All Things Russia & Ukraine

[youthathletics]

One way to hurt Russia, while turning on the Baltic Pipe and destroying the environment with methane.

[old salt]

We fought in Syria with Russia right there. IMO, there's no strategic value to Syria, either. But that's my opinion, not yours.

Your refusal to recognize & apply different circumstances is staggering. We were in Syria, with a small but hugely effective force, to eliminate ISIS & protect our Kurdish allies, who did the bulk of the fighting. We did that in coordination & cooperation with Russian forces. ...& still are.
Every war is not the same. It is simplistic to argue that they are. The strategic significance of Syria was as the Caliphate & safe haven for ISIS.

[old salt]

...the West will need to spend massively to reinforce its defenses, trade will not resume, and Putin will continue to rule with an iron fist to the bitter end...and, of course, he'll continue to use any and all measures to undermine democracies around the world including our own.

EU-NATO members will need to spend more. The US will not. We already have enough forces in place in EUrope to deter & repel any Russian invasion.
The pathetic performance of Russian combined arms in invading Ukraine indicates that we have overestimated their capabilities & that US forces would be better deployed in the Pacific. with EU-NATO members picking up the slack on NATO's E flank.

[MDlaxfan76]

...the West will need to spend massively to reinforce its defenses, trade will not resume, and Putin will continue to rule with an iron fist to the bitter end...and, of course, he'll continue to use any and all measures to undermine democracies around the world including our own.

EU-NATO members will need to spend more. The US will not. We already have enough forces in place in EUrope to deter & repel any Russian invasion.
The pathetic performance of Russian combined arms in invading Ukraine indicates that we have overestimated their capabilities & that US forces would be better deployed in the Pacific. with EU-NATO members picking up the slack on NATO's E flank.

Nope, we will spend billions and billions more...just as you'd earlier said we'd need to do in a perpetual conflict in support of Ukraine's maintenance of its sovereignty. Putin will remain belligerent, that's the nature of the scorpion, and people will continue to die.

But that's just a part of the problems I outlined.

Unless of course you want to see white nationalist dictatorships and kleptocracies continue to rise and democracies to fall...

[old salt]

...the West will need to spend massively to reinforce its defenses, trade will not resume, and Putin will continue to rule with an iron fist to the bitter end...and, of course, he'll continue to use any and all measures to undermine democracies around the world including our own.

EU-NATO members will need to spend more. The US will not. We already have enough forces in place in EUrope to deter & repel any Russian invasion.
The pathetic performance of Russian combined arms in invading Ukraine indicates that we have overestimated their capabilities & that US forces would be better deployed in the Pacific. with EU-NATO members picking up the slack on NATO's E flank.

Nope, we will spend billions and billions more...just as you'd earlier said we'd need to do in a perpetual conflict in support of Ukraine's maintenance of its sovereignty. Putin will remain belligerent, that's the nature of the scorpion, and people will continue to die.

But that's just a part of the problems I outlined.

Unless of course you want to see white nationalist dictatorships and kleptocracies continue to rise and democracies to fall...

Oh sure. We'll keep pumping billions to Ukraine for the indefinite future, but we don't need to send any additional US forces to EUrope to deter & defend against Russia. EU-NATO is more than capable of doing what needs to be done. The more Ukraine attrites Russian forces, the easier the task of NATO defense & deterrence.

I'll be pleased if the string of white nationalist kleptocracies governing Ukraine is interrupted, at least temporarily.
The threat of right wing nationalist movements to EU members is over-hyped.

[old salt]

I wonder who blew up Nordtream 1 and 2? ....

The US taking away Putin's last remaining negotiating chip while simultaneously eliminating any temptation for Germany to cave sounds like a fairly plausible explanation to me.....

Where are the Clinton's?

or the Deep State.

One in the same.

Mike Flynn & the Q Anon dive team did it.
Expect more "unusual" events during our run up to war with Russia.

[a fan]

We fought in Syria with Russia right there. IMO, there's no strategic value to Syria, either. But that's my opinion, not yours.

Your refusal to recognize & apply different circumstances is staggering.

And your unwillingness to learn from the past is staggering.

So for you? You're unable to thing long term in Syria, and have NO INTEREST in what our presence there did to Syria, America, and the world at large over the long haul. All you're able to think is "take that hill".

You're unable to understand that we're STILL paying the price for bankrolling a puppet in Iran way the F back in 1953. Same goes for a choice to bankroll Saddam way back in the 80's. What YOU do is, look a a snippet of an American choice, evaluate if the "mission" in particular is worth it, and to hell with any long term consequences. Fire, ready, aim.

And even now that you can see that what seems like a simple American intervention has MAJOR global effects for going on 70 years? You're still "certain" our choices in Syria were majorly-awesome.

How's Syria doing these days, OS? And who is moving in to rebuild the mess we helped make? Oh, no...YOU'RE the smart one, and I'm an idiot for daring to question the strategic value of going in there.

We were in Syria, with a small but hugely effective force, to eliminate ISIS & protect our Kurdish allies, who did the bulk of the fighting. We did that in coordination & cooperation with Russian forces. ...& still are.
Every war is not the same. It is simplistic to argue that they are. The strategic significance of Syria was as the Caliphate & safe haven for ISIS.

Was. Past tense. And the long term problems? Who cares about those, right? How are our Kurdish doing? Awesome, right? Sunshine, rainbows, and piles of rubble.


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/07/worl ... kurds.html

[old salt]

We fought in Syria with Russia right there. IMO, there's no strategic value to Syria, either. But that's my opinion, not yours.

Your refusal to recognize & apply different circumstances is staggering.

And your unwillingness to learn from the past is staggering.

So for you? You're unable to thing long term in Syria, and have NO INTEREST in what our presence there did to Syria, America, and the world at large over the long haul. All you're able to think is "take that hill".

You're unable to understand that we're STILL paying the price for bankrolling a puppet in Iran way the F back in 1953. Same goes for a choice to bankroll Saddam way back in the 80's. What YOU do is, look a a snippet of an American choice, evaluate if the "mission" in particular is worth it, and to hell with any long term consequences. Fire, ready, aim.

And even now that you can see that what seems like a simple American intervention has MAJOR global effects for going on 70 years? You're still "certain" our choices in Syria were majorly-awesome.

How's Syria doing these days, OS? And who is moving in to rebuild the mess we helped make? Oh, no...YOU'RE the smart one, and I'm an idiot for daring to question the strategic value of going in there.

We were in Syria, with a small but hugely effective force, to eliminate ISIS & protect our Kurdish allies, who did the bulk of the fighting. We did that in coordination & cooperation with Russian forces. ...& still are.
Every war is not the same. It is simplistic to argue that they are. The strategic significance of Syria was as the Caliphate & safe haven for ISIS.

Was. Past tense. And the long term problems? Who cares about those, right? How are our Kurdish doing? Awesome, right? Sunshine, rainbows, and piles of rubble.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/07/worl ... kurds.html

Every circumstance is different. We resisted & avoided getting involved in Syria's civil war. We only went into NE Syria, with a small force, to root out ISIS & support the Kurds. What would you have done, leave ISIS & their caliphate undisturbed ? The Kurds are hanging in there. They still have their autonomy & are still guarding IS prisoners & keeping ISIS under a rock. They're a lot better off now than they were before we became involved. They are on good terms with Assad & the Russians.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-ea ... 022-09-21/

[Kismet]

Things are looking up - Orange Cheato just offered to mediate a solution between Ukraine and Russia

[MDlaxfan76]

...the West will need to spend massively to reinforce its defenses, trade will not resume, and Putin will continue to rule with an iron fist to the bitter end...and, of course, he'll continue to use any and all measures to undermine democracies around the world including our own.

EU-NATO members will need to spend more. The US will not. We already have enough forces in place in EUrope to deter & repel any Russian invasion.
The pathetic performance of Russian combined arms in invading Ukraine indicates that we have overestimated their capabilities & that US forces would be better deployed in the Pacific. with EU-NATO members picking up the slack on NATO's E flank.

Nope, we will spend billions and billions more...just as you'd earlier said we'd need to do in a perpetual conflict in support of Ukraine's maintenance of its sovereignty. Putin will remain belligerent, that's the nature of the scorpion, and people will continue to die.

But that's just a part of the problems I outlined.

Unless of course you want to see white nationalist dictatorships and kleptocracies continue to rise and democracies to fall...

Oh sure. We'll keep pumping billions to Ukraine for the indefinite future, but we don't need to send any additional US forces to EUrope to deter & defend against Russia. EU-NATO is more than capable of doing what needs to be done. The more Ukraine attrites Russian forces, the easier the task of NATO defense & deterrence.

I'll be pleased if the string of white nationalist kleptocracies governing Ukraine is interrupted, at least temporarily.
The threat of right wing nationalist movements to EU members is over-hyped.

Ok, so you disagree with your prior statement immediately above. Tough to keep your story straight, huh.

But hey, you’re back to parroting Putin’s “de-nazification” propaganda, so it’s again clear where your sympathies truly lie.

Ukraine ain’t perfect on this measure, but hey, neither are we…again embracing white nationalism in its various guises by a very significant minority of Americans, concentrated now in the MAGA GOP, Qanon, etc.

[HooDat]

I wonder who blew up Nordtream 1 and 2? ....

The US taking away Putin's last remaining negotiating chip while simultaneously eliminating any temptation for Germany to cave sounds like a fairly plausible explanation to me.....

Where are the Clinton's?

or the Deep State.

One in the same.

laugh all you want, but let's revisit this topic in a few years.....

[HooDat]

the lesson here?........




Don't Mess with Texas!

generally a sound sentiment.

Not too impressed with the rightward lurch these past few years...I wonder when it'll be "don't mess with Texan women"!

From a pure political voyeur perspective it will be interesting to see how that does indeed play out.

Please don't shoot the messenger, I have been very clear about my belief that abortion is between a woman and her doctor - these are just my observations. (and I will put a copy of this in the abortion thread where it belongs)

Beto has bet everything that your implication is correct. The polls so far show him as having bet poorly. I am pretty convinced that the majority of women in Texas are perfectly fine with the abortion laws in Texas and are actually positively inclined toward the recent SCOTUS decision re RvW.

My guess is that in the privacy of the voting booth Texans women would come out in support of a ban after 15 weeks, with: Dallas and Austin skewing fairly heavily against restrictions on abortion (call it 70/30 for the RvW standard); Houston coming in at about 50/50; San Antonio 40/60 leaning toward a 15 week limit; and the rest of the state is likely very heavily skewed in favor of a 15 week limit (I'd guess it would shake out at 20/80 - with 80 in favor of the limit).

Outside Austin and the close in Dallas suburbs, Texas is a very conservative state. The Hispanic community, whether they attend mass or not, is still very culturally influenced by their historic Catholicism and is oriented far more conservative than they have voted in the past, because the old GOP didn't want brown people. Now that the GOP is actively reaching out to these working class minority groups, the GOP is having serious success in attracting them as voters.

[old salt]

Ok, so you disagree with your prior statement immediately above. Tough to keep your story straight, huh.

I make a distinction which you fail to recognize. I was referring to the Increased level of funding for post-invasion US deployments to an expanded NATO mission in EUrope. That is different than financial & military aid directly to Ukraine or to backfill allies' military aid. I was referring to the former.

Given the poor performance of Russia's military, imo, our current commitment to NATO is more than sufficient & should return to pre-invasion levels, while the increasing capabilities of Ukraine's military & our NATO allies are sufficient to contain Russia's supposed "expansionism."

I hold little hope that the fire hose of open ended deficit funded US military & financial aid to Ukraine, in the form of grants, will end or even decrease. Meanwhile lesser aid from the EUroburghers will take the form of loans which will mortgage Ukraine's economic future to the EU.

[MDlaxfan76]

the lesson here?........




Don't Mess with Texas!

generally a sound sentiment.

Not too impressed with the rightward lurch these past few years...I wonder when it'll be "don't mess with Texan women"!

From a pure political voyeur perspective it will be interesting to see how that does indeed play out.

Please don't shoot the messenger, I have been very clear about my belief that abortion is between a woman and her doctor - these are just my observations. (and I will put a copy of this in the abortion thread where it belongs)

Beto has bet everything that your implication is correct. The polls so far show him as having bet poorly. I am pretty convinced that the majority of women in Texas are perfectly fine with the abortion laws in Texas and are actually positively inclined toward the recent SCOTUS decision re RvW.

My guess is that in the privacy of the voting booth Texans women would come out in support of a ban after 15 weeks, with: Dallas and Austin skewing fairly heavily against restrictions on abortion (call it 70/30 for the RvW standard); Houston coming in at about 50/50; San Antonio 40/60 leaning toward a 15 week limit; and the rest of the state is likely very heavily skewed in favor of a 15 week limit (I'd guess it would shake out at 20/80 - with 80 in favor of the limit).

Outside Austin and the close in Dallas suburbs, Texas is a very conservative state. The Hispanic community, whether they attend mass or not, is still very culturally influenced by their historic Catholicism and is oriented far more conservative than they have voted in the past, because the old GOP didn't want brown people. Now that the GOP is actively reaching out to these working class minority groups, the GOP is having serious success in attracting them as voters.

Yes, no shooting of the messenger intended. You have been clear about your views.

However, I think it is important to be clear about the current law in Texas and the Texas GOP’s position…and this notion of a 15 week with exceptions for rape, incest, life etc. they are worlds apart.

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

The polling indicates that Texas women overwhelmingly don’t support the Texas laws and GOP intent.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/04 ... n-ut-poll/

https://www.npr.org/2022/09/01/11204728 ... ion-rights

https://www.axios.com/local/austin/2022 ... omen-polls

Whether that will be enough to sway the overall election is another matter, certainly.

It is going to in a lot of other states.

[HooDat]

The polling indicates that Texas women overwhelmingly don’t support the Texas laws and GOP intent.

I haven't seen the specific polls, was going off of my gut and understanding of the culture across the state. I have lost a lot of faith in pollsters - recent experience has shown that people with "conservative" views are reluctant to share them with random pollsters and even more importantly seem reluctant to even participate in polls. Which would explain the left leaning bias in most polling errors.

I do know that Beto has basically bet his entire candidacy on the issue (I guess he is looking at the same polls), perhaps he is falling further and further behind for other reasons (of which there are many). I am no Greg Abbott fan, but Beto makes me one....

[MDlaxfan76]

Ok, so you disagree with your prior statement immediately above. Tough to keep your story straight, huh.

I make a distinction which you fail to recognize. I was referring to the Increased level of funding for post-invasion US deployments to an expanded NATO mission in EUrope. That is different than financial & military aid directly to Ukraine or to backfill allies' military aid. I was referring to the former.

You were responding to my statement. I said the West will need to "spend massively to reinforce its defenses, trade will not resume, and Putin will continue to rule with an iron fist to the bitter end...and, of course, he'll continue to use any and all measures to undermine democracies around the world including our own."

You said the EU would need to spend, not the US. I don't differentiate between providing massive levels of financial support to NATO or Ukraine based on exactly how it is spent, it's massive spending either way...if Putin remains in power. If Putin doesn't remain in power, the need to spend on defenses is likely to be much less, though no guarantees...but much more likely.

Given the poor performance of Russia's military, imo, our current commitment to NATO is more than sufficient & should return to pre-invasion levels, while the increasing capabilities of Ukraine's military & our NATO allies are sufficient to contain Russia's supposed "expansionism."

Nope, we won't return to pre-invasion levels of commitment as long as Putin remains in power. It won't be politically feasible to do so, nor would it be prudent. Of course, that's just a prediction...in any case, our financial support for Ukraine's capacities will have to be massive if the war doesn't end with Russia's withdrawal and accountability for war crimes, return of stolen children and other families.

I hold little hope that the fire hose of open ended deficit funded US military & financial aid to Ukraine, in the form of grants, will end or even decrease. Meanwhile lesser aid from the EUroburghers will take the form of loans which will mortgage Ukraine's economic future to the EU.

Thus, we need to ensure that Putin's aggression is thoroughly defeated. And that's unlikely to happen overnight.

[MDlaxfan76]

The polling indicates that Texas women overwhelmingly don’t support the Texas laws and GOP intent.

I haven't seen the specific polls, was going off of my gut and understanding of the culture across the state. I have lost a lot of faith in pollsters - recent experience has shown that people with "conservative" views are reluctant to share them with random pollsters and even more importantly seem reluctant to even participate in polls. Which would explain the left leaning bias in most polling errors.

I do know that Beto has basically bet his entire candidacy on the issue (I guess he is looking at the same polls), perhaps he is falling further and further behind for other reasons (of which there are many). I am no Greg Abbott fan, but Beto makes me one....

Abbott makes me prefer a piece of wood, and Beto suffices in that regard.

Yes, undoubtedly there's some polling bias these days...but the surge in voter registration is a confirming signal.

Again, huge difference between supporting a 15 week limit with exceptions and what Texas is actually doing under GOP control. Huge.

[a fan]

Every circumstance is different. We resisted & avoided getting involved in Syria's civil war. We only went into NE Syria, with a small force, to root out ISIS & support the Kurds. What would you have done, leave ISIS & their caliphate undisturbed ?

I see precious little difference between your "Caliphate" and many countries in the ME. Iran? How is "the Caliphate" different than the crew that's been running Iran for decades now? And is the Caliphate better or worse than Erdogan? The "rah rah" that sucked Americans like DocB with Ukraine has managed to suck you in to support more than a few WarZones.

And you're speaking past tense. We have, out in the open, 900 troops in Syria. Operations are ongoing. The fat lady has not sung. And Syria is still a sh*tshow.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Things are looking up - Orange Cheato just offered to mediate a solution between Ukraine and Russia

Well, I can certainly see Zelenskyy taking him up on that. Sure. Buffoonery embodied.

[youthathletics]

Things are looking up - Orange Cheato just offered to mediate a solution between Ukraine and Russia

Well, I can certainly see Zelenskyy taking him up on that. Sure. Buffoonery embodied.

Where is Dennis Rodman when we need him.