mangle history. 15 years of doing nothing ?

YOU made this claim. Don't like it? Don't make the claim. You said that we HAD to do all that stuff in the ME because of the gas lines of the 1970's.

If you changed your mind? Fine.

So which is it? Did we HAVE to do all the stupid stuff we did in the ME in 1990-2000, or not? You tell me.

Show me my words making that claim - that we did nothing for 15 years to become more energy independent.

[DocBarrister]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

[LaxFan2000]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

I'm not sure that this is an informed assessment, rather what you want and think is going to happen. a fan does not strike me as an uniformed reader. How you make that derisory claim is rather bewildering. Do you say these things because you think this forum is your own personal echo chamber? Doesn't seem like your intention is further the discussion, but rather advance your rather dogmatic views on others. It seems very silly. Even I can see that after just a short time using the site. Why do you do this??

[a fan]

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

From the same team that told us that Iran was less than a year from having a Nuke......way back when Obama was in power?

Or how about those WMD's in Iraq?

I'll grant you they do their level best in an impossible job, but......they have no clue, either.

[MDlaxfan76]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

I'm not sure that this is an informed assessment, rather what you want and think is going to happen. a fan does not strike me as an uniformed reader. How you make that derisory claim is rather bewildering. Do you say these things because you think this forum is your own personal echo chamber? Doesn't seem like your intention is further the discussion, but rather advance your rather dogmatic views on others. It seems very silly. Even I can see that after just a short time using the site. Why do you do this??

2000,
Do you have an opinion on this topic or are you just going to post insults about other posters?

Doc just showed precisely what information ("informed") he was saying should be considered, "US intelligence assessment" as reported by Reuters.

He then makes clear (at least to any friendly reader) his own logic about what this means, in a discussion with another poster (a fan) with whom he disagrees on a particular aspect. They both feel strongly and get a bit testy with one another, but not over the top ranting and insulting.

So, what do you think?

My own view is that Doc's conclusions are, unfortunately, more likely a fair read of the situation than not. Lots of reasons why I come to that view, which I've explained numerous times over these past months, but I'm open to new information, new logic that I hadn't previously considered.

I'd love to see an early end of this war, but I don't think that is Putin's intent...as, IMO, he's made abundantly clear both through his actions and his words. I'm not going to call it "stupid" but I would call it "naive and foolish" to expect otherwise from him.

Thus, I don't see a stable end until Putin is deposed, and I don't expect that to happen until the Russian military is so thoroughly defeated and demoralized, that Putin can no longer hold onto power.

Love to be wrong.

[a fan]

Show me my words making that claim - that we did nothing for 15 years to become more energy independent.

I wrote this:

Picture how far ahead our nation would be if our leaders chose nuclear power over shenanigans in the ME. Denser habitation. More mass transit. Accelerated electric car development.

And the context of my post was: after the gas lines of 1973-4.

And you responded in colored font with this:

All in 1990, in a few months, before Iraq invaded Kuwait. The technology was not avail then, or now, & takes decades to implement

What I read from this is that you think we couldn't/didn't do anything about getting oil from the Middle East from the time of the gas lines, up until 1990. Which is what I got from "all in 1990"....as in: "we can't make those changes in the 12 months of 1990."

If that's not what you meant? Please clarify.

[MDlaxfan76]

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

From the same team that told us that Iran was less than a year from having a Nuke......way back when Obama was in power?

Or how about those WMD's in Iraq?

I'll grant you they do their level best in an impossible job, but......they have no clue, either.

Fair skepticism, but you're not really engaging in the various probabilities by simply dismissing this "we have no idea" what anyone will do, much less what Putin will do.

There are very serious policy implications given various assessments and probabilities, right?
As in most anything, it's reasonable to look for experts actually studying a given issue, often with more information and insight than we ourselves possess...valid skepticism doesn't mean outright dismissal is the best path.

Not that you or I or Doc or Salty or anyone else on here will be making these calls, but that's true of all of our discussion topics, really.

[LaxFan2000]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

I'm not sure that this is an informed assessment, rather what you want and think is going to happen. a fan does not strike me as an uniformed reader. How you make that derisory claim is rather bewildering. Do you say these things because you think this forum is your own personal echo chamber? Doesn't seem like your intention is further the discussion, but rather advance your rather dogmatic views on others. It seems very silly. Even I can see that after just a short time using the site. Why do you do this??

2000,
Do you have an opinion on this topic or are you just going to post insults about other posters?

Doc just showed precisely what information ("informed") he was saying should be considered, "US intelligence assessment" as reported by Reuters.

He then makes clear (at least to any friendly reader) his own logic about what this means, in a discussion with another poster (a fan) with whom he disagrees on a particular aspect. They both feel strongly and get a bit testy with one another, but not over the top ranting and insulting.

So, what do you think?

My own view is that Doc's conclusions are, unfortunately, more likely a fair read of the situation than not. Lots of reasons why I come to that view, which I've explained numerous times over these past months, but I'm open to new information, new logic that I hadn't previously considered.

I'd love to see an early end of this war, but I don't think that is Putin's intent...as, IMO, he's made abundantly clear both through his actions and his words. I'm not going to call it "stupid" but I would call it "naive and foolish" to expect otherwise from him.

Thus, I don't see a stable end until Putin is deposed, and I don't expect that to happen until the Russian military is so thoroughly defeated and demoralized, that Putin can no longer hold onto power.

Love to be wrong.

Doc's conclusions are not a fair read of the situation at all (Too much emotion involved and wishful thinking IMO). There isn't only one solution to this war. Heck, Putin's physical condition doesn't look to be too good these days. Whose to say that he doesn't make it through a long war? Why do you discount that option? Watch any recent videos of him, this does not look like a healthy man. Everything is not black and white in regards to this war. Quick question, why the need to jump in and respond to my comments about DocB? You do realize that talking about a poster does not constitute a personal attack. I wasn't spewing vitriol at him, he went beyond a simple disagreement with a fellow poster. Just trying to get an understanding as to why his posts fit a pattern of doing this.

*FTR, asking someone if they have an opinion about a topic is about the worst look you can have. You are intimating that person has nothing to offer. Maybe their response is what they have offer. It doesn't have to be what you like. Seems like you should spend more time considering that. If you were Admin of this site, it would be a different story. But it seems you are not, just a regular old poster like me.

[MDlaxfan76]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

I'm not sure that this is an informed assessment, rather what you want and think is going to happen. a fan does not strike me as an uniformed reader. How you make that derisory claim is rather bewildering. Do you say these things because you think this forum is your own personal echo chamber? Doesn't seem like your intention is further the discussion, but rather advance your rather dogmatic views on others. It seems very silly. Even I can see that after just a short time using the site. Why do you do this??

2000,
Do you have an opinion on this topic or are you just going to post insults about other posters?

Doc just showed precisely what information ("informed") he was saying should be considered, "US intelligence assessment" as reported by Reuters.

He then makes clear (at least to any friendly reader) his own logic about what this means, in a discussion with another poster (a fan) with whom he disagrees on a particular aspect. They both feel strongly and get a bit testy with one another, but not over the top ranting and insulting.

So, what do you think?

My own view is that Doc's conclusions are, unfortunately, more likely a fair read of the situation than not. Lots of reasons why I come to that view, which I've explained numerous times over these past months, but I'm open to new information, new logic that I hadn't previously considered.

I'd love to see an early end of this war, but I don't think that is Putin's intent...as, IMO, he's made abundantly clear both through his actions and his words. I'm not going to call it "stupid" but I would call it "naive and foolish" to expect otherwise from him.

Thus, I don't see a stable end until Putin is deposed, and I don't expect that to happen until the Russian military is so thoroughly defeated and demoralized, that Putin can no longer hold onto power.

Love to be wrong.

Doc's conclusions are not a fair read of the situation at all (Too much emotion involved and wishful thinking IMO). There isn't only one solution to this war. Heck, Putin's physical condition doesn't look to be too good these days. Whose to say that he doesn't make it through a long war? Why do you discount that option? Watch any recent videos of him, this does not look like a healthy man. Everything is not black and white in regards to this war. Quick question, why the need to jump in and respond to my comments about DocB? You do realize that talking about a poster does not constitute a personal attack. I wasn't spewing vitriol at him, he went beyond a simple disagreement with a fellow poster. Just trying to get an understanding as to why his posts fit a pattern of doing this.

*FTR, asking someone if they have an opinion about a topic is about the worst look you can have. You are intimating that person has nothing to offer. Maybe their response is what they have offer. It doesn't have to be what you like. Seems like you should spend more time considering that. If you were Admin of this site, it would be a different story. But it seems you are not, just a regular old poster like me.

First, I really couldn't give a hoot "about the worst look you(I) can have". Your opinion on that aspect has no value to me. Seriously. Now, if we do engage civilly and I find you to be an interesting guy or gal, reasonable in your approach to others, your opinion of me will begin to have some worth to me...but right now you've jumped in with two feet critiquing others, but offering little to the actual discussions on the thread topic itself.

This is a discussion forum with specific topics, discussions underway...why are you here posting if you don't want to discuss these topics?

Why just post about others?

great, let me credit the above: you came up with another scenario under which Putin could eventually leave power during a long war...he dies of natural causes. Fine. I'm sure Doc would agree that it's quite likely that his successor would then sue for peace, especially if the war has bled Russia and its military to the breaking point.

But if he doesn't leave power, I'd like someone (needn't be you, but you're welcome) to explain why we would have anything but the tiniest probability assigned to his ever being willing to back off, leave Ukraine, and become a functioning part of the world rule of law order. He's staked everything on the expansion of Russia to an Empire status...how does he retain power if he abandons that ambition now?

[LaxFan2000]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

I'm not sure that this is an informed assessment, rather what you want and think is going to happen. a fan does not strike me as an uniformed reader. How you make that derisory claim is rather bewildering. Do you say these things because you think this forum is your own personal echo chamber? Doesn't seem like your intention is further the discussion, but rather advance your rather dogmatic views on others. It seems very silly. Even I can see that after just a short time using the site. Why do you do this??

2000,
Do you have an opinion on this topic or are you just going to post insults about other posters?

Doc just showed precisely what information ("informed") he was saying should be considered, "US intelligence assessment" as reported by Reuters.

He then makes clear (at least to any friendly reader) his own logic about what this means, in a discussion with another poster (a fan) with whom he disagrees on a particular aspect. They both feel strongly and get a bit testy with one another, but not over the top ranting and insulting.

So, what do you think?

My own view is that Doc's conclusions are, unfortunately, more likely a fair read of the situation than not. Lots of reasons why I come to that view, which I've explained numerous times over these past months, but I'm open to new information, new logic that I hadn't previously considered.

I'd love to see an early end of this war, but I don't think that is Putin's intent...as, IMO, he's made abundantly clear both through his actions and his words. I'm not going to call it "stupid" but I would call it "naive and foolish" to expect otherwise from him.

Thus, I don't see a stable end until Putin is deposed, and I don't expect that to happen until the Russian military is so thoroughly defeated and demoralized, that Putin can no longer hold onto power.

Love to be wrong.

Doc's conclusions are not a fair read of the situation at all (Too much emotion involved and wishful thinking IMO). There isn't only one solution to this war. Heck, Putin's physical condition doesn't look to be too good these days. Whose to say that he doesn't make it through a long war? Why do you discount that option? Watch any recent videos of him, this does not look like a healthy man. Everything is not black and white in regards to this war. Quick question, why the need to jump in and respond to my comments about DocB? You do realize that talking about a poster does not constitute a personal attack. I wasn't spewing vitriol at him, he went beyond a simple disagreement with a fellow poster. Just trying to get an understanding as to why his posts fit a pattern of doing this.

*FTR, asking someone if they have an opinion about a topic is about the worst look you can have. You are intimating that person has nothing to offer. Maybe their response is what they have offer. It doesn't have to be what you like. Seems like you should spend more time considering that. If you were Admin of this site, it would be a different story. But it seems you are not, just a regular old poster like me.

First, I really couldn't give a hoot "about the worst look you(I) can have". Your opinion on that aspect has no value to me. Seriously. Now, if we do engage civilly and I find you to be an interesting guy or gal, reasonable in your approach to others, your opinion of me will begin to have some worth to me...but right now you've jumped in with two feet critiquing others, but offering little to the actual discussions on the thread topic itself.

This is a discussion forum with specific topics, discussions underway...why are you here posting if you don't want to discuss these topics?

Why just post about others?

great, let me credit the above: you came up with another scenario under which Putin could eventually leave power during a long war...he dies of natural causes. Fine. I'm sure Doc would agree that it's quite likely that his successor would then sue for peace, especially if the war has bled Russia and its military to the breaking point.

But if he doesn't leave power, I'd like someone (needn't be you, but you're welcome) to explain why we would have anything but the tiniest probability assigned to his ever being willing to back off, leave Ukraine, and become a functioning part of the world rule of law order. He's staked everything on the expansion of Russia to an Empire status...how does he retain power if he abandons that ambition now?

MD,

I don't think anyone on this entire site is intimating that Putin will back down in any other many then of the following. To insinuate otherwise tells me you are leading to much with your emotions.

1) Official Agreement/Ceasefire
2) All of his backers turn on him in a significant manner in which he is essentially deposed
3) His death

[MDlaxfan76]

Completely different situations.

Sure it is, Doc. Sure it is.

You have NO CLUE what Putin wants. Or Zelensky, for that matter. Stop pretending you do.

That’s the difference between you and me … I don’t rely only on my own assessments when posting on this forum. I’m an informed reader and forum member.

Here is the current U.S. intelligence assessment of “what Putin wants,” and Zelensky, too.

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin still wants to seize most of Ukraine, but his forces are so degraded by combat that they likely can only achieve incremental gains in the near term, the top U.S. intelligence officer said Wednesday.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, outlining the current U.S. intelligence assessment of the more than four-month war, said that the consensus of U.S. spy agencies is that it will grind on "for an extended period of time."

… Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy this week told U.S. President Joe Biden and other G7 leaders that he wants the war over by the end of the year.

But Haines' comments suggested that the billions of dollars in modern arms being supplied by the United States and other countries to Zelinskiy's forces may not give them the ability to turn the tide against Russia any time soon.

… She said that Putin remains intent on overruning most of Ukraine even though Ukrainian forces beat back Russia's attempt to capture the capital Kyiv in February, forcing Moscow to reduce its target to seizing the entire eastern Donbas region.

"We think he has effectively the same political goals that we had previously, which is to say that he wants to take most of Ukraine," Haines said.

Russian forces, however, have been so degraded by more than four months of combat that it is unlikely they can achieve Putin's goal any time soon, Haines said in her first public assessment of the war since May.

… "We perceive a disconnect between Putin's near-term military objectives in this area and his military's capacity, a kind of mismatch between his ambitions and what the military is able to accomplish," she said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/pu ... 022-06-29/

As I said … Putin is not likely going to end this war until he is forced to end this war. He still pretty much wants all of Ukraine. That hasn’t changed. That’s not just my assessment, that’s the current assessment of U.S. intelligence.

It’s stupid to think the choice in ending this war belongs to Ukraine, the United States, or our allies. It never has.

Putin has been engaging in war against Ukraine for a decade now … he won’t stop until he either gets all of Ukraine or until he LOSES THIS WAR—that is, until he is forced to stop.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t understand this war.

President Zelensky wants to end this war by the end of this year. The United States and the allies probably want it to end sooner. But those who understand Putin’s intentions know that is unlikely.

This is going to be a long and brutal war in all likelihood, possibly lasting years more until Russia just can’t continue.

For this war to end, Putin and Russia MUST LOSE THIS WAR.

DocBarrister

I'm not sure that this is an informed assessment, rather what you want and think is going to happen. a fan does not strike me as an uniformed reader. How you make that derisory claim is rather bewildering. Do you say these things because you think this forum is your own personal echo chamber? Doesn't seem like your intention is further the discussion, but rather advance your rather dogmatic views on others. It seems very silly. Even I can see that after just a short time using the site. Why do you do this??

2000,
Do you have an opinion on this topic or are you just going to post insults about other posters?

Doc just showed precisely what information ("informed") he was saying should be considered, "US intelligence assessment" as reported by Reuters.

He then makes clear (at least to any friendly reader) his own logic about what this means, in a discussion with another poster (a fan) with whom he disagrees on a particular aspect. They both feel strongly and get a bit testy with one another, but not over the top ranting and insulting.

So, what do you think?

My own view is that Doc's conclusions are, unfortunately, more likely a fair read of the situation than not. Lots of reasons why I come to that view, which I've explained numerous times over these past months, but I'm open to new information, new logic that I hadn't previously considered.

I'd love to see an early end of this war, but I don't think that is Putin's intent...as, IMO, he's made abundantly clear both through his actions and his words. I'm not going to call it "stupid" but I would call it "naive and foolish" to expect otherwise from him.

Thus, I don't see a stable end until Putin is deposed, and I don't expect that to happen until the Russian military is so thoroughly defeated and demoralized, that Putin can no longer hold onto power.

Love to be wrong.

Doc's conclusions are not a fair read of the situation at all (Too much emotion involved and wishful thinking IMO). There isn't only one solution to this war. Heck, Putin's physical condition doesn't look to be too good these days. Whose to say that he doesn't make it through a long war? Why do you discount that option? Watch any recent videos of him, this does not look like a healthy man. Everything is not black and white in regards to this war. Quick question, why the need to jump in and respond to my comments about DocB? You do realize that talking about a poster does not constitute a personal attack. I wasn't spewing vitriol at him, he went beyond a simple disagreement with a fellow poster. Just trying to get an understanding as to why his posts fit a pattern of doing this.

*FTR, asking someone if they have an opinion about a topic is about the worst look you can have. You are intimating that person has nothing to offer. Maybe their response is what they have offer. It doesn't have to be what you like. Seems like you should spend more time considering that. If you were Admin of this site, it would be a different story. But it seems you are not, just a regular old poster like me.

First, I really couldn't give a hoot "about the worst look you(I) can have". Your opinion on that aspect has no value to me. Seriously. Now, if we do engage civilly and I find you to be an interesting guy or gal, reasonable in your approach to others, your opinion of me will begin to have some worth to me...but right now you've jumped in with two feet critiquing others, but offering little to the actual discussions on the thread topic itself.

This is a discussion forum with specific topics, discussions underway...why are you here posting if you don't want to discuss these topics?

Why just post about others?

great, let me credit the above: you came up with another scenario under which Putin could eventually leave power during a long war...he dies of natural causes. Fine. I'm sure Doc would agree that it's quite likely that his successor would then sue for peace, especially if the war has bled Russia and its military to the breaking point.

But if he doesn't leave power, I'd like someone (needn't be you, but you're welcome) to explain why we would have anything but the tiniest probability assigned to his ever being willing to back off, leave Ukraine, and become a functioning part of the world rule of law order. He's staked everything on the expansion of Russia to an Empire status...how does he retain power if he abandons that ambition now?

MD,

I don't think anyone on this entire site is intimating that Putin will back down in any other many then of the following. To insinuate otherwise tells me you are leading to much with your emotions.

1) Official Agreement/Ceasefire
2) All of his backers turn on him in a significant manner in which he is essentially deposed
3) His death

what insinuation?

If you'd been following the discussions we've been having over the past 3+ months, you'd know that the question has been whether #1 is a reasonably likely outcome and, if so, on what terms? #2 and #3 are a very different outcome, could be overlapping with one another. Of course those are the 3 outcome potentials, why would you pretend that others, like me, don't recognize that to be the case?

But is #1 an outcome that should be pursued as likely, and if so on what terms...or should it be pursued with the recognition that only through defeat of the Russian military can #1, resulting in #2 or #3 or both, be a reasonable hope for a stable situation?

Some have argued that we (the US and or the West) should encourage, even force, Zelensky to give up territory, maybe 20%, maybe more, of Ukraine for "peace". Notwithstanding whether either Zelensky (or the Ukrainian people) would agree or Putin would settle for 20%, others have questioned whether doing so would simply embolden Putin...I personally know numerous people from that region of the world who believe that Putin has made it incredibly clear that his ambition is not a piece of Ukraine, nor even all of Ukraine, under his hegemony, but rather all of what was once the Russian Empire...he's said so numerous times, and they believe him thoroughly. I tend to think they're right. At a minimum, a high probability, thus should inform our policy making.

We also know that Putin's word to his neighbors and to the West is absolutely meaningless.

So, any "cease fire" or any promise of "peace" can't be considered to be stable; absolutely nothing that Putin says to the West in assurance can, or should be, trusted ever again.

I don't think that's an emotional response, simply a rational assessment of the unfortunate reality we face.

[a fan]

Fair skepticism, but you're not really engaging in the various probabilities by simply dismissing this "we have no idea" what anyone will do, much less what Putin will do.

Ok....here's a few:

-It wouldn't surprise me at all if what we're seeing now is the end goal for Putin.....a war that doesn't end.

-Putin could be waiting out the winter, and then put the screws to the geniuses who depend on him for energy.

-It could be he's slowly installing/locating "his guys" with Ukraine to establish a puppet Ukraine

-It could be that Putin is waiting to wipe out Ukraine's current leadership structure.

-Zelensky could have personal motives that we don't see


I really have no idea. The one thing I think is unlikely, is that this is as cut and dry and Doc and others think it is.

[MDlaxfan76]

Fair skepticism, but you're not really engaging in the various probabilities by simply dismissing this "we have no idea" what anyone will do, much less what Putin will do.

Ok....here's a few:

-It wouldn't surprise me at all if what we're seeing now is the end goal for Putin.....a war that doesn't end.

Why? What would the benefit to Putin be of a war that continues to bleed and bleed Russia? An endless war?

-Putin could be waiting out the winter, and then put the screws to the geniuses who depend on him for energy.

I assume you mean he's waiting for winter and then will put the screws to the Europeans under the hope that their resolve and support for Ukraine will buckle? Yup, that could be...and, if we don't back stop Ukraine, Putin can then roll over Ukraine, and then onward to each new target of his ambitions.

-It could be he's slowly installing/locating "his guys" with Ukraine to establish a puppet Ukraine

mmm, that sounds very, very unlikely to work for him...the Ukrainian people, even Russian speaking, have greatly hardened in their negative views towards Putin...I don't see any puppet, absent complete martial law, being able to hold Ukraine.

-It could be that Putin is waiting to wipe out Ukraine's current leadership structure.

But there's a whole lot of "leadership structure" necessary, see comment about Ukrainian people...Poroshenko or any of the Cabnet or Legislature could take over and be every bit as resolved as is Zelensky.

-Zelensky could have personal motives that we don't see

Like what? And how does that matter...serious question, I just don't see what you're getting at...


I really have no idea. The one thing I think is unlikely, is that this is as cut and dry and Doc and others think it is.

hmmm, any notion as to which, if any, of these has a probability above 10% or so...much less any above 50%?

Policy choices need to be made for the most likely pathways, with contingency planning for others emerging.

[a fan]

Why? What would the benefit to Putin be of a war that continues to bleed and bleed Russia? An endless war?

How are his polling numbers in Russia? High, right? Well...there you go.

He doesn't care that Russia is bleeding. If he did? He would never have, for example, opened military bases in Syria....when his GDP has been pretty much flat since he took office. He can't afford those bases. And he can't afford this war his is fighting.

And yet.....here we are.

I assume you mean he's waiting for winter and then will put the screws to the Europeans under the hope that their resolve and support for Ukraine will buckle? Yup, that could be...and, if we don't back stop Ukraine, Putin can then roll over Ukraine, and then onward to each new target of his ambitions.

He's already proven to the world that his army is a sh*tshow. And you think he'll go after NATO countries? Because it's either that, or head towards China's sphere of influence...and he won't do that.

mmm, that sounds very, very unlikely to work for him...the Ukrainian people, even Russian speaking, have greatly hardened in their negative views towards Putin

Some. Not all. And money talks....and Ukraine is clearly a Kleptocracy. Has a few months of war changed that? Maybe.

Like what? And how does that matter...serious question, I just don't see what you're getting at...

Zelensky could have personal motives (stay in power, for example) that trump the Ukrainian people's interest.

hmmm, any notion as to which, if any, of these has a probability above 10% or so...much less any above 50%?

Policy choices need to be made for the most likely pathways, with contingency planning for others emerging.

The nice thing for Biden is: none of the above matters. Nor does any other speculation.

He has one choice: Give Ukraine enough arms and training to force a stalemate. That's it. That's his "choice".

Any other move would likely cause escalation, and who the F knows what Putin will do if he thinks he's losing this war.

[old salt]

Show me my words making that claim - that we did nothing for 15 years to become more energy independent.

I wrote this:

Picture how far ahead our nation would be if our leaders chose nuclear power over shenanigans in the ME. Denser habitation. More mass transit. Accelerated electric car development.

And the context of my post was: after the gas lines of 1973-4.

And you responded in colored font with this:

All in 1990, in a few months, before Iraq invaded Kuwait. The technology was not avail then, or now, & takes decades to implement

What I read from this is that you think we couldn't/didn't do anything about getting oil from the Middle East from the time of the gas lines, up until 1990. Which is what I got from "all in 1990"....as in: "we can't make those changes in the 12 months of 1990."

If that's not what you meant? Please clarify.

In 1990, the technology for electric vehicles & wind/solar was not yet mature. We scared ourselves into moving away from nuc power. We had not yet developed fracking & horiz drilling. We were more dependent on home hearing oil & had less insulation & fewer heat pumps back then.
Auto EPA standards were increasing gas mileage. No matter which 15 year period you select, we were moving toward more energy independence, but in 1990, we were not in a position to kiss off ME oil. ...& we're still not, but more so because of the impact on the global economy (now) vs oil available to the US (1973 - 1990). You are proposing a fundamental restructuring of how we live in the USA. Saddam's invasion of Kuwait took the whole world by surprise.